SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Erzincan Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi / 2021 / Cilt: 23 Sayı: 3

Planning and writing a scientific review

Bir Bilimsel Derlemenin Planlanması ve Yazımı

Arif Özer(HACETTEPE ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0001-6512-8070
Zeynep Görgülü(HACETTEPE ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-1122-5526
Pages
698–713
Publication Date
2021-12-31
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Since there is a similarity between reviews and research articles, also, it is expected that both researchers writing reviews and the writers of research articles, will be supported about academic writing and provided new perspectives.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:A literature review can be defined as a critical examination of the literature.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Further, the risk of bias of traditional reviews and the thoughts that they just literature abstracts sorting increases this need.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Since there is a similarity between reviews and research articles, also, it is expected that both researchers writing reviews and the writers of research articles, will be supported about academic writing and provided new perspectives.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:derleme · derleme yazımı · literatür derlemesi

Abstract

A literature review can be defined as a critical examination of the literature. Literature reviews contribute to literature as a scientific text; for this reason, scientific reviews should go through a production process that is suitable for validity and reliability standards, as in research articles. However, for writing the scientific review, there is a need in terms of a traditional review, especially in Turkey Literature. Further, the risk of bias of traditional reviews and the thoughts that they just literature abstracts sorting increases this need. With this study, it is aimed to make a contribution towards eliminating the lack of resources in the literature. For this, a review study was conducted from publications for traditional review writing by using Scopus, Web of Science, EBSCO, and Google Scholar databases and libraries. In this study, by synthesizing literature from many disciplines, firstly topics related to the planning were included such as subject selection and goal determination, literature searching, evaluation, analysis, and synthesis, and then the structure of the basic parts of the scientific reviews such as summary, introduction, method, body, and result was explained. It is expected that this study contributes to the literature in terms of supporting the writing of traditional review and guiding new researchers as a beginning study. Since there is a similarity between reviews and research articles, also, it is expected that both researchers writing reviews and the writers of research articles, will be supported about academic writing and provided new perspectives.

Özet

Bir literatür derlemesi, literatürün eleştirel bir şekilde incelenmesi olarak tanımlanabilir. Derlemeler, bilimsel birer metin olarak literatüre katkı sağlar; bu yüzden, araştırma makaleleri gibi geçerlik ve güvenirlik koşullarına uygun bir üretim sürecinden geçmesi gerekir. Ancak derlemelerin yazımı konusunda geleneksel literatür derlemeleri yönünde, özellikle Türkiye literatüründe, bir ihtiyaç bulunmaktadır. Geleneksel derlemelerin yanlılık riskine açık olması ve literatürün sadece art arda sıralanması olarak sanılması bu ihtiyacı arttırmaktadır. Bu çalışmayla literatürdeki kaynak eksikliğini giderilmesine yönelik bir katkı sunulması amaçlanmaktadır. Bunun için Scopus, Web of Science, EBSCO ve Google Scholar veri tabanları ile kütüphanelerden yararlanılarak geleneksel derleme yazımına yönelik ulaşılan yayınlardan bir derleme çalışması yapılmıştır. Bu derleme çalışmasında, birçok disiplinden literatür sentezlenerek, öncelikle konu seçimi ve amacın belirlenmesi, literatür taraması, değerlendirmesi, analiz ve sentezi gibi planlamaya ilişkin başlıklara yer verilmiş, ardından derlemelerin özet, giriş, yöntem, gövde ve sonuç gibi temel bölümlerinin yapısı açıklanmıştır. Bu çalışmanın, derlemelerin yazımına ilişkin literatürü desteklemesi ve yeni araştırmacılara yol göstermesi bakımından derleme yazımına ilişkin başlangıç niteliğinde bir çalışma olarak katkı sunması beklenmektedir. Bununla birlikte, hem derleme yazan araştırmacıların hem de derleme yazımıyla benzerliğinden ötürü araştırma makalesi yazarlarının akademik yazım konusunda desteklemesi ve yeni bakış açıları sağlaması da beklenmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Özer, A., Görgülü, Z. (2021). Planning and writing a scientific review. Erzincan Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 23 Sayı: 3, 698–713. https://doi.org/10.17556/erziefd.819971

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (54)

  1. Aaron, L. (2008). Writing a literature review article. Radiologic Technology, 80(2), 185–186. http://www.radiologictechnology.org/content/80/2/185.short
  2. Aboujaoude, E., Savage, M. W., Starcevic, V., & Salame, W. O. (2015). Cyberbullying: Review of an old problem gone viral. Journal of Adolescent Health, 57(1), 10-18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2015.04.011
  3. Agarwal, N., & Dewan, P. (2016). Writing a review article: Making sense of the jumble. Indian Pediatrics, 53(8), 715-720. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13312-016-0915-z
  4. American Psychological Association (Producer). (2018). Journal article reporting standards: Qualitative research design. Retrieved from https://apastyle.apa.org/jars/qualitative
  5. Barczak, G. (2017). Writing a review article. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 34(2), 120-121. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12365
  6. Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1997). Writing Narrative Literature Reviews. Review of General Psychology, 1(3), 311-320. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.1.3.311
  7. Bem, D. J. (1995). Writing a review article for Psychological Bulletin. Psychological Bulletin, 118(2), 172-177. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.118.2.172
  8. Bolderston, A. (2008). Writing an effective literature review. Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences, 39(2), 86-92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmir.2008.04.009
  9. Callahan, J. L. (2010). Constructing a manuscript: Distinguishing integrative literature reviews and conceptual and theory articles. Human Resource Development Review, 9(3), 300-304. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484310371492
  10. Callahan, J. L. (2014). Writing literature reviews. Human Resource Development Review, 13(3), 271-275. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484314536705
  11. Chambers, R., Gullone, E., & Allen, N. B. (2009). Mindful emotion regulation: An integrative review. In Clinical Psychology Review, 29(6), 560-572. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2009.06.005
  12. Cochrane. (2019). [6]. In J. Higgins & J. Thomas (Eds.), Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Retrieved from www.training.cochrane.org/handbook
  13. Crone, E. A., & Fuligni, A. J. (2020). Self and others in adolescence. Annual Review of Psychology, 71(1), 447-469. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010419-050937
  14. Davidson, F., Rusak, B., Chambers, C., & Corkum, P. (2019). The impact of sleep restriction on daytime functioning in school-age children with and without ADHD: A narrative review of the literature. Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 34(3), 188–214. https://doi.org/10.1177/0829573518770593
  15. de Witte, K., Cabus, S., Thyssen, G., Groot, W., & van den Brink, H. M. (2013). A critical review of the literature on school dropout. Educational Research Review, 10, 13-28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2013.05.002
  16. Denney, A. S., & Tewksbury, R. (2013). How to write a literature review. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 24(2), 218-234. https://doi.org/10.1080/10511253.2012.730617
  17. Derish, P. A., & Annesley, T. M. (2011). How to write a rave review. Clinical Chemistry, 57(3), 388-391. https://doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2010.160622
  18. Dixon-Woods, M., Agarwal, S., Jones, D., Young, B., & Sutton, A. (2005). Synthesising qualitative and quantitative evidence: A review of possible methods. Journal of Health Services Research & Policy, 10(1), 45-53. https://doi.org/10.1177/135581960501000110
  19. Dobber, M., Zwart, R., Tanis, M., & van Oers, B. (2017). Literature review: The role of the teacher in inquiry-based education. Educational Research Review, 22, 194-214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2017.09.002
  20. Doğan, O. (2017). Makale Tez Proje Yazmak: Psikoloji ve Psikiyatri Alanlarında. Ankara: Detay Yayıncılık.
  21. Efron, S. E., & Ravid, R. (2019). Writing the Literature Review: A Practical Guide. London: The Guilford Press.
  22. Fernández-Ríos, L., & Buela-Casal, G. (2009). Standards for the preparation and writing of psychology review articles. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 9(2), 329–344.
  23. Ferrari, R. (2015). Writing narrative style literature reviews. Medical Writing, 24(4), 230-235. https://doi.org/10.1179/2047480615Z.000000000329
  24. Goodall, J., & Montgomery, C. (2014). Parental involvement to parental engagement: A continuum. Educational Review, 66(4), 399-410. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2013.781576
  25. Grant, M. J., & Booth, A. (2009). A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 26(2), 91-108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x
  26. Grant, M. J., & Sutton, A. (2011). Using and writing reviews to inform your practice. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 28(1), 1-2. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2010.00928.x
  27. Green, B. N., Johnson, C. D., & Adams, A. (2006). Writing narrative literature reviews for peer-reviewed journals: secrets of the trade. Journal of Chiropractic Medicine, 5(3), 101-117. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0899-3467(07)60142-6
  28. Gregory, A. T., & Denniss, A. R. (2018). An introduction to writing narrative and systematic reviews — Tasks, tips and traps for aspiring authors. Heart, Lung and Circulation, 27(7), 893-898. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hlc.2018.03.027
  29. Hagger, M. S. (2012). What makes a ‘good’ review article? Some reflections and recommendations. Health Psychology Review, 6(2), 141-146. https://doi.org/10.1080/17437199.2012.705556
  30. Hart, C. (1998). Doing a Literature Review: Releasing the Social Science Research Imagination. London: Sage Publications.
  31. Hong, J. S., & Espelage, D. L. (2012). A review of research on bullying and peer victimization in school: An ecological system analysis. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 17(4), 311-322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2012.03.003
  32. Hornby, G., & Lafaele, R. (2011). Barriers to parental involvement in education: an explanatory model. Educational Review, 63(1), 37-52. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2010.488049
  33. Karaçam, Z. (2013). Sistematik derleme metodolojisi: Sistematik derleme hazırlamak için bir rehber. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Hemşirelik Fakültesi Elektronik Dergisi, 6(1), 26–33. LaRochelle, J. M., King, A. R., Tanas, M., Day, K., Marshall, H. M., & Tyler, A. M. (2011). Writing a review article. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy, 68(9), 790-793. https://doi.org/10.2146/ajhp100235
  34. Levitt, H. M., Bamberg, M., Creswell, J. W., Frost, D. M., Josselson, R., & Suárez-Orozco, C. (2018). Journal article reporting standards for qualitative primary, qualitative meta-analytic, and mixed methods research in psychology: The APA publications and communications board task force report. American Psychologist, 73(1), 26–46. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000151
  35. Moher, D., Shamseer, L., Clarke, M., Ghersi, D., Liberati, A., Petticrew, M., Shekelle, P., & Stewart, L. A. (2015). Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Systematic Reviews, 4(1), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-4-1
  36. Murphy, C. M. (2012). Writing an effective review article. Journal of Medical Toxicology, 8(2) 89-90. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13181-012-0234-2
  37. Nigg, J. T. (2012). Editorial: Writing (and reading) Research Reviews in child psychology and psychiatry - principles and practice, opportunities and pitfalls. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 53(7), 723. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2012.02575.x
  38. Pautasso, M. (2013). Ten simple rules for writing a literature review. PLoS Computational Biology, 9(7), 1-4. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003149
  39. PRISMA. (n.d.). Transparent reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Retrieved from http://www.prisma-statement.org/
  40. QSR. (2019). NVivo (Version 12) [Software]. Victoria, Australia: QSR International. Retrieved from http://www.qsrinternational.com/
  41. Russell, C. L. (2005). An overview of the integrative research review. Progress in Transplantation, 15(1), 8-13. https://doi.org/10.1177/152692480501500102
  42. Sanders, D. A. (2020). How to write (and how not to write) a scientific review article. Clinical Biochemistry, 81, 65-68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2020.04.006
  43. Short, J. (2009). The art of writing a review article. Journal of Management, 35(6), 1312-1317. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206309337489
  44. Thomas, H. J., Connor, J. P., & Scott, J. G. (2018). Why do children and adolescents bully their peers? A critical review of key theoretical frameworks. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 53(5), 437-451. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-017-1462-1
  45. Tokunaga, R. S. (2010). Following you home from school: A critical review and synthesis of research on cyberbullying victimization. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(3), 277-287. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2009.11.014
  46. Torraco, R. J. (2005). Writing integrative literature reviews: Guidelines and examples. Human Resource Development Review, 4(3), 356-367. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484305278283
  47. Torraco, R. J. (2016). Writing integrative reviews of the literature. International Journal of Adult Vocational Education and Technology, 7(3), 62-70. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJAVET.2016070106
  48. Webster, J., & Watson, R. T. (2002). Analyzing the past to prepare for the future: Writing a literature review. MIS Quarterly, 26(2), xiii–xxiii. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/4132319
  49. Wee, B. van, & Banister, D. (2016). How to write a literature review paper? Transport Reviews, 36(2), 278–288. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2015.1065456
  50. Whittemore, R., & Knafl, K. (2005). The integrative review: updated methodology. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 52(5), 546-553. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2005.03621.x
  51. Wolfswinkel, J. F., Furtmueller, E., & Wilderom, C. P. M. (2013). Using grounded theory as a method for rigorously reviewing literature. European Journal of Information Systems, 22(1), 45-55. https://doi.org/10.1057/ejis.2011.51
  52. Yorks, L. (2008). What we know, what we don’t know, what we need to know—Integrative literature reviews are research. Human Resource Development Review, 7(2), 139-141. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484308316395
  53. Zorn, T., & Campbell, N. (2006). Improving the writing of literature reviews through a literature integration exercise. Business Communication Quarterly, 69(2), 172–183. https://doi.org/10.1177/1080569906287960
  54. Karaçam, Z. (2013). Sistematik derleme metodolojisi: Sistematik derleme hazırlamak için bir rehber. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Hemşirelik Fakültesi Elektronik Dergisi, 6(1), 26–33.