Hi guys, I have just finalised my data collection and my supervisor has now asked me to revise the literature review so that I can be very clear about the theoretical framework and themes to be analysed within the data (note: my study is qualitative). My initial lit review was written three years ago and I agree that I have to look at the latest literature but I found now that I am very confused - I feel like I am starting a whole new PhD, revising and redefining my theoretical framework. Any advice on how to do this and still keep my sanity??? I feel like screaaaamingggg....:-(

Hi Christiana,

Look at your research question, look at your data. Think about what data you collected and why. Look through your data and start to work out some exploratory themes (one word ideas that leap out at you) - use these to look back at your lit review, see which ones have been met and think about why you think that, see which ones haven't been met and think about what might have changed between the lit review and data collection for things to have changed in this way. Use these key words to search for new literature (always keeping in mind your research question). With the new literature, think about your research question, the study (and the rationale behind its design), the data collected and see if any new themes emerge. The point is that what you now need to embark on is an iterative process that you will go through several times, constantly switching between research question, old lit review, new literature, study design, data collected, etc. When I did mine, I looked through the data and made a mind map with the research question at the centre, with key themes and sub-themes branching out from there and from those, relevant papers. Maybe that will work for you. (My research is also qualitative). This site might also help you: http://onlineqda.hud.ac.uk/Intro_QDA/what_is_qda.php Don't worry, initial forays into your data always seems chaotic. What your supervisor is trying to get you to do is to organise and structure your ideas. :-)

The other thing is, when it comes to analysing your data, you will feel like you are constantly revising and redefining your theoretical framework. The point of the analysis is that you need to justify your study design, the data selected and your findings and results. You also have to show your originality. The only way to do this is to link your data back to your research questions, literature review and methodology... you need to show how your data answers the research question, how it fills the gap in the literature and how the chosen methodology was the most apt solution - using the data. Also, you need to do this in a coherent, organised way that makes it easy for readers to follow the thread of your argument - hence the themes - these will help you to organise the data. You should make notes as soon as you start to tackle the data because this is part of your justification... think of it in terms of:

- this is what I did (how I looked at the data)
- this is why I did it that way (what I was looking to do)
- this is what that produced (e.g. a mind map of initial themes)
- this is what I did with that (used it to revisit research question and lit review, etc.)
- this produced ... (new themes, new literature, revision of research question, etc.)
- this revealed ... (these issues, problems, gaps)

and so on. If it helps, this kind of analysis is based on a Grounded Theory approach which allows themes to emerge from the data. It's perfectly acceptable to use this as a means of identifying initial themes to be analysed with a more focused theoretical approach later. Well, hope this helps.

Yep, its a circular process, and the need for a literature review changes with time ; whilst your literature review in the 1st year is there to give you a good grounding in the area and to hel you identify key areas and ideas, by the 3rd year it is there to create an argument for your thesis, which you then answer through the data. But the data analysis and literature review should inform each other during writing up.

It is annoying, I gave myself a short deadline to hand in my review chapter, thinking that I had most of it done from my 1st year report. how wrong I was...

Christiana,

Another thing that you need to think about is that at the end there should be a story you are telling in your thesis, an argument that you are supporting with each section of each chapter. When you went to collect your data, you already had part of that story in your head, based on the literature you've read. After collecting and partially analysed your data, that story evolved due to what you found there that you didn't already know. It is only natural that after that, you have some questions since the literature review you did do not perfectly match the new story, so you have to go back and try to fill in those gaps. Even after your revision of the literature, there might still be some gaps remaining, but if you can make sense of them, that's where your contribution will be.

So, you do not necessarily have to update your literature review, what you need to do is to make sure that the combination of theories you have reviewed support your argument. If they explain the phenomenon you are seeing through your data, then say so; if they are not, then try to explain why not and make it your contribution.

Hi Christiana, I was wondering what you research was on, as I am doing a qualitative study and am just about to analyse my data. It would be interesting to know what methodology you are using.

Thank you all for your good advice and support. I am familiar with the methodology behind qualitative research (coding, discussion of themes and emerging themes) but I guess having to look back and revise the literature review makes me feel like I am very very very far away from submission and feels like I am not doing any progress...I definitely do not feel the way I used to feel after completing the data collection...that was such a good feeling, a feeling of achievement...

Anyway, it is good to know that others have been through the same 'confusion' and I suppose I can only continue with what I am doing and hoping that everything will be OK in the end...such a draining process though...

To answer the last reply: my research is qualitative with use of in-depth interviews; for data analysis I use nVIVO .

Thanks again everybody :-)