A review of the previous experiments and investigations done within our chosen topic area. Shows how your chosen topic fits with the research that has gone before and puts this into context. ‘A researcher cannot perform significant research without first understanding the literature in the field’ (Boote and Beile, 2005: 3)

1. The Literature
Review
Dr Ryan Thomas Williams

2. What is it and why do we do it?
• A review of the previous experiments and investigations done within our chosen topic
area.
• Shows how your chosen topic fits with the research that has gone before and puts
this into context.
• ‘A researcher cannot perform significant research without first understanding the
literature in the field’ (Boote and Beile, 2005: 3)

3. What is a literature review?
It is a select analysis of existing research which:
• Shows a gap in the literature around which your dissertation is structured relevant to your
topic and justifies how your own research will answer this.
• Highlights the relevant themes/concepts/variables that should be included in your study.
• Identifies the measures of concepts/variables.
• Presents what as been proved in relation to these concepts/variables so far and uses this as a
comparative for your own findings in the discussion chapter.
• Develops an argument by summarising (present key information) and synthesis
(reorganisation of information)

4. Literature Review: Starts
broad and narrows to show
how past research relates to
your project
Discussion: Starts specific by
explaining what your results
show in relation to your
project, then widens out to
stay what this may mean for
the field of research as a
whole.

5. Why do we write a literature review?
It should demonstrate:
• Your selectiveness in sourcing information necessary to put your own research into
context.
• That you understand and can critically analyse previous research.
• The link between your research and previous investigations.
• The limitation/gap/contribution to knowledge that your study will attempt to make.
• Provides evidence of what is currently known about the elements of your study that
you will use in your discussion chapter to help explain your findings.

6. How do I get started?
Start by identifying what you will need to know to inform your research:
• What research has already been done on this topic?
• What are the sub-areas of the topic you need to explore?
• What other research (perhaps not directly on the topic) might be relevant to your
investigation?
• How do these sub-topics and other research overlap with your investigation?

7. Literature review key stages
1. Search for a topic
2. Identify key words
3. Identify information sources
4. Generate reading list
5. Make notes in your own words
6. Write the literature review

8. Structure of a literature review
Introduction
• Gives a quick idea of the topic of the literature review, such as the central theme or organisational pattern.
Body
• Contains your discussion of sources
• Arguments
• Use sub headings
Conclusions/Recommendations
• Discuss what you have drawn from reviewing literature so far. Where might the discussion proceed?
• Link back to your project

9. Common approaches
• Chronological: depending on the nature of your literature and development of ideas,
a chronological approach will present the development of a key trend and/or
progressions and changes in practices.
• Thematic/conceptual: Time is not a factor here. The review of the literature will be
around particular topics/issues/theories.
• Methodological: This review focuses on the methodological or paradigmatic
approaches to your material.

10. Phraseology
Scholarly writing that avoid
bias, incorporate evidence, and
create a strong argument.
Scholarly writing requires
concise, precise, and clear
language.
Examples:
A broader/narrower scope…
A similar focus/approach tone…
Adapts…
Breaks out the paradigm…
Explores/investigates…
Enters the debate…
In agreement with…

11. How to Make it Critical
• Identify the current findings.
• Are there are key models or theories that are used?
• Which methodologies did the authors use to qualify their findings?
• What are the key themes relevant?
• Do all of the studies agree with each other on the findings of the key themes and why or why not?
• Did they have limitations affecting their results such as the theories, models or methodologies used?
• Are there other possible explanations that could be offered and why?
• How old are the studies?
• Do they seem justified in the investigation they carried out and the results they put forward?

12. Critique vs description
• Description is used to set the
background and to provide
evidence rather than to develop
argument.
• Critique is more about developing a
reasoned argument and
participating in academic debate.
Essentially you are persuading your
reader of your position on the topic
at hand.

13. Example of critique vs description: Method
Descriptive example
• "In addition to competency-based questions, the candidates were asked to complete an in-
tray exercise, which required them to allocate different priority levels to tasks, as an
appropriate method to measure their likely performance in the actual job.”
Critical example
• "In addition to competency-based questions, candidates were asked to complete an in-tray
task prioritisation exercise. This was because it was considered a more effective way to
measure likely performance in the actual role as the majority of the job would involve similar
tasks, with little interaction with customers and therefore less requirement for highly
developed communication skills."

14. Example of critique vs description: Theory
Descriptive example
• "Carl Rogers' theory of a person-centred approach focuses on the freedom of the individual to
determine what values should be used to measure successful personal outcomes or benefit,
and is particularly relevant for social workers when wanting to take into account the diverse
needs of the client group."
Critical example
• "Carl Rogers' theory of a person-centred approach is particularly suitable for social workers
wanting to work with a client group with diverse needs because it allows the client to
determine what values should be used to measure successful outcomes, rather than those
externally determined by, for example, the service, state or dominant culture in society."

15. Examiner comments
Bad literature review:
• ‘Irrelevant rumbling’(‘student drift’)
• ‘Ideas presented in no particular
order’
• ‘Too descriptive’
• ‘Ends abruptly, devoid of any
clarification’
• ‘Limited sources used, coupled
within consistent referencing’
Good literature review:
• ‘Highly focused Literature
Review...’
• ‘Clear evidence of critical
evaluation...’
• ‘Logical structure...eliciting main
issues’
• ‘An excellent in-depth review of
relevant literature, supported by
appropriate sources’

16. Literature review vs systematic review?
• Systematic reviews refer to ‘methods’
• Secondary research
• Appraises all high quality research evidence relevant to that question
• Pre-specified eligibility criteria
• Generally a longer timeline vs literature reviews

17. The Stages of Systematic Review
• Stage 1- Determine review objectives/questions
• Stage 2- Search for literature
• Stage 3- Which literature was selected for inclusion and why?
• Stage 4- Pool Studies
• Stage 5- Place findings in context

18. How to Search?
• Key word searches
• Boolean – key terms: and/or/*
• Snowball technique – using the reference list from other authors

19. Impact Factor (IF)
• The Journal Impact Factor identifies
the frequency with which an
average article from a journal is
cited in a particular year. e.g. an
impact factor of 2.5 means that on
average an article has been cited 2.5
times.

20. IF Example

21. Example
“These journals were sourced based on the SCImago Journal Rank Indicator (SJR), which
measures a journal’s impact, influence and prestige, and the Impact Factor (IF). The SJR
expresses the average number of weighted citations received in the selected year by the
documents published in the previous three, and in this case, journals scoring above 0.8
were used.
Similarly, IF measures the average number of citations per year, and journals with 1+ the
IF influenced this chapter (Gann 2017).
Nonetheless, I also took into consideration the general debate about the validity of IF as
a measure of journal importance as it cannot be used for comparison between
disciplines, in other words, education and technology”

22. Selecting Topics for
Literature Search
SUBJECT (FOCUS OF
STUDY)
TOPIC
(PARTICULAR ASPECT
YOU ARE INTERESTED IN)
“I WANT TO KNOW”
Effectiveness of an MBA Degree Organisational Career Management
& Job Satisfaction
What is career management?
Impacts of career management on
job satisfaction.

23. Which Literature was selected (and why?):
Possible headings and themes:
• Organisational Career Management (independent variable) – concepts/dimensions:
fair promotion career training, provisional occupation, career self development.
• Job satisfaction (dependant variable) concepts/dimensions/measures of: work,
compensation and benefit, relationship with co-workers, opinions re the supervisors,
career advancement opportunities

24. Final thoughts
• Define each concept – what it is, how its is measured
• Draw out what has been proved and published in your research area so far and
concepts so far.
• Which framework/model or theory has been used for this study which you will also
use.
• Critique what has been written so far. Are there any weaknesses in the studies
published, any bias, narrow methodologies?