Scribd
Upload
24 views

Reviewing The Literature

This document provides guidance on how to conduct a literature review. It discusses reviewing research critically and organizing findings logically. The introduction should establish context and review trends. The body should group studies thematically and summarize individually while synthesizing overall. Conclusions should evaluate knowledge gaps and future research areas. Maintaining academic integrity by properly citing sources and avoiding plagiarism is also emphasized.

Uploaded by

mumtaz
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
24 views

Reviewing The Literature

This document provides guidance on how to conduct a literature review. It discusses reviewing research critically and organizing findings logically. The introduction should establish context and review trends. The body should group studies thematically and summarize individually while synthesizing overall. Conclusions should evaluate knowledge gaps and future research areas. Maintaining academic integrity by properly citing sources and avoiding plagiarism is also emphasized.

Uploaded by

mumtaz
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 18

Reviewing the Literature

In review of literature
• Researchers read other peoples’
research.
• They learn, compare, replicate, and
critically appreciate the work by others.
Skepticism
• Read critically. Skepticism is the norm
of science. Don’t accept simply because
it is published. Evaluate.
• See whether introduction and the title
fit with the rest of the article.
• Methods and results sections are the
most critical.
How review will look like?
• Listing series of reports with a summary of
each is not a review.
• In that case the review will look like a set
of notes strung together.
• Organize common findings or arguments
together.
• Address the most important ideas first, to
logically link findings, and to note
discrepancies.
Writing the introduction
• Define or identify the general topic, or issue
of concern i.e. provide an appropriate
context.
• Point out overall trends in what has been
published about the topic. (conflicts in
theory, methodology, evidence, and
conclusions; or gaps in research and
scholarship; new perspective of immediate
interest).
Writing the introduction (cont.)
• Establish your reason for review.
• Establish the criteria to be used in
analyzing and comparing literature.
• Organization of the review (sequence).
• State why certain literature is or is not
included (scope of review).
Writing the body
• Group the studies according to some common
denominators (qualitative vs. quantitative, conclusions
of authors, specific purpose/objective, chronology).
• Major studies are described in detail, while less
important works may be in just a line or two.
• Refer to several studies that reported similar results in
a single sentence [similar other smaller studies
reported similar results (Adams, 1996; Brown, 2006;
Davis, 2007)]
• Summarize individual studies with as much or as little
detail in accordance with its comparative importance.
Space or length denotes its significance.
Writing the body (cont.)
• Provide the reader with strong “umbrella”
sentences at beginnings of paragraph,
• “signposts” throughout, and
• Brief “so what” summary sentences at
intermediate points showing the
comparisons and analysis.
• Use evidence: the interpretation of the
available sources must be backed up with
evidence to show that what you are saying is
valid.
Writing the body (cont.)

• Be selective: select only the most important


points in the review. The type of information
you choose to mention should relate directly
to the review’s focus (theme, methodology,
chronology).
• Use quotes sparingly:
• Summarize and synthesize: Do it in each
paragraph as well as through the review.
Writing the body (cont.)
• Keep your own voice: though reviewing
others “ideas”, your voice should remain
front and center.
• Use caution when paraphrasing: be sure to
represent the author’s information or
opinions accurately and in your own words.
• Use terminology familiar to your audience:
• Double check that you have documented
your sources.
Writing the body (cont.)
• Bad sign to see every paragraph
beginning with name of a researcher.
• Organize the review into sections that
present themes or identify trends.
• Synthesize and evaluate the researches
to the guiding concept of your thesis or
research question.
Example: Why sexist language affects
persuasion?
• However, other studies have shown that
even gender-neutral antecedents are more
likely to produce masculine images than
feminine ones (Gastil, 1990). Hamilton
(1998) asked students to complete sentences
that required them to fill in pronouns that
agreed with gender-neutral antecedents
such as “writer,” “pedestrian,” “persons,”
“director,” “manager,” “worker,” “laborer.”
• The students were asked to describe any
image they have when writing the
sentence. Hamilton found that people
imagined 3.3 men to each woman in the
masculine “generic” condition and 1.5
men per woman in the unbiased
condition. Thus while ambient sexism
accounted for some of the masculine
bias, sexist language amplified the
effect.
Summarize the review in a table
• Keyway to help overview, organize, and
summarize the findings
• Each must be accompanied by an
analysis that interprets and synthesizes.
• Example:
• Definitions of terms and concepts
• Research methods used
• Summary of research results.
Writing the conclusion
• Summarize major contributions of significant
studies to body of knowledge under review
maintaining the focus established in the
introduction.
• Evaluate the current body of knowledge
reviewed pointing out:
• Major methodological flaws or gaps in
research. Dominant approaches.
• Inconsistencies in theory and findings.
• Areas or issues pertinent to future study.
Writing the conclusion (cont.)
• Conclude by providing some insight into:
• The relationship between the central
topic of literature review and a larger
area of study such as discipline,
profession.
• References: Follow appropriate format.
• Review may be spread over 3-6 pages.
Plagiarism
• In publications, presentations, writings the
researchers explicitly identify, credit, and
reference the author when they take data or
material verbatim from another person’s
written work, whether it is published,
unpublished, or electronically available.
• Ethics: Do not present others’ work as your
own. Acknowledge even the ideas that have
been borrowed.
Ethics of research
• Ethical behavior pervades each
step of the research process –
data collection, data analysis,
reporting, and dissemination of
information

You might also like