Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Either way, a literature review provides the researcher/author and the audiences with general information of an existing knowledge of a particular topic. A good literature review has a proper research question, a proper theoretical framework, and/or a chosen research methodology. It serves to situate the current study within the body of the ...
An example of a counterfactual question would be: "What if the Pearl Harbor attack did not happen?"; whereas an alternate history writer would focus on a possible series of events arising therefrom. The line is sometimes blurred as historians may invent more detailed timelines as illustrations of their ideas about the types of changes that ...
Review (literature review, systematic review) Meta-analytic (meta-analysis) Sometimes a distinction is made between "fixed" and "flexible" designs. In some cases, these types coincide with quantitative and qualitative research designs respectively, [6] though this need not be the case. In fixed designs, the design of the study is fixed before ...
A review article is an article that summarizes the current state of understanding on a topic within a certain discipline. [1] [2] A review article is generally considered a secondary source since it may analyze and discuss the method and conclusions in previously published studies.
The literature review identifies flaws or holes in previous research which provides justification for the study. Often, a literature review is conducted in a given subject area before a research question is identified. A gap in the current literature, as identified by a researcher, then engenders a research question.
The historicity of a claim about the past is its factual status. [1] Historicity denotes historical actuality, authenticity, factuality and focuses on the true value of knowledge claims about the past. [2] [3] Some theoreticians characterize historicity as a dimension of all natural phenomena that take place in space and time.
This barrier between fact and value, as construed in epistemology, implies it is impossible to derive ethical claims from factual arguments, or to defend the former using the latter. [2] The fact–value distinction is closely related to, and derived from, the is–ought problem in moral philosophy, characterized by David Hume. [3]
This is only possible if the evidence is possessed by the person, which has prompted various epistemologists to conceive evidence as private mental states like experiences or other beliefs. In philosophy of science , on the other hand, evidence is understood as that which confirms or disconfirms scientific hypotheses and arbitrates between ...