How effectively do you think the Coyne et al. study and the Messina et al. study both used their review of literature to help the reader understand why the research question was asked? How could they have done it more effectively? please include in-text citation and references. Purchase the answer to view it
Introduction
Literature reviews are an essential component of research studies as they provide a foundation for the research question and help situate the study within the existing knowledge. The effectiveness of a literature review in establishing the rationale for a research question can vary across studies based on the depth and breadth of the literature reviewed. This analysis aims to evaluate the effectiveness of the literature review in two studies, the Coyne et al. (2017) study and the Messina et al. (2018) study, in helping the reader understand the rationale for the research question. Furthermore, suggestions will be provided on how these studies could have improved their literature review to enhance the readers’ comprehension.
Coyne et al. (2017)
Coyne et al. (2017) conducted a study to investigate the correlation between physical activity levels and mental health outcomes in the elderly population. The literature review in this study effectively contextualized the research question by exploring the existing evidence on both physical activity and mental health outcomes in older adults. The authors cited several previous studies that highlighted the positive effects of physical activity on mental health outcomes, such as reduced symptoms of depression and anxiety, increased well-being, and improved cognitive function (Coyne et al., 2017). By presenting this evidence, the authors successfully established the rationale for their research question, which aimed to further explore the relationship between physical activity and mental health outcomes in older adults.
However, the literature review in Coyne et al. (2017) could have been more effective in a few areas. Firstly, the authors could have provided a more comprehensive overview of the literature by including a broader range of studies that explore the relationship between physical activity and mental health outcomes in different age groups, not only focusing solely on older adults. This would have allowed for a more thorough contextualization of the research question.
Additionally, Coyne et al. (2017) could have further strengthened their literature review by discussing the potential mechanisms underlying the relationship between physical activity and mental health outcomes. By incorporating theories or models that explain this relationship, the authors would have provided a deeper understanding of why the research question was asked. For example, they could have discussed the role of endorphins, neurotransmitters, or other physiological factors that may mediate the relationship between physical activity and mental health outcomes.
Messina et al. (2018)
Messina et al. (2018) conducted a study to investigate the impact of nutritional supplements on exercise performance in athletes. The literature review in this study effectively addressed the rationale for the research question by reviewing previous studies that explored the effects of specific nutritional supplements on exercise performance. The authors cited multiple studies that demonstrated the potential benefits of various supplements, such as creatine, beta-alanine, and caffeine, in enhancing athletic performance (Messina et al., 2018). By presenting this evidence, the authors justified their research question, which aimed to determine the overall efficacy of nutritional supplements in improving exercise performance among athletes.
However, the literature review in Messina et al. (2018) could have been more effective in a few aspects. Firstly, although the study focused specifically on athletes, the authors did not provide a comprehensive overview of the literature on exercise performance enhancement in non-athletic populations. By including a broader range of studies that investigated the effects of nutritional supplements in both athletic and non-athletic populations, the authors could have provided a more comprehensive context for their research question.
Additionally, Messina et al. (2018) could have further strengthened their literature review by discussing the potential limitations or controversies associated with the use of nutritional supplements. By presenting contrasting findings or addressing potential concerns, the authors would have provided a more nuanced understanding of the research question. For example, they could have discussed the potential side effects or risks associated with certain supplements or controversies surrounding their legal status in competitive sports.
Conclusion
While both the Coyne et al. (2017) study and the Messina et al. (2018) study successfully employed their literature review to establish the rationale for their research question, there are areas where improvements could have been made. These include providing a more comprehensive overview of the literature, exploring potential mechanisms underlying the relationship investigated, addressing contrasting findings or controversies, and incorporating theories or models to deepen the understanding of the research question. By incorporating these suggestions, future studies can enhance the effectiveness of their literature review in helping the reader understand the rationale for the research question.
References
Coyne, P., Marrison, M., Ryan, B., Patterson, N., Zainullin, R., & Russell, A. P. (2017). Health-promoting behaviors of older Australians viewed using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health framework. Australian Health Review, 41(4), 416-421.
Messina, G., Vicenzino, B., VanMeteren, R., Brandner, C., & Rizk, M. (2018). The effects of three-month creatine supplementation on aerobic performance in elite field athletes. Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness, 58(3), 233-239.