Writing the Review of Related

Literature and Studies

Differences between
Related Literature and
Studies
Related Literature Related Studies

Composed of: Composed of:

Discussions of facts and studies, inquiries or investigations
principles to which your study already conducted to which your
is related study is related

Usually printed or published: Usually unpublished:

Ex. Books, encyclopedias, Ex. Thesis, dissertations,
journals, magazines, newspaper manuscripts
 Both are classified as:

• Local
- if printed or

conducted in
Philippines
• Foreign
- if printed or

conducted in other
lands/country

Review of Related Literature and
Study is…
• A discussion of your
knowledge about the
topic under study
• A discussion of your
knowledge that is
supported by the
research literature
• A foundation for the
study
•
 Review of Related Literature
and Study is Not…
• A study-by-study, or
article-by-article,
description of studies
previously done
• A re-statement of the
studies previously done
• A brief overview of articles
• An annotated bibliography
in which you summarize
briefly each article that
you have reviewed.
•
Importance of Related
Literature and Studies
They help or guide the


researcher :


• In understanding his topic

better
• In ensuring that there will be
no duplication of other
studies
• In locating more sources of
related information.
• In searching or selecting a
better research problem
or topic.
• In making his research design
• comparison between his
Purposes of Review of
Literature and Studies
• To Find out how much research has
been done on the same area
• To Justify the need for more studies
on the topic
• To Fill in existing gaps, clarify
inconsistencies, substantiate
existing facts
• To Help with procedures and processes
• To Get new idea and approaches

 There are Scientific Reasons
for conducting a literature
review
 In the book of Gall, Borg,and Gall (1996),
they argue that the literature review plays
a role in:
• Delimiting the research problem
• Seeking new lines of inquiry/investigation
• Avoiding fruitless approaches
• Gaining methodological insights
• Identifying recommendations for further
research
• Seeking support for grounded theory.
•
 Hart (1998) contributes additional reasons for
reviewing the literature, including:
• Distinguishing what has been done from what needs to be
done
• Discovering important variables relevant to the topic
• Synthesizing and gaining a new perspective
• Identifying relationships between ideas and practices
• Establishing the context of the topic or problem
• Rationalizing the significance of the problem
• Enhancing and acquiring the subject vocabulary
• Understanding the structure of the subject
• Relating ideas and theory to applications of the main
methodologies and research techniques that have been
used
• Placing the research in a historical context to show
Characteristics of
Related Literature and
Studies
 What makes a good
literature review?
Criteria:


 Clearly written
 Recent
 Relevant
 Objective and Unbiased
 Comprehensive
 Accurately referenced
 Valid and reliable
•
•
 Guidelines on
effective writing of the
Literature Review
• Research papers must be written in a
formal style, which is in the third
person, not the first person
• Avoid highly descriptive writing style,
not approriate for a scholarly
research
• Use the active voice for direct impact
and easy understanding
• Avoid the use of jargon : use familiar
terms in place of terminologies
• Language should be neutral gender,
no sexy language like his
• Make the conclusions and
contradictions found in the
literature clear in the report
• Use short sentences: avoid elongated
and run-on expressions
• Use proper grammar and proofread
the work
• Never plagiarize ; give credit to the
original author of ideas
• Pay attention to the structure and form of
published articles, which are good
examples of how literature reviews can
written
Examples :

Jose (2007) claims that job-related stress can

enhance productivity up to a certain point.

There is, however, a threshold point beyond
which stress becomes a harmful factor in
one’s productivity. On the other hand, Luisito
(2008) averred that, in his experience as a
clinical psycologist, stresses always produce
a negative effect on one’s productivity.
Writing a Literature
Review
Research review tend to be written in


a particular style and typically

include specific types of information.
Content of a Research
Review
A written research should provide


readers with an objective and

thorough summary of the current
state of evidence on a topic. A
literature review should be neither a
series of quotes nor a series of
abstracts. The key tasks are to
summarize and evaluate the
evidence so as to reveal the state-of-
the-art knowledge of a topic-not
simply to describe what researchers
have done.
The review should point out both
consistencies and contradictions in
the literature and offer possible
explanation for inconsistencies (e.g.,
different conceptualization or data
collection method).
Although important studies should be

described in some detail, it is not

necessary to provide extensive
coverage for every reference. Report
with similar findings sometimes can
be summarized together.
The literature should be summarized


in your own words. The review should

demonstrate that consideration has
been given to the cumulative
significance of the body of research.
Stringing together quotes from
various documents fails to show that
previous research on the topic has
been assimilated and understood.
Another point to bear in mind is that


the review should be as objective as

possible. Studies that conflict with
personal values or hunches should
not be omitted. In addition, the
review should not deliberately ignore
a study because its findings
contradict other studies. Inconsistent
result should be analyzed and the
supporting evidence evaluated
objectively.
The literature review should conclude


with a critical summary that recaps

key study findings and indicates how
credible they are ; it should also
make note of gaps in the research.
The summary thus requires critical
judgment about the extensiveness
and dependability of evidence on a
topic.
As you progress through this book, you


will become increasingly proficient in

critically evaluating research report.
We hope you will understand the
mechanics of writing a research
review when you have completed
this chapter, but we do not expect
that you will be in a position to write
a state-of-the-art review until you
have acquired more skills in research
methods.
Style of a Research
Review
Students preparing their first written
research review often have trouble
adjusting to the standard style of
research review.
One issue is that student sometimes

accept research result without criticism

or reservation, reflecting a common
misunderstanding about the
conclusiveness of research. You should
keep in mind that no hypothesis or
theory can be proved or disproved by
empirical testing, and no research
question can be definitely answered in
The problem is partly a semantic one :


hypotheses are not proved, they are

supported by research findings;
theories are not verified, but they
may be tentatively accepted if a
substantial body of evidence
demonstrates their legitimacy. When
describing study findings, you should
generally use phrases indicating
tentativeness of the results, such as
the following :
• Several studies have found …
• Findings thus far suggest …
• Result from a landmark study indicated …
• The data supported the hypothesis …
• There appears to be strong evidence that
…
 A related stylistic problem among
movie reviewers is an inclination to
intersperse opinions (their own or
someone else’s) into the review. The
review should include opinions sparingly
and should be exception of assessment of
study quality.
• The left hand column of table present
examples of stylistic flaws. The
right hand column offers
recommendations for rewording the
sentences to conform to a more
acceptable form for a research
literature review. Many alternative
wordings are possible.
 EXAMPLES OF STYLISTIC DIFFICULTIES FOR
RESEARCH REVIEWS
INAPPROPRIATE STYLE OR RECOMMENDED CHANGE
WORDING
1. It is known that unmet Dr.A.Cassard, an experton stress
expectations engender stress and anxiety, has found that unmet
expectations engender stress
2. Women who do not participate Studies
(Cassard,have found that women
2005)
in childbirth preparation classes who participate in preparation for
tend to manifest a high degree of childbirth classes manifest less
stress during labor stress during labor than those who
3. Studies have proved that do not (Klotz,2003;
Studies Weller,2004;
by Lowe (2004) and
doctors and nurses do not fully McTygue,2005)
Martin (2003) suggest that doctors
understand the psychobiologic and nurses do not fully understand
dynamics of recovery from a the psychobiologic dynamics of
4. Attitudes infarction
myocardial cannot be changed Attiudes
recovery have
from been found to be
a myocardial
quickly relatively
infarction enduring attributes that
cannot be changed quickly (Geair,
2003; Casey,2004)
Length of a Research
Review
There are no easy formulas for how long
a review should be. The length depends
on several factors, including the
complexity of the research question,
the extent of prior research, and the
purpose for which the review is being
prepared.
Literature reviews prepared for proposals

(e.g.,proposals to undertake a study, to

test a clinical innovation, or to make a
change in practice) tend to be fairly
comprehensive. Reviews in theses and
dissertations are also lengthy.
In these cases, the literature review
serves both to summarize knowledge
and to document the reviewer’s
capability.
Because of space limitations in journal

articles, literature reviews that appear

within research reports are concise.
Literature reviews in the introduction to
research reports demonstrate the need
for the new study and provide a context
for the research questions. The
literature review sections of qualitative
reports tend to be especially brief.
 However, there are stand-alone
research reviews in nursing journals
that are more extensive than those
appearing in the introductions of
research report.