How you could contribute to the existing literature by your efforts – is the research. In recent years there has been significant increase in the number of research programs globally with very scientific curriculum and program design.
Still, there is dearth of the research findings which can be used to solve social and scientific problems !!
I observed many focused doctoral/postdoctoral researchers, where they put their every positive and systematic efforts in terms of ‘finding a research outcome’ that contribute some or the other way to the existing knowledge; but a very few succeed in terms of some kinds of contributions. Though these doctoral/postdoctoral researchers follow every rule of research given by many books by many revered authors. These doctoral/postdoctoral researchers survey literature with theoretical lenses, test questionnaires, stratify samples, collect data, analyse with very advanced tools, interpret it; and come up with research dissertation. Still, very low or no contribution to existing knowledge OR birth of new field.
Among many cases that I observed, they perform research in a fragmented manner. They, i. survey literature to get some gap which can be studied; ii. move on exploring methodologies and get confused with ‘what to do or not to do’ and ‘which methodology to adopt – which not to consider’ (many a times whether qualitative approach or quantitative or mix) iii. develop data collection plan with some tested questionnaire/tools, in some defined territory; iv. use the data and its analyses to test hypotheses they set initially; and v. start writing dissertation.
Often there are lapses at many OR every steps they undertake, mostly in social science research.
I think researchers forget that they are either trying; 1. to raise question(s) on existing literature and suggesting some alternative that is suitable to grow the academic field further; OR 2. to add something new which would flourish the field in future.
I think the ‘review of existing literature’ does not get much focus in rest of the processes during the research, except first section; and the whole study fragments in two parts i. the research gap (from existing literature in a form of section), and ii. the report/dissertation (with altogether new data, findings and very little linking with research gap).
I don’t know ‘whether this process will lead to some contribution in the existing literature’ and ‘how much time should be devoted on literature survey?’
However, one thing is for sure that ‘surveying literature could show many paths to a researcher from where he could get/sense research idea, suitable methodologies and selection of tools.
I agree with your 2 italicised sentences.
I think it is useful to divide research questions into those that only add to human knowledge, and those that also add to the human condition.
In all fairness, we still need to allow researchers to just follow their curiosity: "What is the composition of the crust of Mars?" might one day allow humankind to survive, but is of little practical use today.
Key in doing research is to continually and systematically survey the literature. Yes. patient plodding (and a good personal library system) is mandated.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Medical Science Nursing
- Dissertations