LITERATURE REVIEW PROCESS

Literature Review Process

Table of Contents

Introduction3

Literature Review Process3

i) Finding section3

ii) Qualitative assessment5

iii) Original Research6

iv) Using Footnotes6

v) The Title8

vi) Proceed Chronologically11

Conclusion13

Introduction

There must be a concise presentation of existing literature, both within the subject of inquiry and areas closely related to it. It is not expected that every related aspect will be discussed in the literature review, but reasons for omissions of key areas should be set out. This will ensure the examiner recognises a rational basis for their exclusion.

Literature Review Process

i) Finding section

The Finding section is the most important part of your review. Do not give a summary paper-by-paper; instead, deal with themes and draw together results from several papers for each theme. I have identified four themes for this section: assessing the quality of published work; interpreting effects; points of grammar and style; and a few remarks about tables and figures. These themes are dealt with under subheadings. I encourage you to use such subheadings, (Weiser, 1993, 12) which will make it easier for you to write the review and easier for others to read it.

Look critically at any published work. The fact that something has been published does not mean the findings are automatically trustworthy.(1)

Some research designs are better than others. The most trustworthy conclusions are those reached in double-blind randomized controlled trials with a representative sample of sufficient size to detect the smallest worthwhile effects. The weakest findings are those from case studies. In between are cross-sectional studies, (Weiser, 1993, 12) which are usually plagued by the problem of interpreting cause and effect in the relationship between variables.(1)

How subjects were sampled is an important issue. You can be confident about generalizing results to a population only if the sample was selected randomly from the population and there was a low proportion of refusals and dropouts (<30%).

Be wary of generalizing results from novice athletes to elites. Something that enhances performance in young or untrained individuals may not work so well in highly trained athletes, who may have less headroom for improvement.

There are big differences in the way data can be collected. At one extreme are qualitative methods, in which the researcher interviews subjects without using formal psychometric instruments (questionnaires). At the other extreme are quantitative methods, in which biological or behavioral variables are measured with instruments or techniques of known validity and reliability. In the middle are techniques with uncertain precision and questionnaires with open-ended responses.(1)

ii) Qualitative assessment

Qualitative assessment is time consuming, so samples are usually small in size and non-representative, which in turn limit the conclusions that can be made about effects in a population. The conclusions may also be biased by the prejudices of the researcher-interviewer. (Mark Weiser, 1999, 22) Quantitative data collection is more objective, but for some projects it could miss important issues that would surface in an interview. A combination of qualitative methods for pilot work and quantitative methods for a larger study should therefore produce valuable conclusions, depending, of course, on the design.(2)

You will probably find that your topic has been dealt with ...