Peer Review Questions: Review of the Literature

Background

According to Thury and Drott, a review of the literature should describe the mental map you formed of your topic.

This description should:

1. Explain the grouping or pattern of the sources that you found interesting to talk about. This grouping may be observing ways in which the sources are related according to:
• subject matter
• methodology or approach
• conclusions
• assumptions
2. Accurately reflect the information in the sources.
3. Take into consideration the needs of your audience by providing background material for the reader unfamiliar with the topic

Ideally, there should be a "value added" component to a review of the literature. That is, in addition to showing the reader how the sources can be grouped, it should allow the reader to gain some insight into the topic even beyond the grouping it proposes. The grouping in the review should be like a scientific instrument (say, a magnification device, or a filtering system) that allows you to see some hitherto hidden aspect of the topic.

What to do

Writer:

• Give copies of your essay to members of your writing group.
• Read the essay aloud to them, as they follow along on their copies.

Group members:

• As the writer reads, listen for the following.
• the writer's thesis about how the articles read are related to each other.
• the writer's subtopics or main areas of grouping.
• the evidence that the writer gives to explain the nature of each subcategory of the sources.
• Underline or circle any relevant sections of the paper.

Discussion:

As a group, consider the following questions:

• Is this a paper about the sources (good) or the topic (bad)?
• Which of the criteria mentioned in Point #1 above is used to group the sources?
• Does the writer explain what distinguished each group or area identified in the review?
• What sentence or sentences explain how the writer grouped the sources?
• Does the paper provide extensive summaries of each source covered? (This is not a good thing to do.)
• Discuss ways in which the writer supported the thesis associated with relevant source material.
• Does the writer's version of the source material accurately reflect what the sources said (open the relevant source and check).
• Has the writer explained what the source meant clearly to someone who hasn't read the source?
• Consider what you learned about the topic by reading this review of the literature.
• Was there a "value added" component? That is, did you learn something besides the fact that the sources can be grouped as the writer said?
• Consider how the writer can improve the paper.

Final points:

As a group, consider:

• The coherence of the paper. Are the subtopics of the paper connected with meaningful transitions?
• Are the writer's sources related to each other in topic (or is this the undesirable "paper about China"?
• Does the writer use enough (4-20) sources?
• Does there seem to be any point of view or idea missing from the understanding of the topic?
• Use of source material:
• Has the writer given proper credit to the sources?
• Is there too much direct quotation of the sources?