Hello,

i'm focusing on links between sociology and politics, and I think it could be useful the revision you propose in psychology on "everyday life peacebuilding". Maybe if you includes ethnografic studies on access to health or the concrete exercise of civic or cultural rights connected with health, it could be easier. I'm trying myself to study the rol of emotions in social conflicts and it is true there is little literature on these issues.

hope it may be useful.

Julie Massal

Hi Julie, thank you for coming back to me. It's nice to speak to someone :) and get some feedback. I am interested to hear that you too are struggling with the literature. Actually, I am not looking at health, per se. I was trying to take an inductive approach - hence the scoping review - to see what psychology has had to say so far, about the everyday life in peacebuilding. There is some great work out there, by the likes of John Brewer and Amanda E Donahoe, but who else? Where else?

I don't like the idea of rummaging around for literature; I am attracted to the idea of a systematic scoping review. Maybe lock down has got the better me and I can't resist the need to make this more tidy!

Hi Kisane -- Cool topic! In my experience, the depth and rigor of your lit review really depends on what your goal (i.e., type of publication; grant application) is.

For example, if you're hoping to establish the gap in the literature that you're hoping to address with your research, the review should be thorough but not necessarily systematic. The key difference being that a systematic review seeks to draw conclusions regarding a particular problem by collating all available literature on the topic. If that's not of particular interest (or if you're not planning to publish a systematic review based on your literature search), spending some good time getting a feel for the literature (or lack thereof) should inform the state of the field.

Perhaps a good way to get a feel for the difference would be to read some solid systematic reviews (based on reputable protocols like Cochrane or PRISMA) and see how they differ from more traditional single-study research articles.

Hopefully that's helpful!

Hi Josh,

Thank you so much for your insights and suggestions. I have come across a type of systematic review that aims to map emerging literature which I think might work for my PhD. Called a 'Scoping Review', with a protocol suggested by the Joanna Briggs Institute, this approach offers the rigor of the systematic approaches, but accommodates a broader research question - such as 'what empirical data exists on the topic of x?' In addition to offering a chapter in my PhD thesis, I guess this could lead to an independent published article.

Since I published this question on Researchgate, I have been leaning further towards the path of a scoping review. Feel free to knock me back if you think this is a crazy idea!

Warm wishes and thank you once again for your time and energy in responding to my question,

Kisane

Dear Kisane Prutton , I am currently writing a scoping review protocol using the PRISMA extension (PRISMA-ScR). It is quite the same as the classic PRISMA 2020 but focuses on scoping reviews. Maybe that would fit your data as well? Their Paper is named: PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation.

Currently, I am searching for a suitable site to preregister my protocol. Have you made up your mind yet? I thought maybe OSF would fit? As PROSPERO etc. mostly focuses on systematic reviews.

I wish you a lot of success,

Selina

Hi Selina, thank you for sharing your approach. You are ahead of me in considering where to pre-register your protocol. What is your disciplinary area? Will that also make a difference in where you choose to pre-register? I am working in social psychology and not yet resolved this issue. Thank you and do let me know which sites you have considered/rejected and the criteria you are using to help you with this selection?

Thank you,

Kisane

Dear Kisane Prutton , I think you mentioned the JBI manual earlier. On their website, there is a bullet point focusing on the protocol (https://wiki.jbi.global/display/MANUAL/11.2+Development+of+a+scoping+review+protocol) which I find helpful :)

They recommend OSF since PROSPERO not seem to accept scoping reviews :S I guess I will choose OSF at that point.

I am a Ph.D. student as well in experimental psychology. But the review I am writing on leans more towards social psychology.

So, for the protocol, I use the JBI Manual and for the Review, I am using the PRISMA-ScR (http://www.prisma-statement.org/documents/PRISMA-ScR-Fillable-Checklist_11Sept2019.pdf)