如何组织您的文献综述 (Literature Review) 内容

Quick Takeaways:

et al.' means 'and others'.
Use 'et al.' to cite works with three or more authors.
The presentation (et al., et al., or rarely et al) depends on the style guide or journal guidelines

The English language has a rich history of borrowing words from other languages, especially from Latin. Latin abbreviations such as ‘a.m.’, ‘p.m.’ and ‘CV’ have become part of our everyday vocabulary. Such abbreviations are also frequently used in academic writing, from the ‘Ph.D.’ in the affiliation section to the ‘i.e.’, ‘e.g.’, ‘et al.’, and ‘QED’ in the rest of the paper.

This guide explains when and how to correctly use ‘et al.’ in a research paper.

In this guide:

1)Meaning of ‘et al.’
2)When and how to use ‘et al.’
- a)Table: Correct use of ‘et al.’ by style guide
- b)Unusual scenarios

We shared tips on searching for and assessing papers for your literature review in our previous blog. We will now talk more about how to better organise the content and to what you need to pay attention when writing your literature review.

Before you start writing the review, you should first organise what content you are going to include.

The organisation of content will depend on:

⦁ the nature of your paper

⦁ the expectations of the field and

⦁ any stipulated word limit

How many sections should your literature review have?

There is no fixed approach. You may only be required to review the most relevant and recent papers in some fields, while in others a thorough historical overview of the topic is expected.

For a brief review:

If the common practice in your academic field only requires a brief review of current research, a single section might be enough to do the job.

For a longer review:

When writing a longer literature review, using multiple sections and using sub-headings could be a good idea.

Common ways of organising a longer review:

⦁ using a chronological approach, starting with early developments and ending with the most up-to-date studies

⦁ writing around separate themes, or different theoretical approaches or perspectives

⦁ looking at different research methods if methodology is an important theme of your research

Useful tips for writing your literature review

After developing a clear concept for organising the content of your review, you are now ready to actually start writing!

Throughout your writing process, it’s important to bear in mind:

“The purpose of a review is not to list the studies, but to critically evaluate them.”

You can try following the steps below:

⦁ Start with an introduction that explains why the topic is important and sets out the structure or scope of the review.

⦁ Make constant comparisons and connections: each paragraph should be clearly linked to the overall topic and the connections between different areas should be explicit.

⦁ Highlight controversial or inconsistent findings and discuss any ongoing debates and disagreements in the field.

⦁ Be sure to cite any papers that contradict your approach/findings/hypothesis. If you don’t, a reviewer is sure to spot the omission!

Once your review is complete, the next step is to summarise the findings, identify the gaps in the literature, provide the rationale for your study and explain what it will contribute to research and practice.

QUICK ASIDE

Wondering why some abbreviations such as ‘et al.’ and ‘e.g.’ use periods, whereas others such as CV and AD don’t? Periods are typically used if the abbreviations include lowercase or mixed-case letters. They’re usually not used with abbreviations containing only uppercase letters.

Unusual Scenarios

Our latest online workshop built on the success of face-to-face workshops we developed specifically for local universities. Over 30 faculty members joined the session, presented by our Chief Operating Officer, Mr Nick Case, to learn from our case studies on editing research proposals.

The response to our workshop, which included a constructive and insightful Q&A session, was very positive.Drawing on our extensive experience working with hundreds of Hong Kong researchers targeting the GRF and ECS every year, we used examples of poor and subsequently improved proposals to show the attendees how they can make their applications stand out. The response to our workshop, which included a constructive and insightful Q&A session, was very positive.Drawing on our extensive experience working with hundreds of Hong Kong researchers targeting the GRF and ECS every year, we used examples of poor and subsequently improved proposals to show the attendees how they can make their applications stand out. The response to our workshop, which included a constructive and insightful Q&A session, was very positive.Drawing on our extensive experience working with hundreds of Hong Kong researchers targeting the GRF and ECS every year, we used examples of poor and subsequently improved proposals to show the attendees how they can make their applications stand out.