Search results

Systematic literature review (SLR) papers have gained significant importance during the last years as many reputed journals have asked for literature review submissions from the authors. However, at the same time, authors are experiencing a high number of desk rejections because of a lack of quality and its contribution to the existing body of knowledge. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to offer guidance to researchers who intend to communicate SLR papers in top-rated journals. We attempt to offer a guide to buddy researchers who plan to write SLR papers. This purpose is achieved by clearly stating how the traditional review method is different from SLR, when and how can each type of literature review method be used, writing effective motivation of a review paper and finally how to synthesize the available literature. We have also presented a few suggestions for writing an impactful SLR in the last. Overall, this chapter serves as a guide to various aspirants of SLR paper to understand the prerequisites of an SLR paper and offers deep insights to bring in more clarity before writing an SLR paper, thereby reducing the chances of desk rejection.

The study responds to the common concerns of authors, reviewers, and editors on writing and publishing high-quality literature review (LR) studies. First, we evolved the background and decision elements on the five parameters of a quality LR paper: Planning, Operationalizing, Writing, Embedding, and Reflecting (POWER), from the editorials and guiding literature. Statistical procedure and refinement of 256 responses from writers, reviewers, and editors revealed 37 decision elements. Finally, a multicriteria-decision-making approach was applied to the detailed responses from the lead editors of ABDC, Scopus, ABS, and WoS journals, and 31 decision elements were found strong enough to represent these five parameters on the quality of LR studies. All five parameters are found important to be considered. However, a high priority is suggested for embedding (the results coming out of the review) and operationalizing (the process of conducting the review), whereas reflection, writing, and planning of LR papers still remain important. The purpose of the POWER framework is to overcome the challenges and decision dilemmas faced by writers and decision-makers. The POWER framework acts as a guiding tool to conduct LR studies in general and business management scholars in specific ways. In addition, this study provides a checklist (Table 6) and template (Appendix A1) of a quality LR study to its stakeholders.

To overcome and solve the problems of all the research community, in this chapter we offer everyone to focus on the Planning, Operationalizing, Writing, Embedding, and Reflecting (POWER) framework of conducting literature review. The framework guides the scholarly community on how to create and evaluate literature review papers to overcome the merit dilemma on the contribution made by review papers. With the sole focus toward review of literature, we are pleased to present “Review of Management Literature (RoML)” and introducing the first volume. This chapter and volume answers the present tensions accruing in the existing literature as well as present strategies on bridging the gaps. The chapters included in the first volume belong to emerging research areas such as marketing, human resources, international businesses, supply chain management, artificial neural network, luxury consumption, financial technology (FINTECH), mergers and acquisition, social media platforms like Instagram, cultural diversity, services, sustainability, quality 4.0, entrepreneurial ecosystem, and dividend decisions. The first volume is going to be useful to scholars in exploring future research areas across business management disciplines.

A literature review or review article is an integral part of a scientific body of research which synthesizes prior knowledge and provides a holistic overview of a subject domain. While several studies emphasize the significance of literature reviews and include the guidelines for conducting a review, limited studies demonstrated different types of literature review methodologies in a comprehensive way. Accordingly, this chapter presents various types of review methodologies which includes narrative, descriptive, systematic, meta-analysis, hybrid, umbrella, scoping, theoretical, and critical reviews. In addition, the authors' skills including logical reasoning, content analysis, literature mapping, critical writing, and ethical consideration are presented. Further, quality aspects of the literature review are discussed such as the rigor and relevance of the selected studies. Overall, this chapter provides implications for researchers in understanding types of literature review methodologies along with their objectives, strengths, and weaknesses which can assist them in selecting a suitable methodology while conducting a review.

Management research is a discipline characterized by heterogeneity in viewpoints, the application of research to real-life problems in the organization and the multidisciplinary nature of research problems. The need for a good literature review is paramount in doctoral dissertations with a view to justifying research agendas and help interested scholars use synthesized organization of extant work. The paper aims to provide an overview of the types of review, pointers for effective review, evaluating sources of information, referencing the sources cited, and avoidance of plagiarism in writing literature reviews. The paper is intended to make doctoral scholars understand the importance of literature reviews, the organization and synthesis of ideas involved, and the rigor in detailing references and avoiding plagiarism to increase the quality of the finished output.

Increased attention has been placed on identifying and installing evidence-based practices (EBPs) to effectively and efficiently serve students with and at-risk for learning and behavioral challenges. Council for Exceptional Children's (CEC, 2014) Standards for Evidence-Based Practices in Special Education are often used to examine a range of strategies, practices, and programs to ascertain if they are indeed EBPs. Systematic reviews conducted to evaluate the evidence base of these potential EBPs are important as they inform practice. We contend it is important to provide well-vetted procedures for training scholars to conduct systematic reviews with replicable precision. We offer this chapter to assist scholars in conducting systematic reviews to quality appraise the methodological rigor of a body of literature using the CEC Standards for EBPs. We focus on (1) project management considerations and (2) steps and phases to support the development and dissemination of high quality, methodologically rigorous systematic literature reviews.

This chapter provides a roadmap for a systematic literature review built around the guiding questions of basic research design. First, we highlight the relevance and development of systematic literature reviews in tourism research. Second, we put the systematic review into perspective by outlining its characteristics and by clarifying the methodological assumptions. Third, we bring together recommendations based on previous research and review guidelines and present a step-by-step tutorial for a systematic literature review. From this chapter, readers will understand the foundations of systematic literature reviews, will be able to apply the methodology to their review projects and are introduced to further readings and best practice examples.

Children's marginalisation in research limits their opportunities to create meaningful social change. This project explored children's meaningful participation in Participatory Action Research as a tool to empower children as change makers. An adult and child co-researcher collaborated to conduct a literature review on a social issue chosen by the child: helicopter parenting. Highlighting that children and adults have access to different knowledge based on their status in society, the co-researchers wrote about helicopter parenting from three different perspectives: media, psychology and childhood studies. Through a reflection on the research process, the co-researchers offer insight into the impact of mutual relationships, power imbalances, and emotions on children's meaningful participation in research. They also present the value of children's voices in research and research as a learning opportunity for adults and children. Ultimately, the co-researchers aim to challenge readers to reflect on creating more equitable research practices with children to enhance children's opportunities to make change through research.

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) is a widely accepted guideline for performing a systematic review (SR) in clinical journals. It not only helps an author to improve the reporting but also assists reviewers and editors in the critical appraisal of available SR. These tools help in achieving reproducibility in research, a major concern in contemporary academic research. But there is a lack of awareness about the approach among management researchers. This chapter attempts to fill this gap using a narrative review of reliable online resources and peer-reviewed articles to discuss the PRISMA guidelines and recent amendments. The chapter further points out the limitations of PRISMA in the review of management literature and suggests measures to overcome that. This piece of literature introduces a reader to the basics of a systematic review using PRISMA as an instrument. One of the significant contributions is to delineate a seven-step strategy to attain reproducibility in the systematic review. The chapter is useful for researchers and academicians in the field of social science and management.