Most books written require some form of research. This can be as extensive as knowing a whole time period (such as historical books set in Victorian times, for example), to the tiniest detail that means everything to the plot, or just gives the story a little extra polish.
In my case, a little bit of research is required. But I suppose the question linked to this is: does obedience to fact and the research restrict creative freedom? Is it even necessary?
Using the example of crime novels, the writer is expected to have a very strong knowledge of police procedure among many other legal procedures. In this case (pun not intended), many of the details that the writer finds out when researching may play a key role in the plot, because the stories are mostly based around investigative procedures. If anything, research in this scenario makes it more believable.
On the other hand, a genre such as fantasy may be seen as requiring minimal research and/or knowledge. With books in this genre being based on imaginative and creative plots, fantasy novels tend to not be confined to being 100% accurate when researching.
But back to the original question, I guess it all comes down to credibility. As well as characters, a believable setting or environment also helps when it comes to a reader imagining the writer’s story. Therefore, it could be said that only a minimalistic amount of research is needed for some genres.
What do you think? Are you a writer that strives to be factually correct, or are you a writer that finds other methods of being accurate when writing? Share your thoughts and opinions in the comments below!