Clayton ThynePS 235: World Politics

Spring 2010

Note: This is best viewed as a slide show (otherwise the animations will be screwed up). Hit F5 now to proceed.

What is a Lit Review?A lit review summarizes and evaluates a body

of writings about a specific topic2 key elements:

1. concisely summarize the key findings/claims from prior research2. reach a conclusion about how complete/accurate the knowledge is (what’s right/wrong, conclusive/inconclusive?)

It is not a summary list (i.e., annotated bibliography)

Notes based on Knopf (2006)

Why write a lit review?Gives a general overview of lit that is not

familiar to youReveals what has already been doneGives you new ideas on your researchTells you what holes you can fillHelps you place your research in a broader

context

Notes based on Knopf (2006)

Types of Lit Reviews1. End in itself – excellent if you can find them2. Preliminary stage in a larger project – what

you’re doing3. Component of a finished research report –

finish project by addressing previous literature

Notes based on Knopf (2006)

Your Contribution to KnowledgeMay be theoretical or empiricalMay overthrow previous theories and/or

findings, or may support themRegardless, the reader must know the

current state of knowledge in order to understand your contribution

Notes based on Knopf (2006)

How to Create an Effective ReviewConsider your sources – peer-reviewed is always the

best; avoid biased sourcesImitate published workSummarize each work in 1-2 sentencesFocus on what is relevant; avoid tedious detailsNo item-by-item lists; group into ‘camps’ or ‘schools of

thought’Look for review articles – Annual Review of

International Relations; Annual Review of Political Science; PhD dissertations are a great sources; textbooks often do a decent job; journal articles often skip the lit review or make it very brief

Notes based on Knopf (2006)

Nuts & Bolts: What the Lit Review Should Accomplish1. Be clear about the purpose of each article (in terms

of theory, DV, and Ivs)2. Identify main argument; did the author find support?3. Summarize articles from steps 1-2 in terms of

1. Areas of agreement2. Areas of disagreement3. Gaps/holes that need filled – may be theoretical (new

way of thinking about an issue) or empirical (new way of testing the issue) or both

4. Evaluate the overall state of knowledge; consider…1. Assumptions2. Logic3. Evidence4. Methodology

Notes based on Knopf (2006)

What if there are too few/many sources?Think in terms of 2 tiers:

Tier 1: studies that directly address your research question

Tier 2: studies that overlap somewhat w/ your question

Begin w/ tier 1……if too few sources, broaden to tier 2…if too many, consider…

Leading authorities (e.g., only journal articles) Recent studies (e.g., published since 2002) Studies most relevant to your topic

Notes based on Knopf (2006)

Some examples

Notes based on Bartilow & Eom (2009)

Quickly identifies 3 areas of lit

Then point to the hole in the literature

Clearly states both a (1) theoretical and (2) empirical contribution

Notes based on Bartilow & Eom (2009)

Morey & Kadera’s contribution is primarily theoretical, so they review the literature on dynamic modeling.

They conclude by pointing to the hole in the literature – the need to use a dynamic model to approach this question.

Notes based on Kadera & Morey (2008)

Thyne & Moreno focus primarily on policy.

Notes based on Thyne & Moreno (2008)

They note a disjuncture between policy expectations and reality…

…and then critique previous scholars’ attempts to explain this disjuncture.

Notes based on Thyne & Moreno (2008)

Wallace reviews the dominant literature in this area, which focuses on domestic factors.

He then critiques the literature for its methodology.

Notes based on Wallace (2008)