When conducting a literature review, your job is not simply to collect and report what each source says — it is to critically analyse the arguments presented in those sources. This means examining how arguments are constructed, evaluating their strength, and positioning your investigation relative to the existing debate.
Research articles are not neutral repositories of facts — they are arguments. Authors make claims, present evidence and reason their way to conclusions. Understanding how an argument is constructed in a source allows you to:
- Judge whether the conclusions are warranted
- Identify the assumptions the research rests on
- Locate points of agreement and disagreement across sources
- Position your own research question within the scholarly debate
KEY TAKEAWAY: When you write “Smith (2020) found that X,” you are reporting. When you write “Smith’s (2020) conclusion rests on the assumption that Y, which Jones (2019) contests,” you are analysing. The Extended Investigation rewards the latter.
What is the central claim the paper is arguing? This is often explicit in the abstract and conclusion sections. Write it in one sentence in your own words.
What evidence and reasoning does the author use to support the thesis? Look for:
- Empirical findings (quantitative or qualitative)
- References to other literature
- Logical inferences from data
- Theoretical frameworks
STUDY HINT: Complete a brief argument analysis for each major source as you read it. A table with columns for Thesis, Key Premises, Assumptions, Strengths, Weaknesses and Relevance will serve you well when writing the literature review.
Research literature is a conversation between researchers. When analysing across sources, look for:
| Relationship | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Convergence | Multiple studies reach the same conclusion through different methods — increases confidence |
| Divergence | Studies reach different conclusions — investigate why (different methods? populations? definitions?) |
| Extension | Later study builds on earlier one, addressing its limitations |
| Contradiction | Studies with mutually exclusive conclusions — identify the source of disagreement |
| Replication | Same method, same result — strengthens the original finding |
Your literature may include reports, government documents, news articles or advocacy material. Additional evaluative questions for these:
- Who produced this and what is their agenda?
- Is it based on original research or secondary reporting?
- Are claims cited to peer-reviewed sources?
- Is the reporting accurate to the underlying research?
EXAM TIP: Exam tasks often present two or more sources on the same topic and ask you to compare the arguments or identify where they disagree. Do not just summarise each separately — directly compare the claims, evidence and reasoning. Use connector language: “While Smith concludes X, Jones challenges this by arguing Y, on the grounds that…”
Even peer-reviewed research can contain weak arguments:
- Conclusions that go further than the data supports (overgeneralisation)
- Selective review of literature (only citing supportive studies)
- Methodological flaws that undermine validity
- Failure to consider alternative explanations
Identifying these weaknesses in your literature review demonstrates genuine critical engagement.
APPLICATION: When you write your literature review, do not just describe what each source found — write analytically. Group sources by theme, identify points of agreement and tension, and explain what the collective body of research suggests and where it leaves gaps. This is what distinguishes a literature review from an annotated bibliography.
VCAA FOCUS: The Extended Investigation written report is assessed on the quality of your “analysis and evaluation.” This means assessors are looking for evidence of the techniques described here — not just descriptions of what sources say.
