If you are searching an area where there are a number of prior quantitative studies ,Consider doing a qualitative literature summary. Sum of the summary methods such as tabulating Pro and cons studies are relatively simple. Other methods that compute an effect size may require getting statistical help if you don’t have the statistical skills.
Traditionally literature reviews analyse the positive and negative findings of studies relevant to a proposition.But to draw an overall conclusion,the authors find it difficult to know which studies to weigh the most heavily-the largest,the best experimental design ,the most representative sample ,the valid and reliable instruments? Rarely does in a set of studies satisfy all these criteria,so there are difficult trade-offs to consider. Further where the results of studies are mostly in expected direction but are not statistically significant ,should these be counted as positive evidence or, as the statistical purist would suggest,as merely chance abbreations ? Because of these problems, most traditional reviews conclude with ambiguous generalizations that call for more research.This contributes to the Social and behavioral Sciences having a weak knowledge base. Meta-analysis is a way not only of taking into account a series of near misses but also of summarizing a series of conflicting studies.
When doing a meta-analytic study it is often a good idea to show the results such as comparing the effect sizes: (1) when each sample contributes only one estimate to combined average vs. where there the multiple measures of the effect in a given study a lawyer all of these to enter the combined average to (2)with and without correction for destruction in a range and/ or when the best studies are separated from the approval design and executed ones .
Should you include a meta-analysis in review? The first question to ask yourself is whether there are enough comparables quantitative studies apply the raw data a pilot study of literature will provide an estimate .If the pool of studies is very large,The meta-analysis could possibly become the thesis of itself.
When it asks to be on suitable proposal development effort not development effort,not suitable as the dissertation,but doable and desired,add it to the proposal as a first stage of the study and describe the magnitude of the pool of studies. Because this leaves open the impact of the meta-analysis result on the study base, the proposal on the most likely outcome of the literature review. Also discuss alternative results every direction that serves notice to your reader that you have given this matter from consideration.
Combining a meta-analytic study with traditional judgements of the quality of the studies is particularly used for small pools. Meta-analyses have their advantages,but traditional reviews can take into account the individual circumstances and problems of particular studies that qualitative reviews don’t. Such a section proposal provides good evidence not only that you are top of literature ,but also that you really do understand how to write technically and judgmentally sound literature reviews - clearly, things you wish to demonstrate in this section of the proposal.
