However, your literature review should grow and change as your research progresses, and should be revised at different stages in the course of your studies to include the idea that it is a review and forms an important part of your research argument.
As a research student, you are going to be creating new knowledge in the field, and the final literature review that is included in your thesis or dissertation needs to persuade the reader that this new knowledge is relevant, significant and a logical development from current work in the field.
“One study has shown that eyewitness errors are the most common cause of false convictions (ref.).
Almost all innocent individuals exonerated by DNA evidence had been convicted primarily as a result of erroneous eyewitness evidence (ref.) Consequently, a great deal of research has focussed on the unreliability of eyewitness testimony (refs.).” , such a narrow focus may not fully explain how people remember (ref.). Reviews the chronological development of research in this area (an approach that is useful at times, but not always the best).
Identifies which explanations are likely to be valid in explaining the results of experiments conducted for this thesis. “Whist it has been shown that in some circumstances many people tend to conform to the opinions of others, we also know that some people are able to resist conforming in some situations. This section of the literature review examines factors influencing whether or not a person is likely to conform that are (1) in the situation, and (2) within the individual.” 8.
The literature review aims to compare and contrast the thinking, ideologies, concepts and thoughts in 'the field' of a particular subject area.It is important to keep the reader focused on the rationale and significance of your work, and on the key issues involved.It is therefore important to write with the correct focus and emphasis.For each of the four explanations, followed typical structure of: (a) definition; (b) when might happen; (c) evidence supporting explanation; (d) limitations of this explanation as being “the whole story” (this is the “critical” part of a critical review). “Whilst normative social influence may explain the conformity that occurs in …, it is an unlikely explanation for memory conformity that may occur when people give individual statements following discussion in the absence of their co-witness. “The suggestion that memory conformity is a result of biased guessing is similar to the informational influence explanation because in both instances …However, the distinguishing feature between the two explanations is that …” …“Whilst biased guessing may account for the misinformation effect that occurs in some instances (refs.), research suggests that it is not the only reason for the occurrence of the misinformation effect. This suggests that the misinformation effect may be due at least partially to memory impairment, rather than just biased guessing.” 5.Sums up what has been learned from the review of the four current theoretical explanations. “Informational influence, biased guessing, and modification of memory may help to explain why memory conformity occurs when participants are tested individually, as they are in the studies presented in this thesis. The research presented in this thesis compares these alternative explanations to determine which best explains memory conformity in individual recall following co-witness discussion. “One way to determine whether memory conformity occurs because of biased guessing is to …” “Experiments described in this thesis (Studies 5-7) include a warning for some participants about possible misinformation in an attempt to determine whether participants report misinformation because of informational influence or memory change.” 7.theater or book reviews), literature reviews steer clear of opinion statements.Instead, they summarize and critically assess a body of scholarly literature from a relatively objective perspective.Because such ‘contamination’ is common to memory, understanding its effects enables greater knowledge of memory itself (ref.). Discusses one key paper at a time by describing its methods and key findings, but then identifies weaknesses in the method and/or limitations in the findings.Then discusses how the next researchers tried to address these problems.