What is a literature review? What does it do?
According to Oliver (2012), a literature review is a write-up that focuses on similar or related studies that have been carried out in the past that are similar to the current study. Literature review will also include an in depth analysis of previous publications on the same subject as the current study. Literature review is very important in a study as it shows that the researcher understands the topic of the study. By analyzing previous material on similar subjects, the researcher is able to prove they understand the topic of the study. Literature review is also important as it helps to identify research gaps in the subject. Literature review will involve analysis of previous studies. This helps the researcher to understand what has been researched and studied in the past. This makes it easy to identify research gaps, which the researcher can then focus on in their study (Oliver, 2012).
Finally, literature review is important in justifying the study. Finally, it is important in enabling the researcher to establish a methodological or theoretical focus that they will use in their study. For example, a researcher can identify the successes and failures of previous similar studies. They can then design their study in order to ensure that the failures experienced in previous studies are avoided. The literature review shows that the researcher has an understanding of the subject and therefore it adds to the credibility of the whole study. It shows that the researcher has done research and has been able to identify that there is an area that is not covered by the already existing studies and this informs their decision to carry out the study (Oliver, 2012).
What terms are defined?
Many studies are technical in nature. They use technical terms that may not be easily understood by people who are not technically proficient in the subject. It is therefore important to define terms that are not easily understood in the study. Normal language terms that are used in a different way from the normal in the study are also defined. Defining of terms is important as it helps people to understand the meaning and the context of the terms used in the study. In addition, terms that have been abbreviated have been defined in this paper. For example, CMC, which stands for computer mediated communication, has been defined in the text. This allows the researcher to use the abbreviation instead of continuously repeating the compound word throughout the paper.
How many hypotheses are there?
This paper has four hypotheses. These are:
Discussants that use Singles will be perceived as being a) less informative and b) less persuasive, and they will have c) lower source credibility than discussants that use Standard English (Tan, Swee, Lim, Detenber, & Alsagoff, 2007).
Discussants who have status cues indicating they are Novices will be perceived as being a) less informative and b) less persuasive, and as having c) lower source credibility than discussants who have status cues indicating they are Experts (Tan, Swee, Lim, Detenber, & Alsagoff, 2007).
When discussants use Singles, participants will be more willing to participate in the discussion than when discussants use Standard English (Tan, Swee, Lim, Detenber, & Alsagoff, 2007).
When discussants have status cues indicating they are Novices, people will be less willing to participate in the discussion than when discussants have status cues indicating they are Experts (Tan, Swee, Lim, Detenber, & Alsagoff, 2007).
The hypotheses show the line of thought of the researcher. They are meant to be a guide to the study. In the end, the researcher will collect data with an aim of proving or disproving the hypotheses.
Where does the Research Methodology appear in the study?
The research methodology appears after the literature review and the hypotheses and research questions have been identified. The research methodology explains the design and procedures for this particular study. It is therefore located after the literature review. The methodology explains how data was collected and the procedure for carrying out the study. After the methodology, analysis takes place.
How many cases or subjects were there in the study?
This particular study had 80 participants. The participants were all undergraduate students with 38 females and 42 males. The participants were all Singaporeans who had been offered a $10 incentive to participate in the study. The study was done in two phases. How many hypotheses were supported by the data?
The data collected by the study supported hypotheses 1 and 2. However, the perception of the hypotheses was negated by the data collected. The influence of status and language cues had very limited influence on perception of the user or their credibility. None of the data collected in the study supported hypotheses 3 and 4 of the study.
Where are the "conclusions" given in the research paper?
The study intended to identify the impact of language variety and expertise on perceptions of online political discussions. This study was able to identify that the processing of status and language cues were different between face-to-face interactions and in online interactions. The language and status cues are more prominent in face-to-face interactions than in online interactions. The language cue in particular was observed to have negligible impact on persuasiveness on all the variables examined. The probable reason for this is that the subjects were all Singaporeans and were therefore familiar with Singles that is slang for Singaporean English. It is therefore possible that the respondents unconsciously saw this as a normal heuristic cue rather.
This particular study was well designed. The report follows the correct procedure of reporting in a study. The literature review was conducted that showed the research gaps that this study intended to conduct further research on. The methodology of the study is sound. The participants have been identified clearly and the reason why they were selected was clear. The reason why only Singaporean students were selected is that they were more likely to be conversant with the political environment of the country. The stimulus for the study has also been properly selected in a manner that ensures that the participants respond to heuristic and language cues rather than internalizing the message cognitively. This means that instead of analyzing the content, the participants were to use external variables to determine the persuasiveness and credibility of the message. This is the fundamental reason for the study. The documentation of the study was also carried out properly meaning that using the information presented, the study can be replicated elsewhere easily.
References
Lodico, M. G., Spaulding, D. T., & Voegtle, K. H. (2012). Methods in Educational Research: From Theory to Practice. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.
Oliver, P. (2012). Succeeding with your literature review: A handbook for students. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Tan, K. W., Swee, D., Lim, C., Detenber, B. H., & Alsagoff, L. (2007). The impact of language variety and expertise on perceptions of online political discussions. Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication, 13(1), 76-99.
