Learning Psychology Literature Review: 10 Samples for Students

Historical Review Few things rest in isolation from historical precedent. Historical literature reviews focus on examining research throughout a period of time, often starting with the first time an issue, concept, theory, phenomena emerged in the literature, then tracing its evolution within the scholarship of a discipline.

The purpose is to place research in a historical context to show familiarity with state-of-the-art developments and to identify the likely directions for future research. Methodological Review A review does not always focus on what someone said [findings], but how they came about saying what they say [method of analysis].

Reviewing methods of analysis provides a framework of understanding at different levels [i. This approach helps highlight ethical issues which you should be aware of and consider as you go through your own study. Systematic Review This form consists of an overview of existing evidence pertinent to a clearly formulated research question, which uses pre-specified and standardized methods to identify and critically appraise relevant research, and to collect, report, and analyze data from the studies that are included in the review.

The goal is to deliberately document, critically evaluate, and summarize scientifically all of the research about a clearly defined research problem.

1. Search form.
2. F.A.D.E Fighting Against Demonic Entities: Where Ever I AM They Shall Not Be.
3. Gluten-Free Slow Cooking;
4. Definition.
5. Importance of a Good Literature Review.

Typically it focuses on a very specific empirical question, often posed in a cause-and-effect form, such as "To what extent does A contribute to B? Theoretical Review The purpose of this form is to examine the corpus of theory that has accumulated in regard to an issue, concept, theory, phenomena. The theoretical literature review helps to establish what theories already exist, the relationships between them, to what degree the existing theories have been investigated, and to develop new hypotheses to be tested.

Often this form is used to help establish a lack of appropriate theories or reveal that current theories are inadequate for explaining new or emerging research problems. The unit of analysis can focus on a theoretical concept or a whole theory or framework. Sage Publications, ; Kennedy, Mary M. Systematic Reviews in the Social Sciences: Blackwell Publishers, ; Torracro, Richard. Terms, Functions, and Distinctions.

• .
• ;
• Literature Review Outline: Useful Tips and a Brilliant Template.

Systematic Approaches to a Successful Literature Review. Thinking About Your Literature Review. The structure of a literature review should include the following: The critical evaluation of each work should consider: Development of the Literature Review.

Problem formulation -- which topic or field is being examined and what are its component issues?

Literature search -- finding materials relevant to the subject being explored. Data evaluation -- determining which literature makes a significant contribution to the understanding of the topic. Analysis and interpretation -- discussing the findings and conclusions of pertinent literature. Consider the following issues before writing the literature review: Clarify If your assignment is not very specific about what form your literature review should take, seek clarification from your professor by asking these questions: Roughly how many sources should I include?

What types of sources should I review books, journal articles, websites; scholarly versus popular sources? Should I summarize, synthesize, or critique sources by discussing a common theme or issue? Should I evaluate the sources? Find Models Use the exercise of reviewing the literature to examine how authors in your discipline or area of interest have composed their literature review sections. Read them to get a sense of the types of themes you might want to look for in your own research or to identify ways to organize your final review.

The bibliography or reference section of sources you've already read are also excellent entry points into your own research. Narrow the Topic The narrower your topic, the easier it will be to limit the number of sources you need to read in order to obtain a good survey of relevant resources. Your professor will probably not expect you to read everything that's available about the topic, but you'll make your job easier if you first limit scope of the research problem. A good strategy is to begin by searching the HOMER catalog for books about the topic and review the table of contents for chapters that focuses on specific issues.

You can also review the indexes of books to find references to specific issues that can serve as the focus of your research. For example, a book surveying the history of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict may include a chapter on the role Egypt has played in mediating the conflict, or look in the index for the pages where Egypt is mentioned in the text. Consider Whether Your Sources are Current Some disciplines require that you use information that is as current as possible. This is particularly true in disciplines in medicine and the sciences where research conducted becomes obsolete very quickly as new discoveries are made.

However, when writing a review in the social sciences, a survey of the history of the literature may be required. In other words, a complete understanding the research problem requires you to deliberately examine how knowledge and perspectives have changed over time. Sort through other current bibliographies or literature reviews in the field to get a sense of what your discipline expects.

You can also use this method to explore what is considered by scholars to be a "hot topic" and what is not.

Ways to Organize Your Literature Review. Chronology of Events If your review follows the chronological method, you could write about the materials according to when they were published. This approach should only be followed if a clear path of research building on previous research can be identified and that these trends follow a clear chronological order of development. For example, a literature review that focuses on continuing research about the emergence of German economic power after the fall of the Soviet Union.

By Publication Order your sources by publication chronology, then, only if the order demonstrates a more important trend. However, progression of time may still be an important factor in a thematic review. The only difference here between a "chronological" and a "thematic" approach is what is emphasized the most: Note however that more authentic thematic reviews tend to break away from chronological order.

Related articles

A review organized in this manner would shift between time periods within each section according to the point made. Methodological A methodological approach focuses on the methods utilized by the researcher. For the Internet in American presidential politics project, one methodological approach would be to look at cultural differences between the portrayal of American presidents on American, British, and French websites.

Or the review might focus on the fundraising impact of the Internet on a particular political party. A methodological scope will influence either the types of documents in the review or the way in which these documents are discussed. Other Sections of Your Literature Review Once you've decided on the organizational method for your literature review, the sections you need to include in the paper should be easy to figure out because they arise from your organizational strategy. In other words, a chronological review would have subsections for each vital time period; a thematic review would have subtopics based upon factors that relate to the theme or issue.

However, sometimes you may need to add additional sections that are necessary for your study, but do not fit in the organizational strategy of the body.



What other sections you include in the body is up to you but include only what is necessary for the reader to locate your study within the larger scholarship framework. Such a great help with the information above. Such a pleasure to read your feedback. Thank you for the kind words, Laurel: Glad you found my article helpful! Hi Janeth, Thanks for stopping by. Try to write about features, positive and negative ones. Try to go with the facts, and stick with them. It would work kind of well, Janeth.

Thank you so much. This was so helpful, especially with your examples of an outline. Dominic Weck Raik Posted: Thank you for your kind words, Dominic! Glad the article was useful for you.

Literature reviews - Example 1 - Student Services - The University of Queensland, Australia

Discusses what has been found, but points out inconsistency of results. This area has been surprisingly neglected until recently , as the majority of the literature on eyewitness testimony has focussed on the effect of questions and media reports containing misleading information. To appreciate the effects of co-witness information on eyewitness reports, we must examine , in detail, the different methodologies that have been used to investigate this topic. However , such a narrow focus may not fully explain how people remember ref.

Reviews the chronological development of research in this area an approach that is useful at times, but not always the best. Then discusses how the next researchers tried to address these problems. One should not assume the results obtained from studies using stories and word lists as stimuli can be generalised to forensic contexts. It may therefore be advantageous to also investigate the effects of co-witness information using Natural Discussion Groups as this methodology has high ecological validity.

However , few studies have used this methodology, and those that have, have yielded mixed findings. Therefore , future investigation using the Natural Discussion Group methodology would be helpful to better understand the effects of discussion on memory. In this section, relevant cognitive and social theories are discussed in order to 1 explain the occurrence of memory conformity and 2 describe factors that influence memory conformity. For each of the four explanations, followed typical structure of: Thought went into the choice of order.

There was some comparison between later and earlier explanations and the synthesised conclusions that can be drawn. Supporting evidence … This suggests that the misinformation effect may be due at least partially to memory impairment, rather than just biased guessing. Sums up what has been learned from the review of the four current theoretical explanations.