Exploring How to Make Literature Reviews Easier
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.33423/jhetp.v24i7.7187Keywords:
higher education, literature reviews, reviews of the literature, scholarship, faculty, qualitative analysisAbstract
Many researchers find the literature review portion of conducting research challenging, especially analyzing the information from the literature. Despite the availability of software tools, this article demonstrates that current processes are widely varied and archaic. The processes used are revealed through interviews with current faculty. Faculty members identified numerous challenges and issues with analyzing the qualitative data for literature reviews. The ensuing discussion examines potential improvements which could be achieved through using NVivo as an example of qualitative software that could be used to make literature reviews easier to coordinate. Recommendations for improving the efficiency of literature reviews are included.
References
Bandara, W. (2006). Using NVivo as a research management tool: A case narrative. In Quality and Impact of Qualitative Research: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Qualitative Research in IT & IT in Qualitative Research (pp. 6–19). Institute for Integrated and Intelligent Systems.
Bandara, W., Furtmuller, E., Gorbacheva, E., Miskon, S., & Beekhuyzen, J. (2015). Achieving rigor in literature reviews: Insights from qualitative data analysis and tool-support. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 37(1), Article 8.
Bandara, W., Miskon, S., & Fielt, E. (2011). A systematic, tool-supported method for conducting literature reviews in information systems. In M. Rossi, & J. Nandhakumar (Eds.), Proceedings of the 19th European Conference on Information Systems (pp. 1–13). Association for Information Systems.
Beekhuyzen, J. (2008). Conducting a literature review: A puzzling task [Conference presentation abstract]. Australian Association for Research in Education Annual Conference, Brisbane, Australia.
Boote, D.N., & Beile, P. (2005). Scholars before researchers: On the centrality of the dissertation literature review in research preparation. Educational Researcher, 34(6), 3–15.
Di Gregorio, S. (2000). Using NVivo for your literature review. Strategies in Qualitative Research: Issues and Results from Analysis Using QSR NVivo and NUD IST Conference* at the Institute of Education, London, UK.
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.
Hennink, M.M., Kaiser, B.N., & Marconi, V.C. (2017). Code saturation versus meaning saturation: How many interviews are enough? Qualitative Health Research, 27(4), 591–608.
Onwuegbuzie, A.J., & Frels, R.K. (2014). A framework for using discourse analysis for the review of the literature in counseling research. Counseling Outcome Research and Evaluation, 5(1), 52–63.
Onwuegbuzie, A.J., Leech, N.L., & Collins, K.M. (2012). Qualitative analysis techniques for the review of the literature. The Qualitative Report, 17(28), 1–28.
Paré, G., Trudel, M.C., Jaana, M., & Kitsiou, S. (2015). Synthesizing information systems knowledge: A typology of literature reviews. Information & Management, 52(2), 183–199.
Rowley, J. (2012). Conducting research interviews. Management Research Review, 35(3/4), 260–271.
