Ross Woods, rev. 2018, '20-'24
Literature reviews are usually an early part of a research document, such as a dissertation, thesis, or article for a research journal.
The literature review has two main purposes. First, it gives an up to date picture of current research and thinking relevant to your topic and a fair evaluation of the main ideas. This helps to ensure that your research builds on current research and that your research does not unnecessarily repeat work that has already been done. Second, it should justify your core research question and any sub-questions you have. All relevant aspects of the research question should normally appear in the literature review.
Don't treat it as an unhelpful, onerous chore. First, ask questions and look for answers in order to learn something new about your topic. You might even change your views completely. Second, careful treatment of the details is part of being thorough; learning to do so is part of the degree requirements. Third, the better you perceive the current state of knowledge on the topic, the better your research can be.
The literature review represents the current state of knowledge on the topic. It benefits you in many other ways:
Literature reviews also have another benefit for the beginning researcher. They show that the writer can learn a new topic by oneself with minimal help or supervision.
(By the way, literature reviews are also good assignments by themselves. If you have been given the task of writing a literature review as an undergraduate essay, it will most likely be specified as an essay of between 1,500 words and 2,500 words, but the number of items probably won’t be specified.)
Find three or four dissertations on topics similar to yours. The literature reviews are easy to find because they are put in a separate chapter in most dissertations. (Look near the front; it's usually about chapter 2 or 3.) Many journal articles also contain literature reviews.
perfect. They are finished products, and you won't immediately see how they were written.
Different kinds of sources have different levels of value in research:
There are two main kinds of journals:
Journal articles are often relatively short, and they can be quite recent because they take less time to be published than books. The best journals are all referreed, that is, independent reviewers have approved them before publication.
One kind of article is the research article, which are usually from 4,000-6,000 words and are narrowly focussed on a particular topic. They usually have very specialized relevance, so many articles in the same field will not be relevant to your particular research topic. The other kind of article is the book review; reviewers write short articles reviewing new books published in the specialized field of the journal.
For serious research, especially at doctoral level, it should include mainly doctoral dissertations and peer-reviewed journal articles published in the last three to five years. Some monographs are significant enough to be essential, even if they are older. Masters theses are permitted, but most of them are not as useful.
Besides journal articles, you can use many other kinds of sources. You can use books that are primary or secondary sources (called monographs). They are seldom completely up to date because they take so long to get to print but their thought is normally very well developed. In the same way, you can also use chapters of large books, anthology articles, and (sometimes) Internet sources. In most cases, you’ll be looking at the works of individuals, but you can also study leading figures and major movements in the field. Unpublished sources are also permissible.
You don't need to include only include original research items. You can also include critiques of research because they contribute to the current state of knowledge on the topic.
While many of your sources will be books and journal articles, you can also use chapters of large books, anthology articles, dissertations, and Internet sources. (Try to use a range of sources, and not just the Internet.) In most cases, you’ll be looking at the works of individuals, but you can also study leading figures and major movements in the field.
Your literature review should normally include the theory and concepts behind the topic, including critiques. It should also include empirical literature. This is research done in the real (or simulated) world that has produced concrete evidence related to the topic. 2
After that, supervisors have different views, such as:
But there is no literature on my topic
What if you do not find any literature on your topic? In a very few cases, nothing has ever been published that is clearly and directly relevant to your topic. Usually, however, much more has been published than students think, and their main difficulties are finding it and seeing how it is relevant.
In these cases, the best practice is usually to review the literature in the next door
subjects, that is, those closely related to the topic that do not impinge upon it. The point of the review is to argue that nothing or very little has been written directly on the topic, usually called a gap in the literature
. What little there is should be closely examined. I call this Long Bridge
strategy for literature reviews. Your task is to build a long bridge between indirectly relevant literature and the topic. Perhaps you feel that are in a unique situation or your topic seems so creative and new.
Consider three kinds of cases:
An early stage in almost all research projects is to do your reading and keep a set of useful notes on what you read.
Writing a long literature review is much easier and less overwhelming when you have a good method. It reduces some complicated tasks to simpler steps, so that you can put your effort into the tasks that require more thought. Instead of immediately trying to write a literature review, it is a much easier to write an annotated bibliography first as a separate stage.
An annotated bibliography is simply a set of organized notes from a reading project on a particular topic or issue with your evaluation of each source. It is then put into a form that others can read:
Your annotated bibliography should show the role and effects of recent research in the field. It is a way of getting ahead start by learning as much as you can from what has already been written. That way, your research project will build on the work of others rather than repeat it. This also gives a firm theoretical basis for your research.
There is no specific rule about how long (or how many words) a literature review must be in a dissertation, because the criteria is really its thoroughness in dealing with the topic. A short review might be adequate for some topics, while a very long review might be inadequate for other topics. However, as a guess at what you might expect, the literature review in a Masters thesis of 20,000 might be about 5,000 words, and it is often from 30 to 50 pages for a PhD. Journal articles usually have strict word limits, so writers can select a limited number of only the most significant and relevant items.
“How many items should be in the annotated bibliography?” All PhD programs have the same answer: “You need to be exhaustive; the search is is not complete until all relevant documents have been reviewed.” However, different institutions and departments have different definitions of “exhaustive.” For example, one answer is to stop looking only when there isn't anything left to find.
Look at the page on doing an internet search. However, for a literature review, you probably won't do a general search of the internet, because you want to do most of your search in several databases of research articles, for example, Google Scholar and Core.
Look at the page on doing an internet search. However, for a literature review, do most of your search in several databases of research articles, for example, Google Scholar and Core. (A general search of the internet will gather lots of non-research materials of little value.)
When you get a relevant and helpful paper:
Write a brief introduction explaining your purpose. This will most likely be to explore a topic or issue of some kind and say why it is important. You might need to specify the boundaries of the topic. One or two paragraphs is usually enough for an essay.
As an annotated bibliography, the body of your text is the full biblographical details of each source, followed by your comments on each one.
It is adequate to put your items in alphabetical order of the authors last names, just like a normal bibliography. If it helps you to better organize your notes, you can arrange them under section headings for each topic, with the entries under each topic in alphabetical order.
At the end, write a conclusion so your readers know what you concluded. You should mention general patterns, trends, or themes that you can see in the literature. Present your conclusions in an advanced a state as you can justify from the literature. The conclusion should show that you have achieved the purpose that you stated in the introduction.
A book review is a short article that tells readers about a book and gives a fair evaluation of its main ideas. Most academic and professional journals contain reviews of new books that may interest their readers. The purpose is usually to update readers on new ideas in their field. Authors often submit books in the hope of a favorable review, so that they will sell more (Lecturers sometimes ask students to write them to assess their understanding of particular books.)
A book review normally has the following parts:
Another way of expressing this is the MEAL Plan, which can be a helpful way to construct paragraphs when writing literature reviews:
The MEAL plan is helpful but might not always be appropriate. For example, if several articles say almost the same thing, it might be better to report and comment on them together.
Adapted from Wαlden Acαdemic Guides Link, which adapted it from Duke University's Thοmpsοn Writing Prοogrαm (n.d.) "Paragraphing: The MEAL plan." Link
Then type it up for presentation according to your institution's style guide. Check the layout and proofread your typing, grammar, and language style.
___________
1. Based on “Working Backwards: Moving Past Brain Freeze and Writing Your Problem Statement.” Moliver, Nina. (Unpublished paper.)
2. With thanks to Bαrbαrα Pαvεy.
For more information:
The annotations
are your comments on sources relating to your topic. For each source, briefly report the main points or ideas, because you cannot presume that your readers can already know that information. Then say why it’s relevant, important, and unique. Make sure you include in-text references to every source you use so that you don’t plagiarise anything.
Consider anything that would affect your interpretation. Did the author have a particular purpose for writing? Or a particular audience? Did the source have a particular background that you need to tell your readers about? For example, if an author wrote about a particular country, is he/she a local person or a vistor? If the person is a visitor, how long did they live there? Did they work in the field they are describing? (If the author was a military veteran writing about a battle, you might interpret what they say quite differently from a young armchair amateur, or a prominent academic writing on the same topic.)
Write a critique. Be polite; this does not necessarily mean find fault
because you might find that the source is excellent. Use the same kinds of expressions that you’d have others use to critique you, as long as you are direct enough for your readers to get your point. (A few students are so polite that they don't make their points clearly.)
💡 Hint. Read through the whole journal article, including checking the data. Some authors slant their analyses and findings to find what they wanted to find. Others are more tact than fact; they aim to suit funders, current paradigms, or institutional wishes.
💡 Hint. If you have access only to the abstract, you may include it but perhaps only as a Cf. also ...
or See also ...
comment.
Your main goal is to find information that is directly relevant to your specific research topic, especially research findings and conclusions. You can also look for:
how toinformation that might inform or justify your own methodology later on, along with supporting references. (Methodologies are usually spelled out in enough detail for someone else to copy them.)
If you have already written an annotated bibliography, converting it to a literature review is mainly a fairly simple editing task, although it still requires some serious thought
You need to develop an outline and decide on section headings that will make sense to your readers. Annotated bibliographies normally put items in the alphabetical order of authors, which is not very helpful for a literature review.
You now have an annotated bibliography that might look like a chaotic mix of different ideas. You now need to turn into a literature review. Your goal is to put the contents into a neat, easy-to-understand order, in language that flows. You want your readers to be able to enjoy reading something that is informative and flows well but still accurately represents the contents.
In essense, you need to group the same ideas together under the main ideas, so that each main idea will become a major section in the outline. Then you need to create outlines for each major section.
To create an outline, find a specific method that works for you. The method you choose is irrelevant as long as it results in an outline that makes sense for your topic and to your readers:
At least one outline will emerge, even if you don't see it at first; you might even have multiple options from which to choose. Besides, you can change it later on if you come to a better understanding of your topic.
If possible, the outline should take the shape of a funnel, starting with the broad concepts and progressing logically to the specific research question or hypothesis.* However, outlines can take various forms, and many researchers need to combine these different kinds of outlines:
Strategy 1: History of ideas
Tell the story. The easiest and most logical literature review to read is a history of main ideas, showing how they follow along in sequence and to some extent flow from one to another. The historical approach allows you to trace the origins and development of major ideas, and indicate the false starts and the unexpected insights. This kind of review picks up on trends, assumptions, and watersheds. Watch for developments that happened simultaneously; they tend to mess up the simple linear structure. Be careful not to miss out major developments that are outside your normal field of reading.
Strategy 2: Author by author
A common approach is to consider the works of major writers one by one. This is useful when their specific ideas are directly relevant to your topic, their works are watersheds, or when writers don't fit into categories very neatly.
Strategy 3: Shape of the literature
Discuss the areas in which literature has been written, and when trends dictated that much would be written and when little or nothing would be written. The library stacks will give a rough idea, although familiarity with issues and major writers is necessary to do a good review. It includes mention of especially significant writings that spurred a great deal of other literature to be written. The great strength of this approach is that you can mention whole bodies of literature, describe their general characteristics and assumptions, and give specific examples. This is very appropriate when the literature is massive and the whole is more important than individual parts. (Don't be caught out; there are times when you need to treat each author as having unique ideas that must be addressed individually.)
Strategy 4: Integration
You might be reviewing very different sources from different schools of thought, but you are showing that they are all saying the similar things, are based on similar assumptions, or responding to similar kinds of problems. Your task it then to pull them together into one coherent, overarching theory.
Strategy 5: Spaghetti
Perhaps the most difficult is the case in which a great deal has been written directly upon the topic. You feel like you are finding a path through a tightly knit pile of spaghetti. The way to do it is to divide the literature into groupings according to history, assumptions, or methodology. You can then use the body of literature
approach.
* With thanks to Μassimο Sρinella
You might find that new topics emerge and you need to improve the outline to cope with the new topics. Don't be afraid to make the changes even if they are radical. Although perhaps frustrating for you, it is a sign of progress because you have learned something new.
Here's why. Creating and modifying an outline is itself an analytical process; you identify which ideas are the most important and which are the subordinate or peripheral. The challenge is to present them in an order that helps your readers.
You will probably go through several drafts of your outline before it is ready to show your supervisor. When you think it is ready, present it to your supervisor as a one-page list of section headings and subheadings to ask for advice and to approve your direction. Later on, you might change the outline and some of those headings as you revise successive drafts. Just check that the changes are improvements and that your supervisor agrees.
Then, do some editing:
💡 Hint: You can do this by simply moving text around in a word processor document, as long as you save new work as a new file and keep the older versions as backups.
The preliminary literature review will be included in your proposal, and, ultimately, will be the basis of the literature review in the final dissertation.