You’ve read. And read. And read. You’ve noted. And noted. And 
how. You’ve written summaries and memos. You’ve made groupings and 
mind-maps of the reading. But you’re still a bit away from actually 
writing about the literatures. You’re still not sure how to wrestle all 
of that material into a compliant text. You know the 
purposes of the literature review. But that doesn’t tell you what structure will work for your particular project.
 
Before you put pen to paper - or hand to mouse - it might help you to
 now think about the ways in which literature chapters, if you decide to
 have one, are most often structured. You can then see if one of the 
usual ways will work for you. So here’s a set of five possibilities.
 
 
As the name suggests, this is an historical map of the field. In 
writing historically, your intention is to show how your research either
 adds logically to what has gone before, or to show how your research 
challenges a taken for granted assumption in the field, or how it 
advances a particular body of work in the field. In doing this kind of 
temporal mapping, you need to highlight the key texts, groups and 
categories that your work is building on and/or speaking to. Even though
 a chronology is  linear, you need to also trace threads and 
associations through your chosen timeline.
 
You might choose to just focus on mapping the current themes or 
topics in the field Your intention here is to show how your research 
connects to, uses and adds/speaks to contemporary themes/topics. You 
structure the thematic review through either an examination of the kinds
 of questions that have been asked and the topics that have been 
studied, or a look at the key concepts and categories that have been 
developed and used, or even a look at methodological and methods that 
are used.
 
- The canon/classic studies
This can be standalone, a variation on either (1) or (2) or may also 
appear as a subsection of either of them. Your intention in a canonic 
review is to show how your research fits with the studies that can’t be 
ignored. This kind of literatures review is always heavily evaluative 
and comparative, so you usually need to set out some explicit criteria, 
drawn from your research question, that allows you discuss specific 
texts in some detail. You need to make a very clear connection with your
 study. One of the metaphors used for this kind of literature work is a 
tree, where the ‘trunk’ of the discipline is its classic studies.
 
Research very often draws on more than one body of literatures. These
 might be from different disciplines or be literatures that have been 
used to address very different topics. Your intention in the wheel-like 
review is to show that the originality of your research stems from the 
ways in which you’ve brought together areas that are usually kept apart.
 This bringing together is clearly elaborated in the discussion of 
literatures, where each formerly separate chunk is discussed in relation
 to your research interest. You need to draw out the key contributions 
of each corpus of literatures and their relevance to your research. You 
also need to show very clearly the ways in which the various spokes work
 together- you must show how the various spokes relate to and 
support the centre of the wheel - this is where your research is 
situated.
 
A pyramid literature review places your research in its context. Your
 intention is to show how your research interest is shaped and framed by
 other events/practices/people/policies etc. The literature review can 
be organised to start from the tip - what there is written about your 
specific topic already - and then move out and down through relevant 
contextualising literatures. More commonly, the pyramid is inverted, and
 the review begins with the wider context, honing in ever closer to your
 topic. The concluding tip section of the inverted pyramid review is 
what is written about your particular topic. By then you have indicated 
all of the potential issues and insights you will need to bring to your 
study.
There are of course variations on these  five structures and various 
ways to combine them. You will ‘bespoke’ your literature review to fit 
your topic. However, if you are at a stuck point with structure it can 
help to simply brainstorm how you would organise your material in some 
or all of these ways.
It is crucial to remember that the literature review is not a 
summary, a description or a list! Because the literature review is 
always an argument about why your research is the way that it is, some 
play with structure will help you to think through which set of moves 
allow you to make the most persuasive case.
 
No comments:
Post a Comment