Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

3
  • I upvoted your answer, which is reminiscent of my downvoted answer here: academia.stackexchange.com/a/152333/109931. ;-)
    – Ed V
    Commented Apr 1, 2023 at 18:04
  • "People who write review articles are experts in their respective fields for a large number of years." Not necessarily. I'm doing a Systematic Literature Review as an assignment to a Master Degree course's discipline. Noone in Academia know me so far, noone has told I'm an expert in my field for decades. Commented Jun 26, 2023 at 17:40
  • This is a flawed argument. Review papers support PhD students to narrow down their research questions. For example, if someone is doing a PhD, they have already spent many years in the field and now are narrowing down to one specific area of expertise. And their review of the field could be as good as any expert. The reason this answer is getting upvoted is because the person who asked this question seems more interested in getting published than the research questions. Most of the academicians are like that including the so called 'experts'.
    – kosmos
    Commented Aug 15, 2023 at 1:56