Title: Overcoming Challenges in Formulating Literature Reviews

Crafting a literature review is a formidable task that researchers and students encounter in their
academic journey. This critical component of scholarly writing demands meticulous attention to
detail, comprehensive research skills, and an adept ability to synthesize vast amounts of information.
However, the process is often laden with challenges that can be overwhelming for even the most
seasoned academics.

One of the primary hurdles faced when formulating a literature review is navigating the vast sea of
available literature. With an abundance of scholarly articles, books, and other sources, identifying
relevant and credible sources can be a daunting endeavor. Furthermore, ensuring that the selected
literature aligns with the research topic and contributes meaningfully to the discussion adds another
layer of complexity.

Another challenge lies in synthesizing the gathered information cohesively. It requires the ability to
critically analyze each source, extract key findings, and present them in a logical and structured
manner. Striking a balance between providing sufficient detail and avoiding information overload is
crucial but often proves to be a delicate task.

Moreover, maintaining objectivity throughout the literature review process can be challenging. It's
essential to acknowledge differing perspectives and conflicting findings while still offering
insightful interpretations. This requires careful consideration and a nuanced understanding of the
subject matter.

Additionally, time constraints can exacerbate the difficulties of writing a literature review. Juggling
multiple responsibilities and deadlines can leave little room for the in-depth research and thoughtful
analysis that a comprehensive literature review demands. As a result, many individuals find
themselves grappling with time management issues and struggling to meet academic expectations.

Despite these formidable challenges, help is readily available. ⇒ StudyHub.vip ⇔ offers expert
assistance to individuals seeking to overcome the hurdles of formulating literature reviews. Our team
of experienced writers specializes in conducting thorough research, synthesizing information
effectively, and delivering high-quality literature reviews tailored to your specific requirements.

By entrusting your literature review to ⇒ StudyHub.vip ⇔, you can alleviate the stress and
frustration associated with this demanding task. Our dedicated professionals will work closely with
you to ensure that your literature review meets the highest standards of academic excellence. Don't
let the challenges of writing a literature review hinder your academic success—order from ⇒
StudyHub.vip ⇔ today and embark on a journey towards scholarly achievement.
At the end of the day, it’s the students responsibility to do their own research and work. Similar
businesses are explored, testing the literature to see if there are flaws in our idea. Check on this list
before you start writing a literature review with someone’s help or by yourself and you will be done
with it faster and more efficient than you’ve ever expected to. Researchers may face difficulties in
formulating hypotheses when there is limited or insufficient prior knowledge or theoretical basis to
support their research question. When ideas and information are placed in descending stages from
beginning to end, it makes your paper useful as a secondary source and magnifies how creative you
can be. This link opens in a new window Contact a Librarian Ask a Librarian Definition: A literature
review is a systematic examination and synthesis of existing scholarly research on a specific topic or
subject. Assess the methodology, findings, and limitations of each study to showcase your analytical
skills. The Bookish Elf is a site you can rely on for book reviews, author interviews, book
recommendations, and all things books. Explain the gap’s significance: Predict how filling this gap
would benefit your research field. Theoretical Approach This approach focuses on organizing your
review around different theoretical frameworks or perspectives relevant to your topic. The recent
review paper by Repenning et al. (2022) illustrates this sort of contribution. But they also suffer
weaknesses, embrace underdeveloped ideas, and pursue unproven directions. Just as for empirical
papers, accounting journals typically require from a review article a “contribution in its own right”.
Here, they share their insights on how to overcome seven top research challenges. Literature reviews
are aimed to offer readers an overview of the sources you used when researching a certain issue and
to show them how your research fits into a larger field of study. A summary is a re-organization, or
reshuffling, of that material in a way that informs how you plan to examine a research topic, whereas
a synthesis is a re-organization, or reshuffling, of that information in a way that informs how you
plan to explore a research problem. When writing a literature review, mention the selected source of
information and what class your paper can be categorized. One of the main topics discussed is the
nature of qualitative research, its inherent challenges, and how to overcome them. For instance, in the
first two versions of a recently published review paper I co-authored ( Ndemewah and Hiebl, 2022 ),
we tried to convince the reviewers that we followed evidence-based thinking in the paper and would,
thus, rather not use a predefined theoretical lens to analyze our review sample. To illustrate this kind
of thinking, I refer to one of the review articles I have co-authored ( Ndemewah and Hiebl, 2022 ).
Together with the three potential advantages of literature reviews, the right-hand box of Figure 1
includes the two main publication forms of reviews. But this reasoning is fumble since qualitative
research is a complex methodology where data collection and analysis can be mostly challenging. It
provides a context to your research work and pins down to your research problem. In other words,
your study will attempt to contribute a missing puzzle piece (or get two pieces to fit together).
Newspaper articles tend to target a general (not specialized) audience; hence, they will not be of use
to your Lit Review. University of Alabama Recommended for you 55 RPE Notes-1 - Publication
ethics notes Research Methodology Lecture notes 94% (172) 54 Research Methodlogy-notes mtech
Research Methodology Lecture notes 100% (3) 167 Ethics Research Methodology Lecture notes
100% (3) 7 Research 3 - Short summary note Research Methodology Lecture notes 100% (2) 5
Research 9 - Lecture note Research Methodology Lecture notes 100% (1) Comments Please sign in
or register to post comments. You know whether it says something dubious or valuable. This
consistency also makes it easy to compare multiple articles. New chapters may extend an existing
direction, or blaze an entirely new path. Many of these classifications include choices on the kind of
topic addressed in a literature review and the scholarly advantages to be gained.
Does it agree with what we already know, add new info, or challenge what we thought. Among
these factors, to be publishable in an academic journal, a literature review needs to cover a field in
which “a number of conceptual and empirical articles have amassed without previous review efforts
or a synthesis of past works” ( Short, 2009, p. 1312). We currently lack meta-analytic information on
where such a “critical mass” ( Short, 2009, p. 1316) lies for reviews of (qualitative) accounting
research. Advances in electronics and information technology have created opportunities in a variety
of health professions, devising new diagnostic techniques or data collection and management
strategies. It should, ideally, compare and contrast the “classics” with the more up to date research,
and briefly comment on the evolution. The step-by-step process is essential and is rated by academic
rules and guidelines to ensure an acceptable research paper. Newspaper articles tend to target a
general (not specialized) audience; hence, they will not be of use to your Lit Review. But they also
suffer weaknesses, embrace underdeveloped ideas, and pursue unproven directions. Let us look at
some examples of some research problems. Environmental and social changes As the biological and
social environment changes, new health problems may emerge. Keeping the review sample
manageable in this way may also be achieved by limiting potentially relevant research items
according to their publication date. There is increased research activity concerning the health
problems associated with ageing and the ways of designing and delivering effective and efficient
health services. That is, I have not experienced such theory issues for the use case (iii), namely,
methodological literature reviews ( Feldermann and Hiebl, 2020; Hiebl and Richter, 2018 ),
including one focusing on qualitative accounting research ( Feldermann and Hiebl, 2020 ). Also, they
help in identifying relevant databases in journals and articles. It was established and linked around
the 17th Century. Sitemap case study cover letter creative writing presentation problem solving
rewiew prompts websites tips. Keep it simple, keep it diverse, and keep it relevant to your study. So,
it is pivotal to find the proper method for the research question. Old chapters may give foundational
knowledge or lead to dead ends. You might still need to review a few articles going forward. When
reading a book or an extended article you might notice that it is increasingly hard for you to
concentrate. Addresses Research Gaps: Identifies areas where more knowledge is needed, guiding
your contributions. Conclusion: Summarize what you discovered, highlight any important
contributions, and suggest areas for future research. This is different to my experience of
quantitatively oriented literature reviews of accounting research ( Hiebl, 2014; Hiebl and Richter,
2018; Lavia Lopez and Hiebl, 2015; Plockinger et al., 2016 ) in which fellow accounting researchers
seem more open to evidence-based reviews. First, I discuss how review authors may generally
approach the existing literature and portray it as incomplete, inadequate or incommensurate ( Locke
and Golden-Biddle, 1997 ). You’ll feel daunted by the mountain of reading before you. You know
whether it says something dubious or valuable. For this purpose, I first distinguish between three
potential advantages and three basic use cases of reviews of qualitative accounting research in
Section 2. A summary is a re-organization, or reshuffling, of that material in a way that informs how
you plan to examine a research topic, whereas a synthesis is a re-organization, or reshuffling, of that
information in a way that informs how you plan to explore a research problem. For instance, the
European Accounting Review, a well-regarded accounting journal according to most rankings, has
recently published a special review issue. Remember, if you can’t explain something simply (in your
own words), you don’t really understand it. That is, Repenning et al. (2022) argue that there is much
potential for more interparadigmatic exchange in accounting research on the role of emotions.
Irrelevant References: Including references that are no longer relevant and outdated. In addition, we
did not originally intend this review to analyze whether these existing research findings fit into
predefined theoretical categories. In any case, it seems hard to decide whether a literature review
should be more theory-led or more evidence-based before a full analysis of the review sample.
Promotes Theory Development: Evaluates and combines existing theories, possibly leading to new
ones. A good research requires a good research question as well because it allows us to identify what
we really want to know. Magazines aimed at a wide audience, such as Time, Us, and National
Enquirer, will not provide you with the information you require. Citation: List all the sources studied
for review and give credits wherever it is due. You can spend endless hours sifting through it all.
Theoretical Approach This approach focuses on organizing your review around different theoretical
frameworks or perspectives relevant to your topic. But they also suffer weaknesses, embrace
underdeveloped ideas, and pursue unproven directions. After you review an article, simply copy
these two items into the Literature Synopsis. Wondering whether Articles X, Y, and Z corroborate
each other’s findings. Second, all sections become easier to read with experience. You’re ready to 1)
develop your research question, 2) design an experiment to answer that question, and 3) write an
article that describes your answer to that question in the context of the literature. The question should
be appropriate for the qualitative research and for the specific approach you choose which must be
grounded in research. How do I negotiate power relations and complexities. But it lacks enough
urgency to demand your attention. Their conclusions should be regarded with greater skepticism than
previously published research. Though not included in all types of research papers, it serves as a
critical component in academic research. Foss, Sonja K. Rhetorical criticism: Exploration and
practice. It is not rare to find that researchers and research team try to identify everything, even
sample size, in advance when they design their qualitative study because of the strong background
they have about the quantitative research. If still, you need further guidance, seek the help of
Literature Review Writing Service. You hunt for the text that achieves those objectives. To be clear,
such reviewer and editor opposition to research items from other fields has been the exception in the
numerous review processes of literature reviews in which I have participated. Alternatively, another
route of action would be to submit such review articles to (accounting) journals that do not (yet)
enjoy comparably high esteem in the field and high rankings. Case Study: Pick a case and describe it
to explain your basic research question. In action research articles, this is also the section where you
will likely find discussions of additional information gathering, or reconnaissance. Compared with
reviews of (mostly) qualitative accounting research, we can infer that the standards in the latter field
differ little from the above numbers. However, we aren't going to be using these items: we are only
going to be repairing them. While not relying on a full analysis of all available use case (ii) reviews,
this observation may imply that this type of literature review rests on extended experience with a
certain theory, and thus, having deep insights into the strengths, weaknesses and shortcomings of its
application in accounting research.
Purpose: It serves to provide a comprehensive overview of the current state of knowledge within a
particular field. Explain the gap’s significance: Predict how filling this gap would benefit your
research field. This can hinder the research process and limit the ability to draw valid conclusions.
It’s your job to find those shortcomings and use them to identify a promising research gap. The other
problem is the examination committee and the format of proposal in the grant sites and funding
agencies, which is based on the principles of quantitative study. Advances in electronics and
information technology have created opportunities in a variety of health professions, devising new
diagnostic techniques or data collection and management strategies. Modell (2022b) reviews
institutional research on management accounting and concludes that parts of this literature show no
progress and even some degenerative tendencies in continuing to draw on one-sided views that
predominantly focus on either human agency or structures to explain institutional processes around
management accounting. To be clear, such reviewer and editor opposition to research items from
other fields has been the exception in the numerous review processes of literature reviews in which I
have participated. It may explore theories, it may explore other entrepreneurs who have set up similar
styles, themes, or types of businesses. In all reputable journals, peer-reviewed or refereed research is
published only after it has been reviewed by other researchers in the field. And many PhDs still find
these sections difficult to understand. In academic writing, if you fail to reference a source, you are
effectively claiming the work as your own, which equates to plagiarism. Nova has also worked as a
technical and scientific writer. But you still see one big problem: Some articles are actually worth
reading from start-to-finish. In addition, I offered ideas for reducing overly long lists of potentially
relevant research items to a manageable review sample. And you struggle to achieve the last and
most important literature review objective—finding a research gap. Hence, researchers should not
only pay special attention toward developing a significant and relevant question, but also formulate
it properly. Regardless of which use case is pursued, my experience of crafting, supervising and
reviewing literature reviews is that authors usually decide upfront which use case to follow because
all three use cases usually lead authors in different directions. Lukka and Vinnari (2014) further note
that a “method theory offers a vocabulary and syntax, often also substantive propositions, which are,
at least with adaptations, applicable to another disciplinary domain” (p. 1312), such as accounting
research. A literature review is a comprehensive examination and analysis of existing literature and
scholarly works on a specific subject or research topic. Thus, forming the research question in a
proper way and selecting appropriate methodology can guarantee original, interesting, and applied
knowledge, which at least can increase our understanding about the meaning of certain conditions
for professionals and patients and how their relationships are built in a particular social context.
That’s good. Now you must trade comprehensive note-taking for a different technique—one that
supports your skimming. Just like the three potential advantages of literature reviews, these three use
cases are summarized in Figure 1. Describe the process for identifying research problems. 2. Discuss
the use of literature reviews for developing research questions. 3. Describe the relationship between
formulating research questions and methodology. 4. Explain the relevance of ethics and resources to
the statement of specific aims and hypotheses. 5. Describe what constitutes a research proposal. Such
reinterpretation is not possible when reviewing quantitative accounting research because the
measurement of phenomena in such work is usually tightly linked to the theoretically derived
hypotheses ( Smith, 2019 ). Elucidation: Elucidate the opposing views found in multiple sources
rather in detail and explain the common thread amongst variables, if any. Keeping these notes will
help you avoid this nightmare in the future. Therefore, special attention is needed on how a
qualitative research question will specifically be structured, organized, and formed in the way to
quote the necessary information and elements that allow the readers to assess and evaluate the study.
It particularly helps to improve the research standards, and also it helps to identify the novel methods
for research scholars. Using only those notes, how quickly can you answer the five literature review
objectives.
And that’s just fine—especially for your early research work. Addresses Research Gaps: Identifies
areas where more knowledge is needed, guiding your contributions. Using only those notes, how
quickly can you answer the five literature review objectives. Is the timing right for this question to
be answered. However, given the growing prevalence of the “an A is an A” mentality in business
schools ( Aguinis et al., 2020 ) and perceived need to produce A-level journal “hits” to gain tenure (
Alvesson et al., 2017 ), such action may not be advisable to junior accounting researchers interested
in literature reviews of qualitative accounting research. The formulation of a research question is the
outcome of a complex, iterative process. Still, they do provide an excellent beginning point for
finding better, more extensive materials. As argued by Adams et al. (2017), this may be less
problematic for phenomena that have been intensively researched and existing theories tested
extensively. It is not distance that qualitative researchers want between themselves and their
participants, but the opportunity to connect with them at a human level (Epistemology). Still,
keyword searches and sufficient snowballing techniques may help identify further relevant research
items published in nonaccounting journals that may enrich the literature review and domain with
new insights (cf. Skim Use a note-taking template Be critical Pace yourself Know when to stop Be
encouraged: it gets easier. You mentioned cataloging references, I would like the template for excel.
This helps create a coherent narrative and highlights the connections between different works. Their
insights and constructive comments are reflected in this paper, but given the blind review process,
the author can only name a few of them here. In fact, rather than navigate these old notes, it’s often
easier for me to simply read the original article. In plain words, a good qualitative research question
implicates particular phrasing, whereas the order of words should make the topic of interest amenable
to the qualitative quest. In the management literature, such inductive theory discovery reviews are
often rooted in evidence-based thinking, and they focus on analyzing empirical research items
without a particular informing theory ( Leuz, 2018; Rousseau et al., 2008; Tranfield et al., 2003 ).
Because such evidence-based reviews focus on a phenomenon observed in organizational practice or
a related question, they would mostly apply to use case (i) reviews of a certain domain of
accounting research. The purpose of the Lit Review is to present a survey of the most relevant and
noteworthy published work that relates to your research, rather than a synopsis of all published work
that related to your topic. In all reputable journals, peer-reviewed or refereed research is published
only after it has been reviewed by other researchers in the field. In fact, Petticrew and Roberts (2012)
argue that a literature review should be conducted at the start of any research project, particularly
PhD theses, to avoid overlooking research relevant to the project at hand. In either case, you could
use a more balanced pace. To have even better results don’t wait till you need to write a literature
review and sign up for several relevant scientific newsletters. Then list your most important
criticisms. And drop those criticisms at the end of the note-taking template, in the Impressions
section. They conclude that most prior studies in this field have exclusively contributed to the
domain of management accounting research, with only a small fraction contributing to actor network
theory more generally. Some of the common problems faced in hypothesis formulation include.
Delaying it by a day or two won’t make much difference. So be encouraged! You’ve traded your old
ways for better goals, tools, and rhythms. These strategies will help you finish your literature review
as painlessly as possible. Then once a week or so, sit down with your Literature Synopsis. Curate it.
And scrutinize your collection of the literature’s shortcomings. When you ignore those shortcomings,
you grant the literature too much trust. Reason 1: A template guides your skimming One reason you
undervalue note-taking templates: you think that you should read first and then take notes. “What’s
that?” you interject. “Are you saying I should somehow take notes before I read?” Don’t be silly.
Just as with use case (ii), this observation may indicate that to conduct such methodology-oriented
reviews, authors might benefit from having practical experience of a certain method to provide
authentic recommendations for its future application in accounting research. For them, doing
qualitative research is a challenge that brings the whole self into the process.” Choosing an approach
for health research Researchers select approaches and methodology based on some scientific logics,
not on being easy or interesting. I envisioned world-class scientists producing high-quality research. I
have a video to help us work out the purpose, structure and check points of putting a literature
review together here. All too often, we encounter literature reviews that, at first glance, look pretty
good. One of the main topics discussed is the nature of qualitative research, its inherent challenges,
and how to overcome them. The perfect literature review saves time, energy and resources for
policies makers, academics, writers, readers, and the problems are clearly well-known, and the
concepts are properly targeted. This is 'scoping', and we really need someone who will try to poke
holes in our idea. It does not provide researchers with a set of rules to be followed or give them a
comforting sense of security and safety backup against possible mistakes on the road to knowledge.
This will help the reader get a sense of what the project is about. These are excellent for finding out
about new research or study that hasn’t been published yet. Your paper’s structure, the themes
employed, and the organization should be explained in detail. What follows from our review results
is that in the domain we covered, the available evidence could paint an overly critical picture of
accounting, which may need to be complemented by more research resting on mainstream
quantitative methods. While excellent books on conducting literature reviews in general have been
written ( Booth et al., 2021; Jesson et al., 2011 ), including some that emphasize the social sciences (
Petticrew and Roberts, 2012 ), in this paper I tried to highlight several important choices that authors
can make when crafting literature reviews of qualitative accounting research. When you
procrastinate, literature review becomes a heavy, nagging weight. Like other forms of writing, a
literature review follows a distinct template, a typical intro-body-conclusion, to enhance quality
essays. All the materials from our website should be used with proper references. And settle into a
rhythm that you can sustain for several weeks. What if your literature review collapses under
scrutiny. To sum up The methodological approach is a major determinant of a literature review and
other research papers. It means that either you have to describe two modern works for each
fundamental ones or reverse. However, for less mature and more emerging phenomena, theoretical
explanations may be unavailable. If an article meets one or more of these objectives, then it’s worth
citing, and it achieves your literature review goal. Take, for example, Aguinis and Glavas’ (2012)
review of the corporate social responsibility literature. Step 2: Analyze and Select Sources In the
second phase of your research, it is essential to carefully evaluate and select sources that directly
contribute to your research question. There is a lack of awareness and appreciation of the methods
needed to ensure systematic reviews are as free from bias and as reliable as possible: demonstrated
by recent, flawed, high-profile reviews. An easier way is just to drop us a message on our Live
ChatBox on the bottom right of the page. By doing this, you’ll achieve a comprehensive literature
base that is both well-rooted in tried and tested theory and current. Put differently, the choice of the
use case and central topic of the literature review shapes the remainder of the review process ( Booth
et al., 2021; Hiebl, 2021; Simsek et al., 2021; Tranfield et al., 2003 ). This process is detailed next. 3.
Process and systematicity of literature reviews identify a review topic; search for and select the
relevant literature; analyze the relevant literature; and report the review findings. I call this document
the “Literature Synopsis.” It has two sections: In the Ledger section, simply list each article’s
research question and cite the article.