For most non-LIS researchers, this can be difficult and challenging. Researchers are often eager to begin data collection and may spend less time on the literature review than is needed. For LIS researchers, this is the easiest aspect of the research process because of our information-seeking skills. However, there is a potential pitfall because we can bog down in this phase and not move forward as quickly as we should. There is always another source to check, another item to request on ILL, or simply wait a week or a month to see what new items might become available.
Most important, the literature search should eliminate the possibility of needless duplication. Since your research must be an original contribution, you quickly learn what has already been done satisfactorily and might be avoided.
A proper literature review should save considerable time by building on what is already known as well as using tested methodology, including instruments. In assessing the merit of previous studies: their soundness, relevance, design quality, and findings and conclusions, you can learn from the errors of others and avoid pitfalls. Pitfalls and barriers may be identified in earlier research and avoided.
The literature search, especially in the findings and recommendations of others, often provides more and more persuasive justification for research on the problem. Previous researchers often identify gaps or areas where more research is needed.
The literature search provides context, especially in the history of research on the problem.
In many cases, replication or redoing earlier research is a relatively painless way to make a notable contribution to the literature while becoming more grounded in the problem and the research methodology.
It is important to set a date to complete the literature search and move on. Stop when you are confident that you have been able to identify, retrieve, and review the genuinely important items on this topic. There must be closure and recognition that appropriate new literature may appear later, but that you won't worry about that.
Don't be so specific in your search that you conclude that nothing has been done on your topic. You are responsible for identifying, retrieving, and reviewing those studies which are closest to what you propose to do.
While full-text databases are convenient and save time, the literature needs to be comprehensive and that will involve indexing and abstracting services and the use of ILL. Searcher convenience should not dictate the shape of the literature search. Most data bases are not retrospective enough to be comprehensive. In some cases, you may need to visit other collections that hold needed items.
Identification of likely items or creating a pool is largely a reference skill problem. Pearl fishing is a common approach and it generally works well. You will need to determine how far back to go and that will vary with the nature of your problem.
Typically, this involves responding to fairly obvious questions:
After you have retrieved the several items, you should be able to quickly sort them out into piles of highly relevant, somewhat relevant, and not relevant. The first two categories require thoughtful reading and evaluative note-taking:
In shorter publications, the literature review could range from a paragraph or two to a few pages. Your introduction should briefly summarize search strategy or approach and results. The review itself needs to be logical and include appropriate transition elements. Arrangement will normally be either chronological or reverse chronological. Avoid quotes and use succinct paraphrases as much as possible. In longer publications, especially where methodology is important, you will need to show how you intend to replicate or improve upon the methods used by those who have gone before. Again, focus on those few studies that really make a difference. Only in a thesis or dissertation do you need to include "everything" that you found. Finally, in closing present a brief summary of the state of knowledge, gaps and strengths in the literature, and how these relate to your own study. Your research should build on what has gone before while being an original contribution.
Return to 540 page