91É«Ç鯬

Writing a literature review

Tips for writing a successful literature review

Personalise
A group of students using laptops while studying indoors on 91É«Ç鯬 Kensington Campus

Why do I need to write a literature review?

When you write a literature review, you are demonstrating that you understand the existing research that has been done on your topic.Ìý

A literature review is an examination of the research that has been conducted in a particular field of study.

When you write a literature review, you are:

  • Showing you have the scholarly ability to research and outline relevant existing knowledge
  • Creating a rationale or justification for your study by positioning it against a gap in the current research
  • Evaluating and synthesising your research in line with the concepts you have set yourself.

Start your literature review

  1. Identify your research question to plan and frame your reading.Ìý
  2. Locate appropriate information. Use keywords to begin topic searches.Ìý
  3. Read and critically evaluate the information you locate.Ìý
  4. Read broadly first to build your understanding of the field. This will help you refine your topic,Ìýidentify gaps in the research and understand how your research builds on current knowledge in the field.Ìý

Important:ÌýYour literature review must relate to and explain your research question.Ìý

Once you have your question, you can refine and narrow the scope of your readings.

  1. Take notes from your reading and also write down your thoughts about the information. This will help bring your ideas together when you start writing.Ìý
  2. Organise your readings and notes in a way that allows you to find information quickly.Ìý
  3. Plan, organise and write critically about the literature you have located. You will need to establish which literature is most pertinent to your review and be able to synthesise and critique the relevant materials. Don't underestimate the planning stage. Having a sense of the overall organisation of your literature review may help expedite the process.Ìý

Write, structure & evaluate

How to write a literature review

When writing your literature review, remember that it will likely only be completed when your thesis is almost finished, as new research is always emerging. At some point, you'll need to be satisfied with what you've gathered and move on. Still, you'll continue refining and updating your review throughout the writing process, and may rewrite it several times.

Reading literature reviews in other theses can be extremely helpful, as they offer structural models you could follow.Ìý

Your review should follow a clear, logical structure that’s easy to follow. Let readers know how it’s organised from the start. While there are common methods to structuring your review, choose what best fits your material. Many reviews combine different structural approaches, and that’s okay too.

How to structure a literature review

There are several ways you might structure your literature review. Here are some options.

Topical or thematic organisation

The research is divided into sections representing the categories or conceptual subjects for your topic. The discussion is organised into these categories or subjects.

Inverted pyramid organisation

The literature review begins with a discussion of the related literature from a broad perspective. It then deals with more and more specific or localised studies that focus increasingly on the specific question at hand.

Chronological organisation

The discussion of the research /articles is ordered according to a historical or developmental context.

The 'Classic' studies organisation

A discussion or outline of the major writings regarded as significant in your area of study. (Remember that in nearly all research there are 'benchmark' studies or articles that should be acknowledged).

Discussing and evaluating the literature

Critically examine the literature

The literature review needs to critically examine the texts that relate to your research question, rather than just list what you have located. Therefore, you must link the literature to your research question, demonstrating how it supports or extends the topic or the existing knowledge in the area.

You should also highlight the strengths, weaknesses and omissions of the literature, providing a critique of the research. Hence, the language used in a literature review is often evaluative and demonstrates your perspectives of the literature in relation to your question.

Make your 'voice' clear

Your 'voice', that is, your perspective, position or standpoint, should be clearly identifiable in the literature review, as in the thesis as a whole. However, in the literature review because you are writing about other people's work it is easy for your own 'voice' to be lost. The literature review then reads like a mixture of different tones and arguments.

It is important that, firstly, your theoretical position is clearly and strongly stated and that your critical evaluations are an integral part of this. Secondly, your language must indicate your own or other writers' attitudes to the question or issue. Some ways of using language to do this are outlined in the Text Sample on the next page.

Examples

  • Here you will find some examples from past Honours theses. The first set of examples shows part of the Table of Contents, so that you can see the kind of information included in a literature review. What can you notice about how the students have organised their reviews?Ìý

    Example A:

    From the School of Biotechnology and Biomolecular Sciences

    1. INTRODUCTION ............................................... 1

    1.1 HEPATITIS C VIRUS................................. 1

    Ìý

    1.1.1 Genome ................................................ 1
    1.1.2 Pathogenesis.......................................... 2
    1.1.3 Transmission.......................................... 3
    1.1.4 Epidemiology.......................................... 5
    1.1.5 Treatment.............................................. 5

    1.2 QUASISPECIES............................................ 7

    1.2.1 Quasispecies and Treatment Outcome....... 7

    1.3 METHODS TO ANALYSE QUASISPECIES........... 8

    1.3.1 Cloning and Sequencing........................... 9
    1.3.2 Heteroduplex Mobility Analysis (HMA)........ 9
    1.3.3 Capillary Electrophoresis......................... 11Ìý

    1.4 HYPOTHESIS AND AIMS ............................... 11Ìý

    (Oon 2005, p.ii)

    Ìý

    Example BÌý

    From the School of Photovoltaic and Renewable Energy Engineering

    2. LITERATURE REVIEW .......................................... 2-1

    2.1 CLASSIC DIFFUSION CONCEPT....................... 2-1

    2.1.1 diffusion mechanisms................................ 2-1
    2.1.2 Fick’s law .................................................. 2-4

    2.2 BORON DIFFUSION ........................................ 2-9

    2.2.1 diffusivity ................................................ 2-9
    2.2.2 segregation coefficient ............................. 2-10
    2.2.3 silicon self-interstitial and diffusion rate....... 2-12
    2.2.4 formation of boron rich layer (brl).............. 2-12
    2.2.5 boron diffusion systems............................. 2-14

    2.3 BORON NITRIDE SOLID SOURCE DIFFUSION..... 2-15

    2.3.1 benefits and challenges.............................. 2-15
    2.3.2 diffusion process........................................ 2-16

    2.4 SOLAR CELL CHARACTERISATION..................... 2-18

  • Here you will find some more examples of literature reviews, showing how the students refer to and comment on previous research. Look at the following examples and see how the students summarise several studies and contrast differing findings. Also, notice the use of evaluative language to show the student's evaluation of the previous research.

    Key:

    • Summarising language

    • Contrast languageÌý

    • Evaluative language

    Example C

    BODY: "Several studies [5, 6, 7] have reported the benefits of using boron solid sources over other types of boron diffusion source. … On the contrary, Warabisako et al [9] demonstrated that obtaining high efficiencies with boron solid source was no easy task. They reported severe degradation of bulk minority carrier lifetime after boron solid source diffusion" (Chen, 2003, pp.2-14-2-15).

    Example D

    "On evaluation of the studies performed thus far, genotype 1b RdRp proteins have been studied extensively while RdRp proteins from other genotypes have been somewhat ignored.Ìý Kim et al. was the only group to have published a 3a RdRp paper, although their focus was on the template requirement for the NS5B gene as opposed to polymerase activity" (Tan, 2004, pp.15-16)

  • In 1984, Jenny Cushman, in herÌýperceptiveÌýarticle, 'The Chinese community in Australian historiography' made a passionate plea for historians to move away from studies of Australian attitudes to "relocate the Chinese experience within the Chinese community itself" (p. 75). She further urged researchers to investigate the way Chinese customs, legal notions and kinship relations were adapted to the Australian physical and social environment.ÌýIt is tempting to creditÌýmany of the succeeding changes to Cushman's appeal. However, the new approaches must be viewed within the context of the changing tide of historiography and the impact of 'multiculturalism'.

    ...

    But to say this is to point to widerÌýimplicationsÌýfor history making in Australia. The Eurocentric histories of the past cannot simply be corrected by including the 'Chinese', especially if clear ethnic separations based on assumed single identities are maintained.ÌýIt is necessaryÌýto go beyond Orientalist contrasts between us and them, Australian and Chinese, and to engage in a re-examination of sites of difference and dialogue. These sites will show the need to envisage multiple identities.ÌýThey may also sometimesÌýpointÌýto shared experiences of a shared world. Separate histories of ethnic peoples are not enough, especially if they serve to contain and exclude these peoples. Instead, there is a need for a new synthesis in Australian history. The *crucial need for historians is to personally engageÌýwith the contemporary politics of difference.

    Ìý

    Key

    • Attitude marker: Words or phrases that indicate a writer's assessment of or attitude to an issue.

    • Emphatic expressions: Words or phrases which relate to the strength of the claim or to your degree of confidence in what is said.

    • Hedging expression: Words or phrases that make statements about the degree of certainty, possibility or probability of a question.

    • *Relational marker: Words or phrases that indicate, explicitly or implicitly, the writer's relationship to the audience or the scholarly community in which they are writing.

    Ìý

    NB: Technically emphatic expressions, attitude markers and relational markers are also hedging expressions, but they are described here in terms of their primary function.

    There are numerous resources at the 91É«Ç鯬 library that can help support you in the writing of your literature review. Please remember that there is no one way of writing a literature review and that it is essential that you discuss your chosen approach with your supervisor.

    Text source: Ryan, J. (1997). Chinese Australian history. In W. Hudson & G. Bolton (eds) Creating Australia: Changing Australian history. Allen & Unwin, Sydney (pp. 75, 77)

Frequently asked questions (FAQs)

    1. It "provides background information needed to understand your study
    2. Assures your readers that you are familiar with the important research that has been carried out in your area
    3. Establishes your study as one link in a chain of research that is developing and enlarging knowledge in your field" (Weissberg & Buker 1990, p.41)
  • Some possible approaches, which can be combined (there are others):Ìý

    1. Organised around key themes or debates
    2. From distant to close; from less specific to more specific
    3. Generic knowledge
      1. Conceptual framework
      2. Understanding of specific context
      3. Applying theory to context
    4. ÌýA methodological approach, following the different methods used in your field.
  • The referencing system you follow will be that of one of the leading journals in your field: check with your supervisor.

  • How you refer to authors will depend on whether you want to focus:Ìý

    • On the information: use name/number in parentheses. e.g.: It was demonstrated [2] or It was demonstrated (Williams, 2003)
    • On the author: use acknowledging phrases e.g. Williams (2003) demonstrated that… or Williams [2] demonstrated that…
  • Unless your School specifies the length, you can use the following as a rough guide:

    • Around 15-30% of the whole thesis

    OR

    • Your thesis is expected to be 60% your own work. If your literature review is more than 40% of your thesis, it’s probably too long.
  • You’re expected to show that:

    1. You can recognise the relevant and important research in your field
    2. You can understand this research by organising and evaluating it
    3. You can see where there is a gap in the research which your study will attempt to fill.

Have a question?

Contact us for advice on all things 91É«Ç鯬 Bengaluru, including faculty-specific questions, essential services, support and development. We’re here to help at BengaluruStudentHub@unsw.edu.au.