For research papers, literature reviews, or longer essays, a concept matrix can be an effective resource in organizing research. A concept matrix is an organizational tool that presents connections between available research articles and specific aspects of a chosen topic by having articles on one side and the specific parts of a topic on the other side. Each cell in the matrix is a visual representation of potential intersections between different parts of the larger topic.

For example, a concept matrix for a literature review on sustainability may look something like this:

Concept Matrix for Sustainability Literature Review

Article	Natural Resource Levels	Biodiversity	Pollution	Economic Impacts	Urbanization
Ochoa & Mayer (1983)	X			X	X
Douglas (1997)	X	X	X
Yamamoto et al. (2009)		X	X		X
Chambers, Burton, & Kennedy (2012)	X			X
Baker & Jackson (2015)	X	X	X		X

How Topics Come Together

For the purposes of this literature review, this concept matrix demonstrates several options for an initial draft. If we wanted to discuss issues of our topic like biodiversity and pollution, for example, we would want to use the articles from Douglas, Yamamoto et al., and Baker and Jackson. However, if we wanted to extend the conversation to include urbanization, our matrix shows us that Douglas may not be an effective option because urbanization is not discussed in his article. A concept matrix also highlights gaps in your research, demonstrating where you may need additional support. Especially for literature reviews, a single source is not enough to substantiate a claim.

How a Concept Matrix Strengthens Synthesis

A concept matrix is helpful to identify opportunities for synthesis, which can be described as the “bigger picture” of your topic revealed by overlapping claims in individual sources. For example, four out of the five articles in the example concept matrix discuss natural resource levels, which indicate this is a critical aspect to discuss.

Even though each of these authors may be discussing natural resource levels, they may not be saying the same things about it. Ochoa and Mayer (1983) may comment that natural resource levels are solely impacted by urbanization, while the research conducted by Baker and Jackson (2015) may indicate that natural resource levels have a significant causal relationship to biodiversity. The overlap here builds a larger picture of how natural resource levels, urbanization, and biodiversity all relate, even though not all of the authors discuss all of these subjects.

Synthesis occurs between these two articles when we can see how they present a bigger picture. Since both of these articles discuss natural resource levels and urbanization, we can think of this as a “conversation starter” where we can ask questions such as:

• What do these authors agree on related to these aspects of sustainability?
• How do they disagree about these common aspects?
• How is it significant that some aspects are discussed in certain articles and not in others?
  • For example, how is it significant that Baker and Jackson (2015) discuss biodiversity and pollution while Ochoa and Mayer (1983) do not?
  • Are Baker and Jackson filling in gaps in the previous research conducted by Ochoa and Mayer?
• Between the publications of different articles, how has previous research been changed, added to, or disproven by recent literature?
  • Given that Baker and Jackson’s work is more current than Ochoa and Mayer’s research, how has the earlier discussion about natural resource levels or urbanization changed? What new questions have been raised in the last thirty years?
  • If the previous research by Ochoa and Mayer was important in the field at the time, do Baker and Jackson reference it or comment on it in their own work?

These are all effective types of questions to ask to work toward synthesis. A concept matrix helps you identify gaps in research and opportunities for synthesis.