Section 2.3: Analyzing the Literature

To be an expert on a social scientific topic, you also have to become an expert in evaluating research reports.  You cannot adequately assess the evidentiary value of a research report unless you can readily identify the strengths and weaknesses of it.  As with any other skill, you will get better at evaluating research with practice. Always read with a critical eye for detail.

By this point in the writing process, you should have identified a set of articles for your review.  You should analyze these articles prior to beginning to write.  What follows are some suggestions on how to analyze the literature you have chosen to include in your review.

Suggestions for Article Analysis

Importance of Preliminary Article Scanning

Before diving deep into the intricacies of an article, it’s of paramount importance to first grasp a general sense of its content. This allows the reader to understand the broader context and the primary focus of the paper. A common organizational strategy employed by many authors is known as the “funnel” structure. Just like a funnel, which is broad at the top and narrows down, this approach starts with a wide-ranging overview of the subject matter and methodically zones in on more specific issues, questions, or hypotheses as the article progresses.

To effectively utilize the funnel structure as a reader, a useful method involves first perusing the introductory section of the article. The introduction often establishes the general context, relevance, and aim of the study. After that, instead of moving linearly, it’s beneficial to jump ahead to the concluding paragraphs which usually precede the methods section. This gives a quick snapshot of the results and the primary conclusions drawn by the researcher.

Additionally, the discussion section shouldn’t be overlooked during this preliminary scan. Positioned typically towards the end, this section is where the authors delve into interpretations, implications, and summaries of their key findings, comparing them with existing literature and often suggesting directions for future research. Undertaking this initial scan equips you with a comprehensive view of the article’s essence. This, in turn, sets a firm foundation for you to delve deeper and engage with the more intricate aspects and details of the research with clarity and purpose.

Organizing Articles by Categories

After briefly reviewing the content of articles, it’s highly advantageous to systematically categorize them according to how closely they align with distinct sections or points of your research outline. This method of organization not only streamlines the information but also creates a structured roadmap for your reading. By consolidating and positioning your articles into well-defined categories or themes, you simplify the process of referring back to them during the deeper phases of your research.

Furthermore, there’s an added benefit in terms of comprehension and retention. When you read multiple articles that center around the same topic or sub-topic back-to-back, it creates a continuous flow of information. This continuity can bolster your understanding of the subject, as themes, methods, and findings get reinforced. More importantly, it minimizes the chances of muddling concepts or overlapping ideas, thereby ensuring a more coherent and confusion-free assimilation of the information at hand.

Adopting Effective Note-Taking Strategies

Note-taking is a highly personal process.  The best way is to find a method that is right for you.  As a rule, note-taking should be meticulous. You should take great pains to be highly accurate.  When direct quotes are involved, it is important to verify that you record the quote exactly as it appears in the original, even if there are errors in the original.  It is also important to be consistent: Make sure that you take notes in the same format for every source.  This will prevent confusion later when you are attempting to synthesize the information you have recorded from myriad sources.

Traditionally note cards were the preferred method of taking notes for literature reviews.  They are still very useful and have some advantages over a computer. First, note cards must be handwritten, so you are prone to record only the essential facts and not the author’s exact words.  This can help you to prevent plagiarism by improperly using the author’s exact words. Second, note cards make later organization and reorganization easier.

Different colored note cards can also be a valuable organizational tool if you color code your notes by topic as you record them.  Remember to keep your focus. Do not take needless notes on topics within your article that are not really related to what you are interested in.  This is a reason to specify your specific problem area before you begin the review process.

Whether you are taking notes with a computer or note cards, you should use a consistent format.  It will save you a lot of time in the end if all of your notes are in the same format. At a minimum, your note cards should contain the following information:

• The author’s last name and initials
• The title of the article
• The publication year
• The name of the journal, the publication, the volume and number, and the page numbers
• The main points of the article
• The methodology used by the authors
• The article’s findings
• Highly relevant details for your own review
• Your evaluation of the quality of the article

Identifying Definitions of Key Terms

Understanding both conceptual and operational definitions in your articles is paramount. Definitions, in essence, act as foundational pillars upon which scientific studies are built. It’s of utmost importance to grasp that within the vast realm of research, different scholars might adopt slightly different nuances or interpretations for the same terminology. For instance, what one researcher terms as ‘well-being’ might have a subtly different connotation for another, depending on their academic background, study objectives, or even cultural perspectives.

Such variations aren’t trivial; they can significantly influence the direction, methodology, and ultimately, the findings of a study. Therefore, any ambiguity or oversight in understanding these definitions can lead to skewed interpretations or unintended comparisons. Hence, as you delve into each article, it becomes vital not only to identify these definitions but also to fully comprehend the specific context and application each author assigns to them. In doing so, you arm yourself with the clarity needed to critically analyze, compare, and synthesize information from various sources effectively.

Evaluating Methodological Strengths and Weaknesses

The foundation of any subject’s knowledge base is an intricate mosaic, pieced together from a myriad of studies conducted by a multitude of scientists from varied backgrounds and perspectives. As you embark on the journey of reviewing articles, it’s not merely about absorbing the information presented. Instead, adopt a discerning approach, critically evaluating the strength and validity of the evidence laid out in each study. This includes examining the design, sample size, tools used, and other pivotal factors that can influence outcomes.

Furthermore, while each study provides a unique lens into the subject matter, it’s crucial to be on the lookout for consistent methodological shortcomings that might surface across different articles. Such recurring flaws, whether they pertain to bias, sampling errors, or data analysis techniques, can significantly affect the overall conclusions drawn from the literature. By identifying and understanding these patterns, you’re not just passively ingesting information. You’re actively preparing yourself to offer a more nuanced, informed, and comprehensive critique and synthesis of the existing body of work, ensuring that the essence and intricacies of the topic are captured in their entirety.

Differentiating between Assertions and Empirical Evidence

When reviewing articles, it’s crucial to differentiate between the author’s own beliefs or claims and the actual data-backed results they present. True, verifiable findings emerge from rigorous data collection and in-depth analysis. On the other hand, assertions are the author’s interpretations or opinions that might not necessarily be anchored in solid evidence. Here’s an analogy: think of findings as the sturdy foundation of a building, and assertions as the decorative elements; both are important, but only one provides structural support.

Moreover, be cautious. Some authors might emphasize or amplify their results to make them appear more groundbreaking or definitive than they genuinely are. Imagine a scenario where a speaker presents their achievements in a brighter light for emphasis. So, when diving into literature, it’s essential to approach each piece with a discerning eye, ensuring that you grasp both the intent and the true content. This balanced approach ensures that you can critically engage with the material, extracting genuine insights while avoiding potential pitfalls.

Recognizing Trends in Literature

In the realm of research, it’s not uncommon for various studies to arrive at different conclusions, even when they’re exploring the same hypothesis. This is a natural result of different methodologies, samples, and perspectives at play. When you step into the shoes of a reviewer, you’re tasked with a crucial role: to sift through this mosaic of findings and draw a clearer, unified picture. It’s less about favoring one study over another and more about looking at the collective evidence from a bird’s eye view. By assessing all available data, you’re in a better position to understand its overarching implications and paint a more complete narrative for your audience.

Spotting Gaps in the Research

In the vast landscape of research, no topic is completely explored to its fullest. There will always be pockets of the unknown or areas that are yet to be thoroughly investigated. These unresolved questions or “knowledge gaps” are not shortcomings but golden opportunities. By putting in the effort to pinpoint these gaps, you’re doing more than just highlighting what’s missing. You’re essentially lighting a beacon for future researchers, guiding them toward areas that demand further exploration. More than that, these gaps can become the launching pads for groundbreaking studies. For an eager scholar, identifying these areas not only provides a fresh perspective but also opens doors to making significant contributions to the field. So, while it’s essential to appreciate what’s already known, it’s equally critical to recognize and embrace what’s still left to discover.

Determining Interrelations among Studies

Dive into any research domain, and you’ll find that not all studies stand alone. More often than not, a groundbreaking or influential study acts as a springboard, triggering a cascade of follow-up research and investigations. It’s like a stone thrown into a pond, causing ripples that extend outward. By taking the time to trace these connections and understand the relationships between various studies, you’re essentially weaving a rich tapestry of knowledge. This doesn’t just give you a bird’s-eye view of the existing literature, but it deepens your understanding and broadens the horizons of your own research. In a world where ideas intermingle and evolve, recognizing these intricate interrelations becomes paramount to producing well-informed, comprehensive, and nuanced work.

Embracing the Cyclical Nature of Research Writing

Step into the world of literature review, and you’ll quickly realize it’s not a straight path; it’s more akin to a spiral staircase. The process demands a cyclical, rather than linear, approach. Just as a sculptor might chisel away, step back, and then refine their work, a researcher too will often find themselves revisiting earlier steps to enhance clarity or add depth. And here’s the golden nugget: no reference list is ever truly complete. Like a living organism, it needs to be nurtured, updated, and expanded. Every article you encounter is like an unopened gift, possibly hiding references and insights that could be the missing pieces to your research puzzle. So, always keep an open mind and embrace the iterative dance of research writing, ensuring your work remains relevant, comprehensive, and enriched at every turn.

Summary

To truly master a social scientific topic, you must be adept at evaluating research reports, discerning their strengths and flaws. Like any skill, proficiency grows with practice. By the writing stage, you should have a set of articles ready for review. Begin by analyzing them using the following suggested methods:

1. Preliminary Scanning: Before diving deep, get a general sense of an article’s content. Utilize the “funnel” structure common in many articles: start with the introduction, jump to conclusions, then skim the discussion for an overall gist.
2. Organization by Categories: Post review, group articles based on their alignment with your research’s sections or points. This method streamlines your process and fosters a deeper understanding through thematic immersion.
3. Note-taking Strategies: While personal, note-taking should be thorough and consistent. Traditional note cards remain valuable, especially when color-coded by topic. Whatever method used, consistency in format, and capturing key details are crucial.
4. Key Term Definitions: Understand the nuanced definitions used by various researchers, as slight variations can impact study outcomes.
5. Methodological Evaluation: Don’t merely absorb. Critically assess the methodology’s strength and consistency across different articles.
6. Evidence vs. Assertion: Distinguish between data-backed results and the author’s opinions. Approach each article critically to understand its true essence.
7. Literature Trends: Recognize that varying conclusions on the same topic are common. As a reviewer, synthesize these to create a cohesive picture.
8. Identifying Research Gaps: Spotting unexplored areas or unresolved questions guides future research and can spark innovative studies.
9. Study Interrelations: Understand the interconnectedness among studies, seeing how one influential study can pave the way for subsequent related research.
10. Iterative Research Writing: Embrace the cyclical nature of literature review, continually revisiting, refining, and expanding as your understanding deepens.

 

Modification History

File Created:  08/09/2018

Last Modified:  08/18/2023

---

[ Back | Content | Next]

This work is licensed under an Open Educational Resource-Quality Master Source (OER-QMS) License.