Research Methods Lecture 4

1. Research MethodsLecture 4 16 November, 10-13 Johan Brink C22

2. Agenda • Conducting a literature review • Source criticism • Meta-studies • Reading

3. Reasons for writing a literature review WHY?

4. Reasons for writing a literature review • You need to know what is already known – reinventing the wheel • Learn from others mistakes and avoid them • Learn about different theoretical and methodological approaches • Understand the context of the problem • Understand the structure of the problem • Help you develop your analytical framework • Consider to include additional variables – extend research • Suggest future RQ’s • Help with the interpretation of your findings • Gives you pegs on which to hang your findings • Its expected!

5. A good literature review • Literature mentioned and discussed relates to the problem statement of the study • Mentions different theoretical ideas contributing to the future exploration or explanation of the study’s problem statement • Summarizes previous studies addressing and investigating the current study’s problem statement • Discusses the theoretical ideas mentioned against the background of the results of previous studies • Analyses and compares previous studies in the light of their research design and methodology • Demonstrates how the current study fits in with previous studies, and shows its specific new contribution

6. Literature review Good examples Bad examples No evidence at all Poor length Denser reading required Largely verbatim Poor structure Not correspond to research objectives • Includes a few good review articles • Write critical annotations as you go • Develop a structure • Write purposefully – make a point • Back up arguments • Ongoing • Feedback

7. Read! Note key words Keep notes Note referred literature Generate New keywords Search Narrative literature review • Traditional • To generate understanding rather than accumulating knowledge • Evolving process • Suitable for inductive studies

8. Systematic literature review Critique against narrative literature review • can lack a means for making sense of what the collection of studies is saying • can be biased by the individual researcher • often lack rigor • Not transparent • Not reproducible • low emphasize on practitioners • The relevance gap • The language of practitioners

9. Planning the review Review Panel (Experts) Review Protocol RQ The population The search strategy Inclusion & exclusion Conducting the review Identification of research Selection of studies Quality assessment Data extraction Data analysis Reporting and dissemination Report and recommendations Disseminating into practice Systematic literature review

10. Planning the review Review Panel (Experts) Review Protocol RQ The population the search strategy Inclusion & exclusion Conducting the review Identification of research Selection of studies Quality assessment Data extraction Data analysis Reporting and dissemination Report and recommendations Disseminating into practice Critique Depend on definitions Bureaucratic process Positivistic approach Tricky to deal with qualitative research Systematic literature review

11. Notes

12. IT- Tools EndNote ProCite Mendeley … Style Harvard Name (year) title, journal, Volume, issue, pages Footnotes Bottom of page or end References

13. Searching • Key words • Save them! • Time dependent • Different meaning in different discourses • US/UK • AND, OR, NOT, *, ?, *,’xxx’ • References • Times cited • Authors • Search engines & library • http://scholar.google.se/ • EBSCO • www.ub.gu.se/ • Review papers • Academy of Management Review • International Journal of Management Reviews

14. Discuss 2 and 2 Come up with a suggestion for at least 5 search terms for either a, b or c After break write on board Motivate your choices • Who becomes an entrepreneur and what does it take to be a successful one? • What explains the difference in internationalization strategies chosen by financial institutions in Europe? • How effective is impression management in the consultancy industry?

15. Hermeneutics

16. Language games • Wittgenstein • Re-created mranings of words

17. Source criticism • Trustworthy source • Updated? • Independent sources • Secondary sources • The Chinese whisper game! • Motivation • Why do they say this? • Peer reviewed, academic, journals • Trade journals • Books

18. Combining / Pooling of quantitative studies Emerged in psychotherapy research in the 70ties Overall generalizations Positivistic Allows for an increase in power and thus based on a summary estimate of the effect size and its confidence interval, a certain intervention may be proved to be effective even if the individual studies lacked the power to show effectiveness (Ohlsson, 1994, p. 27) Meta-analysis

19. Meta-ethnography • Translate and interpretations of other researchers studies • Translations between studies – what can I see in this? • Alternative interpretations • Higher order interpretations • Synthesis and expressing (writing it up) • Depends upon the richness in empirical material

20. Biblioteric studies

21. Biblioteric studies

22. Bibliometric studies: Author co-citation

23. Bibliometric studies: Co-occurrence keywords

24. Bibliometric: Journal co-citation

25. Bibliometric studies: Author co-citation (min 5 co-citations)

26. Reading • Read abstract • Skim through it! • Title, headings, chapters • Check empirical evidence & kind of method • Check the references • Read sub-headings • Figures, tables, pictures… • Skim through preface and introduction • Read conclusions, interesting chapters, last chapter • ….Everything else

27. Reading • Take notes • Nice position • Fresh and crisp air • Light • Use highlighting pens • Read & look at the text -Do not ‘sound out’ in your head -( no silent speech) • Do not bother with trying to understand every word • You actually reads sentences - Do not focus on every word • Read with a ‘moving pen’ -Do not go back