Literature Review – how to conduct
We will talk about BOTH:
(1) “Literature Review” as the qualitative
methodological approach
(2) “literature review” as a step in the
Research process
“Literature Review” (upper-class “L”s)
is a qualitative method
• Article characterized by reporting
primary studies that compose
body of literature
• Sometimes…
– Annotated bibliography – descriptive
analysis of primary studies
– New arguments - using primary
studies to support new hypotheses
– Expert opinions - Providing expert
summary of history of literature,
including organization, synthesis,
analysis, and insights into future
“literature review” (lower-case “l”s)
occurs at THREE stages
(1) Research Idea – for pre-emption search
(2) Research Design – for getting materials/procedures
(3) Publication Process – for writing “Introduction”
Pre-production
Pre-production
Research
Idea
Research
Design
Pick a topic
Translate topic into Question
Translate into Hypothesis
Preemption search
Production
Production
Collecting
Data
Post-production
Post-production
Analyzing
Data
Approval for study via IRB
Preparation to conduct study
Recruiting subjects
Conducting the study
Coding and entering data
Selecting the methodological approach
Operationalizing variables/materials
Crafting procedures/paradigms
Determining sample
Evaluating the practicality of the research
Publication
Process
Deciding when to start writing paper
How to write psychology manuscripts
How to write in APA format
How to decide where to submit manuscript
Journal review process
Talks, posters, and other ways to disseminate your work
Data preparation and screening
Evaluating sample statistically
Evaluating materials statistically
Evaluating procedures statistically
Analyzing research Hypothesis
Interpreting the results
What are similarities/differences
between the two?
• Similarities = all pre-writing aspects
are the same, such as
–
–
–
–
–
identifying topic
inclusion/exclusion criteria
collecting literature
summarizing it
interpreting it
What are similarities/differences
between the two?
• Difference = writing stage, such as
–
Literature Review
(1) Annotated Bibliography
Describe each primary study; paragraph per at minimum;
few paragraphs per at maximum; include major points
including hypothesis and design; can group studies
together if relevant; opinions and comments to minimum
(2) New Arguments
Group primary studies according to arguments; discuss
studies only as relevant to arguments; provide critique;
opinions and comments to maximum
(3) Expert Opinion
Summarizing studies as relevant to history, current trends,
and future research; highlighting most important studies;
opinions and comments to maximum
What are similarities/differences
between the two?
• Difference = writing stage, such as
–
literature review
(1) Research Idea phase
No writing for literature review at research idea phase;
only interested in gathering information for pre-emption
(2) Research Design phase
No writing for literature review at research design phase;
only interested in collecting measures/procedures
(3) Publication process phase
Concise mixture of all purposes of Literature Review;
want to include descriptive analysis of primary studies;
want to group studies according to arguments/hypotheses;
want to provide expert opinions of history of topic, current
trends of topic, and future research of topic.
Steps in conducting (pre-writing)
• Identify “core” resources
– Primary (articles and books reporting original content)
– Secondary (textbooks, books, Handbooks, etc)
• Branch out from there using…
–
–
–
–
–
Database searches
Descendancy approach
Ancestry approach
Hand searches
Invisible College
• Inclusion/Exclusion criteria
• Keeping records
Steps in conducting (writing)
• Steps are based upon purpose behind
the article (see previous slides)
• Some commonalities include:
–
–
–
–
Summarize
Interpret
Organize
Synthesize
Advanced Sources
• Synthesizing Research: A Guide
for Literature Reviews, by
Cooper, Sage publications,
1998.
• The Handbook of Research
Synthesis, by Cooper and
Hedges, Russell Sage
publications, 1994