Literature Review 101: So, you’ve read several articles
in response to a pressing question. Now what?
Sherry Wynn Perdue, Director
Oakland University Writing Center
wynn@oakland.edu
Genevieve Taylor, Graduate Consultant
Oakland University Writing Center
gmtaylor@oakland.edu
Composing the Literature Review
What
is (and is not) a literature review?
How should you frame the literature you locate?
How should you draft the literature review?
What institutional support is available to you?
The Literature Review


Do you understand the purpose and scope of a
literature review? And, do you comprehend the
difference between an abstract or an annotation and a
literature review?
Have you examined and annotated models from
academic articles on the topic and within the
discipline?
What is a Literature Review?




A professional conversation framed by a guiding concept
A comprehensive exploration of existing scholarship on a
specific topic
“An account of what has been published on a topic by
accredited scholars. . .” (Taylor & Procter, 2001)
An answer to a persistent question (R. Elmore, Harvard
Graduate School of Education)
A presentation of the current state of knowledge on a
topic, which is designed to highlight past research
findings and to pave the way for your
study/discussion.
Characteristics of a Literature Review





An introduction that shares the persistent question(s) the reviewed
literature will address and indicates how the reviewed scholarship
will be framed
An organizational frame, which groups relevant scholarship by
topic, chronology, theoretical approach, methodology, etc. and/or a
combination of approaches
Transitions organic to the discussion that indicate how different
studies approach the same issues both within individual
paragraphs and between paragraphs
Evidence of how conflicting findings within the literature might be
resolved by looking at the methodology, sample size, questions
asked (and not asked), etc.
A conclusion that clarifies how the literature demonstrates the
efficacy of your paper/position. Does the literature review
demonstrate a gap in the literature? Does it identify a conflict that
needs resolution? In many cases the specific research questions
for the student author’s proposed study will be shared here too.
Literature Review Pitfalls: Forgetting to Frame

Failing to synthesize ideas and information from your
sources into a narrative account of what the professionals
currently know with the purpose of credentialing your study

This synthesis could be framed by date, theoretical
orientation, method, issue, etc. The literature review,
however, is not an annotated bibliography. In other words,
you organize the literature review by issues and ideas rather
than by individual sources. Your goal is to create a
conversation between and among the scholars on each
important issue reviewed.
Literature Review Pitfalls: Overreliance on Quotations
You gain your reader’s trust by sparingly and
strategically using other people’s words.

In most cases, you should paraphrase the material, selecting
only the portions of the original quote that you need.

Generally when you use three or more consecutive words
from the original, you must place quotation marks around all
directly quoted material and use a parenthetical citation that
includes the page number. This advice does not include the
names of theories or tests, which are often quite long and
should be included as used in the literature.
Literature Review Pitfalls: Patching not Paraphrasing
“Patching” occurs when you insert a series of borrowed
ideas and phrases; these strings often differ only slightly
from the original wording.



This is a form of plagiarism, even if the writer provides a
parenthetical citation.
Paraphrase involves both a rewording and reorganizing the
original material; “synonym swapping” is not a paraphrase.
You can mediate the potential for plagiarism by taking
accurate notes in your own words, carefully noting the source
and page number.
To avoid patching, practice making this material your
own. You will need to read a great deal more material
than you cite.
Literature Review Pitfalls: Failing to Connect
Foundational Studies to Your Project

Citing “seminal” works, those studies that are most cited
by others, without understanding how those significant,
early studies complement, qualify, or contrast with the
approach taken in your paper.

While it is helpful to consult reviews of the literature most
crucial to your subject (because they can guide your
understanding of your own source base), it is essential to
gain a firm understanding of the foundational studies that
will contribute to the argument you make.
Everything you discuss in your literature review needs
to pave the way for your project.
Literature Review Pitfalls: Cursory Overview or
Biased Sample


Failing to ensure that your literature review is
comprehensive because you were unaware of the seminal
studies on the topic
Consciously choosing to omit scholarship that challenges
your initial hypothesis, methodology, etc. While you can
choose to narrow your review to two of three pedagogical
approaches or to three potential antagonists among many,
you must indicate the rationale for this decision.
Whether intentional or not, these omissions will
invalidate your claims. Further, you may find it
necessary to consider this pitfall as you evaluate other
scholars’ research.
Getting Started: The Source Grid


A graphic organizer that helps you document your
“talking points,” the level one headers of your
literature review
A non-linear outline of the major topics that your
literature review will synthesize
Drafting from the Source Grid
Envision the composing process as a piecemeal one. To compile
the grid, for example, you need to read, evaluate, and group the
literature by major topics or talking points. To compose the text,
you need to draft from one column at a time. Caution: Never
compose a draft without including an APA citation for each source
as you go. For APA assistance, see the APA Tutorial on the
Oakland University Writing Center homepage.
Remember that each paragraph develops an idea rather than
simply summarizes the results of one article. While there are times
that an individual study might occupy a whole paragraph (it could
be the only study on an important issue), the paragraphs that
follow it should situate other literature in connection to that study
or examine another issue that is addressed by a different study.
Drafting and Integrating the Parts





To mediate distractions, I have found it helpful to open a separate
document for each talking point into which I paste its grid material.
If a good idea for a different part of the paper intrudes on my
process, I quickly click on that document and record the idea
before returning to the issue on which I am currently writing.
Continue to draft new talking points and redraft previously
composed talking points until you have good fragments (quilting
squares) of the paper’s body.
Once you have the parts, you need to examine them in relationship
to one another to determine which talking points must come first.
After you determine the order of information within the body of the
review, it is time to insert and refine your transitions.
After composing the body, draft the introduction and the
conclusion. Caution: It is never a good idea to draft these before
you know how the literature will come together.
When Should You Schedule a Writing Consultation?







After the research consultation (but before you start writing)
to make a plan and review the project specifications
After you have located and started reading your sources to
discuss potential talking points/headers for a source grid
After you have created a source grid to explore potential
ways to situate the issues within each major topic
Once you have drafted a section of the paper
Whenever you need help with APA style issues
Once you have a solid working draft, etc.
Anytime you get stuck or need a second set of eyes
Selected References:
Elmore, R. Some guidance on doing a literature review. Retrieved
on January 15, 2010 from
http://www.gse.harvard.edu/library/services/research_instructio
n/elmore_lit_review.pdf
Graff, G. & Birkenstein, C. (2006).They say/I say: The moves that
matter in academic writing. New York: W.W. Norton.
Taylor, D. & Procter, M. (2001). The literature review: A few tips on
conducting it. Retrieved January 4, 2010 from:
http://www.utoronto.ca/writing/litrev.html
University of Washington Psychology Writing Center. (2004).
Writing a psychology literature review. Retrieved January 15,
2010 from
http://depts.washington.edu/psywc/handouts/pdf/litrev.pdf
Thank You!!
We appreciate the opportunity to speak with you
about this high stakes manuscript. Please feel free
to schedule a Research Consultation or a Writing
Consultation for assistance at any stage of the
research and writing process as you move forward.