在整个调查过程中，我使用了各种各样的研究方法，让我很容易地看到历史学家面临的挑战。许多关于日俄战争的原始资料都是用俄文或日文写成的;对于像我这样不会说这些语言的西方读者来说，他们被迫依赖这些来源可能不准确的翻译，假设这些翻译存在的话。因此，历史学家只能研究译文的准确性，而译者很容易根据他们的偏见对译文进行修改。例如，沙皇尼古拉二世(Tsar Nicholas II)的任何引用都必须被翻译成英语，以便我进行分析，但译者在说他们的语言时可能带有亲俄偏见。因此，这句话作为沙皇政策的真实体现，其可靠性值得商榷。此外，并非所有来自俄罗斯的消息都将被翻译，导致可获得的证据减少，并排除了对此事可能存在的不同看法。此外，原始资料并不总是对历史研究有益。许多分析沙皇尼古拉日记的历史学家称这些资料来源为“他的传记作者的绝望”;他所写的为数不多的记录往往与当时发生的重大事件完全无关，而是集中在不太重要的事情上，比如许多关于天气的记录。这可能会激怒那些试图拼凑沙皇观点的历史学家。
Throughout the process, I used a variety of research methods for the investigation, allowing me to easily see the challenges facing historians. Many primary sources regarding the Russo-Japanese War were written in Russian or Japanese; for Western readers such as myself who cannot speak those languages, they are forced to rely on the possibly inaccurate translations of these sources, assuming such translations exist at all. Thus, historians are limited to only working with the accuracy of the translations, which could easily be altered by the translator based on their biases. For example, any quote from Tsar Nicholas II had to be translated to English in order for me to analyze, but the translator could likely have a pro-Russian bias as he spoke their language. Thus, it is debatable as to how reliable that quote can be as a true representation of the Tsar’s policies. Furthermore, not all Russian sources will be translated, leading to less available evidence and leaving out a potentially different view of the matter. Additionally, primary sources are not always beneficial to historical research. Many historians analyzing Tsar Nicholas’ diaries have called these sources “the despair of his biographers;” the few entries that he did write were often completely unrelated to the major events going on during this time and rather focused less important things, such as many entries about the weather. This can be infuriating to historians who are trying to piece together the views held by the Tsar.