140 likes | 937 Views
WHAT IS A LITERATURE REVIEW?. A body of research and writing on a particular topic.E.g. ?the literature on public opinion and foreign policy" or ?the literature on democratic stability"A literature review is a systematic examination and interpretation of a literatureCreated to inform and shape su
E N D
1. THE LITERATURE REVIEW Political Science 102
Introduction to Political Inquiry
Lecture 10
2. WHAT IS A LITERATURE REVIEW? A body of research and writing on a particular topic.
E.g. “the literature on public opinion and foreign policy” or “the literature on democratic stability”
A literature review is a systematic examination and interpretation of a literature
Created to inform and shape subsequent research
There are no set “boundaries” for literatures
Overlap in complex ways
No categorization scheme for research into “literatures”
Necessary scope for each literature review is idiosyncratic and determined by the research topic
3. PURPOSES OF A LITERATURE REVIEW Learning about what others have discovered
Ensure we don’t reinvent the wheel
Narrowing or focusing a research topic
Motivating and developing a specific research question
Discovering the data, methods, and research strategies others have used
Identifying research questions that have not been answered
Define the original contribution of current research
4. SOURCES FOR THE LITERATURE REVIEW Research topics may come from many sources:
Personal sources (your own experiences)
Non-scholarly sources (news media)
Scholarly sources (academic books or journals)
Literature review may begin with non-scholarly sources
Motivate research question and spark reader’s interest
But literature must move from non-scholarly literature to scholarly research
Demonstrates state of current scientific knowledge
Ensures current research is part of a scientific dialogue
5. WHAT IS “SCHOLARLY RESEARCH?” Defining characteristic of scholarly research is peer review
Scientific knowledge cumulates through public dialogue and replicability
Best check we have against error and fraud
Ensures research evolves as a conversation
Peer review is generally a double-blind process
Scholars submit research in anonymous form and editors send it to scholars who send in anonymous reviews
Process is slow and can be idiosyncratic
Closest thing we have to a “fair” process
Multiple journal outlets help correct for bias and idiosyncracies
6. WHAT ARE THE PEER REVIEWED OUTLETS? Many journals and presses are peer reviewed
Some have obvious academic names (e.g. American Political Science Review, Princeton University Press)
But you can’t tell just by the title
When in doubt – check the website!
Peer reviewed publications WILL identify themselves
If the outlet does not self-identify as peer reviewed – not a “scholarly” outlet.
Non-scholarly does not mean “wrong” or “bad”
Works are appropriate for literature review
But literature review should build beyond them to peer reviewed work
7. FINDING SCHOLARLY LITERATURE Electronic databases are a great resource
Google Scholar (not just a Google search)
Web of Science (SSCI)
JSTOR (for anything more than 5 years old)
Begin with simple keyword searches
Then search for work cited in the work you find
SSCI feature: Citation trees
Reading article abstracts, book prefaces, and book or literature reviews are also useful
Google Books and… your very own Duke Library are great for finding books.
12. STRUCTURING A LITERATURE REVIEW NOT a series of article or book summaries
“Boxcar” approach
Make a conceptual “storyline” for the literature
What are key concepts and causal claims?
How have they evolved?
First goal is to integrate previous research conceptually and methodologically
Second goal is to explain how this new research both complements and moves beyond previous work
13. ENOUGH ALREADY? Common questions: “How many sources are necessary in a literature review?”
There is no single answer to this question
Answer depends on scope of project and state of literature
But there are some broad goals
First goal is appropriate scope
Have you articulated the key concepts and causal claims the new research examines?
Second goal is balance
If the concepts or causal claims are debated, have you articulated the competing perspectives?