LITERATURE REVIEW

Research Methodology

Vienti Hadsari,PhD
What is Literature Review?
• Is gathering scientific literatures on a special topic, to convey the
reader what the knowledge and ideas have been established on the
topic chosen, together with the strength and weaknesses
• It have to be defined by research objectives, the issue discussed, or
the argumentative thesis. It is not a descriptive list of the material
available, or a set of summaries.
Primary Goal of Literature Review?
To know the use of content/ideas/approaches in the literature to
correctly identify the problem that is vaguely known beforehand.

To advocate a specific approach adopted to understanding the

problem.

To access the choice of methods used.

To help the researcher understand clearly that the research to be

undertaken would contribute something new and innovative.
 New VS Existing Knowledge
Can only be interpreted within the context of what is already
known.

Cannot exist without the foundation of existing knowledge.

Can have vastly different interpretations depending on what

the researcher’s background and perception.

The existing knowledge is needed to make the case that

there is a problem and that it is important.
Research Gap

One can infer that the knowledge that is sought

to be produced does not yet exist by describing
what other knowledge already exists and by
pointing out that this part is missing so that
what we have is original.
 To Find A Gap

EXISTING KNOWLEDGE

Context Significance Originality Tools

• Existing Knowledge → Literature Review

Literature Review
Literature
Review
Literature
Review
Literature
Review
 A Good Literature Review
Would not draw hasty conclusions.
Would not look into the individual references to determine the underlying
causes/assumptions/mechanisms.
Synthesize the available information in a much more meaningful way.
Should be able to summarize as to what is already known from the state of the art, detail
the key concepts and the main factors or parameters and the relationship between them.
Describe any complementary existing approaches.

Enumerate the inconsistencies or shortcomings in the published work.

Identify the reported results that are inconclusive or contradictory.

Provide a compulsive reason to do further work in the field.

By writing Literature Review, you can…
• Scan the literature efficiently
• Apply principles of analysis to identify unbiased and valid studies
• What is the specific thesis, problem, or research question that my
literature review helps to define?
• What type of literature review am I conducting? Am I looking at issues of
theory? methodology? policy? quantitative research (e.g. on the
effectiveness of a new procedure)? Qualitative research (e.g., studies )?
• What is the scope of my literature review? What types of publications
am I using (e.g., journals, books, government documents, popular
media)? What discipline am I working in (e.g., environment,
geotechnical engineering, transportation, structure)?
• How good was my information seeking? Has my search been wide
enough to ensure I've found all the relevant material? Has it been
narrow enough to exclude irrelevant material? Is the number of
sources I've used appropriate for the length of my paper?
• Have I critically analyzed the literature I use? Do I follow through a
set of concepts and questions, comparing items to each other in
the ways they deal with them? Instead of just listing and
summarizing items, do I assess them, discussing strengths and
weaknesses?
• Have I cited and discussed studies contrary to my perspective?
• Will the reader find my literature review relevant, appropriate, and
useful?
 About the articles – Ask yourself!
• Has the author formulated a problem/issue?
• Is it clearly defined? Is its significance (scope, severity, relevance) clearly established?
• Could the problem have been approached more effectively from another perspective?
• What is the author's research orientation (e.g., interpretive, critical science, combination)?
• What is the author's theoretical framework (e.g., psychological, developmental, feminist)?
• What is the relationship between the theoretical and research perspectives?
• Has the author evaluated the literature relevant to the problem/issue? Does the author include
literature taking positions she or he does not agree with?
• In a research study, how good are the basic components of the study design (e.g., population,
intervention, outcome)? How accurate and valid are the measurements? Is the analysis of the data
accurate and relevant to the research question? Are the conclusions validly based upon the data
and analysis?
What Should Be Read?

etc.
 Textbooks VS Research Papers
Often -but not always- the textbooks contain the older established
knowledge and the research papers the newer work.

Reading textbook → understand the established knowledge →

reading research papers.

Textbook → from the basic to the detail for the reader to

understand the topic.

Research papers → the readers are assumed to know a lot in the

specific field.
 Literature Survey
• Identify the major topics or subtopics or concepts relevant to
the subject under consideration.

• Place the citation of the relevant source

(article/patent/website/data, etc.) in the correct category of the
concept/topic/subtopic.
new new new
etc.
knowledge knowledge knowledge

• Comprehensive literature survey → methodically analyze and

synthesize quality archived work, provide a firm foundation to a
topic of interest and the choice of suitable research
methodologies, and demonstrate that the proposed work would
make a novel contribution to the overall field of research.
 Goal of Literature Survey

TO BRING OUT SOMETHING NEW TO TO DETERMINE THE PROBLEMS IN PRESENT A NOVEL IDEA AND
WORK ON THROUGH THE THE EXISTING MODELS OR RECOMMENDATIONS.
IDENTIFICATION OF UNSOLVED EXPERIMENTAL DESIGNS.
ISSUES.
 Steps … ?

COLLECTING THE BREAK DOWN EACH IDENTIFY THE SYNTHESIZE THE

SOURCES ARTICLE USEFUL CONTENT COLLECTION OF
SOURCES
 Steps to Analyze the Relevant
Information
Understanding the hypothesis

Understanding the models and the experimental conditions used

Making connections

Comparing and contrasting the various information

Finding out the strong points and the loopholes

 Criteria of A Good Literature

Authority: What are the author’s credentials and affiliation? Who

publishes the information?

Accuracy: Based on what one already knows about the topic or

from reading other sources, does the information seem credible?
Does the author cite other sources in a reference list or
bibliography, to support the information presented?

Scope: Is the source at an appropriate comprehension or research

level?
 How To Read A Paper?
Skimming (title, keywords) – interesting?
Read the abstract – important to the field?
Read the conclusion – relevant?
Read the figures, tables, and the caption – important?
Read the introduction
Read the results and discussion
Read the methods part (experimental setup etc.)
Writing A Literature Review
COPY AND PASTE

VS

PARAPHRASING
Plagiarism?
• Rewriting someone elses script without quoting the source.
• Rewriting someone elses script as if it is your own
• Cutting and Pasting internet materials
• Publishing someone elses result without permission
• Reproducing someone elses figure or table without quoting source
(as after Author, year)
Quoting reference into your writing
• Quoting (Author, Year)
• Quoting Author (Year)
• Quoting (Author1 and Author2, Year)
• Quoting Author1 and Author2 (Year)
• Quoting (Author1 et al., Year)
• Quoting Author1 et al. (Year)
• Quoting (Author, Year1, Year2, Year3, Year4)
• Quoting (Author1, Year1 and Author2, Year2)
• Quoting (Author1, Year1 Author2, Year2 and
Author3, Year3)
Quoting reference into your writing
Ground motion was first incorporated into slope stability analyses to study the
effects from earthquakes (Sarma 1973). This paper will not go much into the
matters on pseudo-static and permanent displacement concepts as discussed by
Newmark (1965), Chang et al. (1983), Lin and Whitman (1986), Kobayashi et al.
(1990), Yegian et al. (1991), Leshchinsky and San (1994), and Kramer and Smith
(1997). Instead, it will refer to works by Sarma (1973, 1975, 1979), Sarma and
Bhave (1974), Kjartannsson (1979), Hoek (1987), Dowding and Gilbert (1988),
Kavetski et al. (1990), Ashford and Sitar (2002), and the authors own earlier
publications (Selamat 1999, Selamat and Chitombo 2003), on how ground
accelerations were computed into forces that were used in the pseudo-static or
permanent displacement ideas.
Quoting reference into your writing
This discussion highlights the relevance of Sarmas method on the
emerging interest in the country in some areas of earthquake
engineering (Adnan et al., 2005). This discussion will refer to works by
Sarma (1973, 1975, 1979), Sarma and Bhave (1974), Kjartannsson
(1979), Hoek (1987), Dowding and Gilbert (1988), Kavetski et al. (1990),
Ashford and Sitar (2002), and the authors own earlier publications
(Selamat 1999, Selamat and Chitombo 2003), on how ground
accelerations were computed into forces that were used in the pseudo-
static or permanent displacement ideas.
Quoting actual script into your writing
• The trend as indicated in Fig. 1 is currently
happening.

Fig. 1 Growth in Waste Recycling Activity.

(After Aziz, 2004)
How to Manage the References List?

MS Word Software
 Example of Software
• Mendeley
 Sample of Software
• Endnote
Assignment – Paraphrasing
Pada umumnya, koefisien permeabilitas bertambah seiring dengan bertambah
besarnya ukuran rongga yang makin besar dengan bertambah besarnya
ukuran butiran. Namun bentuk rongga juga berpengaruh penting terhadap
permeabilitas. Sebagai akibatnya, tidak diketemukan suatu hubungan yang
sederhana antara permeabilitas dan ukuran butiran, kecuali untuk tanah
cukup kasar dengan butiran bulat. Untuk tanah yang mengandung partikel
berbentuk tak bulat, tidak terdapat hubungan sederhana. (Peck et al, 1996)