Download Literature Review Outline and more Lecture notes Literature in PDF only on Docsity!
Literature Review Outline
I. Introduction a. Describe the overall topic that you have been investigating, why it is important to the field, and why you are interested in the topic. b. Identify themes and trends in research questions, methodology, and findings. Give a “big picture” of the literature.
II. Theme A^1 a. Overview of characteristics of the theme (commonalities, differences, nuances) b. Sub-theme – narrow but grouped findings related to the theme i. Study 1 (Research question(s), Methods/Participants, Related Findings) ii. Study 2 (Research question(s), Methods/Participants, Related Findings) iii. Study 3 (Research question(s), Methods/Participants, Related Findings) c. Sub-theme – narrow but grouped findings related to the theme i. Study 4 (Research question(s), Methods/Participants, Related Findings) ii. Study 5 (Research question(s), Methods/Participants, Related Findings) iii. Study 6 (Research question(s), Methods/Participants, Related Findings) d. Etc., etc., etc. with other findings that fit Theme A; studies can be repeated if there are multiple findings that fit under more than one theme. However, no need to re- write methods/participants in detail (just enough to remind the reader about the study).
III. Theme B – follow a, b, c, and so on from above
IV. Keep repeating with themes
V. Conclusion: An evaluation/critique of the existing literature. Write several paragraphs. a. What are the contributions of this literature to the field? b. What are the overall strengths? c. What are the overall weaknesses? d. What might be missing? e. What are some next steps for research? The next steps should explicitly address how to “correct” for strengths, weaknesses, and gaps.
Example: Review of the Literature on Girl Culture
Theme A: Resistance Overview of resistance. Sub-theme: Resistance to teachers. Sub-theme: Resistance as strategic. Sub-theme: Resistance as subconscious.
(^1) Remember: The theme is a broad word or phrase that synthesizes a more narrow group of related
findings. E.g., a theme of “Resistance” would include types of resistance, resistance to whom, resisting what, etc.
School of Liberal Arts
University Writing Center “Because writers need readers” Cavanaugh Hall 427 University Library 2125 (317)274-2049 (317)278- www.iupui.edu/~uwc
Literature Review: Synthesizing Multiple Sources
The term “synthesis” means to combine separate elements to form a whole. Writing teachers often use this term when they assign students to write a literature review or other paper that requires the use of a variety of sources. When writing teachers use this term, they often hope that students will write papers that make a variety of connections among source material so that their papers are not organized source- by-source but are organized topic-by-topic to create a whole text. This handout is designed to help students better use synthesis in their writing and will offer strategies in the areas of: (1) pre-writing, (2) writing, (3) recognizing and (4) revising for synthesis.
A common strategy for planning a synthesis paper is to create a “grid of common points.”
To create a grid follow these steps (note: be sure to see example grid on next page):
- As you read your source material, take note of words or ideas that repeat themselves.
- As you read your source material, also make note of conflicts or contradictions in the information.
- Based on the repetitions and contradictions you notice, write down the main research question that the source material answers. A good research question should be open-ended.
- Make a list of the key ways the research answers the question. Make sure your answers account for both the contradictions and repetitions you discovered. Turn these answers into “categories.”
- Create a grid using authors’ names and categories as organizing features.
- Fill in the grid with details from source material.
A grid of common points is a heuristic that allows a writer to group source material into specific categories. These categories can help the writer organize the paper.
1. Planning a Synthesis Paper1. Planning a Synthesis Paper
Once you have completed a grid of common points, you can begin writing your paper. When you begin to write the body of the paper, you may want to follow these steps:
- Select one common point and divide it into sub-topics that represent paragraph size “chunks.”
For example , capital punishment literature on the issue of deterrence has the following sub-topics: (1) the public’s impression that capital punishment does deter crime, (2) researchers’ impressions that capital punishment does not deter crime in most cases, and (3) researchers’ impressions that capital punishment can lead to more crime.
- For each “chunk” create a topic sentence that both (1) synthesizes the literature to be discussed and (2) describes the literature to be discussed. Here are some example topic sentences:
Much of the literature points out that while capital punishment does not deter crime, most Americans still believe that it does deter crime.
(The first highlighted section synthesizes the literature, the second highlighted section describes the literature).
Not only does the literature agree that capital punishment does not deter crime, some literature suggests that capital punishment may in fact cause more crime.
( The first two highlighted sections synthesize the literature and the third highlighted section describes the literature.)
- Support the topic sentences you created in #2 with quotes and paraphrases from source material. As you incorporate source material, make sure to use clear transitions that relate the sources to each other and to your topic sentences.
( For more information about using and citing sources in text, see the Center’s handouts on MLA format, APA format, and integrating sources.)
2. Writing a Synthesis Paper
The following are two parts of a student’s literature review. The first example is an early draft of the literature review. The second example is a revised version. Notice how the student’s revision makes better use of synthesis at both the paragraph and sentence level. The revised example is also more accurate in its portrayal of the literature.
Unrevised Paragraph: Much of the literature agrees that capital punishment is not a crime deterrent. According to Judy Pennington in an interview with Helen Prejean, crime rates in New Orleans went up in the eight weeks following executions. Jimmy Dunne notes that crime rates often go up in the first two or three months following an execution. “Death and the American” argues that America’s crime rate as a whole has increased drastically since the re-instatement of the death penalty in the 1960s. This article notes that 700 crimes are committed for every 100, Americans. Helen Prejean cites Ellis in her book to note that in 1980 500,000 people were behind bars and in 1990 that figure rose to 1.1 million.
Revised Paragraph(s): The literature on capital punishment suggests that it fails as a deterrent in two key ways. First, much of the literature suggests that capital punishment does not lower the crime rate. Helen Prejean, in Deadman Walking , clearly notes that capital punishment does little to lower the crime rate. Prejean argues that the “evidence that executions do not deter crime is conclusive […] the U.S. murder rate is no higher in states that do not have the death penalty than those who do” (110). Prejean’s point is reiterated from a historical perspective in “Death and the American.” Here, the author notes that despite the social and economic upheavals that occurred from the 1930s to the 1960s, the crime rate barely changed (2). However, after the reinstatement of the death penalty in the 1960s, the author notes that “crime rates soared” (2). Steven Hawkins points out that law enforcement officials also agree that the death penalty has failed to stop crime. He explains that a 1995 Peter D. Hart Research Associates survey found that police chiefs believe the death penalty to be “the least effective way of reducing crime” (1). Some of the literature suggests that, in addition to failing to lower the crime rate, capital punishment can lead to more crime. In an interview with Helen Prejean, Judy Pennington notes that in 1987, the crime rate in New Orleans went up 16.3 percent in the quarter following eight executions (7). In Deadman Walking , Prejean elaborates on her position that capital punishment can be related to an increase in crime. She notes that in Canada in 1975, the murder rate peaked “one year before the death penalty was abolished” (110). Capital punishment opponents like Thurgood Marshall and Donald Cabana agree with Prejean that capital punishment has failed as a deterrent and cite similar statistical studies as evidence for this position (Fitzpatrick 3; Hawkins 1). Fitzpatrick also explains that Marshall would remind “us that the question with respect to deterrence is not whether the death penalty is a deterrent but whether it is a better deterrent than life in imprisonment” (53). The literature reviewed seems to overwhelmingly suggest that capital punishment is not the better deterrent.
3. Recognizing Synthesis
Getting Started: Assessing Sources/Creating a Matrix/Writing a
Literature Review
If you’re new to academic research and are writing an argumentative paper for the first time, you will need to first spend time organizing, assessing, and “unpacking” your sources. Once you can see clearly what kinds of voices and perspectives address your research questions, you can enter into the conversation by addressing counter-arguments as well as articulating and supporting your own arguments.
Getting the basic steps down now will help as you move on to upper level classes in your major.
The basics:
To achieve the kind of familiarity with sources required for incorporating them into your own arguments and demonstrating your knowledge, you will need to know: a) how to assess the sources, b) create a matrix, 3) what’s expected when writing a literature review.
ASSESSING SOURCES
Begin the process of evaluating the sources you are finding by first reading the text and summarizing the author's main points by making notes, written or mental, annotations, or other means. In academic writing, you also need to be fully informed about the sources that look relevant to your research: for example, who is the writer and what are his/her credentials, what is the purpose of and audience for the publication and how does a particular source fit into the larger, ongoing conversation about this question. In other words, look at the factors external to the source in order to help you determine its credibility and authority. Answer the following sets of questions for each of your sources:
Author
Conduct a brief search on the author to determine his/her expertise, reputation, and credibility.
Look at citations, articles, and books by this author to find information about who the author is, what his/her credentials are, and what occupation or position s/he holds.
Publication and Audience
- Examine the publication for which the author is writing to determine the author's intended audience, and the publication's reputation, credibility, and target reader/researcher.
- Look in the text for clues to what audience the author is addressing, e.g., specialized or general vocabulary, types of sources cited, explicit references to the audience.
- Look at the publication itself: front/back cover, submission guidelines, editorial board, etc., for an indication of audience and types of articles. Once you're satisfied that your source is credible and reliable, you are ready to analyze the text itself.
Argument/Evidence
- Carefully read the text, looking at the evidence the author is using and the structure of the argument (e.g., whether it moves logically from point to point).
- Identify the range of evidence (personal opinions or observations, research, case studies, analogies, statistics, facts, quotations, etc.).
- Assess how the author presents and discusses alternative perspectives in relation to his/her thesis?
- Locate any gaps or inconsistencies in the development of the argument.
Relevance/Consistency
- Analyze the text in relation to your question and developing thesis, and in relation to other sources you've been reading.
- If it supports your thinking, identify the assumptions/biases/perspectives influencing the writer, and how they compare to your own and those of other writers with whom this one agrees.
- If it is an opposing perspective, identify the assumptions/biases/perspectives influencing the writer, and how they compare to your own and those of other writers with whom this one agrees?
- Determine how this source contributes to your understanding or to generating new questions in your thinking?
CREATING A MATRIX
From your initial forays into the sources, you should have some sense of the range of ways authors answer your question and that there are, in fact, several reasonable and defensible answers to your question. It is important to begin understanding what influences different writers to answer your question differently. You will want to start identifying the perspectives, schools of thought, sets of variables, etc., that influence the question you're trying to answer. You will also want to organize your readings into categories that will help you choose the main arguments in support of and in opposition to your thesis.
WRITING A LITERATURE REVIEW
Bearing in mind that a viable research question produces more than one reasonable answer, the literature review:
Describes the kind of search that was conducted Summarizes, analyzes, and organizes the various responses found in the scholarly conversation regarding the question
Writing A Literature Review andUsing a Synthesis Matrix
My professor says I have to write a literature review, what do I do?
Well, to begin, you have to know that when writing a literature review, the goal of the researcher is to determine the current
state of knowledge about a particular topic by asking, “What do we know or not know about this issue?” In conducting this type ofresearch, it is imperative to examine several different sources to determine where the knowledge overlaps and where it falls short. Aliterature review requires a
synthesis
of different subtopics to come to a greater understanding of the state of knowledge on a larger
issue. It works very much like a jigsaw puzzle. The individual pieces (arguments) must be put together in order to reveal the whole(state of knowledge). So basically I just read the articles and summarize each one separately?
No, a literature review is not a summary. Rather than merely presenting a summary of each source, a literature review should
be organized according to each subtopic discussed about the larger topic. For example, one section of a literature review might read“Researcher A suggests that X is true. Researcher B also argues that X is true, but points out that the effects of X may be differentfrom those suggested by Researcher A.” It is clear that subtopic X is the main idea covered in these sentences. Researchers A and Bagree that X is true, but they disagree on X’s effects. There is both agreement and disagreement, but what links the two arguments isthe fact that they both concern X. This sounds like a lot of information, how can I keep it organized?
Because a literature review is
NOT
a summary of these different sources, it can be very difficult to keep your research
organized. It is especially difficult to organize the information in a way that makes the writing process simpler. One way that seemsparticularly helpful in organizing literature reviews is the
synthesis matrix
. The synthesis matrix is a chart that allows a researcher to
sort and categorize the different arguments presented on an issue. Across the top of the chart are the spaces to record sources, andalong the side of the chart are the spaces to record the main points of argument on the topic at hand. As you examine your first source,you will work vertically in the column belonging to that source, recording as much information as possible about each significant ideapresented in the work. Follow a similar pattern for your following sources. As you find information that relates to your alreadyidentified main points, put it in the pertaining row. In your new sources, you will also probably find new main ideas that you need toadd to your list at the left. You now have a completed matrix!
As you write your review, you will work horizontally in the row belonging to each point discussed. As you combine the
information presented in each row, you will begin to see each section of your paper taking shape. Remember, some of the sourcesmay not cover all of the main ideas listed on the left, but that can be useful also. The gaps on your chart could provide clues about thegaps in the current state of knowledge on your topic.
CREATING YOUR SYNTHESIS MATRIX
It is probably best to begin your chart by labeling the columns both horizontally and vertically. The sample chart below
illustrates how to do this.
Topic: ______________________________________
Source #
Source #
Source #
Source #
Main IdeaA Main IdeaB Label the columns across the top of your chart with the author’s last name or with a few keywords from the title of the work. Thenlabel the sides of the chart with the main ideas that your sources discuss about your topic. As you read each source, make notes in theappropriate column about the information discussed in the work, as shown in the following chart.
Cornelsen
Stewart
Bruley
Scott
- “In the belief that womenwere emotionally andphysically fragile, the militaryquestioned women’scapabilities to fly an aircraft”(p. 114-5), regardless of theirtraining or aptitude- WASP’s not granted veteranstatus until 1979 (p. 115)
from achieving any sort ofequality” (p. 230)- more traditionally male jobsresisted the integration ofwomen workers, while otherindustries were lessresistant… but in most allcases women were consideredtemporary workers (p. 221)- Equal pay rarely given towomen, even though womendid the same work (p. 221)- Women occasionally foundtheir way to positions ofimportance, but were alwaystreated as inferior (p. 226-8)- After the war, women werethe first to be let go becauseof their temporary status (p.230)- Women in the workforcealso faced discrimination fromlabor unions (p. 226)
Opposition:WWII didNOT effectwomen
- Women put in untraditionalroles during/because of thewar, but back to previoussubservient roles after the war(p. 35)
- Women were not affectedbecause they still remained insubordinate positions after thewar (p. 217)
After your chart is complete, notice patterns of information. You may find that your sources, at times, discuss very similar
material, or that they sometimes deal with completely different aspects of your topic. These patterns can be useful in creating a thesisstatement that can guide your writing and keep you focused as you begin your draft.
WRITING YOUR REVIEW
Here is an example from the literature review: “World War Two and its Effect on Women.” This excerpt synthesizes
information without summarizing.
While the articles used in this research agree that women made many advances during the Word War II period, it is crucial torealize that not all these changes were welcomed. In most cases women faced discrimination from just about everyone aroundthem. Women in the workplace were often placed in positions of inferiority or treated as being less physically able to do thesame work the men did. Many women were often not trained because they were viewed as temporary employees who wereonly there for the duration of the war (Bruley, 2003, pp.221-222). Women were very rarely given equal pay as men, eventhough some of them did the same work. Women in the military faced not only mental abuse but also physical harm from theirmale counterparts. According to Cornelsen (2005), there were many instances where female aviators were injured or killed dueto being made to fly ill-maintained aircrafts or aircrafts that had been sabotaged. (p.114)The sample above is an excellent example of how to synthesize information adequately. Notice how when transitioning from
Bruley to Cornelsen the writer notes not only that the two articles are similar, but also
how
they are similar. The writer goes into detail
about Bruley’s discussion of women in industry facing discrimination while noting that Stewart deals with prejudice in the military.The author also transitions well between the Bruley article and the Cornelsen article; rather than summarizing, the author drawscomparisons between the two articles, giving relevant information and at the same time synthesizing the two works._____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________This document was created by NC State University Writing and Speaking Tutorial Service Tutors during Fall 2006. Contributors were LauraIngram, James Hussey, Michelle Tigani, and Mary Hemmelgarn. Special thanks to Stephanie Huneycutt for providing the sample matrix andparagraph. http://www.ncsu.edu/tutorial_center/writespeak
