Literature Review Webinar with Amina Yonis and Litmaps

Amina Yonis frames a literature review as a five-stage workflow—planning, finding papers, reading/organizing, synthesizing, and writing—and argues that Litmaps can compress the most time-consuming parts by turning keyword searches into a structured “map” of related literature. The practical payoff is speed plus coverage: instead of manually bouncing through reference lists, researchers can start from a “seed” paper and quickly surface relevant work, then tag and organize it into the sections of their eventual review.

The session begins with the core stages and why skipping steps causes rework. In the planning stage, researchers should define the scope: topic, research question, boundaries, and keywords. Yonis emphasizes that search quality depends on keyword specificity, and she recommends using Litmaps to extract recurring terms from initial results (e.g., “ethics,” “genetic engineering,” and narrower concepts like “transgenics” or “animals”) and then narrowing by filters such as year. She also highlights a common warning sign: if only a few papers appear for a narrowly defined query, that can indicate a potential gap worth investigating.

In the finding stage, Litmaps is positioned as an academic “search plus network builder.” Users enter keywords, select a relevant article, and generate a Litmap that visualizes relationships among papers. The map uses axes to help prioritize what to read first—most notably publication recency and citation/reference counts. Yonis also points to additional view modes (like “momentum,” where older papers still matter because they continue to be cited) and “connectivity” options to surface influential or review-like works.

The reading and organizing stage focuses on turning a pile of papers into a review-ready structure. Yonis describes tagging papers into collections that mirror the literature review’s logic—general background, introduction, critical discussion, and later sections. She also demonstrates annotating and labeling papers directly on the map (including color/shape conventions) and using “collections” to keep reading aligned with writing. A key workflow feature is syncing with Zotero, reducing the friction between discovering papers and building a citation library.

For synthesis, Yonis stresses that abstracts and citation counts aren’t enough; researchers should identify trends over time, map connections between studies, and look for “orphan papers” that suggest missing context or underexplored gaps. She then moves to writing: outline sections first, insert content as you read, and keep citations tight. To speed drafting and improve structure, she recommends complementary AI tools for paper Q&A and writing feedback—specifically Unriddle and HATAs for synthesis questions, and Paperpal for review of flow, structure, and gap clarity.

The session closes by addressing common pitfalls: missing key papers, getting overwhelmed without organization, and relying on outdated sources. Litmaps is presented as a remedy through map-based coverage, tagging-based organization, and alerts/filters to keep the literature current. Yonis also answers live questions about using the workflow under deadlines (e.g., a one-month plan: week one for finding/organizing, weeks two–three for drafting, final week for editing and gap-filling).