Stop Writing Without a “Why”: Give Your Literature Review Direction

By Nicole Dhanraj, Ph.D.

Understanding the Pitfall: Synthesis vs. Purpose

You may recall from our previous conversation, Stop Writing a Book Report, Start Synthesizing Your Literature Review, that many doctoral students summarize articles instead of synthesizing them. That leads to those lengthy, disjointed summaries we know frustrate every dissertation chair.

But now, let's explore why even a well-synthesized literature review can still miss the mark: it lacks a clear, driving purpose.

If your writing doesn't clearly map out a destination, that is, your unique contribution, it won't matter how polished the sentences are; you'll simply be drifting.

The Mentor's Insight: Moving Beyond Summary

I've seen this pattern countless times. The process begins with good intentions: you open your laptop, review your stacks of PDFs, and start writing foundational statements:

"Researchers have studied leadership styles for decades…"

You keep writing, driven by the need to cover the existing literature.

Twenty pages later, you pause and realize you've produced a vast amount of material, but unfortunately, you haven't yet made a clear argument.

This is the moment your chair and me, your editor, often intervene with those crucial, clarifying questions:

"What is the purpose of this section?"

How does this connect to your research problem or, more importantly, the gap?”

The writing might be clear, the sources solid. But without an explicit “why”, the justification for your specific study, your review becomes a beautiful scenic drive with no actual arrival point.

The mentor's wisdom here is simple: The ultimate "why" of your literature review is to identify and justify the specific research gap your study will fill.

If it isn't doing that, it remains just an impressive collection of knowledge. I know, great work but no impact from your writing!

The Fix: Writing Strategically with Direction

The good news is that moving forward doesn't require scrapping everything; it requires reframing your existing content.

You need to organize the literature around a central, unwavering storyline: the necessity of your research.

Writing with a why is the final step that elevates synthesis because you are no longer just grouping ideas; you are strategically arranging the literature to build your unique, evidence-based argument.

Here are four strategies to immediately give your review direction:

1. Anchor Everything to Your Research Question

   Before you draft another paragraph, I encourage you to print your research question and tape it above your desk…multiple places on your desk!

   Every single section must help answer it by establishing what is currently known and identifying the critical piece that is missing.

   For example:

   If your dissertation explores burnout and nurse retention, structure your analysis like this:

   “While prior studies confirm that burnout contributes to turnover, few have examined how organizational culture moderates that relationship, an essential area this study is designed to investigate rigorously.”

   Notice the shift? Your writing is now intentional and directional.

2. Create a Strategic Reader Roadmap

   A clear roadmap is a gift to your committee; it shows them you are writing with strategy. Place this directional statement at the beginning of your chapter.

   Here is a roadmap example:

   “This review begins by establishing the known link between burnout and turnover, before transitioning to an exploration of the lesser-examined organizational culture factors (specifically leadership support), and concludes by synthesizing studies that reveal the exact gap this dissertation addresses: the moderating role of leadership support in high-stress clinical units.”

3. Tie Every Section Back to the Gap

   Conclude each major section or subsection by explicitly connecting the studied knowledge to the knowledge that remains uncaptured.

   This reinforces the necessity of your study every few pages. You want to be clear that there is a gap and your study will bridge that gap.

   For example:

   “Taken together, these studies illustrate the strong link between burnout and turnover, yet they rarely consider how positive leadership behaviors buffer this effect, a critical gap addressed directly in this study’s methodology.”

4. Use Purposeful Language

   Your transitions are the navigation tools. Move past generic phrases and use purposeful, argumentative language that guides your reader and please, don’t keep repeating the same transitions over and over.

   “Building upon prior findings, we next explore…”

   “Despite extensive research into X, a critical element remains unexamined: Y…” “However, few studies have been designed to examine the relationship between A and B…”

   These phrases signal to your reviewer that you are thoughtfully moving them toward your unique contribution.

The Payoff: Clarity and Authority

When you write with a clear “why,” the entire dissertation begins to snap into place.

Your introduction flows logically into your review, your review organically sets up your methodology, and your methodology provides a clear path to answer your question.

You will have transformed a collection of articles into the logical, persuasive argument that justifies the existence of your entire study.

Ready to Transform Your Literature Review?

If your current chapter feels aimless, please know that you are in good company, and you don't have to figure out this pivot alone. You don't need to rewrite; you need to refocus and anchor your argument to your research gap.

Let's stop wasting time and start building the foundation of your dissertation right now.

As a dissertation mentor and editor, I can help you clarify your “why,” organize your structure, and transform your review into a purposeful and persuasive chapter that seamlessly transitions into your research design.

Schedule a consultation now, and let's give your literature review the strategic direction it deserves, rather than wasting time and money.