Systematic literature reviews in migration studies: approaches to context-sensitive synthesis.

IF 3.3 2区 社会学 Q1 DEMOGRAPHY
Comparative Migration Studies Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2025-11-22 DOI:10.1186/s40878-025-00502-7
Tone Sommerfelt, Mathilde Bålsrud Mjelva, Jørgen Carling, Maryam Aslany
{"title":"Systematic literature reviews in migration studies: approaches to context-sensitive synthesis.","authors":"Tone Sommerfelt, Mathilde Bålsrud Mjelva, Jørgen Carling, Maryam Aslany","doi":"10.1186/s40878-025-00502-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>With a burgeoning literature on migration, taking stock of what is known about a topic, pattern, or process is challenging. In many scientific fields, systematic literature reviews (SLRs) are a widespread response to this need. In migration research, SLRs are relatively rare. Most existing literature reviews are non-systematic and often geographically specific. The rarity of comprehensive SLRs might partly reflect migration researchers' sensitivity to context-specificity and variation, and their well-founded scepticism towards empirical generalizations. In this article, we make a case for the value of SLRs for synthesizing quantitative findings on migration across diverse contexts. However, we foreground the interpretative nature of quantitative research in migration studies and explore approaches to synthesis that recognize exceptions and diversity as much as the search for unifying answers. Our discussion seeks to increase comparability in syntheses across contexts, all the while allowing reviews to convey disparity of findings. In contrast to common advice to narrow down research topics in SLRs, we demonstrate the feasibility of broader review questions. We exemplify our approach with reference to an extensive review of determinants of migration aspirations, drawn from survey-based research, in which determinants were differentiated in terms of the relative consistency and certainty of results.</p><p><strong>Supplementary information: </strong>The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40878-025-00502-7.</p>","PeriodicalId":37051,"journal":{"name":"Comparative Migration Studies","volume":"13 1","pages":"92"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12748309/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Comparative Migration Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40878-025-00502-7","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/11/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DEMOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

With a burgeoning literature on migration, taking stock of what is known about a topic, pattern, or process is challenging. In many scientific fields, systematic literature reviews (SLRs) are a widespread response to this need. In migration research, SLRs are relatively rare. Most existing literature reviews are non-systematic and often geographically specific. The rarity of comprehensive SLRs might partly reflect migration researchers' sensitivity to context-specificity and variation, and their well-founded scepticism towards empirical generalizations. In this article, we make a case for the value of SLRs for synthesizing quantitative findings on migration across diverse contexts. However, we foreground the interpretative nature of quantitative research in migration studies and explore approaches to synthesis that recognize exceptions and diversity as much as the search for unifying answers. Our discussion seeks to increase comparability in syntheses across contexts, all the while allowing reviews to convey disparity of findings. In contrast to common advice to narrow down research topics in SLRs, we demonstrate the feasibility of broader review questions. We exemplify our approach with reference to an extensive review of determinants of migration aspirations, drawn from survey-based research, in which determinants were differentiated in terms of the relative consistency and certainty of results.

Supplementary information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40878-025-00502-7.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

移民研究中的系统文献综述:上下文敏感综合的方法。
随着关于迁移的文献的迅速发展,对已知的主题、模式或过程进行评估是具有挑战性的。在许多科学领域,系统文献综述(slr)是对这一需求的广泛回应。在迁移研究中,单反是比较少见的。大多数现有的文献综述是非系统的,往往是地理上的。综合单反的罕见可能部分反映了迁移研究人员对环境特异性和变异的敏感性,以及他们对经验概括的有充分根据的怀疑。在这篇文章中,我们提出了一个案例,说明单反在综合不同背景下迁移的定量发现方面的价值。然而,我们强调了移民研究中定量研究的解释性,并探索了识别例外和多样性的综合方法,以及寻找统一答案的方法。我们的讨论旨在增加跨上下文综合的可比性,同时允许评论传达发现的差异。与缩小单反研究主题的常见建议相反,我们证明了更广泛的审查问题的可行性。我们通过对基于调查的研究得出的移民愿望决定因素的广泛审查来举例说明我们的方法,其中决定因素在结果的相对一致性和确定性方面进行了区分。补充信息:在线版本包含补充资料,下载地址:10.1186/s40878-025-00502-7。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Comparative Migration Studies
Comparative Migration Studies Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
8.60%
发文量
47
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书