Writing the Review of Related Literature and Studies

Differences between
Related Literature and Studies

Related Literature
Composed of: Discussions of facts and principles to which your study is related

Related Studies
Composed of: studies, inquiries or investigations already conducted to which your study is related

Usually printed or published: Usually unpublished: Ex. Books, encyclopedias, Ex. Thesis, dissertations, journals, magazines, newspaper manuscripts

Both are classified as:

Local - if printed or conducted in Philippines Foreign - if printed or conducted in other lands/country

Review of Related Literature and Study is

A discussion of your knowledge about the topic under study A discussion of your knowledge that is supported by the research literature A foundation for the study

Review of Related Literature and Study is Not

A study-by-study, or article-by-article, description of studies previously done A re-statement of the studies previously done A brief overview of articles An annotated bibliography in which you summarize briefly each article that you have reviewed.

Importance

of Related Literature and Studies

They help or guide the researcher :

In understanding his topic better In ensuring that there will be no duplication of other studies In locating more sources of related information. In searching or selecting a better research problem or topic. In making his research design comparison between his

Purposes

of Review of Literature and Studies

 To Find out how much research has been done on the same area To Justify the need for more studies on the topic To Fill in existing gaps, clarify inconsistencies, substantiate existing facts To Help with procedures and processes To Get new idea and approaches

There are Scientific Reasons for conducting a literature review

In the book of Gall, Borg,and Gall (1996), they argue that the literature review plays a role in:

Delimiting the research problem Seeking new lines of inquiry/investigation Avoiding fruitless approaches Gaining methodological insights Identifying recommendations for further research Seeking support for grounded theory.

Hart (1998) contributes additional reasons for reviewing the literature, including:
Distinguishing what has been done from what needs to be done Discovering important variables relevant to the topic Synthesizing and gaining a new perspective Identifying relationships between ideas and practices Establishing the context of the topic or problem Rationalizing the significance of the problem Enhancing and acquiring the subject vocabulary Understanding the structure of the subject Relating ideas and theory to applications of the main methodologies and research techniques that have been used Placing the research in a historical context to show

Characteristics of
Related Literature and Studies

Criteria:

What makes a good literature review?

Clearly written Recent Relevant Objective and Unbiased Comprehensive Accurately referenced Valid and reliable

on effective writing of the Literature Review

Guidelines

 Research papers must be written in a formal style, which is in the third person, not the first person Avoid highly descriptive writing style, not approriate for a scholarly research Use the active voice for direct impact and easy understanding Avoid the use of jargon : use familiar terms in place of terminologies

 Language should be neutral gender, no sexy language like his Make the conclusions and contradictions found in the literature clear in the report Use short sentences: avoid elongated and run-on expressions Use proper grammar and proofread the work Never plagiarize ; give credit to the original author of ideas

 Pay attention to the structure and form of published articles, which are good examples of how literature reviews can written Examples : Jose (2007) claims that job-related stress can enhance productivity up to a certain point. There is, however, a threshold point beyond which stress becomes a harmful factor in ones productivity. On the other hand, Luisito (2008) averred that, in his experience as a clinical psycologist, stresses always produce a negative effect on ones productivity.

Writing

a Literature Review

Research review tend to be written in a particular style and typically include specific types of information.

Content

of a Research Review

A written research should provide readers with an objective and thorough summary of the current state of evidence on a topic. A literature review should be neither a series of quotes nor a series of abstracts. The key tasks are to summarize and evaluate the evidence so as to reveal the state-ofthe-art knowledge of a topic-not simply to describe what researchers have done.

The review should point out both consistencies and contradictions in the literature and offer possible explanation for inconsistencies (e.g., different conceptualization or data collection method). Although important studies should be described in some detail, it is not necessary to provide extensive coverage for every reference. Report with similar findings sometimes can be summarized together.

The literature should be summarized in your own words. The review should demonstrate that consideration has been given to the cumulative significance of the body of research. Stringing together quotes from various documents fails to show that previous research on the topic has been assimilated and understood.

Another point to bear in mind is that the review should be as objective as possible. Studies that conflict with personal values or hunches should not be omitted. In addition, the review should not deliberately ignore a study because its findings contradict other studies. Inconsistent result should be analyzed and the supporting evidence evaluated objectively.

The literature review should conclude with a critical summary that recaps key study findings and indicates how credible they are ; it should also make note of gaps in the research. The summary thus requires critical judgment about the extensiveness and dependability of evidence on a topic.

As you progress through this book, you will become increasingly proficient in critically evaluating research report. We hope you will understand the mechanics of writing a research review when you have completed this chapter, but we do not expect that you will be in a position to write a state-of-the-art review until you have acquired more skills in research methods.

Style

of a Research Review

Students preparing their first written research review often have trouble adjusting to the standard style of research review. One issue is that student sometimes accept research result without criticism or reservation, reflecting a common misunderstanding about the conclusiveness of research. You should keep in mind that no hypothesis or theory can be proved or disproved by empirical testing, and no research question can be definitely answered in

The problem is partly a semantic one : hypotheses are not proved, they are supported by research findings; theories are not verified, but they may be tentatively accepted if a substantial body of evidence demonstrates their legitimacy. When describing study findings, you should generally use phrases indicating tentativeness of the results, such as the following :

Several studies have found Findings thus far suggest Result from a landmark study indicated The data supported the hypothesis There appears to be strong evidence that A related stylistic problem among movie reviewers is an inclination to intersperse opinions (their own or someone elses) into the review. The review should include opinions sparingly and should be exception of assessment of study quality.

 The left hand column of table present examples of stylistic flaws. The right hand column offers recommendations for rewording the sentences to conform to a more acceptable form for a research literature review. Many alternative wordings are possible.

EXAMPLES OF STYLISTIC DIFFICULTIES FOR RESEARCH REVIEWS INAPPROPRIATE STYLE OR RECOMMENDED CHANGE WORDING that unmet 1. It is known Dr.A.Cassard, an experton stress expectations engender stress and anxiety, has found that unmet expectations engender stress 2. Women who do not participate Studies have found that women (Cassard, 2005) in childbirth preparation classes who participate in preparation for tend to manifest a high degree of childbirth classes manifest less stress during labor stress during labor than those who do not (Klotz,2003; Weller,2004; 3. Studies have proved that Studies by Lowe (2004) and McTygue,2005) doctors and nurses do not fully Martin (2003) suggest that doctors understand the psychobiologic and nurses do not fully understand dynamics of recovery from a the psychobiologic dynamics of 4. Attitudes infarction changed Attiudes have been found to be myocardial cannot be recovery from a myocardial quickly relatively enduring attributes that infarction cannot be changed quickly (Geair, 2003; Casey,2004)

Length

of a Research Review

There are no easy formulas for how long a review should be. The length depends on several factors, including the complexity of the research question, the extent of prior research, and the purpose for which the review is being prepared. Literature reviews prepared for proposals (e.g.,proposals to undertake a study, to test a clinical innovation, or to make a change in practice) tend to be fairly comprehensive. Reviews in theses and dissertations are also lengthy.

In these cases, the literature review serves both to summarize knowledge and to document the reviewers capability. Because of space limitations in journal articles, literature reviews that appear within research reports are concise. Literature reviews in the introduction to research reports demonstrate the need for the new study and provide a context for the research questions. The literature review sections of qualitative reports tend to be especially brief.

However, there are stand-alone research reviews in nursing journals that are more extensive than those appearing in the introductions of research report.