ANALYTICAL PAPER OUTLINE
Discussion
? 1000 - 1500 words
? What are the implications of the study findings presented in the previous section?
? What is your unique contribution to the literature?
? What are the limitations of your research?
? Did you identify the gaps in the literature?
References
? Use APA 6th edition citation format
Abstract
The abstract is a short summary of the article generally between 200 - 250 words in length. The main problem with abstracts is that they are often vaguely written and do not gran the reader's attention. It is at this point when the reader stops reading and moves onto someone else's work. Perry et al. (2003, p. 658) recommend that the abstract include the following seven elements:
Element 1: The abstract should start with a brief theme sentence to orientate the reader about the overall issue addressed in the article. This sentence should grab the reader's attention.
Element 2: The abstract should then indicate the main aim or purpose of the study.
Element 3: Next, the academic and/or practical importance of the study should be explained.
Element 4: The methodology used in the study should also be briefly described.
Element 5: The main findings of the study should be summarized.
Element 6: A statement of conclusions should indicate the contribution made by the study in filling gaps in the literature.
Element 7: Finally, the practical or managerial implications of the study's findings should be highlighted where appropriate.
Also consider the following principles for abstract writing (McLean, 2001, p. 3):
• Since the abstract is a summary of the article, nothing should be in it that is not also included in the main text.
• An abstract is not an introduction. The article should be complete without the abstract. That is why the abstract is written last.
• The abstract is normally written as a single paragraph and should be understandable without requiring the reader to read something else.
• The abstract should not contain any figures, tables or in-text references, just normal text. In-text citations may be included when you are replicating a previous study and this is specifically mentioned in the abstract.
Keywords
No more than 8 keywords should be included in the article directly after the abstract.
The keywords serve as hooks that draw the attention of potential readers and are also used to locate articles in an electronic database (Perry et al., 2003, p. 657) The keywords should preferably reflect the discipline, sub-discipline, theme, research design and context (industry and/or geographic location) of the study. Where appropriate, frequently used synonyms may be used as separate keywords.
The keywords should be typed in sentence case and in italics. Sentence case means that only the first letter of the first words and the first letter or all proper nouns are written in capital letters.
Introduction
The recommended length for an introduction is between 500-1000 words.
The introduction can be described as the "executive summary" that provides readers a glimpse of what is to come. As such, the introduction must grab the reader's attention by stimulating attention, interest, desire, and action.
In other words, the involution must effectively "sell" the study. This make the introduction difficult to write. An introduction generally consists of six elements (some may be combined):
Element 1: The writer first should state the broad theme or topic of the study
Element 2: Once the broad theme/topic has been introduced, its academic and practical
importance must be explained. In short, you should provide a convincing answer to the question: Why should anyone care about this paper?
Element 3: Summarize the available literature and cite the most important previous studies that are relevant to the current research.
Element 4: Indicate the most important gaps, inconsistencies and/or controversies in the literature that the current study will address. You also need to explain the study's main contribution in such a way that the benefits to the reader are accentuated.
Element 5: The introduction must always provide a clear indication of the following: 5.1 the core research problem/question to be addressed 5.2 the specific research objective that will guide your research 5.3 the context in which the study will be conducted, and 5.4 the units of analysis of the study
Element 6: One should provide the reader with an outline of the structure of the rest of the article. This is provided last.
Literature Review:
Synthesizing Many Sources The literature review represents the core of an article. In this section, we will discuss the purpose of a literature review, how to go about finding appropriate literature, and how this information should be managed. We will also answer four questions that first-time researchers often battle with when compiling a literature review:
1. Which aspects should I include in a literature review?
2. How should I go about synthesizing information in a literature review?
3. How should I structure a literature review?
4. What writing style should I use when compiling a literature review?
Literature Review Purpose
The purpose of a literature review is to "look again" (re + view) at what other researchers have done regarding a specific topic.
A literature review is a means to an end, namely to provide background and motivation for the objectives and hypotheses that guide your research.
A good literature review does not merely summarize relevant previous research. In the literature review, the researcher critically evaluates, re-organizes and synthesizes the work of others. In a sense, compiling a literature review is like making a smoothie:
The end product is a condensed mix that total differs in appearance from the individual ingredients used as inputs. The key to a successful literature review lies in your ability to "digest" information from different sources, critically evaluate it and present your conclusions in a concise, logical and "reader-friendly" manner.
First-time reserachers often naively believe everything they read or are scared to criticise the work of others. However, research is all about critical enquiry! It is, therefore, extremely important that you critically evaluate the material that you read. Do you agree with the arguments and conclusions of other resrachers?
If you disagree, why? Can you identify contradictory arguments or findings? How could one explain these contradictions? Do the findings of previous studies apply in all cotexts or are the findings context-specific? What are the criticisms against the conceptual models or measurement approaches discussed in the literature? Which limitations should be considered when interpreting the results of previous research?
You should carefully read the most recent available literature with a view to identify specific gaps, inconsistencies and/or other controversies that may form the basis of your own research.
Always show that you have considered an issue from a number of angles and that you are aware of the arguments for and against a specific point. Many researchers in service marketing, for example, use the SERVQUAL measurement scale without considering existing criticisms against it.
Compiling a Literature Review
A good literature review should always include a discussion of the following:
Element 1: A brief discussion of where the specific topic under consideration fits into the "bigger picture" of the overall area under investigation
Element 2: Conceptual definitions of all the key concepts/constructs included in the study.
Element 3: A focused and synthesized discussion of relevant previous research findings involving the constructs/concepts relevant to your study.
Element 4: A summary of existing approaches to the measurement of the relevant constructs. In other words, you must explain how other researchers have measured the constructs that you intend to measure.
Element 5: A literature review must provide sufficient theoretical support for the hypothesis to be tested.
One should not use the aforementioned five points as main headings in a literature review. I will look, however, for all five of these elements when evaluating the literature review section of your final article.
A literature review is NOT a chronological summary or what other people have said or found. In other words, it should not be written in the form: "Author A said this, author B said that..." The most difficult challenge in compiling a literature review is to digest to synthesize, not merely summarize, existing knowledge. Novice researcher often copy and paste information without "digesting" the information at all. This is totally unacceptable!
Your literature review should be structured using headings, sub-headings and subsubheadings. Consider the following principles when developing the headings of your literature review:
• It is best to use a "funnel approach" when structuring a literature review. Start the review by placing the specific topic being discussed into an appropriate broader context and then focus your discussion on more specific issues.
• Take time to carefully plan the headings and sub-headings that you will be using to ensure a logical flow of information. You are basically forming an outline.
• Headings should be descriptive and informative, that is, they should tell the reader exactly what is to be covered in the section to follow. Avoid headings that consist of a single word.
• Make sure that the information you place under each heading are, in fact, related to and reflected in the heading.
Discussion
The discussion section should NOT merely restate the findings reported in the results section or report additional findings that have not been discussed earlier in the article. The focus should rather be on highlighting the broader implications of the study's findings and relating these back to previous research.
Make sure that the conclusions you reach follow logical form and are substantiated by the evidence presented in your study. Different authors take different approaches when writing the discussion section. The following are key elements:
Element 1: Restate the study's main purpose
Element 2: Reaffirm the importance of the study by restating its main contribution
Element 3: Summarize the results in relation to the research objective WITHOUT introducing new material
Element 4: Relate the findings back to the literature and to results reported by other researchers
Element 5: Provide possible explanations for unexpected or non-significant findings
Element 6: Discuss the managerial implications of the study
Element 7: Highlight the main limitations of the study that could influence its validity
Element 8: Discuss insightful (i.e., non-obvious) directions or opportunities for future research on the topic
IMPORTANT: You should give careful attention to elements 3-8 as it is primarily through these elements that one demonstrates your insight into the topic being studied as well as the real value of the study that was conducted. Make sure that your discussion of elements 7 and 8 are specific, clear, and properly motivated. Use appropriate in-text references to support your arguments and recommendations.
Some Final Words An article is usually written in the form of multiple drafts that are refined after each round of writing.
• First draft: Should ideally be written quickly without worrying too much about the details of referencing and style. The idea is to get your ideas down on paper.
• Second draft: This is about structure or getting the flow right. During this stage, sections and sub-sections are moved around to ensure a logical flow of ideas. The focus is also on linking the different sections; in other words, on building bridges and providing overviews.
• Third draft: The focus here is on style or "getting it to read right." This may require intensive editing to shorten the article and improve its readability.
• Fourth and final draft: The most detailed with a focus on technical issues such as referencing, headings, the numbering of tables and figures, ensuring that all the references listed in the text are included in the reference list and vice versa and a final check on grammar and spelling. It is often helpful to ask a colleague, friend or family member who was not involved in the study to proofread the final draft before it is submitted.
Abstract
? 200-250 words
? Should be written last!
Keywords
? 6-8 key words
Introduction
? 500 - 1000 words
Literature Review
-Methodology
? 500 - 100 words
? Description of the databases searched (i.e., PubMed, EBSCOhost, etc.)
? List of key search terms used (i.e., "community health center", "health centers", "health centers and access", "health centers and quality of care", etc.)
? Explanation of the criteria of relevance (i.e., what criteria did you use to identify relevant literature on your topic?)
? Time frame specified for the search?
? Total number of citations identified (N)
? Total number of relevant citations (n)
? Total number of relevant citations used in the paper (all n? or less than n?)
Synthesis
? 2000 - 3500 words
? The most important section of the paper
? Integrated summary of research findings
? Can use appropriate subheadings to organize this section
? Try to highlight the main themes emerged rather than listing the specific findings of each study