Finding and Evaluating Appropriate Sources

Covering Assessment Criterion 1.2 of 7CO04, this video focuses on the source selection and evaluation skills that underpin a credible Level 7 literature review. It addresses the full landscape of source types relevant to people practice research, working through academic journal papers, books and edited collections, textbooks, government publications, professional body research, and grey literature — including consultancy output from organisations such as Deloitte and McKinsey. Specific journals named in the video include Human Resource Management Journal, International Journal of Human Resource Management, Personnel Review, and Employee Relations, while government sources discussed include the Department for Business and Trade, the Office for National Statistics, and parliamentary committees.

Alongside source identification, the video addresses what each category of material offers and where its limitations lie. Points of discussion include the significance of the peer review process for academic journal papers, the relationship between books and edited collections in developing depth versus breadth of argument, and the way textbooks function differently from primary research sources at Level 7. For grey literature and professional body output — with particular reference to CIPD research reports and surveys — the video examines questions of methodological transparency, respondent population composition, and the commercial or political considerations that may shape how findings are framed and presented.

The final section of the video is dedicated to source evaluation as a practice in its own right. It covers the assessment of author credentials and institutional affiliation, the identification of predatory journals, and the criteria for judging methodological rigour in both quantitative and qualitative studies — including sample characteristics, data collection methods, and analytical approaches. The video also addresses currency, contextual relevance, funding-related conflicts of interest, and publication bias as factors that bear on how individual studies should be interpreted within a literature review.