What does literature review say about the credibility of authors, and what makes a good dissertation in terms of evidence-based practice?
I put a lot of weight in the literature review of any publication. If one does not recognize the work that was done by others on a particular topic, it will be difficult to 1) triangulate the data and 2) understand where, if any, gaps may exist. For example, I believe there to be a general lack of thoroughness in the health care simulation community in terms of publication and research. Far too many authors abbreviate the literature review to the past ten or so years, as if simulation was not an education practice in use for hundreds of years. This can result in a lack of breadth and depth needed to explore and compare what has already been published. Evidenced-based practice is an iterative process [of published practice and theory], so we need to know what has been written to conduct a critical analysis.
Critical analysis comes in different forms and will depend upon your topic and discipline. It is not limited to the literature review chapter of your dissertation. In general terms I would define critical analysis as the product of investigating a subject or a study in an objective, measured way, weighing the different forms of evidence that are presented.
Different approaches to critical analysis include: a deeper questioning approach (how, why, what if/next); discursive style paragraphs with evidence presented on different sides which is then evaluated; and critiquing the premise, argument and conclusion model. I would recommend Jennifer Moon's (2008) book: Critical Thinking.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Geoscience
- Asia
- India