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

1. Systematic Search - Reproducible, comprehensive search strategies
2. Critical Appraisal - Quality assessment of sources
3. Synthesis - Thematic integration across sources
4. Gap Identification - Locating research opportunities
5. 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

1. Code individual sources - Key concepts, findings, methods
2. Group codes into themes - Patterns across sources
3. 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"