ZeePedia

REVIEW OF LITERATURE:Where to find the Research Literature

<< HYPOTHESIS TESTING & CHARACTERISTICS:Correlational hypotheses
CONDUCTING A SYSTEMATIC LITERATURE REVIEW:Write the Review >>
img
Research Methods ­STA630
VU
Lesson 8
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
A literature review is based on the assumption that knowledge accumulates and that we learn from and
build on what others have done. Scientific research is a collective effort of many researchers who share
their results with one another and who pursue knowledge as a community.
Today's studies build on those of yesterday. Researchers read studies to compare, replicate, or criticize
them for weaknesses.
Goals of a Literature Review
Reviews vary in scope and depth. Different kinds of reviews are stronger at fulfilling different goals of
review. The goals of review are:
1. To demonstrate a familiarity with a body of knowledge and establish credibility. A review tells
the reader that the researcher knows the research in an area and knows the major issues. A good
review increases a reader's confidence in the researcher's professional competence, ability, and
background.
2. To know the path of prior research and how a current research project is linked to it. A review
outlines the direction, ability, and background of research on a question and shows the
development of knowledge.  A good review places a research project in a context and
demonstrates its relevance by making connections to a body of knowledge.
3. To integrate and summarize what is known in an area. A review pulls together and synthesizes
different results. A good review points out areas where prior studies agree, where they
disagree, and where major questions remain. It collects what is known to a point in time and
indicates the direction for future research. No reinventing the wheel. No wastage of effort.
4. To learn from others and stimulate new ideas. A review tells what others have found so that a
researcher can benefit from the efforts of others. A good review identifies blind alleys and
suggests hypotheses for replication. It divulges procedures, techniques, and research designs
worth copying so that a researcher can better focus hypotheses and gain new insights.
5. Identification of variables. Important variables that are likely to influence the problem situation
are not left out of the study.
6. Helps in developing theoretical framework.
7. Helps in developing theoretical framework.
Types of Reviews
When beginning a review, researcher may decide on a topic or field of knowledge to examine, how
much depth to go into, and the kind of review to conduct. There are six types of review:
1. Self-study reviews increase the reader's confidence.  A review that only demonstrates
familiarity with an area is rarely published but it often is part of an educational program. In
addition to giving others confidence in a reviewer's command of field, it has the side benefit of
building the reviewer's self confidence.
2. Context reviews place a specific project in the big picture. One of the goals of review is
creating a link to a developing body of knowledge. This is a background or context review. It
introduces the rest of a research and establishes the significance and relevance of a research
26
img
Research Methods ­STA630
VU
question. It tells the reader how a project fits into the big picture and its implications for a field
of knowledge. The review can summarize how the current research continues a developing line
of thought, or it can point to a question or unresolved conflict in prior research to be addressed.
3. Historical review traces the development of an issue over time. It traces the development of an
idea or shows how a particular issue or theory has evolved over time. Researchers conduct
historical review only on the most important ideas in a field.
4. Theoretical reviews compare how different theories address an issue. It present different
theories that purport to explain the same thing, then evaluates how well each accounts for
findings. In addition to examining the consistency of predictions with findings, a theoretical
review may compare theories for the soundness of their assumptions, logical consistency, and
scope of explanation. Researchers also use it to integrate two theories or extend a theory to new
issues. It sometimes forms a hybrid ­ the historical theoretical review.
5. Integrative review summarizes what is known at a point in time. It presents the current state of
knowledge and pulls together disparate research reports in a fast growing area of knowledge.
6. Methodological reviews point out how methodology varies by study. In it researcher evaluates
the methodological strength of past studies. It describes conflicting results and shows how
different research designs, samples, measures, and so on account for different results.
Where to find the Research Literature
·
Computer: on line systems.
·
Scholarly journals.
·
Books ­ containing reports of original research, or collection of research articles. READERS or
Book of Readings.
·
Dissertations.
·
Government documents.
·
Policy reports and presented papers.
·
Bibliographic indexes.
Referencing Electronic Sources:
·  Ahmad, B. (2005) Technology and immediacy of information. [on line]
Available http://www.bnet.act.com
27
Table of Contents:
  1. INTRODUCTION, DEFINITION & VALUE OF RESEARCH
  2. SCIENTIFIC METHOD OF RESEARCH & ITS SPECIAL FEATURES
  3. CLASSIFICATION OF RESEARCH:Goals of Exploratory Research
  4. THEORY AND RESEARCH:Concepts, Propositions, Role of Theory
  5. CONCEPTS:Concepts are an Abstraction of Reality, Sources of Concepts
  6. VARIABLES AND TYPES OF VARIABLES:Moderating Variables
  7. HYPOTHESIS TESTING & CHARACTERISTICS:Correlational hypotheses
  8. REVIEW OF LITERATURE:Where to find the Research Literature
  9. CONDUCTING A SYSTEMATIC LITERATURE REVIEW:Write the Review
  10. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK:Make an inventory of variables
  11. PROBLEM DEFINITION AND RESEARCH PROPOSAL:Problem Definition
  12. THE RESEARCH PROCESS:Broad Problem Area, Theoretical Framework
  13. ETHICAL ISSUES IN RESEARCH:Ethical Treatment of Participants
  14. ETHICAL ISSUES IN RESEARCH (Cont):Debriefing, Rights to Privacy
  15. MEASUREMENT OF CONCEPTS:Conceptualization
  16. MEASUREMENT OF CONCEPTS (CONTINUED):Operationalization
  17. MEASUREMENT OF CONCEPTS (CONTINUED):Scales and Indexes
  18. CRITERIA FOR GOOD MEASUREMENT:Convergent Validity
  19. RESEARCH DESIGN:Purpose of the Study, Steps in Conducting a Survey
  20. SURVEY RESEARCH:CHOOSING A COMMUNICATION MEDIA
  21. INTERCEPT INTERVIEWS IN MALLS AND OTHER HIGH-TRAFFIC AREAS
  22. SELF ADMINISTERED QUESTIONNAIRES (CONTINUED):Interesting Questions
  23. TOOLS FOR DATA COLLECTION:Guidelines for Questionnaire Design
  24. PILOT TESTING OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE:Discovering errors in the instrument
  25. INTERVIEWING:The Role of the Interviewer, Terminating the Interview
  26. SAMPLE AND SAMPLING TERMINOLOGY:Saves Cost, Labor, and Time
  27. PROBABILITY AND NON-PROBABILITY SAMPLING:Convenience Sampling
  28. TYPES OF PROBABILITY SAMPLING:Systematic Random Sample
  29. DATA ANALYSIS:Information, Editing, Editing for Consistency
  30. DATA TRANSFROMATION:Indexes and Scales, Scoring and Score Index
  31. DATA PRESENTATION:Bivariate Tables, Constructing Percentage Tables
  32. THE PARTS OF THE TABLE:Reading a percentage Table
  33. EXPERIMENTAL RESEARCH:The Language of Experiments
  34. EXPERIMENTAL RESEARCH (Cont.):True Experimental Designs
  35. EXPERIMENTAL RESEARCH (Cont.):Validity in Experiments
  36. NON-REACTIVE RESEARCH:Recording and Documentation
  37. USE OF SECONDARY DATA:Advantages, Disadvantages, Secondary Survey Data
  38. OBSERVATION STUDIES/FIELD RESEARCH:Logic of Field Research
  39. OBSERVATION STUDIES (Contd.):Ethical Dilemmas of Field research
  40. HISTORICAL COMPARATIVE RESEARCH:Similarities to Field Research
  41. HISTORICAL-COMPARATIVE RESEARCH (Contd.):Locating Evidence
  42. FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION:The Purpose of FGD, Formal Focus Groups
  43. FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION (Contd.):Uses of Focus Group Discussions
  44. REPORT WRITING:Conclusions and recommendations, Appended Parts
  45. REFERENCING:Book by a single author, Edited book, Doctoral Dissertation