Systematic Literature Review

Tech4Good Lab

PROJECT OVERVIEW

I designed a structured Systematic Literature Review (SLR) workflow for the Tech4Good Lab to help undergraduate researchers build confidence with academic reading and contribute more effectively to ongoing HCI projects. The workflow breaks the SLR process into approachable stages, starting with reading abstracts and moving into summarizing papers, identifying themes, and synthesizing findings. To support consistency and reduce uncertainty, I created templates, examples, and step-by-step guidance that make the process easy to follow, even for students encountering research for the first time.

This activity is now used throughout the lab as a core research training tool. New members rely on it to learn how to interpret academic work, position their ideas within existing literature, and identify gaps that can inform design. It has become an important part of our onboarding structure and has helped standardize the quality of research contributions across teams.

GOAL

Create an accessible and repeatable literature review process that teaches students how to read, evaluate, and synthesize academic research in a way that strengthens their contributions to HCI design and research projects.

PROBLEM

Research papers can be difficult to interpret, and without guidance it is hard to know what to extract, how to identify key insights, or how findings connect to design work. The lack of a shared process made it challenging for students to contribute consistently to research projects.

Role

Researcher Director

UX Researcher

Timeline

Jun 2025

7 Months

Tools

Google Docs

Google Sheets

Google Drive

Skills

Workflow Design
UX Research Methods
Instructional Design
Documentation Writing
Iterative Improvement

DISCOVER

Identifying the Need for a Structured Research Flow

In my first few quarters in the Tech4Good Lab, I noticed that new undergraduate researchers, including myself, often struggled to engage with academic papers in a meaningful way. Research articles felt dense and abstract, and many students were unsure how to extract insights that could actually inform design. This revealed a clear need for a structured approach that could support students through the process and reduce the cognitive load of navigating unfamiliar research.

Understanding Student Pain Points

Through conversations with my team and reflection on my own early experiences, several challenges became apparent:

• difficulty identifying the purpose and core contribution of a paper
• uncertainty about what information matters for design
• limited strategies for comparing papers or identifying patterns
• lack of confidence in writing summaries or synthesizing themes
• no shared structure across teams for analyzing research

These insights helped me understand what the activity needed to address. It was not enough to ask students to read papers. They needed guidance, actionable steps, and clear examples that would allow them to succeed.

Reviewing Existing SLR Models

Before designing the activity, I studied established SLR methods used in HCI and social science research. These models informed the foundational structure of the workflow and helped me identify which elements were essential for undergraduate researchers and which could be simplified. My goal was to create a process grounded in real research practice but accessible enough for students with minimal experience.

Defining the Core Requirements

From this research, the activity needed to accomplish the following:

• teach students how to read academic papers with purpose
• guide them toward consistent and high-quality summaries
• help them identify themes and patterns across publications
• support collaboration by standardizing documentation
• provide enough structure to reduce confusion while still supporting independent thinking

These requirements shaped the design of the workflow and templates that followed

DESIGN

Designing a Clear and Approachable Workflow

The goal was to transform an overwhelming academic task into a series of small, manageable steps that guide students from initial reading to thematic synthesis. I created a linear structure that students could follow regardless of prior experience, beginning with quick abstract scans and progressing toward identifying themes and writing structured summaries.

The workflow I designed included:

• how to skim papers for relevance
• how to evaluate abstracts using inclusion criteria
• how to write a concise and clear summary
• how to identify contributions and methods
• how to compare papers and group them by theme
• how to synthesize insights across multiple publications

Each step was designed to build confidence and clarity, and to help students understand how research connects directly to HCI project work.

Creating Templates for Consistency

To support students throughout the process, I created a prelab assignment with a series of templates that act as cognitive scaffolding. These templates standardize the way students document findings and reduce uncertainty about what information to extract in the main activity

Templates included:

• summary worksheets with guiding questions
• tables for comparing methods, findings, and contributions
• theme-building worksheets to help group papers
• example summaries to illustrate expectations
• a final synthesis outline to support writing

These tools simplify the research process and make it easier for teams to work collaboratively with a shared structure.

Designing for Independent and Group Work

The workflow needed to support both individual reviewers and groups contributing to a shared SLR. To address this, I created documentation formats that made it easy to compare summaries, merge themes, and organize collective findings. This helped teams maintain alignment and ensured that insights from multiple students could be combined smoothly.

DRAFT

Writing Clear and Structured Documentation

Once the workflow and templates were tested, I created the full written activity that students now use throughout the lab. This included detailed instructions for each step, example summaries, and guidance for how to move from individual analysis to group synthesis. I wrote the materials in a way that felt approachable for beginners while still reflecting the expectations of academic research.

The documentation includes:

• definitions of key research terms
• step-by-step instructions for reading and analyzing papers
• examples that model strong interpretation of findings
• templates that students can directly fill in
• guidance on how to identify patterns and themes
• a final synthesis outline that organizes insights clearly

Writing the activity required me to think about clarity, cognitive load, and the learning experience. I approached the documentation as a designed artifact, not just a set of instructions.

My goal was to write documentation that would not require constant explanation from senior lab members. The activity needed to stand on its own. By focusing on plain language, consistent structure, and visual organization, I created a process that students could navigate independently.

This writing phase also helped solidify the activity as a repeatable system that could be used by any project team, regardless of topic area.

DISCUSS

Feedback from Lab Members

We piloted this activity in the summer with a few of our lab members to see what the consesus was on the activity. Both new and returning lab members completed the activity, and I completed it alongside my peers as well. I collected informal feedback about what worked well and whjat felt confusing.

Several students shared that this was the first time they felt confident reading academic papers. Others noted that the templates helped them organize their thinking more clearly and made group discussions easier.

Some students requested additional examples or clearer distinctions between summary content and thematic insights. These suggestions informed later refinements to the instructions and template structure.

Impact on Lab Workflow and Collaboration

The activity quickly became part of our lab's standard onboarding process. New members began using the workflow within their first weeks, which helped them contribute to research discussions much earlier. Project teams also adopted the activity as a shared method for mapping a research space before ideating design solutions.

Some key outcomes included:

• improved consistency across teams
• better alignment between research findings and design decisions
• more meaningful participation from new members
• reduced need for one-on-one training
• higher quality research insights feeding into design projects

The activity helped create a shared language around research and provided a structure that supported independent learning and collaborative synthesis.

DIGEST

What This Project Taught Me

Designing this activity taught me that UX design principles extend beyond digital interfaces. Many of the same ideas, such as reducing cognitive load, creating clear information hierarchies, and supporting users through complex tasks, were essential to creating a successful research workflow. I learned how to design systems that guide people through new experiences, and how intentional structure can transform confusion into confidence.

I also gained a deeper understanding of how research flows into design. By helping students engage with literature more effectively, the activity strengthened the connection between academic insights and the design decisions we made as a lab.

My Reflection

This project was one of the first times I created a system to support others in their learning and research. It pushed me to think like a designer and an educator at the same time. I learned how to communicate complex ideas in simple language, how to structure processes for clarity, and how to design tools that empower people.

Most importantly, I saw how intentional workflows can democratize participation. By making research accessible to beginners, the activity helped more students contribute meaningfully to our HCI projects. This experience reinforced my interest in building systems that support learning, collaboration, and thoughtful design practice.