Literature Reviews

A literature review can help you:

• explain what is already known about a topic
• compare relevant findings, theories and interpretations
• examine how research methods and contexts affect the evidence
• identify disagreements, limitations and unanswered questions
• place a question or research project within the wider literature

The purpose depends on your task. A standalone review may assess what the literature tells us about a particular question. Within a dissertation or research project, it can also help explain the rationale for your investigation and inform your theoretical framework or methods.

You do not need to claim that you have found a research gap unless this is relevant to the task and supported by your review. Finding few sources does not, by itself, establish that a gap exists.

1. Understand the task and scope

Check your assessment brief and marking criteria. Establish:

• the question, topic or purpose of the review

• whether you are reviewing provided sources or finding literature independently

• the kinds of sources and evidence expected

• any required boundaries, such as dates, locations or populations

• whether you must explain how you searched and selected sources

• the required length, structure and referencing style

Ask your tutor or supervisor if these expectations are unclear. See Understanding your assessment brief for help interpreting the task.

2. Develop a focus

Use the question or purpose of the review to decide what is relevant. If you are developing your own question, early searching and reading can help you refine it. You do not need a final question before beginning exploratory searches.

Keep the scope manageable within the time and length available. Agree significant changes with your tutor or supervisor where appropriate.

3. Explore the literature

Start with relevant module readings and introductory material recommended by your tutor or supervisor, including your reading list where one is provided. Look for useful terminology, theories, debates and approaches. Follow the references in relevant sources and look for later publications that cite them. See Citation chaining for guidance.

When independent searching is required, choose routes that match the evidence you need. LibrarySearch can help you find academic material and check access; specialist databases may be important for your subject or review method. The Library’s Subject Guides can help you identify resources for your subject.

See Search skills: finding information effectively for help developing search terms and refining your searches, and the Library’s Search and discovery tools guide for help choosing where to search.

4. Refine your searching and record decisions

Adjust your terms and search routes as your understanding develops. Consider whether you have included relevant perspectives and evidence that challenges your initial ideas.

Keep a record of useful searches and the sources you select. Where your assessment or research method requires a documented search, follow its requirements for recording databases, dates, search terms, limits and selection decisions. Keeping a search log does not, by itself, make a review systematic or comprehensive.

5. Evaluate the sources

Examine each source’s relevance, evidence, methods or reasoning, and limitations. Consider:

• what question the source addresses

• how its findings or arguments were produced

• whether its evidence supports its conclusions

• whether it supports the specific claim you intend to make

• how its context affects its relevance to your review

• how it compares with other sources

Use the evaluation approaches taught within your programme. Checklists can prompt useful questions, but they do not replace close reading or disciplinary judgement. See Evaluate information.

Review articles and scholarly books can help you understand debates and existing interpretations. Examine original research where your task requires it or where you need to check a specific finding. Make clear which sources you have actually read. See Primary, secondary and other source types.

6. Organise your notes and references

Record more than a summary of each source. Note its main contribution, relevant evidence, limitations and connections to other sources. Keep your own comments separate from copied wording, and record page numbers or other locations where needed.

A comparison table can help you organise findings, evaluate evidence and identify connections between sources.

This example uses the hypothetical studies in the synthesis example later in this guide. These are not real references. In your own notes, use accurate source details and record relevant page numbers or other locations.

Adapt the columns to your question and subject. The table is a working aid rather than a required format.

See Reading and Note-taking for further guidance. Record references as you work rather than leaving them until the end. The reference-management guide explains the tool available through Abertay. Check imported references against the original publications.

If you use AI to help find or understand literature, check that your assessment permits this, read the original sources and acknowledge any contribution as required. AI summaries can omit important context or disagreement. See AI for researching a topic.

Choose a structure that helps answer your review question. Follow any structure required by your assessment or programme.

Common approaches include:

• Thematic: group sources around relevant themes, questions or debates
• Chronological: explain how knowledge or a debate has developed over time
• Methodological: compare research approaches and what they allow researchers to conclude
• Theoretical: compare theories or conceptual approaches used to understand the topic

You can combine approaches where this makes the discussion clearer. Avoid organising the whole review as a sequence of separate source summaries.

A funnel structure, moving from broader context towards a specific question, can be useful when introducing a research project. It is an option rather than a requirement for every review.

Draft an outline showing the purpose of each section, the sources you will discuss together and how the sections connect. Revise it as your interpretation develops.

Writing, reading and analysis often overlap. Drafting a section can reveal an unanswered question or show that you need to revisit a source.

Introduction

Introduce the topic and explain the purpose of the review. State its question or focus, define its scope and indicate how the discussion is organised.

Where required, explain your search and source-selection approach in the location specified by your assessment or review method.

Body

Organise the discussion around themes, questions or debates. Summarise enough of each source for the reader to understand its contribution, then compare and evaluate relevant sources together.

Ask:

• Where do the sources agree or disagree?

• Are they addressing the same question or using comparable evidence?

• Might differences reflect their methods, samples, assumptions or contexts?

• Which conclusions are well supported, and which remain uncertain?

• How does this discussion help answer the review question?

This is synthesis: bringing sources together to develop an interpretation of the literature. It involves more than putting several citations after a sentence or counting how many authors agree.

Example: Moving from Summary to Synthesis

The following example uses hypothetical studies. Study A, Study B and Study C are placeholders, not real references.

Imagine you are reviewing research on remote working and employee wellbeing:

• Study A: a small survey in one organisation reports a positive association between remote working and wellbeing

• Study B: a survey across several organisations finds no overall association

• Study C: interviews with new employees describe experiences of isolation

A source-by-source summary might say:

Study A found a positive association. Study B found no association. Study C identified isolation among new employees.

A paragraph that synthesises and evaluates the evidence could say:

Findings on remote working and wellbeing are mixed. Study A reports a positive association, while Study B finds no overall association. Their different samples and settings need to be considered when comparing the findings. Study C identifies isolation as a concern for some new employees, although the interviews cannot establish how common this experience is. Together, these studies do not establish that remote working improves wellbeing for everyone. Differences in setting and employee experience require closer examination.

The second paragraph connects the findings, considers limitations and explains what can reasonably be concluded. In your own review, support the discussion with accurate citations in the required referencing style.

Develop Your Paragraphs

A useful paragraph will usually introduce a point, bring in relevant evidence, explain or evaluate it, and connect the discussion to the review’s purpose. Use this flexibly rather than forcing every paragraph into the same formula.

Distinguish the sources’ findings from your own interpretation. Support your judgements with evidence, and avoid making conclusions broader or more certain than the literature allows.

See Integrating information from sources for guidance on bringing sources together, paraphrasing, summarising, quoting and using reporting verbs. See Cohesion in academic writing for help connecting ideas. Use any writing assistance only as your assessment permits.

Conclusion

Draw together the review’s main findings and explain what they tell us about the question. Preserve significant disagreement, limitations and uncertainty rather than forcing a single conclusion.

Discuss unanswered questions or future research where relevant to the task. If the review forms part of a research project, explain how it informs the rationale, framework or methods for that project. Avoid introducing substantial new evidence in the conclusion.

Avoid:

• selecting only evidence that supports your preferred conclusion
• overlooking relevant disagreement, limitations or contrary findings
• treating each source separately without explaining connections
• relying on summaries when your task requires examination of original studies
• making claims about sources you have not read
• presenting your interpretation as if it were a source's finding
• claiming a research gap or comprehensive coverage without sufficient justification
• using quotations where paraphrasing or summarising would better serve the discussion
• losing sight of the review question

Allow time to read, compare, draft and revise. Before submitting, check that:

• the review answers the task and stays within its stated scope
• each section contributes to a clear discussion
• related sources are compared and evaluated
• conclusions reflect the evidence, including disagreement and uncertainty
• citations and references are accurate and complete
• any required search information and AI acknowledgement are included

Studiosity can provide feedback on your writing, but it does not provide subject-specific evaluation of your literature review.

Where draft submission and report access are available, a Turnitin Similarity Report can help you examine matching text and review how you have used sources. It does not assess the quality of your evidence or synthesis.