Marie Barisaux, Pierre Gasselin, Lucette Laurens, Guillaume Ollivier
{"title":"为什么以及如何对人文和社会科学领域的文献进行范围界定审查?对农业自由劳动力的应用","authors":"Marie Barisaux, Pierre Gasselin, Lucette Laurens, Guillaume Ollivier","doi":"10.1177/07591063241236069","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Literature reviews stand as familiar and relevant tools within the research community, as mean to produce a state of knowledge to justify the relevance of a research question. Among the many methods that can be used, systematic approaches are developing in the Humanities and Social Sciences (HSS). These review methodologies employ rigorous techniques in the identification, retrieval, and analysis of data. The overarching objective is to uphold transparency and replicability in research endeavours, elevating the overall quality and credibility of scholarly work in these disciplines. By presenting the two main systematic approaches to literature reviews – Systematic Literature Reviews (SLRs) and Scoping Reviews (SRs) –, we intend to clarify their respective objectives and methods, so that interested researchers can make an informed choice between them. We thus show that an SR aims to characterise the extent (or scope) of research on a subject or field, whereas an SLR aims to answer a specific question with a view to guiding practices. We also show the interest of these approaches for the HSS. We use a case study – free or unpaid labour in agriculture – to illustrate the different stages of a systematic approach to a literature review. We begin by justifying the choice of an SR over an SLR, and then test the former’s methodology through its various stages. The aim is to provide guidelines for researchers wishing to undertake this type of work. We reflect on this methodology, illustrating its advantages and disadvantages in the light of our experience. We show that systematic approaches to literature reviews are non-linear and time-consuming processes which require constant back-and-forth and reflection between the various stages. Nevertheless, their contributions in helping us understand complex subjects, develop expertise and achieve transparency show that they are suitable approaches for the HSS.","PeriodicalId":517384,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of Sociological Methodology/Bulletin de Méthodologie Sociologique","volume":"12 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Why and how to conduct a Scoping Review of literature in the Humanities and Social Sciences? Application to free labour in agriculture\",\"authors\":\"Marie Barisaux, Pierre Gasselin, Lucette Laurens, Guillaume Ollivier\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/07591063241236069\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Literature reviews stand as familiar and relevant tools within the research community, as mean to produce a state of knowledge to justify the relevance of a research question. Among the many methods that can be used, systematic approaches are developing in the Humanities and Social Sciences (HSS). These review methodologies employ rigorous techniques in the identification, retrieval, and analysis of data. The overarching objective is to uphold transparency and replicability in research endeavours, elevating the overall quality and credibility of scholarly work in these disciplines. By presenting the two main systematic approaches to literature reviews – Systematic Literature Reviews (SLRs) and Scoping Reviews (SRs) –, we intend to clarify their respective objectives and methods, so that interested researchers can make an informed choice between them. We thus show that an SR aims to characterise the extent (or scope) of research on a subject or field, whereas an SLR aims to answer a specific question with a view to guiding practices. We also show the interest of these approaches for the HSS. We use a case study – free or unpaid labour in agriculture – to illustrate the different stages of a systematic approach to a literature review. We begin by justifying the choice of an SR over an SLR, and then test the former’s methodology through its various stages. The aim is to provide guidelines for researchers wishing to undertake this type of work. We reflect on this methodology, illustrating its advantages and disadvantages in the light of our experience. We show that systematic approaches to literature reviews are non-linear and time-consuming processes which require constant back-and-forth and reflection between the various stages. Nevertheless, their contributions in helping us understand complex subjects, develop expertise and achieve transparency show that they are suitable approaches for the HSS.\",\"PeriodicalId\":517384,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Bulletin of Sociological Methodology/Bulletin de Méthodologie Sociologique\",\"volume\":\"12 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Bulletin of Sociological Methodology/Bulletin de Méthodologie Sociologique\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/07591063241236069\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bulletin of Sociological Methodology/Bulletin de Méthodologie Sociologique","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07591063241236069","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
文献综述是研究界耳熟能详的相关工具,是为证明研究问题的相关性而提供知识状态的手段。在可以使用的众多方法中,系统性方法正在人文和社会科学(HSS)领域得到发展。这些审查方法在识别、检索和分析数据时采用了严格的技术。其总体目标是维护研究工作的透明度和可复制性,提高这些学科学术工作的整体质量和可信度。通过介绍文献综述的两种主要系统方法--系统文献综述 (SLR) 和范围综述 (SR),我们希望阐明它们各自的目标和方法,以便感兴趣的研究人员在两者之间做出明智的选择。因此,我们要说明的是,文献综述的目的是描述某个主题或领域的研究程度(或范围),而范围界定研究的目的是回答某个具体问题,以指导实践。我们还说明了这些方法对人文科学的意义。我们用一个案例研究--农业中的免费或无偿劳动--来说明系统性文献综述方法的不同 阶段。我们首先说明了选择 SR 而不是 SLR 的理由,然后通过各个阶段对前者的方法进行了测试。目的是为希望开展此类工作的研究人员提供指导。我们对这种方法进行了反思,并根据我们的经验说明了它的优缺点。我们表明,文献综述的系统方法是一个非线性、耗时的过程,需要在各个阶段之间不断地往返和反思。尽管如此,它们在帮助我们理解复杂的课题、发展专业知识和实现透明度方面所做的贡 献表明,它们是适用于人文科学的方法。
Why and how to conduct a Scoping Review of literature in the Humanities and Social Sciences? Application to free labour in agriculture
Literature reviews stand as familiar and relevant tools within the research community, as mean to produce a state of knowledge to justify the relevance of a research question. Among the many methods that can be used, systematic approaches are developing in the Humanities and Social Sciences (HSS). These review methodologies employ rigorous techniques in the identification, retrieval, and analysis of data. The overarching objective is to uphold transparency and replicability in research endeavours, elevating the overall quality and credibility of scholarly work in these disciplines. By presenting the two main systematic approaches to literature reviews – Systematic Literature Reviews (SLRs) and Scoping Reviews (SRs) –, we intend to clarify their respective objectives and methods, so that interested researchers can make an informed choice between them. We thus show that an SR aims to characterise the extent (or scope) of research on a subject or field, whereas an SLR aims to answer a specific question with a view to guiding practices. We also show the interest of these approaches for the HSS. We use a case study – free or unpaid labour in agriculture – to illustrate the different stages of a systematic approach to a literature review. We begin by justifying the choice of an SR over an SLR, and then test the former’s methodology through its various stages. The aim is to provide guidelines for researchers wishing to undertake this type of work. We reflect on this methodology, illustrating its advantages and disadvantages in the light of our experience. We show that systematic approaches to literature reviews are non-linear and time-consuming processes which require constant back-and-forth and reflection between the various stages. Nevertheless, their contributions in helping us understand complex subjects, develop expertise and achieve transparency show that they are suitable approaches for the HSS.