The most common feedback on a rejected literature review is that it summarises rather than argues. Each paragraph should advance a claim about the state of knowledge, not simply report what an author said.
Organise thematically, never chronologically by author. Group studies by the question they answer, then show where they agree, where they conflict and what none of them addresses.
That final gap is the point of the whole chapter — it justifies your study. Name it explicitly rather than leaving the reader to infer it.
Keep citation discipline from the first draft. Retrofitting references at the end is where most originality problems begin.
Comments
Comments are moderated before publication. Send your thoughts and we'll add them to the thread.
Leave a comment
