Is a uni lab project harder than literature review?

Are they options for writing your dissertation?
I do biomed and chose a lab project for my final year project and the lab work was very time consuming! BUT the write up was pretty okay because so much of it is just discussing your own work which you know inside out. But obviously you will also have to read a lot of literature as well for the intro and discussion.
From people I spoke to doing literature review projects - these seem to get a bit less support - just because you see your superviser less often as you aren't together with them in the lab. You also have to teach yourself the principles of whatever your writing about which can be confusing. However people seemed to finish these projects earlier which I guess suggests they may be slightly easier or just that they could put the time in early due to not waiting for results.
Either way they'll require you to put in a lot of hours to get a good grade so it pretty much depends on where your skills lie - and on what you want to do - if you are applying for a research masters afterwards it might not be looked on as favourably if you do a lit review as you gain less lab skills. But if you are applying for anything communication based a literature review demonstrates that you can take in information and present it in a format that is clear to others.

Thank you for replying Yep those are the options they gave for writing our dissertation. Even though it depends on the particular topic you choose, how long did it take for you to complete your lab project? and even if the experimental results gained aren't good, will we get penalised? Also, did you have to research the appropriate method for the project independently?

I've asked a few of my mates and they said the exact same thing.

If you don't mind, could you tell me what a literature review involves and what its about? I'm kinda lost cause my uni didn't describe what we actually have to do.

I got told I'd get more marks if I did an experiment or used software than completely Google stuff

I did software and I got stuck and so I had to copy someone's results and data and method online. copied entire 72 page diss using my own words

got merit in my masters diss

So at my uni (York) we're supposed to spend about 2 days a week on our project from two weeks before christmas until we submit just after easter. This equates to around 9 weeks of 2 days in the lab (I ran over and went into 10). I wrote as I went so it wasn't horrific at the end but it probably took me about 6 solid days of writing + lab time + data analysis (I did this in incubations in lab time mostly). Then maybe 3 days editing after we get given general feedback.
You won't get penalised for poor results but you do need to offer sufficient explanation as to why they, if you aren't sure it's best to explain a couple of possible reasons and evaluate which is most likely e.g. equipment failure or human mistake in not adding a reagent.
It totally depends on your project if you research the methods used - the lab I was in researched something pretty niche so there are very few techniques and I had to use their protocols to ensure I had the right reagents etc. But I was asked to go through key experiments I wanted to do so I had some control there.
Obviously I haven't done a literature review so I can only go from what I've heard. But generally literature reviews seem to give you more control on the path you go down. When you get your topic you describe why it is important, what current information is out there, evaluate the reliability of previous work, evaluate any contradictory findings. Discuss what more research should be done. Some people seem to to design questionnaires to back up what they are saying with more information e.g. if your project was discussing the effects of public education about diabetes and the stage at which people are diagnosed you might want to question people on what their understanding of diabetes. Others seem to use software to carry out meta-analysis of multple previous studies and integrate their findings.

Thank you so much! Ah okay I get what you mean. I'm normally awful at critical analysis and evaluating so probably wouldn't do literature review.
Did you find it hard to juggle everything, so like doing the project and focussing on lectures or was it alright for you?

Hi guys,
I'm a uni student doing biochemistry and was wondering if a lab project is harder than a literature review? what are the pros and cons?

Thanks in advance

Some weeks were stressful and i was running out the lab into a lecture and then straight back to the lab after but mostly it was fine. You won't be in the lab outside of 9-5 normally so can always use the odd evening to catch up. 3rd year is definitely hard work but as long as you organise yourself a bit it's fine

There not really comparable things imo, but a lit review is much easier.

Okay thank you in what way is it easier?