Or How to avoid having your committee die of boredom.

12
How to Write a Literature Review Or How to avoid having your committee die of boredom

Transcript of Or How to avoid having your committee die of boredom.

Page 1: Or How to avoid having your committee die of boredom.

How to Write a Literature Review

OrHow to avoid having your committee die of

boredom

Page 2: Or How to avoid having your committee die of boredom.

PurposeTo show you did something this semester?To help you define your research question.To place your research in the literature.To help the reader understand what you are

doing.To show why your research is interesting.

Page 3: Or How to avoid having your committee die of boredom.

Important!This is not just busy work:

You need to know what’s been done.Selling your work is crucial on the marketA good literature review:

Makes you look professionalMakes your work stand out as importantProvides a common ground for

discussion.

Page 4: Or How to avoid having your committee die of boredom.

Where to find the LiteratureField class reading listsYour AdvisorSurvey Articles (JEL, Handbooks, New

Palgrave Dictionary)References Lists of Articles you readS.S. Citations index (who cited classic articles

on same topic)EconLit SearchSSRN, Google Scholar Search

Page 5: Or How to avoid having your committee die of boredom.

Stay OrganizedMake notes on every paper you “read”Lists of papers by ??? (see more below)Learn to read it one or three times:

One time for big picture, what does this paper do?

Second time for details: study it!Third time, put details back into big picture.

Begin to focus on Critical turns in the literature.

Page 6: Or How to avoid having your committee die of boredom.

Organization OptionsChronological Paper by Paper coverage.

Great for your notes..Terrible to read…Not really a lit review

By IssueBy Common resultsBy Common dataBy Common models/methodsMost Likely a combination of all.

Page 7: Or How to avoid having your committee die of boredom.

Keep in Mind Your Goal:What is your research Question?How does this paper fit in with what you are doing?

What’s the big picture?Above all, the literature review should be

designed to highlight YOUR research: what will you add? How will your results inform the profession? How will your results answer the open questions?

Page 8: Or How to avoid having your committee die of boredom.

AudienceWho you are writing to is crucial.

Ultimately, you are writing for a journal audience.

Economists (typically), usually in your field.Think other graduate students who have

passed the field exam.You can assume they understand the

literature and may have read some of it. The goal is to remind them, and tie it together to your work.

Page 9: Or How to avoid having your committee die of boredom.

LengthLong enough to cover the subject, short

enough to keep it interesting (there’s an old saying…)

Two lengths:Journal Article (shorter, 2-3 pages of a 25 page

paper)Proposal/Thesis (longer, 5-10 pages)

Take some time and read a few people’s thesis.

Pick a few papers in AER/JEP/QJE and see what they look like.

Page 10: Or How to avoid having your committee die of boredom.

Good WritingSpelling and Grammar One idea per paragraphTransitions, between paragraphs and

sectionsActive voice (“Bollinger (2003) demonstrates

that”…rather than “In Bollinger (2003) it is shown that”)

Page 11: Or How to avoid having your committee die of boredom.

PlagiarismAny time you use the same words, you must

put it in quotes and acknowledge it. Changing one or two words is not sufficient.

If in doubt, quote and cite. It can be difficult, but think about how you

would explain it to your non-economist friends, then start from there.

Page 12: Or How to avoid having your committee die of boredom.

Citation StyleChicago manual of style.Typically, I see the use of last name, year of

publication in journals Many researchers are unclear on this(Bollinger

2003; Smith 2008) Bollinger (2003) is perhaps the least clear on

this issue.In the references, then

Bollinger, Christopher. 2003. Confusing the Reader: A How to Guide. Journal of Irreproducible Results, π:17-65.