如何組織您的文獻探討 (Literature Review) 內容

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

在上一篇網誌中，我們分享了一些關於文獻檢索及評估所找到的文獻與您的研究是否相關的實用小貼士。我們現在來談談如何更有效組織您的文獻探討內容和在寫文獻探討時需要注意的地方。

在下筆寫文獻探討前先組織一下有哪些內容需要包括在內可以令您事半功倍。

如何組織文獻探討的內容取決於:

⦁ 您論文的性質

⦁ 您研究所在學科的一般期望

⦁ 是否有字數要求的規定

您的文獻探討需要有多少個部分?

這個問題其實沒有標準答案，有一些學科中的慣例是只要求概述最新及最相關的文獻，而另外一些則要求要有一個對該研究範疇的完整文獻概述。

針對只要求精簡概述的文獻探討:

如果您研究的學科只要求精簡地概述最新的相關文獻，那麼您的文獻探討只需要一個段落就可以了。

針對要求較完整概述的文獻探討:

當您需要寫一個較長的文獻探討時，適當分段及運用小標題會有幫助。

組織較長的文獻探討的普遍做法:

⦁ 使用按時間順序書寫的方式，由較早期的研究發展開始概述到近期的研究結果

⦁ 圍繞文獻中不同的主題、理論方向或觀點

⦁ 如果研究方法在您的研究中很重要，那可以圍繞文獻中不同的研究方法組織內容

撰寫文獻探討的實用小貼士

在建立了一個清晰的概念去組織您的文獻探討內容後，下一步就是下筆把它寫出來。

在您的書寫過程中要時刻記住這個要點:

「文獻探討的目的不是在於只列舉過往的研究，而是有批判性地評論它們。」

另外，您亦可以跟隨下面的一些指引:

1. 先以一個可解釋題目重要性的引言作開端，之後再羅列出該文獻探討的整體架構及包括範圍。

2. 多作比較和聯繫: 每一個段落都需要清楚地連結到整個文獻探討的主題，另外綜述中的不同部分的相互關聯亦要清晰地表現出來。

3. 強調具爭議性或不一致的研究發現，及討論在該學科中持續存在的爭論和分歧。

4. 記得要引述那些與您的研究方向、發現或假設有矛盾的論文。如果您忘記這樣做，您的審稿員是一定會發現的!

當您完成您的文獻探討後，下一步是總結文獻探討結果、辨識出文獻中的研究缺口、為您的研究提出基本原理以及解釋您的研究如何為該領域作出貢獻。

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.