Three pages do not ask more than $13Follow the direction The literature review is an important part of the process of conducting research. After we complete a course in research methods, we expect everyone to be able to conduct an actual research project which starts with finding a topic, conducting literature review, designing the methodology, collecting and analyzing data and discussing or interpreting the findings, and presenting the conclusion and recommendations. As you can see, the literature review is where all starts. The literature review allows you to investigate what has been already written on the subject matter; how narrow or wide the information is; what has been found; what is still yet to be done in the area? Through the literature review, you can see the gaps in the previous studies, findings or methodology, or you can see what the limitations of those previous studies are and what area need to be explored more. In scientific research or writing, the moto is not to reinvent the wheels if one can build on what has already been established. Chances are that the idea you have or think you are the only one to have, somebody else might have it long before you. Some preliminary reading and research may be useful to help you define your topic more clearly. By conducting a thorough literature review, you are able to discover what other people have done and what the most relevant or outstanding issues or theories are. You may either, criticize it, join in, improve or provide an alternative. It is, therefore, imperative that your review be thorough. You do this by investigating as many sources as possible, including journal articles, books, dissertations and theses or other reports and publications. It is always recommended that you stick with scholarly written articles (since most of them have gone through a rigorous and merciless peer review) instead of relying on popular magazines. If the available literature on the subject is huge, it may be that your topic is too broad and you need to narrow it down; and if the literature on the topic is too scanty, it may mean that your topic is too narrow, and you need to broaden it a little bit.Example: Your initial topic may be: Sex Offenders”. This topic may be too broad and even vague. Narrow it down to “juvenile sex offenders”. Even this may also be too broad although a little better than the initial topic. You can narrow it further down to “treatment of juvenile sex offenders”, or even more by limiting your topic geographically or in time such as, “treatment of juvenile sex offenders in Texas”, etc. On the other hand, if the topic appears too narrow, you can broaden it by going through the reverse steps.But like a detective, you must investigate all places where the information on the topic might be recorded. In scientific writings, we rely on what others have written or found, not on personal feelings or judgments. Your personal opinion is important and you must trust your instinct, but it cannot serve as a basis for a scientific endeavor. Like in a jury trial, you need as many witnesses as possible to make your case stronger than otherwise, here you need as many sources (authors) as possible to make a point, to support the idea or to contradict it. Two sources are better than one, and three are better than two, etc. For example, if you say: children commit most delinquent acts after school when parents are still at work (Doe, 2004), it is good but not powerful as such. But if you can show that other sources than Doe have also found the same thing, it is more powerful. For example, you will have: children commit most delinquent acts after school when parents are still at work (Doe, 2004; Brown, 2003, & King & Smith, 2002). When I read your paper, I pay attention to whether or not you use multiple sources as opposed to a single source. Arguments based on multiple sources are generally much stronger than those based on a single source, and are a clear indication that the researcher took time to thoroughly investigate the literature, therefore, they deserve higher marks.
