Literature Review and Conceptualization

Critical Review of Literature and
Conceptualization
Learning Outcomes
At the end of this session, you will be able to:

 Undertake critical literature review & effectively write
the chapter on literature review
 Engage in conceptualization of a research
problem/questions
 Formulate the conceptual framework
The purpose of the critical Review
 To help further refine your research questions and objectives.
 To highlight further research possibilities.
 To help you avoid repeating research work that has been carried
out already.
 To sample current opinions in news papers, professional and trade

journals in order to justify your research questions and
objectives.
 To provide insights into research approaches, strategies and

techniques that may be appropriate for your research questions.
Please refer the annexure for “the literature review process”

The content of the critical Review
 To include the key academic theories within your chosen area.
 To demonstrate that your knowledge is up to date.
 To show how your research is related to previous published

research.
 To assess the strengths and weaknesses of previous work.
 To justify your arguments by referencing previous research.
 To develop conceptual model and hypotheses.

The meaning of the term “Critical”
Refer to work by recognized experts in your chosen

area.
Consider and discuss work that supports and work that
opposes your ideas.
Make reasoned judgments regarding the value of
others’ work to your work.
Support your arguments with a valid evidence in a
logical manner.
Distinguish clearly between facts and opinions.
The structure of the Critical review
 Does your start at a more general level before narrowing
down?
 Does the literature covered relate clearly to your research
questions and objectives?
 Have you covered the key theories of recognized experts in
the area?
 Is the literature you have included up to date?
 Have you been objectives in your discussion and assessment
of other people’s work?
 Have you included references that are counter to your own
opinion?
 Have you clearly distinguished between facts and opinions?
Please refer the annexure for an example of a critical

review of literature
Planning the literature search
Defining parameters
 Language of publication
 Subject area
 Business Geographical area.
 Publication period
 Literature type
Generating keywords
 Discussion, reading
 Brainstorming (Please refer the annexure for an
example of generating key words)
 Relevance trees
Constructing a relevance tree
Start with your research questions or objectives at
the to level.
Identify two or more subject areas that you think are
important.
Further subdivide each major subject area into more
precise sub areas that you are of relevance.
Further, divide the sub areas into more precise sub
areas that you think are of relevance.
Identify those areas that you need to search
immediately and those that you particularly need to
focus.
As you reading and reviewing progress, add new areas
to your relevance tree.
Please refer the annexure for an example of using a
relevance tree.
Conducting the literature search
Primary literature sources

 Reports, Theses, e-mails, conference reports
 Company reports, some government publications
 Unpublished manuscripts
Secondary literature sources
 News papers, books, Journals
 The Internet, some government publications
Tertiary literature sources

 Abstracts, Data Bases, Encyclopedias, Dictionaries,
Evaluating the literature
 Assessing relevance
 Assessing sufficiency
Recording the literature
Bibliographic details / List of References

 Referencing style (Harvard system)
Brief summary
Supplementary information
Forming an Expectation Framework
(Theorizing/Conceptualizing/Modeling)
 Once the research problem is defined & possibly research

questions are formed, the researcher is in the position to move
into the next major stage of researching: ‘forming an
expectation framework”
 Anti-positivist researchers, specially grounded theorists are
advised not to form such expectancy framework, the scientific
approach deems necessary such framework
 In a more basic sense, by expectancy framework, I mean logical
& rational arrangement of all possible factors which is related to
the research problem clearly showing all possible relationship
among them. However, IN SPECIFIC SENSE I mean logical &
rational arrangement of selected factors (by the researcher)
and selected relationships among those factors (again by the
researcher) which is related to the research problem/question.
 However, when the researcher moves from the expectancy

framework of all possible factors & relationships to the
expectancy framework of selected factors & relationships,
he/she should provide sufficient justifications for his/her
selection
 Possible such justifications
 Selected ones appear to be more important in
explaining/predicting the phenomenon
 Need some information, that you may not have access
(difficulty of empirical investigation)
 May bit away from your discipline
 You don’t feel interesting…!
 Anyway, how one can begin with an expectancy framework?

 Your research problem would state two or more relevant
factors (concepts/constructs/variables), if so then identify
them & establish possible relationships among them
 Your research questions may state some more factors,
identify them & establish possible relationships among them
 Then observe more carefully (may be even interviewing
others) & see any possible new factors & establish possible
relationship adding them also to the existing network of
relationships
 Think logically & rationally, you may able to suggest some

more possible such factors & relationship, add them also to
existing network of relationships you have developed
 Now move into the existing literature directly related to the
problem/phenomenon interested
 As already said, start with ‘home article (s)’
 This reading may demand you to move into indirectly related
literature as well as to the ‘routes’ literature
 This exercise of literature review may help you:
 Refining expectation framework as it facilitates to shape your
factors (concepts/constructs/variables) by way of defining
them appropriately, & grouping or braking them if necessary
 Get strengthened the expectation framework grounding it

in a more appropriate theory (s) – theorizing the research
problem
• The term ‘theorizing’ is not much deliberately use many
scientific researchers, but anti-positivists celebrate it.
However, in general, but not exclusively the stage, they
think of theorizing is found only towards the end of
research
• And also remember deduction involves
– Laws & theories (which is taken as true & established from
observation by induction)
– Antecedent conditions (what should occur prior to or
simultaneously to the phenomenon to described)
– Phenomenon to be explained
• thus bringing theory into the scenario is important
 Let you link the expectation framework (also research

problem) to the existing body of knowledge, see where
the existing body of knowledge is appropriate to
explain/predict the phenomenon (remember: research is
moving from known to unknown)
 Something more on literature review? Research question to

literature review
 We have already seen, the literature helps you:
• Refining your research questions
• Justifying the necessity of the research that you proposed highlighting
theoretical gap/empirical gap/methodological gap, so to demonstrate the
contribution of your research
• To locate your work within the present stock of knowledge
 Literature review is also essential:
• To show the authority you have gained in the area of your
interest
• To develop the expectancy framework rationally & logically
• To get validated your expectancy framework from the
researchers who is known to have authority of the field of study
 Something more on literature review?

 Through literature review:
• You develop the argument/expectancy framework which is
supported by the present stock of knowledge. So,
expectancy framework is justified, validated & acceptable
• In the process of developing such framework, you use the
literature to refine & define your
concept/construct/variables & draw indicators of variables
• You use the literature to establish possible relationships
among those concepts/constructs/variables
• Finally to advance your argument/thesis

 When doing literature review:
• Be objective – attempt to see what is written from the
writers frame of reference rather than interpreting
from your point of view & see what he/she argues
• Don’t get into the trap - only seeing the evidence that
support your argument while rejecting the evidence
that contradict it
• See what new insights you can draw - from linking
different writers’ views, specially views which
contradict
• Be judgmental - See the strength, weakness as well as
what has missed in the different points of view

 When doing literature review:
• Be critical – literature review is not reporting what has been done in
the past, it is not even judging strengths, weaknesses & omissions
(though you should find them), it is, (in my point of view) more to do
with framing the current stock of knowledge in order to draw new
insights about the phenomena which have been specified as research
problem/research questions interested to you
• Present your opinion – specially there is contradiction between two
writers or if it contradict with your point of view. However, make sure
that you support such opinion/conclusion with other writers, probably
outside your theoretical domain
• So, be selective – rather than reporting all what have been written
about the topic of interest (eg. Quality circle), report only what is
relevant (support or contradict with your argument) to you research
problem/questions in hand), however, need to read all literature which
are closely link with your topic/theoretical domain
 Something more on literature review? Writing literature review-some

specific guidance
 Don’t start your writing until you get them into a appropriate mental
order, so until you read sufficiently
 Think your reading in relation to your research questions – get them focus
 Remember you may have to follow different style of writing throughout
your litterateur review chapter (s)
• You may simply report about another research
• you may simply clarify the definition adopted by other writers
• You may evaluate others works (findings) comparing & contrasting
• You may get others work into the line of argument you are advancing
• You may advance your argument with the sufficient level of breadth &
depth
 Something more on literature review? Writing literature review-some

specific guidance
 Let you appear in your literature review – you should be the ‘figure’ rather
than the ‘ground’. Readers want to ‘hear’ your ‘voice’ rather than other’s
that they already have ‘heard’. So, build the literature review around your
research questions/your argument
 Structure your writing by organizing them into appropriate ‘chunk’ with
meaningful sub-headings
• Think of possible different logical orders of developing your argument
& then structure
• You can clarify concepts while you are advancing your argument or you
can do it separately. Alternatively, clarify only what is in line with your
argument & get into discussing other concepts separately
• Be flexible – whenever you find some other way of structuring
(certainly, better than what you have already planed), get into that
 Don’t try to simply fill the pages, though number of pages is really matter
meeting required length of your research report.
 Something more on literature review? Writing

literature review-some specific guidance
 Be conscious about there is a rethem in everything in
this world, so need to have it here too
 Write, Read, cut/edit & read – remember this is the
first time you are doing such an ‘academic’ exercise, so,
there is lot of opportunities develop
 Don’t try to simply fill the pages, though number of
pages is really matter meeting required length of your
research paper/thesis
 Don’t forget basic rules in general writing work
• Its you own – have your own style

 When you do literature review, pay attention to:
• Methodology that has been used – paradigm, methodology,
sample, population, data collection techniques, socio-cultural
context, limitations & thus how relevant the particular work is
relevant to your research problem
• Question repeatedly the relevance of what you read to your
research problem/questions/objectives & empirical domain, if you
have already set the boundaries of empirical domain
• Try to find original work, rather than depending on quotations of
such original work, this is specially need when original work is in
the different discipline, as many writers tend to interpret
original work within the tradition of their discipline
 Something more on literature review? –from literature review to

the expectation framework
 by this time you have completed two chapters of your research
paper/thesis
 Chapter 1 – Introduction
• Background of the study, Research problem, Significance of
the study, Research questions, Objectives etc.
 Chapter 2 – Literature Review
 Now you can get into forming your expectation framework, where
you attempt to, among other things graphically show
concepts/constructs/variables & there relationships
 This is where you organize more succinctly your argument in
responding to your research questions, draw conceptual model
(expectation framework), from which you derive your hypotheses
If the expectation framework consists of factors

(concepts/constructs/variables) & relationships, then
one should know well about types of factors &
relationships to work well with the expectancy
framework. So, let look them in a sufficient depth
 Concept-an umbrella term that used to classify objects,

experiences, events, phenomena and relationships.
 Concept can be either observable or constructs
 Observable- an item that can be perceived by the senses
(make sense quality of facts?)
 Constructs – an item that is not objects to our senses but can
be inferred from observables (Sarantakos, 1993, p. 439)
 Construct is ‘an intangible’, does not ‘exist’ in an absolute sense:

we define them into existence (Hofstede,1980:14)
 An abstract theoretical (hypothetical) variable that is invented
(constructed) to explain some phenomenon (Schresheim et. al.,
1993)
 Constructs – “…terms which, though not observational

either directly or indirectly, may be applied or even
defined on the basis of the observables” (Kaplan as cited in
Bacharach, 1989)
 “Thus a construct can be viewed as a broad mental
configuration of a given phenomenon…” (Bacharach, 1989)
 Variable – “…an observable entity which is capable of

assuming two or more values” (Schwab as cited in Bacharach, 1989)
 So, “…variable may be viewed as an operational configuration

derived from a construct” (Bacharach, 1989)
 Variable should be specific & it can be achieved only by defining it in terms of
its measurement (Bacharach, 1989)
 Clarity & parsimony which is defined as constitutive definition is sufficient for
construct, variable should also be specific thus should be defined in terms of
measurement (defined as operational definition) (Bacharach, 1989)
Concepts
Object to senses Not object to

Observables Constructs
senses
Convert to
Inferred through
Observables object to senses
Sense
Sense
Reality
 though variable is defined as “… an operational

configuration derived from a construct”, in the
context of researching, variable is used
another way too
That is to name concept, construct & variable
when they are placed as components of
relationship in your expectancy model (which is
also known as conceptual model or theoretical
framework).
So, beware! when the term ‘variable’ is found &
give a second thought in understanding it.
 As said previously empiricism of theory involves observing the

relationship among concept
 Based on the relationship stated in the theory, a concept
would become:
 Independent variable
 Dependent variable
 Mediating variable
 Moderating variable
 Extraneous variable
 The first four variables are the generic names given to
different types of variables which are selected for your
“selected expectation framework”
 The last variable: Extraneous variable is the generic name given to

variable which is not selected for your selected expectation framework. It
also covers variables which are yet recognized but possible
 “Those that could be competing independent variables, influencing
the dependent variable, but are not interest to the research” (Black,
1999:60)
 Effects of these variables should be controlled (then known as
controlled variable), in order to observe whether the independent
variable cause the dependent variable, & if cause, then the degree
of effect
 The researcher attempts to remove the effect of controlled
variables or should attempts to keep them constant in order to
appropriately observe the relationship among variables interested
 However, as management research very often are undertaken in the
context of open environment (as the phenomenon of interest can not be
closed), identification of extraneous variables (conceptual closure) as
well as controlling of them (physical closure) is not easy
 Dependent variable (criterion variable)

 is what is primary interested to the researcher – it is what we
known as “what”
 This is the variable whose behavior/variation that the
researcher is interested to explain/predict
 As researchers you may interest about observing declining
productivity of employees, so the productivity of employees is
a dependent variable
 Many research carries to study only one dependent variable,
but some research carries to study more than one, probably
when “what” can be broken into two or few dimensions
 However, one should not attempt of investigating many
dependent, as the work would become extreamly complex
Independent variable (predictor variable)

 Is what cause the dependent variable to vary
 When the independent variable presents, the dependent
variable also presents
 The influence of independent variable will either be
positive or negative
• An independent variable of productivity of employees
will be motivation of employees, skills of employees
Moderator variable
 It is “…one has a strong contingent effect on the
independent variable-dependent variable relationship”
(Sekaran, 1984)
 “…is a qualitative (e.g. sex, race, class) or quantitative
(e.g. level of reward) variable that affects the direction
and/or strength of the relation between an independent
or predictor variable & a dependent or criterion
variable” (Baron, 1986)
 This modifies the relationship between independent &
dependent variable
Mediating (intervening) variable

 “…a given variable may be said to function as a mediator
to the extent that it accounts for the relation between
the predictor & criterion”
 This is what explain ‘why” or ‘how’ predictor causes on
criterion
 If a particular variable really mediating two variables,
when the mediating variable is absence, there is no
effect of the independent variable on the dependent
variable
independent Mediating Dependant
Moderating
Mediating variable that intervene between the

independent (predictor) and dependent (criterion)
variable
a
Mediator b
Independent Dependent
variable C variable
 Conceptualization
 After grounding your research problem/questions on the
appropriate theory (s), & observing the possible behavior of
problem in the light of the theory, after learning about the
types of variables & relationships among them, now you are
ready to advance your argument (conceptual framework)
 By ‘conceptualization’, I mean logical & rational explanation
about the relationships of various variables that needed to
explain the behavior of the problem/phenomenon. This
explanation is essentially grounded on the existing literature,
probably related to the appropriate theory (s)
 During the conceptualization:
• Variables considered relevant to study should be clearly
identified & labeled (i.e. dependent, independent, moderator
& mediator)
• The relationships among the various variables should be
clearly explained (i.e. main effect, mediating effect,
moderating effect, direct effect indirect effect), if possible
stating the direction of each relationship
• Possibility of expecting such relationships should be
appropriately supported with the existing literature (no room
for doubt can exist)
• State as clearly as possible assumptions behind your theory
or explanation/prediction
 Conceptualization should be brief, clear, logical & should have sufficient level
of “argumentive tone”
 Once you complete the conceptualization, re-read your literature review &
see whether there is any contradiction or possible avenue of improving the
conceptualization
 You should put sufficient effort to see the possibility of prevailing of
alternative relationships reading & re-reading the literature as what really
conceptualize is a new theory or a possible attempt of confirming or
rejecting an existing theory or part of it
 You should be ‘honest’ to the extent that you do not have any doubt about
the thesis (argument) you advanced in the conceptualization
 Also see the possibility of converting your baseline argument into a
proposition or a few proposition
 Modeling (conceptual model)

 By ‘modeling’ I mean graphical representation of your theory
which explains or explanation/prediction of
phenomenon/problem you are interested. It is the graphical
representation of your conceptualization
 It shows all the variables and relationships among them
expected to take place that you explain in conceptualization
 Model would be one consisting of:
• Boxes & arrows
• Graph
• Equation
• Grid (matrix)
Modeling (conceptual model)

 As I suggested, if you could derive a proposition (stated
relationship between constructs) or a few proposition,
you can start your modeling graphically showing those
proposition
 Then brake those constructs into variables, probably you
have already identified & show the possible relationship
among them too.
G
Boundary = Assumptions about values, time & space
E
N
E
R
A Propositions
Constructs Constructs
L
I
Z
A Variables Hypotheses Variables
B
I
L
I
T (Bacharach, 1989)
y
Collectivism
(+)
Organizational
commitment
Transformational (+)
Job satisfaction
leadership
behavior
(+) Withdrawal
behavior
Casual effect
(Walumbwa & Lawler,
Moderating effect 2003)
Org. commitment
High collectivist society
Low collectivist society
Transformational
leadership behavior
Transformational (+) Organizational

leadership commitment
behavior
(+) •Affective
•Idealized commitment
influence (+)
•Normative
•Inspirational (+) commitment
motivation
(+) •Continuance
•Intellectual commitment
stimulation
•Individual
consideration
Hypothesis
Proposition
Leader behavior Mediators Performance dimensions
Role ambiguity
In-roles sales
Transactional
performance
leadership
Transformational Extra-role
leadership performance
Trust in
manager
Indirect/mediated effect (Mackenzie, Podsakoff

& Rich, 2001)
direct effect
Repositories of charisma
Persons Objects
Super-natural The divinely inspired Sacred law, charisma of

charisma leader office, kinship group
Origin of
charisma
The ‘magnetic political The charisma of status
leader systems, customs
Secular charisma
(Spencer, 1973)
Again remember to sufficient level of effort to

develop the model. See all possible way of arranging
your variables. Make sure it is the ‘best’
representation of your theory (conceptualization)
You should approach the model being developed from
the different point of views
Probably you may find the necessity of re-writing your
conceptualization. Don’t hesitate to do so.
Deriving hypothesis
 You have come to the end of forming your expectation
framework as deriving hypothesis is the last step of
forming expectation framework
 Hypothesis is the bridge that links your
‘conceptual/theoretical world’ to your
‘practical/empirical world’
 Proposition & hypothesis

 Proposition – a general statement regarding relationships between:
• Concepts/constructs
• Concepts/constructs & variable
 Transformational leadership behavior positively affect
follower organizational commitment.
 “…An assumption about the status of events or about relations between variables.
It is a tentative explanation of the research problem, a possible outcome of the
research, or an educated guess about the research outcome” (Sarantakos,
1993:119)
 “…a logically conjectured relationship between two or more variables expressed in
the form of testable statement” (Sekaran, 2003:103)
 As hypothesis should be in a testable form, hypothesis should essentially states a
relationship between two or more variables
• idealized influence behavior of manager positively effects on affective
commitment & continuance commitment of his/her subordinates
Proposition & hypothesis

 idealized influence behavior of manager positively effects on affective
commitment & continuance commitment of his/her subordinates
 The joint effect of customer trust and individualized considerate behavior
of a salesperson is greater than the impact of each alone on the customer
relationship commitment to a salesperson
Activity: state all possible hypothesizes that can be derived from the
following conceptual model
Idealized
influence Customer trust
behavior of + + Customer
in sales person
salesperson relationship
commitment
Individualized to a
considerate + salesperson
behavior of
salesperson
 Types of hypothesis
 Research hypothesis (alternative hypothesis) – refers to the hypothesis
derived from the conceptual model & explain the expected relationship
between two or more variables of the conceptual framework
 Generally, like a group of propositions, a group of hypothesizes can be
taken as statements of a theory
 So, the researcher should attempt to derive all possible hypothesizes
from the conceptual model & if possible should test all of them
 This is the opposite of null hypothesis
 Higher the number of alternative hypothesis that can be derived from a
theory/conceptual model, higher will be the falsifibility of a theory
Types of hypothesis
 Null hypothesis – in more general sense state the non existence
of a relationship/difference between two or more variables. Or
the relationship/difference occur by chance/due to sampling
error
• There is no relationship between stressed level experience in the job
and the job satisfaction of managers
 Certainly, the deductive approach advice researchers not to
attempt to prove the research hypothesis. Instead advised to
attempt of rejecting the null hypothesis. The researchers should
attempt to accept the alternative hypothesis by rejecting the
null hypothesis. This process is known as falsification
 Writing of null hypothesis as well as hypothesis testing will be
discussed in detail later in this course
Some other classifications of hypothesis

 Directional & non-directional – hypothesis may state or may not
state the direction of the relationship.
 If the researcher knows the direction (i.e. positive, negative,
greater, lower, higher) of the relationship, he/she can state the
direction of relationship, thus such hypothesis is said to be
directional
 If the researcher dose not know direction of the relationship,
he/she can simply state the existence of relationship, & such
hypothesis is known as non-directional
Some other classifications of hypothesis

 Relational or descriptive form
 Relational hypothesis states a relationship. Remember our
definition of hypothesis indicates relationship between two
variables is what stated in the hypothesis
 However, some writers (Sarantakos,1993:120) mentioned about
descriptive hypothesis. According to him, such hypothesis
describes event
 Characteristics of hypothesis
 Empirical testability
 Should be drawn from conceptual model/conceptualization which is
grounded on the existing literature
 Clear, specific & precise
 State one relationship only
 Should not contradict with other hypothesizes
 Should address research questions & the research problem (so,
carefully observe how tightly link your research problem, research
questions, conceptual model & hypothesizes)
Please try to develop a conceptual model for the activity provided

in the annexure.

Literature Review and Conceptualization

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Literature Review and Conceptualization

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Critical Review of Literature and

At the end of this session, you will be able to:

 To help further refine your research questions and objectives.

 To highlight further research possibilities.

 To sample current opinions in news papers, professional and trade

 To provide insights into research approaches, strategies and

Please refer the annexure for “the literature review process”

 To include the key academic theories within your chosen area.

 To demonstrate that your knowledge is up to date.

 To show how your research is related to previous published

 To assess the strengths and weaknesses of previous work.

 To justify your arguments by referencing previous research.

 To develop conceptual model and hypotheses.

Refer to work by recognized experts in your chosen

Please refer the annexure for an example of a critical

Primary literature sources

Tertiary literature sources

Recording the literature

Bibliographic details / List of References

 Once the research problem is defined & possibly research

 However, when the researcher moves from the expectancy

 Anyway, how one can begin with an expectancy framework?

 Think logically & rationally, you may able to suggest some

 Get strengthened the expectation framework grounding it

 Let you link the expectation framework (also research

 Something more on literature review? Research question to

 Something more on literature review?

 Something more on literature review?

 Something more on literature review?

 Something more on literature review? Writing literature review-some

 Something more on literature review? Writing literature review-some

 Something more on literature review? Writing

 Something more on literature review?

 Something more on literature review? –from literature review to

If the expectation framework consists of factors

 Concept-an umbrella term that used to classify objects,

 Construct is ‘an intangible’, does not ‘exist’ in an absolute sense:

 Constructs – “…terms which, though not observational

 Variable – “…an observable entity which is capable of

 So, “…variable may be viewed as an operational configuration

Object to senses Not object to

 though variable is defined as “… an operational

 As said previously empiricism of theory involves observing the

 The last variable: Extraneous variable is the generic name given to

 Dependent variable (criterion variable)

Independent variable (predictor variable)

Mediating (intervening) variable

independent Mediating Dependant

Mediating variable that intervene between the

 Modeling (conceptual model)

Modeling (conceptual model)

High collectivist society

Low collectivist society

Transformational (+) Organizational

Leader behavior Mediators Performance dimensions

Indirect/mediated effect (Mackenzie, Podsakoff

Super-natural The divinely inspired Sacred law, charisma of

Again remember to sufficient level of effort to

 Proposition & hypothesis

Proposition & hypothesis

Some other classifications of hypothesis

Some other classifications of hypothesis

Please try to develop a conceptual model for the activity provided

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen