One of the obligations or duties of a professor is to write a scientific article. However, original research is depending on many factors so that sometimes there is no enough data available for a new original article. Please help me to explain how is the merit of review article over an original research article?
Hello Prof. Tarkus. There are many types of review. Grant and Booth (2009) identified 14 different types of review, and each of this review method has its own strengths and weaknesses. I attached the link to this publication. (Kalau perlu artikenya, saya bisa kirimkan japri Prof).
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x/full
Thanks Bu Neti. I already have that article. Actually the information that I am looking for is about the status of scholarship of a review article. In our country an article is not catagorized as scientific if only as a review ones. Most of people think that a research article must be based on our own data (primary data), whereas research fund is limited and highly competitive. . That's why it is so difficult for ones to have credits for rank promotion. If a review article has also a high merit or value academically, I am thinking that we should train people how to write a review article as often as how to write a primary scientific article, since so far, training on how to write a review article is still neglected. (Saya sudah berusaha menyadarkan teman-teman bahwa di luar negeri, artikel ilmiah para profesor tidak selalu hasil riset primer, apalagi dalam ilmu sosial. Jika ada hasil studi tentang review article, please share dengan saya untuk saya gunakan sebagai acuan).
This a very useful link:
http://www.itc.nl/library/papers/hengl_rules.pdf
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Composition Studies
- Articles