How to conduct an effective Literature Review

TEQIP Short Term Course on Research Skills and Methods

19th - 21st February 2016

Ashish Garg IIT Kanpur

ashishg@iitk.ac.in

Bibliography •  “A Gentle Guide to Research Methods” by

Gordon Rugg and Marian Petre, McGraw Hill

•  Many other on-line articles

2

What is “Literature Review”? •  C. Hart (1998) “Doing a literature review:

Releasing the social science research imagination”, London, UK, Sage Publications. – Theuseofknowledge/ideas/approachesintheliterature

•  Tocorrectlyiden8fytheproblem(ifvaguelyknownbeforehand)

•  Tojus8fythepar8cularapproachtakentothetopic•  Toassesstheselec8onofmethodsused,and•  Tounderstandthattheresearchtobedonecontributessomethingnew

– Qualityofthereviewmeansappropriatebreadthanddepth,rigorandconsistency,clarityandbrevity,andeffec8veanalysisandsynthesis

3

What is “Literature Review”? •  J. Shaw, System, 23(3), 325-335 (1995).

– Processofthereviewshould“explainhowonepieceofresearchbuildsonanother”.

•  Webster and Watson, MIS Quarterly, 26 (2), 13-23 (2002) – Aneffec8veliteraturereviewcreatesafirmfounda8onforadvancingknowledge.Itfacilitatestheorydevelopment,closesareaswhereaplethoraofresearchexists,anduncoversareaswhereresearchisneeded.

4

Literature Review •  An effective literature review should include

the following characteristics: a)  Methodologicallyanalyzeandsynthesizequality

literature,b)  Provideafirmfounda8ontoaresearchtopicc)  Provideafirmfounda8ontotheselec8onofresearch

methodologyd)  Demonstratethattheproposedresearchcontributes

somethingnewtotheoverallbodyofknowledgeoradvancestheresearchfield’sknowledge-base.

•  Helps you to create a good impression on the supervisor that you do understand the state of the art in your chosen field J

5

Stages of Literature Review

6

1.INPUT

2.PROCESSING

3.OUTPUT

i.KnowledgeoftheLiterature

ii.UnderstandingoftheLiterature

iii.Applica8on

iv.Analysis

v.Synthesis

vi.Evalua8onQualityofinput(SourceandSearchtools)

Knowing and Understanding the Literature

7

Example:Oneisdoingaliteraturereviewon“CO2emissionandglobalwarming”

Case-IIthasbeenshowedinvariousstudiesthatCO2emissionleadstoincreaseintheglobalmeanearthtemperature(ABCetal,DEFetal…).

Case-IIIthasbeenshowedinvariousstudiesthatCO2emissionleadstoincreaseintheglobalmeanearthtemperature.Forexample,ABCetal.conductedadetailedstudyandfoundthatCO2emissionsleadtoanincreasedof2-5degreesinthemeantemperaturesdependingontheloca8onandlevelofpollu8on.Inanotherstudy,BEFetal.showedthattheincreaseinthemeantemperaturewasbetween1-2degreesandthedevia8onwasalsodependentonthelocalmeantemperaturesataspecificloca8on.

BETTER

Application •  Typically a two step two-step process

–  Iden8fythemajorconceptsortopicsorsubtopicsrelevanttothesubjectunderconsidera8on,and

– Placethecita8oninthecorrectcategoryofconcept.

8

Concept1 Concept2 Concept3 ConceptM

ArKcle1 X

ArKcle2 X X

ArKcle3 X

ArKcleN X X

Analysis •  Analyze the data

– Understandhypotheses– Understandmodelsusedorexperimentalcondi8onsused– Makeconnec8ons–  Compareandcontrast–  Findoutstrongpointsandloopholes– …..

9

Analysis: An Example

10

Case–IDataminingistheanalyzingandinterpreta8onoflargeamountsofinforma8on.Throughanalyzingvastamountsofdataitispossibletofindpaeerns,rela8onshipsandfromthesediscoveriesitispossibletomakecorrela8ons(Chen&Liu,2005).

CaseIIDataminingisaprocessofdiscoveringnewknowledgebyusingsta8s8calanalysistoiden8fypreviouslyunsuspectedpaeernsandclusteringinlargedatasets(Chen&Liu,2005).

Whyitwouldbeofanyinterestorvaluetofindpaeernsandrela8onshipsinordertomakecorrela8ons?

InformingScienceJournal,9,181(2006)

Synthesis and Evaluation •  Bringing out something new out of the

literature review –  Iden8fica8onofunsolvedproblemsorissues– Problemsinthemodelsorexperimentaldesignsusedinpast

– Anewidea– Providerecommenda8onsandconclusions

11

Synthesis: Example

12

ExampleCO2emissionisbelievedtoberesponsibleforincreaseintheglobalmeantemperatures.Theproblemisassociatedwithemissionsduetocoalburning,biomassburning,vehicularpollu8onandotherhumanac8vi8es.Howevertherearestudieswhichcontradictthisviewandsuggestthatglobalwarminghasnorela8ontotheatmosphericCO2levels.

ExampleVarioushumanac8vi8esrelatedtoburningofhydrocarbonsleadtoCO2emissionsintheatmospherewhicharewidelybelievedtoberesponsibleforincreaseintheglobalmeantemperatures.Atthesame8me,therearestudieswhichcontradictthisviewandsuggestthatglobalwarminghasnorela8ontotheatmosphericCO2levels.Itwouldthusbeinteres8ngtoexaminethisindetailbymodelingthedataaswellasbycarryingoutexperimentsaswellasdatacollec8oninareaswhichhaveexperiencedlargeincreaseintheCO2levelsduetoindustrializa8onandfindoutwhythesediscrepanciesoccur.

√Beeer

How do you actually do it? •  Exploit the power of web in a positive way

•  Rely on refereed articles published in scholarly journals, not just on some news items or random articles

•  There is a method to it.

13

Method •  Specify your research question.

–  Itistricky,shouldnotbetoonarrowortoobroad– Learnbyexperience– Example:Howtosearchforinforma8onrelatedtoglobalwarmingbyusingkeywords

•  Globalwarming•  Globalwarmingandpollu8on•  Globalwarmingandairpollu8on•  Globalwarmingandairpollu8onandcarbondi-oxide•  ……………

14

Use of Bibliographic Databases •  Identify ones which are of your use

– WebofScience(orISIwebofknowledge)– Scopus– GoogleScholar

•  Build a tentative list of terms that you would use for search

•  Narrow your search

•  Refine your search

15

Further work •  Thorough reading of the papers/articles

–  Forwardandbackwardsearch

•  Read critically, make observations of the salient points and create summaries

•  Compile the information, compare and contrast

•  Go back to step-1 if needed

•  Determine what is done, what is the relevance and the importance of the work done, what are the missing links and the remaining challenges on the topic you have chosen.

16

Important aspects •  An effective and quality literature review is

based upon a concept-centric approach rather than chronological or author-centric approach –  J.Webster&R.T.Watson,MISQuarterly,26(2),13-23,2002.

•  Authors of literature reviews are at risk for producing mind-numbing lists of citations and findings that resemble a phone book – impressive case, lots of numbers, but not much plot. – D.J.Bem,PsychologicalBulle8n,118(2),172-177,1995. 17

Output of a literature review

18

Hart,C.(1998).Doingaliteraturereview:Releasingthesocialscienceresearchimagina5on.London,UK:SagePublica8ons.

Structureofanargument

Key points •  Literature review is not a one time thing.

–  Itisacon8nuousandcyclicprocessthatonemayneedtogobackandforth8lltheend.

•  Important to comment upon the comparisons between numerical and experimental studies.

•  Reasons/arguments must be constructed to explain the disagreements/discrepancies like some of the assumptions made in numerical/theoretical studies are not at all only partly met in experiments.

•  Conversely, experimental error analysis must be performed to ascertain whether the differences are significant or well within the error band.

19

Writing a literature review •  A difficult task to write a good review

•  Unlike an introductory chapter in a thesis or report, a literature review is usually more comprehensive and elaborate and is well-supported by the evidence. 

•  Topics are usually covered in substantial detail and supported by references to research

20

Structure of a literature review •  Various methods of writing a literature

review

•  One can either go by the authors or by the topic – Usually,secondapproachisbeeerthanthefirst

21

Process of writing the literature review •  Read and understand the articles

– Understandthepurpose,assump8ons&hypothesesmadeandtheclaimsmadeintheformofresultsandanalysis

•  Organization of the topics – Synthesizetheinforma8onintheformofnotes,takereferences

•  Createasetoftopicsandsub-topics•  Iden8fykeyreferencesforeachtopic

– Createastoryinthemind

22

Process of writing the literature review •  Jot down a framework in the document

– Forexample,makealistofvarioussec8ons•  Introduc8onofthearea•  Statementoftheproblem•  Topicandsub-topicwiselistofsec8ons•  Provideadiscussion•  Provideanaccountofwhatneedstobedone•  Summaryandoutlook•  References

•  Fill in the details •  Read it thoroughly and get rid of the mistakes

– Payspecialaeen8ontofactualmistakes,spellingmistakes,assump8onsandclaims

23

Reading the articles

24

How to read a scientific article •  A complex task •  Try not to read it like a text book •  Identify its structure and features •  Look for author’s main points •  Ask questions before, during and after

reading the article •  Draw inferences based on your own

knowledge and experience

25

Structure of an article •  Most article follow a conventional structure:

– Abstract–  Introduc8on/LiteratureReview– Methods/ExperimentalDesign/Calcula8onDetails– Results– Discussion– Summary/Conclusions– AcknowledgementandReferences

26

Abstract •  Purpose of the study •  Very brief account of Methodology •  Key results •  Most important message(s)

27Whatnext:Youmaymovetofigurestogetafeelofthecontents!

Introduction Section •  What is the purpose of introduction section?

– ProvidebackgroundInforma8on

– Exposethelacunasorgapsintheexis8ngbodyofknowledgeandstatetheproblemundertaken

– Showmo8va8onofthestudy

28

Introduction

29

Royetal.,Am.J.Phys.758,August2007

Introducingthetopic

Introduction

30Royetal.,Am.J.Phys.758,August2007

Builduptotheproblemwithexamplesofworksdoneinpast

Introduction

31

Royetal.,Am.J.Phys.758,August2007

Highligh8ngtheproblem

Introduction

32

AnalyzingtheProblem

Royetal.,Am.J.Phys.758,August2007

Introduction

33

Howtheauthorshavetackledtheproblemexis8ngintheliterature

Analysisoftheproblem

Royetal.,Am.J.Phys.758,August2007

Experimental/Calculation Details •  Experimental Details:

– DesignofExperiments– Explana8onofthetypeofexperimentsconductedandtheirdetailsforonetobeabletoreproducetheresults

•  Explain the calculation approach – Whatkindofsoqwaresoralgorithmswereused,whatweretheassump8onsmadeetc

34

Details of the Experiment

35Royetal.,Am.J.Phys.758,August2007

NeedtobeenoughtoallowrepeKKonofthework

Results and Discussion •  Results

– Repor8ngofvariouskindsofdataintheformoffigures/graphsandtables

– Observa8onsmadewithappropriatereferencestothefiguresandtables

•  Discussion – Comparisonofthefindingswiththeliterature– Explana8onofanynewfindingandproposepossiblereasonsbymeansofeitherorallofanaly8cal/schema8c/textualmethods

–  Inferencesdrawninabroadercontext– Answerstotheques8onsposedintheintroduc8on

36

Results and Discussion

37Royetal.,Am.J.Phys.758,August2007

Results and Discussion

38

Sourceoferror

Results

39Royetal.,Am.J.Phys.758,August2007

Analysisofthedata

Results

40Royetal.,Am.J.Phys.758,August2007

AnalysisandNovelty

Discussion

41

HighlighKngtheimportantfeaturesLimitaKonsPossibilityoffurtherstudies

Royetal.,Am.J.Phys.758,August2007

What are your critical observations? •  On Page 1, why should the drag force consist

of a damping like behaviour? •  How correct is the assumption about

dependence of damping coefficient k on permeability of vacuum, magnetic moment, conductivity and inner radius?

•  What will this happen if the magnet was not a good metal?

•  What if the magnet is not cylindrical? •  What is magnet gets titled? •  What if the gap between magnet and the tube

wall is tiny? 42

What else? •  Extension of this idea to some other problem

– Forexamplehowdoshockabsorberswork?– Cantherebeanyapplica8onofthisexperimentorLenz’sLaw?

43

Summary •  Have some idea of the topic in mind. •  Choose right sources and be methodical. •  Get enough literature relevant to your

problem. •  Read thoroughly and be critical. •  Ask questions at every stage. •  Make notes. •  Remember it is a continuous process even you

have found your problem and have started experiments/calculations/modelling.

•  Have fun while doing all this J 44