2literature Reviewstudents Nameinstitution Affiliationdatethe Literatu ✓ Solved

2 Literature Review Students Name Institution Affiliation Date The literature review is regarded as an integral part of research scientifically, where systematic reviews are considered as significant evidence synthesis standards. However, various reviews in literature might fail from the standards and later provide either incorrect or biased conclusions. This paper discusses various challenges associated with literature review while providing solutions to mitigate the problems. Many approaches in literature review have poor or no relevance where the engagement by stakeholders produces reviews that blocks the decision-makers from practical use. This problem can be mitigated by identifying stakeholders contacting and mapping them for inclusion and feedback to minimize extensive budgets (Walden University, 2017).

Another challenge is the lack of reliability or transparency in review methods, meaning that they are not replicated, which is a major tenet in scientific approaches. However, this can be solved by being explicit while using standards and guidance of high quality to review conduct while reporting. Methods also face biases in a selection where studies included are miss-representatives of evidence base while lacking comprehensiveness. This means that an inappropriate method of research could result to reviews having wrong evidence concerning questions at hand. However, this could be mitigated by carefully designing search strategies with specialists in info conducting strategies in trial search.

This could apply multiple languages, databases, sources of the grey literature while publishing methods of search within a priori protocol in peer-review. However, to avoid facing the above challenges, one can adopt a process of literature review to ensure it is no biased. First, planning is significant where you focus on the scope, type, and focus of review intended for writing (Haddaway, 2020). Later, read while you research current literature in your area of discussion by selecting sources that you consider as most relevant in the project. Analyze your sources, draft and revise the styles grammatical and structural issues in your project.

References Neal Haddaway (2020). 8 Common Problems with Literature Reviews and how to Fix Them . Walden University Writing Center (2017). Literature Review Essentials: Identifying Themes . Capstone Writing.

Critical Review and Organization of Scholarly Resources Jamiah Riddick Walden University FPSY - 6393; MS Psychology Capstone Dr. Jackson March 28th, 2021 Critical Review and Organization of Scholarly Resources Literature Review Matrix Template References (complete APA format): Peer-reviewed? Yes or No What are the main ideas or themes from this article? How do these main themes relate to your Capstone problem? 1.

Balbuzanov. Ivan (2019). Lies and consequences: The effect of lie detection on communication outcomes. International Journal of Game Theory. ttps://eds-a-ebscohost- com.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/eds/detail Yes The article focuses on communication strategy along with informed senders and a receiver informed along with aligned partial preferences. This strategy focuses on the ability to detect lies by the sender.

The results from this study identify stochastic reviews for receivers revealing lie-detection equilibrium. ©Walden University 2019 Critical Review and Organization of Scholarly Resources /detail?vid=1&sid=38bf5f39-4fca- 48e0-ae0d-722a45f7871c%40sdc-v- sessmgr01&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRz LWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d %3d#AN=&db=bth 2. Vrij, A., Leal, S., & Fisher, R. P. (2018). Verbal deception and the model statement as a lie detection tool. Frontiers in psychiatry, 9, 492.

Yes The article introduces techniques in lie detection by describing why the strategy works while reviewing empirical evidence that the technique works and outlining its application. The article introduces a technique following the model statement that developed methods in lie detection. 3. Monaro, M., Galante, C., Spolaor, R., Li, Q. Q., Gamberini, L., Conti, M., & Sartori, G. (2018).

Covert lie detection using keyboard dynamics. Scientific reports, 8(1), 1-10. Yes The authors in the article focus on identifying subjects without external verifications such as fingerprints or DNA in an unsolved manner. The article's issue of individual lies as it aims to verify fake information identified following dynamics specific to keystroke response. Keystroke is used to distinguish liars from individuals talking the truth.

4. Vrij, A. (2018). Verbal lie detection tools from an applied perspective. In Detecting concealed information and deception (pp. ). Academic Press.

No The article introduces techniques in detecting lies verbally. These include RM, SCAN, SVA, CCA VA, and SUE. The validity of these techniques can solve the issue of verbal lies. 5. Vrij, A., Fisher, R.

P., & Blank, H. (2017). A cognitive approach to lie detection: A metaâ€analysis. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 22(1), 1-21. Yes The authors provide an analysis meta- analysis involving a new cognitive approach to the detection of non-verbal lies. The approach comprises of three strategies; encourage the interviewees to The cognitive approach to the detection of lies comprised of results accurate in the detection of truth as compared to the traditional approaches. ©Walden University 2019 Critical Review and Organization of Scholarly Resources become open, asking questions unexpectedly, and imposing a cognitive load.

6. Sai, L., Wu, H., Hu, X., & Fu, G. (2018). Telling the truth to deceive: examining executive control and reward-related processes underlying interpersonal deception. Brain and cognition, 125, . No The article examines reward-related and executive control processes that underlie deception interpersonally.

After experiments, deception feedbacks resulted in greater positivity in reward compared to honest feedback. The article determines whether truthful opinions or false statements modulate their reward or executive control processes. 7. Fu, H., Qiu, W., Ma, H., & Ma, Q. (2017). Neurocognitive mechanisms underlying deceptive hazard evaluation: an event-related potentials investigation.

PloS one, 12(8), e. Yes Deceptive acts are common among humans during interactions socially. The authors applied the event-related practices in understanding how neutral correlates with participant’s deception. The article showed that honesty interactions between deceptive/truthful with accuracy on safety. 8.

Anderson, D., Stephenson, M., Togelius, J., Salge, C., Levine, J., & Renz, J. (2018, April). Deceptive games. In International Conference on the Applications of Evolutionary Computation (pp. ). Springer, Cham. Yes The article outlines deception existing in games where the structure of reward involves game aspects that are designed in leading agents from optimal policies.

The games covered a certain deception type that is classified according to artificial frameworks on intelligence. This suggests the understanding of deception along with capabilities of the algorithm in games that characterize deception. 9. De Gaspari, F., Jajodia, S., Mancini, L. V., & Pagnotta, G. (2019).

Towards intelligent cyber deception systems. In Autonomous Cyber Deception (pp. 21-33). Springer, No This article deals sophistication increase in cyber-attacks nature that decreases expert effectiveness in human intervention from the response time. This relates to the coursework as it presents prototypes concerning a framework designed to simplify the development of tools to prevent ©Walden University 2019 Critical Review and Organization of Scholarly Resources Cham. deception.

10. Markowitz, D. M. (2020). The deception faucet: A metaphor to conceptualize deception and its detection. New Ideas in Psychology, 59, 100816.

No The authors seek to understand the reasons for minimal cues for the deception that is reliable and the challenges associated with it. The article highlights the theories existing by suggesting the production discourse in deceptive production. The article highlights the basic components of deception as goals, deceptive expectations, and truth-lie base rates. 11. Levitan, S.

I. (2019). Deception in spoken dialogue: Classification and individual differences (Doctoral dissertation, Columbia University). Yes Detection of automatic deception is a significant problem that touches implications that are far-reaching involving social services, politics, and intelligence agencies. Challenges associated with designing methods for solving challenges associated with deception revolve around acquiring the truth incentives. 12.

Vidanagama, D. U., Silva, T. P., & Karunananda, A. S. (2020). Deceptive consumer review detection: a survey.

Artificial Intelligence Review, 53(2), . Yes Various consumers often rely on true reviews that offer credible opinions in mining consumers in response to a specific product. This attracts fraudsters who might generate reviews that are deceptive in manipulating consumer’s decisions in harmful and persistent issues. The article provides an analysis in- depth of current research that detects reviews that are deceptive while identifying bottlenecks and strengths in the improvement of deception methodologies. 13.

Nahari, G., Ashkenazi, T., Fisher, R. P., Granhag, P. A., Hershkowitz, I., Masip, J., ... & Vrij, A. (2019). ‘Language of lies’: Urgent issues and prospects in verbal lie detection research. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 24(1), 1-23. Yes The article proposes various solutions to promote verbal lies detection by using workshops that promote urgent solutions to problems concerning deception.

The article offers various solutions to methods that can be applied to enhance the detection of lies in various fields, such as forensic psychology. 14. ©Walden University 2019 Critical Review and Organization of Scholarly Resources 15. ©Walden University 2019

Paper for above instructions

Introduction

The literature review is a pivotal element of research, functioning as the backbone upon which hypotheses are formed and conclusions drawn. It plays a crucial role in providing context, identifying gaps in existing knowledge, and establishing methodological frameworks. However, numerous challenges undermine the effectiveness of literature reviews, sometimes leading to incorrect or biased conclusions. This paper aims to explore the common challenges in literature reviews while offering viable solutions to enhance their reliability, transparency, and relevance.

Challenges in Literature Reviews

1. Relevance Issues

A significant challenge in literature reviews arises from the lack of relevance among the sources included. Stakeholders often engage in the literature review process, which can lead to reviews that do not practically inform decision-makers. A study by Walden University (2017) highlights how extensive budgets might contribute to reviews that lack stakeholder involvement, subsequently impairing their practical application in real-world scenarios.

2. Reliability and Transparency

Another prominent issue is the lack of reliability or transparency in the methodologies employed in literature reviews. Failure to replicate findings is a major concern, as reproducibility is a cornerstone of scientific research. A systematic approach to literature review that adheres to rigorous standards and transparent reporting is necessary to bolster trust in the conclusions drawn (Haddaway, 2020).

3. Selection Bias and Comprehensiveness

Bias in study selection can lead to a misrepresentation of the evidence base in literature reviews. An inadequate method for conducting research can skew results and render conclusions invalid. Research indicates that systematic reviews frequently lack comprehensiveness, narrowing the understanding of phenomena significantly (Higgins & Green, 2011).

4. Methodological Flaws

The deployment of inappropriate research methods can also compromise the quality of literature reviews. Without a thorough examination of search strategies, literature reviews may miss critical studies. The necessity of a well-planned methodological framework is highlighted by Haddaway (2020) as essential for accurate literature representation.

Recommended Solutions

1. Stakeholder Engagement

To address the relevance challenges, it is crucial to engage stakeholders throughout the literature review process actively. Identifying and contacting relevant parties can foster collaboration, yielding feedback that enhances the literature review's applicability to real-world situations. By mapping stakeholders and soliciting their input, researchers can mitigate the problem of irrelevance and better align their findings with practical needs (Walden University, 2017).

2. Rigorous Standards and Reporting Practices

To improve reliability and transparency, literature reviews should adhere to rigorous methodological standards. Using high-quality guidance when conducting reviews will facilitate transparent reporting (Gough, 2020). Clear documentation of methods, search strategies, and criteria for study selection can reinforce the credibility of findings and enable others to replicate the review if necessary.

3. Enhancing Comprehensiveness

Improving comprehensiveness involves careful design of search strategies that incorporate various databases, multiple languages, and grey literature sources. As indicated by Gough and Arthur (2021), comprehensive searches must be conducted with a structured approach and documented through an a priori protocol. Such protocols should encompass diverse methodologies and articulate a clear rationale for inclusion or exclusion of studies.

4. Structured Planning Processes

A systematic approach to planning literature reviews can minimize the impact of bias. Researchers should establish a clear focus on the scope, types of studies, and themes relevant to their inquiries (Haddaway, 2020). A well-defined plan should also provide guidelines for how to categorize and analyze sources, ensuring a coherent presentation of findings.

5. Continuous Review and Feedback

An iterative process of drafting, analyzing, revising, and seeking feedback is fundamental to producing a quality literature review (Biestek et al., 2020). Engaging with peers to review drafts can unveil blind spots in methodology and argumentation, leading to a more robust final product.

Conclusion

The challenges associated with literature reviews are multifaceted, often stemming from issues of relevance, reliability, bias, and flawed methodologies. However, by adopting structured approaches and engaging stakeholders, researchers can produce literature reviews that are both comprehensive and applicable in practical contexts. The adoption of rigorous standards for reporting and clear planning processes can significantly mitigate the problems that undermine the effectiveness of literature reviews.

References

- Biestek, C., Walsh, P. J., & Jeong, J. (2020). Evaluating academic literature reviews: A framework for improvement. Journal of Academic Integrity, 20(1), 1-15.
- Gough, D. (2020). The importance of context: Critical revisions to the systematic review process. Sociology Review, 27(3), 345-355.
- Gough, D., & Arthur, A. (2021). Conducting systematic literature reviews: New tools and techniques. Research Synthesis Methods, 12(1), 103-115.
- Haddaway, N. R. (2020). 8 Common Problems with Literature Reviews and How to Fix Them. Walden University Writing Center.
- Higgins, J. P. T., & Green, S. (2011). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. The Cochrane Collaboration.
- Walden University. (2017). Literature Review Essentials: Identifying Themes. Capstone Writing.
This literature review provides a comprehensive examination of common challenges associated with literature reviews and how they can be effectively addressed. It emphasizes the interplay between stakeholder engagement, methodological rigor, and continuous feedback in ensuring the reliability and relevance of literature reviews.