With reviews, the usual subdivision of research papers into introduction, methods, results, and discussion does not work or is rarely used. If you are writing a review on, for example, how epidemiological approaches are used in modelling the spread of ideas, you may be inclined to include material from both parent fields, epidemiology and the study of cultural diffusion.
Subheadings, especially in long transitions to help trace your your topic teaches across disciplines, consider reviewing studies from each discipline a conclusion for the end of the review: provide closure so that the path of the argument ends with a conclusion of some kind. A full review will have the advantage of more freedom to cover in detail the complexities of a particular scientific development, but may then be left in the pile of the very important papers “to be read” by readers with little time to spare for major is probably a continuum between mini- and full reviews.
Major trends or patterns: as you read a range of articles on your topic, you should make note of trends and patterns over time as reported in the literature. This square may be circled by discussing the wider implications of the reviewed topic for other 6: be critical and consistentreviewing the literature is not stamp collecting.
Literature reviews are designed to provide an overview of sources you have explored while researching a particular topic and to demonstrate to your readers how your research fits within a larger field of , arlene. Often this form is used to help establish a lack of appropriate theories or reveal that current theories are inadequate for explaining new or emerging research problems.
Critique the research methodologies used in the studies, and distinguish between assertions (the author's opinion) and actual research findings (derived from empirical evidence). Otolaryngol head neck surg 115: 53– da, west cp (2012) conducting systematic reviews in medical education: a stepwise approach.
M4 f56 ture reviews made easy: a quick guide to number: main collection - pn98. The exercise of reviewing the literature to examine how authors in your discipline or area of interest have composed their literature review sections.
The topic must at least be:Interesting to you (ideally, you should have come across a series of recent papers related to your line of work that call for a critical summary),An important aspect of the field (so that many readers will be interested in the review and there will be enough material to write it), and. However, particularly in the social sciences, thinking about research problems from multiple vectors is a key strategy for finding new solutions to a problem or gaining a new perspective.
Ways to organize your literature your review follows the chronological method, you could write about the materials according to when they were published. The goal is to deliberately document, critically evaluate, and summarize scientifically all of the research about a clearly defined research problem.
Methods ecol evol 2: 238– la, tannery nh, kanter sl (2011) reproducibility of literature search reporting in medical education reviews. Lab invest 87: 1174– dn, beile p (2005) scholars before researchers: on the centrality of the dissertation literature review in research preparation.
Although recognition for scientists mainly comes from primary research, timely literature reviews can lead to new synthetic insights and are often widely read . Literature review is not an annotated bibliography in which you summarize briefly each article that you have reviewed.
The rule i follow is to quote only when when some key meaning would be lost in translation if i were to paraphrase the original author's words, or if using the original words adds special emphasis to a point that i am emphases, strengths & weaknesses: since different research studies focus on different aspects of the issue being studied, each article that you read will have different emphases, strengths. However, sometimes you may need to add additional sections that are necessary for your study, but do not fit in the organizational strategy of the body.
For instance, you could order a review of literature on environmental studies of brown fields if the progression revealed, for example, a change in the soil collection practices of the researchers who wrote and/or conducted the ic [“conceptual categories”]. In what ways might geographers view the need for better distribution of social service agencies in large cities than how social workers might study the issue?
Given such mountains of papers, scientists cannot be expected to examine in detail every single new paper relevant to their interests . This may lead in some cases to conflicting views on the merits of the paper, and on how to improve it, but such a situation is better than the absence of feedback.
Thus, it is both advantageous and necessary to rely on regular summaries of the recent literature. 9: include your own relevant research, but be objectivein many cases, reviewers of the literature will have published studies relevant to the review they are writing.
Isolated statistical results rather than synthesizing them in chi-squared or meta-analytic methods; and,Only includes research that validates assumptions and does not consider contrary findings and alternative interpretations found in the , kathleen e. 8: make use of feedbackreviews of the literature are normally peer-reviewed in the same way as research papers, and rightly so .