In the previous blog post in this section, I had
written about what should be kept in mind while writing the review chapter. This
post specifically focuses on the structure of the review chapter. Before
talking about the structure, I would first urge you to sit down and think about
what purposes your review chapter serves and why is it considered essential in
a thesis.
written about what should be kept in mind while writing the review chapter. This
post specifically focuses on the structure of the review chapter. Before
talking about the structure, I would first urge you to sit down and think about
what purposes your review chapter serves and why is it considered essential in
a thesis.
Rationale of Including a Review Chapter
Many researchers talk about the review chapter as the
most boring and purposeless of all chapters. Part of the reason is that despite
being in academics, many researchers find libraries the most boring spaces. Of
course this has to do with the way libraries are structured and work needs to
be done to make libraries inviting spaces. On the other hand, there are many
researchers who don’t like reading work undertaken by others. By not reading other
researches, there is a strong possibility of missing out on important
developments in your field of work. Additionally, reading good writing is
probably the only way to know the developments in research writing styles.
most boring and purposeless of all chapters. Part of the reason is that despite
being in academics, many researchers find libraries the most boring spaces. Of
course this has to do with the way libraries are structured and work needs to
be done to make libraries inviting spaces. On the other hand, there are many
researchers who don’t like reading work undertaken by others. By not reading other
researches, there is a strong possibility of missing out on important
developments in your field of work. Additionally, reading good writing is
probably the only way to know the developments in research writing styles.
The review chapter serves the valuable purpose of
communicating to the reader where your own research work stands vis-à-vis the
growing body of research work in the area. In addition, you may have read a lot
and built your work on existing work. Using Einstein’s famous quote loosely
here- I see further than others because I stand on the shoulders of giants.
However, the reader does not know what works you have referred to. The review
chapter thus serves to contextualise your work. In this sense, your review
chapter should be comprehensive.
communicating to the reader where your own research work stands vis-à-vis the
growing body of research work in the area. In addition, you may have read a lot
and built your work on existing work. Using Einstein’s famous quote loosely
here- I see further than others because I stand on the shoulders of giants.
However, the reader does not know what works you have referred to. The review
chapter thus serves to contextualise your work. In this sense, your review
chapter should be comprehensive.
In addition, it is important to justify why you are
not taking certain arguments into credence. The chapter also thus serves the purpose
of defending your stance and putting forth your arguments against another
position.
not taking certain arguments into credence. The chapter also thus serves the purpose
of defending your stance and putting forth your arguments against another
position.
Structure of the Chapter
In my limited reading, I have seen two popular ways
of structuring the review chapter.
of structuring the review chapter.
The first is the chronological order. This is also
the more popular and traditional way of writing the research in most
universities. Here the chapter is divided into broad themes according to the topic
of research. Related researches in each of the themes are then presented
chronologically. This serves the purpose of developing arguments along the
trajectory of evolution in the field. In some cases, I have seen an alphabetic presentation.
I could not fathom the purpose of this presentation and thus do not recommend
it. Either way, the chapter presents a summary of each research paper. The
chapter should ideally conclude with an analytical overview that presents the
key arguments that contribute to your research. In most theses, though, I have
found this missing.
the more popular and traditional way of writing the research in most
universities. Here the chapter is divided into broad themes according to the topic
of research. Related researches in each of the themes are then presented
chronologically. This serves the purpose of developing arguments along the
trajectory of evolution in the field. In some cases, I have seen an alphabetic presentation.
I could not fathom the purpose of this presentation and thus do not recommend
it. Either way, the chapter presents a summary of each research paper. The
chapter should ideally conclude with an analytical overview that presents the
key arguments that contribute to your research. In most theses, though, I have
found this missing.
The second form of structuring is to present the
central arguments of your work at the beginning of the chapter. This is
followed by presenting supporting literature around the arguments. The arrangement
of studies is thus not chronological but revolving around building arguments. This
form of presentation is more contemporary and I have noticed this in most
theses outside India and in the theses of some universities in India. The first
and foremost benefit is that this presentation ensures that the focus stays on
your work and how you have arrived at an understanding in your area of
research. The analysis is interwoven within the research studies. Here the summary of research papers is not important.
Instead, the relevant portion is presented. This may be the finding or the
theoretical framework used or the research questions addressed. In some cases,
this style is also used to justify the research method used. So for instance,
if there are a lot of cross sectional studies available in an area, you may
justify the need for a longitudinal one. The chapter in this style typically
concludes with a brief justification and reiteration of your central argument.
central arguments of your work at the beginning of the chapter. This is
followed by presenting supporting literature around the arguments. The arrangement
of studies is thus not chronological but revolving around building arguments. This
form of presentation is more contemporary and I have noticed this in most
theses outside India and in the theses of some universities in India. The first
and foremost benefit is that this presentation ensures that the focus stays on
your work and how you have arrived at an understanding in your area of
research. The analysis is interwoven within the research studies. Here the summary of research papers is not important.
Instead, the relevant portion is presented. This may be the finding or the
theoretical framework used or the research questions addressed. In some cases,
this style is also used to justify the research method used. So for instance,
if there are a lot of cross sectional studies available in an area, you may
justify the need for a longitudinal one. The chapter in this style typically
concludes with a brief justification and reiteration of your central argument.
Introducing and Concluding the Chapter
I have often noticed that people tend to be at a
loss in introducing and concluding the chapter. Traditionally, when theses were
judged on the basis of the number of pages in them, page after page in the
review chapter used to be dedicated to why review is required, and what it
entails etc. This is no longer required. Instead, the introduction can contain
a set of ideas that the review chapter aims to present.
loss in introducing and concluding the chapter. Traditionally, when theses were
judged on the basis of the number of pages in them, page after page in the
review chapter used to be dedicated to why review is required, and what it
entails etc. This is no longer required. Instead, the introduction can contain
a set of ideas that the review chapter aims to present.
The conclusion can be an analytical summary of what
various research studies have indicated. Most chapters would end here. However,
I recommend that the analysis point towards the necessity of your research as
well as contribute towards building your research questions. If you are using a
grounded theory approach, your research questions would evolve from the field. Even in this situation, you would go back to
look for more researches that support the voices from the field. If you are not
able to locate such researches despite making a genuine effort in this direction,
you would have to justify adding more questions by mentioning the absence of research
literature.
various research studies have indicated. Most chapters would end here. However,
I recommend that the analysis point towards the necessity of your research as
well as contribute towards building your research questions. If you are using a
grounded theory approach, your research questions would evolve from the field. Even in this situation, you would go back to
look for more researches that support the voices from the field. If you are not
able to locate such researches despite making a genuine effort in this direction,
you would have to justify adding more questions by mentioning the absence of research
literature.
A Word of Caution
I am concluding this post here with a word of
caution. It is much too easy to sit in one library or undertake one online
search and give up saying that this is all that is available. If research were
this easy as to have everything accessible at one place, I wonder if it would
even constitute a formal task, and in some cases a profession. Be honest in
trying to locate researches. One library is not enough. And of course your
research topic has been approved by the concerned board because your research
area is new and little else has been done in this area. But this does not mean
that you do not explore the possibility of learning from others. In most
situations, your research guide will be able to tell you if you have done
enough. But my suggestion is to just ask yourself if you have done enough or
are you just giving up because you don’t want to do more.
caution. It is much too easy to sit in one library or undertake one online
search and give up saying that this is all that is available. If research were
this easy as to have everything accessible at one place, I wonder if it would
even constitute a formal task, and in some cases a profession. Be honest in
trying to locate researches. One library is not enough. And of course your
research topic has been approved by the concerned board because your research
area is new and little else has been done in this area. But this does not mean
that you do not explore the possibility of learning from others. In most
situations, your research guide will be able to tell you if you have done
enough. But my suggestion is to just ask yourself if you have done enough or
are you just giving up because you don’t want to do more.