5 analyzing and synthesizing findings-khalid


Published on

1 Like
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

5 analyzing and synthesizing findings-khalid

  1. 1. Analyzing andSynthesizing FindingsProf. Dr. Khalid MahmoodDepartment of Library & Information ScienceUniversity of the PunjabLahore, PAKISTAN 1
  2. 2. Read the articles completely in each topic together Take notes in an organized manner: computer files, note cards, etc. Include all bibliographic info, especially page number when quoting! Flag like information with same color post-its across articles. 2
  3. 3. Summarize main purpose (research questions) methodology  qualitative/quantitative  subjects, controls, treatments findings relevant details 3
  4. 4. Analyze varying definitions of key terms methodology used  size & generalizability of subject pool  innovative methodology enough evidence? findings consistent with those of similar studies? 4
  5. 5. Analyze currency: lit review shows the latest work done in subject area. (last 5 years on average) Include older articles if:  landmark study  only evidence on a topic  helps explain the evolution of the research 5
  6. 6. Synthesize the Literature How does each article relate to your topic and purpose? Define your argument/thesis. Identify major trends or patterns emerging from your reading. 6
  7. 7. Synthesize Reassemble your notes based on results of reading, using organizational aids such as post-its, flags, etc. Revise original outline of categories Create a detailed topic outline  begin with your “argument” or claim  present evidence from articles researched that proves your claim Do not string together a summary of articles. The outline is topic driven. 7
  8. 8. Sample topic outline Psychological Aspects of Organ Donation: Individual and Next-of-Kin Donation DecisionsI. Introduction IV. Methodological issues and directions for future research A. Establish importance of topic (cite statistics on scarcity of organs). A. Improvement in attitude measures and measurement strategy. B. Delimit the review to psychological components of decisions. B. Greater differentiation by type of donation. C. Describe organization of the paper, indicating that the remaining topics in C. Stronger theoretical emphasis. the outline will be discussed. D. Greater interdisciplinary focus.II. Individual decisions regarding posthumous V. Summary, Conclusions, and Implications organ donation A. Summary of points I-IV. A. Beliefs about organ donation B. Need well-developed theoretical B. Attitudes toward donating models of attitudes and decision C. Stated willingness to donate making. D. Summary of research on individual C. Current survey data limited in scope decisions and application points to need for more sophisticated research in the future.III. Next-of-kin consent decisions D. Need more use of sophisticated data A. Beliefs about donating others’ organs. analytic techniques. B. Attitudes toward next-of-kin donations. E. Conclusion: Psychology can draw from various C. Summary of research on next-of-kin subdisciplines for an understanding of consent decisions donation decisions so intervention strategies can be identifiable. Desperately need to increase the available supply of donor organs. 8
  9. 9. Synthesize Note on your topic outline relationships among studies: which researchers, what page, etc. support each point? Note consistency of results from study to study. Note discrepancies among studies and provide possible explanations such as dates of studies, different methodologies. 9
  10. 10. Synthesize Note landmark studies and if replicated. Note how individual studies help illustrate or advance theoretical notions. Note gaps or areas needing more research. Make sure your detailed outline follows a logical sequence of topics and subtopics. This will give your literature review the coherence it needs. 10
  11. 11. Some problems could be … Lacking organization and structure Lacking focus, unity and coherence Being repetitive and verbose Failing to cite influential papers Failing to keep up with recent developments Failing to critically evaluate cited papers Citing irrelevant references Depending too much on secondary sources 11