Synthesizing Literature Review

Answer

Synthesizing Literature Review

3. a.

Ridley (2012) defines literature review as a scholarly article or paper that includes current knowledge, especially substantive findings, methodological and theoretical contributions to a given topic. As a result, it details information that has already been collected regarding a topic of interest. There has been widespread concern on the quality of literature reviews, especially where some authors and researchers simply provide summaries of articles reviewed. This process, which is also referred to as ‘book report,’ is a simplistic way of making a literature review. As much as it is acceptable in some contexts, it is advised that a literature review synthesizes different articles rather than presenting a summary as is the case with book reports.

Booth, Sutton and Papaioannou (2016) define synthesis as the systematic process of combining different components and substances into a connected whole. This contrasts the definition of summarizing, which is a process associated with discerning important articles and ideas, while ignoring those with irrelevant information. As noted in the definitions, synthesizing provides a more coherent and focused literature review than summarizing. This answers the question on the significance of developing and employing synthesizing skills to improve the quality of a literature review (Machi & McEvoy, 2016). Apart from enhancing the flow and appeal of the literature, it enables the author to identify how the literature connects or addresses the research question.

Q3.b.

The three items I retrieved from my junk drawer include; a note book, a pencil and paper glue.

The first item was a note book. I rarely use the notebook and prefer keeping it in the junk drawer just in case I get random thoughts that need to be penned down. I decided to purchase a notebook since I tend to have flash thoughts. For the sake of reminiscing over them, I found it prudent to write them down.

A pencil is a handy tool for writing down the points. I specifically prefer a pencil to a pen because it can be erased. I believe ideas can be improved with time, either through research or critical thinking. This is the reason I prefer the flexibility of using a pencil.

Paper glue is an adhesive substance used to stick papers together. This is an item that I bought for the sake of it. This is because I rarely find myself binding papers, instead, I prefer purchasing note books with a plastic spiral for ease of use.

My junk drawer has a number of items but the three random items included a note book, paper glue and a pencil. Personally, I find these three items handy when doing paper work. For instance, I use the pencil to pen down my emotions and any other random thoughts that could cross my mind in the course of the day. I prefer pencils to pens because they are erasable. On the other hand, the glue comes in handy in bonding papers that are plucked from the notebook.

While undertaking this exercise, I experienced two main challenges. First, there was difficulty in achieving a clear flow of ideas (Callahan, 2014). This challenges relates to change of lack of organizational structure. The second challenge arises from the lack of compatibility between the items selected. In this case, I was lucky to have picked items that complement each other. In regard to these challenges, I am interested in understanding how mind maps can be used to enhance clarity of structure of a literature review.