Library based research and the literature review

Jenny DriscollNovember 2013

Purpose of the literature review (Rudestam and Newton)

To provide a context for your study To explain the importance of your study To explain the timeliness of your study To clarify the relationship between your

study and previous work in the field To demonstrate that your study is

worthwhile and distinctiveIe – it is not just a demonstration of

your knowledge of the existing literature!

Role of literature review in empirical studies

Set out state of thinking /research in topic area

Identify gaps/flaws in existing knowledge

Consider methods used in topic area

Identify key questions to be studied and methods of enquiry likely to be effective

From Arksey and Knight (1999)

Role of literature review in library-based dissertations

Particular importance of critical analysis

Greater depth

Policy context

Implications for practice

Requires originality deriving from new perspective/ policy critique/creative synthesis – examples?

Contents of literature review (Ridley)

Historical background to study Definition of key terms and use in context of

work (could be in introduction) Discussion of relevant theories and concepts

underpinning research Contemporary debates, issues and questions

in field Discussion of related research, demonstrating

how study will extend/challenge this Supporting evidence for issues you are

addressing

Planning the literature review

Systematic searches by key wordsStart writing informally early: it

will help develop plan and save panic later!

Cyclical process:Searching

Reading

Writing

Read around the topic

Central idea/ research question

Immediate context(s)

Wide view: includesperipheral literature

Mapping the literature review

Opportunity and motivation in instrumental and singing tuition:why do children take up and give up music lessons?

MusicWhy study music?

Cognitive, social and emotional benefits of

music education

MotivationTheories of motivation

Motivation in education and

musicChildren’s motivation

Opportunity Historical

perspective Status of music

educationCurrent policy Availability of

tuition

Appropriate sources

Use original sources, not secondary sources or reviews wherever possible

Beware ‘soft’ sources eg internet/ unauthored

Balance of ‘front-line’ literature theoretical work reports of original research accounts of current practice policy statements

Selecting sources Read widely, then ask:

1. What is the relevance of this piece for my topic/research?

2. What information do I need to get from this piece that feeds into my writing?

‘build an argument, not a library’ (Rudestam 2001: 59)

Select literature to serve your purposes

to avoid becoming overwhelmed to enhance criticality over description

Critical reading

The critical reader evaluates the arguments of others:

What evidence does the author produce for their claims?

Does the author’s reasoning lead logically to the conclusions drawn?

What values or assumptions are made explicitly or implicitly?

How do the author’s claims relate to those of others?

How do the author’s claims relate to the reader’s own research or knowledge?

Code literature you have read

Keep records of reading and code for future reference:

(1) Return to this for detailed analysis(2) Important general text(3) Of minor importance (4) Not relevant

Ensure you keep full citations (including page numbers for future reference) from the outset!

Requirements of academic writing

1. Writing for building knowledge

2. All claims backed up by evidence

3. All sources of information acknowledged

4. Relatively formal style

5. Clear structure

Writing for building knowledge

Academic writing is not about testing knowledge!

It requires you to:

Critically analyse instead of reporting

Take a stance

Express your voice

Critical writing

The critical writer constructs their own argument

Arguments have 2 components:A set of claims or assertions (conclusions)The warrant (backing) for them (evidence)

OPINION = UNWARRANTED CONCLUSIONARGUMENT = CONCLUSION + WARRANT

(Wallace and Wray 2006)

Developing a coherent argument

Rudestam (2001: 57) the literature review is ‘not a compilation of facts but a coherent argument that leads to the description of a proposed study’

Anticipate reader’s (or marker’s) comments:What is your evidence for this?What point are you trying to make here?So what? What are the implications?Where is this leading? Why does it matter?

Don’t report - critique

Assess the status of existing knowledge

Give both or all sides of the argument Take a stance

Where does weight of argument fall?Where are gaps in the knowledge base?

Convince reader of legitimacy of assertions by sufficient logical and empirical evidence

Originality:Analysis and synthesis

Analysis: systematic extraction of ideas / theories / concepts / assumptions from the literature

Synthesis: making of connections

between elements derived from analysis to demonstrate patterns not previously produced

Voice and authorship

Foregrounding of writer voiceMake connections between sources

‘X...whilst Y.....’; ‘furthermore, A contends...’Summarise source text(s) then evaluate

‘but B’s research does not extend to consideration of...’

‘these examples demonstrate the significance of...’)

Summarise state of play at end of section

Maintain your authority

Rudestam 2001, Ridley 2008 Develop your argument, and cite work of others

to evidence /buttress points/ provide examples... ‘Care leavers can be remarkably resilient (Dixon

et al 2006)’ …Rather than hiding behind authority of cited

texts ‘Dixon et al (2006) found that care leavers can

be remarkably resilient’ tends to shift focus from your argument to work of others

Use your own words Overuse of quotations will deflect your

ownership of the argument

Acknowledging sources

APA system of referencing

Partial references in text (Fortin 2009: 81)

Full references in Reference ListFortin, J. (2009 3rd edition) Children’s

Rights and the Developing Law Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Structuring the literature review

State goal and structure of evolving argument at the start

By end, reader will understand the need for the study to progress knowledge in the area

At the conclusion, remind reader how each hypothesis/research question emerged from theoretical propositions established in the literature review

Explain methodology with reference to literature

Structure

Structure chapters clearly Use headings and sub-headings Logical flow Signpost development of material Link chapters with brief summary

and highlight of next aspect Be consistent

Writing style

Conventional to use third person/ passive tense - but may use personal pronouns for sociological work especially in reflexive passages

Conventional to use past tenseClarity is paramount: avoid very

lengthy sentences or paragraphsAttention to spelling and grammarAvoid multiple

acronyms/abbreviations

Writing style

One idea per sentence

One topic per paragraph

Ensure all sentences have subject, object and verb

Link paragraphs to show development of argument

Linkage tracker test (Wallace and Wray 2006)

To check the logical coherence of your argument and the relevance of your material, select any piece of text and ask:

1) Why is this material here?2) How does it contribute to the

development of my overall argument?

Coherence

The study confirms the importance of intrinsic pleasure in music tuition...This may be worth remembering in the context of recent initiatives focussing on informal or non-formal learning, primarily in large groups. However, ‘performing in groups’ came a close second to ‘playing alone for my own pleasure’ in the aspects of music tuition respondents liked best...These findings confirm the significance of social aspects of music tuition for young people.

Relates back to importance of intrinsic pleasure

Adversative statement

Referring to last point Links to next paragraph

Signposting

From Fortin (2009)

...It is clear that the law could do more to ensure that parents paidgreater attention to their children’s rights, if it took a moreinterventionist role. But social policy...reflects a distinct lack ofsympathy for the view that the law should attempt to interfere withfamily life. This chapter starts by assessing the extent to which theassumption that the family should be free from legal regulationunderlies current legislation governing the relationship betweenchildren and their parents. It then considers two areas which,despite being very different in content, demonstrate well the law’sreluctance to intervene in order to promote children’s rights. Itassesses first the legal principles governing parents’ right to

controland discipline their children as they think fit. Second, it considersthe law’s treatment of the child’s right to financial support and to

bebrought up with a reasonable standard of living. Both areas of lawreflect how the concept of ‘private ordering’ dominates policy inthese fields.

Overcoming writing avoidancestrategies

Don’t wait until you have ‘something to write’ You will end up with more reading than you can cope with

Write as you go! Start literature review as soon as you have started reading...

Most of us can’t organise thoughts in head – do it on paper First draft is hardest – then you have something to work on Work on several sections at a time – if you get blocked/bored,

a change is as good as a rest Don’t start at the beginning

leave the introduction until you know what you are introducing

See Allison and Race (2004)

Revision of drafts

Leave first draft a while before returning to read it afresh and revise

Read aloud for sense and flow Read through quickly for overview of

message Check for grammatical construction and

spelling Remove extraneous words and repetition If over the word limit, ask – how does this

section contribute to answering my research question?

What makes a good literature review?

Demonstrates understanding of key issues in field

Provides context and justification for research question(s)

Critical evaluationContributes to rationale for methodology Well-developed logical argumentClarity of expression and presentationAccurate references [Clear linkage to findings and

conclusions]

Things that tend to go wrong

Research question not grounded in literature review (empirical study)

Literature review descriptive, not analytical Lack of originality arising from inadequate

synthesis Poor balance between review of theoretical

work, empirical research, policy and practice Linkage: literature review – methods -

findings Lacking multi-disciplinary perspective (Child

Studies)

Judging the literature review (Hart 1998/Boote and Biele 2005)

1. Coverage A. Justified criteria for inclusion and exclusion from review.

2. Synthesis B. Distinguished what has been done in field from what needs to be

done. C. Placed topic or problem in broader scholarly literature D. Placed research in historical context of field. E. Acquired and enhanced subject vocabulary. F. Articulated important variables and phenomena relevant to topic. G. Synthesized and gained a new perspective on the literature.

3. Methodology H. Identified main methodologies /techniques in field; advantages and disadvantages.

I. Related ideas and theories in field to research methodologies.4. Significance

J. Rationalized practical significance of research problem.K. Rationalized the scholarly significance of research problem.

5. Rhetoric L. Written with coherent, clear structure that supported the review.

Assess the 3 articles

Originality of contribution

Critical evaluation of literature

Policy/ practice/ research implications

Author’s voice

Structure

Coherence and writing style

Useful resources

Allison and Race (2004, 2nd ed) The student’s guide to preparing dissertations and theses London: RoutledgeFalmer

Hart, C. (1998) Doing a Literature Review: Releasing the Social Science Research Imagination London: Sage

Ridley, D. (2008) The literature review: a step-by-step guide for students London: Sage

Rudestam, K. And Newton, R. (2001 2nd edition) Surviving your Dissertation: A Comprehensive Guide to Content and Process Thousand Oaks: Sage

Wallace, M. And Wray, A. (2006) Critical reading and Writing for Postgraduates London: Sage