literature review backgroundViva Du文档格式.docx

literature review backgroundViva Du文档格式.docx

《literature review backgroundViva Du文档格式.docx》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《literature review backgroundViva Du文档格式.docx（8页珍藏版）》请在冰豆网上搜索。

Bell,2007）.Inotherwords,agoodliteraturereviewingprocessisnotsimplyaboutsearchingforpaststudiesonaparticulartopicandthendescribingtherelevantinformation/resultsgeneratedbyeachstudy,butmoreimportantlyitshouldalsore-organizeandcriticallyevaluatetheselectedliterature,integratetheirresults,interpretthecumulativefindingsandultimatelytoproduceacomprehensiveandcoherentreportofthesynthesis’findingsonthechosentopic（Kennedy,2007）.Itaimstoreviewthecriticalpointsofcurrentknowledgeanddemonstratetherelationshipofeachworktotheothersunderconsideration,thusitdoesnotcontributeanyoriginalexperimentalwork（Gall,Borg,&

Gall,2002;

Hart,1998）.

Purposesofconductingaliteraturereview

Byconductingaliteraturereview,theresearchercangainacomprehensiveunderstandingandincreaseone’sownknowledgeabouttheareaofinterestbasedonwhathavealreadybeenstudiedandpublishedbyotherscholars（Galletal.,2002）.Thiswillhelptheresearchertoknowwhatisalreadyknowninthefieldsothats/hewouldnot“reinventthewheel”.Fromreaders’pointofview,thiswillalsobringthereadersuptodatewithwhathavebeencurrentlystudiedandknown.

Theresearcherscanalsocheckideasandtestpersonalperceptionsduringthisprocess.Therelevanttheoriesandconceptsonaparticulartopicwillbeexploredbyreviewingavarietyofsources（Galletal.,2002）.Basedonthisexistingknowledge,researcherswillneedtothinkcriticallyaboutthekeyissuesandaskthemselvesquestionssuchas“arethesefindingsreliable?

”,“arethereanygapsamongthosestudiesthatneedtobelookedintoinfuturestudies?

”,or“arethereanymajordebatesinthefieldandhowcanmyresearchcontributetothem?

”（Bryman&

Bell,2007）.Theexistingknowledgefromtheliteraturecombinedwithcriticalthinkingcanhelptheresearcherreviseandrefinetheresearchquestionsoranalyticalframeworkforhis/herownresearchprojectorprovidesomebasisforfuturestudies（Hart,2001）.Forexample,researchersmayconductaliteraturereviewistoexplorewhatmethodsandresearchstrategiesareoftenadoptedinconductingthestudiesinafieldofinterest.Thesemethodsandstrategiesneedtobecomparedandcriticallyevaluatedinordertoexploreanypotentialproblemsthatareaffectingthevalidityandreliabilityofpreviousstudies（Dellinger,2005）.Inthisprocess,researcherscanlearnfromothers’mistakesandthereforetorefinetheresearchdesignoftheirownresearchproject（Galletal.,2002）.Furthermore,researchersreviewliteraturetofindoutanyinconsistenciesorsignificantcontroversiesinpreviousfindingsoranyunansweredquestionsinaparticulararea（Colling,1003;

Saunders,Lewis,&

Thornhill,2007）.Thustheprocessofconductingaliteraturereviewhelpsresearcherstodecidetheirresearchfocuses（suchasfocusingontestingaparticularhypothesis）orsuggestnewfutureresearchdirections.

Inshort,aliteraturereviewisameansofdevelopinganargumentaboutthesignificanceofone’sresearchandwhereitleads.Thereviewshouldshowwhytheproposedresearchquestionsareimportant.Insomeinstances,researchersmayinterpretwhatotherscholarshavearguedinpreviousliteratureandusethoseprominentwritingstosupportaparticularviewpoint.Thisisameansofaffirmingtheresearcher’scredibilityassomeonewhoisknowledgeableinthechosenarea（Bryman&

Bell,2007）.

Commonstepsinconductingaliteraturereview

Therearemanydifferentwaysofconductingaliteraturereviewduetodifferentphilosophicalpositionsheldbytheresearchers.HoweverAccordingtoDenyerandNeely（2004）thefollowingstepsareveyoftenincluded.

Firstofall,theresearchtopicneedstobenarroweddowninordertolimitthenumberofsourcesthatshouldbereadandreviewed.Bynarrowingthetopicdown,theresearcherwillbemorefocusedononespecificarea.Thisenablestheliteraturereviewandtheanalysistobemorecomprehensiveandremainabetterquality（Cronin,Ryan,&

Coughlan,2008;

DeakinUniversityLibrary,2011）.Secondly,developthecriteriaforjudgingwhetherastudywasconductedwellenoughtobeincludedinthesynthesis.Itisunlikelythatoneoracoupleofarticleswillprovidesufficientinformationrelevanttothechosentopic.Researchersalwaysneedtoreadalargeamountofarticlesthatseemtoberelevantinordertodiscoverwhatisgenerallyagreedorwhatarethemaindebatesinthefield.Thereforethepredeterminedcriteriacanhelpresearcherstomakegoodandconsistentjudgmentsonwhatneedtobeincludedorexcludedduringtheliteraturereviewprocess.Moreover“alackoftime”isacommonlimitationforresearchprojects,thissecondstepsavesresearchers’timeonreviewingliteratureandenablestheresearchprocesstobeefficient（Bryman&

Bell,2007）.Thenextstepistothinkaboutwhatthemesandcriticalissuesconnecttheliteraturetogetherastheliteraturereviewrequiresare-organizationandasynthesisratherthansimplysummarizeeachworkonebyone.Somescholarsclassifythesethreestepsintooneandnameit“problemformulation”.Itinvolvesidentifyingwhichtopicorfieldaretobeexaminedandwhatitscomponentissuesare（Trochim,2006）.

Aftertheproblemformulation,thefollowingstepistobeginsearchingfortherelevantmaterialsandidentifythekeyissuesandfindingsdemonstratedbythosestudies.Theresearcherneedstoevaluatehowtheevidencesupportstheauthors’argumentsandhowtheseargumentsorproposedtheoriesandconceptsarerelated.Inthisprocess,itisimportanttohighlightanymajordebatesonthetopicandanyinconsistencyofthosefindingsinordertoproduceathoroughcritiqueofexistingliterature.Thereviewerneedstodistinguishbetweenfactsandopinionsandjustifyhowtheseexistingargumentsandmodelsarerelatedtothereviewer’sownresearcharea（Dees,2003;

Sharpetal.,2002）.

Fromhereonresearcherscanstartdesigningtheresearch.Howeveritisworthnotingthatresearchersshouldnotstopreviewingtheliteratureoncetheystartdesigningtheresearchandcollectingdata.Thereviewshouldbecarriedoutmoreorlessthroughouttheentireresearchprocessinordertokeepresearchersuptodatewithanycurrentstudiesinthesamefield（Bryman&

Bell,2007）.Thereasonisthatresearchprojectsoftentakeafewweeksormonthsorevenyears,inthemeantimetheresearchgapthatyouarecurrentlyworkingonmayhavealreadybeenfilledbyanotherresearcher’lateststudy.Inthiscase,youmaywanttochangetheresearchdirectiontoavoidduplicationofeffort.Anotherreasonisthatcontinuouslyreviewingmoreliteraturethroughouttheresearchprojectmayenabletheresearchertogainbetterinsightsandnewideastowardstheresearchquestionsandthereforetogeneratebetterresearchoutcomes（Galvan,1999）.

Keyelementsofaliterature

Aliteraturereviewconsistsofthreemainparts:

aintroduction,amainbodyandaconclusion（TheUniversityofWisconsin-MadisonWritingCenter,2009）.Theintroductionisanoverviewofthechosentopic.Itbrieflyoutlinesthemainissuesortheoriesunderinvestigation.Theobjectivesoftheliteraturereviewarepresentedhereaswell.Themainbodyoftheliteraturereviewshouldclearlyidentifythekeyargumentsinthefield（Saundersetal.,2007;

TheUniversityofWisconsin-MadisonWritingCenter,2009）.Theargumentsmaybedividedintocategories,forexample,theonesthatsupportaparticularviewpointmaybediscussedtogetherandthosethatshowanoppositepositionmaybediscussedtogetheragainsttheformerones（Sharpetal.,2002）.Thelinkbetweenthosepositionsshouldbeportrayedclearlyinordertoidentifywhythedifferences/debatesexist.Theworkthatprovidesthemostconvincingargumentsormakesthegreatestcontributiontothedevelopmentofthatparticularfieldshouldbehighlightedhere（Bryman&

Bell,2007;

H.Cooper,2010;

TheUniversityofWisconsin-MadisonWritingCenter,2009）.Thisprocessrequiresacriticalthinkingandtheresearchershouldgiveconsiderationstothefollowingfewaspectswhenreviewingeachwork:

1）aretheargumentssupportedbyempiricalevidences,2）arethereanybiasintheresearchdesign,3）doestheworksignificantlycontributetotheresearchareaorprovidesanyvaluableinsightsthatworthmentioningintheliteraturereview（Machi,2009）.

Approachestotheliteraturereview

Literaturereviewscanhavedifferentpurposes,goals,focuses,perspectives,coveragestrategies,organizationsandaudiences.Theymayhavedifferentfocusesoneitherresearchmethods,researchoutcomes,theoriesorapplications.Researchersmayattempttointegratewhatothershavewrittenandhighlightthecentralissues,ortocriticizethosearguments,ortobuildconnectionsbetweenrelatedtopics（Kennedy,2007）.Basedonthesedifferences,literaturereviewscanbeclassifiedintothefollowingtypes:

Argume