How to Write Literature Review with no Existing Literature/Research Studies?

TL;DR

Define X and Y using existing literature before writing any linkage claims.

Briefing Cornell Notes

Briefing

When there’s little or no prior research connecting two concepts, a literature review still can be built—by grounding the work in definitions, extracting concept-specific characteristics, and then using theory (or theory-adjacent logic) to justify the proposed relationship. The core move is to stop treating the literature gap as a dead end and instead treat it as a prompt to construct a defensible argument: define X and Y precisely, identify their key characteristics, and then explain why those characteristics should connect.

The process starts with conceptualization. Before writing, the first task is to understand what X and Y mean in the literature—how each concept is defined and how it is conceptualized. With those definitions in hand, the next step is to pull out the keywords and key characteristics embedded in each definition. This turns vague labels into observable components. Once X’s characteristics and Y’s characteristics are clear, linking becomes more concrete: the relationship can be argued through shared mechanisms rather than through prior studies that directly test X and Y together.

If no research exists on the relationship between X and Y, the next step is to search for theory that can bridge them. That search can be done separately for each concept: look at papers where each variable has been studied, and use Google Scholar to find theories associated with each concept. After selecting a relevant theory, read it for the mechanism it proposes, then write the relationship in light of that mechanism. The example given is servant leadership influencing humility. Even without studies directly connecting the two, servant leadership’s characteristics—such as building relationships, focusing on the growth of followers, developing others, and being humble, honest, and ethical—can be paired with humility’s traits (ethical, humble, down-to-earth, trustworthy). Then social learning theory is used as the explanatory bridge: employees can learn humility from humble leaders.

But theory may not always be found. In that case, the literature review can still be developed by shifting the linkage level. One fallback is to link characteristics of X to the dependent variable (Y) directly—using the characteristics of servant leadership to explain how humility could emerge. Another option is to link characteristics of X to characteristics of Y, rather than linking the overall constructs. The key is flexibility: if the direct construct-to-construct argument fails, the review can be rebuilt through characteristic-to-characteristic or characteristic-to-outcome reasoning. This approach supports hypothesis development even when the exact relationship has never been tested, because the argument rests on conceptual definitions and plausible mechanisms rather than on missing empirical studies.

Cornell Notes

When direct studies linking two concepts are missing, a literature review can still be written by building a mechanism-based argument. Start by defining X and Y as they are conceptualized in existing sources, then extract key characteristics and keywords from those definitions. Next, search for theory that explains how one concept could produce the other; read the theory for the learning or influence mechanism and use it to justify the proposed relationship. If no theory cleanly links X and Y, shift the argument to the component level: connect X’s characteristics to Y as an outcome, or connect X’s characteristics to Y’s characteristics. This method supports hypothesis development despite a research gap.

How should a writer begin a literature review when there is hardly any prior research on the relationship between X and Y?

Begin with conceptualization. Define X and Y using how they are described in the literature, then identify each concept’s key characteristics. From those definitions, extract keywords and traits so the concepts become specific enough to connect. Only after the definitions and characteristics are clear should the writer attempt to link X and Y.

What is the recommended strategy for bridging X and Y when no studies have tested their relationship together?

Search for theory that can explain the linkage. Look for theories used when each variable has been studied, using existing papers and tools like Google Scholar. Because X and Y may never have been studied together, search for theory separately for each concept, then use the theory’s mechanism to justify how X could influence Y.

How does the servant leadership to humility example work as a template?

Servant leadership is broken into characteristics—building relationships, focusing on growth of followers, developing others, and traits like humility, honesty, and ethics. Humility is also characterized—employees become ethical, humble, down-to-earth, and trustworthy. With social learning theory, the mechanism is that employees learn from their leaders, so humble leaders can produce humble employees, even without direct studies linking the two constructs.

What should be done if no theory is found that links X and Y?

Use alternative linkage strategies at the characteristic level. One approach is to link X’s characteristics directly to Y (the endogenous/dependent variable) as an outcome. Another approach is to link characteristics of X to characteristics of Y—building the argument through component-to-component connections rather than relying on a direct construct-to-construct relationship.

Why can linking characteristics still produce a credible literature review?

Because the argument is grounded in definitions and mechanisms. Even without empirical studies testing X and Y together, the review can justify the proposed relationship by explaining how specific traits of X logically lead to specific traits or outcomes of Y.

Review Questions

What are the first two tasks needed before attempting to link X and Y in a literature review with a research gap?
Describe two different ways to build an argument when no theory directly links X and Y.
In the servant leadership example, what role does social learning theory play in justifying the relationship?

Key Points

1
Define X and Y using existing literature before writing any linkage claims.
2
Extract key characteristics and keywords from the definitions of X and Y to make the concepts connectable.
3
When direct studies are missing, search for theory that can explain how X could influence Y, using Google Scholar and prior research on each concept separately.
4
Use the mechanism from the chosen theory to write the relationship between X and Y in a way that is logically grounded.
5
If theory fails to link the constructs, connect X’s characteristics to Y as an outcome, or connect X’s characteristics to Y’s characteristics.
6
Build hypotheses using mechanism-based reasoning rather than relying solely on prior empirical tests of the exact X–Y relationship.

Highlights

A literature review can be built from conceptual definitions and characteristic-level logic even when no studies test the exact relationship.

Theory selection should be mechanism-driven: read the theory for how employees learn or how influence occurs, then apply that mechanism to X and Y.

When direct construct-to-construct links don’t work, shift to characteristic-to-outcome or characteristic-to-characteristic linkages to sustain the argument.