Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Literature review and the PhD


Published on

Presentation by Professor Simon Haslett at the Institute of Life Science, Swansea University, Monday 4th July 2011.

Published in: Education, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

Literature review and the PhD

  1. 1. Literature review and the PhD<br />Professor Simon Haslett<br />Dean, School of STEM<br />Seminar at the Institute of Life Sciences, Swansea University,<br />Monday 4th July 2011<br />
  2. 2. Contents<br />A taxonomy for literature reviews<br />Undertaking a literature review<br />Assessing the success of a literature review<br />Institutional guides and resources<br />Recommended reading:<br />Randolph, Justus (2009) A Guide to Writing the Dissertation Literature Review. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 14(13). Available online:<br />
  3. 3. Cooper’s (1988) Taxonomy of Literature Reviews<br />
  4. 4. Cooper’s Taxonomy (cont.)<br />From “Organizing Knowledge Synthesis: A Taxonomy of Literature Reviews,” by H. M. Cooper, 1988, Knowledge in Society, 1, p. 109. <br />
  5. 5. Undertaking a literature review<br />Once the categories have been decided, identify tools available relevant to the review:<br /><ul><li>Libraries:
  6. 6. Personal
  7. 7. Departmental/School/Faculty
  8. 8. Institutional
  9. 9. Other external e.g. British Library, learned society
  10. 10. Online literature databases:
  11. 11. Web-based e.g. Google Scholar – but note limits
  12. 12. Web of Knowledge (Web of Science) – but note limits
  13. 13. Subject-specific databases e.g. Geobase
  14. 14. Conferences and other sources – be wary of whether peer-reviewed or not</li></li></ul><li>My own usual procedure<br /><ul><li>Search Web of Knowledge
  15. 15. Search Geobase
  16. 16. Refine results if there are many
  17. 17. Read through all remaining results
  18. 18. Mark for collection into ‘marked list’
  19. 19. Collate all titles and abstracts in ‘marked list’ and go through them
  20. 20. Decide whether relevant or irrelevant
  21. 21. Categorise them according to which aspect of my research they relate to
  22. 22. Decide whether the title and abstract provide enough information on their own
  23. 23. If not, obtain full paper e.g. search online, search library catalogues, inter-library loans
  24. 24. Annotate abstracts and papers precisely where relevant passages are located
  25. 25. Decide on organisation structure
  26. 26. Prioritise primary refs for detailed discussion i.e. base paragraphs on, and secondary refs for simple citation (often as lists)</li></li></ul><li>Assessing a literature review<br />Boote and Beile’s(2005) Literature Review Scoring Rubric:<br />Coverage<br />Synthesis<br />Methodology<br />Significance<br />Rhetoric<br />(D. N. Booteand P. Beile, 2005, Educational Researcher, 34 (6), p. 8)<br />
  27. 27. Institutional Online Guides and Resources<br /><ul><li>Concordia University
  28. 28. Deakin University
  29. 29. Monash University
  30. 30. St. Mary’s University
  31. 31. University of California, Santa Cruz
  32. 32. University of Canberra
  33. 33. University of Leicester
  34. 34. University of North Carolina
  35. 35. University of Toronto</li>