The method
- Choose a question shared by both readings. Note author, title, used edition and page or chapter. Another edition may change pagination; preserve enough information to locate the passage.
- Summarise each passage in your own words and keep your reaction separate. Mark any short quotation explicitly with its reference rather than copying whole pages.
- Compare answers to your question instead of making a global judgement. Record an agreement, a difference and an open question. Silence on a subject is not automatically a contradiction.
Fictional worked example
In a fictional example, one book describes a technique and another its history. The table identifies two perspectives instead of claiming one refutes the other.
The record to keep
Keep references, passage markers and dated notes. Later reading can add observations without erasing your initial understanding.
Your record, step by step
For your own situation, record the following information. Check a field when it is documented; missing information still needs verification. The boxes are a reminder within this page.
This checklist does not validate your project. No entries are sent or saved.
What this method can establish
The comparison automatically establishes neither scientific quality nor factual accuracy. Factual claims need a separate examination of evidence.
Useful questions before you start
Can I compare only promotional summaries?
They guide a search but do not replace passages actually read.
Is a page number sufficient?
Add the edition and, where possible, chapter to locate the passage.
Supporting documentation
These references support the method. Each source shows its language and consultation date; an available directory record explains its purpose.
- BnF — Catalogue général FR ↗
Documentation consulted on
An editorial method, a fictional example and references for further reading.