|
Systematic reviews have processes for synthesizing multiple studies in order to provide results that are more than the sum of the parts. As with any method, the approaches chosen should be appropriate to the purpose of the study and the nature of the available data As noted by Hart (1998, p. 110) this usually invovles a two-step process: Analysis, "…is the job of systematically breaking down something into its constituent parts and describing how they relate to each other – it is not random dissection but a methodological examination."
Synthesis,
"…is the act of making connections between the parts identified in analysis. It is about recasting the information into a new or different arrangement. That arrangement should show connections and patterns that have not been produced previously."
The purpose of the synthesis can be to:
The process of synthesis is a key challenge for inexperienced researchers and is a skills that is developed through experience. As noted by Ray Pawson, “Evidence, new or old, numerical or narrative, diffuse or condensed, never speaks for itself. The analysis and usage of data is a sense-making exercise” (Pawson, 2001: 17)
There are multiple approaches to synthesis. Please refer to Rousseau, Manning and Denyer (2008) who differentiate between aggregative, interpretative, integrative and explanatory forms of synthesis. Also see Denyer and Tranfield (2006) for a discussion of qualitative appraoches to synthesis and Denyer, Tranfield and Van Aken (2008) for a discussion of explanatory synthesis. Please remember that the method of synthesis must:
References Denyer, D. & Tranfield, D. (2006). Using qualitative research synthesis to build an actionable knowledge base, Management Decision, Vol. 44, 213 - 227. Denyer, D., Tranfield, D. & van Aken, J.E. (2008). Developing design propositions through research synthesis, Organization Studies, Vol. 29, 393-413. Hart, C. (1998) 'Doing a literature review: releasing the social science research imagination', London: SAGE Publications Pawson, R. (2001) 'Evidence Based Policy: I. In search of a method'. Working Paper 3. ESRC Centre for Evidence Based Policy and Practice, Queen Mary, University of London. (Pre-publication version: submitted to Evaluation). Rousseau, D.M., Manning, J. & Denyer, D. (2008). Evidence in Management and Organizational Science: Assembling the field’s full weight of scientific knowledge through syntheses. In A. Brief & J. Walsh (Eds.), Annals of the Academy of Management, Vol. 2., No. 1, 475-515
The text on this page was created by Professor David Denyer, Professor of Organizational Change, Cranfield School of Management. |
