1 / 15

CHAPTER FIVE REVIEWING THE LITERATURE

CHAPTER FIVE REVIEWING THE LITERATURE. Knowledge does not exist in a vacuum, and your work only has value in relation to other people’s. Your work and your findings will be significant only to the extent that they are the same as, or different from, other people’s work.

tory
Download Presentation

CHAPTER FIVE REVIEWING THE LITERATURE

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. CHAPTER FIVE REVIEWING THE LITERATURE

  2. Knowledge does not exist in a vacuum, and your work only has value in relation to other people’s. Your work and your findings will be significant only to the extent that they are the same as, or different from, other people’s work. (Jankowicz 1995, pp.128–9)

  3. PURPOSES OF THE LITERATURE REVIEW • To demonstrate your knowledge of the subject. • To provide an outline of the relevant theories and concepts. • To focus the research question. • To determine the extent of past research into the subject. • To develop a hypothesis. • To identify methodologies and methods that have been successfully utilised in the past. • To help ensure all relevant variables are identified. • To allow comparison of your findings with those of others.

  4. SOURCES OF LITERATURE • Peer-reviewed journals. • Conference papers. • The Internet. • Past theses. • Newspapers/magazines. • Trade journals.

  5. ASSESSING THE LITERATURE • What is the source of the literature? • Who are the authors? Are they experts in the field? • What other work have they published in a similar area? • Is that piece of literature referenced elsewhere in other articles on the subject area? If so, are such references positive or critical? • When was the article published? Is it a recent article or has it been superseded by other research? • Using your own knowledge, how good do you think the article is?

  6. ASSESSING WEB SITES • Who produced the page? Was it: • An academic institution or publisher? • An official company or organisational web page? • A personal web page? • What are their qualifications for producing such material? • What was their purpose in producing the page? • Who was their intended audience? • Has the content undergone any form of refereeing process? • When was the page last updated?

  7. WRITING THE LITERATURE REVIEW The literature review should start with an introduction, identifying the topic under investigation and providing a context for the review. This should be followed by the main body, where the literature is reviewed.

  8. Begin the review with a broad overview of the relevant ideas, concepts and definitions, before narrowing down to more relevant works. Past research should be grouped together under appropriate categories, for example: • Studies involving similar research problems. • Studies involving similar methodologies. • Studies coming to similar conclusions.

  9. Demonstrate: • What do we know? • What don’t we know (research gap)? • How your study fits the research gap. • What you may expect to find (hypotheses). • Relate the literature to your study. • Be critical if appropriate.

  10. MISTAKES OFTEN MADE IN THE LITERATURE REVIEW • Making the review simply a list of past studies, or producing an annotated bibliography. • Not relating the literature review to the study, and making it simply a general review of the subject matter. • Not taking time to identify the best sources, and give such sources due emphasis, while at the same time over-emphasising weaker or less important sources.

  11. Failing to appreciate the relevant wider (i.e. beyond just that which is sports related) literature. • Relying on secondary rather than primary sources of literature (textbooks rather than journal articles for example). • Uncritically accepting the findings of existing literature rather than critically evaluating them. • Not considering contrary findings and alternative interpretations. • Raising problematic issues but not addressing them.

  12. HOW DO I KNOW IF I HAVE COMPLETED MY LITERATURE REVIEW? • Have I covered the key literature? • Is the literature review up to date? • Have I covered recent sources? • Do I relate that literature to my research question? • Have I included literature that contradicts, as well as supports my viewpoint?

  13. Have I produced a critical assessment rather than a descriptive review? • Have I organised the review into a logical and coherent structure rather than simply producing a list of literature? • Have I identified the gaps/weaknesses in existing literature? • Does my research question emerge clearly from the literature?

  14. SUMMARY 1. It is important that you develop your own expertise in the subject matter at an early stage in the research process. This is done through locating, reading and reviewing relevant literature. 2. The written review of this literature also forms an important part of your written report. 3. In your search for literature, you should not restrict yourself. Broaden your search at the beginning, and be prepared to seek out different sources. You should then gradually focus your review towards your particular research objectives.

  15. 4. Always relate your review to your own research question, rather than simply making it a review of the state of knowledge in the area per se. 5. Existing literature may, in certain cases, provide you with existing data with which you can achieve your research objectives.

More Related