Literature Review 1000 words
Nayef_222
6PIRS022WLiteratureReview2-WritingYourReview2022-23.pptx
University of Westminster
Politics, International Relations, Development Studies
Workshop 3: Literature Review 2
Writing your Literature Review
6PIRS022W: Dissertation – Module Leader: Bridget Cotter
Today’s Lecture on Literature Review
Assessment Requirements
What to include in the Review
Writing your Review – style and approach
References and Bibliography
What are the requirements?
Development Expected since last year
“The Literature Review for this module will be significantly developed and different from the work you did for your Research Methods module. (p.2)
If doing the same topic you should
build on the dissertation proposal that you submitted in your second year…integrating tutor feedback (10-11);
demonstrate that you have made significant progress since last year (11).
formulate an entirely new piece of work.
“This is not the same as the research search and review you did for your Level 5 Political Research module.” (11)
You will be expected to demonstrate:
Identify your research question beyond a general ‘topic’ of choice. The question will need to be clearly stated in the assignment. (p.11)
Research the relevant literature beyond what was required in your proposal. In particular, your literature review should cover at least 20 sources.
Found ways to categorise and characterize the types of research and literature available and relevant to your work
Expand the bibliography to reflect your research into the literature beyond what was required in your proposal last year
All of the above is from page 11 of the Handbook
Marking Criteria (p.11)
Your literature review will be assessed according to the:
Breadth of the literature discussed
Coherence of the themes and structure of the review
Fit between literature review and research question
Clarity of writing style
Presentation, including academic conventions
What should I include in my review?
What is a Lit Review again?
An objective, concise, and critical summary of published research literature pertinent to your subject of study.
In most cases, you should think of it as stage in the research process, rather than a draft section of your final dissertation. (p.2)
Remember to refer back to Lecture 2 for tips on finding sources
Also see examples on Bb
You can use the following questions as prompts
Write about the ones that are most relevant for you.
Don’t feel you have to cover all of them.
(Note! the order of these questions is not a guide to the structure of your review)
Questions to get started
What does my reader need to know?
Which empirical RESEARCH STUDIES have been done on your topic? What is the knowledge? Who conducted the most important studies, when, where? Academic or other?
What are the key CONCEPTS in your subject of study and who has developed these? How do they help us?
Which THEORIES have been developed to analyse, explain, and evaluate your topic (and who are the key theorists?) How do they help us understand?
What DON’T we know? Are there gaps in the literature, neglected areas of study?
These are the questions that drive the Literature Review!
What insights can I bring to bear?
For what purpose has the research knowledge been used by various analysts?
What are the different political and ideological perspectives evident in the literature?
What are the different methodological approaches to this topic? If empirical: what kinds of methods are used? What schools of thought are the researchers and theorists from?
What do the concepts mean and how can they help to interpret, explain and assess my topic?
How do the theories help us analyse the information I have about my topic?
These are the questions that drive the Literature Review.
What needs evaluating?
What YOU think about these studies and analyses?
Which research, concepts and theories offer the most insight?
What are the strengths and weakness of the evidence, concepts and theories?
What research questions are being asked and what is NOT being asked?
What are the biases in the literature?
What are the limits of the literature?
These are the questions that drive the Literature Review.
Is a Literature Review the same as an essay?
No. It is different from an essay.
The main tasks of an essay:
to substantively answer a set essay question
the essay intro focuses on the question and the structure of the argument
present an argument including extensive evidence
to persuade the reader of an argument
present evidence to show strengths and weaknesses of a range of arguments
Evaluate the evidence and the various arguments
Give a thorough account of the topic including some detail of the topic and analysis of this
The tasks of a Literature review (The Product)
Define your research question in relation to the literature
To introduce the reader to the key aspects of your topic
introduce the reader to the relevant strands of literature
Surveys the relevant and available literature
Demonstrates your knowledge of the literature and the subject
Gives overview of most important research studies, theories, and analyses of your topic
categorises the literature thematically
the introduction focuses on the character of the literature and the structure of the review (ie how you are organising the review)
Evaluates, compares and contrast the significant theories, studies, approaches in the literature (compares and contrasts)
Identifies trends, controversies, debates
Evaluates strengths and weaknesses of the literature
As a Process: the Review Helps you
Use the review to develop your research
Have a dialogue with the literature: from when you start your research until the end
A review helps you to
work out your thoughts about your subject
narrow down your research aims and thesis statement
Work out your
empirical contribution
analytical contribution
to situate your topic in the field
understand the literature
decide on your research methods and methodology
How is it different from last year?
Includes more – possibly more relevant - sources
Most likely to show:
More knowledge of what is available and relevant
More advanced research and reading effort
Clearer picture of your research question
A more mature perspective on the literature
Stronger ability to stand back and generalise
Better synthesis and categorisation of literature
Less descriptive/detailed summary of specific sources
More concise writing
Incorporated tutor comments from proposal
How do I write my review?
Ideas for Organising your Review
20
Start General and get more specific.
Around key concepts, strands of your research, different literature subject areas
Around perspectives, ideologies, arguments, approaches, methodologies (grouping the sources)
Give a few illustrative examples from the more pertinent studies (but not lots of details of the evidence offered by these)
Use inline references as a shorthand way of referring to your specific sources
Writing Discursively
20
Is this a good review? What could be improved? Student work on women’s political representation in the UK
Childs (2006) states that even after the great strides forward after the 1997 election, women still make up less than 20% of MPs. (p.3) She cites a number of reasons for this. Firstly,…
Jones (2005) argues that women are excluded from becoming representatives at the point of candidacy selection. (p.134) She based this on a 1993 study of parliamentary candidates (by Danfield and Clover 1993), which, she argues, demonstrated that…
Fallowfield (2003) has conducted a series of interviews gauging the opinions of women MPs on why it is so difficult for women to gain entry to Parliament. (p.24-27) She concludes that…
21
22
This Review is more discursive
Research studies present a series of explanations for the unequal number of women representatives in the UK parliament, including candidate selection, family unfriendly practices, and continuing sexual stereo-types. (Childs 2006; Jones 2006; Fallowfield 2003)
By far the most important author in this field is Sarah Childs (1993, 1998, 2006) who has conducted several major studies on the topic. In contrast to some of her earlier studies, in which she argued that….(1993: 52), her most recent conclusion (2006) is that….(120) However, Jones and Fallowfield suggest that the most important factors are instead linked to….(Jones, 2006: 43; Fallowfield 2003: 21)
But there are weaknesses in all current research in that no one has compared attitudes of male and female MPs. Without interviewing men, it is hard to draw full conclusions. One study that goes some way to addressing this gap is Soleri (2005). He and his team interviewed…
23
Descriptive vs Analytical Writing (Analytical writing is more Discursive)
In answer to the question: “How far do you think GM crops are dangerous, basing your response on Goldsmith’s article”, student followed the intro to his essay in a purely descriptive way…
In the article Zac Goldsmith discusses the dangers of GM crops. He relates how Klebsiella seeds were found to render soil dead and threatened to end nearly all plant life. He also mentions how easily mistakes can happen when 11,500 acres of land in the UK was wrongly planted with GM contaminated seed. He feels that people are becoming more aware of the dangers of GM crops with even McDonald’s announcing that their French fries will be GM free.
24
Here is a more analytical approach…
Goldsmith (1999) presents an array of evidence to suggest that GM crops are dangerous. The most striking illustration of possible disaster is the production of klebsiella seeds. David Suzuki, an eminent Canadian geneticist, maintains that genetically engineered seeds could end all plant life on the North American continent. And research in different countries, including Canada Mexico, and the UK has revealed that genes travel miles from their original sites. Such evidence seems to leave no doubt as to the danger of GM crops.
However, there are a number of potentially positive affects that Goldsmith’s article glances over but does not develop. There appears to be potential benefits in klebsiella seeds – the production of ethanol. In addition, Goldsmith cites mainstream opinion as now being uncomfortable with GM foods, but the Royal Society as only “revising its position” (a relatively mild phrase in contrast to the more extreme language of much of the article).
25
This summary reads like a list of research findings: Sexual harassment has many consequences. Adams, Kottke, and Padgitt (1983) found that some women students said they avoided taking a class or working with certain professors because of the risk of harassment. They also found that men and women students reacted differently. Their research was a survey of 1,000 men and women graduate and undergraduate students. Benson and Thomson's study in Social Problems (1982) lists many problems created by sexual harassment. In their excellent book, The Lecherous Professor, Dziech and Weiner (1990) give a long list of difficulties that victims have suffered.
This one focusses on the conclusions that can be drawn from the studies, and uses the findings to elaborate and illustrate this: The victims of sexual harassment suffer a range of consequences, from lowered self- esteem and loss of self-confidence to withdrawal from social interaction, changed career goals, and depression (Adams, Kottke, and Padgitt, 1983:135; Benson and Thomson, 1982:23-24; Dziech and Weiner, 1990:42). For example, Adams, Kottke, and Padgitt (1983) noted that 13 percent of women students said they avoided taking a class or working with certain professors because of the risk of harassment. (p. 138)
8
Using the literature review approach as part of an introduction or chapter…
Real Student Example (on Just War Theory and Kosovo)
A growing body of literature on ‘just war’ theory emerged soon after the end of the Cold War. Further, the controversy surrounding NATO’s intervention in Kosovo in 1999 led scholars to address the issues behind the challenge of humanitarian intervention as a contested form of ‘just war’.REF WITH PAGE NUMBER While some continue to defend both the theory and the intervention, there are many who argue against the relevance of the concept of a just war and the legitimacy of NATO’s humanitarian war in Kosovo.(EXAMPLES OF SOURCES ON THIS) The conflict between respect for state sovereignty as enshrined in the UN Charter and intervention within sovereign states’ boundaries to defend human rights is the subject of hot contemporary debate. The opinions are divided and the subjects do not escape without being scrutinized and evaluated.
One of the main just war theorists, Bellamy (2006) offers an in-depth
presentation of the reasons why… NEEDS INLINE REFERENCE WITH PAGE NUMBER!
Manchester Phrase bank (for all your academic vocabulary and style needs!)
http://www.phrasebank.manchester.ac.uk/
The Inline References and Bibliography
In-Line References
17
Harvard, Westminster Harvard…
(Name date: page)
Do I use them in my lit review?
Of course you do!!!!!
See examples in previous slides
Use the PIR RED BOOK for a style and referencing guide! Bb PIR site (Under Organisations)
Bibliography
17
Does not count in the word requirement
At Least 20 sources – majority peer-reviewed!
Relevant to your research question and aims
Harvard, Westminster Harvard…
Hart, C. (2001), Doing a Literature Search: A comprehensive guide for the social sciences, (London: Sage).
Caulley, D. N. (1992). Writing a Critical Review of the Literature. La Trobe University: Bundoora.
Clark, I. (2006). Writing the Successful Thesis and dissertation: Entering the Conversation. Oxford: Prentice Hall.
Goodson, P. (2013) Becoming an academic writer. London: Sage
Bibliography
17
Henning (2011) ‘Literature Review: Synthesizing Multiple Sources’ School of Liberal Arts, Indiana University Available at: http://liberalarts.iupui.edu/uwc/uploads/docs/Lit+Review+weaver-1.pdf [accessed 03/03/14]
Leicester University (2013) ‘Writing a Dissertation: Study Guide’. Available at: http://www2.le.ac.uk/offices/ld/resources/writing/writing-resources/writing-dissertation
Merriam S. (1988) Case study research in education: a qualitative approach. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
