How to Write a Review Paper — Transcript

Full transcript

1. 0:00Are you thinking about writing a review paper but  are not sure how to go about it? Don t worry.
2. 0:07You are not alone. Few scientists receive  training in how to write a review paper.
3. 0:14Most learn by trial and error. Not surprisingly,  many struggle to complete the task.
4. 0:22Hi. I'm Karen McKee and in this video, I ll cover the  characteristics of a good review paper,
5. 0:28provide some examples of review papers, and give a few  tips on organizing and writing a review paper.
6. 0:38In general, a review paper summarizes  current knowledge about a topic
7. 0:42and organizes it in such a way as to produce new  insights and/or identify new research directions
8. 0:49in the field of study. Instead of  empirical data collected by the author,
9. 0:55information from published studies  is used to write the paper.
10. 1:02There are several types of reviews such as  narrative, integrative, or systematic.
11. 1:07The narrative or literature review  is a comprehensive survey of the
12. 1:11current knowledge on a topic and is  conveyed in a narrative format.
13. 1:17It may cover the general literature on a topic  or focus on theory, methodology, or history.
14. 1:24The integrative review type tries to develop a new  perspective on a topic by synthesizing information
15. 1:31from previous studies. It also uses a narrative  approach to develop a synthesis of published work
16. 1:38but additionally collates published  data to reveal patterns or identify
17. 1:43gaps in knowledge. A systematic literature  review identifies and assesses published data
18. 1:49to address a specific question and follows a  clear protocol for searching and selecting studies
19. 1:55to include in the review. A special type  of systematic review is the meta-analysis,
20. 2:03which uses statistical methods to  synthesize data from multiple studies.
21. 2:11Writing a review paper is not easy because it  involves a deep dive into the literature and
22. 2:17requires the ability to synthesize information  in a way that is interesting and informative.
23. 2:24Why would someone write a review paper? Writing  a review paper is a great way to gain an overview
24. 2:31of your research topic and hone your skills at  synthesizing information. Authoring a review can
25. 2:39help you become more widely known in your field.   Also, good review papers are often cited more than
26. 2:47regular research papers. Some of my most highly  cited papers are reviews, as you see here.
27. 2:54And, you don't need a lot of resources, just  access to the literature and a good topic.
28. 3:03A good review focuses on an important  or new topic in a field of study.
29. 3:09A good review has a clear central theme  and uses the literature to explore it.
30. 3:15There can be multiple sub-themes  or concepts, but you should have
31. 3:18an overarching aim for your review. A good review doesn't just list a bunch of studies;
32. 3:26it integrates various pieces of information to  detect patterns and produce new insights.
33. 3:33A good review begins with a concise overview  and then presents specific information organized
34. 3:40in a logical structure, using concepts,  processes, or questions as headings.
35. 3:48A good review should be sufficiently detailed  to support the conclusions without being too
36. 3:53long-winded. The writing in a good review should  be understandable by a wide audience, that is,
37. 4:00not just by specialists, but by those in  related scientific fields. A good review uses
38. 4:07photographs, illustrations, graphs, and diagrams  to aid the reader in understanding concepts,
39. 4:13processes, or relationships being discussed.   Now, let s look at some examples.
40. 4:21The review may synthesize information to advance  understanding of an important or new concept.
41. 4:28In this review, we examined how biological factors  may influence resilience of coastal ecosystems to
42. 4:35sea-level rise. In such a review, you summarize  what is known and explain how this advances,
43. 4:43modifies, or overturns a theory. Another approach  is to review the validity or applicability
44. 4:51of a widely held view. In this paper, we used  published data to look at the relationship between
45. 4:58tidal datums such as mean high water and the  upper growth limit of a coastal marsh grass.
46. 5:04This relationship has practical  significance because mean high water
47. 5:08or some elevation relative to it has traditionally  been used to determine state and private ownership
48. 5:15in the United States. The outcome of such  a synthesis thus provides evidence not only
49. 5:21for ecological or management considerations but  for legal matters. A review may bring together
50. 5:29different areas of research, for example different  levels of hierarchy in an ecosystem, to offer an
51. 5:35integrated view of a broader topic. For example,  in this review we described how various processes
52. 5:43at different hierarchical scales lead to the  emergent properties of mangrove forests.
53. 5:49Such a framework provides a  clear structure for a review
54. 5:53in which aspects ranging from cellular-to  landscape-level scales are explored.
55. 6:00Another example in which different areas  of research are combined in a review
56. 6:04is this paper examining controls on  early establishment of tree seedlings.
57. 6:11As you can see in the table of contents, the  review is divided into sections and subsections
58. 6:17focused on different environmental factors  such as temperature, nutrient availability,
59. 6:22and other controls on seedling survival and  growth. A review can also evaluate the
60. 6:29efficacy of a method or compare data collected  across a geographic area using a specific
61. 6:35method. In this paper, for example, we assessed  the geographic distribution of field stations
62. 6:41established to measure changes in wetland  elevation and response to sea-level rise.
63. 6:47This type of review can be quite useful to other  researchers, especially if it identifies quality
64. 6:53control issues, pinpoints gaps in the data, or  recommends a standard operating procedure.
65. 7:04Anyone can write a review paper.   If you are a newly minted Ph.D.,
66. 7:09you might write a review paper using the  literature review in your dissertation
67. 7:14as a starting point. Some young researchers  coauthor review papers with a senior scientist.
68. 7:21In this paper, I collaborated with my lab  director who suggested the topic to me.
69. 7:28Or you might join forces with researchers in a  different geographic area or discipline to write
70. 7:34a review paper. In this paper, I collaborated  with multiple scientists from different
71. 7:40institutions to review environmental drivers of  seedling dynamics in mangrove forests. My early
72. 7:47work on the topic was known to the lead author  who invited me to contribute to the review.
73. 7:53In another example, I participated in a  post-conference workshop that produced a review of
74. 7:59sediment and its role in mangrove forest response  to sea-level rise. You can do the same by
75. 8:05joining a workshop or organizing one yourself and  inviting others in your field to participate.
76. 8:14The exact structure will depend on the type of  review and your target journal s instructions.
77. 8:21But here are some broad guidelines. Identify a  topic and search the literature to see if it has
78. 8:28been reviewed before and how many studies have  been published on the topic. You don t want to
79. 8:34repeat what someone else has already reviewed.   If there are lots of papers on the topic, you may
80. 8:42need to narrow your focus to cover one aspect  that perhaps has not been previously explored
81. 8:49in depth. After settling on the topic and  scope of your review, outline the paper.
82. 8:57An outline is especially essential when you have  coauthors who will write different sections.
83. 9:03Generally, there will be an introduction followed  by several sections and ending with conclusions.
84. 9:10Some reviews such as systematic reviews will  have methods, results, and discussion sections.
85. 9:17Narrative reviews will have multiple sections,  each devoted to a subtopic being reviewed.
86. 9:23In this paper, for example, we outlined the  main environmental factors affecting the plant
87. 9:28community that was our focus and each of us wrote  one or more sections depending on our specific
88. 9:35expertise. The introductory section should  provide a good overview of the topic and put it
89. 9:42into perspective. It should be understandable  by a broad audience of non-specialists.
90. 9:48In this example, we briefly described the  ecosystem and why it is of interest.
91. 9:54We also explained our focus on early  growth stages of mangrove trees and
92. 9:58relevant environmental factors. The introduction  was followed by a section on theory in which we
93. 10:04summarized five central paradigms related to  the ecology and physiology of these plants. The
94. 10:12next seven sections each focused on an important  environmental factor affecting plant growth. Each
95. 10:19of these sections contained subsections describing  various effects of the environmental factor.
96. 10:26For example, the section on temperature had  a short paragraph explaining its overall role
97. 10:32in distribution of this forest type. It was  followed by a discussion of temperature extremes
98. 10:38in general, followed by specific examples of  studies that examined cold tolerance and heat
99. 10:43tolerance of these plants. The section concluded  with a synthesis that pointed out gaps in
100. 10:50knowledge and suggestions for future research. As  I mentioned earlier, some reviews have a specific
101. 10:56question to answer and include sections describing  the methods, results, and discussion.
102. 11:02In this paper, we had a specific question about  the elevational growth range of an intertidal
103. 11:08grass and analyzed published information on  its occurrence relative to tidal datums.
104. 11:15The methods went into detail about what studies  were included and how the data were analyzed.
105. 11:22The results and discussion described patterns  in the data and interpreted them with respect
106. 11:27to our main question. The review should end  with a well-thought-out conclusions section
107. 11:33in which new insights or areas for future  research are described. In this example,
108. 11:38we pointed out what was new in the review  and how the reviewed information would aid
109. 11:43in conservation and management of these coastal  forests. When preparing to write a review paper,
110. 11:50it s a good idea to look at several examples  of the type of review you intend to write,
111. 11:56in your field and in other fields. Well, those  are a few thoughts about writing a review paper.
112. 12:03Thanks for watching and please like my video and  subscribe if you found this information helpful.