1 / 19

IR1IMEM YEAR ONE

IR1IMEM YEAR ONE. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY L2: Reviewing Literature, Formulating Research Problem, Variables DR. JAVED-VASSILIS KHAN, Drs. Allerd Peters, Frank Weissman BREDA SEP2011. INDEX. Reviewing the Literature. REVIEWING THE LITERATURE. Integral part of research process

stu
Download Presentation

IR1IMEM YEAR ONE

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. IR1IMEM YEAR ONE RESEARCH METHODOLOGY L2: Reviewing Literature, Formulating Research Problem, Variables DR. JAVED-VASSILIS KHAN, Drs. Allerd Peters, Frank Weissman BREDASEP2011

  2. INDEX • Reviewing the Literature

  3. REVIEWING THE LITERATURE • Integral part of research process • In initial stages it helps to: • Establish theoretical roots • Clarify ideas • Develop research methodology • Later serves to: • Consolidate your knowledge • Integrate your findings with existing knowledge

  4. LITERATURE REVIEW • Most (graduation) proposals suffer from superficial understanding of the issue at stake • If understanding about a subject does not go beyond ‘common knowledge’ => research ideas will be superficial and not state-of-the-art

  5. LITERATURE REVIEW HELPS: • Clarify your research problem/question • Paradox, chicken-egg problem • Iterative process • Improve research methodology • Methodologies used by others, pros/cons • Broaden knowledge base • What are findings around your RQ? • What theories have been put forward? • What are gaps in existing literature? • Contextualize findings • How do your findings fit into the existing body of knowledge?

  6. LITERATURE REVIEW • Before writing a research proposal you are able to give at least an informed answer to: • What is already known with respect to my subject? • What theories and concepts are relevant? • What research strategies and methods have been employed by others performing similar research? • What questions have remained unanswered/ what suggestions for further research have been done? • What researchers are important with respect to this topic?

  7. LITERATURE REVIEW: HOW TO • Search existing literature in your area of interest • Review this existing literature • Develop a theoretical framework for your RQ • Develop conceptual framework

  8. SEARCH

  9. ASSESSING LITERATURE QUALITY • How can I see if it is a good source? • Plenty of material => even more difficult to assess • Not that easy

  10. INDICATORS FOR A GOOD SOURCE • Carries a title • Has the author/s clearly listed • Uses sources according to an international standard • reference list & in-text referencing according to e.g., APA • Is published at credible publishing houses • Is referenced by other researchers too • If 1-3 are not met, the source is of questionable quality => refrain from using it • If 4-5 are met, the source is of good quality => use it!

  11. INDICATORS FOR A GOOD SOURCE • Carries a title • Has the author/s clearly listed • Uses sources according to an international standard • reference list & in-text referencing according to e.g., APA • Is published at credible publishing houses • Is referenced by other researchers too • Has a summary or abstract • Is incorporated in electronic library collections • Is balanced in its word use and uses factual argumentation in stead of rhetoric

  12. WEB SOURCES • Easy to find -> hard to assess for quality • Search engine can find a site but does not evaluate it • Web sources can be published by anybody => no peer review, no editorial board • Many web sources have their own agenda • Need to cross-check • Download all material found on the Internet

  13. SOURCES • http://scholar.google.com • http://portal.acm.org • http://ieeexplore.ieee.org • http://sciencedirect.com • Conference paper => less time to prepare, less time to review, more recent, limited scope • Journal paper => more preparation, strict review process, established knowledge, easier to generalize • Book chapter => even more established knowledge but no peer review

  14. CREDIBLE PUBLISHING HOUSES • ACM • IEEE • Elsevier • Springer • Taylor & Francis • SAGE • McGraw Hill • Oxford University Press • …

  15. SEARCHING vs. FINDING • Search easy but Find not easy Main problems: • Sticking to the obvious • Using tutor cited literature • Inefficient search strategies • Content is not possible to be accessed

  16. EFFICIENT LITERATURE REVIEW STRATEGIES • Search – find - evaluate • RQ, general knowledge, literature => derive keywords • Use specialized, credible sources Select sources in comparable context • After having compiled a list of articles => evaluate & prioritize

  17. ARTICLE EVALUATION • Evaluate quality based on the afore mentioned indicators => how many indicators does it satisfy? • Read abstract => is it interesting for my RQ? If yes => read conclusions => still interesting? • Answer the question: ‘This source I can use for my research, because it gives the following information:...’ • Only now you read the whole article

More Related