Module 2 - Writing Literature Reviews
True scholarship consists in knowing not what things exist, but what they mean; it is not memory but judgement.
In this module we will explore the crucial task of preparing a literature review. This document is required for Confirmation and Candidature, and for the thesis as well. A literature review should provide a firm intellectual context for the research in the body of the thesis by systematically describing, summarising, evaluating,clarifying and synthesising current thinking in the field.
The review examines the scholarly literature around your particular thesis or hypothesis and indicates to the candidature committee, and later the thesis examiners, that you are familiar with relevant existing scholarship. This work is not a review of the entire field, but of fields related directly to your study, your case studies or experiments. A literature review is a critical survey and assessment of the existing research on a particular defined topic.
Setting the context
A literature review provides intellectual context for the research in the thesis by systematically:
- Describing
- Summarising
- Evaluating
- Clarifying and
- Synthesising current thinking in the field.
JCU’s discipline-specific librarians can help you. You may not be aware of all the databases or literature research tools available to you. Please ensure that your literature search is professional and operates within ethical guidelines. Your librarian can help with this.
“Literature” means the body of published work related to the topic. In many disciplines, this is restricted to peer reviewed journal articles. However, other disciplines allow a broader definition of literature and you may be able to include web-based and multimedia materials and books, as well as journal articles. Ensure before you start that you know exactly what is allowed to be reviewed.
The work you do to create a literature review is not that different to primary data gathering. The “data”, however, are the research outcomes recorded in the journal articles you are reviewing. Therefore, you engage in:
- Problem formulation
- Data collection
- Data evaluation
- Analysis and interpretation
- Public presentation
(List from Justus J Randolph, “A guide to writing a dissertation literature review”, Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation, Vol. 14 No. 13, June 2009.)
Begin early in your study because:
- You build knowledge - you learn about important concepts, research methods & experimental techniques
- You learn how others have approached or conceptualised your topic, and with what success
- You gain insight into particular aspects of your topic that warrant more detailed exploration
- You learn how research findings are presented and discussed in your discipline.
Your literature review will show both:
- the consistent themes that run through the relevant texts; and
- the divergent viewpoints
Take the opportunity to engage with scholarship that goes against your own ideas. The best literature reviews embrace divergent viewpoints and account for them.
Identify areas that have not been sufficiently covered by other authors. Into these gaps you will pour your original thinking. Indicate where your studies will fill these gaps and thereby contribute to the discipline. You will make clear statements about knowledge gaps both in your Confirmation documents and in your thesis.
Marker of thesis quality
According to researchers, examiners form their initial impressions of the quality of your thesis by the time they have finished reading your literature review.
You describe literature that supports your choice of topic, methodology, etc. Justify your project by placing it into the wider field. The way you analyse published literature will also demonstrate your research skills and your professional competence.
Critically analyse the material you encounter, asking questions such as:
- has the author defined the topic and constructed a valid argument;
- is the research valid and reliable; and
- is the paper in a reputable publication?
- What specifically your project will look at;
- Why your project will investigate that particular problem; and
- Why your approach is the best to deal with your particular project, based on an analysis of existing scholarship.
The process of preparing your literature will involve organising literature into groups. All problem solving involves regrouping data and noting the patterns that are created. Gather information into the main component groups that underlie your project. I would like to suggest one way of doing this that might help you to be comprehensive without wasting time on irrelevancies. I call it the “cascade”.
The “cascade”
This is a simple mechanism to set the parameters of your literature review. The process begins with a working title that best summarises your whole research project. That title should be straightforward and informative. Here is an example of a title for a project looking at developing programs to slow down memory loss in aging brains:
"A new program to slow down memory loss in aging brains."
A cascade of ideas
From this title comes a cascade of ideas that must be covered for the project to be comprehensive:
- The aging brain – what it is, why it declines etc.
- The memory process.
- Loss of memory.
- Loss of memory in aging brains (specifically).
- Ways/programs to improve memory loss.
- Existing programs to improve memory loss.
- Methodological problems in developing memory loss programs.
- Advantages of existing programs (Blogg’s method).
- Problems with existing programs (gaps) (e.g. Blogg’s method is not cost-effective).
Use your cascade of ideas as a starting point
Each idea will need sub-sections and sub-sub-sections to ensure that you cover each point comprehensively. Place these points into a table outline structure and start to flesh them out with evidence. Decide how many paragraphs you need to establish each point, then draft theme sentences.
This process will enable you to make a definitive statement about how you will fill the knowledge gap, like this:
"At present, Blogg’s method of transference works well but has proven not to be cost-effective, making it too expensive in many community settings. A new method is needed that can provide a similar level of effectiveness but at a reduced cost. This study aims to eliminate this gap."
When first exploring a field of research new to you, skim the literature. At the beginning, read only the abstract, introduction and discussion. Identify the ideas, theories, questions and controversies that underlie each piece of work.
- What is already known about the area?
- What are the characteristics of the key concepts or the main factors or variables?
- What are the relationships between these key concepts factors or variables?
- What are the existing theories?
- What are the inconsistencies or other shortcomings in understanding?
- What views need to be (further) tested?
- What evidence is lacking, inconclusive, contradictory or too limited?
- Why study (further) the research problem?
- What contribution can your study make?
- What research designs or methods seem unsatisfactory?
Write a synthesis and a critique. You are not just providing evidence of your ability to find the material. You must show that you have understood it and can place it into context. Synthesising and critiquing requires deep consideration of all the material you have identified as important to your topic and an ability to understand how it fits together. Draw relationships between the ideas you encounter, rather than just name them.
Tips for reading difficult material
- Start with more popular or accessible journals, and even consider reading material from non-peer reviewed sources such as popular science magazines, to build your understanding.
- Create a glossary of unfamiliar terms and definitions.
- Read the introduction and conclusion first, before attempting to read the methods or results sections.
- Skim the main sections to establish a sense of scope, purpose and themes before attempting a sentence by sentence reading.
Writing tips
Experiment with different ways of expressing your core thesis terminology. Working on the wording of your central idea/s can be a powerful process for understanding what you are doing, on the basis that writing is part of thinking. Stand back from what you have written to critically analyse the effectiveness of your words.
- Vary sentence and paragraph length.
- Use short sentences for key statements.
- Use sub-headings to break up text and introduce new ideas.
- Use boxed text to introduce case studies or additional information.
- Use direct quotes sparingly, if your discipline allows you to do so. Note that some disciplines do not allow direct quotes at all and you will have to paraphrase all information.
Move from general to specific
Find expressions to move from the general to the specific or vice-versa:
- Contrary to patterns of gendered behaviour in Europe generally, women of the x region typically …
- Compare national patterns with local patterns
- Compare a national trend with the trend in your findings
- Compare global patterns with your findings
Structure of the document
Literature reviews must contain at least three basic elements:
- introduction or background section;
- body that selectively/strategically discusses sources; and
- a conclusion that generally contains a gap statement.
These elements must cohere, with a logical structure throughout.
This section an overview, including the central theme and the organisational pattern and signposts to how the rest of the document will be structured. Take special care with your opening sentence. Craft it carefully to provide an effective and engaging overview of your topic.
Contains discussion of sources and is organised either:
- Chronologically (i.e. based on time as the organising principle)
- Thematically (based on selected themes) or
- Methodologically (based upon the way the research was conducted)
Discusses what you have drawn from reviewing literature so far and sets up the rest of the thesis by showing exactly where your research fits and how you are going to contribute original thought. This part of your literature review establishes the knowledge gap.
Some common problems (adapted from Randolph)
- The review does not clearly relate the findings of the literature review to the researcher’s own study;
- The review relies on secondary sources rather than primary sources in reviewing the literature;
- The review does not consider contrary findings and alternative interpretations.
Key terms
You may need to define and differentiate between key terms. Within your discipline key terms are often used differently - you will need to be explicit about how you are using them.
Here is an example of how key terms are explained in a literature review:
Use of terminology in the literature on competence is ambiguous and confusing, with terms such as competence, competency, capability and performance being used inconsistently and often interchangeably. There appears to be a distinct difference between the meanings of competence and competency (Manley & Garbett 2000). Competence and competences are job-related, being a description of an action, behaviour or outcome that a person should demonstrate in their performance. Competency and competencies, on the other hand, are person-orientated, referring to the person's underlying characteristics and qualities that lead to an effective and/or superior performance in a job. According to Woodruffe (1993), competence is aspects of the job that an individual can perform, while competency is an individual's behaviour underpinning competent performance. In their original uses these terms are specific to particular models or approaches to the topic but usage has become blurred over time.
Truly intellectual work
A good literature review is concise and economical, but comprehensive enough to cover everything you need to cover. This work is truly intellectual in its capacity to make connections between elements of relevant literature, to show your mastery of the subject and your contribution to original thinking.
Organising information
Using automated systems like Endnote can make this work easier (and you can seek help from the Library on how to optimise your use of Endnote), but I recommend that you do not depend too much on these systems. Instead, you should interrogate the literature in a variety of systematic ways that require the exercise of your judgement. Here are a few possible ways to segment your information, using various kinds of “grids”.
Using automated systems like Endnote can make this work easier (and you can seek help from the Library on how to optimise your use of Endnote), but I recommend that you do not depend too much on these systems. Instead, you should interrogate the literature in a variety of systematic ways that require the exercise of your judgement. Here are a few possible ways to segment your information, using various kinds of “grids”.
This simple grid enables you to record basic information about each journal article in such a way that you can later discover patterns:
| Source | Research Question | Theoretical Framework | Methodology | Results | Conclusions |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Source 1 | |||||
| Source 2 | |||||
| ... |
A grid concentrating on one theme or main idea can be useful to record the comments and ideas made on a particular theme or subject in the literature. You will have a handy ready reference for all relevant material on that theme. The themes could be the ideas that came out of the “cascade” exercise described earlier.
| Theme | |
|---|---|
| Idea/information | Reference |
| Idea/information | Reference |
This grid, and the one after, include an element of evaluation, to help you establish the effectiveness or quality of the material you survey.
| Work | Answer | Evaluation |
|---|---|---|
| Smithson 1975 | Eastern Texas, 40 speakers, 20 from rural, 20 from small city. speakers all 50+ (p. 144) | balance rural/city, male/female (+) only older speakers, none born after 1961 (-) |
| Anderton 1987 | SW Alabama. 2 small rural towns. ages 18-70+. all speakers born and raised in the town. | doesn’t mention education, race, or gender (-) all speakers lived in area all life (++) |
If your goal is to provide an overview of a field of research, you might organise and evaluate your sources by theme. For this approach, a source-driven list may be helpful.
| Work | Type of work | Themes/Ideas | Evaluation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jones et al. 2002 | biological study done in Amazon | mutually beneficial relationship between orchids and birds |
scientific study (+) focused more on other varieties of orchids(-) |
| Hillier, 1995 | research compilation on hummingbirds | symbiotic relationships, colour of flower | mentions role of flower colour (+) in attraction, has section on Vanda (+) |
Source: Studies mentioning a relationship between hummingbirds and Vanda coerulea
Note relevant information throughout, such as:
- Are these the leading sources in the field?
- Are they the most recent sources?
- What source answers your question most effectively?
- Least effectively?
- Which sources answer the question most fully?
- Least fully?
- Which sources discuss the topic in specific terms?
- In general terms?
You may re-order the structure of your grids once you have accumulated enough material to see patterns in it.