Skill: Literature Review
Systematic literature search, synthesis, gap identification, and narrative construction for academic research.
Metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Skill ID | literature-review |
| Version | 1.0.0 |
| Category | Research |
| Difficulty | Advanced |
| Prerequisites | None |
| Related Skills | academic-paper-drafting, citation-management, dissertation-defense |
Overview
Literature review is foundational to academic research. This skill provides structured workflows for systematic searching, critical synthesis, and gap identification—transforming scattered sources into coherent scholarly narratives.
Core Competencies
- •Systematic Search - Reproducible, comprehensive search strategies
- •Critical Appraisal - Quality assessment of sources
- •Synthesis - Thematic integration across sources
- •Gap Identification - Locating research opportunities
- •Narrative Construction - Weaving sources into argument
Module 1: Systematic Search Strategy
The PICO(S) Framework
For empirical research questions:
| Element | Description | Example (AIRS) |
|---|---|---|
| Population | Who is studied | Knowledge workers, AI users |
| Intervention | What is applied | AI-powered tools, copilots |
| Comparison | Alternative | Traditional tools, no AI |
| Outcome | What is measured | Adoption intention, behavioral intention |
| Study type | Research design | Quantitative survey, SEM |
Database Selection
| Database | Best For | Coverage |
|---|---|---|
| Google Scholar | Broad discovery, citation tracking | All disciplines |
| Web of Science | High-impact journals, citation analysis | STEM, social sciences |
| Scopus | Comprehensive coverage, author metrics | Multidisciplinary |
| ACM Digital Library | Computer science, HCI | CS, CHI proceedings |
| PsycINFO | Psychology, behavioral research | Psychology, social sciences |
| SSRN | Working papers, preprints | Business, economics, law |
Search String Construction
Boolean operators:
("artificial intelligence" OR "AI" OR "machine learning")
AND
("adoption" OR "acceptance" OR "intention")
AND
("UTAUT" OR "TAM" OR "technology acceptance")
Truncation and wildcards:
- •
adopt*→ adoption, adopting, adopter - •
behavio?r→ behavior, behaviour
Search Protocol Template
## Search Protocol **Research Question**: [Your RQ] **Date Conducted**: [Date] **Databases Searched**: [List] ### Search Terms - Primary: [terms] - Secondary: [terms] - Exclusions: [terms with NOT] ### Inclusion Criteria - Published: [date range] - Language: [languages] - Study type: [empirical, theoretical, etc.] - Peer-reviewed: [yes/no] ### Exclusion Criteria - [List exclusions] ### Results | Database | Initial Hits | After Dedup | After Title Screen | After Abstract Screen | Final | |----------|--------------|-------------|--------------------|-----------------------|-------|
Module 2: Source Management
The Funnel Process
Initial Search Results (hundreds)
↓ Title screening
Potentially Relevant (~50-100)
↓ Abstract screening
Candidates for Full-Text (~30-50)
↓ Full-text review
Included Sources (~15-30)
↓ Backward/forward citation
Final Corpus (~20-40)
Screening Criteria
Quick reject (title/abstract):
- •Wrong population
- •Wrong intervention
- •Wrong outcome
- •Non-empirical (if seeking empirical)
- •Wrong language
- •Duplicate
Full-text assessment:
- •Methodological rigor
- •Relevance to research question
- •Contribution to synthesis
Citation Tracking
Backward citation (reference mining):
- •Review reference lists of key papers
- •Find foundational works
- •Identify theoretical ancestry
Forward citation (cited by):
- •Use Google Scholar "Cited by"
- •Find recent developments
- •Identify methodological improvements
Module 3: Critical Appraisal
Quality Assessment Dimensions
| Dimension | Questions |
|---|---|
| Validity | Are findings believable? Methods appropriate? |
| Reliability | Would study replicate? Measures consistent? |
| Generalizability | To what populations/contexts? |
| Rigor | Adequate sample? Controls? Analysis? |
| Transparency | Can methods be reproduced? |
Study Type Checklists
Quantitative survey studies:
- • Sample size adequate (power analysis?)
- • Response rate reported
- • Validated instruments used
- • Reliability reported (Cronbach's α)
- • Common method bias addressed
- • Appropriate statistical analysis
Qualitative studies:
- • Sampling strategy justified
- • Data saturation discussed
- • Researcher positionality stated
- • Coding process transparent
- • Member checking or triangulation
SEM/CFA studies:
- • Model fit indices reported (CFI, RMSEA, SRMR)
- • Convergent validity (AVE ≥ .50)
- • Discriminant validity (HTMT < .85)
- • Sample size adequate (N ≥ 200 preferred)
Module 4: Synthesis Strategies
Thematic Synthesis
- •Code individual sources - Key concepts, findings, methods
- •Group codes into themes - Patterns across sources
- •Develop analytical narrative - What themes mean together
Example themes for AIRS research:
- •Trust and reliance
- •Value perception
- •Effort-benefit trade-offs
- •Social and organizational factors
Comparative Matrix
| Source | Theory | Method | Sample | Key Finding | Limitation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Author1 (Year) | TAM | Survey | N=312 | PE→BI significant | Cross-sectional |
| Author2 (Year) | UTAUT2 | SEM | N=523 | PV strongest | Self-report |
Theoretical Integration
Identifying theoretical tensions:
- •Where do theories contradict?
- •What boundary conditions apply?
- •How can conflicts be resolved?
Building theoretical contribution:
- •What's missing from current theories?
- •How does your work extend understanding?
- •What new constructs are needed?
Module 5: Gap Identification
Types of Research Gaps
| Gap Type | Description | Signal Phrases |
|---|---|---|
| Empirical | Untested relationships | "No study has examined..." |
| Theoretical | Missing constructs or mechanisms | "Theory does not account for..." |
| Methodological | Better methods needed | "Prior studies relied on..." |
| Contextual | Untested populations/settings | "Research in [context] is lacking..." |
| Temporal | Outdated findings | "Since [year], technology has changed..." |
Gap Articulation Template
## Research Gap **What we know**: [Summary of existing knowledge] **What we don't know**: [The gap] **Why it matters**: [Significance of filling gap] **How this study addresses it**: [Your contribution]
Module 6: Writing the Literature Review
Structure Options
Chronological:
- •Best for: Tracing evolution of a concept
- •Risk: Can become mere historical summary
Thematic:
- •Best for: Synthesizing diverse perspectives
- •Risk: May obscure temporal development
Methodological:
- •Best for: Evaluating research approaches
- •Risk: Can be dry, less engaging
Theoretical:
- •Best for: Comparing frameworks
- •Risk: Requires deep theory knowledge
The Funnel Structure
Broad context (the problem space)
↓
Theoretical foundations (key theories)
↓
Prior empirical work (what's been studied)
↓
Gap and contribution (what's missing → your work)
Synthesis vs. Summary
❌ Summary (weak):
"Smith (2020) found X. Jones (2021) found Y. Brown (2022) found Z."
✅ Synthesis (strong):
"While early studies emphasized X (Smith, 2020), subsequent research revealed the moderating role of Y (Jones, 2021), leading to more nuanced frameworks that integrate both factors (Brown, 2022)."
Transition Phrases for Synthesis
| Purpose | Phrases |
|---|---|
| Agreement | "Consistent with...", "Similarly...", "Extending this..." |
| Contrast | "However...", "In contrast...", "Alternatively..." |
| Extension | "Building on...", "Taking this further...", "Integrating..." |
| Gap signal | "Yet...", "Nevertheless...", "What remains unclear..." |
Quick Reference
Literature Review Checklist
- • Search strategy documented and reproducible
- • Multiple databases searched
- • Inclusion/exclusion criteria explicit
- • Backward and forward citation completed
- • Sources critically appraised
- • Themes identified across sources
- • Gaps clearly articulated
- • Synthesis (not just summary)
- • Clear link to research questions
Common Pitfalls
| Pitfall | Solution |
|---|---|
| Too narrow search | Use multiple databases, synonyms |
| Uncritical acceptance | Apply quality assessment |
| Descriptive only | Focus on synthesis and analysis |
| No clear gap | Explicitly state what's missing |
| Outdated sources | Include recent (last 5 years) work |
| Missing seminal works | Track backward citations |
Activation Patterns
| Trigger | Response |
|---|---|
| "literature review", "lit review", "sources" | Full skill activation |
| "search strategy", "database search" | Module 1: Systematic Search |
| "synthesize", "themes", "patterns" | Module 4: Synthesis |
| "research gap", "what's missing" | Module 5: Gap Identification |
| "how to write lit review" | Module 6: Writing |
Skill created: 2026-02-10 | Category: Research | Status: Active
Synapses
- •[.github/skills/citation-management/SKILL.md] (High, Uses, Bidirectional) - "Lit review requires proper citations"
- •[.github/skills/academic-paper-drafting/SKILL.md] (High, Feeds, Forward) - "Lit review becomes paper section"
- •[.github/instructions/empirical-validation.instructions.md] (Medium, Applies, Forward) - "Evidence-based source evaluation"