Search results

This article offers support and guidance for students undertaking a literature review as part of their dissertation during an undergraduate or Masters course. A literature review is a summary of a subject field that supports the identification of specific research questions. A literature review needs to draw on and evaluate a range of different types of sources including academic and professional journal articles, books, and web‐based resources. The literature search helps in the identification and location of relevant documents and other sources. Search engines can be used to search web resources and bibliographic databases. Conceptual frameworks can be a useful tool in developing an understanding of a subject area. Creating the literature review involves the stages of: scanning, making notes, structuring the literature review, writing the literature review, and building a bibliography.

Within the context of providing an indexing service to the review literature in science and technology, reviews are defined and six types of review literature described. The sources of review literature are examined and an attempt made to estimate the current annual output of reviews in specialist review serials, primary journals, conference proceedings, books, reports and secondary services. The total output of ‘good’ quality reviews from these sources in 1972 is estimated to be 22,000. The characteristics of review literature are examined for the purposes of automatic identification; a method of identifying reviews by using the number of references was found to be between 75 and 85 per cent effective at the 40 references level.

Most papers and books on conducting literature reviews primarily emphasize achieving technical quality, ensuring reproducibility and validating results. Notwithstanding the need for technical excellence, there is also a need for relevance. The purpose of this study is to address that need and offer practical and constructive suggestions for enhancing the meaningful contribution of a literature review, thereby increasing its impact and relevance for publication.

In this conceptual paper, the authors explore strategies to enhance the relevance and contribution of a literature review. By clarifying the needs of diverse audiences and the principles of generating new insights, the authors provide a broad range of options without being prescriptive. Recognizing that every literature review is unique, this paper contrasts various approaches to offer flexible and adaptable guidance.

Literature reviews can be enjoyable to read and write, offering a wide range of substantial contributions that meet the expectations of readers and journal editors. This paper offers practical suggestions for prospective authors to make their reviews more relevant, invaluable and engaging, and summarizes these suggestions in a comprehensive checklist.

The paper is not exhaustive but rather complements prevalent literature review methodologies.

Existing literature offers limited guidance on enhancing a review’s contribution to science, academic inquiry and society. This paper fills that gap by providing both academic considerations and practical recommendations, drawing on the author’s extensive experience in reviewing and conducting literature reviews.

La mayoría de los artículos y libros sobre la realización de revisiones de literatura enfatizan principalmente la obtención de calidad técnica, asegurando la reproducibilidad y validando resultados. A pesar de la necesidad de excelencia técnica, también existe la necesidad de la relevancia. El presente artículo aborda esa necesidad y tiene como objetivo ofrecer sugerencias prácticas y constructivas para mejorar la contribución significativa de una revisión de literatura, aumentando así su impacto y relevancia para su publicación.

En este artículo conceptual, los autores exploran estrategias para mejorar la relevancia y la contribución de una revisión de literatura. Al clarificar las necesidades de audiencias diversas y los principios para generar nuevos conocimientos, los autores proporcionan una amplia gama de opciones sin ser prescriptivos. Reconociendo que cada revisión de literatura es única, este artículo contrasta varios enfoques para ofrecer orientación flexible y adaptable.

Las revisiones de literatura pueden ser placenteras de leer y escribir, ofreciendo una amplia gama de contribuciones sustanciales que satisfacen las expectativas de los lectores y editores de revistas. Este artículo ofrece sugerencias prácticas para que los autores potenciales hagan que sus revisiones sean más relevantes, valiosas y atractivas, y resume estas sugerencias en una lista de verificación integral.

La literatura existente ofrece una orientación limitada sobre cómo mejorar la contribución de una revisión a la ciencia, la investigación académica y la sociedad. Este artículo cubre ese vacío proporcionando consideraciones académicas y recomendaciones prácticas, basadas en la extensa experiencia de los autores en la revisión y realización de revisiones de literatura.

El artículo no es exhaustivo, sino que complementa las metodologías prevalentes de revisión de literatura.

大多数关于如何进行文献综述的文章和书籍主要强调实现技术质量、确保可重复性和验证结果。尽管技术卓越性至关重要, 但同样需要注重相关性。本文正是为了满足这一需求, 旨在提供实用且建设性的建议, 以增强文献综述的有意义贡献, 从而增加其发表的影响力和相关性。

在这篇概念性文章中, 作者探讨了增强文献综述相关性和贡献的策略。通过阐明多样化受众的需求和生成新见解的原则, 作者提供了广泛的选项, 而不是一味地指示。认识到每篇文献综述都是独一无二的, 本文对比了各种方法, 以提供灵活和适应性的指导。

文献综述可以既有趣味性又富有实质性贡献, 满足读者和期刊编辑的期望。本文为潜在作者提供了实用的建议, 使他们的综述更具相关性、不可或缺且引人入胜, 并将这些建议总结在一个全面的清单中。

现有文献对如何增强综述对科学、学术研究和社会的贡献提供的指导有限。本文通过结合学术考虑和实际建议, 弥补了这一空白, 基于作者在审阅和进行文献综述方面的丰富经验, 提供了独特的见解。

该文章并非详尽无遗, 而是对现有文献综述方法的补充。

This study aims to understand and a lay a foundation of how analytics has been used in depression management, this study conducts a systematic literature review using two techniques – text mining and manual review. The proposed methodology would aid researchers in identifying key concepts and research gaps, which in turn, will help them to establish the theoretical background supporting their empirical research objective.

This paper explores a hybrid methodology for literature review (HMLR), using text mining prior to systematic manual review.

The proposed rapid methodology is an effective tool to automate and speed up the process required to identify key and emerging concepts and research gaps in any specific research domain while conducting a systematic literature review. It assists in populating a research knowledge graph that does not reach all semantic depths of the examined domain yet provides some science-specific structure.

This study presents a new methodology for conducting a literature review for empirical research articles. This study has explored an “HMLR” that combines text mining and manual systematic literature review. Depending on the purpose of the research, these two techniques can be used in tandem to undertake a comprehensive literature review, by combining pieces of complex textual data together and revealing areas where research might be lacking.

This paper aims to identify specific challenges and opportunities when crafting literature reviews of qualitative accounting research. In addition, it offers potential remedies to frequent challenges when conducting such reviews.

This piece is based on recent methodological advice on conducting literature reviews and my own experience when conducting and publishing reviews that primarily cover qualitative accounting research.

The author chart three typical advantages and three typical use cases of literature reviews of qualitative accounting research, as well as the typical process steps and outputs of such reviews. Along with these process steps, The author identifies three overarching specific challenges when conducting such reviews and discusses potential remedies. Overall, this paper suggests that literature reviews of qualitative accounting research feature idiosyncratic challenges but offer specific opportunities at the same time.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper is among the first to offer advice on the specific challenges and opportunities when conducting literature reviews of qualitative accounting research.

Literature review articles have become a frequently applied research approach in operations and supply chain management (SCM). The purpose of this paper aims to elaborate on four approaches for developing or employing theory in systematic literature reviews (SLRs).

The paper uses conceptual arguments and illustrates them by pointing to recent examples. In SLRs, the material collection is usually based on keywords and searching databases, which is comparatively well documented. Data analysis, however, often falls short in documentation and, consequently, is neither well explained nor replicable. Therefore, the focus of this paper is the elaboration of the data analysis and sense-making stage in the research process of SLRs.

The paper presents four different approaches, which are characterized as theory (1) building, (2) modification, (3) refinement and (4) extension, based on whether new concepts are formed or extant concepts within SCM or other fields of management theory are adopted.

The limitation of this research is that literature reviews could be conducted and presented in many ways. Since the focus of this research is on systematic literature reviews, only a limited number of approaches can be discussed and presented here.

The paper contributes to explaining the process and expected outcomes of a literature review and, therefore, aids in further developing the related methodological approaches. This is relevant as literature review publications now often replace conceptual or theoretical pieces but still have to deliver concerning demands of theory building.

The aim of this study is to find out the most common types of literature review and the accuracy of citing information related to topic in question among Saudi English as a Foreign Language (EFL) postgraduate students at Al-Baha University. This study also aims at revealing the quality of the literature review written by researchers.

This qualitative study used content analysis to investigate 15 unpublished Master of Arts (MA) dissertations written on EFL of Saudi context. They were analyzed qualitatively using criteria modified from Snyder's (2019) model which is considered a potential method for making theoretical and practical contributions of literature review.

The findings of the study showed that students favored the systematic review over the integrative. Additionally, data showed that students were lacking in paraphrasing and organizing cited information coherently and appropriately. Moreover, students' performance was better in design, conduct, and data abstraction and analysis criterion, whereas they seemed rather weak in structuring and writing the review criteria.

The significance of the study is to provide researchers with methodological guidance and reference to write a comprehensive and appropriate literature review. Based on the findings, this study concluded with some implications that aim to assist researchers in carrying out their studies professionally. Furthermore, the findings provide decision-makers in higher education institutions with important practical implications. In light of the study's findings, it is suggested to carry out further research investigating postgraduate students to find out their perceptions and attitudes regarding the quality standards of scientific research writing and the paraphrasing strategies.

This paper aims to assess the links among these supply chain constructs by conducting a full-scale systematic review of all supply chain management (SCM) literature reviews published in ten leading logistics, SCM and operations management journals from 1989 to 2012. Collaboration and integration are as central to SCM as risk and performance management.

The authors apply content analysis to execute the systematic literature review on the sample of 103 articles, supplemented by contingency analysis. These approaches guarantee a replicable, rigorous and transparent research process and minimize researcher bias. The analytical categories required for the content analysis are defined along the constructs of collaboration/integration and risk/performance.

As can be expected, the review highlights the key role of the two constructs in SCM. In this light, the research claims to provide statistical evidence of a link between the constructs of collaboration/integration and risk/performance, most notably between collaboration and performance, information sharing and rewards sharing, as well as integration and supply chain performance.

The study assesses the link between the constructs of collaboration/integration and risk/performance through research embedded in literature reviews, pinpointing research gaps and potential future research directions in the field. Contributing to SCM theory building, a thorough review provides statistical proof of the link between collaboration/integration and risk/performance.

Although numerous literature reviews have been conducted in the past on the SCM constructs of collaboration/integration and risk/performance, no full review of literature reviews aiming to test a theoretical link in the here presented form has yet been undertaken to the authors’ knowledge.

The discipline's most common uses for literature reviews—identifying gaps, developing research agendas, and categorizing the literature—too often fail to challenge, change or advance theoretical perspectives. The authors offer guidance to theorization through literature reviews. The key to theory advancement is consistency between the state of theory and the chosen review type.

A conceptual approach is taken. The authors identify shortcomings in literature reviews of logistics and supply chain management (L&SCM) research and develop a framework to aid theorization from literature.

Literature review types are categorized as inductive theory building, contextualized explanations, theory testing and interpretive sensemaking. The authors argue that the effectiveness of a review type depends on the prior state of theory, which ranges from nascent, to intermediate, to mature. The authors propose the interpretive sensemaking review as a novel review type rooted in the interpretive paradigm.

This study should be of immediate interest and value to logistics and supply chain management scholars—as well as scholars in other fields—because it offers a pathway to theory development through literature reviews. Appropriate applications of the proposed review types will result in more comprehensive theories.

This article lays down arguments for the need to change the way L&SCM scholars use literature reviews. It extends earlier work from the authors (Durach et al., 2017; A New Paradigm for Systematic Literature Reviews in Supply Chain Management, Journal of Supply Chain Management) by outlining four review types, and offering further insights to theorization, as is typically the goal in the synthesis step of literature reviews.

The objective of this paper is to investigate systematically the discipline of supply chain management (SCM) within the context of sustainability. The two concepts are increasingly aligned, and sustainable supply chain management (SSCM) represents an evolving field where they explicitly interact. Given their complex and holistic nature, breaking down the literature to understand its structures, processes, connections and limitations can provide an objective view of the status of research in these highly important fields, identifying key areas for future research/theory development.

A systematic review of current SCM literature is carried out, specifically in relation to the social and environmental dimensions of sustainability.

SSCM and the integration of sustainability into supply chains is a significant but evolving field evidenced by a current bias in the literature towards theory development and highly qualitative research methods. The environmental dimension is significantly better represented in the literature through specific processes at all stages of the supply chain. The social dimension is recognised, but receives less emphasis than expected given SCM's focus on interaction, relationships and communication. These two dimensions are treated separately in the literature with limited insight on how to integrate them and current SCM and sustainability research provides limited practical outputs.

The review focuses on environmental and social sustainability within supply chains without explicit consideration of the economic dimension.

The review highlights the key themes and issues for supply chain managers faced with implementing sustainability. It also illustrates a number of areas for future research, along with the need for researchers to develop more practical tools for implementing SSCM.

Indicates the extent to which sustainability is integrated within SCM and where the research emphasis currently lies. The environmental dimension is significantly more defined and developed in the literature. SCM literature emphasises the importance of long‐term supplier relationships, but this “people‐focused” approach does not appear to translate into socially responsible supply chains. It suggests that the more process‐driven nature of environmental sustainability makes it easier to put into supply chain practice. There is also limited research or evidence on how the two dimensions can be integrated despite recognition of their inter‐relationship.