نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 کارشناس ارشد علم اطلاعات و دانش‌شناسی، دانشگاه رازی، کرمانشاه، ایران

2 دانشجوی کارشناسی مشاوره، دانشگاه پیام نور واحد صحنه، کرمانشاه، ایران

چکیده

پیشینه‌­های پژوهش نقش و جایگاه ویژه­‌ای در بین پژوهش­‌ها دارند و زمانی ارزش آن‌ها بیشتر خواهد شد که پژوهشگر منابع مرتبط را به‌صورت انتقادی موردبررسی و تحلیل قرار دهد. ازاین‌رو، هدف پژوهش حاضر، مرور انتقادی مطالعات و شناسایی مهم­ترین مباحث و معیارهایی است که به بررسی پیشینه‌­های پژوهش پرداخته‌اند، است. روش این پژوهش کتابخانه‌­ای- اسنادی است که با استفاده از مرور نظام‌­مند و با رویکرد تحلیل انتقادی، به بررسی و تحلیل منابع و مطالعات صورت گرفته پرداخته است. با استفاده از مراحل، مشخص کردن هدف پژوهش، جستجوی منابع، تجزیه‌وتحلیل منابع و استخراج دسته­­‌های موضوعی به بررسی منابع و تحلیل آن‌ها پرداخته شده است. در پایگاه‌­های فارسی ایرانداک، سیویلیکا، پایگاه اطلاعات علمی جهاد دانشگاهی (SID)، نورمگز، پرتال علوم انسانی، مگیران و در پایگاه­‌های غیرفارسی ساینس دایرکت، اریک و امرالد جستجو انجام شد و با بررسی منابع­، دسته­‌های مطالعات نظری و راهنماها (تعریف، اهمیت، هدف و کارکرد) پیشینه‌­های پژوهش، انتقادی بودن پیشینه­‌های پژوهش و معیارهای ارزیابی پیشینه‌­های پژوهش استخراج گردید. در دسته مبانی نظری پیشینه­‌های پژوهش، از محاسن مطالعات آن است که به تشریح اهمیت، فواید و کارکردهای پیشینه پژوهش پرداخته‌­اند، اما به دلیل قابل‌فهم نبودن راهنماها، عدم تشریح مسئله پژوهش و ارائه مطالب نامرتبط موجب سردرگمی مخاطب شده‌­اند. در دسته معیارهای ارزیابی پیشینه پژوهش، پژوهش­‌ها با تدوین معیارهایی جهت بررسی پیشینه­‌ها به پژوهشگران این امکان را داده‌­اند که منابع و مطالعات گذشته را با دیدگاهی عمیق‌­تری موردبررسی قرار دهند، اما این معیارها نیز گاه به دلیل گویا و قابل‌فهم نبودن مشکلاتی را برای پژوهشگران به ارمغان آورده است و در دسته تحلیل انتقادی پیشینه­‌ها، با این‌که در عنوان و متن پژوهش‌ها قصد داشته‌­اند به بررسی تحلیل انتقادی بپردازند، اما آن‌ها نیز نه‌تنها به تشریح کامل موضوع نپرداخته­‌اند، بلکه خود نیز منابع موردبررسی را با رویکردی انتقادی مورد تحلیل قرار نداده­‌اند. نتایج نشان می­‌دهد، پژوهش‌­ها توجه به بحث تحلیل انتقادی در پیشینه­‌های پژوهش را مورد کم‌­توجهی قرار داده‌­اند و این مسئله نشان­‌دهنده‌­ی آن است که پژوهشگران با دیدگاهی سطحی­ به این مسئله پرداخته‌­اند و به عمق منابع و متون پیشینه‌­­های پژوهش نفوذ نکرده‌­اند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

A Critical Review of Studies and Research Related to the Literature Review (1997- 2022)

نویسندگان [English]

  • Nahid Shahveisi 1
  • Shabnam Shahveisi 2

1 Master of Information Science and Knowledge, Razi University, Kermanshah, Iran

2 Bachelor Student in Counseling, Payam Noor University, Sahne Branch, Kermanshah, Iran

چکیده [English]

1. Introduction
Research is one of the most important processes in scientific societies, and one of the main stages and foundations of any research is the investigation of the Literature Review. Literature review has a special value and place in research, and the value of literature review increases when the researcher analyzes it critically, because stating the shortcomings and merits of past researches informs the researchers to find out in which field more research is needed and what are the deficiencies in research; this work shows the skill of the researcher and his mastery over the investigated researches. The literature review is not only a summary of previous researches, but the review of sources requires a complete and systematic analysis of the strengths, shortcomings and inaccuracies of past researches, and a careful review of the sources can guide the researcher in the field of research.

2. Literature Review
The results of the investigations show that, so far, inside and outside the country, no research has been done with a systematic review method with a critical analysis approach to collect sources on the topic of literature review; although Koreh-Paz (2016) has compared the literature review of two disciplines, a separate research, all the sources that have dealt with the issue of literature review in all disciplines have not been examined. Fatahi and Parirokh (1999), Karami (2017), Yahyavi (2015), Fit (2011), Nopf (2006), Winchester and Selji (2016) have taken steps to guide researchers in the field of literature review and also in research sources Hori (1997), Nariza et al (2014) have examined the year, topic relevance, sharing and quality of literature review.

3. Methodology
This research has collected studies and researches conducted in the field of literature review using a systematic review and a critical analysis approach, as well as a qualitative library-document method. In order to collect sources and select the appropriate source, the following steps were taken, which are as follows:
1- Determining the purpose of the research: according to the topic of the research, i.e. literature review and critical analysis of sources, all the researches and studies that were related to the topic of literature review were examined.
2- Searching for sources: in order to search for accurate sources related to the subject of research, considering that literature review is used in different disciplines and fields with different titles, first by checking in texts and books.
3- Analysis of sources: After searching the databases, a total of 64 sources were retrieved in Persian and non-Persian databases. By reviewing the sources, 13 sources had duplicate titles, which were removed from the collection of reviews, and then by reviewing the full text of the remaining sources, 20 articles were identified as unrelated to the research topic, although the titles of the sources show thematic relevance, in the review of the text, it was found that they are unrelated, because some sources have chosen literature review in the title of the word review, but within the text, especially in non-Persian sources, they have not paid attention to the issue of literature review. After going through the above steps, a total of 31 sources (articles, books and theses) were examined.
4- Extraction of thematic categories: after examining the full text of the selected sources, for its thematic classification, the most important topic that the source had examined from its own angle, the literature review, was placed as a category, meaning that the selected categories were extracted from the texts and based on the understanding and inference obtained from the sources, they were considered for this research, then according to the large number of categories extracted from the texts, categories were selected that had the highest frequency; in this way, the sources were divided into three categories, which are: 1- theoretical studies and guides (definition, importance, purpose and function) of literature review 2- evaluation criteria of literature review 3- criticality of literature review.

4. Results
The result indicates that the literature review is divided into 4 categories as follows:
1- Theoretical foundations and guidelines (definition, importance, purpose and function) of literature review:
 Most of the studies and researches that have been done in relation to the theoretical foundations of literature review are related to articles. The findings indicate that most of the studies intended to provide guidelines for the preparation of the literature review in addition to the importance and benefits of the literature review for researchers.
2- Reviewing the criticality of the literature review:
Table 2 shows that in the two studies that have been conducted in relation to critical analysis, although the basis of the research work was the critical analysis of the literature review, they did not criticize the sources as they should have, in the end, Korepaz's letter did not pay attention to the critical analysis of the literature review, and in the text of the literature review, he did not examine the literature with a critical approach, but besides this, Akindele's research examined the research with critical analysis, which he counted it as one of its merits.
3- Literature review evaluation criteria:
Most of the conducted researches have investigated the quality of the literature review, these researches take into consideration the criteria of the year, the structure of the literature review, the relevance of the topic, the impartiality of the researcher in the research work and information literacy education.

5. Discussion
Research is one of the important factors for the growth and success of societies, and researchers can be successful in conducting their research when they put the works and resources of the past at the forefront of their work. The review of the conducted researches and studies shows that most of the sources that have been written about the literature review have paid attention to the theoretical foundations of the literature review and it can be said that most of the researches have followed it. 

6. Conclusion
The results of the findings indicate that in the category of theoretical foundations, one of the strong points of the researches is that they have explained the importance, benefits and functions of the background of the research in an understandable and expressive manner. Also, one of the weaknesses of these studies is that they have not explained exactly how the researcher can compile a research background, and the guidelines of these studies are mostly theoretical and have not considered the practical development of the research background. In the category of critical review of backgrounds, one of the advantages of the researches is to pay attention to the review of the researches with a critical approach, but these researches have only addressed the weak points of the researches in the review of the sources and the research itself. Also, he did not critically analyze the sources he used. In the category of research background evaluation criteria, the most important criteria proposed in the researches for research background evaluation are: year, research background structure, subject relevance, researcher's impartiality in research work and information literacy education. Also, one of the strengths of the researches in this category is the provision of instructions, providing guidelines and considering criteria for evaluating the quality of the research backgrounds, and the weaknesses are the lack of clarity and understanding of the considered criteria. 

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Literature Review
  • Critical Review
  • Evaluation Criteria
  • Studies and Research
افشار، ابراهیم. (1388). نقص غرض در پیشینه‌­نویسی. فصلنامه کتاب ماه، 13 (3)، 28- 29.
اشتریان، کیومرث و امامی میبدی، راضیه. (1392). پیشینه پژوهش و مرور سیستمی ادبیات علمی (2) پیشنهاداتی برای دستور کار دانشکده‌­ها، مؤسسات پژوهشی و پایان‌­نامه‌­های تحصیلات تکمیلی: راهنمای عملی. فصلنامه سیاست، 43 (2)، 3- 19.
اشتریان، کیومرث و امامی میبدی، راضیه. (1391). پیشینه پژوهش و مرور سیستمی ادبیات علمی (1) پیشنهاداتی برای دستور کار دانشکده‌­ها، مؤسسات پژوهشی و پایان­‌نامه‌­های تحصیلات تکمیلی اصول و مبانی. فصلنامه سیاست، 42 (3)، 1-15.
پارسائیان، مریم. (1387). بررسی میزان ارتباط موضوعی پایان­‌نامه­‌های رشته‌­ی کتابداری و اطلاع‌رسانی دانشگاه­‌های دولتی تهران با پیشینه‌های مندرج در آن‌ها (1387-1383). فصلنامه کتابداری، 42 (47)، 185-200.
حری، عباس. (1375). بررسی وضع پیشینه در پایان‌­نامه­­‌های کارشناسی ارشد دانشکده مدیریت و اطلاع‌رسانی پزشکی. فصلنامه روان­شناسی و علوم تربیتی، (56)، 33-48.
عبدخدایی، زهرا و طیوری، امیر. (1398). تفاوت­های مرور روایتی و مرور نظام­‌مند. فصلنامه ایرانی آموزش در علوم پزشکی، 19 (18)، 166- 168.
فتاحی، رحمت‌الله و پریرخ، مهری. (1390). مرور نوشتارها و پیشینه پژوهش: راهنمای نگارش. تهران: نشر کتابدار.
فتاحی، رحمت اله و پریرخ، مهری. (1377). رهنمودهایی برای نگارش مرور نوشتارها و پیشینه­‌ی پژوهش در حوزه‌­های علوم انسانی و اجتماعی. فصلنامه علوم انسانی دانشگاه الزهرا، (28)، 62- 82.
قاسمی، محمد. (1396). ضرورت توجه به پیشینه تحقیق در پژوهش­ها. فصلنامه آموزش زبان و ادب فارسی، (2)، 14-15.
کریمی، بهناز. (1395). نحوه جمع‌­آوری پیشینه تحقیق در پژوهش‌­های علوم رفتاری و روان‌شناسی. ششمین کنفرانس ملی مدیریت، اقتصاد و حسابداری، آذربایجان شرقی: دانشگاه فنی و حرفه‌­ای، آذربایجان شرقی، 1- 5.
کوره­پز، هانیه. (1394). مقایسه تحلیل انتقادی فصل پیشینه­‌ی دانشجویان ایرانی تحصیلات تکمیلی آموزش زبان انگلیسی و مترجمی زبان انگلیسی. ]پایان­‌نامه کارشناسی ارشد، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد مرودشت[.
یحیوی، فاطمه سادات. (1395). چیستی و چرایی و چگونگی تدوین پیشینه تحقیق. ششمین کنفرانس ملی مدیریت، اقتصاد و حسابداری، آذربایجان شرقی: دانشگاه فنی و حرفه­‌ای آذربایجان شرقی، 1-8.
Akindele, O. (2008). A critical analysis of the literature review section of graduate dissertations at the University of Botswana. 1- 20.
Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1997). Writing Narrative Literature Review. The Eduational Publishing Foundation. Review of General Psychology, 1(30), 311- 320.
Boell, K. S., & Kecmanovic, C. D. (2014). A Hermenetic Approach for Conducting Literature Review and Literature Searches. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 34, 257-286.
Callahan, J. L. (2014). Writing literature reviews: A reprise and update. Human resource development review, 13(3), 271- 275. https://doi.org/10.1177/153448 4314536705
Chen, H. T. (2016). Writing the Literature Review Section: Teaching Undergraduate Psychology Students Scientific Writing. Florida International University, USA, 39- 44.
Cisco, J. (2014). Teaching the literature review: A practical approach for college instructors. Teaching & Learning Inquiry, 2(2), 41- 57.
Denney, A. s., & Tewkusbury, R. (2013). How to Write a Literature Review. Jouranal of Criminal Justice Education, 24(2), 218- 234.
Efron, E. S., & Ravid, R. (2019). Writing the Literature Review a Practical Guide. London: The Guilford Press New York.
Faryadi, Q. (2018). PhD Thesis Writing Process: A Systematic Approach- How to Write Your Literature Review. Scientific Research Publishing, creative Education, 9(28), 2912- 2919. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2018.916219.
Fitt, H. R. M. (2011). An investigation The Doctoral Dissertation Literature Review: From The Materials We Use to Prepare Students to The Materials That Students Prepare. [Doctoral Dissertation,Utah State University].
Garrard, J. (2011). Health Sciences Literature Review Made Easy: The Matrix Method. Third Edition.Jones & Bartlett Learning.
Green, R., & Bower, M. (2003). Evolution of the Thesis Literature Review; A Faculty-Librarian Partnership To Guide Off-Campus Graduate Research and Writing. Shenandoah University, 1- 10.
Kaminstein, D. (2017). Writing A Literature Review For An Applied Master’s Degree. Organizational Dynamics Working Papers, University of Pennsylvania Scholarly Commons, 9(19), 1- 13.
Knopf, J. W. (2006). Doing a Literature Review. Political Science and Politics, 39 (1), 127- 133.
Krishnan, L. A., & Kathpalia, S. S. (2002). Literature Reviews in Student Project Reports. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 45(3), 187- 197. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPC.2002.801637.
Nariza, Sutapa, G., & Salam, U. (2014). Critical Thinking in Literature Review Writing Section of Students’’Theses’’. Journal Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran Untan, Tanjungpu ra University,1- 8.
Oliver, P. (2012). Succeeding with Your Literature Review: A handbook for students. Open University Press.
Rewhorn, S. (2017). Writing Your Successful Literature Review. Journal of Geography in Higner Education, 42 (1), 143-147. https://doi.org/10.1080/03098265.2017.1337732
Rowley, J., & Slack, F. (2004). Conducting a Literature Review. Management Research News, 27(6), 31- 39.
Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Business Research, 104, 333- 339.
Torraco, R. J. (2016). Writing Integrative Reviews of the Literature: Methods and Purposes. Adult Vocational Education and Technology, 7(3), 62- 70. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJAVET.2016070106
Winchester, C. L., & Salji, M. (2016). Writing a Literature Review. clinical Urology, 9 (5), 308- 312. https://doi.org/10.1177/2051415816650133
 
References [In Persian]
Abdkhodaii, Z., & Toyuri, A. (2018). Differences between narrative review and systematic review. Iranian Quarterly of Education in Medical Sciences, 19 (18), 166-168. [In Persian]
Afshar, E. (2009). Intentional defect in Literature Review. Book of the Month Quarterly, 13 (3), 28-29. [In Persian]
Ashtarian, K., & Imami, R. (2011). Literature review and systematic review of scientific literature (2) Suggestions for the agenda of colleges, research institutions and graduate theses: a practical guide. Politics Quarterly, 42 (3), 1-15. [In Persian]
Ashtarian, K., & Imami, R. (2012). Literature review and systematic review of scientific literature (2) Suggestions for the agenda of colleges, research institutions and graduate theses: a practical guide. Politics Quarterly, 43 (2), 19-3. [In Persian]
Fattahi, R., & Parirokh, M. (1998). Guidelines for writing a review of articles and literature review in the fields of humanities and social sciences. AlZahra University Humanities Quarterly, (28), 62-82. [In Persian]
Fattahi, R., & Parirokh, M. (2011). Review of articles and literature review: writing guide. Tehran: Ketabdar Publishing. [In Persian]
Ghasemi, M. (2016). The need to pay attention to literature review in researches. Persian Language and Literature Education Quarterly, (2), 14-15. [In Persian]
Horri, A. (1997). Examining the status of the background in the master's theses of the Faculty of Management and Medical Information. Quarterly Journal of Psychology and Educational Sciences, (56), 33-48. [In Persian]
Karimi, B. (2015). How to collect literature review in behavioral science and psychology researches. The 6th National Conference on Management, Economics and Accounting Azerbaijan sharghi: Technical and Vocational University, Azerbaijan sharghi, 5-1. [In Persian]
Korepaz, H. (2014). Comparison of the critical analysis of the literature review chapter of Iranian graduate students in English language teaching and English translation. [Master's thesis, Islamic Azad University, Maroodasht branch] [In Persian]
Parsaian, M. (2008). Examining the degree of thematic relevance of theses in the field of librarianship and information of Tehran state universities, reviewing the literature contained in them (1383-1387). Library Quarterly, 42 (47), 185-200. [In Persian]
Yahyavi, F. S. (2015). What and why and how to compile a literature review. The 6th National Conference on Management, Economics and Accounting, Azerbaijan sharghi: Azerbaijan sharghi Technical and Vocational University, 8-1. [In Persian]