Writing a Literature Review and Using a Synthesis Matrix

My professor says I have to write a literature review, what do I do? Well, to begin, you have to know that when writing a literature review, the goal of the researcher is to determine the current state of knowledge about a particular topic by asking, What do we know or not know about this issue? In conducting this type of research, it is imperative to examine several different sources to determine where the knowledge overlaps and where it falls short. A literature review requires a synthesis of different subtopics to come to a greater understanding of the state of knowledge on a larger issue. It works very much like a jigsaw puzzle. The individual pieces (arguments) must be put together in order to reveal the whole (state of knowledge). So basically I just read the articles and summarize each one separately? No, a literature review is not a summary. Rather than merely presenting a summary of each source, a literature review should be organized according to each subtopic discussed about the larger topic. For example, one section of a literature review might read Researcher A suggests that X is true. Researcher B also argues that X is true, but points out that the effects of X may be different from those suggested by Researcher A. It is clear that subtopic X is the main idea covered in these sentences. Researchers A and B agree that X is true, but they disagree on Xs effects. There is both agreement and disagreement, but what links the two arguments is the fact that they both concern X. This sounds like a lot of information, how can I keep it organized? Because a literature review is NOT a summary of these different sources, it can be very difficult to keep your research organized. It is especially difficult to organize the information in a way that makes the writing process simpler. One way that seems particularly helpful in organizing literature reviews is the synthesis matrix. The synthesis matrix is a chart that allows a researcher to sort and categorize the different arguments presented on an issue. Across the top of the chart are the spaces to record sources, and along the side of the chart are the spaces to record the main points of argument on the topic at hand. As you examine your first source, you will work vertically in the column belonging to that source, recording as much information as possible about each significant idea presented in the work. Follow a similar pattern for your following sources. As you find information that relates to your already identified main points, put it in the pertaining row. In your new sources, you will also probably find new main ideas that you need to add to your list at the left. You now have a completed matrix!

As you write your review, you will work horizontally in the row belonging to each point discussed. As you combine the information presented in each row, you will begin to see each section of your paper taking shape. Remember, some of the sources may not cover all of the main ideas listed on the left, but that can be useful also. The gaps on your chart could provide clues about the gaps in the current state of knowledge on your topic.

CREATING YOUR SYNTHESIS MATRIX It is probably best to begin your chart by labeling the columns both horizontally and vertically. The sample chart below illustrates how to do this: Topic: ______________________________________ Source #1 Main Idea A Source #2 Source #3 Source #4

Main Idea B

Label the columns across the top of your chart with the authors last name or with a few keywords from the title of the work. Then label the sides of the chart with the main ideas that your sources discuss about your topic. As you read each source, make notes in the appropriate column about the information discussed in the work, as shown in the following chart.

Topic: Measuring Risk of Self-Disclosure

Larson & Chastain, 1990 -Self-concealment has been shown as conceptually and empirically different than self-disclosure - anxiety, depression and bodily symptoms have been correlated with selfconcealment Kelly & McKillop, 1996 -Revealing secrets can alleviates stress and guilt; physical and psychological symptoms -Concealing secrets can protect the secret keeper from negative feedback or rejection - Most research in concealing has been done with rejecting feedback from strangers only - Most health benefits of self-disclosure are correlational, not empirical; knowledge of health benefits is somewhat limited -Descriptive writing of different events; trivial, traumatic, etc -Self-report, correlational -Questionnaire -Measures amount and content of selfdisclosure -Target persons; mother, father, male friend, female friend, spouse Jourard, 1958 -Accurate selfdisclosure allows others to understand the real self which makes for a healthy personality, the opposite being neurosis Snell, Belk & Hawkins, 1986 -Masculine/Feminine types of topics influence the tendency of men and women to self-disclose -Self-disclosure gender differences not necessarily related to sex stereotyping of topics disclosed Snell, Belk, Papini & Clark, 1989 -people show a need to discuss their sexuality with others -may help to validate their own beliefs and behaviors with societal norms or the norms of people close to them

Benefits/Risk of SelfDisclosure

Current problems with research

-inconsistent findings to the amount and type of disclosure differences between males and females lead to this current research

-lengthy scale; many items, similar to many others - two different scales. one scale with target person as significant other; second scale with target persons mother, father, male best friend, female best friend

Type of questions current measurements use

-40-item disclosure inventory with four scales; masculineinstrumental behavior, masculine-instrumental trait, feminine-expressive behavior, feminine-expressive trait - 4 different disclosure recipients; male friend, female friend, male interviewer, spouse

-Questionnaire -12 sub-scales concerned with different types of sexual disclosure; sexual behavior, sexual fantasies, sexual attitudes, etc. -Target persons; significant other, friends, therapist (by gender)

WRITING YOUR REVIEW Here is an example from the article: Measurement of perceived risk of self-disclosure: Scale development. This excerpt synthesizes information without summarizing.
While research has continued to explore the benefits and risks associated with self-concealment (Larson & Chastain, 1990) the risks involved in self-disclosing are not as defined. Theories and empirical findings on the risks associated with revealing personal secrets is limiting in several ways. One drawback of the current research is that it focuses on rejecting feedback that comes from confidants who are strangers (Kelly & McKillop, 1996, p.457). This may be due to the set-up of the measurements used. Scales of self-disclosure, for example, usually ask the respondent to answer the questions with one of several people in mind: such as a same-sex friend, an opposite-sex friend, a spouse and a stranger (Jourard, 1958; Snell, Belk & Hawkins, 1986; Snell, Belk, Papini & Clark, 1989). Measuring self-disclosure in this way may limit the understanding researchers have in regards to the risks involved in self-disclosing to specific confidants. Disclosing to a confidant that is close to the self-discloser may involve a different set of risks. While relying on whether the confidant reacts positively or not, the self-discloser might also have to consider upsetting the confidant with his/her personal information (Kelly & McKillop, 1996), not to mention the detrimental effect on ones social network and relationships that comes with self-discloser encounters that end negatively.

The sample above is a good example of how to synthesize information adequately. Notice how the writer incorporates the different articles in varying degrees. The paragraph does not focus on the findings of one particular study, but uses several to help explain the lack of research involving risk and self-disclosure. The paragraph begins by introducing research that has been explored and how risk and self-disclosure research has not been explored. Further sources are used to show drawbacks in the research done on risk and self-disclosure, but are not explained study by study. Instead the information from the sources is synthesized together to better explain the authors point.

This document was originally created by NC State University Writing and Speaking Tutorial Service Tutors during Fall 2006. Contributors were Laura Ingram, James Hussey, Michelle Tigani, and Mary Hemmelgarn. . Original sample matrix and paragraph were from Stephanie Huneycutt. http://www.ncsu.edu/tutorial_center/writespeak The sample matrix and paragraph were edited from the original by Nicole Fisher (npf1018@westminstercollege.edu).