What is the best way to determine the scope of a literature review?

Research question can seriously determine the start and Path of our research. Having one correct question is always a desire, but we can work for it. Every research start with a hypothesis and reiterating the hypothesis based on our learning will help us be on point but having a boundary and deadlines should also be there in order to avoid getting devation from our original interest which we usually do and notice at the last. In short, write your question study about it and then rewrite your question and repeat until you find a real question for which you can't find any info which is where you have to start.

To determine the scope of a literature review, start by defining your research question and setting inclusion/exclusion criteria. Identify key concepts and keywords, conduct an initial search, and review results to gauge relevance. Create a conceptual framework, decide on a time frame, and consider theoretical and methodological approaches. Map the literature, justify your scope, and stay flexible to adapt as needed. Seek feedback from advisers and peers to ensure your scope is well-defined and aligned with your research objectives.

Determining a literature review's scope involves defining focus and boundaries. Steps include outlining the research question, conducting preliminary searches, setting inclusion and exclusion criteria, identifying key themes, deciding the time frame, specifying geographical and disciplinary scope, evaluating review depth, identifying gaps, and staying flexible as understanding evolves, allowing necessary scope adjustments.

The value of a review of literature is determined by its relevance, comprehensiveness, and the quality of analysis. Here are some key factors to consider: 1. Relevance: It should be focused on the specific subject matter of your study. 2. Currency: The literature should include recent and up-to-date sources, especially in rapidly evolving fields. 3. Comprehensiveness: A valuable review should cover a wide range of relevant sources. 4. Credibility: Assess the credibility of the sources included in the review. Ultimately, the value of a review of literature lies in its ability to inform, guide, and support your research or study by providing a solid foundation of existing knowledge.

I would say the scope of a literature review is determined by clearly defining its objectives and research question (hypothesis). The objectives and research questions can be easily defined by first identifying the specific topic, key themes and boundaries of the review.

Usually, any research is motivated. For example, in natural sciences a researcher would observe a phenomenon in his domain of research and according to the degree of advancement in his research discipline, they will be inclined to first read referenced "common - knowledge" resources such as Wikipedia. If the research subject seems to be worthy of advancing, then the literature review will start at points where researchers left off. Often times, these points of where previous researchers "left off" are variable, and pursuing these points (could be across a few centuries!) is left in the end to the interest of the researcher. This requires more patience in pursuing the research subject matter but demands earlier application to getting funded.

The most key part of a preliminary search, and the methodological rigor for any lit review is to keep a running log of your search terms. The protocol should involve adding every search to a log in chronological order including all search terms, filters, boolean terms and databases being searched, as well as the number of items returned and publications reviewed. These should be listed following each search. This list forms a method of reproducibility for a literature review, allowing the findings of the lit review to have validity. In an academic context, these logs are then one step in a process of formalizing the results for greater validty.

I prefer to have a few hypotheses before a preliminary search. Ideally, all of those must be contradicting. I believe that would remove some of the confirmation bias from our prior art search

Don't limit your search by date. Many times, some of the best work was done before you were born. Ampulla of lorenzini, electroreceptors in the snout of elasmobranchs were dissected and described accurately by Lorenzini in 1679. Their function was finally described in 1960.

The scope of a literature review is determined by clearly defining its objectives and research questions. Start by identifying the specific topic, key themes, and boundaries of the review.

Ensure that your sources address the specific questions or arguments you intend to explore in your literature review.? RELEVANCE: 1. Does the source directly address your research question or topic? 2. Does the source provide new insights or perspectives on your research topic? 3. Is the source up-to-date and relevant to current research in your field? VALIDITY 1. Is the research methodology sound and transparent? 2. Are the results of the study supported by the data? 3. Are the conclusions of the study logical and well-supported? 4. Are there any limitations to the study that should be considered?

Once a list of potential litterature has been isolated, it needs to be thoroughly reviewed in order to establish the key lit to be reviewed. Inclusion and exclusion criteria should be developed based on the previously established goals of the review. Who is it for, what is the goal, what is attempting to be established through this review? These questions give a natural jumping off point for inclusion/exclusion criteria. What publication years are relevant for this search? What kinds of review are sufficient? Should grey literature be reviewed or excluded? Exclusion and inclusion criteria also strengthen the resulting review by focusing what findings are considered relevant and valid to inform your finding.

In the last decade there has been an upsurge in fraud. About 2-3% of papers published in the last 10 years come from paper mills and other bogus publishers so a search of Retraction Watch is essential.

It is very easy to make a project a bottomless pit. Every time a new angle of the research excites you, remember what you started with. Note down all the branch-outs as future topic but maintain the discipline of sticking to the topic, however exciting a new topic sounds

I don't know that this should be the last step. It should be the first step. A strong methodology and process is essential for avoiding scope creep.

Your scope should also suggest the areas relevant to your research where further research is needed. It will not only clearly specify your research but also your research can be used as a citation for others to conduct their research.

In my experience, defining the scope of study helps to retain clarity of focus. Also limiting the study to a specific time frame ensures that the researcher is up to date with new developments in the study under investigation. While determining the scope of literature review, its also important to understand the gap of knowledge that exists and the new contribution envisaged by the researcher.

Refine the scope based on your evaluation. 1. Identify Gaps and Inconsistencies Analyse the literature to identify gaps in research, inconsistencies in findings, and areas that require further exploration.? 2. Tailor the Scope Based on your evaluation, refine the scope of your literature review to address the identified gaps and inconsistencies.? 3. Justify Scope Decisions Clearly articulate the rationale behind your inclusion and exclusion criteria, as well as the decisions made in refining the scope based on your evaluation. 4. Revisit Your Research Question As your scope evolves, revisit your research question to ensure it aligns with the refined scope and adequately captures the essence of your investigation.

In general this is less of a step and more of the methodology. Searching is necessarily an iterative process, and so the best practice is to document that iteration and the resulting changes to both scope, content, and search in order to create a replicable and verifiable process of establishing the level of information necessary to achieve your research goals. At the most rigorous, this looks like being able to assert with high confidence that the information being reviewed constitutes the only and/or best information available on a subject, from while findings can be made.

The filtration of your scope is not a one-time process but throughout your research, a researcher needs to be conscious not to deviate from his/her scope.

I've found literature reviews remarkably useful when they're structured around specific thematic elements common to the entire corpus. This not only aids in identifying patterns but also serves as the foundation for factor analysis. Thus, the initial post-review steps can zero in on the most pertinent components for comprehensive understanding and subsequent investigation.

Watch out for bias. Papers that present only one side of an argument because of the author's views. Lysenkoism is the classic, and tragic, example.