Had this conversation the other day, thought it was worth sharing:
Daniel S says:
How do you attack a lit search on a totally new area?
Do you start a new notebook?
JimDavies says:
I don't use paper. I start a new lit review file in my lit review directory
lit-reviews/face-to-face-human.txt
Daniel S says:
What goes in there?
JimDavies says:
SaundersDaviesHaighMaitee2006: Shows that 20% of discussion is talking about girls
referencing the pdf in my articles directory and the paper in my files
Daniel S says:
So a blurb about each paper you "process"
JimDavies says:
yes, and perhaps the sentence you'd cite it in
put the paper in multiple lit review files to handle crossreferencing
Daniel S says:
Nice. So what constitutes an individual review? Like on some question or subject area?
JimDavies says:
you mean a text file?
Daniel S says:
Yes
JimDavies says:
a subject area. I don' thave a systematic way to decide the granularity.
Daniel S says:
Do you organize under subheadings within a file?
JimDavies says:
no. visual.txt, visual-analogy.txt, analogy.txt
flat file system, not subdivisions within a file
I have too many refs to keep track of indentation and subdivision within a file
The articles do not even have an order in a file
Daniel S says:
Ok, so you use it as a bin and go for smaller order insertion time versus extraction time (which is still very fast I'm sure)
JimDavies says:
I follow the stub with an R if read, and S if summarized on my website
Daniel S says:
Oh ok so you don't have separate lists for "to read" vs "have read" or "not sure if I want to read"
JimDavies says:
no. it's just so if I want all papers relevant, I know where to go
Daniel S says:
So if you look into something and it isn't relevant you might take it out. It's just a big heap of papers etc. related to the topic, some read, some not etc
JimDavies says:
yes but if the paper is in my articles computer directory or in paper form in my file,it must be in at least one review document, so it's not lost. They are the index to the paper file system. I can grep on the directory to find papers. grep -i saunders *
Daniel S says:
So the heap has threads leading out of it to the real active papers
Daniel S says:
What about books? How do you read books in a big lit review?
JimDavies says:
Saunders2007: RS proved a theory of everything
if it's just a chapter, I note it as such
but I will put books in there without having read them if I'm pretty sure they're relevant
2 comments:
Having used a whole different set of techniques when I was working on my Ph.D. thesis (U. of T. 1984, English Lit), I was fascinated and delighted to read your blog. I'm very impressed that someone works so hard to use his time more efficiently. I never did, and that's why I remain dilatory even now, twenty years later.
But I do find that breaking a task down is sometimes the only thing that allows it to be done at all. Everything substantial I have ever done I have done by working on it a little each day rather than trying to accomplish everything all at once.
I might not have commented at all, but for the fact that we share something important. It's kind of irrelevant, but it caught my attention. . . .
Yours,
Daniel S
Hello other Daniel S, thank you for your encouraging words. They made my day. You are officially the first person I don't know to post on here. I hope you continue to find things of interest on here, and by all means comment if you have any tips from your PhD experience etc.
Post a Comment