Different Types Of Reviews Research Articles

Judicial Review in Public Law and in Contract Law: The Example of 'Student Rules'

In an earlier article, it was established that the rules which govern the relations between universities and their students may find their legal source in prescription, royal charter, parliamentary legislation or contract. This article compares judicial review of student rules according to these different sources, whether this review forms part of public law (the review of byelaws, delegated legislation or the expression of other statutory rule‐making powers) or of contract law (as a matter of the fairness of the rules as terms of the student contract or by the inherent qualification of any contractual rule‐making power in a university by reference to reasonableness). Both similarities and differences in these different types of review are identified and their implication in the student context assessed (notably, as to the exclusivity of the visitorial jurisdiction in the case of chartered universities). Finally, it is argued that the compatibility of student rules with students' human rights may be relevant to review in contract law as well as in public law as a result of the very inclusive nature of the grounds of this review.

Quantitative Measurements of the Influence of Participant Roles during Peer Review Meetings

Peer review meetings (PRMs) are formal meetings during which peers systematically analyze artifacts to improve their quality and report on non-conformities. This paper presents an approach based on protocol analysis for quantifying the influence of participant roles during PRMs. Three views are used to characterize the seven defined participant roles. The project view defines three roles: supervisor, procedure expert and developer. The meeting view defines two roles: author and reviewer, and the task view defines the roles reflecting direct and indirect interest in the artifact under review. The analysis, based on log-linear modeling, shows that review activities have different patterns, depending on their focus: form or content. The influence of each role is analyzed with respect to this focus. Interpretation of the quantitative data leads to the suggestion that PRMs could be improved by creating three different types of reviews, each of which collects together specific roles: form review, cognitive synchronization review and content review.

Three-dimensional dynamic analysis of the pole vault

Knowledge production within the field of business research is accelerating at a tremendous speed while at the same time remaining fragmented and interdisciplinary. This makes it hard to keep up with state-of-the-art and to be at the forefront of research, as well as to assess the collective evidence in a particular area of business research. This is why the literature review as a research method is more relevant than ever. Traditional literature reviews often lack thoroughness and rigor and are conducted ad hoc, rather than following a specific methodology. Therefore, questions can be raised about the quality and trustworthiness of these types of reviews. This paper discusses literature review as a methodology for conducting research and offers an overview of different types of reviews, as well as some guidelines to how to both conduct and evaluate a literature review paper. It also discusses common pitfalls and how to get literature reviews published.

Organizing knowledge syntheses: A taxonomy of literature reviews

A taxonomy of literature reviews in education and psychology is presented. The taxonomy categorizes reviews according to: (a) focus; (b) goal; (c) perspective; (d) coverage; (e) organization; and (f) audience. The seven winners of the American Educational Research Association’s Research Review Award are used to illustrate the taxonomy’s categories. Data on the reliability of taxonomy codings when applied by readers is presented. Results of a survey of review authors provides baseline data on how frequently different types of reviews appear in the education and psychology literature. How the taxonomy might help in judging the quality of literature reviews is discussed, along with more general standards for evaluating reviews.

CITATIONS TO REVIEW SERIALS

It is generally agreed that the scientific review literature is of great value to both the scientific and lay communities. The combination of an overview of the progress of a scientific discipline and the simultaneous evaluation of the more important literature contributing to that development appears to be exceedingly powerful. There are many different types of review ranging from those which are not much more than an annotated bibliography to the seminal, almost monographic, work. Each review, to a variable extent, forms a comprehensive, reasonably up‐to‐date, single source of both didactic and bibliographic information which by its very nature provides an impressive time‐saving tool, particularly for the user searching for information in a somewhat unfamiliar area. Indeed in some disciplines, reviews appear to be used to a greater extent than abstracting and indexing services. The very usefulness of reviews also implies that a great deal of intellectual effort must be put into their production and again this varies considerably, being correlated with the final perceived quality of the review. The investments in intellectual effort may be estimated at 5 million man hours annually and total production costs are conservatively estimated at £65 million annually worldwide.

5 - General Analgesia-Anaesthesia for Vaginal Delivery

Knowledge production within the field of business research is accelerating at a tremendous speed while at the same time remaining fragmented and interdisciplinary. This makes it hard to keep up with state-of-the-art and to be at the forefront of research, as well as to assess the collective evidence in a particular area of business research. This is why the literature review as a research method is more relevant than ever. Traditional literature reviews often lack thoroughness and rigor and are conducted ad hoc, rather than following a specific methodology. Therefore, questions can be raised about the quality and trustworthiness of these types of reviews. This paper discusses literature review as a methodology for conducting research and offers an overview of different types of reviews, as well as some guidelines to how to both conduct and evaluate a literature review paper. It also discusses common pitfalls and how to get literature reviews published.

A study of the effects of different types of review and of structuring sub-titles on the amount learned from a training film

A study of the effects of different types of review and of structuring sub-titles on the amount learned from a training film

On the economy of using steam expansively

Knowledge production within the field of business research is accelerating at a tremendous speed while at the same time remaining fragmented and interdisciplinary. This makes it hard to keep up with state-of-the-art and to be at the forefront of research, as well as to assess the collective evidence in a particular area of business research. This is why the literature review as a research method is more relevant than ever. Traditional literature reviews often lack thoroughness and rigor and are conducted ad hoc, rather than following a specific methodology. Therefore, questions can be raised about the quality and trustworthiness of these types of reviews. This paper discusses literature review as a methodology for conducting research and offers an overview of different types of reviews, as well as some guidelines to how to both conduct and evaluate a literature review paper. It also discusses common pitfalls and how to get literature reviews published.