Which of the Following Is a Common Mistake That Weakens a Literature Review

Crafting a high-quality literature review is disquisitional to earning marks and developing a strong dissertation, thesis or inquiry project. But, it'due south no simple task. Here at Grad Jitney, we've reviewed thousands of literature reviews and seen a recurring set up of mistakes and issues that drag students down.

In this postal service, we'll unpack 7 common literature review mistakes, so that you can avoid these pitfalls and submit a literature review that impresses.

Overview: vii Literature Review Killers

1. Over-reliance on depression-quality sources
2. A lack of landmark/seminal literature
3. A lack of current literature
4. Description instead of integration and synthesis
5. Irrelevant or unfocused content
6. Poor affiliate structure and layout
7. Plagiarism and poor referencing

Mistake #1: Over-reliance on depression-quality sources

I of the most common problems nosotros see in literature reviews is an over-reliance on low-quality sources. This includes a wide collection of not-academic sources like blog posts, opinion pieces, publications past advancement groups and daily news articles.

Of course, just because a piece of content takes the form of a blog postal service doesn't automatically mean information technology is low-quality. All the same, it'southward (generally) unlikely to be as academically audio (i.east., well-researched, objective and scientific) as a periodical article, so yous demand to exist a lot more sceptical when considering this content and make certain that it has a potent, well-reasoned foundation. As a dominion of thumb, your literature review shouldn't rely heavily on these types of content – they should be used sparingly.

Ideally, your literature review should be built on a strong base of operations of journal manufactures, ideally from well-recognised, peer-reviewed journals with a loftier H index. You can also draw on books written past well-established subject matter experts. When considering books, try to focus on those that are published by academic publishers, for case, Cambridge University Press, Oxford Academy Press and Routledge. You lot tin also draw on government websites, provided they have a strong reputation for objectivity and information quality. As with any other source, be wary of whatsoever government website that seems to exist pushing an agenda.

As I mentioned, this doesn't mean that your literature review can't include the occasional blog mail service or news article. These types of content take their place, especially when setting the context for your study. For example, you may desire to cite a collection of newspaper articles to demonstrate the emergence of a recent trend. However, your cadre arguments and theoretical foundations shouldn't rely on these. Build your foundation on credible academic literature to ensure that your report stands on the proverbial shoulders of giants.

Mistake #two: A lack of landmark/seminal literature

Another event we see in weaker literature reviews is an absence of landmark literature for the enquiry topic. Landmark literature (sometimes also referred to every bit seminal or pivotal work) refers to the articles that initially presented an idea of great importance or influence inside a detail discipline. In other words, the articles that put the specific area of enquiry "on the map", so to speak.

The reason for the absence of landmark literature in poor literature reviews is most usually that either the pupil isn't aware of the literature (because they haven't sufficiently immersed themselves in the existing research), or that they experience that they should simply nowadays the most upward to date studies. Any the cause, it's a trouble, as a good literature review should ever acknowledge the seminal writing in the field.

But, how do y'all detect landmark literature?

Well, you tin can usually spot these past searching for the topic in Google Scholar and identifying the handful of articles with high citation counts. They'll also be the studies most commonly cited in textbooks and, of grade, Wikipedia (but please don't use Wikipedia as a source!).

So, when you're piecing your literature review together, remember to pay homage to the classics, even if only briefly. Seminal works are the theoretical foundation of a strong literature review.

Fault #3: A lack of current literature

As I mentioned, it's incredibly important to acknowledge the landmark studies and research in your literature review. Withal, a strong literature review should too comprise the current literature. Information technology should, ideally, compare and contrast the "classics" with the more than up to appointment research, and briefly annotate on the development.

Of grade, yous don't desire to burn down precious word count providing an in-depth history lesson regarding the development of the topic (unless that's one of your inquiry aims, of course), simply yous should at least acknowledge any key differences betwixt the old and the new.

But, how do you find electric current literature?

To find current literature in your research area, you can once again use Google Scholar by only selecting the "Since…" link on the left-mitt side. Depending on your expanse of study, contempo may mean the last year or ii, or a fair bargain longer.

So, equally you develop your catalogue of literature, remember to incorporate both the classics and the more than upwards to date inquiry. By doing this, you lot'll attain a comprehensive literature base that is both well-rooted in tried and tested theory and current.

Mistake #iv: Description instead of integration and synthesis

This i is a big one. And, unfortunately, it'due south a very common 1. In fact, it'southward probably the nigh common issue nosotros encounter in literature reviews.

All besides often, students think that a literature review is but a summary of what each researcher has said. A lengthy, detailed "he said, she said". This is incorrect. A good literature review needs to go beyond only describing all the relevant literature. It needs to integrate the existing research to show how it all fits together.

A good literature review should too highlight what areas don't fit together, and which pieces are missing. In other words, what do researchers disagree on and why might that be. Information technology'southward seldom the case that everyone agrees on everything because the "truth" is typically very nuanced and intricate in reality. A strong literature review is a balanced 1, with a mix of different perspectives and findings that give the reader a clear view of the current state of knowledge.

A good analogy is that of a jigsaw puzzle. The various findings and arguments from each piece of literature grade the individual puzzle pieces, and you then put these together to develop a motion picture of the electric current country of knowledge. Importantly, that puzzle will in all likelihood accept pieces that don't fit well together, and pieces that are missing. Information technology'due south seldom a pretty puzzle!

Past the terminate of this process of critical review and synthesis of the existing literature, it should exist clear what'southward missing – in other words, the gaps exist in the electric current enquiry. These gaps and so form the foundation for your proposed report. In other words, your written report will attempt to contribute a missing puzzle piece (or get two pieces to fit together).

And so, when you lot're crafting your literature review affiliate, think that this chapter needs to become well beyond a basic clarification of the existing research – information technology needs to synthesise it (bring it all together) and form the foundation for your study.

Mistake #5: Irrelevant or unfocused content

Another common mistake we see in literature review chapters is quite simply the inclusion of irrelevant content. Some chapters can waffle on for pages and pages and leave the reader thinking, "and then what?"

So, how practice y'all decide what's relevant?

Well, to ensure you stay on-topic and focus, you lot demand to revisit your inquiry aims, objectives and research questions. Call up, the purpose of the literature review is to build the theoretical foundation that will assistance you lot attain your research aims and objectives, and answer your research questions. Therefore, relevant content is the relatively narrow body of content that relates directly to those 3 components.

Let's look at an instance.

If your enquiry aims to place factors that cultivate employee loyalty and delivery, your literature review needs to focus on existing research that identifies such factors. Simple enough, right? Well, during your review process, you volition invariably come across enough of research relating to employee loyalty and commitment, including things like:

• The benefits of high employee commitment
• The different types of delivery
• The impact of commitment on corporate culture
• The links between commitment and productivity

While all of these chronicle to employee commitment, they're non focused on the research aims, objectives and questions, as they're non identifying factors that foster employee delivery. Of course, they may still exist useful in helping yous justify your topic, then they'll probable have a place somewhere in your dissertation or thesis. However, for your literature review, you need to proceed things focused.

And so, as you work through your literature review, ever circle back to your enquiry aims, objective and enquiry questions and use them as a litmus test for commodity relevance.

Mistake #6: Poor affiliate structure and layout

Fifty-fifty the best content can fail to earn marks when the literature review chapter is poorly structured. Unfortunately, this is a fairly common outcome, resulting in disjointed, poorly-flowing arguments that are difficult for the reader (the marking…) to follow.

The virtually mutual reason that students country upwardly with a poor structure is that they kickoff writing their literature review affiliate without a program or structure. Of class, as we've discussed before, writing is a form of thinking, so you don't need to plan out every item before y'all kickoff writing. Withal, you should at least have an outline structure penned down before you hit the keyboard.

So, how should you structure your literature review?

We've covered literature review construction in detail previously, so I won't go into it here. However, every bit a quick overview, your literature review should consist of three core sections:

1. The introduction section – where yous outline your topic, innovate any definitions and jargon and ascertain the scope of your literature review.
2. The body section – where you sink your teeth into the existing inquiry. This tin be bundled in diverse means (east.k. thematically, chronologically or methodologically).
3. The conclusion section – where yous present the key takeaways and highlight the research gap (or gaps), which lays the foundation for your study.

Some other reason that students state up with a poor structure is that they start writing their literature affiliate prematurely. In other words, they start writing before they've finished digesting the literature. This is a costly error, as it always results in extensive rewriting, which takes a lot longer than but doing it one stride at a time. Once again, it'due south completely natural to practise a petty extra reading every bit thoughts ingather up during the writing procedure, but you should complete your cadre reading before you start writing.

Long story short – don't start writing your literature review without some sort of structural programme. This construction tin can (and likely will) evolve as y'all write, but you need some sort of outline equally a starting point.

Mistake #vii: Plagiarism and poor referencing

This i is by far the virtually unforgivable literature review mistake, as information technology carries one of the heaviest penalties, while information technology is so hands avoidable.

All also often, nosotros come across literature reviews that, at outset glance, look pretty good. Still, a quick run through a plagiarism checker and information technology quickly becomes apparent that the student has failed to fully digest the literature they've reviewed and put it into their own words.

"Merely, the original author said information technology perfectly…"

I get it – sometimes the way an author phrased something is "simply perfect" and y'all can't notice a improve fashion to say it. In those (pretty rare) cases, you lot can utilize direct quotes (and a citation, of form). Notwithstanding, for the vast majority of your literature review, you need to put things into your own words.

The good news is that if you focus on integrating and synthesising the literature (every bit I mentioned in indicate 3), you shouldn't encounter this issue also oftentimes, as you'll naturally be writing about the relationships between studies, not simply about the studies themselves. Remember, if you can't explain something merely (in your own words), you don't really understand it.

A related issue that we see quite often is plainly sometime-fashioned poor referencing. This can include commendation and reference formatting bug (for example, Harvard or APA style errors), or just a straight out lack of references. In academic writing, if you fail to reference a source, you are finer claiming the piece of work equally your own, which equates to plagiarism. This might seem harmless, merely plagiarism is a serious course of academic misconduct and could price you a lot more than than only a few marks.

So, when you're writing upward your literature review, remember that yous need to digest the content and put everything into your ain words. Y'all as well need to reference the sources of whatever and all ideas, theories, frameworks and models y'all draw on.

Epitomize: vii Literature Review Mistakes

Nosotros've covered a lot of footing in this mail service. Let's rapidly recap on the seven most common literature review mistakes.

1. Over-reliance on low-quality sources
2. A lack of landmark/seminal literature
3. A lack of current literature
4. Description instead of integration and synthesis
5. Irrelevant or unfocused content
6. Poor chapter structure and layout
7. Plagiarism and poor referencing

If you accept whatever questions about these literature review mistakes, leave a annotate below and we'll do our best to answer. If you'd similar to get 1-on-ane help with your literature review, book a free initial consultation with a friendly coach to discuss how we can motility you lot frontwards.

pullumofectown.blogspot.com

Source: https://gradcoach.com/literature-review-mistakes/

Share this post