Literature Review Example, UK University Standard
An annotated literature review extract at UK first-class standard, showing thematic grouping, critical appraisal and how the research gap is stated.
What a first-class extract looks like
Below is a short extract in the style UK markers reward, followed by an explanation of why each move earns marks. The topic is remote working and employee wellbeing, chosen because it has a genuinely contested evidence base.
The extract
Evidence on remote working and wellbeing is contested. Studies reporting improved wellbeing tend to measure autonomy-related outcomes in professional samples, while those reporting decline more often measure social connectedness across mixed occupational groups. The divergence therefore appears to be partly an artefact of construct choice rather than a genuine contradiction, a possibility that has rarely been tested directly.
Notice that no sentence begins with an author's name, the paragraph makes a claim, and the final clause identifies something nobody has done.
Why it scores
It groups studies by what they measured, not by who wrote them. It offers an explanation for the disagreement rather than reporting that disagreement exists. It ends by pointing at an untested possibility, which is the gap in embryo.
The 2:2 version of the same content
'Smith (2021) found remote working improved wellbeing. Jones (2022) found it reduced wellbeing. Patel (2023) found mixed results.' Accurate, and worth very few marks, because the reader is left to do the analysis.
How to convert your own draft
Take any paragraph that names authors as subjects. Rewrite it so the claim is the subject and the authors sit in brackets at the end. If the paragraph then says nothing, it was never carrying an argument, and it should be cut or merged.
Length and coverage
For a 12,000-word Master's dissertation the review runs roughly 2,500 to 3,000 words, typically citing 40 to 60 sources with perhaps 15 discussed in depth. Breadth shows awareness; depth earns marks.