Dismissive literature reviews reduce understanding – so why do academics keep making them?
How many times have you read an article that confidently states there are few other studies in this area? And how confident are you that this is the case? Richard Phelps argues outside of the sciences there is rarely a lack of pre-existing literature, but claiming so is a rhetorical move to give priority to one’s own research.
Doesn’t all scholarship add to our storehouse of knowledge, you ask? Well, yes, in an absolute sense. Isaac Newton’s generous acknowledgement of his predecessors seeing farther by standing on the shoulders of giants comes to mind.
In a relative sense, however, a new piece of scholarship may subtract from our collective understanding with a most un-Newtonian device: the dismissive literature review. With a dismissive review, a scholar assures an audience that little or no previous research exists on a topic or, if it does, it is so poorly done it is not worth citing.
With a dismissive review, a scholar assures an audience that little or no previous research exists on a topic or, if it does, it is so poorly done it is not worth citing.
