User Tools

Site Tools


lq:literature-review

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

lq:literature-review [2017/02/06 14:19]
seanburns created
lq:literature-review [2017/02/06 14:25] (current)
seanburns [Brief Literature Review]
Line 73: Line 73:
 for various disciplines or fields of research to determine for themselves. However, although such a move may mean a loss or a gain for those research cultures, the role that journals have played in developing a field or a professional identity should be part of the discussion. In other words, history should be part of the discussion. for various disciplines or fields of research to determine for themselves. However, although such a move may mean a loss or a gain for those research cultures, the role that journals have played in developing a field or a professional identity should be part of the discussion. In other words, history should be part of the discussion.
  
-**Note:** This is an information seeking note. My [abstract][2] has an obvious omission: no literature review of any articles on the *LQ*. At the time I wrote that abstract, I was more interested in reviewing the literature on autoethnography. Also, the motivation, as described in that abstract, led me toward a different set of literature to review---literature on current +**Note:** This is an information seeking note. My [[https://​cseanburns.net/​wiki/​lq/​background#​dokuwiki__top|abstract]] has an obvious omission: no literature review of any articles on the //LQ//. At the time I wrote that abstract, I was more interested in reviewing the literature on autoethnography. Also, the motivation, as described in that abstract, led me toward a different set of literature to review---literature on current 
-scholarly communication problems and issues. I //stumbled upon// Norman'​s history of the early years of *LQ* because I pulled up the Wikipedia [article][3] on the journal for a reason I can no longer remember. According to Wikipedia'​s [revision history][4] of its article on *LQ*, the reference to Norman'​s article was added on February 10, 2011 by User *Wskent*. +scholarly communication problems and issues. I //stumbled upon// Norman'​s history of the early years of *LQ* because I pulled up the Wikipedia [[http://​en.wikipedia.org/​wiki/​The_Library_Quarterly|article]] on the journal for a reason I can no longer remember. According to Wikipedia'​s [[http://​en.wikipedia.org/​w/​index.php?​title=The_Library_Quarterly&​direction=next&​oldid=411028346|revision history]] of its article on //LQ//, the reference to Norman'​s article was added on February 10, 2011 by User *Wskent*.
- +
-[2]: /​blog/​2013/​07/​19/​authoethnography-abstract/​ +
-[3]: http://​en.wikipedia.org/​wiki/​The_Library_Quarterly +
-[4]: http://​en.wikipedia.org/​w/​index.php?​title=The_Library_Quarterly&​direction=next&​oldid=411028346+
  
 After I found Norman'​s article, I did a keyword search for it, using the names of the author and title, on [[https://​scholar.google.com/​|Google Scholar]] in order to quickly see if any one had cited Norman'​s article. That's how I found Wiegand'​s article (reference above), which briefly describes Norman'​s piece. (I quote that description above.) After I found Norman'​s article, I did a keyword search for it, using the names of the author and title, on [[https://​scholar.google.com/​|Google Scholar]] in order to quickly see if any one had cited Norman'​s article. That's how I found Wiegand'​s article (reference above), which briefly describes Norman'​s piece. (I quote that description above.)
lq/literature-review.txt · Last modified: 2017/02/06 14:25 by seanburns