1、1,Review of the Literature,Seminar on Research Methods Renmin University A.D. Cohen Professor in Phased Retirement, U. of M, /adcohen 3.7.12,2,Sources for Literature to Review,Key journals in your field of interest Most recent published books in the field The website o

2、f key scholars Email replies from scholars re their own recent writings and those of others The references section in current publications Asking local colleagues Doctoral students Where else?,3,Criteria for Inclusion in Lit Review,Given the proliferation of published research, is there clear justif

3、ication for including each reference in the review? Will a reading of this review of the literature change or enhance anyones theoretical understanding of the problem? change or enhance the research methods in their work?,4,Do you say what you are going to review up front road-mapping the plan for t

4、he review? Note that this is critical with longer reviews (7-15 pp.). Is each section linked with each other section? Are there clear transitions?,5,Do you integrate only those articles that are expressly relevant to the topic of the given study? Especially if you take a funnel approach (starting br

5、oad and narrowing down), are you adequately selective in choosing only those references that have relevance to the topic either for their inclusion or exclusion? Is case taken to ensure that the details of each reviewed article are of value to this review and dont read like an extended book review?,

6、6,How is the balance between having enough information so that the reader understands its contribution to the review vs. having too much information and possibly of dubious relationship to the current study?,7,Are there adequate references to seminal classical studies? Likewise, are there adequate r

7、eferences to the latest and most relevant studies? Is there adequate reference to empirical studies?,8,Is there other relevant literature which you might have overlooked? Is it possible to determine which cited studies are central to the aims of the research and which others may be tangential or ext

8、raneous?,9,Is there a summary of each section before you move to the next, or at least an indication as to what the reader is expected to take away from the section?,10,Instead of leading with the names of the authors, do you start with the issue, concept, or point? This is not easy to do it calls f

9、or a good sense of cohesion and coherence. If researchers do this well, they are engaged in discourse synthesis.,11,Does the current study logically follow from the review? Does the review set the reader up to be able to understand all the variables in the study, and if need be, the research methodo

10、logy used?,12,Is the review critical enough or too accepting? It is possible to play both a doubting and a believing game.,13,Does the literature review make a convincing case for the need for this study? Does the researcher insert references to the literature in other sections (e.g., under “Instrum

11、entation” or “Discussion”)?,14,Stylistic Issues Do you as writer keep the paragraphs at a reasonable length? Are you mindful of the difference between conceptual paragraphing and physical paragraphing that is, the division of a conceptual unit into two or more physical paragraphs for the sake of the readers train of thought? Do you use headings and subheadings to help the reader know where they are, where they were, and where they are going?