A literature review explains how relevant research fits together: what it agrees on, where findings differ, how methods affect the evidence and what remains unresolved. The example below demonstrates that reasoning. Its three study summaries are fictional teaching materials, not real research or citations to use in an assignment.
Build an evidence matrix first
Imagine a review question: “How does the timing of feedback affect students’ revision?” Before writing a paragraph, separate what each study measured from what it can establish. In a real review, every row needs a full, verified reference and notes tied to the source.
| Fictional source | Design and finding | Limit |
|---|---|---|
| Study A | Interviews: students say prompt feedback helps them remember their reasoning. | Reported experience does not measure performance improvement. |
| Study B | Course comparison: an earlier-feedback group makes more revisions. | Groups also have different teaching arrangements. |
| Study C | Draft analysis: detailed comments are associated with substantive revision. | Comment detail may matter separately from timing. |
Weak version: a list of summaries
Study A discusses prompt feedback. Study B finds more revisions after earlier feedback. Study C discusses detailed comments. All three studies are about feedback.
The paragraph names a common topic but does not explain the relationship between the evidence. It leaves the reader to work out what the studies collectively show.
Stronger version: an annotated synthesis
In this illustrative evidence set, earlier feedback appears useful when students can act on it. Study A suggests a possible explanation: students report remembering their reasoning more clearly. Study B is consistent with that account because its earlier-feedback group revises more, although differences in teaching arrangements prevent timing from being isolated. Study C adds a qualification: the detail of comments may influence whether revisions are substantive. Taken together, these examples suggest that feedback timing and usability should be examined jointly rather than treated as interchangeable explanations.
- Opening claim: identifies a relationship worth examining, not just a topic.
- Evidence connection: uses one study to suggest an explanation for another result.
- Methodological limit: separates an observed association from a causal conclusion.
- Qualification: introduces a competing or complementary explanation.
- Synthesis: states what follows from considering the studies together.
How to adapt the technique to real papers
Choose a narrow question and collect verified sources. For each one, record the population, design, measures, main finding and limitations relevant to your question. Group sources by a meaningful issue, such as feedback timing, feedback detail or opportunities for revision. Draft a claim about each group, then check that the source evidence actually supports it.
Add citations at the points where you use a source’s finding or interpretation. The fictional Study A/B/C labels above cannot become references; replace the entire invented evidence set with your own reading. Never invent authors, dates, sample sizes or results to complete a paragraph structure.
Structure beyond one paragraph
A short review might introduce the question and scope, compare evidence in two or three thematic sections, then explain the most defensible conclusion and unresolved issue. A dissertation chapter may need more depth and an explicit account of search and selection. Follow the assessment instructions; a general literature review is not automatically a systematic review.
For university guidance and authentic student examples, consult the University of Leeds project-structure guide. The worked example on this page is original and intentionally fictional.
Revision checklist
- Does each paragraph make a claim supported by the cited papers?
- Have you compared methods as well as findings?
- Can readers distinguish agreement, contradiction and missing evidence?
- Have you avoided claiming a research gap just because your search was narrow?
- Can every citation be traced to a source you actually read?
Continue with how to write a literature review, synthesis versus summary, and systematic and literature reviews.