This paper surveys forensics research broadly over the last 26 years and argues for research that more comprehensively accounts for forensics in its full range of activity. Forensics research has historically tended to focus on one area of competition. The paper argues for more research that conceptualizes the activity across these practices and for research that may benefit programs that do more than one kind of forensics activity. Research in forensics has also been characterized by some authors as lacking to some degree in quality. These authors note that lack of solid research hurts programs' chances for increased funding and other necessities since administrators have been characterized as an audience most likely to be persuaded by solid quantitative research. The paper argues along with these authors for higher quality in forensics research relative to other kinds of research, contending that this must begin with more complete basic research. Without discounting the work of scholars over the last 26 years, the paper calls for a higher standard of research which more closely follows research norms of the academe at large. Contains 24 references. (Author/NKA)