One suggestion I received for my thesis is to include a summary of related studies and compare the results with my results.

Should I include the summary in Review of Related Literature? Is it a good idea?

2 Answers 2


You most definitely need to compare your results to other related results: otherwise, how is the reader to know the significance of your work? Whether this should be done in a literature review section or in your results section depends on how quantitative a comparison can be made.

If your results cannot be quantitatively compared to the prior work, then the comparison should be in the literature review section and discuss the qualitative relationship between the two pieces of work. For example, if the previous mechanism handles only fribbles but your system handles both fribbles and tribbles, then you can't quantitatively compare tribble-handling capability, but can state the difference much like I just did in your literature review section.

If you can make a direct, quantitative comparison between results, on the other hand, then it is best to do that right in the section where you are presenting your own quantitative results. For example, if you created an algorithm, you might compare it against other algorithms that do the same thing, running on the same tests as your algorithm, and show that yours is faster, smaller, more reliable, etc. You should also mention the other algorithms in your literature review section, with a qualitative comparison that will then have the details filled later by your results comparison.


In my opinion, results are most important part of the thesis. Please make a comparison of your result with related works results (don't forget to compare with at least one recent work 2014/2015), and include them in the appropriate section of the thesis. Regarding summary of related work. Normally we provide a detail analysis of the work has been done in past. However, it is also nice, if you include a summary table of the related work, such as follows:

S. No., Author (write first author surname et al. [cite] (year of publication), Related Entities/objects (the approach about), Description (include pros and cons of each approach), any other remake/comparison you wish to make.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .