MA 3: Micro-Literature Review

Context: The Research Article

Even with the many technological changes that have taken place over last few decades, the scientific journal is still one of the main venues for the dissemination of scientific knowledge, and the process of this dissemination shows us a lot about the social nature of communication in the sciences. Penrose and Katz (2010) help us to understand this in the following analysis of the research report:

“The communication of research results is far from straightforward.  It is traditional to think of scientific reports as purely factual or explanatory, but as we saw in Chapter 1, the report also serves an important interpretive and persuasive function. Scientists publish descriptions of their research not simply to tell others what they’ve done but also to persuade readers that the work is valid and useful.  In terms of form, then, the research report is more than a narrative; it is a careful argument” (93).

The research report is not just about recording and sharing data. It is also about using persuasion to build meaning and make connections within a community of people.

This Assignment: The Literature Review Article

Though the literature review article does not present new research or make an argument in the same way that a research report does, it shares a similar dual purpose. First, it sorts through individual pieces of research on a particular topic and presents these pieces in a way that is manageable to the reader.  As Penrose and Katz (2010) put it: “In short, the goal of the research review is to help readers to make sense of all the available evidence. The reviewer offers a description of what the field does and doesn’t know on a given topic at a given point in time” (134).

Second, in selecting and interpreting the research, the review article creates meaning and context. Penrose and Katz state, “Research becomes meaningful only when viewed in the context of the field’s developing knowledge” (130), and they go on to suggest that the review article, “may have a substantial influence on how readers perceive the nature and implications of recent developments in the field and thus may influence the direction of subsequent research” (132).

A narrative literature review article synthesizes current research on a topic and draws a conclusion based on this synthesis. If this conclusion is accepted by the audience, then it can become meaningful in the community.

What We’re Going to Do

In this assignment, you will choose a topic of interest to you, narrow this topic, find and read research reports from peer-reviewed journals about this topic, and write a short literature review article to inform the reader of the current research on this topic. As discussed above, you will be synthesizing the research and drawing a conclusion about the need for future research based on this synthesis.

Because of our time constraints in this course, your review will be substantially shorter than the average review you’d find in a scientific journal. You will need to focus your topic more narrowly than you would for a full-length review to accommodate this short length.  The success of your review will depend on how carefully you narrow your topic and conduct your research.

Organization

Unlike research reports which tend to follow the Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion (IMRAD) format, there is not one standard way to organize a review article (Penrose and Katz 2010). However, reviews are frequently organized in one of the following ways: chronologically (based on when the articles were published), thematically (based on various themes or topics that emerge in the articles), or methodologically (based on different methods or approaches that were used to conduct the research or analyze the data) (Hofmann 2014). For your review, please use a theme that works best for your selected research topic (email me for questions: brandon_rogers@ncsu.edu).

Your review should have an introduction that states the topic of your review, briefly gives some background on this topic, and explains why review of your topic is warranted. Your review article should also include a conclusion that summarizes the findings of your review and the general interpretations of your topic. Your conclusion should also include a statement about the significance of what you’ve found in your review and what questions still remain to be investigated. Please use headings and subheadings, topic sentences, and transitions words and phrases to help organize your review.

Abstract

Because your abstract is basically a summary of your review, you should write your abstract last, after your review article is written.  Please, please, please, do not write your abstract first! Write your abstract last!

Checklist for the Indicative Abstract of Your Micro Review

  • Gives a brief description of your topic (must include)
  • Gives an overview of what your article will cover (must include)
  • May also give background information about the topic (optional depending on your content)
  • May also include a statement about why the topic needs to be reviewed (optional depending on your content)
  • May also include a brief statement about conclusions of the review (optional depending on your content)
  • Your abstract should NOT include IMRAD headings (introduction, methods, results, discussion) or discuss specific data from your review.

References and Citation Formatting

Your review must cite 9 to 12 research reports from peer-reviewed journals. Your review should not use any sources other than research reports from peer-reviewed journals. This is probably the most important element of this assignment because, as a genre, a literature review “reviews” recent research, so research reports are the appropriate source for this type of document.

Your review must cite all sources used in the text with in-text citations. Your review must also have a works cited list that includes all references cited in your text.

Please make sure that your in-text citations and works cited list are formatted in accordance with the author guidelines (may also be called journal guidelines) of your target journal.

We will be discussing proper citation, paraphrasing, and plagiarism in this course.

Grammar/Mechanics

Please make sure you proofread your review and edit it for clarity and to remove any problems with typos, grammar, mechanics, or spelling. As always, please make sure you use spellcheck.

Submission

Please make sure you submit this assignment via Moodle as a Word document with your name on it.  Because I will be grading using comments and tracked changes in Word, I cannot accept any assignments as PDFs or other types of files.

Your Review Should…

  • Synthesize research from 9 to 12 research reports published in peer-reviewed journals.
  • NOT include quotations, only paraphrasing and summary.
  • Be 900- to 1200-words long.
  • Have the editors and peer reviewers of your target journal (one that publishes reviews) as an audience.
  • Follow the author guidelines of your target journal for reference and in-text citation formatting.
  • Include an introduction and a conclusion.
  • Organize the research by themes or topics (thematic approach).
  • Use heading and subheadings.
  • Use topic sentences.
  • Use transition words and phrases as appropriate.
  • Have an indicative abstract that follows the checklist on the “Abstracts” list
  • Cite all sources using the in-text citation style specified by your target journal’s author guidelines.
  • Include a works cited page that follows your journal’s style.
  • Be edited and proofread carefully.
  • Be submitted on time.

Sequence of Steps 

1. PICK A TOPIC.

Let’s say I’m writing my review on feral cat reproduction in urban environments. I won’t know for sure that the scope of this topic is doable until I start looking through the literature. I’ll have to be open to tweaking the topic as needed.

2. DEVELOP A WORKING TITLE AS A WAY TO KEEP FOCUSED.

I’ll likely change the title later, after I’ve done all the research and adjusted my topic based on the literature.

3. FIND AN AUDIENCE.

By looking through several journals, I determine that the best one to submit my review to is called the Journal of Feline Biology. That journal publishes articles of all types on felines, and it also publishes topical review articles — so it meets my needs. [That isn’t a real journal, by the way. I imagined it for this example.]

4. FIND THE GUIDELINES.

For this, I will search the journal’s web site.

5. FIND A SAMPLE NARRATIVE LITERATURE REVIEW.

I need to make sure I write my review in the style that the Journal of Feline Biology prefers — language, organization, documentation. I’ll look over several review articles published in recent years in that journal. I’ll select one to act as a model. It shouldn’t be on my specific topic. For example, I could pick one titled “The Effects of Human Encroachment on Lions in Southern Africa: A Review.” I can use this review article to get an idea of how to write my own on my particular topic.

6. DO THE RESEARCH.

To write my article, I will search several databases for relevant literature about feral cat reproduction. Will I use Google Scholar? Maybe — but I won’t rely on that search engine. My best bet is to consult with a librarian about the best discipline-specific databases at NC State to search. I will also consult the librarians for help with key words to enter into the databases.

I will likely find articles in numerous journals, say Science, The Journal of Mammalian Studies, Behavioral Ecology, etc.

I’ll collect 20 or so articles that deal with my topic. (I will not use a review article as a source. My sources should all be research reports.) Gathering more articles than necessary for the assignment’s minimum requirement is a good idea.

7. DEVELOP A SYSTEM FOR TRACKING INFORMATION & SOURCES.

8. ORGANIZE THE MATERIAL INTO TOPICAL HEADINGS.

I’ll use the trends grid for this part of my writing process. See the “Finding Trends in the Literature” page in the Assignment 2 Binder.

9. SYNTHESIZE THE INFORMATION AND WRITE THE MAIN BODY OF THE PAPER.

At this point, I will use my very own Pink and Green Highlighter Test to make sure that the balance of material is as it should be. I will use green highlighting for only those sentences where my voice dominates (topic sentences, transitional sentences, concluding statements) and pink for all the text that is cited, i.e., the voices of the authors whose work I am reviewing. The body of my paper should be mostly pink.

10. WRITE THE CONCLUSION.

11. WRITE THE INTRODUCTION.

12. CHECK THE DOCUMENTATION STYLE.

13. WRITE THE ABSTRACT.

15. PROOFREAD & SPELL CHECK.

14. FORMAT THE DOCUMENT.

16. PROOFREAD & SPELL CHECK AGAIN.

Rubric

This is the rubric that I will be using to grade your Assignment 2.  Please review this rubric to understand more about how your work will be evaluated.

Rhetorical Awareness – 30 pts.

  • Contextualizes and synthesizes a broader topic within a relevant and timely body of specific research
  • Remains neutral and unbiased
  • Centers description and synthesis over evaluation of source material
  • Uses a wide and complex set of studies

Content – 25 pts.

  • Synthesizes 10-15 primary source studies covering a particular topic and scope in 4-5 pages
  • Highlights and synthesizes important findings and notes questions that remain to be answered
  • Discusses implications and limitations of the literature as a whole
  • Includes an abstract that summarizes the trends you observed in the literature and the conclusion of your review

Organization & Structure – 25 pts.

  • Organized around main ideas and trends rather than individual sources
  • Uses introduction and conclusion to establish significance and provide an overview of implications
  • Uses topic sentences and headings to transition from one point of agreement or disagreement to another
  • Coherent and easy to follow

Formatting & Design – 10 pts.

  • Reviews 10-15 articles
  • Follows the formatting & citation guidelines of a journal in your field (include link to the guidelines in the footer of your document)

Mechanics & Conventions – 10 pts.

  • Follows the standards of style for your discourse community
  • Contains few spelling and grammatical errors and no patterns of error