Every researcher faces it: the ocean of information. It demands reading, synthesizing, and turning it into a thorough review. You open papers. Read pages and pages of explanations. Before you know it, you’re knuckles-deep in a fifty-page document. And what do you have to show for it? A series of haphazard summaries that do little more than echo what others have said.
Think of your literature review as the cluttered garage of Tony Stark. Sure, gadgets are everywhere, but without an organizing system, you can’t find your Mark III suit when the world needs saving. Bummer. Enter the 9-question literature review framework. It’s my trusty sidekick. I used it to take a 50-page mess and make it a 10-page juggernaut worthy of Stark Industries. Take that, Nick Fury. You can ask these questions for each paper you review in your literature corpus.
Here’s why it’s different: You must understand the structure rather than getting bogged down in the details. Assessing your literature review is like debugging code. Understanding the system architecture lets you fix individual lines or modules much easier. It’s about asking the right questions to get answers and gets you a map to guide you through the literature. Let me show you how.
1. What has been done?
Let’s start with the simplest question—what’s already been done? This is about surveying the field and mapping out what’s covered. The mission? Draw those lines so clearly even a blindfolded raccoon couldn’t miss them. We need to know which studies form the foundation and which are more like passing trends—flash in the pan. You must distinguish between the two to understand where to focus your efforts for lasting impact. Imagine it’s like preparing a massive Chinese lunch buffet—some dishes are timeless staples, like Ramen (saves you budget, not calories, my friend). In contrast, others are just trendy fusion experiments, like that infamous pickle-flavoured ice cream that might not make it to the table next time. Your task is to figure out which ones deserve a permanent spot in your recipe book.
Start by scanning abstracts of relevant studies. Zero in on the juicy bits—the key areas researchers have already poked and prodded. Identify foundational studies versus more recent, less impactful trends. Grab your pen and start scribbling. Jot down a summary of each major work, focusing on the broad contribution it has made. Consider it your personal mission to decipher the magic that turns these simple words into cultural earthquakes.
Ask:
- Which studies are most frequently cited, and why?
- Are there any major debates or disagreements in this area?
- How has the understanding of this topic evolved over time?
2. What were the hypotheses?
Every groundbreaking study kicks off with a spark — a problem begging for a solution. So, let’s cut to the chase: what was this study trying to blow out of the water? When you do this, you start to draw connections between different works — you’re basically cracking the Da Vinci Code. Is everyone investigating the same thing from different angles, or are there conflicting ideas at play? Picture it like a group of Hogwarts students brewing potions: most are making a simple Forgetfulness Potion, but one cheeky student throws in a dash of powdered dragon claw. Are they all aiming for the same potion, or is there an unexpected brain boost in the making? Who doesn’t love a good plot twist?
Go full detective mode. Read the introduction of each study to identify the stated hypothesis. Scan the literature to understand the big questions driving the research in this area, the hypotheses being tested, and whether there are any conflicting ideas or approaches at play. Summarize each hypothesis in one clear, concise sentence. Compare hypotheses across different studies (from the related literature, either in the paper or in your Zotero library) to identify common themes or conflicts. If a paper doesn’t have hypotheses, jump right to the next point and focus on the research questions.
Ask:
- What assumptions underlie each hypothesis?
- Are there any surprising or unconventional hypotheses?
- How do different hypotheses build on or contradict each other?
3. What were the research questions?
Hypotheses might be the spine holding it all together, but let’s be real — research questions are the brawny muscles flexing the whole operation. Without them, your paper is just a skeleton in a lab coat! These questions shape the study and determine where the researchers will focus. Let’s say you’re building a treehouse. The hypotheses are your vision and design, but the research questions are where you need to roll up your sleeves and get to work — do you need to reinforce the base, check for rotten wood, or figure out the perfect leaf-proof roof?
Dive into the introductions and methods sections to uncover the specific research questions driving each study. Catalogue every last one, then play connect-the-dots with the similarities, spot the oddballs, and target those glaring gaps. Where are researchers focusing their efforts, and where are the white spaces waiting to be filled?
Ask:
- Are the research questions specific or broad?
- How do the research questions align with the stated hypothesis?
- Do the questions push the boundaries of current understanding, or are they more confirmatory?
4. How was the work done?
Figuring out the methods is fundamental. Without it, you’re just a lost moose wandering around in a Canadian blizzard. Was the study based on a lab experiment, a survey, a meta-analysis? Did they gather primary data or depend on existing datasets? The methods tell you what weight to put on the findings. Don’t bet on a three-legged racehorse. Flimsy methods often lead to unreliable conclusions. And that’s like handing out Monopoly money in a real-world economy.
Comb through the methods sections for details on the study design, data collection, and analysis. Get granular—sample size, measurement techniques, statistical tests, everything. Draw connections between the methods and the research questions. Find the studies that ruffle some feathers because innovation doesn’t come to those who sit on the sidelines.
Ask:
- Were there any major limitations acknowledged by the authors?
- How well does the chosen method fit the research question?
- Could different methods have led to different outcomes?
5. When was it done?
When a study was conducted tells you a lot. Even a good study can age faster than a snowball in July. Ensure that the findings you’re considering are more relevant than a flip phone in a 5G smartphone world (yes, I see you there, Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 6, stop being such a clamshell). A 1995 study might as well be vintage clothing (in some cases).
Check the publication dates and, if available, the data collection timeline for each study. Look for any major events, discoveries, or technological shifts that may have impacted the research field during that time. Those factors could’ve steered the research like a rogue hockey puck sliding across the ice. Skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been, Wayne Gretzky.
Ask:
- How has the timing of the study influenced its findings? What were the technological or social contexts at the time?
- Were there any significant technological advancements that might have impacted the research?
- How do historical or social contexts at the time of the study influence its relevance today? Are the findings still relevant?
6. Who did it?
This question is about uncovering the brains, the institutions, and even the money bags behind the curtain. Investigate who is pulling the strings, writing the cheques, and calling the shots. These often influence how a study is perceived. An industry-funded study might be perceived as a fox guarding the henhouse and needs more scrutiny.
Identify the main authors and their affiliations, noting any institutions or funding sources (or hidden agendas). Consider whether the researchers or sponsors have any potential biases (i.e., are they playing for the home team or in someone else’s pocket?). Reflect on how the credibility and background of the authors might impact the interpretation of the study. Trust me, you’ll want this intel before you buy into what they’re selling.
Ask:
- What are the backgrounds and qualifications of the researchers?
- Are there any affiliations or funding sources that could introduce bias?
- How might the authors’ previous work influence their perspective on this study?
7. What were the main findings?
The meat (or potatos if you’re a vegetarian) of the literature—what did the researchers find? What matters isn’t just the results but how they fit in with other work in the field. Do they back up the old research, flip it on its head, or toss in some spicy new twists? Make those discoveries work for you and see if they corroborate, contradict, or add new insights to the existing body of research.
Read the results and discussion sections for the key takeaways. Here’s where you’ll find the juicy details, the gritty truths, and the revelations that’ll make your brain cut a rug with happiness. Summarize these findings in your own words to understand them. To retain them better. Sure, numbers are solid, easy to stack up and compare, but if you’re ignoring qualitative insights, you’re missing half the bloody picture. Think of it like appreciating a painting by only counting brushstrokes. That’s no fun. Synthesize the major patterns, look for outliers, and focus on the most impactful discoveries. Compare these results with those from other studies to identify commonalities and differences.
Ask:
- Are the findings consistent with those from other similar studies?
- What unique insights or contributions do these findings provide?
- Are there any results that seem surprising or counterintuitive?
8. What were the conclusions?
Wrapping up a study is like serving a meal with both the juicy steak (i.e., findings with impact) and the overcooked veggies (i.e., the limitations). Sure, we’ve got the wins, but let’s not pretend there aren’t some cringe-worthy fails too. Be careful not to accept everything at face value—look for caveats or areas where the researchers admit uncertainty.
Read the conclusion section carefully to understand the final takeaways. Think of it as the espresso shot of this whole experience: short, potent, and absolutely necessary to grasp the big picture. Wipe off the fairy dust and check whether the conclusions logically follow from the findings presented in the study. Make sure the findings have legs.
Ask:
- Do the conclusions logically follow from the findings?
- Are there limitations that weaken the conclusions?
- How might the authors’ interpretations differ if certain limitations were addressed?
9. What should be done next?
The final question is the most exciting (not just for the paper but for yourself, too). You’ve made it through the gauntlet—now it’s time to turn your sights to the future. Picture this: a vast wilderness of research, just begging for a brave soul like you to explore it. Look for ways the current body of research could be expanded, sharpened, or redirected. Scribble down those burning questions that the studies were too chicken to touch, the gaps that need filling, and the unexplored frontiers waiting to be conquered.
Ponder what kind of studies would build meaningfully on these findings. Don’t be afraid to get a little creative—the best ideas often lurk just beyond the obvious. Put on your visionary cap and brainstorm other promising paths forward that might rattle some cages. Use these gaps as a basis to formulate your own research questions or ideas for further exploration.
Ask:
- What specific areas do the authors suggest for future research?
- Are there unexplored questions that align with your own interests?
- Are there specific methods, populations, or contexts that warrant further investigation?
Organizing your review
This 9-question framework isn’t just about reading a bunch of papers—it’s about processing information in a way that adds value to your field. Here’s how you can transform this framework into a structured literature review:
- Ask these questions for each relevant study. Start by reading through the literature and noting down answers to the nine questions for every significant work you find. This will prevent you from getting lost in too much detail.
- Organize answers into clusters. Once you’ve gathered your notes, arrange them by theme instead of by study. You’ll find patterns and contradictions more easily this way. Tag each study in Zotero.
- Identify gaps and contradictions. With the themes laid out, it’s time to see where there are gaps. Contradictory findings are particularly valuable, as they often highlight where further work is most needed.
- Spot opportunities. Use the gaps you’ve found as kickoff points for your own research questions or hypotheses. Confront the chaos others fear. Be the bold one who sets things right.
What to do now?
The 9-Question Literature Review Framework is simple, yet it can change how you approach your research. The next time you’re staring down a mountain of papers, don’t panic. Use these nine questions to shape a clear, concise, and coherent review that makes a simple contribution.
Ready to give it a try? Here are three simple steps you can take right now:
- Pick a single theme that interests you in your research. Gather the key studies that relate to it.
- Write a one-sentence summary for each paper focusing on the main finding or insight.
- Group similar ideas together and look for recurring themes or differences. This will help you see patterns more clearly.
You know what they say. Good research is 20% cramming new insights into your brain and 80% making chaos look like an aesthetic work of art. Hopefully, this guide helps you do the latter. Until next time.
Downloads
Here is the full checklist as a PDF download:
