What models do you use to analyze literature reviews?

The thematic model is an effective method for analyzing literature reviews, focusing on identifying and categorizing recurring themes and patterns. I use this model to break down complex texts into key themes, making it easier to understand overarching concepts. For example, in a literature review on climate change impacts, I categorized studies into themes like "economic effects," "ecological consequences," and "social implications." This approach helps organize information, highlights connections between studies, and provides a clear, structured analysis of the literature.

One of the main problems I noticed when using the thematic model is the literature review often appears disconnected and with no clear logical progression. I've found preparing a concept map where I identify, group, and connect the main themes, to be a useful approach for writing. I first write down my big idea 💡 and then identify the central themes that shape that big idea. I then find a unique bent that I use to unravel how the themes link with the big idea. For example, say my big idea is: chemical exposure is a main cause of diseases in children. My themes could be contaminated foods, indoor air pollution, water pollution, and play. My bent could be do previous studies show a link between exposure and disease development of worsening?

The conceptual model is a valuable method for analyzing literature reviews, focusing on understanding the relationships between key concepts and theories. I use this model to map out the main ideas and how they interconnect, providing a clear framework for analysis. For example, in a literature review on educational technology, I identified core concepts like "student engagement," "technology integration," and "learning outcomes," and explored how these concepts influence each other. This method clarifies complex relationships, guiding a comprehensive understanding of the subject.

A conceptual model organizes literature by key concepts defining the topic, clarifying their meanings, scope, and interrelationships. For example, in studying resilience, it involves defining resilience, measuring it, identifying influencing factors, and exploring its connections to concepts like coping, stress, and well-being. The model systematically reviews how various sources utilize and interpret resilience in their research, providing a structured framework for understanding the concept. This approach facilitates a comprehensive analysis of the literature, highlighting differing perspectives and methodologies, and synthesizing findings to present a cohesive understanding of resilience and its broader implications.

The Theoretical Model is oriented toward the systematic analysis of theories, concepts, and frameworks in existence on a particular topic in research. The model comprises the identification of theories, the analysis of relationships, the evaluation of application, and the proposition of new theoretical propositions that add up to the comprehension of the theoretical underpinnings of the identification of areas for new development.

The primary goal of a methodological review is to identify the key advanced or developments in your research area. By the end of your methodological review, you should be able to develop a research protocol, listing the steps you would take. The methodological review should give reasons why you should take those steps. With the end in mind, it follows then that when writing a methodological review, you should not just summarize what was done, but explain based on fundamental theory why it was done. A good tip is always compare findings obtained using similar methods and try to account based on theory the differences or similarities in the findings.

The methodological model is an effective approach for analyzing literature reviews, emphasizing the examination of research methods used in various studies. I use this model to compare and evaluate the methodologies, identifying strengths, weaknesses, and gaps. For example, in a literature review on mental health interventions, I categorized studies by their methods, such as randomized controlled trials, surveys, and qualitative interviews. This allowed me to assess the rigor and reliability of the findings, ensuring a comprehensive and critical understanding of the research landscape.