1. Writing Literature Reviews and Research Proposals
Galvan, Jose L Writing literature reviews: A guide for students of the social and behavioral sciences. Los Angeles, CA: Pyrczak Publishing. 1

2. Information Sources Primary (empirical) sources***** Secondary sources
original; empirical; first published account
details on methodology, findings, and discussion
systematic observation (carefully planned)
Secondary sources
found in books, magazines, newspapers
global descriptions of findings 2

3. 3 Potential Problems with Empirical Research
Sampling
unrepresentativeness
sampling bias
Measurement
flawed instrumentation (surveys, interviews, observation, experimentation)
multiple measures -- consistent results?
Problem identification
researchers studying same problem might examine different specific (narrow) areas of the problem 3

4. Other Sources Theoretical articles Literature review articles
theory built on existing empirical work
pieces of theory can be tested empirically
follow up on leads in bibliography
Literature review articles
new and fresh insights that advance knowledge
resolve conflicts in articles that contradict each other
identify new ways to interpret results
lay out a path for future research/generate propositions
Antecdotal Reports (do NOT use these) 4

5. Writing Process Planning Organizing Drafting Editing Redrafting
defining a topic and selecting literature
Organizing
analyzing, synthesizing, and evaluating review articles
Drafting
writing a first draft of the review
Editing
checking draft for completeness, cohesion, correctness
Redrafting 5

6. Questions to Ask in Evaluating an Empirical Article
Are there obvious sampling problems?
Are there obvious measurement problems?
Is the problem narrow enough? Too narrow?
Are there any other flaws in the paper?
Does the research make an important contribution to advancing knowledge? 6

7. Questions to Ask in Evaluating Review Articles
Have the reviewers clearly identified the topic of review?
Have the reviewers indicated its delimitations (time period, aspects of the problem, etc)?
Have the reviewers written a cohesive essay that guides you through the lit from topic to topic?
Have the reviewers interpreted the literature (as opposed to summarizing)?
Did the reviewers make an important contribution? 7

8. Writing for Specific Purposes
Term paper for class
Plan carefully -- use a timeline. Don’t wait til the last minute to start. Pace yourself.
Stage 1: Prelim library search and selection of topic
Stage 2: Reading list and prelim paper outline
Stage 3: First draft of paper
Stage 4: Revised final draft of paper
Ask questions of your instructor -- understand expectatns
Keep your topic narrow; choose a well-defined topic
Use textbook subheadings or articles to help you choose
Get feedback on drafts (if possible) 8

9. Writing for Specific Purposes
Journal Article
introduction to topic, statement of purpose of empirical research, and lit review
establishes scientific context for study
very straightforward, short, focused.
Provide rationale and background for specific and often very narrow research projects
should reflect current state of research; articles included should be the most recent 9

10. Identifying Literature
Search an appropriate database
can start with general topic
better to start with more specific topic, but can narrow down a general topic after seeing list of articles
Shorten list to a manageable size
which articles pertain to your major field of study?
reclassify articles in the list
is the journal respected in your field? 10

11. Additional Steps to Get Started
Write the first draft of your topic sentence
name the area you will investigate, in general
after examining more focused list of articles
Pick on-line databases that are appropriate for your topic
As you search databases for articles and narrow your search, redefine your topic more narrowly.
Start with the most current and work backwards 11

12. Steps to Get Started
Use most recent applicable article(s) as sources for more articles.
Compare bibliographies to your previous list and make strategic decisions about which to include. Keep in mind:
list should represent the extent of knowledge on the topic
list should provide a proper context for your investigation
Search for theoretical articles in databases and bibliographies of articles
Search for review articles, proposals, meta-analyses
Identify landmark or classic studies 12

13. Guidelines for Analyzing Literature
Analyze chosen articles before you start writing
1. Scan articles to get an overview of each
first few paragraphs, paragraph before Method, major and minor subheadings, hypotheses, purposes, scan text (but don’t get caught in details), first para of Discussion
keep an eye on big picture by pre-reading
take notes on first page about overall purpose/findings
2. Based on #1, group articles by category
by topic and subtopic, then chronologically 13

14. Guidelines for Analyzing Literature
3. Organize yourself before reading
computer, pack of note cards for comments, self-adhesive flags to mark important places
4. Use a consistent format in notes
begin reading and making notes of important points on cards
start a system of note-taking and use system consistently
what is notable about the article?
Landmark/flaws/experimental/qualitative?
Use several cards per article 14

15. Guidelines for Analyzing Literature
5. Note explicit definitions of key terms
note differences between/among researchers
6. Note methodological strengths and weaknesses
e.g., triangulation of methods, sample sizes, generalizability.
does one article improve upon another bc of method?
does innovative methodology seem appropriate?
Is there enough evidence to support conclusions?
critique groups of studies together, esp if similar flaws
note patterns of weaknesses across studies 15

16. Guidelines for Analyzing Literature
7. Distinguish between assertion and evidence
understand empirical findings from data collected
v. author’s opinion
8. Identify major trends or patterns in studies
if conflicting results, try to explain them
can make a generalization based on majority of articles or those with strong methodology.
Describe these generalizations carefully.
9. Identify gaps in literature and discuss why 16

17. Guidelines for Analyzing Literature
10. Identify relationships among studies
when write, discuss them together
11. Note how each article relates to your topic
keep your specific topic in mind all the time and make sure your articles address it. If not, do not include
12. Evaluate your list for currency and coverage
start with most recent 5 years and include others if necessary. 17

18. Guidelines for Analyzing Methodology
1. Qualitative or quantitative? (makes notes)
Quantitative: results presented as stats and numbers
explicitly stated hypotheses
large ( ), random sample from particular population
objectively scored instruments
inferential statistics -- make inferences about pop from sample
Qualitative: results presented as narrative
general, nonspecific problem, with no rigid, specific purposes
small, purposive (not random) sample
measure with unstructured instruments (interviews)
results in words with emphasis on understanding sample 18

19. Guidelines for Analyzing Methodology
2. Experimental or nonexperimental?
Experimental:
treatments administered to participants for purposes of study
effects of treatments assessed
almost all are quantitative
Nonexperimental:
participants’ traits measured without attempting to change them
quantitative or qualitative
do not use the term ‘experiment’ to describe, use ‘study,’ ‘investigation,’ etc. 19

20. Guidelines for Analyzing Methodology
3. Participants randomly assigned to conditions?
Guarantees no bias in assignment.
More weight given to true experiments (with RA).
4. Cause/effect relationships asserted in nonexperiments?
5. How were major variables measured?
Reliability and validity; appropriateness of measures
triangulation and strength of conclusions
discrepancies in results and patterns in method 20

21. Guidelines for Analyzing Methodology
6. Characteristics of participants/samples?
Make notes on demographics.
Could demographics have played a role in results? (no way you can say for sure, but might raise question
7. How large is difference?... not just significance
statistically significant -- greater than chance, not necessarily big.
8. Major flaws? (do not dissect each article)
Safe to assume that all empirical studies have them.
Degrees of evidence 21

22. Synthesizing Literature
1. Decide purpose and voice
Purpose:
term paper, dissertation/thesis, journal article?
Voice:
formal, de-emphasize self, avoid first person (usually)
2. Consider how to reassemble your notes
NOT a series of annotations of research studies
describe the forest (not the trees) from a unique perspective using the trees you found
how do the pieces relate to each other? 22

23. Synthesizing Literature
3. Create a topic outline that traces your argument
establish for the reader the line of argumentation (thesis)
develop a traceable narrative that demonstrates the loa is worthwhile and justified (writer formed judgments about topic based on analysis and synthesis of lit)
TO is roadmap of argument.
Starts with assertion, then introduction, systematic review of relevant literature, and ends with conclusion that relates back to original assertion
4. Reorganize notes according to path of argument
code cards according to TO; write cites on TO 23

24. Synthesizing Literature
5. Within each topic heading, note relationships among studies
can subgroups be created?
Add detail to your outline
consider consistency of results from study to study
if discrepant, provide relevant info about research, trying to identify possible explanations for the differences
6. Within each topic heading, note obvious gaps
discuss in manuscript 24

25. Synthesizing Literature
7. How do individual studies advance theory?
Often researchers will discuss this in their studies -- use their expertise.
8. Plan to summarize periodically and again near end of the review
especially with long, difficult, or complex topics
help reader understand direction the author is taking
begin last section with brief summary of main points 25

26. Synthesizing Literature
9. Plan to present conclusions and implications
conclusion: statement about state of knowledge using degrees of evidence.
“it seems safe to conclude that...” “one conclusion might be...”
if weight of evidence does not favor one conclusion over the other, say so
implication: statement of what people or organizations should do in light of existing research.
What actions (interventions) seem promising based on review
you are now an expert and can offer conclusions and implications. 26

27. Synthesizing Literature
10. Plan to suggest directions for future research
make specific (relevant) suggestions about gaps
can be populations (understudied groups), methodologies, etc
11. Flesh out TO with details from analysis
final step before write first draft
include enough detail to write clearly about studies
strengths/weaknesses, gaps, relationships, major trends
TO will be several pages long
studies may appear in several places on TO 27

28. Writing First Draft
1. Identify broad problem area; avoid global statmts
start broad in your topic area and work toward specific
2. Indicate why certain studies are important
3. If commenting on timeliness, be specific
4. If citing a classic or landmark, say so
5. If landmark was replicated, say so and state result
6. Discuss other lit reviews on topic
7. Refer reader to other reviews on related topics
8. Justify comments such as “no studies were found” 28

29. Writing First Draft 9. Avoid long lists of nonspecific references
10. If results of studies are inconsistent or widely varying, cite them separately
11. Cite all relevant references in review section of a thesis/dissertation or journal article
12. Emphasize the need for your study in your lit review section or chapter
closes gap in lit, tests important aspect of current theory, replicates important study, retests hypothesis using new or improved method, resolves conflicts in lit, etc 29

30. Develop a Coherent Essay
Remember: this is not an annotated bibliography (a series of connected article summaries). Review should have a clearly stated argument, developed in such a way that all elements work together to communicate a well-reasoned account of argument
1. Describe review outline for reader
introductory paragraphs should include roadmap of where you are going in paper
2. Near beginning, state what will and won’t be covered 30

31. Develop a Coherent Essay
3. Specify your point of view early
serves as thesis statement -- the assertion or proposition that is supported in remainder of report
can incorporate it into description of path of argument
4. Aim for a clear and cohesive essay; avoid annotations
organize research to make a point
translate TO into prose account that integrates important details of research lit into an essay that communicates a point of view 31

32. Develop a Coherent Essay
5. Use subheadings, esp in long reviews
use TO to place strategically to help advance argument
6. Use transitions to help trace your argument
e.g., first, second, third
7. Consider a table for comparing studies
main characteristics of related studies
still must discuss them in narrative
8. If topic crosses disciplines, review separately
e.g., diabetes in teenage girls: nutrition, medical, psych 32

33. Develop a Coherent Essay
9. Write a conclusion for the end of the review
depends on reason for writing review
stand alone: make clear how material in body supports assertion or proposition presented
thesis/diss/journal article presenting original research: not labeled as conclusion. Lit review leads to research questions/hypotheses that will be addressed.
If paper is long and complex, briefly summarize
10. Check flow of argument for coherence (does manuscript hold together as unified document) 33

34. Style, Mechanics, Language
1. Compare draft with TO
ensure you have fleshed out the path of the argument
2. Check structure of your review for parallelism
balance in arguments: for/against; strengths/weaknesses
3. Avoid overusing direct quotations
quotations should not be isolated from surrounding prose
4. Check style manual for correct use of citations
5. Avoid using synonyms for recurring words
allow the reader to compare across studies and internalize information quickly 34

35. Style, Mechanics, Language
6. Spell out acronyms when first use and avoid using too many
7. Avoid contractions
8. Coined terms should be quoted
9. Avoid slang expressions, colloquialisms, idioms
10. Use Latin abbreviations in parenthetics. Use English elsewhere
(e.g.,……); (cf. ….) or ….for example,…… 35

36. Style, Mechanics, Language
11. Check draft for common writing conventions
complete sentences avoid first person
avoid sexist language strive for clarity
use active voice spell out, >10 write
spell out number when first word in sentence.
12. Write a concise and descriptive title
identify field of study and point of view
help reader adopt frame of reference
avoid “cute” titles
keep it short 36

37. Style, Mechanics, Language
13. Strive for user-friendly draft (for feedback)
spell-check, proofread, edit number pages
double-space use 1” margins
staple or binder clip identify yourself
font should be readable avoid “cute” touches
14. Avoid plagiarism at all costs
see University rules about this
15. Get help if you need it
hire proofreaders
go to writing center on campus 37

38. Incorporating Feedback..Refining
Put the ms aside for a time to create some distance
Remember that writing is an ongoing process of negotiation between writer and audience
Approach draft from viewpoint of audience member
Get feedback from anyone who will read your paper
DO NOT BE PERSONALLY OFFENDED BY SOMEONE’S CRITICAL EVALUATION of your work!!!!! 38

39. Incorporating Feedback..Refining
1. The reader is always right
if the reader did not understand a point, rewrite it.
What needs to be clarified? What specifically is the trouble?
2. Expect your instructor to comment on content
do not make it difficult for instructor to read/understand
get the style/grammar/language in order before handing it over
3. Concentrate on comments about ideas
did ideas come across as you intended?
4. Reconcile contradictory feedback
seek clarification from both and negotiate a resolution 39

40. Incorporating Feedback..Refining
5. Reconcile comments about style with a style manual
6. Allow plenty of time for feedback and redrafting process
at least one or two drafts!! 40

41. Writing Literature Reviews
By Jose Galvan, 1999, Pyrczak Publishing, LA, CA
Excellent book with great examples
Contains a comprehensive self-editing checklist for refining the final draft at end.
Contains 3 excellent literature reviews for evaluation and analysis
I *highly recommend* purchasing this book 41