The Why and How of the Integrative Review
By Matthew A. Cronin, Elizabeth George. Organizational Research Methods, 2020
546 citations recorded by the source corpus.
An effective integrative review can provide important insight into the current state of research on a topic and can recommend future research directions. This article discusses different types of reviews and outlines an approach to writing an integrative review. It includes guidance regarding challenges encountered when composing integrative reviews, such as fair representation of different perspectives and synthesizing that knowledge to yield new insights. An integrative review is of unique value among other types of knowledge-synthesis vehicles, such as narrative or systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Because each has distinctive but important approaches to synthesizing empirical knowledge, our protocol for writing integrative reviews is designed to complement these other knowledge-synthesis vehicles to best advance organization science.
Subfields: Communication, Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management, Social Psychology
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/81dc75853764a0350f2527627519a412c1e92ce5
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Communication
In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management
In Social Psychology
Citations in the corpus
- Sample Selection in Systematic Literature Reviews of Management Research (2021, background): “For such, and potentially further, review articles, the development or redirection of theory is of primary interest, which may warrant why they do not focus so much on the rationale for the selection of informing articles (cf. Breslin & Gatrell, 2020; Cronin & George, 2020).”
- Systematicity in Organizational Research Literature Reviews: A Framework and Assessment (2021, unknown): “A common concern is that a review overlooks disconfirming evidence by excluding, discounting, or dismissing studies contrary to the author’s beliefs or values (Cronin & George, 2020).”