As I wrote the first draft of my literature review, my categories sort of materialized on their own as I found myself swimming through oceans of articles and digging through bibliographies that lead to more intriguing articles and so on and so forth. I added two more very excellent pieces...
-If It Catches My Eye: An Exploration of Online News Experiences of Teenagers
-The Psychology of the Internet
...so my literature review is now divided into the following three categories:
1. Traditional Engagement
2. Modern Engagement
3. Internet Psychology
In my first category, I describe what civic/political engagement has meant in the past. In the second section, I describe how engagement is changing and what is means now, and the third category sets the tone for explaining why people behave the way they do on the Internet, which is important because I'm observing online forum comments related to civic engagement. I have to say that Internet psychology is fascinating. If you've ever wondered why there is so much fighting and idiocy and misunderstanding on the Internet, you should check out The Psychology of the Internet by Patricia Wallace. Yes, it's a few years old, but she describes aspects of human nature which of course have not changed in just a few years.
I now have 12 references, when our minimum is 4 and the maximum allowed is 15. There were several more references that I wanted to include but our literature review isn't supposed to be too long. I may end up using the ones sitting on top of my shredder right now when I revise next week, since my draft was written by a brain that has been forced to run on Ham n' Cheese Hot Pockets for six days and counting.
P.S. - Hey thanks, brain. You're a real trooper.