Skip to content

Rrl Research Paper

1. Rapple C (2011) The role of the critical review article in alleviating information overload. Annual Reviews White Paper. Available: http://www.annualreviews.org/userimages/ContentEditor/1300384004941/Annual_Reviews_WhitePaper_Web_2011.pdf. Accessed May 2013.

2. Pautasso M (2010) Worsening file-drawer problem in the abstracts of natural, medical and social science databases. Scientometrics85: 193–202 doi:10.1007/s11192-010-0233-5

3. Erren TC, Cullen P, Erren M (2009) How to surf today's information tsunami: on the craft of effective reading. Med Hypotheses73: 278–279 doi:10.1016/j.mehy.2009.05.002[PubMed]

4. Hampton SE, Parker JN (2011) Collaboration and productivity in scientific synthesis. Bioscience61: 900–910 doi:10.1525/bio.2011.61.11.9

5. Ketcham CM, Crawford JM (2007) The impact of review articles. Lab Invest87: 1174–1185 doi:10.1038/labinvest.3700688[PubMed]

6. Boote DN, Beile P (2005) Scholars before researchers: on the centrality of the dissertation literature review in research preparation. Educ Res34: 3–15 doi:10.3102/0013189X034006003

7. Budgen D, Brereton P (2006) Performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering. Proc 28th Int Conf Software Engineering, ACM New York, NY, USA, pp. 1051–1052. doi:10.1145/1134285.1134500.

8. Maier HR (2013) What constitutes a good literature review and why does its quality matter?Environ Model Softw43: 3–4 doi:10.1016/j.envsoft.2013.02.004

9. Sutherland WJ, Fleishman E, Mascia MB, Pretty J, Rudd MA (2011) Methods for collaboratively identifying research priorities and emerging issues in science and policy. Methods Ecol Evol2: 238–247 doi:10.1111/j.2041-210X.2010.00083.x

10. Maggio LA, Tannery NH, Kanter SL (2011) Reproducibility of literature search reporting in medical education reviews. Acad Med86: 1049–1054 doi:10.1097/ACM.0b013e31822221e7[PubMed]

11. Torraco RJ (2005) Writing integrative literature reviews: guidelines and examples. Human Res Develop Rev4: 356–367 doi:10.1177/1534484305278283

12. Khoo CSG, Na JC, Jaidka K (2011) Analysis of the macro-level discourse structure of literature reviews. Online Info Rev35: 255–271 doi:10.1108/14684521111128032

13. Rosenfeld RM (1996) How to systematically review the medical literature. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg115: 53–63 doi:10.1016/S0194-5998(96)70137-7[PubMed]

14. Cook DA, West CP (2012) Conducting systematic reviews in medical education: a stepwise approach. Med Educ46: 943–952 doi:10.1111/j.1365-2923.2012.04328.x[PubMed]

15. Dijkers M (2009) The Task Force on Systematic Reviews and Guidelines (2009) The value of “traditional” reviews in the era of systematic reviewing. Am J Phys Med Rehabil88: 423–430 doi:10.1097/PHM.0b013e31819c59c6[PubMed]

16. Eco U (1977) Come si fa una tesi di laurea. Milan: Bompiani.

17. Hart C (1998) Doing a literature review: releasing the social science research imagination. London: SAGE.

18. Wagner CS, Roessner JD, Bobb K, Klein JT, Boyack KW, et al. (2011) Approaches to understanding and measuring interdisciplinary scientific research (IDR): a review of the literature. J Informetr5: 14–26 doi:10.1016/j.joi.2010.06.004

19. Carnwell R, Daly W (2001) Strategies for the construction of a critical review of the literature. Nurse Educ Pract1: 57–63 doi:10.1054/nepr.2001.0008[PubMed]

20. Roberts PD, Stewart GB, Pullin AS (2006) Are review articles a reliable source of evidence to support conservation and environmental management? A comparison with medicine. Biol Conserv132: 409–423 doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2006.04.034

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

22. Kelleher C, Wagener T (2011) Ten guidelines for effective data visualization in scientific publications. Environ Model Softw26: 822–827 doi:10.1016/j.envsoft.2010.12.006

23. Oxman AD, Guyatt GH (1988) Guidelines for reading literature reviews. CMAJ138: 697–703. [PMC free article][PubMed]

24. May RM (2011) Science as organized scepticism. Philos Trans A Math Phys Eng Sci369: 4685–4689 doi:10.1098/rsta.2011.0177[PubMed]

25. Logan DW, Sandal M, Gardner PP, Manske M, Bateman A (2010) Ten simple rules for editing Wikipedia. PLoS Comput Biol6: e1000941 doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000941[PMC free article][PubMed]

26. van Raan AFJ (2004) Sleeping beauties in science. Scientometrics59: 467–472 doi:10.1023/B:SCIE.0000018543.82441.f1

27. Rosenberg D (2003) Early modern information overload. J Hist Ideas64: 1–9 doi:10.1353/jhi.2003.0017

28. Bastian H, Glasziou P, Chalmers I (2010) Seventy-five trials and eleven systematic reviews a day: how will we ever keep up?PLoS Med7: e1000326 doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000326[PMC free article][PubMed]

29. Bertamini M, Munafò MR (2012) Bite-size science and its undesired side effects. Perspect Psychol Sci7: 67–71 doi:10.1177/1745691611429353[PubMed]

30. Pautasso M (2012) Publication growth in biological sub-fields: patterns, predictability and sustainability. Sustainability4: 3234–3247 doi:10.3390/su4123234

31. Michels C, Schmoch U (2013) Impact of bibliometric studies on the publication behaviour of authors. Scientometrics doi:10.1007/s11192-013-1015-7. In press.

32. Tsafnat G, Dunn A, Glasziou P, Coiera E (2013) The automation of systematic reviews. BMJ346: f139 doi:10.1136/bmj.f139[PubMed]

33. Pautasso M, Döring TF, Garbelotto M, Pellis L, Jeger MJ (2012) Impacts of climate change on plant diseases - opinions and trends. Eur J Plant Pathol133: 295–313 doi:10.1007/s10658-012-9936-1

   

Tanya Golash-Boza
Associate Professor of Sociology, University of California, Merced

Writing a literature review is often the most daunting part of writing an article, book, thesis, or dissertation. “The literature” seems (and often is) massive. I have found it helpful to be as systematic as possible when completing this gargantuan task.

Sonja Foss and William Walters* describe an efficient and effective way of writing a literature review. Their system provides an excellent guide for getting through the massive amounts of literature for any purpose: in a dissertation, an M.A. thesis, or an article or book in any field of study. Below is a  summary of the steps they outline as well as a step-by-step method for writing a literature review.

Step One: Decide on your areas of research:

Before you begin to search for articles or books, decide beforehand what areas you are going to research. Make sure that you only get articles and books in those areas, even if you come across fascinating books in other areas. A literature review I am currently working on, for example, explores barriers to higher education for undocumented students.

Step Two: Search for the literature:

Conduct a comprehensive bibliographic search of books and articles in your area. Read the abstracts online and download and/or print those articles that pertain to your area of research. Find books in the library that are relevant and check them out. Set a specific time frame for how long you will search. It should not take more than two or three dedicated sessions.

Step Three: Find relevant excerpts in your books and articles:

Skim the contents of each book and article and look specifically for these five things:

1. Claims, conclusions, and findings about the constructs you are investigating

2. Definitions of terms

3. Calls for follow-up studies relevant to your project

4. Gaps you notice in the literature

5. Disagreement about the constructs you are investigating

When you find any of these five things, type the relevant excerpt directly into a Word document. Don’t summarize, as summarizing takes longer than simply typing the excerpt. Make sure to note the name of the author and the page number following each excerpt. Do this for each article and book that you have in your stack of literature. When you are done, print out your excerpts.

Step Four: Code the literature:

Get out a pair of scissors and cut each excerpt out. Now, sort the pieces of paper into similar topics. Figure out what the main themes are. Place each excerpt into a themed pile. Make sure each note goes into a pile. If there are excerpts that you can’t figure out where they belong, separate those and go over them again at the end to see if you need new categories. When you finish, place each stack of notes into an envelope labeled with the name of the theme.

Step Five: Create Your Conceptual Schema:

Type, in large font, the name of each of your coded themes. Print this out, and cut the titles into individual slips of paper. Take the slips of paper to a table or large workspace and figure out the best way to organize them. Are there ideas that go together or that are in dialogue with each other? Are there ideas that contradict each other? Move around the slips of paper until you come up with a way of organizing the codes that makes sense. Write the conceptual schema down before you forget or someone cleans up your slips of paper.

Step Six: Begin to Write Your Literature Review:

Choose any section of your conceptual schema to begin with. You can begin anywhere, because you already know the order. Find the envelope with the excerpts in them and lay them on the table in front of you. Figure out a mini-conceptual schema based on that theme by grouping together those excerpts that say the same thing. Use that mini-conceptual schema to write up your literature review based on the excerpts that you have in front of you. Don’t forget to include the citations as you write, so as not to lose track of who said what. Repeat this for each section of your literature review.

Once you complete these six steps, you will have a complete draft of your literature review. The great thing about this process is that it breaks down into manageable steps something that seems enormous: writing a literature review.

I think that Foss and Walter’s system for writing the literature review is ideal for a dissertation, because a Ph.D. candidate has already read widely in his or her field through graduate seminars and comprehensive exams.

It may be more challenging for M.A. students, unless you are already familiar with the literature. It is always hard to figure out how much you need to read for deep meaning, and how much you just need to know what others have said. That balance will depend on how much you already know.

For people writing literature reviews for articles or books, this system also could work, especially when you are writing in a field with which you are already familiar. The mere fact of having a system can make the literature review seem much less daunting, so I recommend this system for anyone who feels overwhelmed by the prospect of writing a literature review.

*Destination Dissertation: A Traveler's Guide to a Done Dissertation

Image Credit/Source: Goldmund Lukic/Getty Images