To tell what makes a good literature review, you first need to know what a bad literature review looks like.
1. The literature is not related to the research.
The inclusion of literature reviews that are not relevant to the research does not provide strong theoretical support and empirical evidence for the research, does not have a clear research purpose, and cannot reflect the significance and value of its writing, making it difficult for readers to understand why this review is needed.
2. The logic of the literature review is incoherent.
Merely listing the literature, without in-depth analysis and commentary, cannot show the author's understanding and critical thinking of the content of the literature. In addition, the lack of good cohesion between the various parts of the literature review makes the whole review appear fragmented and lacks integrity.
The most important aspect of a literature review is that we need to synthesize previous research and authors in the research area, highlight the focus of previous research, and identify gaps and any inconsistencies with existing research. This helps to uncover the context of the development of the research field, understand the divergence of different perspectives, and identify gaps and shortcomings in research. And the most core content. This involves sorting out and summarizing key theories, important findings, and research methods.
Finally, we need to give the reader a general idea of the background knowledge of the field and point out which previous research is important or points out errors. This not only provides readers with the necessary information to help them better understand the research topic, but also increases the credibility and authority of the research.