King Seth A, Kostewicz Douglas, Enders Olivia, Burch Taneal, Chitiyo Argnue, Taylor Johanna, DeMaria Sarah, Reid Milsha
College of Education, University of Iowa, 240 South Madison Street, Iowa City, IA 52242 USA.
University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA USA.
Perspect Behav Sci. 2020 Aug 20;43(4):725-760. doi: 10.1007/s40614-020-00265-9. eCollection 2020 Dec.
Literature reviews allow professionals to identify effective interventions and assess developments in research and practice. As in other forms of scientific inquiry, the transparency of literature searches enhances the credibility of findings, particularly in regards to intervention research. The current review evaluated the characteristics of search methods employed in literature reviews appearing in publications concerning behavior analysis ( = 28) from 1997 to 2017. Specific aims included determining the frequency of narrative, systematic, and meta-analytic reviews over time; examining the publication of reviews in specific journals; and evaluating author reports of literature search and selection procedures. Narrative reviews (51.30 = 630) represented the majority of the total sample ( = 1,228), followed by systematic (31.51%; = 387) and meta-analytic (17.18%; = 211) reviews. In contrast to trends in related fields (e.g., special education), narrative reviews continued to represent a large portion of published reviews each year. The evaluated reviews exhibited multiple strengths; nonetheless, issues involving the reporting and execution of searches may limit the validity and replicability of literature reviews. A discussion of implications for research follows an overview of findings.
文献综述使专业人员能够识别有效的干预措施,并评估研究与实践中的进展。与其他形式的科学探究一样,文献检索的透明度提高了研究结果的可信度,尤其是在干预研究方面。本综述评估了1997年至2017年发表的有关行为分析的出版物(= 28)中,文献综述所采用的检索方法的特点。具体目标包括确定不同时期叙述性综述、系统性综述和元分析综述的出现频率;考察特定期刊上综述的发表情况;以及评估作者对文献检索和筛选程序的报告。叙述性综述(51.30 = 630)占总样本(= 1,228)的大多数,其次是系统性综述(31.51%;= 387)和元分析综述(17.18%;= 211)。与相关领域(如特殊教育)的趋势相反,叙述性综述每年在已发表的综述中仍占很大比例。所评估的综述展现出多种优势;尽管如此,涉及检索报告和执行的问题可能会限制文献综述的有效性和可重复性。在对研究结果进行概述之后,将对研究的意义进行讨论。