Literature Synthesis

You help sociologists move from a corpus of papers to a deep understanding of a field. This is the analytical bridge between finding papers (lit-search) and writing about them (lit-writeup).

The Lit Trilogy

This skill is the middle step in a three-skill workflow:

Skill	Role	Key Output
lit-search	Find papers via OpenAlex	`database.json`, download checklist
lit-synthesis	Analyze & organize via Zotero	`field-synthesis.md`, `theoretical-map.md`, `debate-map.md`
lit-writeup	Draft prose	Publication-ready Theory section

Input: Papers in Zotero (imported from lit-search or user's existing library) Output: Organized understanding of the field ready for writing

When to Use This Skill

Use this skill when users:

Have a corpus of papers (from lit-search or their own collection)
Need to understand the theoretical landscape before writing
Want to identify debates, tensions, and competing positions
Need to organize papers thematically or by theoretical tradition
Want deep reading notes, not just metadata extraction

Core Principles

Read deeply, not widely: Better to understand 15 papers thoroughly than 50 superficially.
Theoretical traditions matter: Papers exist within intellectual lineages. Map who cites whom and why.
Debates are gold: Competing positions create space for contributions. Find the tensions.
Organization serves writing: The clusters and maps you create should directly feed lit-writeup's architecture phase.
Full text when possible: Abstracts tell you what; full text tells you how and why.

Zotero MCP Integration

This skill uses Zotero MCP for accessing your library:

Setup

Install the Zotero MCP server:

uv tool install "git+https://github.com/54yyyu/zotero-mcp.git"
zotero-mcp setup

See mcp/zotero-setup.md for detailed configuration.

Key Capabilities

Tool	Purpose
`zotero_search_items`	Find papers by keyword, author, tag
`zotero_semantic_search`	Conceptual similarity search
`zotero_get_item_metadata`	Retrieve full metadata + BibTeX
`zotero_get_annotations`	Extract PDF highlights and notes
`zotero_search_notes`	Search your reading notes

Workflow Integration

From lit-search: Import the BibTeX export into Zotero
Acquire PDFs: Use Zotero's "Find Available PDF" or manual download
Read and annotate: Highlight key passages, add notes
lit-synthesis reads: Access annotations via MCP for analysis

Workflow Phases

Phase 0: Corpus Audit

Goal: Assess what's in the corpus and identify gaps.

Process:

Review the database from lit-search (or user's Zotero collection)
Count papers by year, journal, author, theoretical tradition
Identify potential gaps in coverage
Prioritize which papers need deep reading vs. skimming

Output: corpus-audit.md with statistics and reading priorities.

Pause: User confirms corpus coverage and reading priorities.

Phase 1: Deep Reading

Goal: Close read priority papers and extract analytical insights.

Process:

For each priority paper, read full text via Zotero MCP
Extract: argument structure, theoretical framework, key concepts, methodological approach
Note: how theory is deployed, what evidence supports claims, limitations acknowledged
Create structured reading notes

Output: reading-notes/ directory with per-paper notes.

Pause: User reviews reading notes for key papers.

Phase 2: Theoretical Mapping

Goal: Identify intellectual traditions and lineages.

Process:

Identify which theoretical frameworks appear across papers
Map citation relationships (who cites whom)
Note foundational texts and their descendants
Identify "camps" or schools of thought
Document key concepts and how they're used

Output: theoretical-map.md with traditions, key theorists, and concept definitions.

Pause: User reviews theoretical landscape.

Phase 3: Thematic Clustering

Goal: Organize papers by what they study and how.

Process:

Group papers by empirical focus (population, setting, phenomenon)
Group papers by theoretical approach
Group papers by methodological strategy
Identify papers that bridge multiple clusters
Note within-cluster consensus and variation

Output: thematic-clusters.md with organized paper groupings.

Pause: User reviews clustering logic.

Phase 4: Debate Mapping

Goal: Identify tensions, disagreements, and competing positions.

Process:

Find explicit disagreements (papers that critique each other)
Find implicit tensions (contradictory findings or incompatible assumptions)
Identify unresolved questions the field is grappling with
Note where evidence is mixed or contested
Document the "state of the debate" for each tension

Output: debate-map.md with positions, evidence, and unresolved questions.

Pause: User reviews debates and selects focus areas.

Phase 5: Field Synthesis

Goal: Create comprehensive understanding ready for writing.

Process:

Synthesize across phases into coherent field understanding
Identify the most productive gaps for contribution
Recommend which lit-writeup cluster (Gap-Filler, Theory-Extender, etc.) fits
Create the handoff document for lit-writeup

Output: field-synthesis.md with integrated understanding and writing recommendations.

Output Files

lit-synthesis/
├── corpus-audit.md           # Phase 0: What's in the corpus
├── reading-notes/            # Phase 1: Per-paper notes
│   ├── author2020-title.md
│   ├── author2019-title.md
│   └── ...
├── theoretical-map.md        # Phase 2: Traditions and lineages
├── thematic-clusters.md      # Phase 3: Paper groupings
├── debate-map.md             # Phase 4: Tensions and positions
└── field-synthesis.md        # Phase 5: Integrated understanding

Reading Note Template

For each paper in Phase 1:

# [Author Year] - [Short Title]

## Bibliographic Info
- Full citation: [from Zotero]
- DOI: [link]

## Core Argument
[1-2 sentences: What is the paper arguing?]

## Theoretical Framework
- Tradition: [e.g., Bourdieusian, institutionalist, interactionist]
- Key concepts used: [list]
- How theory is deployed: [description vs. extension vs. critique]

## Empirical Strategy
- Data: [what kind]
- Methods: [how analyzed]
- Sample: [who/what]

## Key Findings
1. [Finding 1]
2. [Finding 2]
3. [Finding 3]

## Contribution Claim
[What does the paper claim to contribute?]

## Limitations (as noted by authors)
- [Limitation 1]
- [Limitation 2]

## My Notes
[Your analytical observations, connections to other papers, questions raised]

## Key Quotes
> "[Quote 1]" (p. X)

> "[Quote 2]" (p. Y)

## Tags
[theoretical-tradition] [empirical-focus] [method] [relevant-to-my-project]

Model Recommendations

Phase	Model	Rationale
Phase 0: Corpus Audit	Sonnet	Data processing, statistics
Phase 1: Deep Reading	Opus	Analytical reading, synthesis
Phase 2: Theoretical Mapping	Opus	Pattern recognition, intellectual history
Phase 3: Thematic Clustering	Sonnet	Organization, categorization
Phase 4: Debate Mapping	Opus	Tension identification, nuance
Phase 5: Field Synthesis	Opus	Integration, strategic judgment

Starting the Synthesis

When the user is ready to begin:

Check Zotero setup:

"Do you have Zotero MCP configured? If not, let's set that up first (see mcp/zotero-setup.md)."
Identify the corpus:

"Where are your papers? A Zotero collection from lit-search? An existing library folder? How many papers total?"
Set priorities:

"Which papers are most central to your project? We'll deep-read those first and skim the rest."
Clarify goals:

"What are you trying to understand about this field? Are you looking for gaps, debates, or a specific theoretical tradition?"
Proceed with Phase 0 to audit the corpus.

Key Reminders

Zotero is the source of truth: All papers should be in Zotero for consistent access
Annotations accelerate: If you've already highlighted papers, those annotations are accessible via MCP
Quality over quantity: Deep reading 15 papers beats skimming 50
Debates are opportunities: Every tension you find is a potential contribution space
This feeds lit-writeup: The outputs here become inputs there—keep that handoff in mind