怎样写文献综述？
文献综述都是大牛写的吗？
按投票排序
步骤： 找一篇好的综述，比如Current Opinion系列上的就都不错。找的方法是搜索关键词，限定为review。方法二是从手头的书/别人的文章reference里面找最靠谱的那篇，然后再从这篇的reference里面找，不出两三跳总可以追到一篇高手的综述的。找出你的话题相关的参考文献读。如果是Current Opinion系列，作者加点推荐的那些最好看看。当你觉得你了解了整个问题的前因后果发展过程时，整理出你的综述大纲。在大纲上补充具体事例，哪个例子没有相关参考文献就去查出来加上。Tips： 看英文文献。看高水平的英文文献。筛选很容易，让搜索引擎(scopus之类)给你按照引用次数排个序。或者限定某一级别的杂志。不要抓来一篇综述翻译，而要用自己的语言总结发展过程。举例时不要引综述，而要引发表这个工作的第一篇文章。万不得已才引综述。举例子空口无凭，一定要引用。以上适用于学术类综述。虽然我猜你大约只是需要写个课程论文，但是我强烈建议以学术的态度来对待。
请参考《怎样做文献综述——六步走向成功》外文书名: The Literature Review: Six Steps to SuccessGoogle Books也有两个作者分别是：Lawrence (Larry) A. (Anthony) MachiBrenda T. (Tyler) McEvoy丛书名: 社会科学研究指导丛书上海世纪出版股份有限公司·上海教育出版社·第1版 (日)文献综述是研究的基础性工作，也是论文写作的核心环节。文献综述的质量，直接决定研究能否顺利完成，以及论文质量之高低。因此，做文献综述是一项重要的学术训练。但是，怎样做文献综述，这于硕、博研究生和许多研究者而言，常常是一团迷雾。许多人只能通过不断试误的方法去掌握做文献综述的诀窍。本书将文献综述的过程分解为六个操作性步骤，为广大读者提供了一套行之有效的操作方法和建议，深受国外研究生喜爱。本书浅显易懂、结构清晰、操作性强，是研究入门者和硕、博研究生案头必备的研究工具书。=============================================================目录 前言文献综述的过程——入门指南文献综述的目的文献综述的定义文献综述的过程第一步：选择主题第二步：文献搜索第三步：展开论证第四步：文献研究第五步：文献批评第六步：综述撰写质疑：必要的前提在开始写作之前认真积累和准备 第一章 选择主题——从日常兴趣到研究课题第一阶段：选择研究兴趣练习研究者的偏见第二阶段：从日常生活兴趣中选择研究兴趣研究兴趣的具体化研究兴趣的聚焦选择角度反思：选择研究兴趣的关键第三阶段：根据研究兴趣确定研究课题第四阶段：访问图书馆第二章 文献搜索——搜索任务和方式第一阶段：发现需要审阅的文献第二阶段：进行文献查询第三阶段：浏览文献第四阶段：使用网络第五阶段：资料管理书目存档浏览第六阶段：快速阅读文献第七阶段：将资料化为图表核心观点图作者图谱第八阶段：精炼主题第九阶段：主题扩展第三章 展开论证——为文献综述建立论证方案第一阶段：为文献综述建立论证方案第二阶段：论证第三阶段：评价论证的基本要素第四阶段：形成论断论断证据推理第五阶段：复杂论点的论证第四章 文献研究——进行发现式论证第一阶段：集中收集到的资料集中资料记录资料第二阶段：综合信息综合信息和建立证据推理形式整合信息，建立论断第三阶段：分析资料类型复杂推理对比推理进行发现式论证：示例发现式论证制图论证分析第五章 文献批评——对研究进行阐释第一阶段：隐含推理第二阶段：二度论证第三阶段：论证模式第四阶段：推理保障第五阶段；谬误论证第六阶段：方案即一切第六章 综述撰写——撰写、审核、修改写作过程：概述第一阶段：通过写作增进自身理解尝试性写作大纲最初的初稿审核初稿修改初稿第二阶段：通过写作促进他人理解分析评价外部评审第二稿和第三稿终稿写作格式手册==========================================Write a Literature Review 1. IntroductionNot to be confused with a book review, a literature review surveys scholarly articles, books and other sources (e.g. dissertations, conference proceedings) relevant to a particular issue, area of research, or theory, providing a description, summary, and critical evaluation of each work. The purpose is to offer an overview of significant literature published on a topic.2. ComponentsSimilar to primary research, development of the literature review requires four stages:Problem formulation—which topic or field is being examined and what are its component issues?Literature search—finding materials relevant to the subject being exploredData evaluation—determining which literature makes a significant contribution to the understanding of the topicAnalysis and interpretation—discussing the findings and conclusions of pertinent literatureLiterature reviews should comprise the following elements:An overview of the subject, issue or theory under consideration, along with the objectives of the literature reviewDivision of works under review into categories (e.g. those in support of a particular position, those against, and those offering alternative theses entirely)Explanation of how each work is similar to and how it varies from the othersConclusions as to which pieces are best considered in their argument, are most convincing of their opinions, and make the greatest contribution to the understanding and development of their area of researchIn assessing each piece, consideration should be given to:Provenance—What are the author's credentials? Are the author's arguments supported by evidence (e.g. primary historical material, case studies, narratives, statistics, recent scientific findings)?Objectivity—Is the author's perspective even-handed or prejudicial? Is contrary data considered or is certain pertinent information ignored to prove the author's point?Persuasiveness—Which of the author's theses are most/least convincing?Value—Are the author's arguments and conclusions convincing? Does the work ultimately contribute in any significant way to an understanding of the subject?3. Definition and Use/PurposeA literature review may constitute an essential chapter of a thesis or dissertation, or may be a self-contained review of writings on a subject. In either case, its purpose is to:Place each work in the context of its contribution to the understanding of the subject under reviewDescribe the relationship of each work to the others under considerationIdentify new ways to interpret, and shed light on any gaps in, previous researchResolve conflicts amongst seemingly contradictory previous studiesIdentify areas of prior scholarship to prevent duplication of effortPoint the way forward for further researchPlace one's original work (in the case of theses or dissertations) in the context of existing literatureThe literature review itself, however, does not present new primary scholarship.An annotated example of a literature review may be found at:Find a published, peer-reviewed literature review by searching the JSTOR database for the following:Allen, R.C. (1996). Socioeconomic Conditions and Property Crime: A Comprehensive Review and Test of the Professional Literature.The American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 55, 293.Further information on the literature review may be found in:Cooper, H. (2010). Research Synthesis and Meta-Analysis: A Step-By-Step Approach.Los Angeles: Sage.(call number McHenry Stacks H62 C5859)Machi, L.A. (2009). The Literature Review: Six Steps to Success.Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin Press.(call number McHenry Stacks LB)Deakin University. (2009). The Literature Review.Geelong, Victoria, Australia: Author.Retrieved 4th September 2009 from the World Wide Web:The University of Wisconsin-Madison Writing Center. (2009). Writer's Handbook: Common Writing Assignments: Review of Literature.Madison, Wisconsin: Author.Retrieved 4th September 2009 from the World Wide Web:
从工科研究生角度回答。1、写文献综述需要建立在大量文献阅读的基础上。先简单说一下如何独立自主地建立起自己的文献资料库。（因为有的导师会给出指导）
1.1、从自然科学的研究方面来讲，主要阅读的文献应该是英文文献。这是国内长期学术氛围所导致的，大家有好的结果，都会去写英文文献。
1.2、web of knowledge是良好的搜索来源。根据所要研究的方向，输入关键词进行检索，寻找其中发表在权威杂志上的文献来阅读。
1.3、在阅读一篇英文文献的过程中，要注意introduction中的部分，其中作者会提到很多前人的工作，再去查找这其中的文献。从而大致的概念就是，以一篇文献为基础，展开到更多的文献。
1.4、当你发现阅读到的一些文献有交集时，就可以进行一些概括。为什么会有交集？是不是谈到了一些共同的问题？或者采用了一些共同的方法？或是这篇文献是这个领域的基础？2、在阅读完大量文献的基础上，对所研究领域有了较为概括性的看法后，可以开始思考文献综述。
2.1、文献综述也是需要点子的，不是简单的概括。例如，针对某一个研究方法的综述，某一个方面历史发展过来的综述等等。
2.2、对于参考文献作者的研究也十分重要。追溯作者的课题组，以及课题组的历史，可以发现很多研究小组在某种程度上都有联系，这是很好的着力点。研究者总会从其他研究者那里得到灵感，或者对其他研究者进行发展或反驳。针对这些关系也是很好的综述展开的来源。
本科毕业设计（论文）文献综述的规范为了促使学生熟悉更多的专业文献资料，进一步强化学生搜集文献资料的能力，提高对文献资料的归纳、分析、综合运用能力及独立开展科研活动的能力。根据学校教务处的要求，特给出下列毕业设计（论文）中文献综述的写作要求，供老师和学生参考。一、文献综述的概念文献综述是针对某一研究领域或专题搜集大量文献资料的基础上，就国内外在该领域或专题的主要研究成果、最新进展、研究动态、前沿问题等进行综合分析而写成的，能比较全面地反映相关领域或专题历史背景、前人工作、争论焦点、研究现状和发展前景等内容的综述性文章，是高度浓缩的文献产品。“综”是要求对文献资料进行综合分析、归纳整理，使材料更精练明确、更有逻辑层次；“述”就是要求对综合整理后的文献进行比较专门的、全面的、深入的、系统的评述。二、撰写文献综述的基本要求文献综述主要用以介绍与毕业设计主题密切相关的详细资料、动态、进展、展望以及对以上方面的评述。除综述题目外，其内容一般包含前言、主题、总结、参考文献四个部分，撰写文献综述时可按这四部分拟写提纲，再根据提纲进行撰写工作。前言部分，主要说明写作的目的，介绍有关的概念、定义以及综述的范围，扼要说明有关主题的现状或争论焦点，使读者对全文要叙述的问题有一个初步的轮廓。主题部分，是综述的主体，其写法多样，没有固定的格式。可按年代顺序综述，也可按不同的问题进行综述，还可按不同的观点进行比较综述，不管用那一种格式综述，都要将所搜集到的文献资料进行归纳、整理和分析比较，阐明有关主题的历史背景、现状、发展方向以及对这些问题的评述。主题部分应特别注意代表性强、具有科学性和创造性文献的引用和评述。总结部分，将全文主题进行扼要总结，提出自己的见解并对进一步的发展方向做出预测。参考文献，它不仅表示对被引用文献作者的尊重及引用文献的依据，而且也为评审者审查提供查找线索。参考文献的编排应条目清楚，查找方便，内容准确无误。参考文献的书写格式与毕业设计（论文）相同。三、撰写文献综述的基本注意事项1．在文献综述时，应系统地查阅与自己的毕业设计选题直接相关的国内外文献。搜集文献应尽量全，尽量选自学术期刊或学术会议。掌握全面、大量的文献资料是写好综述的前提。2．文献综述的题目不宜过大、范围不宜过宽。3．在引用文献时，应注意选用代表性、可靠性和科学性较好的文献。4．在文献综述中，应说明毕业设计选题方向的发展历史、他人的主要研究成果、存在的问题及发展趋势等。文献综述在逻辑上要合理，即做到由远而近先引用关系较远的文献，最后才是关联最密切的文献。要围绕主题对文献的各种观点作比较分析，不要教科书式地将有关的理论和学派观点简要地汇总陈述一遍。评述(特别是批评前人不足时)要引用原作者的原文，防止对原作者论点的误解。5．文献综述要条理清晰，文字通顺简练。采用的文献中的观点和内容应注明来源，模型、图表、数据应注明出处。6．文献综述中要有自己的观点和见解。鼓励学生多发现问题、多提出问题，并指出分析、解决问题的可能途径。7．毕业设计（论文）的文献综述主要是为自己进行毕业设计（论文）提供文献方面的帮助和指导，所以，只要把自己所作题目的相关文献找准、找全，然后对这些文献中的观点、方法、原理、材料等进行归纳和总结，形成文字就可以了。总之，一篇好的文献综述，应有较完整的文献资料，有评论分析，并能准确地反映主题内容。8．文献综述的总字数要求不少于3000字，应重点提出主体部分。9．合理选择字体和行间距，力求整体布局合理、美观。附件：毕业设计（论文）文献综述格式模板一、前言（前言部分，主要是说明写作的目的，介绍有关的概念及定义以及综述的范围，扼要说明有关主题的现状或争论焦点，使读者对全文要叙述的问题有一个初步的轮廓。前言部分要写清：(1)首先要说明写作的目的。(2)有关概念的定义。(3)规定综述的范围、包括：“专题涉及的学科范围”，综述范围切忌过宽、过杂，“时间范围”，必须声明引用文献起止的年份。(4)扼要说明有关问题的现况或争论焦点，引出所写综述的核心主题，这是广大读者最关心而又感兴趣的，也是写作综述的主线。）二﹑主体部分（主题部分，是综述的主体，其写法多样，没有固定的格式。可按年代顺序综述，也可按不同的问题进行综述，还可按不同的观点进行比较综述，不管用那一种格式综述，都要将所搜集到的文献资料归纳、整理及分析比较，阐明有关主题的历史背景、现状和发展方向，以及对这些问题的评述，主题部分应特别注意代表性强、具有科学性和创造性的文献引用和评述。）三、总结（总结部分，与研究性论文的小结有些类似，将全文主题进行扼要总结，对所综述的主题有研究的作者，最好能提出自己的见解。）四、参考文献（参考文献虽然放在文末，但却是文献综述的重要组成部分。因为它不仅表示对被引用文献作者的尊重及引用文献的依据，而且为读者深入探讨有关问题提供了文献查找线索。因此，应认真对待。参考文献的编排应条目清楚，查找方便，内容准确无误。）
文献综述三步走：1. 总结研究领域的现状，除了介绍现有的研究，还要进行一定的概括总结；2. 提出research gap3. 解释为什么这些gap是有研究价值的。
文献综述怎么写？教你搞定论文计划书中的理论架构 国家社科期刊数据库我们在写论文之前，甚至在写研究计划之前，一般都会遇到一个板块：文献综述，很多学生不知道这一部分到底是干什么的，也不知道怎么写。其实文献综述是论文计划书中很重要的部分，需要我们完成一个清楚的理论架构。那么什么是理论架构？该如何建立？在这里为您解答。何谓理论架构理论架构一般置于论文的前半部，用来阐述研究的进行以及问题探讨的基本原理或理由，可被视为一种概念模型。作为文章的骨架，理论架构能够引导您将要进行的研究。作为文章的背景，理论架构能撑起您的研究，同时向读者解释您研究某此议题的原因，理论架构应包含您希望测量的变项以及您欲了解的变项关系。基本上，在此节中，您应该要建立一套「理论」并加以阐述、论证。理论架构是您对某个理论的呈现，而您将以此来解释某个特殊现象。换言之，理论架构并非作者自行猜测而得的。「并非自行猜测而得的」是什么意思理论架构是「作者透过文献回顾，对于要探讨的问题所发展出来的理论」。当然，所回顾的文献应该包含您想要讨论的变项。此外，理论架构能够说明您对于研究发现的探讨与诠释。因此，当中应包含充足的证据来支撑您的研究。并且，理论架构的组织及呈现能够帮助读者了解、评价您的研究观点。撰写理论架构的目的是要证明您所提出的，变项之间的关系并非出自个人直觉或揣测，而是建立在前人的研究结果上。为何理论架构如此重要理论架构的建立能够帮助您厘清，并清楚定义此研究中所隐含的理论。它帮助您思考其他可能的架构，以减少偏误，使您的研究诠释不致偏颇。在发展理论架构时，也必须考虑其他可能挑战您观点的理论，以及您研究理论的限制。而这时，您也可能会发现其他更适合您研究问题的理论架构。理论架构说明您如何概念化研究问题的本质、基础，以及您将选择何种分析方式来探讨此问题，也说明了您对手边资料的理解与认知，以及您是如何诠释这些资料。另外，您对理论架构的解释能够帮助读者理解您的研究观点和脉络。我该如何发展理论架构理论架构是发展自研究题目的知识回顾（文献回顾），同时连结到研究题目的文献回顾，而此知识便是您在一开始时所衍生出的研究问题。在回顾文献时，您会发现到某些现象的解释并不完整。理论架构使您能按照文献探讨所得结果来呈现研究问题。您可于文献回顾的脉络中描述所欲研究的变项，使读者了解变项之间的理论关系。您可以从描述变项开始，介绍目前对于该变项以及变项之间关系的现有知识，进而点出可以进一步解释的部分。接着，您会探讨其他研究者对于这些变项关系的理论，并且找出一个（或将数个理论合并）能解释您主要研究问题的理论。基本上，您的目标是要告诉读者为何您认为这些变项是有关联的，因此，将支持您想法的前人研究及理论放入文章中能够帮助捍卫您的想法和理由。进而将理论应用在研究问题上，并对于可能的变项关系提出假设或预测。同时，您也须告诉读者您期望在研究中得到什么。理论架构与量化研究的设计有何关系理论架构与量化研究的设计是有关连的。研究设计的选择是基于该篇研究的目标以及完整的文献回顾。量化研究采用演绎推理，亦即先发展理论架构以确立整篇研究的结构，同时也能够引导研究的进行。理论架构通常会出现在量化研究的前面章节，以建立整篇研究的基础。理论架构也能引导您选择所需的研究方法，而所选择的研究方法必须要能够让所得出的结论与理论相符。说得更简单点，我们可以将理论架构简化为两个要素：（1）研究问题（2）研究此问题的理由。看似复杂难懂的理论架构其实便是由这两项要素组成，一旦列出这两项因素，便能建构出理论架构的基础。参考资料：1. Breakwell, G., Hammon, S., Fife-Schaw, C., & Smith, J.A. (Eds.). (2007). Research methods in psychology (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage Publications.2. Creswell, J. W. (2005). Educational research: Planning,conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (2nd ed.).Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.3. Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative,quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SagePublications.4. Leedy, P. D., & Ormrod, J. E. (2005). Practicalresearch: Planning and design (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: MerrillPrentice Hall.5. Pedhauzer, E. J., & Schmelkin, L. P. (1991).Measurement, design and analysis: An integrated approach. Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
啊哈，这个问题没有那么复杂，好的文献综述其实就是相关领域的一个学术发展小史，文献搜集全面，写得有条理是基本要求，要想出彩，需要对文献总体非常熟悉，找其中最关键的作为主要论述对象，同时不能简单罗列材料，要分析每个论述对象有什么优势和劣势，这样就会自然而然地导向你自己要写的题目，这也是文献综述的目的所在。
非常感谢大家的回答。俺找到了这篇，觉得非常有用，贴上来分享：What is a literature review?A literature review is not an annotated bibliography in which you summarize briefly each article that you have reviewed. While a summary of the what you have read is contained within the literature review, it goes well beyond merely summarizing professional literature. It focuses on a specific topic of interest to you and includes a critical analysis of the relationship among different works, and relating this research to your work. It may be written as a stand-alone paper or to provide a theoretical framework and rationale for a research study (such as a thesis or dissertation).Step-by-step guideThese guidelines are adapted primarily from Galvan (2006). Galvan outlines a very clear, step-by-step approach that is very useful to use as you write your review. I have integrated some other tips within this guide, particularly in suggesting different technology tools that you might want to consider in helping you organize your review. In the sections from Step 6-9 what I have included is the outline of those steps exactly as described by Galvan. I also provide links at the end of this guide to resources that you should use in order to search the literature and as you write your review.In addition to using the step-by-step guide that I have provided below, I also recommend that you (a) locate examples of literature reviews in your field of study and skim over these to get a feel for what a literature review is and how these are written (I have also provided links to a couple of examples at the end of these guidelines (b) read over other guides to writing literature reviews so that you see different perspectives and approaches: Some examples are:1 Review of Literature: University of Wisconsin - Madison The Writing Center.2 How to ..Write a Literature Review: University of California, Santa Cruz University Library).3 Information Fluency - Literature Review: Washington & Lee University4 How to Do A Literature Review? North Carolina A&T State University F.D. Bluford Library.5 Writing up research: using the literature. Language Center, Asian Institute of Technology (Thailand).6 Selected Links to Resources on Writing a Literature ReviewStep 1: Review APA guidelinesRead through the links provided below on APA guidelines so that you become familiar with the common core elements of how to write in APA style: in particular, pay attention to general document guidelines (e.g. font, margins, spacing), title page, abstract, body, text citations, quotations.Step 2: Decide on a topicIt will help you considerably if your topic for your literature review is the one on which you intend to do your final M.Ed. project, or is in some way related to the topic of your final project. However, you may pick any scholarly topic. Step 3: Identify the literature that you will review:7 Familiarize yourself with online databases (see UMD library resource links below for help with this), identifying relevant databases in your field of study.8 Using relevant databases, search for literature sources using Google Scholar and also searching using Furl (search all sources, including the Furl accounts of other Furl members). Some tips for identifying suitable literature and narrowing your search :8 Start with a general descriptor from the database thesaurus or one that you know is already a well defined descriptor based on past work that you have done in this field. You will need to experiment with different searches, such as limiting your search to descriptors that appear only in the document titles, or in both the document title and in the abstract.8 Redefine your topic if needed: as you search you will quickly find out if the topic that you are reviewing is too broad. Try to narrow it to a specific area of interest within the broad area that you have chosen (remember: this is merely an introductory literature review for Educ 7001). It is a good idea, as part of your literature search, to look for existing literature reviews that have already been written on this topic.8 As part of your search, be sure to identify landmark or classic studies and theorists as these provide you with a framework/context for your study.9 Import your references into your RefWorks account (see: Refworks Import Directions for guide on how to do this from different databases). You can also enter references manually into RefWorks if you need to. Step 4: Analyze the literatureOnce you have identified and located the articles for your review, you need to analyze them and organize them before you begin writing:10 Overview the articles: Skim the articles to get an idea of the general purpose and content of the article (focus your reading here on the abstract, introduction and first few paragraphs, the conclusion of each article. Tip: as you skim the articles, you may want to record the notes that you take on each directly into RefWorks in the box for User 1. You can take notes onto note cards or into a word processing document instead or as well as using RefWorks, but having your notes in RefWorks makes it easy to organize your notes later.11 Group the articles into categories (e.g. into topics and subtopics and chronologically within each subtopic). Once again, it's useful to enter this information into your RefWorks record. You can record the topics in the same box as before (User 1) or use User 2 box for the topic(s) under which you have chosen to place this article.12 Take notes:12 Decide on the format in which you will take notes as you read the articles (as mentioned above, you can do this in RefWorks. You can also do this using a Word Processor, or a concept mapping program like Inspiration (free 30 trial download), a data base program (e.g. Access or File Maker Pro), in an Excel spreadsheet, or the "old-fashioned" way of using note cards. Be consistent in how you record notes.12 Define key terms: look for differences in the way keys terms are defined (note these differences).12 Note key statistics that you may want to use in the introduction to your review.12 Select useful quotes that you may want to include in your review. Important: If you copy the exact words from an article, be sure to cite the page number as you will need this should you decide to use the quote when you write your review (as direct quotes must always be accompanied by page references). To ensure that you have quoted accurately (and to save time in note taking), if you are accessing the article in a format that allows this, you can copy and paste using your computer "edit --& copy --& paste" functions. Note: although you may collect a large number of quotes during the note taking phase of your review, when you write the review, use quotes very sparingly. The rule I follow is to quote only when when some key meaning would be lost in translation if I were to paraphrase the original author's words, or if using the original words adds special emphasis to a point that I am making.12 Note emphases, strengths & weaknesses: Since different research studies focus on different aspects of the issue being studied, each article that you read will have different emphases, strengths. and weaknesses. Your role as a reviewer is to evaluate what you read, so that your review is not a mere description of different articles, but rather a critical analysis that makes sense of the collection of articles that you are reviewing. Critique the research methodologies used in the studies, and distinguish between assertions (the author's opinion) and actual research findings (derived from empirical evidence).12 Identify major trends or patterns: As you read a range of articles on your topic, you should make note of trends and patterns over time as reported in the literature. This step requires you to synthesize and make sense of what you read, since these patterns and trends may not be spelled out in the literature, but rather become apparent to you as you review the big picture that has emerged over time. Your analysis can make generalizations across a majority of studies, but should also note inconsistencies across studies and over time.12 Identify gaps in the literature, and reflect on why these might exist (based on the understandings that you have gained by reading literature in this field of study). These gaps will be important for you to address as you plan and write your review.12 Identify relationships among studies: note relationships among studies, such as which studies were landmark ones that led to subsequent studies in the same area. You may also note that studies fall into different categories (categories that you see emerging or ones that are already discussed in the literature). When you write your review, you should address these relationships and different categories and discuss relevant studies using this as a framework.12 Keep your review focused on your topic: make sure that the articles you find are relevant and directly related to your topic. As you take notes, record which specific aspects of the article you are reading are relevant to your topic (as you read you will come up with key descriptors that you can record in your notes that will help you organize your findings when you come to write up your review). If you are using an electronic form of note taking, you might note these descriptors in a separate field (e.g. in RefWorks, put these under User 2 or User 3; in Excel have a separate column if you use Inspiration, you might attach a separate note for key descriptors.12 Evaluate your references for currency and coverage: Although you can always find more articles on your topic, you have to decide at what point you are finished with collecting new resources so that you can focus on writing up your findings. However, before you begin writing, you must evaluate your reference list to ensure that it is up to date and has reported the most current work. Typically a review will cover the last five years, but should also refer to any landmark studies prior to this time if they have significance in shaping the direction of the field. If you include studies prior to the past five years that are not landmark studies, you should defend why you have chosen these rather than more current ones.Step 5: Summarize the literature in table or concept map formatGalvan (2006) recommends building tables as a key way to help you overview, organize, and summarize your findings, and suggests that including one or more of the tables that you create may be helpful in your literature review. If you do include tables as part of your review each must be accompanied by an analysis that summarizes, interprets and synthesizes the literature that you have charted in the table. You can plan your table or do the entire summary chart of your literature using a concept map (such as using Inspiration)12 You can create the table using the table feature within Microsoft Word, or can create it initially in Excel and then copy and paste/import the the Excel sheet into Word once you have completed the table in Excel. The advantage of using Excel is that it enables you to sort your findings according to a variety of factors (e.g. sort by date, sort by methodology and then date)12 Examples of tables that may be relevant to your review:12 Definitions of key terms and concepts.12 Research methods12 Summary of research resultsStep 6: Synthesize the literature prior to writing your reviewUsing the notes that you have taken and summary tables, develop an outline of your final review. The following are the key steps as outlined by Galvan ()13 Consider your purpose and voice before beginning to write. In the case of this Educ 7001 introductory literature review, your initial purpose is to provide an overview of the topic that is of interest to you, demonstrating your understanding of key works and concepts within your chosen area of focus. You are also developing skills in reviewing and writing, to provide a foundation on which you will build in subsequent courses within your M.Ed. and ultimately in your final project. In your final project your literature review should demonstrate your command of your field of study and/or establishing context for a study that you have done.14 Consider how you reassemble your notes: plan how you will organize your findings into a unique analysis of the picture that you have captured in your notes. Important: A literature review is not series of annotations (like an annotated bibliography). Galvan (2006:72) captures the difference between an annotated bibliography and a literature review very well: "...in essence, like describing trees when you really should be describing a forest. In the case of a literature review, you are really creating a new forest, which you will build by using the trees you found in the literature you read."15 Create a topic outline that traces your argument: first explain to the reader your line or argument (or thesis); then your narrative that follows should explain and justify your line of argument. You may find the program Inspiration useful in mapping out your argument (and once you have created this in a concept map form, Inspiration enables you to convert this to a text outline merely by clicking on the "outline" button). This can then be exported into a Microsoft Word document.16 Reorganize your notes according to the path of your argument17 Within each topic heading, note differences among studies.18 Within each topic heading, look for obvious gaps or areas needing more research.19 Plan to describe relevant theories.20 Plan to discuss how individual studies relate to and advance theory21 Plan to summarize periodically and, again near the end of the review22 Plan to present conclusions and implications23 Plan to suggest specific directions for future research near the end of the review24 Flesh out your outline with details from your analysisStep 7: Writing the review (Galvan, )25 Identify the broad problem area, but avoid global statements26 Early in the review, indicate why the topic being reviewed is important27 Distinguish between research finding and other sources of information28 Indicate why certain studies are important29 If you are commenting on the timeliness of a topic, be specific in describing the time frame30 If citing a classic or landmark study, identify it as such31 If a landmark study was replicated, mention that and indicate the results of the replication32 Discuss other literature reviews on your topic33 Refer the reader to other reviews on issues that you will not be discussing in details34 Justify comments such as, "no studies were found."35 Avoid long lists of nonspecific references36 If the results of previous studies are inconsistent or widely varying, cite them separately37 Cite all relevant references in the review section of thesis, dissertation, or journal articleStep 8: Developing a coherent essay (Galvan, )38 If your review is long, provide an overview near the beginning of the review39 Near the beginning of a review, state explicitly what will and will not be covered40 Specify your point of view early in the review: this serves as the thesis statement of the review.41 Aim for a clear and cohesive essay that integrates the key details of the literature and communicates your point of view (a literature is not a series of annotated articles).42 Use subheadings, especially in long reviews43 Use transitions to help trace your argument44 If your topic teaches across disciplines, consider reviewing studies from each discipline separately45 Write a conclusion for the end of the review: Provide closure so that the path of the argument ends with a conclusion of some kind. How you end the review, however, will depend on your reason for writing it. If the review was written to stand alone, as is the case of a term paper or a review article for publication, the conclusion needs to make clear how the material in the body of the review has supported the assertion or proposition presented in the introduction. On the other hand, a review in a thesis, dissertation, or journal article presenting original research usually leads to the research questions that will be addressed.46 Check the flow of your argument for coherence.
谢邀。杂志发表的文献综述不一定都是大牛写的，但是大牛很常收到杂志的文献综述约稿。这种约稿要么大牛自己写，要么就让自己的研究生写。另外，研究生科研其实也离不开文献综述。写了的文献综述要么供毕业论文背景介绍用，要么写得不错，顺道发表出来。具体怎么写文献综述，我应该不能回答得比上面其他人更好了。不过与上面的回答不同，我接触了很多系统综述（Systematic literature review），或许从系统综述的角度来看文献综述可以提供一个比较有意思的视角。上面的回答提到了，文献综述需要检索并阅读大量文献，最好挑权威杂志的文献引用，以期了解整个问题的具体内容前因后果发展过程等等。但是，看多少篇文献才为多？多权威的杂志才权威？不权威杂志发表的文章就没有看的价值吗？没有把所有相关的文献都看了，难道不会担心遗漏吗? 不过，有时检索出来的是几千篇文献，难道担心遗漏就要把全部相关文献都看了吗？没错，就算检索出几万篇文献，都要全都看了。系统综述就是尽可能地获取现有的所有相关的文献进行评价的综述。只有把所有可能相关的文献都看了，我才能有信心告诉别人，这就是综合现有证据的最佳结果。其次，系统综述要求作者对要纳入的文章有明确的目标。前面提到“就算检索出几万篇文献，都是要全都看了”，不是在开玩笑。之前导师做的一个课题就是筛出来几万篇文献，然后分了几组每组几千篇文献筛来看。尽管不是每篇都下载全文来看（先看标题摘要筛选文献，筛出的文献再下载全文看是否符合要求），但是几千篇文献进行筛选的工作量也还是很大的。如果对于纳入的文章没有明确的目标，那么除了筛文献会筛死你以外，你对文献的处理也会很头疼。普通综述常要回答某个名词或者操作的定义。系统综述完全可以不用检索很多文章就能回答。我们可以合理的认为指南对于名词或者操作的定义是最为准确的，所以我们可以把将要纳入的文献限定在指南。此时，我们只需要筛选少量的文献，就可以得到最终拿来进行综述的所有文章。另外，系统综述要求透明的可重复的方法学。系统综述中必须让读者知道，文献的检索方法，纳入排除标准，文献评价的方式，文献数据处理的方法等等。通过透明可重复的方法学，所有人做出的综述结果都是一样的。这样就可以避免，某人引用几篇文章写了篇综述，另一个人引用另几篇文章又写了篇综述。两者得出的结果一样，那么就浪费了资源；两者得出的结果不一样，那又得第三方印证，更浪费资源。仔细一想，其实系统综述就是普通综述的强化版：将检索强化至全面，把目标强化至明确，把综述方法强化至透明。与其花功夫在思考文献是否检索足够，还不如花多些功夫将文献全部看完；与其花精力在盲目翻阅文献，还不如花多些精力想想目标文献是什么；与其什么都不说希望别人不知道自己写得low，还不如坦白自己的处理方法让别人说去以后好好写。系统地进行综述成本很高，但都是值得的。那，难道每个问题每个定义都需要系统地检索文献进行回答吗? 可以这么做，不一定要这么做。不知道这么说是否合适，我觉得所有问题都能用系统综述的方法回答。前阵子在专栏里介绍了下。他们产出的所有报告，包括药物或非药物的系统评价Meta分析，卫生技术评估以及相应的方法学支撑，甚至是提供给公众的医疗信息，都是使用了系统综述的方法。以前临床指南都是厚厚的一堆定义，操作方法等，现在临床指南逐渐转型为产出推荐意见的循证指南（如JNC-8）。其中，每条推荐意见的背后都是系统综述。但是，我们都要面临精力与效果的取舍。每个问题都系统地检索文献回答太消耗资源了。美国高血压指南（JNC-8）最后也只产生了不超过十个推荐意见（忘了具体数字了）。所以，重要的问题尽量全面的有目标的有方法学地进行综述评价，其他的不要在意那些细节吧。
1.明确你想讨论的问题2.看看别人说了啥3.说说你的看法4.要注意有理有据哦
文献综述是一种书面论证，它建立在前人研究的基础上。研究者从前人的研究中寻找到可信的证据，建立自己的论据，从而将一个论题推向前进。综述的意义就是在于参考广泛的材料然后发现现有研究中的问题。然后提出自己要研究的问题。针对这个问题进行分析和解决。（发现问题——提出问题——分析问题——解决问题）吸收——思考——沉淀——反馈第一步：选择主题一个好的研究课题通常是从对现实问题的兴趣中产生的，确定研究课题可以为第二部指出方向。第二步：文献搜索文献搜索决定文献综述将包含的信息。文献搜索的任务是选择信息，找出能支持论题的最有利的资料证据。第三步：展开论证要成功的论证主题，需要建立和呈现论证方案。论证方案要对论断进行逻辑安排，对相关资料加以组织，使之成为论证主体。论证主体则要对关于研究课题的现有知识进行解释。第四步：文献研究文献研究对检索到的资料进行集中、综合和分析，从而建立探究式论证。第五步：文献批评文献批评是对研究课题现有知识的理解，分析先前的知识是如何回答研究问题的。第六步：综述撰写通过构思、塑造、修改，文献综述成为一份可以准确传递研究内容，让目标读者明白研究问题的书面资料。写之前，在不超过5页纸的前提回答如下问题：1.我的主题是什么2.对于主题，我知道什么？3.围绕这一主题的背景是什么？4.为什么这一主题是重要的？5.我的核心论点或主旨是什么？6.我怎样证明它？7.我得出的结论是什么？哪些理由能够支持这一结论？8.我的研究对这一领域有何意义？完成文章后，问自己：1.我是否精确界定了研究课题及其核心概念？2.该课题是否清晰而简练？3.我是否描述了使该课题得以产生的普遍议题或关注点？4.我是否阐明了我的研究路径是属于哪个学术领域？我所用的语言是不是该领域所认可的语言？5.该主题是否阐明了我最初的兴趣？它是怎么反映我的研究兴趣的？6.我所用的论据是否能够体现我的研究在这一领域中是重要的？7.对于有关这一主题的已有知识，我是否做出了确凿合理的发现式论证？8.支持式论证是如何处理这一问题的？9.基于我的论点，这些结论是否解决了我的最初兴趣所引出的疑问？10.我的结论与我的论证是否形成一个统一的方案、一个令人信服的整体？
关于学术整理，
首先是学术整理的目的。
学术整理的目的是梳理整个学术界关于你所研究课题或对象的已经取得的研究成果。找出之前研究活动的重点、特点，其目的是为了自己的将要进行的研究活动找到准确的切入点。 其次是学术整理的过程和方法。
学术整理的第一步是学术搜索，即将与你所研究课题或对象相关的学术成果进行搜索、积累。一般来说这些成果按照形式可以分为论文类、著作类。按照时间可分成古代研究成果（以清末为断限）；近现代研究成果；建国以来的研究成果。按照与所研究对象的相关程度可分为完全一致、重点相似和一般相关三种。第二步是在搜索和分类的基础上，大量阅读文献。这里需要注意的是阅读方式，按照与所研究对象的相关程度，完全一致类的要逐字逐句的阅读，注意作者的写作背景、写作动机、论证过程、最后结论，特别是作业引用的文献资料的出处和版本。重点相关类的要注意阅读文章的摘要，了解其主要观点、立场和最后结论，也要注意作者所选用的文献资料出处和版本。一般相关的文章，就不用认真阅读了，只要了解其大意和结论就好。需要指出的是，阅读文献是学术回顾的最重要步骤，这里不仅仅要总结出前人的研究重点、研究特点和研究结论，还要注意前人研究的文献资料（其一，这些资料他们用得，你也可以用得，积累文献可以拓展文章引用资料的详实程度，这是历史学论文的重要步骤，常说的一句话叫“孤证不立”，我们在行文中要避免孤证；其二，当你看到了前人所用文献范围后，你也可以自己去拓展本课题的文献范围，寻找更多的文献去说明问题，文献范围的拓展也可以当作学位论文的创新点之一，当然了，相同文献的不同版本是不算的。）阅读文献的过程还需要指出的是，在你阅读过程中，可能会发现前人研究的错误和商榷之处，这种情况就非常理想了，你可以在之后你的论文中对于前人的疏漏和商榷之处进行批驳和指正，这个环节的术语叫发覆，即发前人之覆。如果有这样的情况，你的论文就是非常出彩的论文了。最后我再说一点个人经验，通过阅读文献，发现自己当初对于拟研究课题的设想和研究方向往往有人已经捷足先登了，这是常见的现象，但不严重，因为大量阅读文献后，你就会重新找到新的研究方向，这个时候就需要重新修改研究计划书（国内叫选题论证或开题报告）了。而这次的修改才是研究计划书的最后定版。
文献综述不是一两句话可以解决的，需要长时间的积累，可以参见以下书籍，我个人觉得写的比较优秀的：Babbie: The Practice of Social Research（清华出了影印版和翻译版）Cooper: 研究文献之回顾与整合（台湾国立编译馆）
我们对一个新领域的研究往往从以下步骤进行：1、看最基础的专业书籍，弄明白该领域研究什么内容，最基础的专业性词语都是什么意思；2、大量查阅国内文献，从出现该领域起最早的文献开始看，了解这个领域的发展历程。在这个过程中，可以看到这个领域很多新技术的发展、基础理论研究的深入以及国内的大牛都在哪里。一般来说，一个领域在早期时的文章都较少，但有不少精华，因为早期的文章很多是从国外的文献中借鉴和翻译过来的，可以精读。读到后期，会发现越来越多的该领域文章出现，研究的水平也参差不齐，这时就需要进行适当筛选，当你看了很多文章，也能够比较轻易地看出哪些文章是为了凑数才发的，哪些文章是整体参考他人的，哪些文章是真正有见地的。对于有见地的文章，尤其是高水平期刊上的文章（如学报、国外SCI\EI检索等）要精读。另外，也要留意那些大牛发表的该领域发展概况类综述文章以及前沿展望文章，这样能让自己明白这个领域的发展方向在哪里，也看看大牛们是怎么把握整体发展动态的，和自己的区别在哪里。3、在大量阅读国内文献的基础上，搜索大牛在国外发表的文章，最好是SCI\EI检索的文章。对于如何找国外文献这方面，可以仔细看看之前国内好文章的参考文献，好文章的参考文献一般也都比较有可读价值。总之，在这个过程中，锻炼自己阅读外文文献的能力，最初会很慢，但是不要着急，抓住一篇文章，就看透一篇、看懂一篇。由于在前期阅读大量国内文献，对很多专业词汇都有所了解，因此能够将外文文献中的词汇与之对应起来，记下这些专业词汇和语句的常见英文表达，为自己以后写英文文章做准备。4、写一篇文献综述，把前期积累的国内文献、后期精读的国外文献，用领域历史发展的眼光以及技术发展的角度，完成文献综述。写完初稿之后，要跳出文章，归纳自己文章的逻辑结构，梳理领域技术和理论发展的树状图，整理文献综述的框架结构和内容，反复修改，直到自己认为无可挑剔，为止。
我是学管理学的，我来谈谈吧(^_^)我老板曾在我入学时候给了我一本《怎样写好文献综述:案例及评述》，作者是张黎，科学出版社出版。这本书我没翻完，我觉得写得还是很不错的，符合中国人的思维。在管理学里，我觉得《南开管理评论》这本杂志的文献综述是写得最好的，这本杂志每一期的主题文章的文献综述可以详细学习，其他的管理学期刊我觉得文献综述写得不如它。结合我自己写论文经验(^_^)。第一，写文献综述一定要有逻辑性，比如A学者提出过什么理论，B学者扩展了A学者的理论……第二，文献综述一定要为我所用，有些文章可能跟你主题不是完全切合，但就管理学而言，其实好多概念都是表达一个意思，比如新产品价值和新产品绩效。所以你可以说A学者说过什么，也就是说……第三，多看英文论文的文献综述，当然，英文看着烦可以看我说的《南开管理评论》。第四，文献综述千万不要综述最浅的东西，论文都是给内行人看的，写文献综述不要对概念进行回顾，概念找一个你认为好的定义用一下就好了，文献综述一定要跟文章相关。比如我要写企业家角色对企业绩效的影响，一定要找类似的企业家角色可以提高企业的创新能力，进而提高企业绩效云云。(^_^)大概就这样吧，感觉论文的文献综述好难写︶︿︶
摘要、引言、主体和参考文献开门见山，直接简洁地叙述参考文献的内容，回顾历史要点，总结出与自己有利的东西。接着对自己论文有利有意义。
写综述是第三步。首先熟读该大领域的相关文献，从中整理出需要继续研究和回答的问题，这是第二步。再围绕提炼出来的问题/需要解释的现象，制造一条专属的研究脉络。所以要写出好的综述，大量阅读是前提，理论洞察力是关键，加上清晰的文字表达，就可以了。
曾经有一门课的考核是写一篇文献综述，写的过程中感觉有一个办法对整理思路很有帮助，同时这个办法也可以让读者更好地从多个角度理解一个领域的研究现状。那就是——列表格！！(??? ?? ???)以“APP用研方法”为例：●按照APP类目来整理用研方法。比如在你找到的文献里，战争游戏有ABCD四种用研方法，冒险游戏有AB，模拟游戏有AC，教育游戏有AD。在表格里列出来的话就很清楚，A方法是目前应用最广的，涵盖到文献里出现的所有类型的游戏；战争游戏是被研究最全面的，被ABCD方法剖析过。●按照用研方法来整理收集的数据类型。比如①方法可以得到ab两种数据，②方法可以得到b种数据，③方法可以得到c种数据。那么列出表格后可以接着分析：对于①方法，为什么可以收集到两种数据，在什么情况下收集a，什么情况下收集b；对于b种数据，①②方法都可以，哪个方法更好，或者什么情况下选择①/②；③方法可能是一种补充手段，可以得到c种数据并帮助研究。●按照文献研究对象来整理用研方法。比如一部分文献是研究用研方法本身的，另一部分文献是研究app设计的，但是其中涉及了用研过程，用了某（些）个用研方法。然后再深入分析......另外，对于需要考试写文献综述的同学，不管你对文献分析得是好是坏，请时不时地确认你写的内容涉及到了评分标准的每一项...如果你实在对写文献综述感觉很糟，但是有按照评分标准执行，至少不会挂科甚至可以得到中等的分数。希望对大家有所帮助：）
引自How to write a literature reviewWhat is a literature review?The aim of a literature review is to show your reader (your tutor) that you have read, and have a good grasp of, the main published work concerning a particular topic or question in your field. This work may be in any format, including online sources. It may be a separate assignment, or one of the introductory sections of a report, dissertation or thesis. In the latter cases in particular, the review will be guided by your research objective or by the issue or thesis you are arguing and will provide the framework for your further work.It is very important to note that your review should not be simply a description of what others have published in the form of a set of summaries, but should take the form of a critical discussion, showing insight and an awareness of differing arguments, theories and approaches. It should be a synthesis and analysis of the relevant published work, linked at all times to your own purpose and rationale.According to Caulley (1992) of La Trobe University, the literature review should:o compare and contrast different authors' views on an issueo group authors who draw similar conclusionso criticise aspects of methodologyo note areas in which authors are in disagreemento highlight exemplary studieso highlight gaps in researcho show how your study relates to previous studieso show how your study relates to the literature in generalo conclude by summarising what the literature saysThe purposes of the review are:o to define and limit the problem you are working ono to place your study in an historical perspectiveo to avoid unnecessary duplicationo to evaluate promising research methodso to relate your findings to previous knowledge and suggest further researchA good literature review, therefore, is critical of what has been written, identifies areas of controversy, raises questions and identifies areas which need further research.Structure of the literature reviewThe overall structure of your review will depend largely on your own thesis or research area. What you will need to do is to group together and compare and contrast the varying opinions of different writers on certain topics. What you must not do is just describe what one writer says, and then go on to give a general overview of another writer, and then another, and so on. Your structure should be dictated instead by topic areas, controversial issues or by questions to which there are varying approaches and theories. Within each of these sections, you would then discuss what the different literature argues, remembering to link this to your own purpose.Linking words are important. If you are grouping together writers with similar opinions, you would use words or phrases such as:similarly, in addition, also, againMore importantly, if there is disagreement, you need to indicate clearly that you are aware of this by the use of linkers such as:however, on the other hand, conversely, neverthelessAt the end of the review you should include a summary of what the literature implies, which again links to your hypothesis or main question.Writing the reviewYou first need to decide what you need to read. In many cases you will be given a booklist or directed towards areas of useful published work. Make sure you use this help. With dissertations, and particularly theses, it will be more down to you to decide. It is important, therefore, to try and decide on the parameters of your research. What exactly are your objectives and what do you need to find out? In your review, are you looking at issues of theory, methodology, policy, quantitive research, or what? Before you start reading it may be useful to compile a list of the main areas and questions involved, and then read with the purpose of finding out about or answering these. Unless something comes up which is particularly important, stick to this list, as it is very easy to get sidetracked, particularly on the internet.A good literature review needs a clear line of argument. You therefore need to use the critical notes and comments you made whilst doing your reading to express an academic opinion. Make sure that:o you include a clear, short introduction which gives an outline of the review, including the main topics covered and the order of the arguments, with a brief rationale for this.o there is always a clear link between your own arguments and the evidence uncovered in your reading. Include a short summary at the end of each section.Use quotations if appropriate.o you always acknowledge opinions which do not agree with your thesis. If you ignore opposing viewpoints, your argument will in fact be weaker.Your review must be written in a formal, academic style. Keep your writing clear and concise, avoiding colloquialisms and personal language. You should always aim to be objective and respectful of others' this is not the place for emotive language or strong personal opinions. If you thought something was rubbish, use words such as "inconsistent", "lacking in certain areas" or "based on false assumptions"! (See Guide 1.21)When introducing someone's opinion, don't use "says", but instead an appropriate verb which more accurately reflects this viewpoint, such as "argues", "claims" or "states". Use the present tense for general opinions and theories, or the past when referring to specific research or experiments:Although Trescothick (2001) argues that attack is the best form of defence, Boycott (1969) claims that ...In a field study carried out amongst the homeless of Sydney, Warne (1999) found that ...And remember at all times to avoid plagiarising your sources. Always separate your source opinions from your own hypothesis. making sure you consistently reference the literature you are referring to. When you are doing your reading and making notes, it might be an idea to use different colours to distinguish between your ideas and those of others. (See Guide 1.13).Final checklistHere is a final checklist, courtesy of the University of Melbourne:Selection of Sources Have you indicated the purpose of the review?
Are the parameters of the review reasonable?
Why did you include some of the literature and exclude others?
Which years did you exclude?
Have you emphasised recent developments?
Have you focussed on primary sources with only selective use of secondary sources?
Is the literature you have selected relevant?
Is your bibliographic data complete?Critical Evaluation of the Literature Have you organised your material according to issues?
Is there a logic to the way you organised the material?
Does the amount of detail included on an issue relate to its importance?
Have you been sufficiently critical of design and methodological issues?
Have you indicated when results were conflicting or inconclusive and discussed possible reasons?
Have you indicated the relevance of each reference to your research?Interpretation Has your summary of the current literature contributed to the reader's understanding of the problems?
Does the design of your research reflect the methodological implications of the literature review?Note The literature review will be judged in the context of your completed research.
The review needs to further the reader's understanding of the problem and whether it provides a rationale for your
来学习中。。。
已有帐号？
无法登录？
社交帐号登录