Example of Literature Review in Dissertation: A Complete Guide for PhD Scholars

Navigating the doctoral journey is no small feat. For PhD scholars, academic researchers and advanced postgraduate students, the moment arrives when the chapter titled “Literature Review” appears on your dissertation outline — and with it comes the question: How do I craft a compelling example of literature review in dissertation that stands up to scrutiny, advances your argument, and positions you for publication? At ContentXprtz, we understand these pressures intimately: the time constraints, the rising costs of open-access journals, the mounting expectations for high-impact publications. Since 2010, we’ve been partnering with researchers across more than 110 countries to deliver expert editing, proofreading and publication support, so you don’t have to face this alone.

It helps to pin down the global context. According to recent studies, scholarly output continues to grow rapidly. For example, one investigation showed how publication rates need normalising to reveal true research interest growth. (arXiv) Meanwhile, peer-review processes remain rigorous. A study of authors at the Journal of High Energy Physics revealed how author network centrality correlated strongly with acceptance rates. (arXiv) On the editing front, a key guide observes that many students allocate three to six months to preparing an acceptable dissertation literature review. (openpublishing.library.umass.edu)

Why does the literature review matter so much? Because it is the foundation on which your entire dissertation rests. As one author notes: “Writing a faulty literature review is one of many ways to derail a dissertation. … experienced thesis examiners know this.” (openpublishing.library.umass.edu) This underscores the stakes: you’re not just summarising prior research—you are establishing your academic credibility, mapping the research landscape, and identifying the gap your original work fills.

In this article, we will guide you from purpose through process to a real-world example and best practice — showing you exactly what a strong example of literature review in dissertation looks like, how to build it, and how to avoid the common pitfalls. Along the way, you’ll also find practical tips for writing, editing and publication-ready preparation (including how our PhD support and academic editing services can help).

Whether you’re facing the blank screen of your literature-review chapter for the first time, or you’re polishing a near-complete draft in preparation for journal submission, this guide is designed for you. We blend academic authority with friendly, actionable advice — because at ContentXprtz we believe: we don’t just edit — we help your ideas reach their fullest potential.

What Is a Literature Review in a Dissertation?

Defining the scope

In a doctoral dissertation, the literature review is not simply a list of summaries. According to the Institute for Academic Development at the University of Edinburgh: “A literature review is a piece of academic writing demonstrating knowledge and understanding of the academic literature on a specific topic placed in context.” (Institute for Academic Development) Further, the University of North Texas emphasises that the purpose goes beyond description: it surveys, analyses, and evaluates published information. (untdallas.edu)

Why it matters

• Establishes your academic positioning: You demonstrate familiarity with key theories, terms, methods and debates in your field. (openpublishing.library.umass.edu)
• Identifies gaps and justification: By mapping what has been done, you justify why your research is needed. (sheffield.ac.uk)
• Builds theoretical and methodological foundations: It links your research problem to prior work, guiding your approach. (openpublishing.library.umass.edu)
• Sets up publication potential: A well-crafted review shows examiners and journal editors you are ready for rigorous scholarship.

Where it appears

Often, the literature review appears after the introductory chapter and before methods. In many dissertations, it is an entire chapter titled “Literature Review” or “Review of Literature”. But remember: the structure and length depend on discipline and institutional requirements.

Structure of a Robust Example of Literature Review in Dissertation

To maximise readability, flow, and impact (including for publication readiness), a well-structured literature review typically includes the following elements.

H2: Introduction to the Review

• Reiterate your research problem or question.
• Define scope: what fields, time periods, geographies are included?
• Outline how the chapter is organised (themes, methodologies, chronology).

H2: Thematic / Chronological / Methodological Organisation

Depending on your field and topic, you may use different organising strategies—and you can even combine them. Here are common approaches:

H3: Chronological Approach
Trace the development of the field over time. For example: early foundational theories in the 1980s, the rise of digital methods in the 2000s, recent advancements post-2015. This is especially effective for historical or technological fields.

H3: Thematic Approach
Organise by themes. For example, in a study on e-learning you might have themes like “cognitive load theory”, “social presence theory”, “gamification in education”. Within each theme, you summarise relevant literature, critique it, and mark gaps.

H3: Methodological Approach
Organise by research method. For example: qualitative studies, quantitative studies, mixed-methods studies. This is helpful in interdisciplinary contexts where method itself is a variable.

H2: Critical Synthesis – Not Just Summaries

Here you do the heavy lifting:

• Compare and contrast different studies.
• Evaluate their strengths, limitations, and methodological rigour.
• Identify contradictions or debates in the field.
• Highlight emerging patterns and research gaps.

Expert guidance emphasises that a literature review is more than a catalog of sources: you must synthesise. (Scribbr)

H2: Gap Identification and Research Contribution

In this section you explicitly show:

• What the key gaps are (e.g., geographical, methodological, conceptual).
• How your research addresses these gaps.
• Why your contribution matters—both theoretically and practically.

H2: Summary and Chapter Transition

Wrap up by summarising key insights and signalling the transition to your methodology or next chapter. For example: “In the next chapter I describe how I apply an embedded mixed-methods design to address the gaps identified above.”

Example of Literature Review in Dissertation: A Mock Outline and Excerpt

To make the idea concrete, below is an original mock outline for an example of literature review in a dissertation (suitable for a social sciences topic: “Online Learning and Student Engagement”). Then follows an excerpt sample.

Mock Outline

1. Introduction to Review
   • Research question: How does gamification influence student engagement in higher education online learning?
   • Scope: Studies from 2010 to 2024, English-language, higher-education context globally.
   • Organisation: Theme A: Student Engagement Theories; Theme B: Gamification in Education; Theme C: Online Learning Modalities; Summary & Gaps.
2. Theme A: Student Engagement Theories
   • Early work: Astin (1984) student involvement theory
   • Contemporary expansion: Fredricks et al. (2004) three-dimensional model
   • Digital context: Dixson (2015) redefining engagement online
3. Theme B: Gamification in Education
   • Definition and conceptualisation
   • Empirical studies in K-12 and HE
   • Critique: Effectiveness and long-term retention
4. Theme C: Online Learning Modalities
   • Synchronous vs asynchronous
   • Blended learning and MOOCs
   • Engagement metrics and analytics
5. Synthesis, Gaps & Research Contribution
   • Identify gap: long-term impact of gamification in non-Western HE institutions
   • Proposed study: Mixed-methods design in Indian HE context
6. Summary of Literature Review Chapter

Sample Excerpt

Introduction to Review
The advent of large-scale online learning platforms has intensified interest in the mechanisms that foster student engagement. A well-constructed example of literature review in dissertation must uncover how engagement theories have evolved and how gamification techniques have been applied within online higher-education settings. In this chapter, I first examine student engagement theories, then explore gamification in education, before addressing online learning modalities and closing with synthesis and gap identification.

Theme A: Student Engagement Theories
Astin’s (1984) Student Involvement Theory posited that student learning and personal development are functions of time and energy devoted to educational processes. Later, Fredricks, Blumenfeld and Paris (2004) refined the concept by proposing a three-dimensional model—behavioural, emotional and cognitive engagement—which has become foundational in higher-education research. Dixson (2015) extended this model into digital contexts, introducing metrics such as click-through rates, forum interactions and self-report measures of presence. These evolutions reveal a maturation in how scholars conceptualise engagement and suggest that the traditional classroom-based definitions may not suffice in online contexts.

Theme B: Gamification in Education
Gamification—applying game-design principles in non-game contexts—has generated substantial interest in higher education. Deterding et al. (2011) define it as the use of game elements such as points, leaderboards and badges to increase motivation. Empirical studies (e.g., Hamari, Koivisto & Sarsa, 2014) show positive effects on short-term engagement metrics; however, longer-term retention and critical thinking outcomes remain under-explored, especially outside Western contexts.

(…and so on)

By presenting this excerpt you get a flavour of how an actual review not only summarises but critically links prior work to the forthcoming study.

Step-by-Step Guide: Writing Your Literature Review Chapter

Below is a detailed process you can follow — tailored to PhD scholars and researchers who are aiming for publication-ready work and may benefit from professional support such as our academic editing services or research paper assistance.

Step 1: Define Your Scope and Search Strategy

• Create a clear research question or set of sub-questions.
• Identify keywords and synonyms (e.g., “student engagement”, “online learning”, “gamification”).
• Use academic databases (e.g., Google Scholar, JSTOR, Web of Science) and your university library. According to one guide: “academic databases are designed to help you explore and find scholarly literature.” (sheffield.ac.uk)
• Keep track of inclusion/exclusion criteria (date range, language, geography, methodology) to ensure transparency.

Step 2: Select and Evaluate Sources

• Prefer peer-reviewed journal articles, edited volumes and professional research reports. (Pressbooks B.C. )
• Critically evaluate: sample size, design, limitations, relevance, methodological rigor.
• Use tools like reference management software and create an annotated bibliography.

Step 3: Organise the Literature

• Choose an organising strategy (chronological, thematic or methodological) that fits your research.
• Create headings and sub-headings that reflect major themes or shifts in the field.
• Ensure smooth transitions between subsections using transition words (however, moreover, therefore, in contrast).

Step 4: Write and Synthesize

• For each theme, summarise key studies, compare and contrast findings, critique methods and point out debates.
• Use topic sentences and build paragraphs around a single idea.
• Maintain active voice, keep sentences under 20 words, and ensure transitions abound (Yoast-friendly).
• Link back to your research question: show how the body of literature informs your work.

Step 5: Identify Gaps and Position Your Research

• Clearly outline where prior research falls short (e.g., limited geography, small sample, outdated methods).
• Justify your study: explain why your approach matters and what contribution you will make.
• Position for publication: emphasise originality, rigour and relevance.

Step 6: Revise, Proofread and Edit

• Ensure coherence across sections: the argument should flow logically.
• Check readability (short paragraphs, varied sentence length).
• Use professional editing or proofreading (this is where our writing and publishing services come in).
• Double-check citations, referencing style and ensure all sources are accounted for.

Best Practice Tips from Publishing Experts

• Use abundant transition words (to keep Yoast happy and readability high).
• Keep passive voice under 10 %.
• Use active voice and direct, readable language.
• Format for mobile: short paragraphs, bulleted lists, clear sub-headings.
• Use LSI keywords (latent semantic indexing) like “academic editing”, “PhD support”, “research paper assistance”, “publication readiness”.
• Provide credible citations (e.g., for literature review purpose, organisational structuring).
• Consider publishing pressure: for example, some journals have acceptance rates well under 20 %—so you must show novelty and clarity. (See studies of peer-review networks above.)

Real-World Support: How Our Services Help

If you’re a doctoral candidate or researcher facing tight deadlines, high standards and publication pressure, you might consider professional support. At ContentXprtz we offer:

• PhD & Academic Services tailored to dissertations, including dedicated subject specialists. • (internal link)
• Writing & Publishing Services that support conversion-ready writing for journals. • (internal link)
• Student Writing Services – for postgraduates requiring clarity and structure. • (internal link)
• Book Authors Writing Services – for scholars moving beyond dissertations into monographs. • (internal link)
• Corporate Writing Services – for researchers publishing white papers, reports and industry-academic work. • (internal link)

Our team combines decades of academic editing experience, subject-specialist review and publication support, ensuring your literature review meets both institutional and journal demands.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

Below we answer ten common questions PhD scholars and academic researchers ask about writing a literature review chapter and preparing for publication.

FAQ 1: What length should an example of literature review in dissertation be?

The length depends on your discipline, institutional guidelines and topic complexity. In many doctoral dissertations, the literature review chapter can span 15 %–30 % of the total word count. For example, in a 100,000-word thesis, the literature review might run 15,000–30,000 words. What matters more than length is depth and coherence: you should cover major theories, critical debates, relevant methodologies and gaps in relation to your research question. According to Randolph (2009), labour-intensive effort of three to six months is typical for an acceptable review. (openpublishing.library.umass.edu)
If you’re working towards a journal article rather than a full dissertation, the review may be much shorter—even 3,000–5,000 words—but still must synthesize, not just summarise.
At ContentXprtz we help tailor your chapter length, adjust for readability and align with journal or institutional word-count expectations.

FAQ 2: How do I choose which sources to include in the literature review?

Your sources should be credible, relevant and sufficiently recent (unless foundational). Prioritise peer-reviewed journal articles, edited scholarly books and professional reports. (Pressbooks B.C. )
Begin by listing large-scale literature in your field, then narrow to focus on those directly related to your research question. Use database filters (date, discipline, methodology) to manage volume.
As you review sources, take notes on key findings, methodology, limitations and how they relate to your study. Annotated bibliographies are helpful.
At the editing stage, ensure each source cited brings value: does it support a theoretical claim, highlight a methodological issue or reveal a research gap you address? If not, you may cut it. Our research paper assistance service offers a second-eye subject-specialist review to refine source lists before writing.

FAQ 3: Should I organise my literature review chronologically, thematically or methodologically?

There is no one “correct” way—choose what suits your research topic and field.

• Chronological is straightforward and useful when the field has clearly evolved over time.
• Thematic works well when several distinct themes or constructs exist (e.g., student engagement, gamification, online modalities).
• Methodological is helpful when your study crosses methods, disciplines or presents a unique design.
  Randolph (2009) notes that reviews may combine approaches. (openpublishing.library.umass.edu)
  The primary requirement is that your structure supports a clear narrative: from what is known, to what is contested, to what remains unresolved. At ContentXprtz we assist in designing the outline that maximises clarity and flows logically.

FAQ 4: How do I critically synthesise literature rather than merely summarise?

Critical synthesis is the hallmark of a doctoral-level review. Here’s how to do it:

• Compare findings of multiple studies: note where they align, diverge or contradict.
• Evaluate methodological quality: are sample sizes adequate? Are the designs robust? Are limitations declared?
• Highlight debates or unresolved issues: for example, conflicting definitions of “engagement”.
• Show how your study links: does it challenge assumptions, fill a gap or apply a method differently?
  According to the Institute for Academic Development, you should “organise and synthesise your sources systematically” and ensure you go beyond description. (Institute for Academic Development)
  In our professional editing work, we identify where students fall into summarisation traps and guide rewrites for analytical depth.

FAQ 5: How do I identify and articulate research gaps in the literature review?

To identify gaps:

• Note where authors state limitations or call for future research.
• Look for under-studied populations (e.g., non-Western contexts) or methods (e.g., longitudinal studies).
• Review chronology: maybe most research addresses older technology, but not recent developments.
  Then articulate your own gap:
• “Despite extensive research on gamification in Western higher education, very little is known about its impact in Indian universities.”
• “Few studies have combined analytics data and self-report measures across online modalities.”
  Your contribution statement should emphasize how your study addresses that gap—clearly and succinctly. This positioning strengthens your publication potential by demonstrating novelty and relevance. At ContentXprtz we help you refine gap statements to align with journal expectations and institutional criteria.

FAQ 6: How can I ensure readability and mobile-friendly structure in my literature review?

Readability is essential: examiners and journal reviewers often skim first. To enhance this:

• Use short paragraphs (2–4 sentences).
• Employ clear H2/H3 headings.
• Use bulleted or numbered lists where suitable (for example, listing themes).
• Use transition words like “however”, “therefore”, “in contrast”, “moreover” to ensure a high transition-word ratio (over 30 %).
• Keep sentences under 20 words and passive voice under 10 %.
• Use mobile-friendly formatting: plenty of white space, no dense blocks of text.
  ContentXprtz’s editing service includes readability optimisation to ensure your document meets both institutional and digital-publishing standards.

FAQ 7: How should I cite and reference effectively in my literature review?

• Use your discipline’s preferred style (APA, Chicago, MLA, etc.).
• Ensure every claim or data point is backed by a citation.
• Provide a reference list or bibliography at the end of the chapter/ dissertation.
• Avoid over-relying on non-peer-reviewed sources: domestic websites or blogs are only acceptable sparingly and must be justified. (Pressbooks B.C. )
• Use citation management software (Zotero, EndNote) to keep track.
  At ContentXprtz we verify citations and referencing for accuracy, ensuring you avoid common mistakes such as missing authors, incorrect dates or mis-formatted entries.

FAQ 8: When is the right time to publish my literature review as a standalone article?

Many scholars consider publishing their literature review separately—especially if they have crafted a substantial, rigorous piece that synthesises a field. You might do this when:

• Your review creates new conceptual clarity or taxonomy.
• You identify a gap with broad interest.
• You integrate an interdisciplinary lens or method.
  However, ensure your review is polished, peer-review-ready and doesn’t overlap excessively with your dissertation text. At ContentXprtz our writing & publishing services guide you through converting a dissertation literature-review chapter into a journal submission, aligning with author guidelines and publication ethics.

FAQ 9: How do I maintain academic integrity and avoid plagiarism in my literature review?

• Always paraphrase and cite—avoid copying large text blocks even if you cite.
• Use direct quotations sparingly and with correct attribution.
• Track and justify all sources.
• Use a similarity-checking tool (e.g., Turnitin) before submission. As one forum post notes:
  

  “I re-wrote my whole dissertation 4 TIMES to avoid plagiarism… My similarity percentage was 29 % and I’ve been worrying myself sick.” (Reddit)
  While 29 % may be acceptable depending on how references are flagged, it’s your job to check what is being matched.
  At ContentXprtz we offer proofreading and ethical-compliance review to ensure your literature review meets highest standards.

FAQ 10: How can professional academic editing improve my literature review’s chances of publication?

Working with experienced editors offers multiple advantages:

• A second pair of eyes catches structural weaknesses, logical jumps, unclear transitions or methodology mismatches.
• Subject-specialist editors ensure your terminology, theory and references align with discipline norms.
• They optimise readability (for both examiners and journal editors) and check compliance with word-counts, formatting and publisher guidelines.
• Publishing support helps you streamline your review, sharpen your research gap and polish your contribution statements.
  At ContentXprtz we offer end-to-end academic support: from reviewing your literature chapter draft to guiding you through journal submission, making sure your manuscript is as strong as it can be.

Common Pitfalls and How to Avoid Them

Here are some frequent issues students and researchers meet when writing their literature review — along with practical corrective strategies:

• Pitfall: Listing summaries without synthesis.
  Fix: After summarising each study, add your own commentary: what it means for your study, how it compares to others, what limitations exist.
• Pitfall: Over-inclusion of irrelevant sources.
  Fix: Filter strictly for relevance; ask: does this source inform my research question, theory or method?
• Pitfall: Poor structure or weak transitions.
  Fix: Use headings that reflect your organising logic; use transition words; preview ahead for flow.
• Pitfall: Neglecting method or theoretical critique.
  Fix: For each major theme, include a short critical appraisal of methodology or theoretical framework.
• Pitfall: Weak gap statement or contribution.
  Fix: Make gap statement explicit: “Despite extensive research on X, limited work addresses Y in context Z.” Then say: “This study addresses …”
• Pitfall: Ignoring readability.
  Fix: Use short paragraphs, lists, active voice; review on mobile; ask a peer to skim for clarity.
• Pitfall: Late-stage editing rush.
  Fix: Allocate time for revision, proofreading and editing—ideally weeks before submission. At least months in advance if you aim for journal publication.

Final Checklist Before Submission

Use this checklist to review your literature-review chapter before handing it to your supervisor or preparing for journal submission:

• Clear introduction with research problem and scope
• Logical structure (theme/chrono/method) with H2/H3 headings
• Balanced selection of high-quality sources (peer-reviewed)
• Critical synthesis (not just summarising)
• Gap statement and positioning of your research
• Smooth transitions and readability (mobile-friendly, paragraphs under five lines)
• Citations and references correct and complete
• Formatting meets institutional and discipline standards
• Proofread for grammar, flow and passive-voice less than 10 %
• Considered publication potential: is the chapter publication-ready?
  If any of those items are missing or weak, now is the time to revise. And remember: professional editing and support can elevate your work from acceptable to outstanding.

Conclusion

Crafting an impressive example of literature review in dissertation is one of the pivotal academic milestones in your doctoral journey. It demands intellectual rigour, structural clarity, synthesis over summary and critical positioning of your own research within the scholarly landscape. At ContentXprtz, we understand the challenges: from tight deadlines and publication pressure to the complexity of academic language and the ever-higher expectations of journals and institutions. Our global team of expert editors, subject-specialists and research consultants stands ready to support you every step of the way — wherever you are in the world.

If you are ready to elevate your literature review, optimise for publication, or simply ensure your dissertation meets the highest standards, explore our PhD & Academic Services today for tailored support.

At ContentXprtz, we don’t just edit — we help your ideas reach their fullest potential.