Literature review
Skill fabioc-aloha/Alex_Skill_Mall/plugins/academic-research/literature-review
284 curated plugins for AI assistants across 16 categories: security, Azure, documentation, code quality, cloud infrastructure, and more. Works with GitHub Copilot. Drop into .github/skills/local/ and go.
npx -y skills add fabioc-aloha/Alex_Skill_Mall --skill literature-reviewAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
One thing to look at
- 3 stars3 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.
What its author says it does
Copied from the file, not written here
Systematic literature search, synthesis, gap identification, and narrative construction for academic research
SKILL.md
9.8 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it
Skill: Literature Review
Systematic literature search, synthesis, gap identification, and narrative construction for academic research.
Metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Skill ID | literature-review |
| Version | 1.0.0 |
| Category | Research |
| Difficulty | Advanced |
| Prerequisites | None |
| Related Skills | academic-research, citation-management, dissertation-defense |
Overview
Literature review is foundational to academic research. This skill provides structured workflows for systematic searching, critical synthesis, and gap identification—transforming scattered sources into coherent scholarly narratives.
Core Competencies
- Systematic Search - Reproducible, comprehensive search strategies
- Critical Appraisal - Quality assessment of sources
- Synthesis - Thematic integration across sources
- Gap Identification - Locating research opportunities
- Narrative Construction - Weaving sources into argument
Module 1: Systematic Search Strategy
The PICO(S) Framework
For empirical research questions:
| Element | Description | Example (AIRS) |
|---|---|---|
| Population | Who is studied | Knowledge workers, AI users |
| Intervention | What is applied | AI-powered tools, copilots |
| Comparison | Alternative | Traditional tools, no AI |
| Outcome | What is measured | Adoption intention, behavioral intention |
| Study type | Research design | Quantitative survey, SEM |
Database Selection
| Database | Best For | Coverage |
|---|---|---|
| Google Scholar | Broad discovery, citation tracking | All disciplines |
| Web of Science | High-impact journals, citation analysis | STEM, social sciences |
| Scopus | Comprehensive coverage, author metrics | Multidisciplinary |
| ACM Digital Library | Computer science, HCI | CS, CHI proceedings |
| PsycINFO | Psychology, behavioral research | Psychology, social sciences |
| SSRN | Working papers, preprints | Business, economics, law |
Search String Construction
Boolean operators:
("artificial intelligence" OR "AI" OR "machine learning")
AND
("adoption" OR "acceptance" OR "intention")
AND
("UTAUT" OR "TAM" OR "technology acceptance")
Truncation and wildcards:
adopt*→ adoption, adopting, adopterbehavio?r→ behavior, behaviour
Search Protocol Template
## Search Protocol
**Research Question**: [Your RQ]
**Date Conducted**: [Date]
**Databases Searched**: [List]
### Search Terms
- Primary: [terms]
- Secondary: [terms]
- Exclusions: [terms with NOT]
### Inclusion Criteria
- Published: [date range]
- Language: [languages]
- Study type: [empirical, theoretical, etc.]
- Peer-reviewed: [yes/no]
### Exclusion Criteria
- [List exclusions]
### Results
| Database | Initial Hits | After Dedup | After Title Screen | After Abstract Screen | Final |
|----------|--------------|-------------|--------------------|-----------------------|-------|
Module 2: Source Management
The Funnel Process
Initial Search Results (hundreds)
↓ Title screening
Potentially Relevant (~50-100)
↓ Abstract screening
Candidates for Full-Text (~30-50)
↓ Full-text review
Included Sources (~15-30)
↓ Backward/forward citation
Final Corpus (~20-40)
Screening Criteria
Quick reject (title/abstract):
- Wrong population
- Wrong intervention
- Wrong outcome
- Non-empirical (if seeking empirical)
- Wrong language
- Duplicate
Full-text assessment:
- Methodological rigor
- Relevance to research question
- Contribution to synthesis
Citation Tracking
Backward citation (reference mining):
- Review reference lists of key papers
- Find foundational works
- Identify theoretical ancestry
Forward citation (cited by):
- Use Google Scholar "Cited by"
- Find recent developments
- Identify methodological improvements
Module 3: Critical Appraisal
Quality Assessment Dimensions
| Dimension | Questions |
|---|---|
| Validity | Are findings believable? Methods appropriate? |
| Reliability | Would study replicate? Measures consistent? |
| Generalizability | To what populations/contexts? |
| Rigor | Adequate sample? Controls? Analysis? |
| Transparency | Can methods be reproduced? |
Study Type Checklists
Quantitative survey studies:
- Sample size adequate (power analysis?)
- Response rate reported
- Validated instruments used
- Reliability reported (Cronbach's α)
- Common method bias addressed
- Appropriate statistical analysis
Qualitative studies:
- Sampling strategy justified
- Data saturation discussed
- Researcher positionality stated
- Coding process transparent
- Member checking or triangulation
SEM/CFA studies:
- Model fit indices reported (CFI, RMSEA, SRMR)
- Convergent validity (AVE ≥ .50)
- Discriminant validity (HTMT < .85)
- Sample size adequate (N ≥ 200 preferred)
Module 4: Synthesis Strategies
Thematic Synthesis
- Code individual sources - Key concepts, findings, methods
- Group codes into themes - Patterns across sources
- Develop analytical narrative - What themes mean together
Example themes for AIRS research:
- Trust and reliance
- Value perception
- Effort-benefit trade-offs
- Social and organizational factors
Comparative Matrix
| Source | Theory | Method | Sample | Key Finding | Limitation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Author1 (Year) | TAM | Survey | N=312 | PE→BI significant | Cross-sectional |
| Author2 (Year) | UTAUT2 | SEM | N=523 | PV strongest | Self-report |
Theoretical Integration
Identifying theoretical tensions:
- Where do theories contradict?
- What boundary conditions apply?
- How can conflicts be resolved?
Building theoretical contribution:
- What's missing from current theories?
- How does your work extend understanding?
- What new constructs are needed?
Module 5: Gap Identification
Types of Research Gaps
| Gap Type | Description | Signal Phrases |
|---|---|---|
| Empirical | Untested relationships | "No study has examined..." |
| Theoretical | Missing constructs or mechanisms | "Theory does not account for..." |
| Methodological | Better methods needed | "Prior studies relied on..." |
| Contextual | Untested populations/settings | "Research in [context] is lacking..." |
| Temporal | Outdated findings | "Since [year], technology has changed..." |
Gap Articulation Template
## Research Gap
**What we know**: [Summary of existing knowledge]
**What we don't know**: [The gap]
**Why it matters**: [Significance of filling gap]
**How this study addresses it**: [Your contribution]
Module 6: Writing the Literature Review
Structure Options
Chronological:
- Best for: Tracing evolution of a concept
- Risk: Can become mere historical summary
Thematic:
- Best for: Synthesizing diverse perspectives
- Risk: May obscure temporal development
Methodological:
- Best for: Evaluating research approaches
- Risk: Can be dry, less engaging
Theoretical:
- Best for: Comparing frameworks
- Risk: Requires deep theory knowledge
The Funnel Structure
Broad context (the problem space)
↓
Theoretical foundations (key theories)
↓
Prior empirical work (what's been studied)
↓
Gap and contribution (what's missing → your work)
Synthesis vs. Summary
❌ Summary (weak):
"Smith (2020) found X. Jones (2021) found Y. Brown (2022) found Z."
✅ Synthesis (strong):
"While early studies emphasized X (Smith, 2020), subsequent research revealed the moderating role of Y (Jones, 2021), leading to more nuanced frameworks that integrate both factors (Brown, 2022)."
Transition Phrases for Synthesis
| Purpose | Phrases |
|---|---|
| Agreement | "Consistent with...", "Similarly...", "Extending this..." |
| Contrast | "However...", "In contrast...", "Alternatively..." |
| Extension | "Building on...", "Taking this further...", "Integrating..." |
| Gap signal | "Yet...", "Nevertheless...", "What remains unclear..." |
Quick Reference
Literature Review Checklist
- Search strategy documented and reproducible
- Multiple databases searched
- Inclusion/exclusion criteria explicit
- Backward and forward citation completed
- Sources critically appraised
- Themes identified across sources
- Gaps clearly articulated
- Synthesis (not just summary)
- Clear link to research questions
Common Pitfalls
| Pitfall | Solution |
|---|---|
| Too narrow search | Use multiple databases, synonyms |
| Uncritical acceptance | Apply quality assessment |
| Descriptive only | Focus on synthesis and analysis |
| No clear gap | Explicitly state what's missing |
| Outdated sources | Include recent (last 5 years) work |
| Missing seminal works | Track backward citations |
Activation Patterns
| Trigger | Response |
|---|---|
| "literature review", "lit review", "sources" | Full skill activation |
| "search strategy", "database search" | Module 1: Systematic Search |
| "synthesize", "themes", "patterns" | Module 4: Synthesis |
| "research gap", "what's missing" | Module 5: Gap Identification |
| "how to write lit review" | Module 6: Writing |
Skill created: 2026-02-10 | Category: Research | Status: Active