Interactive practical

Research and referencing skills

Judge a set of sources about a medical tracer for reliability, rank them, compare conflicting values, use the best data in a calculation and write a correct reference.

Open interactive simulation

A-Level Physics

Research skills for practical physics

OCR H556 — matched to your course.

These revision notes are free. Premium unlocks the full question and retrieval-card bank for this topic.

Revision hub

At a glance

Start practice

Practical focuses1

Questions available2

Retrieval cards available1

Available question marks4

Practical focus

Research a physics question using reliable sources, cite evidence correctly and connect the research to a practical investigation.

Practical method

Aim

Use and cite reliable sources to support a practical investigation, using research into the specific heat capacity of metals as the example.

Variables

Independent variable: the source consulted
Dependent variable: the value and reliability of the information
Control variables: the same quantity (specific heat capacity of aluminium); the same evaluation criteria.

Apparatus

Textbooks and data books
Peer-reviewed or institutional websites
A reference list in a consistent style
A research log

Method

Define the question: what is the specific heat capacity of aluminium, and what affects measurements of it?
Find at least three independent sources and record full references.
Evaluate each source: author, date, publisher, evidence and agreement with other sources.
Use the accepted value to evaluate your own measurement and cite it.
Record how the research changed your method in the research log.

Sample results

Sources for the specific heat capacity of aluminium (illustrative).

Source	Value / J kg⁻¹ K⁻¹	Reliability
Physics data book (2019)	900	High: standard reference
University physics department web page	897	High: institutional
Anonymous forum post	1100	Low: no evidence or author

Analysis

The two reliable sources agree (897–900 J kg⁻¹ K⁻¹); the forum value is an outlier with no supporting evidence and is rejected. A measured value of 950 J kg⁻¹ K⁻¹ is 6% high, consistent with energy losses in a simple block experiment.

Uncertainty

Reliable sources agree to within 0.3%, so the accepted value is far more certain than a school measurement. Compare your result with the accepted value using your own uncertainty.

Errors and improvements

Problem	Effect	Improvement
Relying on one source	Errors go unnoticed	Use several independent sources
Uncited information	Plagiarism and no way to check	Cite every source in a consistent style
Using undated or anonymous sources	Unreliable values	Check author, date and evidence

Risk assessment

Hazard	Risk	Control measure
Following unsafe methods found online	Injury	Check methods against your school's risk assessment
Misleading sources	Wrong conclusions	Cross-check with reliable references

Common mistakes

Copying text without citing it.
Using a source because it agrees with your result.
Giving a website address without a date accessed.

Worked analysis

Measured c = 950 J kg⁻¹ K⁻¹; accepted value 900 J kg⁻¹ K⁻¹ (data book). Percentage difference = \(\dfrac{950 - 900}{900}\) × 100 = 5.6%, suggesting energy losses rather than a wrong accepted value.

Common misconception

A source is not reliable simply because it is online or agrees with you; reliability depends on authorship, evidence and agreement with independent sources.

Assessment coverage

Practice this practical

2 questions available, worth 4 marks in total.

Practical 2

Foundation 1Standard 1

Practise this practical