I’ll start with the cons. Once we get into it, writers love to research for fiction. The problem comes when we try to shove all that research onto the page and call it fiction. That ain’t fiction. That’s lecture and history lesson, the classic information dump. You know that lecture in your history class that went on and on? Yeah, that.

Sometimes we love our research so much that we just can’t resist the urge to throw our own actual research experience into the story. We end up with “research scenes” in our narrative, where we take those days spent sorting through family archives, or visiting the library, or conducting interviews and plunk that on the page as “scene.” I see library, museum, city tour and interview scenes in the manuscripts I edit all the time (and in my own, come to think of it. Sigh.) But these research scenes are often a sure-fire way to put the reader to sleep. So, watch for that one.

But on the flip side, research will inspire your fiction like nothing else. If you’re stuck on what to write, an hour on the internet or in a library is likely to spark a writing session. More importantly, research will give your writing credibility and make it feel real. Growing up near the Okanagan and Shuswap lakes, where lake monsters are said to lurk, I thought I knew everything about my subject matter when I started to write Spotting Dottie. Turns out, I didn't know as much as I thought. You know that old saying, Write what you know? It’s true that writing about your own experiences will lend authenticity to your writing. But I believe the saying should really be, Know what you’re writing about. Take the time to dig into the subject you're writing about and know it, before you sit down to write. And continue to dig deeper into the subject as the writing progresses.

Here's Vicki Delany on writing what you want to know.