MAEDM 111: Methods of Research

Review of Related Literature

Romeo C. Layones
REVIEWING THE LITERATURE
➢ going through the existing literature in order to acquaint
the researcher with the available body of knowledge in his
area of interest

REASONS FOR REVIEWING THE LITERATURE

(Kumar, 2011)
1. Bring clarity and focus to the research problem
➢ helps the researcher a) conceptualize the research
problem clearly and precisely and b) understand the
relationship between the research problem and the
body of knowledge in the area.
2. Improve the methodology
➢ acquaints the researcher with the methodologies used
by others to answer questions similar to the one being
investigated
REASONS FOR REVIEWING THE LITERATURE
(Kumar, 2011)
3. Broaden researcher’s knowledge base in his
research area
➢ Provides the researcher knowledge what other
researchers found out to similar questions, what
theories were used, and what gaps exist in the relevant
body of knowledge
➢ helps the researcher to understand how the findings of
the study will fit into the existing body of knowledge
4. Contextualize findings
➢ helps the researcher place his findings in the context
of what is already known in his field of inquiry
STEPS INVOLVED IN LITERATURE SEARCH
(Fraenkel & Wallen, 2007)

1. Define the research problem as precisely as possible.

2. Look at relevant secondary sources.
3. Select and peruse one or two appropriate general
reference works.
4. Formulate search terms (key words or phrases)
pertinent to the problem or question of interest.
5. Search the general references for relevant primary
sources.
6. Obtain and read relevant primary sources, and note
and summarize key points in the sources.
Source: Neuman, 2014
Source: Neuman, 2014
Source: Neuman, 2014
Source: Saunders et al, 2009
LITERATURE SOURCES
(Saunders, 2009)

1. Primary literature sources

➢ the first occurrence of a piece of work
➢ also called “grey literature” because these are difficult
to trace
2. Secondary literature sources
➢ subsequent publication of primary literature
➢ publications aimed at wider audience
➢ easier to locate than primary literature
3. Tertiary literature sources
➢ designed either to locate primary and secondary
sources or to introduce a topic
➢ also called “search tools”
Source: Saunders et al, 2009
SOURCES FOR EXISTING LITERATURE
(Kumar, 2011)
➢ Books
➢ Journals
➢ the Internet
SOURCES FOR EXISTING LITERATURE

➢ Books PARTS OF A BOOK

SOURCES FOR EXISTING LITERATURE

➢ Books
Advantage: the material published is usually important and
of good quality, and the findings are ‘integrated with other
research to form a coherent body of knowledge’ (Martin,
1985)
Disadvantage: the material is not completely up-to-date

➢ Journals
Advantage: journals provide up-to-date information
SOURCES FOR EXISTING LITERATURE
➢ the Internet (or the World Wide Web)
Advantages: (Fraenkel and Wallen, 2007)
1. Currency
➢ Many resources on the Internet are updated very
rapidly, offering the latest information about a topic
2. Access to a wide variety of materials
➢ Many resources, including works of art, manuscripts,
even entire library collections, can be reviewed at
leisure using a personal computer.
3. Varied formats
➢ Materials can be sent over the Internet in different
formats, including text, video, sound, animation.
4. Immediacy
➢ The Internet is available 24 hours a day. Information
can be viewed on one’s own computer and can be
examined as desired.
SOURCES FOR EXISTING LITERATURE
➢ the Internet (or the World Wide Web)
Disadvantages (Fraenkel and Wallen, 2007)
1. Disorganization
➢ information not well organized; employs few of the well
developed classification systems used by libraries and
archives; researcher must have good online searching
skills
2. Time commitment
➢ There is always a need to search continually for new
and more complete information; time consuming; less
productive
3. Lack (sometimes) of credibility
➢ anyone can publish something on the Internet;
materials obtained may have little credibility
SOURCES FOR EXISTING LITERATURE
➢ the Internet (or the World Wide Web)
Disadvantages (Fraenkel and Wallen, 2007)
4. Uncertain reliability
➢ It is easy to publish information on the Internet that it is
often difficult to judge its worth.
5. Ethical violation
➢ Because material on the Internet is so easy to obtain,
there is greater temptation for researchers to use the
material without citation or permission.
6. Undue reliance
➢ The amount of information available on the Internet
has grown rapidly in the last few years that some
researchers may be misled to think they can find
everything they need on the Internet, causing them to
ignore other traditional sources of information.
SOURCES FOR EXISTING LITERATURE
➢ the Internet (or the World Wide Web)

EVALUATING WEB RESOURCES (Walliman, 2011)

1. Is it accurate? Does it say what sources the data are based on?
Compare the data with other sources. If it diverges greatly, is there
some explanation for this?

2. What authority is it based on? Find out who authored the pages, and
whether they are recognized experts or are issued by a reputable
organization. Check if other publications are cited or if they provide a
bibliography of other articles, reports or books. You may need to track
down the ‘home page’ to get to the details. Web addresses that end in
‘ac’ (meaning academic) are likely to be university or college
addresses and therefore point to some intellectual credibility – no
guarantee of quality but nevertheless a useful indicator.
SOURCES FOR EXISTING LITERATURE
➢ the Internet (or the World Wide Web)

EVALUATING WEB RESOURCES (Walliman, 2011)

3. Is it biased? Many pressure groups and commercial organizations use
the Web to promote their ideas and products, and present information
in a one-sided way. Can you detect a vested interest in the subject on
the part of the author? Find out more about the authors – e.g. does
the information about animal experiments come from an
antivivisection league, a cosmetics company, or an independent
research institute?

4. How detailed is the information? Is the information so general that it is

of little use, or so detailed and specialized that it is difficult to
understand? Investigate whether it is only fragmentary and misses out
important issues in the subject, and whether the evidence is backed
up by relevant data. There may be useful links to further information,
other websites or printed publications.
SOURCES FOR EXISTING LITERATURE
➢ the Internet (or the World Wide Web)

EVALUATING WEB RESOURCES (Walliman, 2011)

5. Is it out of date? Pages stay on the Web until they are removed. Some
have obviously been forgotten and are hopelessly out of date. Try to
find a date or when it was updated (perhaps on the View-Page Info
option on your web browser). Note that some updates might not
update all the contents. Check any links provided to see if they work.
6. Have you cross-checked? Compare the contents with other sources
of information such as books, articles, official statistics and other
websites. Does the information tally with or contradict these. If the
latter, can you see why?
7. Have you tried pre-evaluated ‘subject gateways’? The information on
these sites has been vetted by experts in the relevant subjects so can
be relied upon to be of high quality. Try BUBL Link
(www.bubl.ac.uk/link/).
SOURCES FOR EXISTING LITERATURE
➢ the Internet (or the World Wide Web)

SEARCH ENGINES
1. Google: www.google.com
2. Bing: www.bing.com
3. Yahoo! Search: www.search.yahoo.com
4. Ask: www.ask.com
5. Aol Search: www.search.aol.com
6. DuckDuckGo: www.duckduckgo.com
7. WebCrawler: www.webcrawler.com
8. Search: www.search.com
9. ixquick: www.ixquick.com
10. excite: www.excite.com
 Useful Tip in Searching the Internet

Source: Saunders, 2009

PLAGIARISM
➢‘presenting the work and ideas of other people and passing
them off as your own, without acknowledging the original source
of the ideas used’. (Easterby-Smith et al., 2008, as cited by
Saunders et al., 2009)

COMMON FORMS OF PLAGIARISM IN UNIVERSITIES

(Park, 2003, as cited by Saunders, 2009)
➢ stealing material from another source and passing it off as your
own
➢ submitting a paper written by someone else (e.g. a peer or
relative) and passing it off as your own
➢copying sections of material from one or more source texts,
supplying proper documentation (including the full reference) but
leaving out quotation marks, thus giving the impression that the
material has been paraphrased rather than directly quoted
➢paraphrasing material from one or more source texts without
supplying appropriate documentation
READING PRIMARY SOURCES
(Fraenkel & Wallen, 2007)

The following should be noted:

1. Problem:
➢ State it clearly.
2. Hypotheses or objectives:
➢ List them exactly as stated.
3. Procedures:
➢ List the research methodology used (experiment, case
study, and so on), the number of respondents and how
they were selected, and the kind of instrument
(questionnaire, tally sheet and so on) used. Make note
of any unusual techniques employed.
READING PRIMARY SOURCES
(Fraenkel & Wallen, 2007)

The following should be noted:

4. Findings:
➢ List the major findings. Indicate whether the objectives
of the study were attained and whether the hypotheses
were supported. Often findings are summarized in a
table, which might be photocopied and attached to the
back of the note card.
5. Conclusions:
➢ Record or summarize the author’s conclusions. Note
your disagreements with the author and the reasons for
such disagreement.. Note strengths and weaknesses of
the study that make the results particularly applicable
or limited with regard to your research question.