The Student Room Group

Anyone done a literature at Masters level?

Hi there,

This isn't subject specific, it's just the process of the literature review, so just wanted a few opinions.

I have never done a literature review, only a book review I vaguely remember doing in my first year of undergrad.

Anyway, I have my first assessment due in 2 weeks. My degree is political/social science, and the topic I have chosen is the idea of nationalism and ethnicity in Eastern Europe. I have 4 articles. I have read all of them, currently typing up notes, but I just wanted some advice on wider reading.

For example, I know I stick to these 4 articles and it isn't imperative to use outside sources unless strongly desired. But, I haven't studied this kind of topic in depth, it's quite overwhelming as I'm from a history background, and although this is essentially grounded in history, it's still a new thing for me.

For people that have done a review, did you do a lot of background reading? Because essentially when I come to write this I don't need to draw upon outside texts, I guess what I am asking is could someone just sit down with 4 articles and create an essay out of those articles without any knowledge of the topic, albeit what you're reading in the selected articles?

The topic I'm doing isn't alien to me, like I have a rough idea, but I'm just unsure how to construct it. I've picked out the main points and arguments of the authors but I'm just confused as to how I piece it all together!

Thank you :smile:
OK, very briefly (and this is for my subject, another social science so it may not apply to yours)

A literature review should be critical - you are examining the strength of the authors' arguments. So, take a theme that they have all written about and structure it something like this…

A says that…. but B disagrees with it because……. However it should be noted that B may be biased because….. C supports and develops A's argument by suggesting that…… More recently, however, D has shown that B's point of view may be valid because…….

Then choose another theme and work that through in the same way.

I would suggest that four articles is a bit limited for this at Masters level - we were always told that if you only stick to the suggested readings, you're only going to get a Pass. It's worth having a look at the articles cited in your selected articles and see if they can add anything to your argument. And background reading is always good especially if the subject is new to you.

This is a very very basic explanation of how to structure your lit review, and others may disagree, but I hope it's given you somewhere to start.
(edited 9 years ago)
Jantaculum has pretty much nailed it. Four articles is nowhere near enough, I'd say fourteen would probably be closer to the mark. Then again, how long is your lit review meant to be?
Reply 3
Good advice above. If your assignment brief or lecturer has specified four texts, then stick to them. Otherwise, wider reading is indicated. More reading is never a bad thing!

Must say that one of my Masters assignments did consist of a limited Lit Review of four to six key texts agreed in advance with my diss supervisor. It was a way of getting us used to working together and allowed them to get a feel for how we worked. Sounds like the OP may have one of those.
Hey, thanks for your replies. I haven't got a choice over how many articles, one topic has 4 articles (one I'm doing) and the other has 5. It's 2,000 to 3,000 word count also.


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Klix88
Good advice above. If your assignment brief or lecturer has specified four texts, then stick to them. Otherwise, wider reading is indicated. More reading is never a bad thing!

Must say that one of my Masters assignments did consist of a limited Lit Review of four to six key texts agreed in advance with my diss supervisor. It was a way of getting us used to working together and allowed them to get a feel for how we worked. Sounds like the OP may have one of those.


Yeah sounds like mine is similar to yours. The articles are limited but they're pretty long and full of interesting points. The only thing which worries me about the review is that I'm just going to regurgitate information. There's one article in particular which is a critical review of a pre existent theory, so it's kind of alien to me that I'm not meant to include the work of the guy in which this guy is referring to (if that makes sense)


Posted from TSR Mobile

Quick Reply

Latest