Writing literature reviews

Why do you need to review the literature for your thesis or project?

A review of the literature has the following functions:

·         To justify your choice of research question, theoretical or conceptual framework, and method

·         To establish the importance of the topic

·         To provide background information needed to understand the study

·         To show readers you are familiar with significant and/or up-to-date research relevant to the topic

·         To establish your study as one link in a chain of research that is developing knowledge in your field

The review traditionally provides a historical overview of the theory and the research literature, with a special emphasis on the literature specific to the thesis topic. It serves as well to support the argument/proposition behind your thesis, using evidence drawn from authorities or experts in your research field.

Your review of the literature may be

·         stand-alone, or

·         embedded in the discussion, or

·         segmented into a series of chapters on several topics

Giving reader directions

Reader directions are comments on the text in the text: they give signals to the reader about where the author is going, where he or she has got to, and what he or she has achieved so far. The author "intrudes" to direct the reader in some way.

Starting with the top level this can apply to:

The whole thesis ( the focus of this thesis is...)

Another chapter ( the physical properties are presented and analysed in Chapter 5)

The current chapter ( the rest of this chapter will examine...)

Another section ( in the previous section, it was demonstrated...)

The current section ( the following case study will illuminate...)

Passage immediately preceeding or following ( the objectives are as follows:...)

More specifically, these reader directions can function to:

1.       Preview

Example 1: These two techniques are discussed below.

Example 2: In the first section of this chapter, the achievement in this area between 1996 and 1998 will be presented and discussed in detail.

2.       Review

Example 1: In the preceding section, the results of tests performed on interfaces comprising concrete and either Johnstone or Gambier Limestone were outlined.

Example 2: The applications of educational technology elaborated on in the previous chapter has indicted an irreconcilable difference between...

3.       Overview (provide purpose statements)

Example 1: It is now appropriate to consolidate these ideas and to examine POSTGRES in greater detail in relation to its support for rules and objects.

Example 2: This discussion of constructivism has underlined the necessity to consider collaborative learning as a means of providing multiple perspectives. That approach will now be examined in relation to...

Citing previous research

When you cite the work of other authors, you may choose to focus either on the information provided by that author, or on the author him- or herself. The first focus is called information prominent because the information is given primary importance:

Example 1: " For viscoelastic fluids, the behaviour of the time-dependent stresses in the transient shear flows is also very important (Boger et al., 1974)."

In the second type, author-prominent citation, the author's name is given more emphasis. It serves as the subject of the sentence, followed by the date or citation number in parentheses, and then by the information. Such citations can be either strong or weak, depending on how much emphasis is placed on the identity of the author:

Example 2: " Close (1983) developed a simplified theory using an analogy between heat and mass transfer and the equivalent heat transfer only case." ( strong)

Example 3: " Several authors have suggested that automated testing should be more readily accepted (Balcer, 1989; Stahl, 1989; Carver and Tai, 1991)." ( weak)

The review must be shaped by a focus on key areas of interest, including research which provides a background to the topic (depending on whether it is for an Honours thesis or for a PhD). It should also be selective. A common mistake in writing the review is to comment on everything you have read regardless of its relevance. In your writing it is useful to think of the review as a funnel - start wide with the overview and then quickly narrow into discussing the research that relates to your specific topic.

·         Another way of looking at the process, particularly if you are examining several topics (or variables), is to think of yourself as a film director (Rudestam and Newton, 1992). You can think of providing your audience with:

·         long shots to provide a solid sense of the background

·         middle distance shots where the key figures and elements to be examined are brought clearly into view

·         close-up shots where the precise focus of your work is pinpointed

'Literature' can include a range of sources:

·         Journal articles

·         Monographs

·         Computerized databases

·         Conferences proceedings

·         Dissertations

·         Empirical studies

·         Government reports and reports from other bodies

·         Historical records

·         Statistical handbooks

A number of these may be on the web. You should approach such material with the same critical eye as you approach printed material.

What are the examiners looking for?

A review of the literature should:

·         Set up a theoretical framework for your research

·         Show your reader that you...

·         have a clear understanding of the key concepts/ideas/studies/ models related to your topic

·         know about the history of your research area and any related controversies

·         can discuss these ideas in a context appropriate for your own investigation

·         can evaluate the work of others

·         Clarify important definitions/terminology

·         Develop the research space you will also indicate in the Introduction and Abstract

·         Narrow the problem; make the study feasible

Questions you need to ask yourself when you are planning and drafting your Literature Review:

·         What has been done in your field of research? What principles of selection are you going to use?

·         How are you going to order your discussion? Chronological, thematic, conceptual, methodological, or a combination? What section headings will you use?

·         How do the various studies relate to each other? What precise contribution do they make to the field? What are their limitations?

·         How does your own research fit into what has already been done?

Adapted from Literature Review Guide, Gail Craswell, ANU.

Matching introductions and conclusions

The main aim in structuring your review of the literature is to lead your reader to the point where he/she can see no other option than the need to conduct precisely the form of research you are proposing. The introduction and conclusion to your review of the literature, as well as indicating how your research is going to bring to a satisfactory resolution unresolved questions in others' work, can also accomplish additional tasks. You can, for example, identify the key terms and concepts; you can outline the structure of the review itself - by preview in the introduction, or review in the conclusion - and you can then foreshadow the direction of the next section/chapter. (see also Giving Reader Directions).

Consider the key terms in the following introduction to the literature review in a Masters Project in Linguistics and see how the student returns to them in her conclusion.