What Is Review Of Related Literature In English

A main limitation of the present study relates to its exploratory nature and the statistical robustness of the findings. First, only one author conducted the data extraction and coding, meaning there could be a degree of bias and risk of errors in the process. However, a protocol was put in place to guide the project and frequent support and supervision was given with the second author. Some caution is also warranted considering the statistical issues of non-normality, relatively high levels of multicollinearity and chances of random error when dealing with 15 to 17 factors within a relatively small dataset. Still, the relation between author countries and included non-English studies was consistent for all models, except for the bootstrapped ones, which added some credibility to the results, supported by the qualitative data. Unfortunately, the results are somewhat confounded by the 35 systematic reviews—accounting for 17.9% of the total Campbell authorship —that did not report exhaustively on the institutional affiliation of all review authors.

The Cochrane Handbook acknowledges the risk of bias in reviews containing exclusively English language studies and somewhat vaguely recommends 'case-by-case' decisions concerning the inclusion of non-English studies . Similarly, the methodological guidelines for Campbell Collaboration reviews warn against the risk of language bias and encourages authors not to restrict by language . The lack of concrete advice and guidelines is problematic because non-English studies have been shown to be more cumbersome for researchers to identify than English language studies.

Research databases, for example, are less rigorous in their inclusion and indexing of non-English studies . Searching specialised non-English language databases using search terms in the appropriate language might alleviate this problem , but researchers are still limited by their own language skills or their ability to pay for the services of professional translators. For these reasons, reviewers commonly report that it is costly and time-consuming to include non-English studies and use this to justify a priori exclusion . Noteworthy for the present study, the role of non-English studies appears to be largely unassessed within the social sciences where publication channels are more prone to publication biases .

Studies published in languages other than English are often neglected when research teams conduct systematic reviews. Literature on how to deal with non-English studies when conducting reviews have focused on the importance of including such studies, while less attention has been paid to the practical challenges of locating and assessing relevant non-English studies. We investigated the factors which might predict the inclusion of non-English studies in systematic reviews in the social sciences, to better understand how, when and why these are included/excluded. We investigated the factors that might predict the inclusion of studies that are in languages other than English in systematic reviews, particularly in the social sciences. We analysed all 123 systematic reviews published by the Campbell Collaboration, categorising each by its language inclusiveness.

We also sought additional data from review authors and received responses from around one third of our sample. We found few and smaller differences when comparing the three review categories , for example in relation to the number of data sources sought. In practice, however, the number of data sources might be less relevant than which (non-English language specialised) data sources a review team searched. Perhaps the clear dominance of individual researchers based in English-speaking countries and review teams consisting only of team members in these countries reflects a partiality among publication channels for studies in English. Additionally, if the low prevalence of non-English search terms is a proxy for the general rigour with which non-English studies have been pursued, the factor that we identified (authors' working countries) might not be the most effective.

Factors such as the number of search-term languages might be more important in practice if they were applied more often. This speculation is not supported by our statistical models, which did not identify language as being of significant importance. However, the data on author languages was to some degree unreliable as questionnaire respondents expressed uncertainty about languages spoken by their co-authors.

Further, the questionnaire only covered 47 of the 123 review teams, which lowers its statistical power to identify a real relationship, if one exists. The statistical power of another language variable identified by earlier research —the application of non-English search term in the literature search process—is also low due to the few reviews that applied non-English search terms. We therefore cannot confirm the importance of language in accessing non-English studies, nor do we have reason to reject the importance of language diversity. Results of the author questionnaire suggested that the most obvious challenges to include non-English studies were resource constraints and, somewhat linked to this, the reliance of research teams on their own internal language skills. In this light, Fig.1 illustrates that review teams may expect an overwhelming number of studies to screen and full-text assess when seeking to include non-English studies. To counter this challenge, we suggest two options that could lower the work load burden for C2 review teams and improve the review quality.

First, teams might benefit from putting more effort into improving the specificity of their research questions and search strategies. Our regression analyses indicated a negative relationship between the number of studies screened and the inclusion of non-English studies, as well as a positive relationship between the number of studies included and the inclusion of non-English studies. Indeed, Fig.1 does illustrate that LOE-inclusive reviews succeed in including more relevant studies disregarding publication language than LOE-open reviews, while screening substantially fewer studies.

It might also be that the range of author countries is a proxy for knowledge about and access to more diverse or specific publication channels that facilitate the inclusion of non-English studies. Finally, there might be a degree of selection effect operating, whereby international review teams pick research topics with more global relevance and therefore a higher prevalence of non-English studies. Among the 123 reviews in our study, 108 did not exclude non-English studies a priori, and of those who did, few justified their reasons to do so.

The relatively low prevalence of non-English studies in our sample of reviews might be somewhat underestimated by our data extraction approach, counting non-English titles in the study inclusion list. Assuming that this is not the case, the low prevalence might indicate that relevant non-English studies were not available or that the review teams failed to identify these studies. We did not assess whether relevant non-English studies had been overlooked or, if located, were excluded due to risk of bias. Overall, however, the infrequent number of non-English studies does leave some room for C2 to convincingly develop a 'world-library of systematic reviews' . At the moment, we cannot tell to which degree the results can be extrapolated from our sample of Campbell reviews to the wider population of reviews.

What Is Literature Review In English A literature review is an overview of the previously published works on a specific topic. The term can refer to a full scholarly paper or a section of a scholarly work such as a book, or an article. Either way, a literature review is supposed to provide the researcher/author and the audiences with a general image of the existing knowledge on the topic under question. A good literature review can ensure that a proper research question has been asked and a proper theoretical framework and/or research methodology have been chosen. To be precise, a literature review serves to situate the current study within the body of the relevant literature and to provide context for the reader. In such case, the review usually precedes the methodology and results sections of the work.

Reviews which included non-English studies were more likely to be produced by review teams comprised of members working across different countries and languages. For example, international review teams may have easier, perhaps informal, access to and/or knowledge about a more diverse set of language resources and publication channels than teams working within the same country. Or there might be a degree of selection effect in play, whereby international review teams pick research topics with more global relevance and therefore a higher prevalence of non-English studies. Having extracted the majority of data from the C2 reviews, we found that some relevant factors were likely underreported to assess their importance. We also asked respondents what they perceived to be the barriers and facilitators of including non-English studies. These free-text box inputs from the author questionnaire were coded iteratively and aimed to identify the challenges that review teams experience when considering, or actually including, non-English studies in Campbell reviews.

This study sought to identify and explore factors that might predict the inclusion in or exclusion from systematic reviews of studies that are in languages other than English. It also sought to extend the investigation of non-English study inclusion from the health sciences to the social sciences. Literature refers to a collection of published information/materials on a particular area of research or topic, such as books and journal articles of academic value. However, your literature review does not need to be inclusive of every article and book that has been written on your topic because that will be too broad. Rather, it should include the key sources related to the main debates, trends and gaps in your research area.

If you have limited time to conduct research, literature reviews can give you an overview or act as a stepping stone. For professionals, they are useful reports that keep them up to date with what is current in the field. For scholars, the depth and breadth of the literature review emphasizes the credibility of the writer in his or her field. Literature reviews also provide a solid background for a research paper's investigation.

Comprehensive knowledge of the literature of the field is essential to most research papers. This study has highlighted some of the remaining questions around language inclusiveness in systematic reviews and the unique challenges involved in locating and assessing available non-English studies. In light of these issues, we recommend replicating our study using a wider range of reviews, for example using the Cochrane Library as a sample. Such efforts are crucial if the evidence-based movement is to succeed in becoming a global movement of people aiming to build a world library of systematic reviews. Unsurprisingly, authors commonly pointed to issues of cost, time and funding as crucial for the inclusion of non-English studies, as well as lack of language resources . 'Language resources' here refers to people or services external to the review team (e.g. professional and volunteer translators, software translation tools and English abstracts).

'Language skills'—the language competencies within the review teams (e.g. multilingual authors and affiliated staff)—was not experienced as a barrier, nor a facilitator, as often as language resources, but was still pointed to as the third most common barrier. Slightly more often than language skills, authors pointed to the need for training in and guidelines on how to deal with non-English studies and access to non-English specialised databases as important facilitators. Issues of bias and methodological quality were mentioned, although infrequently.

You've decided to focus your literature review on materials dealing with sperm whales. This is because you've just finished reading Moby Dick, and you wonder if that whale's portrayal is really real. You start with some articles about the physiology of sperm whales in biology journals written in the 1980's. But these articles refer to some British biological studies performed on whales in the early 18th century.

Then you look up a book written in 1968 with information on how sperm whales have been portrayed in other forms of art, such as in Alaskan poetry, in French painting, or on whale bone, as the whale hunters in the late 19th century used to do. This makes you wonder about American whaling methods during the time portrayed in Moby Dick, so you find some academic articles published in the last five years on how accurately Herman Melville portrayed the whaling scene in his novel. In addition, this type of literature review is usually much longer than the literature review introducing a study. At the end of the review is a conclusion that once again explicitly ties all of these works together to show how this analysis is itself a contribution to the literature. While it is not necessary to include the terms "Literature Review" or "Review of the Literature" in the title, many literature reviews do indicate the type of article in their title. Whether or not that is necessary or appropriate can also depend on the specific author instructions of the target journal.

Have a look at this article for more input on how to compile a stand-alone review article that is insightful and helpful for other researchers in your field. To counter non-normal data distribution, all models were bootstrapped with 1000 samples. A literature review, like a term paper, is usually organized around ideas, not the sources themselves as an annotated bibliography would be organized.

This means that you will not just simply list your sources and go into detail about each one of them, one at a time. As you read widely but selectively in your topic area, consider instead what themes or issues connect your sources together. How well do they present the material and do they portray it according to an appropriate theory? Some disciplines require that you use information that is as current as possible. In the sciences, for instance, treatments for medical problems are constantly changing according to the latest studies. However, if you are writing a review in the humanities, history, or social sciences, a survey of the history of the literature may be what is needed, because what is important is how perspectives have changed through the years or within a certain time period.

Try sorting through some other current bibliographies or literature reviews in the field to get a sense of what your discipline expects. You can also use this method to consider what is currently of interest to scholars in this field and what is not. Look for other literature reviews in your area of interest or in the discipline and read them to get a sense of the types of themes you might want to look for in your own research or ways to organize your final review. You can simply put the word "review" in your search engine along with your other topic terms to find articles of this type on the Internet or in an electronic database.

The bibliography or reference section of sources you've already read are also excellent entry points into your own research. A meta-analysis is typically a systematic review using statistical methods to effectively combine the data used on all selected studies to produce a more reliable result. A literature review is an account of what has been published on a topic by accredited scholars and researchers. In writing the literature review, your purpose is to convey to your reader what knowledge and ideas have been established on a topic, and what their strengths and weaknesses are. As a piece of writing, the literature review must be defined by a guiding concept (e.g., your research objective, the problem or issue you are discussing, or your argumentative thesis).

It is not just a descriptive list of the material available, or a set of summaries. Finally, after you have finished drafting your literature review, be sure toreceive proofreading and language editing for your academic work. A competent proofread who understands academic writing conventions and the specific style guides used by academic journals will ensure that your paper is ready for publication in your target journal. Second, more review teams could consider explicitly restricting their reviews to English language publications and state, as well as justify, this limitation, e.g. in abstracts, research questions, objectives and eligibility criteria.

Pragmatically restricting reviews to English publications is legitimate but should be clearly acknowledged and the limitations in findings and their relevance should then be properly discussed by review teams. Future C2 guidelines could address these issues more clearly as called for by some of our questionnaire respondents. Abstracts were assessed to determine if they included research questions that stated a geographical focus on predominantly English-speaking countries (i.e. USA, UK, Ireland, Australia and New Zealand), which could lead to categorising the review as EL-justified.

Therefore, we also extracted any information about geographical limitations that were stated in the research objectives, as a way to identify when reviews were EL-justified. Our findings may indicate a connection between the limited inclusion of non-English studies and a lack of resources, which forces review teams to rely on their limited language skills rather than the support of professional translators. If unaddressed, review teams risk ignoring key data and introduce bias in otherwise high-quality reviews. However, the validity and interpretation of our findings should be further assessed if we are to tackle the challenges of dealing with non-English studies. In a larger piece of written work, such as a dissertation or project, a literature review is usually one of the first tasks carried out after deciding on a topic.

Reading combined with critical analysis can help to refine a topic and frame research questions. A literature review establishes familiarity with and understanding of current research in a particular field before carrying out a new investigation. Conducting a literature review should enable you to find out what research has already been done and identify what is unknown within your topic. It provides an overview of current knowledge, allowing you to identify relevant theories, methods, and gaps in the existing research. The more reviews one reads in the context of an article, the better one understands the specific demands for literature in a given study.

Your hypothesis, argument, or guiding concept is the "golden thread" that will ultimately tie the works together and provide readers with specific insights they didn't have before reading your literature review. This is not usually a linear process—authors often go back and check the literature while reformulating their ideas or making adjustments to their study. Sometimes new findings are published before a study is completed and need to be incorporated in the current work. This also means you will not be writing the literature review at any one time, but constantly working on it before, during, and after your study is complete.

These literature reviews are generally a bit broader in scope and can extend further back in time. This means that sometimes a scientific literature review can be highly theoretical, in addition to focusing on specific methods and outcomes of previous studies. In addition, all of its sections refer to the literature rather than detailing a current study.

The literature review published as its own article presents and analyzes as many of the important texts in an area of study as possible to provide background information and context for a current area of research or a study. Stand-alone reviews are an excellent resource for researchers when they are first searching for the most relevant information on an area of study. The literature review found at the beginning of a journal article is used to introduce research related to the specific study and is found in the Introduction section, usually near the end. It is shorter than a stand-alone review because it must limit its scope to very specific studies and theories that are directly relevant to this study. Its purpose is to set research precedence and provide support for the study's theory, methods, results, and/or conclusions.

Not all research articles contain an explicit review of the literature, but many do, whether it is a discrete section or indistinguishable from the rest of the Introduction. Three exploratory multivariate models were tested with the software, SPSS Statistics 25 for Windows, to identify factors that correlate with the number of included non-English studies in the Campbell reviews. Due to the explorative nature of the study and the low statistical power from the small sample, we accepted significant associations at a p value of 0.10 when running regressions to identify possible associations.

F1 Qualifying Start Time Uk

Shown in conjunction with a yellow flag to indicate that the virtual safety car is in use. During this time, the drivers are given minimum sector times that they must stay above. The car's time relative to this set time is measured at each marshalling post , and the difference is referred to as the car's "delta" time. This delta time is reported to the driver, and must remain positive throughout the VSC period else the driver will be penalised.GreenNormal racing conditions apply. This is usually shown following a yellow flag to indicate that the hazard has been passed.

A green flag is shown at all stations for the lap following the end of a full-course yellow . A green flag is also shown at the start of a session.YellowIndicates a hazard on or near the track . Double waved yellows inform drivers that they must slow down as marshals are working on or near to the track and drivers should be prepared to stop.Yellow and red stripedSlippery track, due to oil, water, or loose debris.

Can be seen 'rocked' from side to side to indicate a small animal on track.BlueA blue flag indicates that the driver in front must let faster cars behind them pass because they are being lapped. If the flag is missed 3 times, the driver could be penalised.WhiteIndicates that there is a slow car ahead. Often waved at the end of the pit lane when a car is about to leave the pits.Black and orange circleCar is damaged or has a mechanical problem, must return to the pit lane immediately. Will be accompanied by driver's numberHalf black half whiteWarns a driver for poor sportsmanship or dangerous behaviour. Can be followed by a Black flag upon further infringement. Accompanied by the driver's number.BlackDriver is disqualified.

The main changes have revolved around what is allowed at pit stops. In the early days of Grand Prix racing, a driver would be allowed to continue a race in their teammate's car should theirs develop a problem – in the modern era, cars are so carefully fitted to drivers that this has become impossible. In recent years, the emphasis has been on changing refuelling and tyre change regulations. Since the 2010 season, refuelling – which was reintroduced in 1994 – has not been allowed, to encourage less tactical racing following safety concerns.

The rule requiring both compounds of tyre to be used during the race was introduced in 2007, again to encourage racing on the track. The safety car is another relatively recent innovation that reduced the need to deploy the red flag, allowing races to be completed on time for a growing international live television audience. The current qualifying system was adopted in the 2006 season.

Known as "knock-out" qualifying, it is split into three periods, known as Q1, Q2, and Q3. Drivers are allowed as many laps as they wish within each period. After each period, all times are reset, and only a driver's fastest lap in that period counts. Any timed lap started before the end of that period may be completed, and will count toward that driver's placement.

The number of cars eliminated in each period is dependent on the total number of cars entered into the championship. Currently, with 20 cars, Q1 runs for 18 minutes, and eliminates the slowest five drivers. During this period, any driver whose best lap takes longer than 107% of the fastest time in Q1 will not be allowed to start the race without permission from the stewards. Otherwise, all drivers proceed to the race albeit in the worst starting positions.

In Q2, the 15 remaining drivers have 15 minutes to set one of the ten fastest times and proceed to the next period. Finally, Q3 lasts 12 minutes and sees the remaining ten drivers decide the first ten grid positions. At the beginning of the 2016 Formula 1 season, the FIA introduced a new qualifying format, whereby drivers were knocked out every 90 seconds after a certain amount of time had passed in each session. The aim was to mix up grid positions for the race, but due to unpopularity the FIA reverted to the above qualifying format for the Chinese GP, after running the format for only two races. This approach lasted until the end of 2002 before the rules were changed again because the teams were not running in the early part of the session to take advantage of better track conditions later on.

On the track, the McLaren and Williams teams dominated the 1980s and 1990s, with Brabham also being competitive during the early part of the 1980s, winning two Drivers' Championships with Nelson Piquet. The rivalry between racers Ayrton Senna and Alain Prost became F1's central focus during 1988 and continued until Prost retired at the end of 1993. Senna died at the 1994 San Marino Grand Prix after crashing into a wall on the exit of the notorious curve Tamburello. The FIA worked to improve the sport's safety standards since that weekend, during which Roland Ratzenberger also lost his life in an accident during Saturday qualifying.

Since 1994, three track marshals have lost their lives, one at the 2000 Italian Grand Prix, the second at the 2001 Australian Grand Prix and the third at the 2013 Canadian Grand Prix. As of 2019, each team may have no more than two cars available for use at any time. Each driver may use no more than four engines during a championship season unless they drive for more than one team. If more engines are used, they drop ten places on the starting grid of the event at which an additional engine is used.

The only exception is where the engine is provided by a manufacturer or supplier taking part in its first championship season, in which case up to five may be used by a driver. Each driver may use no more than one gearbox for six consecutive events; every unscheduled gearbox change requires the driver to drop five places on the grid unless they failed to finish the previous race due to reasons beyond the team's control. Each car is allocated one set of the softest tyres for use in Q3. The cars that qualify for Q3 must return them after Q3; the cars that do not qualify for Q3 can use them during the race.

The first ten drivers, i.e. the drivers through to Q3 must start the race on the tyre which set the fastest time in Q2, unless the weather requires the use of wet-weather tyres, in which case all of the rules about the tyres won't be followed. All of the drivers that did not participate in Q3 have free tyre choice for the start of the race. Any penalties that affect grid position are applied at the end of qualifying.

Grid penalties can be applied for driving infractions in the previous or current Grand Prix, or for changing a gearbox or engine component. If a car fails scrutineering, the driver will be excluded from qualifying but will be allowed to start the race from the back of the grid at the race steward's discretion. Grids were generally limited to 26 cars – if the race had more entries, qualification would also decide which drivers would start the race. During the early 1990s, the number of entries was so high that the worst-performing teams had to enter a pre-qualifying session, with the fastest cars allowed through to the main qualifying session. The qualifying format began to change in the early 2000s, with the FIA experimenting with limiting the number of laps, determining the aggregate time over two sessions, and allowing each driver only one qualifying lap. It begins with two free practice sessions on Friday , and one free practice on Saturday.

Additional drivers are allowed to run on Fridays, but only two cars may be used per team, requiring a race driver to give up their seat. A qualifying session is held after the last free practice session. This session determines the starting order for the race on Sunday. During this period, the championship rules were changed frequently by the FIA with the intention of improving the on-track action and cutting costs.

Team orders, legal since the championship started during 1950, were banned during 2002, after several incidents, in which teams openly manipulated race results, generating negative publicity, most famously by Ferrari at the 2002 Austrian Grand Prix. Other changes included the qualifying format, the points scoring system, the technical regulations, and rules specifying how long engines and tyres must last. Bridgestone then went on to sign a contract on 20 December 2007 that officially made them the exclusive tyre supplier for the next three seasons. Aimed at improving the spectacle for both live and TV fans, Sprint Qualifying will shake up Formula 1's longstanding weekend schedule with a 100km sprint race on Saturday afternoon. Sprint Qualifying will replace the traditional qualifying session and set the grid for Sunday's race.

The top 3 drivers in Sprint Qualifying will also be awarded additional points . The introduction of Sprint Qualifying means that the traditional 1-hour qualifying session will now be staged on Friday afternoon, providing fans with a much more exciting first day of on-track action. There's no change to the main race, which will still take place on Sunday afternoon.

It was announced on 29 July 2011, that Sky Sports and the BBC would team up to show the races in F1 from 2012 to 2018. Sky launched a dedicated channel, Sky Sports F1 which covered all races live without commercial interruption as well as live practice and qualifying sessions, along with F1 programming, including interviews, archive action and magazine shows. In 2012 the BBC broadcast live coverage of half of the races in the season. The BBC ended its television contract after the 2015 season, three years earlier than planned. The free-to-air TV rights were picked up by Channel 4 until the end of the 2018 season.

Sky Sports F1 coverage remained unaffected and BBC Radio 5 Live and 5 Live Sports Extra coverage was extended until 2021. If less than 75% of the race laps are completed by the winner, then only half of the points listed in the table are awarded to the drivers and constructors. This has happened on only five occasions in the history of the championship, and it had a notable influence on the final standing of the 1984 season. The last occurrence was at the 2021 Belgian Grand Prix when the race was called off after just 3 laps behind a safety car due to torrential rain. This period featured teams managed by road-car manufacturers Alfa Romeo, Ferrari, Mercedes-Benz, and Maserati.

The first seasons featured pre-war cars like Alfa's 158. They were front-engined, with narrow tyres and 1.5-litre supercharged or 4.5-litre naturally aspirated engines. The 1952 and 1953 World Championships were run to Formula Two regulations, for smaller, less powerful cars, due to concerns over the lack of Formula One cars available. When a new Formula One formula for engines limited to 2.5 litres was reinstated to the world championship for 1954, Mercedes-Benz introduced the advanced W196. This featured innovations such as desmodromic valves and fuel injection, as well as enclosed streamlined bodywork.

Mercedes drivers won the championship for two years, before the team withdrew from all motorsport in the wake of the 1955 Le Mans disaster. Lewis Hamilton came unstuck in last year's gripping F1 title race because he was 'fighting fire' against Max Verstappen , says former driver David Coulthard . Verstappen got the better of Hamilton in a historic battle for the 2021 championship, pipping his arch-rival to the crown after a controversial finale out in Abu Dhabi. The pair had already clashed on several occasions throughout the season, including when Verstappen was penalised for a collision with his title nemesis at the Saudi Arabian Grand Prix. And the Dutchman eventually romped home to glory in contentious fashion, passing Hamilton on the final lap despite a late safety car emerging after a Nicholas Latifi crash. A typical circuit features a stretch of straight road on which the starting grid is situated.

The layout of the rest of the circuit varies widely, although in most cases the circuit runs in a clockwise direction. Those few circuits that run anticlockwise (and therefore have predominantly left-handed corners) can cause drivers neck problems due to the enormous lateral forces generated by F1 cars pulling their heads in the opposite direction to normal. A single race requires hotel rooms to accommodate at least 5,000 visitors.

The race begins with a warm-up lap, after which the cars assemble on the starting grid in the order they qualified. This lap is often referred to as the formation lap, as the cars lap in formation with no overtaking . The warm-up lap allows drivers to check the condition of the track and their car, gives the tyres a chance to warm up to increase traction, and also gives the pit crews time to clear themselves and their equipment from the grid. Drivers will race 17 laps around the Silverstone circuit which will determine Sunday's official starting grid. Teams will have a free choice of starting tyre for the sprint race. There are no mandatory pit stops either so drivers can go flat out on one set of tyres while trying to avoid damage for Sunday's race.

Formula 1 Qualifying Start Time Uk Ello and welcome along to our live blog for Saturday's Saudi Arabia Grand Prix qualifying session, as we work out the starting grid for the penultimate race of the 2021 Formula 1 season. Max Verstappen and Lewis Hamilton are the favourites for pole position and, with overtaking so difficult at the Jeddah Corniche Circuit, starting at the front will be crucial. The season began in dominant fashion for Nico Rosberg, winning the first 4 Grands Prix. His charge was halted by Max Verstappen, who took his maiden win in Spain in his debut race for Red Bull.

After that, the reigning champion Lewis Hamilton decreased the point gap between him and Rosberg to only one point, before taking the championship lead heading into the summer break. Following the break, the 1–2 positioning remained constant until an engine failure for Hamilton in Malaysia left Rosberg in a commanding lead that he would not relinquish in the 5 remaining races. Having won the title by a mere 5 points, Rosberg retired from Formula One at season's end, becoming the first driver since Alain Prost in 1993 to retire after winning the Drivers' Championship.

All 22 featured weekends on the F1 calendar will be broadcast in Australia on Fox Sports, which is available to watch on the Kayo Sports streaming service, as well as Foxtel, Foxtel from Telstra and Foxtel Now. This includes every qualifying and practice session shown live, with no ad breaks during racing to enhance your viewing experience. It is approximately one hour in length and is broken up into three stages with an intermission after the first and second stages. The first stage is 20 minutes and features all 20 cars trying to secure the fastest time.

The five slowest cars in the first period are eliminated and placed at the back of the race grid. The second qualifying period is 15 minutes and the remaining 15 cars compete for a new fastest time. The five slowest cars in this second stage are eliminated to set positions 11 through 15 in the grid. The final ten minutes feature the 10 remaining cars competing for the fastest time to secure pole position.

Using the links above you can find the full weekend schedule, including details of practice and qualifying sessions, support races, press conferences and special events, plus the latest news headlines, circuit information and F1 race results. In the earlier history of Formula One, many races took place outside the World Championship, and local championships run to Formula One regulations also occurred. These events often took place on circuits that were not always suitable for the World Championship, and featured local cars and drivers as well as those competing in the championship.

Most F1 drivers start in kart racing competitions, and then come up through traditional European single-seater series like Formula Ford and Formula Renault to Formula 3, and finally the GP2 Series. GP2 started in 2005, replacing Formula 3000, which itself had replaced Formula Two as the last major stepping-stone into F1. GP2 was rebranded as the FIA Formula 2 Championship in 2017. Most champions from this level graduate into F1, but 2006 GP2 champion Lewis Hamilton became the first F2, F3000 or GP2 champion to win the Formula One driver's title in 2008. Drivers are not required to have competed at this level before entering Formula One.

British F3 has supplied many F1 drivers, with champions, including Nigel Mansell, Ayrton Senna and Mika Häkkinen having moved straight from that series to Formula One, and Max Verstappen made his F1 debut following a single season in European F3. More rarely a driver may be picked from an even lower level, as was the case with 2007 World Champion Kimi Räikkönen, who went straight from Formula Renault to F1. Under normal circumstances, the winner of the race is the first driver to cross the finish line having completed a set number of laps. Although the UK's Stirling Moss was able to compete regularly, he was never able to win the world championship and has been described by The Independent as "The greatest driver to never win the world championship". In a seven-year span between 1955 and 1961, Moss finished as championship runner-up four times and in third place the other three times.

Fangio, however, achieved the record of winning 24 of the 52 races he entered - a record that holds to this day. National championships existed in South Africa and the UK in the 1960s and 1970s. Non-championship Formula One events were held by promoters for many years, but due to the increasing cost of competition, the last of these occurred in 1983. F1 TV is the official Formula 1 channel around the world, giving fans are more intimate view of the pit lane and talking points across every F1 weekend. You even get access to team radio clips during races that don't go out on TV! Although live racing isn't available on the streaming service in Australia, yet, it is packed with over 650 archived Grand Prix available to watch on demand, as well as exclusive documentaries.