Source Search for a Historical Research Question

The Vorort and Council of Europe Accession 1963

Sources
A guided exercise for systematic source searching (primary/secondary/tertiary) with reflective use of generative AI.
Author
Affiliation

Moritz Mähr

University of Bern

Published

December 29, 2025

Modified

February 12, 2026

Overview and Didactic Goal

This exercise trains transferable research competencies: from precise operationalization of a research question through systematic and unsystematic (snowball) search strategies to critical evaluation of sources (provenance, context, bias, relevance).(Putnam 2016) Generative AI is used here as a heuristic aid (conceptual clarification, keyword expansion, search paths).(Milligan 2019)

The case study is the research question:
What role did the Swiss Trade and Industry Association (Vorort) play in the decision-making process for Council of Europe accession in 1963?

The exercise follows a circular understanding of research: search results change keywords, hypotheses, and the delimitation of the research design.

NoteNote on Materiality of Source Situation

When working with archives, note protection periods, usage conditions, and digital availability of individual holdings. Plan the workload for access requests, on-site consultation, and reproduction rights.

Prerequisites

  • Basic understanding of historical research methods
  • Basic knowledge of working with generative AI (especially prompting)
NotePrompt Engineering

If you are not yet familiar with prompting, we recommend completing the Prompt Engineering exercise first.

NoteLLM

You can complete this exercise with LLMs from different providers. For this exercise, it is helpful if the LLM has internet access and allows file uploads.

Learning Objectives

Upon completion of the exercise, you will be able to:

  • typologically distinguish sources (primary/secondary/tertiary) and justify their epistemic function,
  • translate a research question into researchable sub-questions and search indicators,
  • use systematic and snowball search in combination and document them,
  • develop multilingual search strategies (DE/FR/EN; incl. historical terminology),
  • use library catalogs, bibliographic databases, finding aids, and portals purposefully,
  • reproducibly document findings and critically evaluate sources,
  • treat responses as heuristic suggestions, systematically verify, and reflect.

Structure of the Exercise

  1. Operationalize Research Question
  2. Source Types and Evidence Logic
  3. Systematic Search I: Tertiary Sources and Context Framework
  4. Systematic Search II: Catalogs, Databases, Official Publications
  5. Unsystematic Search: Snowballing from Core Literature and Dossiers
  6. Archives and Finding Aids: Provenance Logic and Fonds Formation
  7. Source Criticism: Assessment Rubric and Minimal Documentation
  8. AI Reflection: Controlled Use, Documentation, Error Culture

1. Operationalize Research Question

Goal

The research question is decomposed into sub-questions so that concrete search paths and verifiable sub-hypotheses emerge.

Task (Without AI)

Sketch in 10 minutes a working model of the decision-making process (actors, arenas, phases, document types).

Guiding questions:

  • Which state arenas are relevant (Federal Council, departments, parliament, consultation, diplomacy)?
  • Where could the Vorort have intervened (position papers, contacts, media, expert commissions)?
  • What analytical significance do agenda-setting, expertise, lobbying, coalition-building, legitimation, gatekeeping have?

Task (AI Exploration)

Decompose the research question into 4–6 sub-questions, each of which can be verified source-based.
For each sub-question, indicate which document types could serve as evidence.

Critical Comparison

Mark in the response:

  • verifiable vs. vague statements,
  • missing arenas (e.g., consultation, FDFA/FDEA),
  • implicit conceptual assumptions (e.g., “lobbying” as potentially anachronistic category).

2. Source Types and Evidence Logic

Goal

Clarify which evidence can support which claims – and which systematic limits exist.

Task: Source Type Matrix (Without AI)

Create a matrix with:

  • Rows: Sub-questions / sub-hypotheses
  • Columns: Source types

Source Types:

  • Primary: Association protocols, correspondence, internal reports, submissions, memoranda; government records; parliamentary protocols; media reports
  • Secondary: Research literature on foreign, European, and association policy; organizational history Vorort/economiesuisse
  • Tertiary: Catalogs, bibliographies, dossiers, registers, databases, finding aids

For each cell: What would be compelling evidence? / Which biases are likely?

Task (AI Exploration)

Name suitable primary, secondary, and tertiary sources for the research question.
Assign each source to an arena (Federal Council / Department / Parliament / Association / Media / International).

Reflection

Where does AI typically “invent” sources (e.g., seemingly specific protocols or letters without reference)? Note three risk areas.

3. Systematic Search I: Context Framework via Tertiary Sources

Goal

Build an orienting reference framework before deep research begins.

Core Resources

Task (AI as Search Assistant, Not as Source)

Create a list of 15 search locations (portals, catalogs, editions, archives, databases)
that could be relevant for the question about the Vorort and Council of Europe accession 1963.
For each search location, provide 1–2 typical hit types (e.g., message, protocol, dossier, newspaper article).

Validation

  • Open at least 5 mentioned search locations and test 2 search queries each.
  • Document null results (wrong arena, wrong term, wrong time period, missing digitization).

4. Systematic Search II: Catalogs, Databases, Official Publications

Goal

Develop search terms as testable hypotheses, incl. historical terminology and name variants.

Task A: Concept Fields

Create three concept fields (DE/FR/EN):

  1. Actor: Vorort; Swiss Trade and Industry Association; STIA; (FR) Union suisse du commerce et de l’industrie; economiesuisse (mark as retroactive)
  2. Event/Institution: Council of Europe; Conseil de l’Europe; accession/membership; 1963; ECHR/ECtHR (as context paths)
  3. Process/Mechanisms: Consultation; interest group; submission; statement; expert opinion; economic interests; foreign economic policy

Task B (AI-Assisted): Controlled Synonym Lists

Create for the three concept fields (Actor / Institution-Event / Process) 12–20 search terms each.
Conditions:
- Output DE/FR/EN separately
- Consider historical spellings and abbreviations
- For each term, indicate where it is more likely to appear (parliamentary protocol / internal records / press)
- No invented proper names or signatures

Quality Check

  • Remove or mark anachronistic terms as retrospective search anchors.
  • Supplement person and place anchors (e.g., Vorort presidium, delegates; Bern/Zurich; relevant departments).

5. Systematic Research: Secondary Literature and Reference Works

Goal

Create a reliable starting base of secondary literature (incl. bibliographies).

Task A: Catalog Strategy

Research with combinations like:

  • (Vorort OR STIA) AND (Council of Europe OR Conseil de l’Europe) AND 196*
  • (Associations OR Interest politics) AND (Foreign policy OR European policy) AND Switzerland AND 1950–1960
  • Switzerland AND Council of Europe AND (accession OR membership)

Document:

  • Search terms
  • Filters (year, language, material type)
  • Hit counts
  • Selection criteria

Task B (AI-Assisted): Optimize Search Terms

Here are my previous search terms and hit problems: [insert].
Optimize the search terms for catalogs (Boolean, phrases, truncation).
Provide 6 variants and briefly explain which problem each variant addresses.

Deliverable

  • Briefly annotated bibliography (8–12 titles) with:

    • Question relevance (1–2 sentences)
    • Expected source value (which primary sources are cited?)

6. Unsystematic Search: Snowballing

Goal

From a small starting corpus, reconstruct debates and source references.

Task: Define Starting Set

Select:

  • 1 dossier or edition (navigator),
  • 1 overview presentation,
  • 1 in-depth study (actor- or institution-related).

Snowball Protocol

  • central references (10–20),
  • cited primary sources (archives, signatures, document types),
  • recurring actors and commissions.

Task (AI Exploration)

I have the following 8 literature or source references:
1. ___
2. ___
…
Organize them by (a) primary/secondary, (b) arena, (c) potential insight value
for the role of the Vorort.
Suggest a follow-up research for each.

Reflection

Snowballing reproduces canons and blind spots. Note missing perspectives (e.g., unions, parties, international actors) and possible counter-strategies.

7. Archive Research: Finding Aids, Holdings, Access

Goal

Identify primary sources so that they are orderable and analyzable.

Starting Points (Orientation)

  • Vorort/economiesuisse holdings at Archives for Contemporary History (ETH Zurich)
  • References in catalogs (e.g., SWA/UB Wirtschaft Basel)
  • Vorort-related documents in diplomatic history contexts (e.g., Dodis)
WarningMethodological Note

“Dossier found” is not the same as “evidence secured.” Finding aids are tertiary access instruments: they structure visibility, not truth.

Task A: Finding Aid Analysis

Reconstruct for one archive:

  • Series and dossier types,
  • Cataloging logic,
  • Access restrictions.

Task B: Dossier Shortlist (1960–1963)

Create a shortlist of 10 units with:

  • Signature or permalink,
  • Title and time span,
  • Expected relation to sub-hypothesis,
  • Access (online / reading room / request).

Task C (AI-Assisted): Plan Search Paths

Suggest three search paths:
1) Actor-centered
2) Process-oriented
3) Event-centered
Per path: 8–12 search terms (DE/FR/EN) incl. name variants.

8. Iteration, Reproducibility, and AI Reflection

Research Protocol

At minimum:

  • Date, tool/portal, query, filter, hit count
  • Selection criteria
  • Bias notes (OCR, cataloging, language)

Reflection Questions (250–400 words)

  • What did AI specifically accelerate?
  • Where did it mislead (pseudo-specificity, anachronisms)?
  • What validation steps did you introduce?
  • Which decisions remained necessarily human?

AI Protocol (Appendix)

  • 2–3 prompts,
  • shortened responses,
  • justified corrections or rejects.

Submission

  1. Source matrix (sub-questions × source types)
  2. Research protocol (≥ 15 entries)
  3. Shortlist: 10 primary source units
  4. Briefly annotated bibliography (8–12 titles)
  5. Reflection on AI use incl. AI protocol

Further Resources

Bibliography

Milligan, Ian. 2019. History in the Age of Abundance? How the Web Is Transforming Historical Research. Montreal; Kingston: McGill-Queen’s University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvggx2kh.
Putnam, Lara. 2016. “The Transnational and the Text-Searchable: Digitized Sources and the Shadows They Cast.” The American Historical Review 121 (2): 377–402. https://doi.org/10.1093/ahr/121.2.377.
WarningAutomated Translation Disclaimer

This exercise was automatically translated from German using AI and may contain errors or inaccuracies. Please refer to the original German version for the authoritative text. If you notice any translation issues, please report them.

Back to top

Citation

BibTeX citation:
@inreference{mähr2025,
  author = {Mähr, Moritz},
  title = {Source {Search} for a {Historical} {Research} {Question}},
  booktitle = {Critical AI Literacy for Historians},
  date = {2025-12-29},
  url = {https://maehr.github.io/critical-ai-literacy-for-historians/en/exercises/source-search-vorort-council-of-europe-1963.html},
  langid = {en}
}
For attribution, please cite this work as:
Mähr, Moritz. 2025. “Source Search for a Historical Research Question.” In Critical AI Literacy for Historians. https://maehr.github.io/critical-ai-literacy-for-historians/en/exercises/source-search-vorort-council-of-europe-1963.html.