An evaluation of consultants' works and academics' works with reference to literature review in Housing Studies dissertation projects

An evaluation of consultants' works and academics' works with reference to literature review in Housing Studies dissertation projects (information from perplexity.ai)

My question: "In the context of doing literature review (notably on writing the literature review chapter in the dissertation reports) in Housing Studies dissertation projects, please compare and evaluate the quality of published works of (1) white papers working papers and books of practitioners and consultants and (2) academic publications, primarily in academic journals and books)."

The reply: "Academic publications in journals and books generally offer higher quality for Housing Studies dissertation literature reviews due to rigorous peer review, while practitioner white papers and working papers provide practical insights but often lack equivalent scrutiny. This comparison highlights trade-offs in rigor, relevance, and applicability for dissertation work.

Academic Publications

Journals like Housing Studies undergo double-blind peer review, ensuring methodological soundness and theoretical depth, with metrics such as an SJR of 1.496 and h-index of 95 indicating strong influence. Academic books synthesize extensive research, offering comprehensive frameworks ideal for grounding dissertation arguments. These sources excel in critical engagement and gap identification, meeting criteria like recency, diversity, and synthesis emphasized in Housing Studies projects.

​

Practitioner Works

White papers and working papers from consultants prioritize real-world data and policy applications, such as housing affordability trends, but typically bypass formal peer review, risking bias or incomplete analysis. They supplement reviews with current practitioner perspectives, yet lower citation quality reduces academic credibility compared to journals. Books by practitioners may offer case studies but often focus narrowly on applications over theoretical advancement.

​

Key Comparison 

Aspect	Academic Publications	Practitioner Works
Peer Review	Rigorous, multi-stage	Minimal or internal
Methodological Rigor	High, with replicable standards	Variable, often descriptive
Theoretical Depth	Strong, advances field discourse	Practical, less emphasis on theory
Relevance to Dissertations	Core for critical synthesis	Supplementary for policy insights
Citation Impact	High (e.g., impact score 5.09)	Lower, niche influence

 

Evaluation for Literature Reviews

Prioritize 50-70% academic sources (e.g., 15+ of 30 references) for adequacy in undergraduate Housing Studies dissertations, ensuring relevance, critical analysis, and thematic organization. Practitioner materials enhance diversity and recency but require validation against peer-reviewed works to address gaps like bias. This balance demonstrates scholarly engagement while informing policy-relevant research."

A collection of blog notes on using chatgpt for research purpose.