Dear Derek,

Thanks for your reply. I agree with you about the different issues in
the literature review as part of the PhD. In this case, I wasn’t
describing the literature review chapter of the PhD thesis, but rather
the genre of research article known as a literature review. 

The PhD thesis makes an original contribution to the knowledge of a
field by a specific doctoral candidate. Within the PhD thesis, the
literature review chapter has a formative role, defining the topic,
summarizing progress to the moment in the topic, narrowing the field of
interest, and identifying the knowledge gap that the thesis author will
fill. In filling this gap, the doctoral candidate makes an original
contribution to the knowledge of the field. 

The genre of journal article known as a literature review has a
related, but slightly different purpose. Literature review articles
published in journals are generally written by scholars after completing
the PhD. In some cases, these are important research statements by
senior scholars. 

The literature review article seeks to summarize the knowledge of the
field at any given moment. Using the Webster-Watson schema, the
literature review article will (1) state why the research topic is
important, (2) explain the contribution that the literature review
article will make to the field, (3) describe the key concepts in the
article, which may include definition statements, (4) delineate
boundaries of research issues the article will address,  (5) review
relevant prior literature – for us, this will cover relevant areas of
design – as well as reviewing the literature of relevant related
areas, (6) develop a model to guide future research, (7) justify the
propositions of the model by presenting theoretical explanations, past
empirical findings, and practical examples, (8) present concluding
implications for researchers and relevant professionals, including
designer, design managers, project leaders, and others.

The Webster-Watson list has seven bullet points. This list has eight,
since I see the first two steps as distinct. I’d also argue that
several steps take place in moving from step 5 to step 6. Here, though,
one comes to a range of challenges and problems in theory construction.

My purpose in posting the article was to alert people to the value of
the literature review article as a contribution to the knowledge of the
field.

There are other approaches. I presented this one because it is a good
summary piece, readily available. The IS field – including HCI and MIS
– shares many common challenges with the design field, so it seemed a
good fit.

Again, I invite people to read it for themselves:

Webster, Jane, and Richard T. Watson. 2002. “Analyzing the Past to
Prepare for the Future: Writing a Literature Review.” Management
Information Science Quarterly Vol. 26 No. 2, (June), xiii-xxiii.

Available from URL:

www.misq.org/misq/downloads/download/editorial/176/

Best regards,

Ken

--

Derek Miller wrote:

—snip—

Any Ph.D. program requires a literature review, as well it should. We
cannot make a contribution to scholarship if we haven't situated that
contribution in the scholastic record. That is — at least since the
Enlightenment and the advent of the modern academy — the point.  

However, some schools differentiate the literature review from the
prospectus. That separates the 7-point list into separate stages of the
degree (hence the ABD designation in the U.S. of All But Dissertation),
and the habit of giving away MAs when the Ph.D. candidate doesn't finish
the dissertation.

—snip—

[Quoted from Webster and Watson in my earlier post]

—snip—

An ideal [literature review] article:

- motivates the research topic and explains the review’s
contributions
- describes the key concepts
- delineates the boundaries of the research
- reviews relevant prior literature in IS and related areas
- develops a model to guide future research
- justifies propositions by presenting theoretical explanations, past
empirical findings, and practical examples
- presents concluding implications for researchers and managers.

And on top of this, the exemplary review article should be explanatory
and creative!

—snip—

Professor Ken Friedman, PhD, DSc (hc), FDRS | University Distinguished
Professor | Dean, Faculty of Design | Swinburne University of Technology
| Melbourne, Australia | [log in to unmask] | Ph: +61 3
9214 6078 | Faculty www.swinburne.edu.au/design