Literature Review: Ph.D. Coursework Activity
This blog is written in response to the Ph.D. coursework activity assigned by Prof. Dr. Dilip Barad, Department of English, Maharaja Krishnakumarsinhji Bhavnagar University. In this post, I aim to explore the concept and significance of a Literature Review.
What is a Literature Review?
A literature review is a fundamental component of research writing that underpins and supports the arguments made by a researcher. It involves the critical examination and synthesis of existing scholarly work related to a specific area of study.
According to Fink, a literature review is defined as “a systematic, explicit, and reproducible method for identifying, evaluating, and synthesising the existing body of completed and recorded work produced by researchers, scholars, and practitioners.”
A well-constructed literature review not only informs us about the work already conducted in a given field but also reveals how scholars have approached specific topics and theoretical frameworks. It allows the researcher to build upon the intellectual foundation laid by others—standing, as it were, on the shoulders of giants—not merely to observe what they have achieved, but to envision possibilities beyond their scope. Thus, reviewing existing literature paves the way for fresh insights and helps in reassessing previously held views.
Key Takeaways from the Videos: Foundational Concepts for Literature Review
While reviewing related literature, three fundamental questions must be considered, as emphasized in the first video:
- What? – What is there that can be known? What is knowable?
- Why? – What is the relationship between the knower and the known?
- How? – How do we discover or come to know these things?
These questions are central to any research process. In light of them, it becomes essential to analyse everything encountered in a clear and unbiased manner. A researcher must observe findings with neutrality and curiosity. This attitude of inquiry ensures that the literature review is not merely a reproduction of existing ideas but becomes a process of generating knowledge and understanding knowability itself.
The Johari Window: The Realms of Knowability
The concept of Johari Window, introduced by Joseph Luft and Harrington Ingham, was originally developed to enhance self-awareness and interpersonal communication. However, it also applies meaningfully to the research process by revealing the dimensions of what we know and don’t know. The four realms it identifies are:
- I know what I know – This refers to the conscious awareness of one’s knowledge.
- I know what I don’t know – This indicates a recognition of knowledge gaps, which can be addressed through research.
- I don’t know what I know – This refers to tacit or subconscious knowledge that might be revealed through reflection or experience.
- I don’t know what I don’t know – This is the realm of complete ignorance—areas we are unaware even exist.
This model encourages researchers to be constantly alert to their assumptions, blind spots, and unexamined ideas. It also underscores the importance of skepticism in the research process. To question and doubt one's understanding repeatedly is a crucial step toward deeper inquiry. Research, being a scientific process, is fundamentally grounded in doubt, questioning, and critical thinking.
In her work Research Practice for Cultural Studies, Ann Gray presents three fundamental philosophical questions that structure the process of research:
- Ontological Question – What is there that can be known? What is the nature of reality?
- Epistemological Question – What is the relationship between the knower and the known?
- Methodological Question – How do we come to know what we know?
These three questions provide a framework for understanding the nature, acquisition, and methods of knowledge. Let us explore them in detail:
Ontology: The Study of Existence and Reality
Ontology is the branch of philosophy concerned with the nature of being, existence, or reality. In research, ontological questions seek to understand what kinds of things exist in the world and what can be studied. Two major branches of philosophical ontology are:
- Ontological Materialism – This worldview asserts that material or physical things are more real than ideas or thoughts. It maintains that reality exists independently of the human mind or perception.
- Ontological Idealism – In contrast, idealism emphasizes that immaterial phenomena—such as thoughts, ideas, and consciousness—are more fundamental than material objects. It suggests that reality is constructed in the minds of the observers.
A useful metaphor for understanding this dichotomy is the relationship between shoes and walking. The shoes are material and can be seen, while walking is an abstract activity. Despite their differences, both are essential and interconnected. The same is true for materialism and idealism—they represent two necessary perspectives on reality.
Philosopher René Descartes famously declared, “I think, therefore I am.” However, this statement can be reversed to say, “I am, therefore I think,” suggesting that both existence (being) and thought (consciousness) are interdependent. This illustrates how materialism and idealism are not mutually exclusive but are essential counterparts in understanding reality.
Epistemology: The Study of Knowledge
Epistemology is the philosophical study of knowledge. It deals with questions such as:
- What is knowledge?
- How do we acquire it?
- What justifies a belief as true knowledge?
Knowledge is commonly defined as a justified true belief. For a belief to be considered knowledge, it must satisfy the following three criteria:
- It must be true.
- The individual must believe it.
- The belief must be justified with sufficient evidence.
The justification of belief involves presenting logical, high-quality, and reliable evidence. Without evidence, a belief remains an opinion rather than established knowledge.
There are two principal schools within epistemology:
- Empiricism – This school of thought maintains that all true knowledge arises from sense experience. In this view, belief is validated when it is experienced, observed, and proven through physical evidence.
- Rationalism – Rationalism asserts that reason and logic, rather than sensory experience, are the primary sources of knowledge. A rational and logical human mind is capable of arriving at truth through intellectual deduction.
Within rationalism, there are three key approaches:
- Deductive Reasoning – Moving from general principles to specific conclusions.
- Intuitive Method – Gaining insight through reflection, perception, or immediate awareness.
Logical Reasoning – Accepting conclusions based on coherence and logical consistency within the mind.
To conduct an effective literature review, one must not only summarize existing works but engage critically with their ontological, epistemological, and methodological foundations. The process involves a continuous cycle of inquiry, skepticism, reflection, and synthesis—transforming scattered information into meaningful, structured knowledge.
Purpose and Significance of the Literature Review
In the age of the Internet, the researcher is faced with an overwhelming volume of information—a phenomenon often referred to as information explosion or information overload. In The Literature Review: Its Role Within Research, Booth highlights the importance of developing information literacy, stating that:
The purposes of conducting a literature review are manifold:
- To place each scholarly work within the broader context of how it contributes to understanding the subject;
- To analyse the interrelationships among existing studies;
- To identify gaps, contradictions, or unexplored areas in previous research;
- To uncover new interpretations or perspectives;
To avoid duplicating past research unnecessarily;
To identify opposing views
- To identify methods that could be relevant to your study.
- To provide direction for future research; and
- To situate one’s own original contribution within the framework of existing scholarship.
While the primary goal may be to take stock of existing knowledge, a literature review also serves practical ends. It can assist in the design of your research, guide the selection of appropriate theories or methodologies, and inform the choice of tools, instruments, or scales. Furthermore, it highlights research gaps that may signal unexplored questions or potential areas for innovation.
In this way, the literature review becomes more than a survey of existing work; it becomes an essential intellectual exercise that shapes the direction and depth of one’s own research journey.
There are two primary objectives of a literature review:
- Information Seeking – This involves systematically scanning the available literature to gather relevant information on the research topic.
- Critical Appraisal – This refers to the ability to apply analytical principles in order to evaluate whether a study is unbiased, valid, and methodologically sound.
A well-constructed literature review must:
- Be organized around and directly relevant to the thesis or research questions being developed.
- Synthesize findings into a coherent summary that highlights what is already known and what remains unknown in the field.
Identify areas of controversy or disagreement within the existing literature, thereby acknowledging different perspectives and debates
The third question of a literature review are questions that a researcher needs to ask themselves. In a literature review, asking questions is of the utmost importance. At its core, a literature review involves exploring what has already been published on a given topic by accredited scholars and researchers. It is not merely a summary of existing work but a critical engagement with it.
The process of research is metaphorically described as "standing on the shoulders of giants"—not only to understand what has already been achieved, but also to see beyond the vision of past scholars, thereby identifying new possibilities and perspectives within your own research focus.
An effective literature review involves locating and contextualizing existing literature within broader discourses and knowledge systems, recognizing how ideas have evolved, where gaps exist, and how your own work contributes to and extends the existing body of knowledge.
Here are some research questions for a researcher, suggest in the video to be asked to oneself.
What is the specific thesis, problem, or research question that my literature review helps to define?
What type of literature review am | conducting? Am I looking at issues of theory? methodology? policy? quantitative research (e.g. on the effectiveness of a new procedure)? qualitative research (e.g., studies )?
What is the scope of my literature review? What types of publications am I using (e.g., journals, books, government documents, popular media)? What discipline am I working in (e.g., Engineering, Psychology, Humanities, Pharmacy, Management)?
How good was my information seeking? Has my search been wide enough to ensure I've found all the relevant material? Has it been narrow enough to exclude irrelevant material? Is the number of sources I've used appropriate for the length of my paper?
Have I critically analysed the literature I use? Do I follow through a set of concepts and questions, comparing items to each other in the ways they deal with them?
Instead of just listing and summarizing items, do I assess them, discussing strengths and weaknesses?
Have I cited and discussed studies contrary to my perspective?
Will the reader find my literature review relevant, appropriate, and useful?
Has the author formulated a problem/issue?
Is it clearly defined? Is its significance (scope, severity, relevance) clearly established?
Could the problem have been approached more effectively from another perspective?
What is the author's research orientation (e.g., interpretive, critical science, combination)?
What is the author's theoretical framework (e.g., psychological, developmental, feminist)?
Has the author evaluated the literature relevant to the problem/issue? Does the author include literature taking positions she or he does not agree with?
In a research study, how good are the basic components of the study design (e.g., population, intervention, outcome)?
How accurate and valid are the measurements? Is the analysis of the data accurate and relevant to the research question? Are the conclusions validly based upon the data and analysis?
How does the author structure the argument?
Can you "deconstruct" the flow of the argument to see whether or where it breaks down logically (e.g., in establishing cause-effect relationships)?
In what ways does this book or article contribute to our understanding of the problem under study, and in what ways is it useful for practice? What are the strengths and limitations?
How does this book or article relate to the specific thesis or question I am developing?
Steps in Writing a Literature Review:
Writing a literature review involves a structured process that gradually leads to a coherent and comprehensive final draft. The following six steps serve as a practical guide:
Make a table of all works reviewed or considered for review
Annotated Bibliography of selected works: It can be in chronological or alphabetical order.
Reorganise the 'order': Your 'hypothesis' shall guide you in reorganizing. This re-ordering depends on the flow of your arguments. Make your own trajectory.
Now write introductory and concluding lines. These lines shall be written to 'hook paragraphs' with each other. Write in such a way that the transitions from one paragraph to another help the 'flow of ideas'.
Now write the 'Concluding Paragraph' of the 'Review of Related Literature'. Start with a clear, strong, and concrete statement. Make your conclusions about your 'Literature Review'.
Now, write 'Introduction'. The thesis statement shall be 'last' in the Introduction and 'first' in the Conclusion.
No comments:
Post a Comment