1

Eye of the Beholder: Focusing the Lit Review

Literature reviews are funny things. They are enormously useful to read; they are frightfully

difficult to write. Cognitively speaking, your brain begins creating a "review" of what you are

reading because we are wired to find patterns. Literature reviews are never simple listing or

rehashing or summary of all the information a writer has encountered while conducting research.

Instead, information is selected according to the perspective on the topic. Ultimately, the lit

review (whatever its use) is a pattern imposed upon -- or found within -- the information you are

reading.

When you have lots of time, you can wait for the patterns to gel on their own. This is called

"emergent analysis" and it is fairly common at the dissertation level, especially in the

humanities and social sciences, or whenever qualitative research is being conducted. When you

do not have much time, or you are working within a field with strongly conventionalized patterns

of organization, structure is imposed on the literature -- I call this "endemic analysis".

For example, if a medical clinician wants to review the of side effects of different medications

for ADHD, then the clinician reads dozens of articles solely for the information they provide on

side effects. The literature review presents only that information, most probably structured

according to class of drug. I say "probably" because in medicine, endemic analyses include a

hierarchy wherein "drugs" is a higher node and "side effects" is one of the nodes branching off

the drug. Since classes of drugs generally share side effects AND both patients and providers

will discuss drugs-for-treatment as the starting point, then organizing according to drugs makes

most sense.

A medical anthropologist might take a very different point of view (POV). This researcher might

be quite interested in the patient experience of side effects for the purpose of discovering which

side effects bother patients the most (all in all, the medical field does not ask this question! It

usually ranks severity of side effects with regard to causing dysfunction from a medical POV). In

this case, the organization of the lit review will emerge from the data collected by the researcher.

Whatever form of analysis your work entails, you begin the process of writing a literature review

by deciding what part of the universe you will be investigating. While the outcome of the work

you do is assumed to be unique, to contribute to the field, to change what we already know, all

academic work begins with what has already been established. This is the domain of the

literature review.

2 Intelligent Searching: FFSP

A literature review requires literature to work with! This means searching. Begin this process

using the UF Subject Guides. The guides are discipline-specific; just find your area and get

familiar with the databases identified as being central to your field.

It is time to create order out of chaos. To search effectively for the masses of information

you need at this level, you need a process. The four steps below take a close-up view of the

locating-literature process. Steps 1-2 are often blended, and if you are working in an area you are

very familiar with, then you can combine them. Steps 3 and 4 are best done individually. Keep in

mind -- if you are pressed for time, ANY of these steps can be done on their own with just a bit

of discipline and practice.

Find -- got search skills? At first, searching is hard, but gets easier the more you practice.

use key words from research question to supply search terms

mark likely candidates

set a time limit, then move onto filtering

Filter -- this is a quick perusal of possibilities

use titles and abstracts to find likely candidates

move likely candidates for actual reading into a folder or send to self or use tech

tool

bibliographic management software -- Refworks, EndNoteWeb, Mendeley

bookmarking -- pinboard

Select -- a quick read to determine value of article to project

use opportunistic reading strategies

opportunistic reading is a technique for gaining fast understanding of an

article

reading at this level is recursive -- you are supposed to return to a paper more

than once with each visit being a deliberate choice with a deliberate outcome

in mind

Place articles to keep in a folder or send to self

Label or tag articles with project-related key terms

Discard unnecessary reading or place these into a folder called "Later"

Prioritize -- not all reading is created equal

create three piles -- Very Important Papers, Partially Important Papers, Low

Importance Papers

you will be able to distinguish VIPs, PIPs, and LIPs as you gain expertise in your

project

3

Draft a research question or set of questions. Identify key terms. Identify

relationships.

Organized Notes -- The Annotated Bibliography

Essentially, an annotated bibliography is an organized way of taking notes. Dictionary.com

defines annotation as:

1. The act or process of furnishing critical commentary or explanatory notes.

2. A critical or explanatory note; a commentary

and defines "bibliography" as:

1. A list of the works of a specific author or publisher.

2. A list of writings relating to a given subject: a bibliography of Latin American history.

3. A list of writings used or considered by an author in preparing a particular work.

Thus, an "annotated bibliography" is a compilation of sources related to a given subject which

includes critical or explanatory information.

Annotated bibliographies have many uses. First, they provide the format for keeping your

reading load prioritized by including project-specific evaluation. Second, ABs provide a quick

reference for useful definitions and key ideas (if you've done your job). Finally, ABs provide an

overview of the area of inquiry so that you are not repeating work that's already been done.

In the examples below, note that the writer has clearly separated the entry into 4 parts: source (in

a discipline-appropriate citation style), summary/notes, key ideas/quotes (with page number),

and evaluation. The format serves many useful purposes while writing.

1. Clearly distinguishing summary from evaluation accomplishes two objectives: a)

clarifies what must be cited from what is potential original contribution; b) trains

your mind to consistently separate others' content from reaction to content -- in

academic discourse, these two must be kept distinct.

2. Source is ready to copy-and-paste into bibliography.

3. Key ideas/quotes helps the writer keep track of where the most relevant or useful

portions of the article are located, even in fields where quoting is discouraged

(especially biological, medical, and physical sciences).

4

4. Evaluation begins the process of synthesis -- as your brain begins to find patterns

in the information, the evaluation portion allows you to start noting this, thereby

jump-starting the process of mapping knowledge with a particular focus in mind.

Examples

Bolton-maggs PH. Idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura. Arch Dis Child. 2000;83(3):220-2. “The problem with all these treatments [corticosteroids, anti-D, IVIgG] is that they do not treat the underlying disorder, only the low count, so that relapse is common." Page 221. Acute ITP occurs in about 4 children per 100,000 and is usually a benign, self-limiting disorder which may be caused by previous illness and often spontaneously remises. For this reason, and due to the potentially serious side effects of standard treatments for ITP, children with mild bleeding may be best treated with no treatment at all, but simply observation. [excellent source for our main point: that ITP under most circumstances is better left alone with only observation and careful watch of child's activities]

Postill, J. (2010), Researching the Internet. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 16: 646–650. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9655.2010.01644.x A review of four recent anthropological studies of the Internet (Boellstorff 2008, Hinkelbein 2008, Kelty 2008, Roig 2008; search through this blog for details). Considered together, these studies suggest that the Internet is becoming ever more (sub)culturally diversified and that no ‘network logic’ (or totalising logic of another kind) is at work. " I shall argue that the studies’ chief contributions to the field are the strong case made for the existence of virtual places, detailed accounts of a wide range of new and old Internet practices, and the rigorous conceptual work around key notions such as ‘third place’, ‘recursive public’, ‘collaborative filmmaking’, and ‘digital integration’” (647) [am particularly interested in his arguments regarding internet as virtual places and how they become 'third places' -- I think this is a potential lead to how internet users assign 'real life' status to virtual acquaintances]

Mapping Knowledge

Mapping Knowledge is the process by which the writer begins to organize the information

according to a particular perspective. To do so, the writer begins with the focus, the POV about

the literature. Mapping does not work without a clear POV.

5

Mapping can be accomplished with lists or with a concept map. You can write these by hand or

use a computer. If you use a computer, consider using a web-based writing tool like Google

Drive so that you can access your work from anywhere you have an internet connection. G-drive

is not the only one -- also try zoho writer, pirate pad, think free -- MS Office also has online web

apps. If using concept maps, try Text2Mindmap or wisdomap or freemind-- personally, I prefer

web-based programs like Wisdomap because all the information is stored online (freemind is a

very popular product, but is a download). There are many mapping programs and if this form

works for you, explore them! Or, just draw by hand. Finally, there are inexpensive productivity

programs such as Scrivener and ConnectedText and WorkFlowy. The key here is that you should

use the technology you have time for now. Learning new technology is an activity that must be

scheduled into your writing time. The UF libraries offer great workshops for the tech tools we

have access to, especially bibliography management systems.

Whatever system you use, place the POV in the middle or at the top. For example, for my

dissertation, the literature review was organized according to the following concept -- "The

status of transitivity is a logical outcome of the treatment of verbal meaning according to

theoretical frame: verb-oriented, phrase-oriented, discourse-oriented". Mapping the literature

requires nodes or lists constructed for each orientation, a definition for each, then explicit

pointing to the material demonstrating that item. Accomplish this by labeling your bibliography

with letters or numbers for easy reference. Then, for each node/list item, simply include the label

for the source material.

Note that your POV can be functionally endemic or emergent, but it still "belongs" to you! In

fact, this is the most important contribution a literature review -- whatever its purpose -- makes

to a field. The unique perspective and selection of materials by the writer contributes a state-of-

the-art view on that area of research, enhancing understanding for all practitioners.

Take a current project. Craft a POV. Create a map.

6 Synthesizing Sources

Synthesis is:

1. the combining of the constituent elements of separate material or abstract entities into a single or unified entity ( opposed to analysis).

2. a complex whole formed by combining. (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/synthesis)

Where analysis is the process of identifying the parts of a whole, synthesis is the complementary

act of re-combining those parts into a new construct. Essentially, synthesis is the act of creating a

new whole from components identified through analysis. You will analyze and identify

components either through endemic or emergent approaches. Your map will guide how you will

synthesize.

There are two types of synthesis: text level and sentence level. Your map has created the outline

for synthesis at the text level. That is, you have analyzed your pile of reading according to a

POV. Further, you've identified the particular parts of articles thatare sources for each point. The

creation of the map itself is the synthesis of component parts into a new whole.

At the sentence level, synthesis has two purposes: 1) fulfills the academic prime directive to

provide intellectual history (provenance) for each idea that is not your own; 2) is the CYA

strategy for preventing plagiarism.

Provenance

Provenance simply means "place or source of origin". In all academic writing, regardless of

discipline,

every idea/detail/example/image/formula/quote/illustration/figure/etc. requires overt

marking of provenance.

We call this "in text citing" or just "citing" for short. Disciplines vary quite a bit in the particular

rules governing how/when citing happens, so you must learn the rules pertaining to your

discipline. In literature reviews, most of the sentences you write will require citation. Sentences

without citation are clearly related to a previously identified source, common knowledge (terms,

dates, historical facts, natural facts), and your original contributions. In fact, this is how someone

reading your work knows when to attribute information to you.

Loosely speaking, the humanities allows citation at the sentence level and paragraph level; that

is, if most of a paragraph is synthesized from a single source, the citation can wait until the end

of the paragraph. Citation styles include MLA, APA, Chicago, and Turabian. See library guides

for more detail.

On the other hand, the experimental sciences, especially behavioral, biological, and physical

sciences, require sentence-level citation throughout a text. Each sentence must have a citation at

7

the end unless it is an original contribution of the writer OR an unambigious continuation of a

previous sentence. The latter happens only when a clear process is discussed (such as method--

>result) or part-whole (such as experimental population-->control and intervention). Citation

styles include AMA, CSE, IEEE, and APA. See library guides for more detail.

Here is an example of a synthesized definition:

"…telehealth technology (ie, videoconferencing) was used." (Tuerk, Brady, & Grubaugh,

2009)

added to...

"One such method proposed is telemedicine or telehealth, which involves the use of

telecommunication technology for providing assessment and treatment to patients."

(Tuerk, Yoder, Ruggiero, Gros, & Acierno, 2010)

yields...

“Telehealth is the delivery of health care using communication technology (Tuerk, Yoder,

Ruggiero, Gros, & Acierno, 2010) such as videoconferencing (Tuerk, Brady,& Grubaugh,

2009; Tuerk, et al., 2010) or cell phone (Tuerk, et al. 2009; Tuerk et al., 2010).”

Management Tips for Writing the Literature Review

Writing a lit review is a time-intensive venture that begins with gathering sources and taking

organized notes and ends with drafting/revising/revising/revising. For a research report or

dissertation, you will probably write your lit review last; it is often the most difficult portion to

put together. Because we use lit reviews for a variety of purposes, it is difficult to baldly state

"here is how you write this". Instead, I'll offer some general principles for writing any lit review.

1) You must make the organizing focus of the lit review clear. Whether the parts of the lit

review are endemic or emergent, as we'll discuss in the next section of the workshop, your

writing life will be made MUCH easier if you have a single focus statement written at the top of

the paper.

2) The lit review should be written as a series of mini-essays, each its own part of the whole.

To help with this process, organize your lit review using subheadings, even if you don't use

actual subheadings in your field. Then, when you begin drafting...

a) if your field uses subheadings, you will not need transition sentences or paragraphs between

sections -- instead, you will set up the organization in an introductory section

b) if your field does not use subheadings, you will need transition sentences or paragraphs

between sections -- and you will still need to set up the overall organization in an introductory

section.

8

3) Start drafting by creating an outline -- unlike some parts of research papers, this is not a

part most people can write improvisationally! Lit reviews are complex; you will need time to

map, re-map, then finally outline before you can actually begin writing.

4) Begin drafting as early as you can, as soon as you've finished gathering/reading sources and

outlining. This section will take longer to write -- synthesized work always does. Remember that

you have three writing processes to go though: analysis, synthesis, critique. Give yourself the

time to complete them all.

5) Write sections in parallel form. If one section begins with a definition, then all sections

should begin with definitions. If the first section evolves to include examples or case studies,

then all sections should have one, too.

6) Gather unto ye peer reviewers! Because lit reviews often get written last, writers have often

lost perspective on just how novel their ideas are. You've been ramming this information through

your brain day and night for 2-3 years, but your readers are just encountering your version of the

universe for the first time (this is especially true of dissertations and published review papers).

Consequently, you don't remember what it was like to not know what you know, and have gotten

to the point where you think it's so obvious as to be embarrassing. As a result, the lit review gets

short-changed as you rush through material. Remember that the reader has not been living inside

your head with you, and actually needs all the dots connected. Since we are such bad "objective"

readers of our own work, give your lit review to a few peers to read. Ask them to point out where

the argument/logic breaks down!

Endemic Analysis

Reviewing the literature has an answer to the age-old question of which came first: the chicken

or the egg? In fields whose methods are primarily experimental, conventionalized approaches

dictate how the primary literature is to be analyzed; in other words, the "whole" is given, hence

the chicken comes first! I call this "endemic analysis" because the approaches are provided by

the field itself and the principle means by which practitioners understand each other's work.

In many sciences, categories of information have already been established by experimental

means. Broadly speaking, endemic approaches include structure, function/process, system, or

category (taxonomy, morphology, typology).

The humanities also offers endemic approaches. These approaches often start as novel

theoretical approaches (hence, emergent), becoming established through time into endemic

analytical approaches. Examples include historical, psychoanalytical, cultural, symbolic, and

categorical (types of/groups of).

9

Using very broad strokes, let's examine endemic analysis as it happens in the "sciences" and

"humanities". This does not mean there is no original contribution by the writer-researcher! It

does mean that the act of organizing the constituent bits is made a bit easier.

Science

As stated above, endemic approaches tend to dominate science: structure, function, system,

method, and category (e.g. what a cell is made of, what a cell does, how a cell plays with others,

the cell's neighborhood). Literature reviews can also focus on "meta" concepts such as methods

or really big ideas that cover an entire field of research. The examples below are published

review papers in biology; their purpose is to illustrate the range of possibilities for categories of

analysis that covers the gamut of the sciences. (Note that these are stand-alone publications, as

we'll discuss in "uses of literature reviews".)

Structure -- Epstein-Barr

Function -- NMD / Nuclear Pore Complex (structure + function, a pretty normal

combination)

System -- Animal Personality / Multiple Signalling (think environment and ecology)

Method -- Geometric Morphometrics / Imaging Clathrin Structures

Process – Nondestructive Testing Concrete Structures

Category/Part-Whole -- Crenarchaea / The Phonetics and Phonology of Chuxnabán Mixe

Seriously Meta Stuff -- Ecology and Time

Disciplines will also have their own endemic approaches. This is especially clear in the applied

sciences, such as medicine, where conventional discipline-specific cover areas of application in

addition to basic science.

10 Humanities

The humanities also have endemic approaches. Perhaps the best known include historical,

cultural, psychoanalytic, structuralist, and symbolic. Individual disciplines will also have their

own commonly-practiced analytical approaches.

Symbolic -- Symbols in Vonnegut

Cultural --Images of Mothers/Daughters in Post-Soviet Prose / To Break Down the Wall

Psychoanalysis -- Grandiosity/Guilt in Conan Doyle

Historical -- Political hegemony and zombies

Brainstorm 2-3 endemic analyses for your current project/s.

Emergent Analysis

Like a baby chick emerges from what seems like only yolk and albumen, “emergence” is a

process by which complex systems arise from simpler parts. In writing literature reviews,

“emergent analysis” is the process by which the writer-researcher identifies novel patterns of

11

information to reveal an original perspective on an area of study. This new perspective can

be a re-visioning of a topic of research or a careful analysis of current trends for the purpose of

suggesting a new direction for research. Whatever the purpose, the emergent analysis is novel in

the sense that it is the writer's reworking of the literature (the constituent parts) in order to create

a new perspective that serves some particular purpose.

Emergent analyses may present something wholly new, a new way of seeing the current topic, or

a clarification of what already exists in the literature. The writer presents similarities, differences,

congruencies, contradictions, themes, and/or motifs gleaned from (usually) long study of the

literature. Because emergent analyses provide re-interpretation, they usually take longer to write

and more intense study to accomplish.

Both the sciences and the humanities embrace emergent analyses, though the longer a topic has

been studied, the more challenging it is re-configure. More frequently, novel understandings are

brought to an area of study via the "outsider" by borrowing concepts from other disciplines and

applying to the researcher's own field or applying discipline-specific concepts to a topic that had

not been considered from that perspective before.

Clarifying/Galvanizing/Directing the Field

Innovation Typology/Terminology -- a literature review with the purpose of coming to

standardized definitions of "innovation" in technology of production studies

The Role of Migration -- review of literature emphasizing multiple reasons for human mobility

in order to change thinking of academics and policy makersin development studies

Organizational Routines -- review to clarify theoretical literature on the concept of routines and

empirical literature on application of the concept of routines

Physics of Microwave Background Anisotropies -- review of literature in order to present clear

understanding of individual mechanisms in order to prepare researchers for anticipated

detections

New Knowledge Production -- review of how new knowledge is produced in science with

particular consideration of the "new knowledge production, Mode 2" paradigm

Applying Discipline-Specific Concept to New Topic

Researching the Internet -- applying anthropologic concepts of place and time to virtual

environments by reviewing 4 ethnographies of cyberspace

Psychology and Social Science of Cyberspace -- applying psychological concepts to

understanding how people perceive of cyberspace

Epidemiology of Obesity, Metabolic Syndrome, Kidney Disease -- application of classic

epidemiological concepts to "lifestyle" disorders

12

Borrowing Concepts from Others

Green Supply Chain Management -- application of environmental thinking to supply chain

management for purpose of creating cohesion in field

Fast Zombie/Slow Zombie -- application of food-chain analysis to understanding zombie movies

Reflections on Gender and Technology -- a social sciences-feminist analysis of technology

studies

Gender and CMC -- application of theoretical literature on face-to-face communication to

communication and gender in computer-mediated communication

Alzheimer's Disease Patients as Zombies -- application of discourse analysis about AD to reveal

negative social stereotypes characterizing AD patients as zombie-like

Ancient Art versus Modern Aesthetics -- application of present understanding of human

cognition to studies of art history

Phenomenology: Place, Environment, Architecture -- the application of philosophical

investigation on humanities

Science Teachers' Conceptions of Science -- application of history of science to education of

science teachers

Brainstorm one lit review for each of the emergent approaches.

Uses of Literature Reviews

The literature review is both process and product. Writing one entails perspective-driven reading

of the literature and selection of an organizational pattern to embody that POV. Now, we'll

examine how to use literature reviews to accomplish the various writing tasks to which they are

put.

Recall from "Eye of the Beholder" that the overall purpose of a literature review is to support a

research endeavor by first laying the foundation for the project as it has already been explored by

13

other researchers. All projects come from somewhere -- they are born of the researcher's

particular interests and the needs of a field for the purpose of extending the boundary of what is

known. Before you can extend, you have to demonstrate through the published literature that the

research project makes a credible contribution. This task is accomplished in different ways for

each of the major types of writing researchers do: introducing research reports

(quantitative/qualitative), providing context for a proposal, showing the overview of a topic in a

dissertation, and writing a stand-alone publication, the review paper.

Introducing the Research Report

The introduction to a research report has 5 parts:

1. Topic

2. Significance of topic (practical, research, clinical)

3. Context/Background

4. Gap

5. Research Question/Statement

Literature review belongs to steps 3-->4 -- that is, in a research report, the function of the

literature review is to lead the reader to the "gap", the missing part or conflict in the field that

necessitates further research, hence validating the research question. The literature review

accomplishes many objectives at once. First, the lit review informs the reader of the most

important research needed to understand the research question. Second, the lit review gives

credibility to the writer as someone who knows what they are talking about. Third, the lit review

is organized so that the research question is validated; in other words, the review leads the reader

to a “gap” or “conflict” in the literature.

Whether you use subheadings to organize the literature review depends on your field -- in the

social/behavioral sciences, it is quite common to use subheadings; in the neuro/behavioral,

biological and physical sciences, it is uncommon. We'll look at two examples, one from

translational medicine and one from the social sciences.

Please Note: The literature review as it is used in a research report is not always clearly

"endemic" or "emergent". This lit review is organized according to the needs of the writer in

order to demonstrate the legitimacy of a research question as revealed by a clear gap in the field.

Where a longer lit review is used, the organization is determined by the research question itself

rather than a novel POV. In general, the more ideas/concepts/relationships contained in the

research question, the longer the literature review will need to be. Each major concept and

relationship must be explained before the reader will be sufficiently informed to evaluate the

credibility of the research question itself. Nonetheless, the lit review in a research report is still

concise and highly focused because the audience is assumed to be an expert one; you do not need

to cover every element involved in the project (that is more likely to happen in a dissertation).

14

In the natural sciences, introductions are usually shorter and written for the reader -- to inform

the reader about the research question and to persuade the reader that the research question is

legitimately motivated. Clearly, the literature review is NOT exhaustive! Rather, it focuses solely

on the specific points needed to accomplish the task of the introduction.

15

In the social and behavioral sciences (particularly those dealing with non-lab-situated work), the

literature review still performs the functions of informing and persuading, but the informing part

is more extensive. Because behavior is multi-faceted, more than one "strand" is necessary to

properly inform the reader and demonstrate the legitimacy of the parts of the research question.

In this example, the reader must be shown that leadership, social identity, and leadership identity

are connected; otherwise, the reader has no a priori reason to accept the question as a good one.

Also note that each section of the literature review is labeled and focused; this is also not an

exhaustive literature review. Information is selected for the purposes of demonstrating the items

16

in the research question are connected. Each review section ends with a short, one-sentence

finalé clarifying the contribution to the research question.

Background or Context of Proposal

At its most basic, the proposal is constructed of 4 parts: 1) objective/significance statement; 2)

background/context; 3) methods/plan; 4) bibliography. Each part is read to differing degrees by

different audiences. Everyone reads the objective/significance, and as such, this portion is short,

straightforward, and written with a minimum of jargon. The background section is read mostly

by fellow experts, often with the goal of establishing the credibility of the writer -- this is where

the writer demonstrates his/her knowledge of the literature to persuade a funding agency that

he/she knows is capable of doing the work. The literature review must demonstrate the

legitimacy of the project by accomplishing three goals:

1. Justify how the project carves up the world (endemic or emergent approach);

2. Lead to the missing information/gaps/conflicts that motivate the research;

3. Argue for the impact of the research on the field.

Example

This except justifies the type of analysis being used – evidence is established in theoretical terms

(some have argued), empirical terms (preliminary research), foundation research (one study

implemented a similar approach).

17

To begin working your research ideas into a formal proposal, reverse engineer the

proposal subheadings and elaborate on them. Turn them into questions and answer the questions.

Then, turn the answers into cohesive text.

What is the OBJECTIVE of your research? What final work will the activity produce?

What is the SIGNIFICANCE of your research? How will the results change the field? How

will activities change/impact the field? Will you impact theory, practice, or both? How so?

Be specific and think big: impact can range from smaller ones (such as filling in missing

information) to large ones (changing the theory of your field) to really big ones (implying

changed practiced outside your field).

What are your RESEARCH QUESTIONS? If "one" complex question, try breaking it into

parts that logically connect.

What ACTIVITIES will you do to answer the question? Write them out in excruciating

detail. If equipment, materials, or instruments are involved, name them and state where

you will access them. If participants are involved, state how you will get recruit them. If

you need money/funding, what is your plan for getting it? (ex: Search NIH/NSF/NEH for

UF Grants, put University of Florida in the "organization" search box to generate a list of

UF researchers with current grants: use this info to guide your choices, and even to pay

yourself!)

What published AUTHORS/RESEARCHERS ARE THE KEY PLAYERS in your area of research?

(remember, you don't have to agree with them for the researcher to be a key player) What

names come up most often in literature searches covering only the last 5-10 years?

What are the key publications in your area of research? (these can be important because of

content, method, or theory). Create a list of key ideas from each publication. Create a

second list where key ideas are categorized, e.g. according to content areas, method,

theory, etc.

What are the GAPS/CONFLICTS THAT MOTIVATE YOUR RESEARCH? Locate them in the

literature (meaning, use the literature to show that we know X, and Y, but not Z, therefore

Z is a worthwhile goal).

Dissertation Chapter

If you are writing a classic academic dissertation, then one of your first chapters is likely a

literature review. In fact, if you've spent time in the databases, you've probably discovered that

the most comprehensive, up-to-date literature reviews in your field are either in Review papers

or in dissertations.

Dissertations may be either endemic or emergent -- it really depends on the nature of your

research. For example, if you are answering a structural question (what part of X performs Y),

then an endemic analysis is likely -- after all, you are showing how a structure fits into a larger

18

structure, process, or system that is already known. If your project is comparative or exploratory,

though, then the lit review is likely to be emergent as you discover the categories of information

that make sense of your data.

Endemic Example

CHAPTER 3 CONSERVATION IN MUSEUMS

Although this project focuses on the actual conservation treatment of seven paintings, this section provides a broader perspective on the profession of conservation and its role in museums. The following discussion addresses conservation, the museum’s role in conservation, including conservation budgeting and preventative care by museums.

Conservation

Conservation is the profession devoted to the preservation of cultural property for the future. It is also defined as the application of science to the examination and treatment of museum objects and to the study of the environment in which they are placed. Conservation activities include examination, documentation, treatment, and preventative care, supported by research and education.1

Examination is the investigation of the structure, materials, and condition of cultural property including the identification, the extent and the causes of alteration and deterioration.2

Documentation is the recording in a permanent format of information derived from conservation activities.3 This includes conservation reports and photographic evidence of before, during and after treatment.

Treatment is the deliberate alteration of the chemical and/or physical aspects of cultural property, aimed primarily at prolonging its existence. Treatment may consist of stabilization and/or restoration.4...

Conservation vs. Restoration

Conservation is different from restoration. Conservation in this respect is the control of the environment to minimize the decay of artifacts and materials. Conservation treatment arrests decay and stabilizes artifacts to prevent further deterioration. Restoration is an extension of stabilizing against further deterioration....

Role of the Museum

“Museums collect, preserve, and interpret the things of this world."11 This definition of museums by the American Association of Museums (AAM) summarizes the three important aspects of most museums: collection, preservation and interpretation. The museum’s responsibility to care for the collection for the future lies under the heading of preservation...

Note the careful construction of this chapter. The subheadings of the chapters are laid out in an

opening statement, then the sections are presented in the order they appear in the opening. The

three definitions of "examination", "documentation", and "treatment" are written in parallel

19

format using the classic academic form of "X is a (type of) Y (that)". It is not meant to be

thrilling prose; it is supposed to be clear, easy to follow scholarly prose.

Emergent Example

In the following, the entire dissertation is an emergent analysis as a way of examining tourism in

terms of a particular philosopher's treatment of language. The dissertation is carefully organized

with parallel chapter titles making the overall conception of the whole document clear.

20 The Review Paper

The review paper is a stand-alone publication that offers "...critical evaluations of material that

has already been published. By organizing, integrating, and evaluating previously published

material, the author of a review article considers the progress of current research toward

clarifying a problem. In a sense, a review article is tutorial in that the author

defines and clarifies the problem;

summarizes previous investigations in order to inform the reader of the state of current

research;

identifies relations, contradictions, gaps, and inconsistencies in the literature; and

suggests the next step or steps in solving the problem." (APA Style Guide, 2001, 7).

There are many different types of reviews, for example, reviews of methods or historical

reviews. You will probably be writing the most common type of review: The State of the Art

Review-- "A state-of-the-art review presents an up-to-date, interpretative synthesis of our

knowledge of a certain subject or issue, with emphasis on the most recent literature. For

example, an author might look at what is currently known about the advantages and

disadvantages of a particular surgical method for mastectomy, or a particular chemotherapy

regime in the treatment of breast cancer." --"How and Why Biologists Write", Writing Papers in the

Biological Sciences, McMillan, 2006, 114 (bolding added).

Review papers are often written by experts, and many journals require a prospective request

letter before a review paper can be submitted. Nearly all of the examples used in the Endemic

and Emergent sections of this workshop are examples of published review papers. Thus, the

review paper (like some dissertations) is the ultimate form of literature review since the entire

purpose of the publication is to review the current literature on a topic in order to provide

critique and direction to an area of study. Readers love reviews because they have huge

bibliographies that have already been synthesized.

Most fields have whole journals devoted to reviews of some kind. The title of the journal will

usually include the word "review" to make clear that there is no "original research" in the

journal. This is something of a quandary for the academic: promotion depends on publication,

but not all publication is created equal. In many science departments, publication must be

experimental to count for tenure. This is another reason why reviews tend to be written by those

with a longer history in a field; they've already acquired tenure and no longer have to publish

solely experimental or analytical material.

Here is just a short list of some review journals. To find journals in your area of study, just type

your discipline plus the words "review journal" into a search box!

American Art Review

The American Historical Review

Biological Reviews

Cell Press

Chemical Reviews

The Review of English Studies

The American Economics Review

The Philosophical Review

Nature Neuroscience Reviews

Research and Reviews: Zoology

21

Writing a review paper is a workshop unto itself! For the time being, understand that a review

paper has an introduction much like a research report, except the research question is replaced by

an overview statement that provides the focus and topical subheadings of the paper. The body of

the review is not cumulative; each section is its own mini-essay and sections should not co-refer.

All critique or evaluation offered in the body of the review should be the last paragraph of a

particular subsection. Otherwise, the critique should be in the conclusion.

Here is a link to the Lit Review Workshop Handout.