Understanding and Writing Literature Review
This blog is an activity assigned by Prof. (Dr.) Dilip Barad as a part of PhD Course for better understanig of Literature review which is an integral part of any reseach, especially a PhD programme. This blog will consist the notes of video lectures on Literature review (it will be linked in this blog and it is also available on Dr. Barad sir's blog. If you are reading this do understand what is literature review I hope this blog helps you but heed my word that it will be incomplete knowledge. I will suggest you watch all the three vidoes and read this linked blog.
1. First Principles: What is a Literature Review (and What It Is Not)?
Before we begin, let's watch a humorous short video. Also available on YouTube Shorts. In the video, a professor introduces a course on quantum physics by referencing Richard Feynman. He says that at that moment, he is the only one who doesn't understand quantum mechanics, but after 7 days or so—all the students attending the course will also be unable to understand it.
Let’s clear up a fundamental confusion:
An annotated bibliography and a literature review are not the same.
An annotated bibliography is a descriptive list — summarizing the content, methods, and conclusions of each source individually.
A literature review, by contrast, is a critical, integrative synthesis — it weaves multiple sources into a cohesive narrative that relates directly to your research question or thesis argument.
The Derridean Lens: Differentiating with Precision
As Jacques Derrida emphasized in his deconstructive philosophy, understanding something often starts with clarifying what it is not. Also in Literary Criticism his theory of Deconstruction has been used to analyze literary texts, revealing the instability of meaning and the ways in which texts are open to multiple interpretations.
So here’s what a literature review is not:
- It is not a mere list of sources.
- It is not a set of summaries.
- It is not neutral cataloguing.
Instead, it is a dynamic scholarly conversation — one where you stand on the shoulders of giants, as Newton famously put it, to see further by building on prior knowledge.
Think of John Dryden’s Essay on Dramatic Poesy, I.A. Richards’ Archetypal Criticism, or T.S. Eliot’s Tradition and the Individual Talent.
These scholars didn't just summarize what others said — they critically engaged, redefined perspectives, and positioned their voices within existing traditions.
Key takeaway
Your literature review should engage, synthesize, and contextualize prior work — not merely recount it.
2. Why Conduct a Literature Review? Clarifying Its Purpose
A literature review serves multiple purposes — all of which strengthen both your research credibility and the scholarly value of your work.
It’s not an academic formality — it’s an intellectual necessity.
Core Functions of a Literature Review
- Map the Knowledge Terrain
Understand what ideas and evidence already exist, and where strengths and weaknesses lie.
- Define Your Guiding Concept
Every literature review must be anchored to a research objective, problem statement, or thesis argument — not just roam aimlessly through a field.
- Identify Gaps
Spot areas that are under-researched, contentious, or ripe for new inquiry.
- Avoid Reinventing the Wheel
Ensure you’re building upon, not duplicating, existing work.
- Connect with Your Scholarly Community
Identify other researchers, seminal works, and opposing views in your area.
- Broaden and Deepen Your Knowledge
Gain breadth (overall field understanding) and depth (specific research niche).
- Situate Your Work in Context
Show how your study fits into — and extends — ongoing scholarly conversations.
The Importance of Opposing Views
An excellent literature review doesn’t just spotlight research that supports your thesis — it engages with dissent.
Consider:
- Sidney’s Defence of Poetry vs. Dryden’s contributions
- Wordsworth’s Preface (new definition of poetry) vs. T.S. Eliot’s tradition argument
- Harold Bloom’s Anxiety of Influence (opposing dominant literary canons)
Robust scholarship = inclusive scholarship.
3. The Two Pillars of a Literature Review
To conduct an effective literature review, you need to master both of these skills:
3.1. Information Seeking
Efficiently search, filter, and curate relevant materials — using both manual and digital methods (databases, search engines, bibliographies).
3.2. Critical Appraisal
Analyze and evaluate sources based on methodological rigor, theoretical soundness, bias, and validity.
Ask not just what does this study say?, but how credible, influential, and relevant is it?
4. What Should a High-Quality Literature Review Achieve?
A gold-standard literature review does the following:
- Organized around your research question
- Synthesizes results — shows what is known and what is not
- Identifies controversies and conflicting perspectives
- Formulates clear research questions that remain unanswered
Guiding Questions to Ask Yourself
- What is the specific thesis, problem, or research question my review helps to define?
- What type of literature review am I conducting?
(Thematic, historical, methodological, theoretical?)
- What is the scope of my review?
(Broad overview or narrow deep dive?)
- Have I critically analyzed, not just summarized, the literature?
- Have I cited and discussed studies contrary to my position?
- Will my literature review be relevant, appropriate, and useful to readers?
Self-audit regularly. These reflective questions will keep your review sharp, critical, and impactful.
5. A Six-Step Practical Approach to Writing Your Literature Review
Once you’ve gathered and appraised your sources, follow this systematic process:
Step 1: Create a Tabular Summary of Works
Organize all reviewed literature in a table (author, topic, theoretical framework, key findings).
Example: From 5,000 articles, one scholar filtered to 246 relevant sources — systematically mapped.
Step 2: Develop an Annotated Bibliography
Write concise, structured summaries for each selected work.
Organize chronologically or alphabetically (initially).
Step 3: Reorganize Based on Argument Structure
Now rearrange sources thematically or conceptually — building a narrative that supports your research question, not just author-date listing.
Step 4: Add Introductions & Conclusions to Each Section
Guide readers with smooth transitions and clear signposting between sections.
Step 5: Write the Overall Introduction & Conclusion for the Review
State your thesis statement clearly and highlight the research gap you're addressing.
Step 6: Compile and Refine the Final Document
Ensure your review:
- Has a clear, informative title
- Contains logically structured sections
- Uses academic conventions (citations, transitions, clarity markers)
6. Bonus Tips for a Polished Literature Review
- Use Linguistic Markers
Signpost your argument (e.g., "In contrast," "Building on," "However,").
- Blend Theory and Empirics
Don’t silo theoretical and empirical literature — integrate them to strengthen your narrative.
- Be Methodologically Transparent
Mention how and where you searched (databases, keywords).
- Balance Citation Breadth and Depth
Don’t just cite many sources — engage deeply with key ones.
Final Thoughts: Crafting a Literature Review That Stands Out
Your literature review isn’t a background chore — it’s your intellectual launchpad.
Done right, it shows:
- You know your field inside out.
- You’ve critically evaluated all relevant work.
- You’ve identified a meaningful gap worth addressing.
- You have positioned your voice within an evolving scholarly conversation
My Opinionated Take
Many scholars rush into data collection or theoretical framing without spending enough time mapping the field. If I were advising a first-year PhD student? Which I am. I would dsend 3–6 months just reading, organizing, and synthesizing literature — it will save years of trouble later.
Reflections and Applications to My Research
No comments:
Post a Comment