future directions for research literature review

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base

Methodology

• How to Write a Literature Review | Guide, Examples, & Templates

How to Write a Literature Review | Guide, Examples, & Templates

Published on January 2, 2023 by Shona McCombes . Revised on September 11, 2023.

What is a literature review? A literature review is a survey of scholarly sources on a specific topic. It provides an overview of current knowledge, allowing you to identify relevant theories, methods, and gaps in the existing research that you can later apply to your paper, thesis, or dissertation topic .

There are five key steps to writing a literature review:

• Search for relevant literature
• Evaluate sources
• Identify themes, debates, and gaps
• Outline the structure
• Write your literature review

A good literature review doesn’t just summarize sources—it analyzes, synthesizes , and critically evaluates to give a clear picture of the state of knowledge on the subject.

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

Table of contents

What is the purpose of a literature review, examples of literature reviews, step 1 – search for relevant literature, step 2 – evaluate and select sources, step 3 – identify themes, debates, and gaps, step 4 – outline your literature review’s structure, step 5 – write your literature review, free lecture slides, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions, introduction.

• Quick Run-through
• Step 1 & 2

When you write a thesis , dissertation , or research paper , you will likely have to conduct a literature review to situate your research within existing knowledge. The literature review gives you a chance to:

• Demonstrate your familiarity with the topic and its scholarly context
• Develop a theoretical framework and methodology for your research
• Position your work in relation to other researchers and theorists
• Show how your research addresses a gap or contributes to a debate
• Evaluate the current state of research and demonstrate your knowledge of the scholarly debates around your topic.

Writing literature reviews is a particularly important skill if you want to apply for graduate school or pursue a career in research. We’ve written a step-by-step guide that you can follow below.

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

Writing literature reviews can be quite challenging! A good starting point could be to look at some examples, depending on what kind of literature review you’d like to write.

• Example literature review #1: “Why Do People Migrate? A Review of the Theoretical Literature” ( Theoretical literature review about the development of economic migration theory from the 1950s to today.)
• Example literature review #2: “Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines” ( Methodological literature review about interdisciplinary knowledge acquisition and production.)
• Example literature review #3: “The Use of Technology in English Language Learning: A Literature Review” ( Thematic literature review about the effects of technology on language acquisition.)
• Example literature review #4: “Learners’ Listening Comprehension Difficulties in English Language Learning: A Literature Review” ( Chronological literature review about how the concept of listening skills has changed over time.)

You can also check out our templates with literature review examples and sample outlines at the links below.

Download Word doc Download Google doc

Before you begin searching for literature, you need a clearly defined topic .

If you are writing the literature review section of a dissertation or research paper, you will search for literature related to your research problem and questions .

Make a list of keywords

Start by creating a list of keywords related to your research question. Include each of the key concepts or variables you’re interested in, and list any synonyms and related terms. You can add to this list as you discover new keywords in the process of your literature search.

• Social media, Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, Snapchat, TikTok
• Body image, self-perception, self-esteem, mental health
• Generation Z, teenagers, adolescents, youth

Search for relevant sources

Use your keywords to begin searching for sources. Some useful databases to search for journals and articles include:

• Your university’s library catalogue
• Google Scholar
• Project Muse (humanities and social sciences)
• Medline (life sciences and biomedicine)
• EconLit (economics)
• Inspec (physics, engineering and computer science)

You can also use boolean operators to help narrow down your search.

Make sure to read the abstract to find out whether an article is relevant to your question. When you find a useful book or article, you can check the bibliography to find other relevant sources.

You likely won’t be able to read absolutely everything that has been written on your topic, so it will be necessary to evaluate which sources are most relevant to your research question.

For each publication, ask yourself:

• What question or problem is the author addressing?
• What are the key concepts and how are they defined?
• What are the key theories, models, and methods?
• Does the research use established frameworks or take an innovative approach?
• What are the results and conclusions of the study?
• How does the publication relate to other literature in the field? Does it confirm, add to, or challenge established knowledge?
• What are the strengths and weaknesses of the research?

Make sure the sources you use are credible , and make sure you read any landmark studies and major theories in your field of research.

You can use our template to summarize and evaluate sources you’re thinking about using. Click on either button below to download.

Take notes and cite your sources

As you read, you should also begin the writing process. Take notes that you can later incorporate into the text of your literature review.

It is important to keep track of your sources with citations to avoid plagiarism . It can be helpful to make an annotated bibliography , where you compile full citation information and write a paragraph of summary and analysis for each source. This helps you remember what you read and saves time later in the process.

The only proofreading tool specialized in correcting academic writing - try for free!

The academic proofreading tool has been trained on 1000s of academic texts and by native English editors. Making it the most accurate and reliable proofreading tool for students.

Try for free

To begin organizing your literature review’s argument and structure, be sure you understand the connections and relationships between the sources you’ve read. Based on your reading and notes, you can look for:

• Trends and patterns (in theory, method or results): do certain approaches become more or less popular over time?
• Themes: what questions or concepts recur across the literature?
• Debates, conflicts and contradictions: where do sources disagree?
• Pivotal publications: are there any influential theories or studies that changed the direction of the field?
• Gaps: what is missing from the literature? Are there weaknesses that need to be addressed?

This step will help you work out the structure of your literature review and (if applicable) show how your own research will contribute to existing knowledge.

• Most research has focused on young women.
• There is an increasing interest in the visual aspects of social media.
• But there is still a lack of robust research on highly visual platforms like Instagram and Snapchat—this is a gap that you could address in your own research.

There are various approaches to organizing the body of a literature review. Depending on the length of your literature review, you can combine several of these strategies (for example, your overall structure might be thematic, but each theme is discussed chronologically).

Chronological

The simplest approach is to trace the development of the topic over time. However, if you choose this strategy, be careful to avoid simply listing and summarizing sources in order.

Try to analyze patterns, turning points and key debates that have shaped the direction of the field. Give your interpretation of how and why certain developments occurred.

If you have found some recurring central themes, you can organize your literature review into subsections that address different aspects of the topic.

For example, if you are reviewing literature about inequalities in migrant health outcomes, key themes might include healthcare policy, language barriers, cultural attitudes, legal status, and economic access.

Methodological

If you draw your sources from different disciplines or fields that use a variety of research methods , you might want to compare the results and conclusions that emerge from different approaches. For example:

• Look at what results have emerged in qualitative versus quantitative research
• Discuss how the topic has been approached by empirical versus theoretical scholarship
• Divide the literature into sociological, historical, and cultural sources

Theoretical

A literature review is often the foundation for a theoretical framework . You can use it to discuss various theories, models, and definitions of key concepts.

You might argue for the relevance of a specific theoretical approach, or combine various theoretical concepts to create a framework for your research.

Like any other academic text , your literature review should have an introduction , a main body, and a conclusion . What you include in each depends on the objective of your literature review.

The introduction should clearly establish the focus and purpose of the literature review.

Depending on the length of your literature review, you might want to divide the body into subsections. You can use a subheading for each theme, time period, or methodological approach.

As you write, you can follow these tips:

• Summarize and synthesize: give an overview of the main points of each source and combine them into a coherent whole
• Analyze and interpret: don’t just paraphrase other researchers — add your own interpretations where possible, discussing the significance of findings in relation to the literature as a whole
• Critically evaluate: mention the strengths and weaknesses of your sources
• Write in well-structured paragraphs: use transition words and topic sentences to draw connections, comparisons and contrasts

In the conclusion, you should summarize the key findings you have taken from the literature and emphasize their significance.

When you’ve finished writing and revising your literature review, don’t forget to proofread thoroughly before submitting. Not a language expert? Check out Scribbr’s professional proofreading services !

This article has been adapted into lecture slides that you can use to teach your students about writing a literature review.

Scribbr slides are free to use, customize, and distribute for educational purposes.

Open Google Slides Download PowerPoint

If you want to know more about the research process , methodology , research bias , or statistics , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.

• Sampling methods
• Simple random sampling
• Stratified sampling
• Cluster sampling
• Likert scales
• Reproducibility

 Statistics

• Null hypothesis
• Statistical power
• Probability distribution
• Effect size
• Poisson distribution

Research bias

• Optimism bias
• Cognitive bias
• Implicit bias
• Hawthorne effect
• Anchoring bias
• Explicit bias

A literature review is a survey of scholarly sources (such as books, journal articles, and theses) related to a specific topic or research question .

It is often written as part of a thesis, dissertation , or research paper , in order to situate your work in relation to existing knowledge.

There are several reasons to conduct a literature review at the beginning of a research project:

• To familiarize yourself with the current state of knowledge on your topic
• To ensure that you’re not just repeating what others have already done
• To identify gaps in knowledge and unresolved problems that your research can address
• To develop your theoretical framework and methodology
• To provide an overview of the key findings and debates on the topic

Writing the literature review shows your reader how your work relates to existing research and what new insights it will contribute.

The literature review usually comes near the beginning of your thesis or dissertation . After the introduction , it grounds your research in a scholarly field and leads directly to your theoretical framework or methodology .

A literature review is a survey of credible sources on a topic, often used in dissertations , theses, and research papers . Literature reviews give an overview of knowledge on a subject, helping you identify relevant theories and methods, as well as gaps in existing research. Literature reviews are set up similarly to other  academic texts , with an introduction , a main body, and a conclusion .

An  annotated bibliography is a list of  source references that has a short description (called an annotation ) for each of the sources. It is often assigned as part of the research process for a  paper .  

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

McCombes, S. (2023, September 11). How to Write a Literature Review | Guide, Examples, & Templates. Scribbr. Retrieved April 9, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/dissertation/literature-review/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, what is a theoretical framework | guide to organizing, what is a research methodology | steps & tips, how to write a research proposal | examples & templates, unlimited academic ai-proofreading.

✔ Document error-free in 5minutes ✔ Unlimited document corrections ✔ Specialized in correcting academic texts

Research Methods

• Getting Started
• Literature Review Research
• Research Design
• Research Design By Discipline
• SAGE Research Methods
• Teaching with SAGE Research Methods

Literature Review

• What is a Literature Review?
• What is NOT a Literature Review?
• Purposes of a Literature Review
• Types of Literature Reviews
• Literature Reviews vs. Systematic Reviews
• Systematic vs. Meta-Analysis

Literature Review  is a comprehensive survey of the works published in a particular field of study or line of research, usually over a specific period of time, in the form of an in-depth, critical bibliographic essay or annotated list in which attention is drawn to the most significant works.

Also, we can define a literature review as the collected body of scholarly works related to a topic:

• Summarizes and analyzes previous research relevant to a topic
• Includes scholarly books and articles published in academic journals
• Can be an specific scholarly paper or a section in a research paper

The objective of a Literature Review is to find previous published scholarly works relevant to an specific topic

• Help gather ideas or information
• Keep up to date in current trends and findings
• Help develop new questions

A literature review is important because it:

• Explains the background of research on a topic.
• Demonstrates why a topic is significant to a subject area.
• Helps focus your own research questions or problems
• Discovers relationships between research studies/ideas.
• Suggests unexplored ideas or populations
• Identifies major themes, concepts, and researchers on a topic.
• Tests assumptions; may help counter preconceived ideas and remove unconscious bias.
• Identifies critical gaps, points of disagreement, or potentially flawed methodology or theoretical approaches.
• Indicates potential directions for future research.

All content in this section is from Literature Review Research from Old Dominion University 

Keep in mind the following, a literature review is NOT:

Not an essay 

Not an annotated bibliography  in which you summarize each article that you have reviewed.  A literature review goes beyond basic summarizing to focus on the critical analysis of the reviewed works and their relationship to your research question.

Not a research paper   where you select resources to support one side of an issue versus another.  A lit review should explain and consider all sides of an argument in order to avoid bias, and areas of agreement and disagreement should be highlighted.

A literature review serves several purposes. For example, it

• provides thorough knowledge of previous studies; introduces seminal works.
• helps focus one’s own research topic.
• identifies a conceptual framework for one’s own research questions or problems; indicates potential directions for future research.
• suggests previously unused or underused methodologies, designs, quantitative and qualitative strategies.
• identifies gaps in previous studies; identifies flawed methodologies and/or theoretical approaches; avoids replication of mistakes.
• helps the researcher avoid repetition of earlier research.
• suggests unexplored populations.
• determines whether past studies agree or disagree; identifies controversy in the literature.
• tests assumptions; may help counter preconceived ideas and remove unconscious bias.

As Kennedy (2007) notes*, it is important to think of knowledge in a given field as consisting of three layers. First, there are the primary studies that researchers conduct and publish. Second are the reviews of those studies that summarize and offer new interpretations built from and often extending beyond the original studies. Third, there are the perceptions, conclusions, opinion, and interpretations that are shared informally that become part of the lore of field. In composing a literature review, it is important to note that it is often this third layer of knowledge that is cited as "true" even though it often has only a loose relationship to the primary studies and secondary literature reviews.

Given this, while literature reviews are designed to provide an overview and synthesis of pertinent sources you have explored, there are several approaches to how they can be done, depending upon the type of analysis underpinning your study. Listed below are definitions of types of literature reviews:

Argumentative Review      This form examines literature selectively in order to support or refute an argument, deeply imbedded assumption, or philosophical problem already established in the literature. The purpose is to develop a body of literature that establishes a contrarian viewpoint. Given the value-laden nature of some social science research [e.g., educational reform; immigration control], argumentative approaches to analyzing the literature can be a legitimate and important form of discourse. However, note that they can also introduce problems of bias when they are used to to make summary claims of the sort found in systematic reviews.

Integrative Review      Considered a form of research that reviews, critiques, and synthesizes representative literature on a topic in an integrated way such that new frameworks and perspectives on the topic are generated. The body of literature includes all studies that address related or identical hypotheses. A well-done integrative review meets the same standards as primary research in regard to clarity, rigor, and replication.

Historical Review      Few things rest in isolation from historical precedent. Historical reviews are focused on examining research throughout a period of time, often starting with the first time an issue, concept, theory, phenomena emerged in the literature, then tracing its evolution within the scholarship of a discipline. The purpose is to place research in a historical context to show familiarity with state-of-the-art developments and to identify the likely directions for future research.

Methodological Review      A review does not always focus on what someone said [content], but how they said it [method of analysis]. This approach provides a framework of understanding at different levels (i.e. those of theory, substantive fields, research approaches and data collection and analysis techniques), enables researchers to draw on a wide variety of knowledge ranging from the conceptual level to practical documents for use in fieldwork in the areas of ontological and epistemological consideration, quantitative and qualitative integration, sampling, interviewing, data collection and data analysis, and helps highlight many ethical issues which we should be aware of and consider as we go through our study.

Systematic Review      This form consists of an overview of existing evidence pertinent to a clearly formulated research question, which uses pre-specified and standardized methods to identify and critically appraise relevant research, and to collect, report, and analyse data from the studies that are included in the review. Typically it focuses on a very specific empirical question, often posed in a cause-and-effect form, such as "To what extent does A contribute to B?"

Theoretical Review      The purpose of this form is to concretely examine the corpus of theory that has accumulated in regard to an issue, concept, theory, phenomena. The theoretical literature review help establish what theories already exist, the relationships between them, to what degree the existing theories have been investigated, and to develop new hypotheses to be tested. Often this form is used to help establish a lack of appropriate theories or reveal that current theories are inadequate for explaining new or emerging research problems. The unit of analysis can focus on a theoretical concept or a whole theory or framework.

* Kennedy, Mary M. "Defining a Literature."  Educational Researcher  36 (April 2007): 139-147.

All content in this section is from The Literature Review created by Dr. Robert Larabee USC

Robinson, P. and Lowe, J. (2015),  Literature reviews vs systematic reviews.  Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 39: 103-103. doi: 10.1111/1753-6405.12393

What's in the name? The difference between a Systematic Review and a Literature Review, and why it matters . By Lynn Kysh from University of Southern California

Systematic review or meta-analysis?

A  systematic review  answers a defined research question by collecting and summarizing all empirical evidence that fits pre-specified eligibility criteria.

A  meta-analysis  is the use of statistical methods to summarize the results of these studies.

Systematic reviews, just like other research articles, can be of varying quality. They are a significant piece of work (the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination at York estimates that a team will take 9-24 months), and to be useful to other researchers and practitioners they should have:

• clearly stated objectives with pre-defined eligibility criteria for studies
• explicit, reproducible methodology
• a systematic search that attempts to identify all studies
• assessment of the validity of the findings of the included studies (e.g. risk of bias)
• systematic presentation, and synthesis, of the characteristics and findings of the included studies

Not all systematic reviews contain meta-analysis. 

Meta-analysis is the use of statistical methods to summarize the results of independent studies. By combining information from all relevant studies, meta-analysis can provide more precise estimates of the effects of health care than those derived from the individual studies included within a review.  More information on meta-analyses can be found in  Cochrane Handbook, Chapter 9 .

A meta-analysis goes beyond critique and integration and conducts secondary statistical analysis on the outcomes of similar studies.  It is a systematic review that uses quantitative methods to synthesize and summarize the results.

An advantage of a meta-analysis is the ability to be completely objective in evaluating research findings.  Not all topics, however, have sufficient research evidence to allow a meta-analysis to be conducted.  In that case, an integrative review is an appropriate strategy. 

Some of the content in this section is from Systematic reviews and meta-analyses: step by step guide created by Kate McAllister.

• << Previous: Getting Started
• Next: Research Design >>
• Last Updated: Aug 21, 2023 4:07 PM
• URL: https://guides.lib.udel.edu/researchmethods

REVIEW article

Variety-seeking behavior in consumption: a literature review and future research directions.

• Business School, Huaqiao University, Quanzhou, China

Variety-seeking is a popular choice strategy in consumers’ daily lives, and many factors influence it. This study conducted a narrative and structured literature review based on three popular online academic databases to understand how researchers used influencing factors, adopted theoretical perspectives and underlying mechanisms, and developed measure methods in their studies. This paper consolidated and analyzed 61 articles on variety-seeking behaviors in consumer research, including empirical studies spanning from 2000 to 2021. This paper primarily focused on articles published at top tiers in the marketing literature. From these articles, a collection of internal and external factors, theoretical perspectives, underlying mechanisms, and measure methods adopted was summarized and tabulated for easy reference and comprehension. A research framework was developed to illustrate the relationships between influence factors and variety-seeking proposed by previous researchers. The literature review may not be exhaustive because variety-seeking behaviors could involve various research topics; however, the proposed research framework and suggested directions may be representative references for future research. This study is a more comprehensive literature review of variety-seeking behaviors in consumption research after 2000, and it contributes to a better understanding of the causes and effects of variety-seeking behaviors in consumption.

Introduction

In daily life, when consumers face various selectable products, although they can repeatedly select their favorite products, they often choose ones in different categories, regarded as variety-seeking behavior ( Kahn and Louie, 1990 ). To meet consumers’ needs and maximize their satisfaction ( Sevilla et al., 2019 ), enterprises need to pursue the most accurate marketing segments. Consumption-related variety-seeking behavior provides an effective market segmentation standard for enterprises ( Trivedi, 1999 ). In addition, such behavior helps increase sales volume and market share ( Simonson and Winer, 1992 ), classify products, and effectively combine marketing strategies ( Sela et al., 2019 ).

Variety-seeking behavior in consumption refers to individuals switching among products, categories, or brands to avoid the decreasing utility due to repeat purchases or consumption of the same products ( Ratner et al., 1999 ). Over time, people tend to switch between options or select different options within a choice set ( Shaddy et al., 2021 ). In the marketing domain, variety-seeking behavior also covers switching between marketing activities and services. Previous research found that consumers buy a certain number of diversified products even if they can repeatedly buy their favorite products from a given selection set ( Ratner and Kahn, 2002 ). Repeating purchase or consumption reduces products’ marginal utility, thus reducing product attractiveness and causing boredom among consumers ( McAlister, 1982 ; McAlister and Pessemier, 1982 ); existing products no longer meet consumers’ needs for stimulation ( Choi, 1991 ). Therefore, consumers pursue freshness, change, and diversity by experiencing goods with different attributes to form satiety ( Seetharaman and Che, 2009 ; Sevilla et al., 2016 ). This tendency shows that variety-seeking is common among consumers making product purchase decisions ( McAlister, 1982 ) and a common choice strategy ( Drolet and He, 2010 ).

Research on variety-seeking behaviors has a long history. Previous researchers have conducted valuable reviews on variety-seeking ( McAlister and Pessemier, 1982 ; Kahn, 1995 ; Herrmann and Heitmann, 2006 ). However, the first two were published two or three decades ago. McAlister and Pessemier (1982) focused on the taxonomy of varied behavior and divided variety-seeking behaviors into two classes (decried and direct). Kahn (1995) similarly discussed three primary motivations for variety-seeking in the marketing literature: satiation/stimulation, external situation, and future preference uncertainty. The last one, Herrmann and Heitmann (2006) , highlights the relevant literature on the domains of cultural psychology as well as marketing psychology with a review of consumers’ perception of variety-seeking. This study differs from the extant literature on the timeframe, method, and analysis. This study’s value lies in its narrative literature review on marketing and consumption articles published from 2000 to 2021 and their proposed conceptual models and frameworks. In contrast to previous reviews, this paper overviews the methodology approach, influencing factors, theoretical perspective, and underlying mechanism of variety-seeking behaviors in consumption. Based on these findings, a research framework of variety-seeking behaviors in consumption was developed to illustrate the inter-relationships among the adopted research constructs. This framework can provide a reference for researchers, serve as a research road map, and stimulate new ideas in future research in this subject area.

This review article is organized as follows. This paper first briefly describes the method of conducting the search process. Next, this paper summarizes and discusses the internal and external factors of variety-seeking behaviors in consumption, followed by a generalization of the theoretical perspectives and underlying mechanisms of variety-seeking behaviors. Then, this paper reviews various measurement methods used by researchers and recommends the directions for future research based on the summarization of the current findings ( Figure 1 ).

Figure 1 . Flow diagram of sections.

Research Methodology

To investigate the work of previous researchers on variety-seeking behaviors in the consumption domain, this paper searched for empirical studies in the extant literature after 2000. The literature search was conducted from the Scopus database, which is the largest abstract and citation database of the peer-reviewed literature. The keyword “variety-seeking” was applied in the search process. The scope of this study is limited to the timeframe of 2000–2021 because there was only one literature review paper during this period. This search generated 293 records in total. Two hundred and thirty-five literature were omitted due to non-article type (8 records), neither SCI nor SSCI journal (70 records), non-English (2 records), specific subjects (e.g., children, older people, nonhumanity; 7 records), non-empirical paper (e.g., conceptual, review, and interview papers; 7 records), using modeling method (40 records), focusing on personality traits (52 records) and personal motivation (9 records) of variety-seeking, and no relation to consumption (40 records). Another 3 relevant papers were added. Finally, 61 papers were selected for in-depth analysis.

The search for relevant research in this process was by no means exhaustive; however, the findings nevertheless serve as a representative summary of the research conducted thus far. Only refereed journal articles were included in the study; conference papers, doctorate and master theses, textbooks, and documentaries were excluded because I believe refereed journal articles represent state-of-the-art research outputs ( Chan and Ngai, 2011 ; Ngai et al., 2015 ). Moreover, because the current paper focus on “variety-seeking behavior in consumption,” most journals involving marketing and consumer psychology in top tiers were selected, such as Journal of Marketing, Journal of Marketing Research, Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Psychology, European Journal of Marketing, Marketing Letters, International Journal in Marketing, Journal of Consumer Psychology, and Journal of Personal and Social Psychology as well as some journals in psychology and tourism and hospitality management. Finally, this study focused on papers presenting empirical studies, and the adopted variables and proposed models were reviewed and included in the framework.

Analysis and Results

This section begins with a narrative review of the influencing factors adopted in the 61 identified empirical studies. The section then continues with the development of the research framework embedded in an analysis of theoretical perspectives and underlying mechanism, and measuring methods investigated by previous researchers in the formation of their conceptual models or frameworks. It should be noted that there are seven classical articles in the area published before 2000 described in this section, which are severed as background information.

Internal Factors

The extant literature on variety-seeking behaviors in consumption considers five aspects of internal influencing: individual demographics, personality characteristics, emotional and physical states, sensory clues, and mindset.

Individual Demographics

A factor that could affect consumers’ variety-seeking behaviors is individual demographics, such as gender and age. For the effect of gender on variety-seeking behavior, researchers focused on the feminine menstrual cycle and gender differences. For example, across the reward domains of mating and hedonic food, Faraji-Rad et al. (2013) showed that women seek more variety in rewards when they are closer to ovulation because of their increased reward sensitivity caused by hormonal shifts during the fertile phase of the menstrual cycle. Similarly, Durante and Arsena (2015) revealed that women select a greater number of unique options from consumer product sets at high fertility, which is particularly strong for those in committed relationships. Chen et al. (2016) focused on two genders and demonstrated that men’s variety-seeking behavior in the product consumption domain increases in the presence of short-term, not long-term mating cues; by contrast, women’s variety-seeking behavior decreases in the presence of long-term but not short-term mating cues. For the effect of age on variety-seeking behavior, Novak and Mather (2007) found that younger adults selected similar levels of variety when choosing between what to consume immediately and later. By contrast, older adults consistently selected less variety when choosing something to be consumed later than immediately.

Personality Characteristics

Individual characteristics could influence consumers’ variety-seeking behaviors. Consumers who feel powerful ( Jiang et al., 2014 ) are chronically indecisive ( Jeong et al., 2016 ; Jeong and Drolet, 2016 ) and are novices ( Sela et al., 2019 ) present more variety-seeking behaviors. First, building on an action-orientation perspective of power, Jiang et al. (2014) demonstrated that because high power is associated with a readiness to act and switching behavior generally requires taking actions in some form, consumers who feel powerful are more likely to switch in choice tasks. Second, Jeong et al. (2016) and Jeong and Drolet (2016) highlighted that chronic indecisiveness is associated with increased variety-seeking behavior. Chronically indecisive consumers (vs. not) feel less anxious and more positive after selecting a mix of products. Finally, consumers can acquire knowledge and signal their status in the marketplace during variety-seeking. Sela et al. (2019) argued that novices (vs. experts) perceive greater (vs. less) variety-seeking to indicate expertise because of perceived category breadth knowledge (vs. within-category discernment). Thus, novices (vs. experts) seek more (vs. less) variety to signal expertise. However, privately self-aware consumers are less inclined to opt for a varied choice set ( Goukens et al., 2009 ).

In recent years, researchers explored luck beliefs, mindset traits, and self-oriented perfectionism in consumers’ variety-seeking behaviors. For instance, Zhao et al. (2021b) analyzed data from 593 respondents and showed that personal luckiness and belief in luck positively affect variety seeking. Li and Sun (2021) investigated 364 participants in the United States and found that consumers with a growth (vs. fixed) mindset are more likely to engage in variety seeking. As a purchasing strategy, variety-seeking also could be positively influenced by self-oriented perfectionism ( Fu et al., 2021 ; N  = 312).

Other personality traits, such as goal orientation and trait anger, influence variety-seeking behaviors depending on the situations. Considering decision tasks, Wu and Kao (2011) found that in the sequential choices for sequential consumption conditions, promotion-focused consumers tend to select a greater variety of items than prevention-focused consumers. The effect reversed in the simultaneous choices for sequential consumption conditions for prevention-focused consumers. Considering state anger, Zhao et al. (2021a) showed that people from relatively resource-abundant environments generally tend to seek variety when they are temporarily in an angry mood, independent of trait anger; although those with low trait anger tend to choose more variety compared to those with high trait anger. For people growing up in relatively resource-scarce environments, those with a low trait of anger tend to choose less variety when they feel angry than those with a high trait of anger.

Emotion and Physical State

Early researchers mainly explored the relationship between broad emotions (positive and negative feelings) and variety-seeking. For example, Kahn and Isen (1993) explored the influence of the positive effect on variety-seeking among safe and enjoyable products. The findings revealed that the positive affect induced by a gift bag of candy or sugarless gum enhanced consumers’ variety-seeking in choice behavior in three food categories (i.e., crackers, soup, and snack food) when circumstances did not make negative features of the items. However, the different degrees of positive feelings could produce distinct effects. Roehm and Roehm (2005) believed that more extreme positive moods might reduce variety-seeking—unlike mild positive moods—because the moderate stimulation obtained from variety-seeking is insufficient to meet people’s demands of extreme positive moods. The results of two pilot studies and two experiments showed that participants who viewed an ad cultivating an extremely positive mood switched less between candy bar snack brands on successive choices and selected fewer brands.

Then, researchers discussed how specific emotions and physical conditions, including positive and negative emotions ( Chuang et al., 2008 ), sadness and happiness ( Lin and Lin, 2009 ; Chien-Huang and Hung-Chou, 2010 , 2012 ; Lin et al., 2011 ; Lin, 2014 ), local optimism and pessimism ( Yang and Urminsky, 2015 ), and winning-losing perception ( Chang et al., 2021 ), affect consumers’ decision-making behaviors when faced with multiple choices. In these moods and states, seeking variety helps people change their current status. For example, a study with 124 subjects demonstrated that people are likely to include more variety in their consumption decisions when they are induced to a negative emotion than a positive emotion ( Chuang et al., 2008 ). Moreover, a series of research discussed the effect of two specific emotional states (sadness and happiness) on variety-seeking behaviors and found similar conclusions ( Lin and Lin, 2009 ; Chien-Huang and Hung-Chou, 2010 , 2012 ; Lin et al., 2011 ; Lin, 2014 ). These studies used choice task scenarios and revealed that participants with a sad mood selected more variety than those with a happy mood. Furthermore, Yang and Urminsky (2015) demonstrated that local optimism increases sequential choice consistency, whereas local pessimism increases sequential variety-seeking. Finally, Chang et al. (2021) found that consumers who have failed in a competition or not achieved a goal tend to seek less variety in their later consumption than consumers who have succeeded because losing feedback weakens consumers’ perception of their control of personal mastery.

Interestingly, some special physiological states have effects on variety-seeking, such as hunger ( Goukens et al., 2007 ) and sleepiness ( Huang et al., 2019 ). When people felt hunger or thirst, visual food or drink cues encouraged them to seek variety in relevant domains because these cues were more attractive to consumers who were in hunger or had just finished a fitness ( Goukens et al., 2007 ). Another physiological state influencing variety-seeking is sleepiness. Huang et al. (2019) used multiple methods and revealed that sleepier consumers tended to seek more variety because of the need for arousal to maintain wakefulness. Particularly in Study1, a natural experiment based on the change of DST policy provided practical evidence for the positive effect of DST (decreasing short-term sleeping time and increasing sleepiness) on variety-seeking in products purchased by using Nielsen panel data (approximately 60,000 U.S. households data).

Sensory Clues

Individuals’ perception of the external circumstances depends on their keen sensory system, which receives various stimuli from the outside and then influences individuals’ mindset and decision making. People seek various choices when consuming to satisfy the sensory demand of vision ( Maimaran and Wheeler, 2008 ; Deng et al., 2016 ; Huang and Kwong, 2016 ) and taste ( Inman, 2001 ; Mukherjee et al., 2017 ), which have been discussed more in the current research.

Initially, the structural and superficial features of vision affect consumers’ variety-seeking behaviors subconsciously. First, individuals’ choices could be causally influenced by novel visual stimuli. For example, Maimaran and Wheeler (2008) demonstrated that exposure to variety arrays (arrays of differing shapes) increases variety-seeking, whereas exposure to uniqueness arrays (e.g., one circle among six squares) increases the choice of unique over common objects. Second, the display of products further influences variety-seeking in consumption because of the direction match between displays and eye movements. For example, Deng et al. (2016) used multiple methods (e.g., field study, laboratory study, and eye-tracking study) and demonstrated that consumers chose more variety (i.e., distinct fragrances, different candies, unique chocolates, and different types of lollipops) when alternatives were horizontally assorted or displayed. Third, a superficial feature can affect various perceptions even when the actual content or structure of an assortment remains unchanged. Huang and Kwong (2016) revealed that when the menu or catalog of an assortment is more difficult to read, the individuals perceived a higher variety. This readability effect stems from the subjective interpretation of the feeling of difficulty, that is, consumers generally endorse a lay belief that it is more difficult to make choices when they face a greater variety of options.

Subsequently, people might seek variety of taste stimuli to satisfy their needs. Inman (2001) believed that people switch more on sensory attributes (e.g., flavor) than nonsensory attributes (e.g., brand) to seek more pleasure. Inman (2001) used ACNielsen wand panel data for purchases of tortilla chips and cake mixes from almost 2000 consumers over 3 years (Study 1) and examined actual consumption behavior using a six-week consumption diary panel from over 850 consumers in two cities (Study 2) and employed a survey methodology (Study 3; 1056 responses) to verify his hypotheses: the difference of variety-seeking based on sensory and brand could be explained by “sensory-specific satiety,” that is, because of the high correlation between sensory-specific satiety and variety-seeking on sensory attributes, consumers switched more on flavors than brands. The research of Inman (2001) on sensory is broad, and subsequently, Mukherjee et al. (2017) discussed the relationship between a more specific taste—spicy and variety-seeking consumption. Based on embodied cognition and the metaphor “variety is the spice of life,” the authors found that spicy gustatory sensations (e.g., spicy vs. mild potato chips) activate a desire to be interesting that leads to greater variety in the subsequent unrelated choices (e.g., candy bars).

Ultimately, Lee and Sergueeva (2017) demonstrated an interesting “chewing effect” and argued that chewing more increases the viewing time and consumers’ thought-engagement while shopping and then increases variety-seeking behavior among consumers.

Variety-seeking could also be the behavioral result of spontaneous thinking. The priming mindset influences variety-seeking in follow-up consumption, including past experiencing priming ( Shen and Wyer, 2010 ) and semantic concept priming ( Fishbach et al., 2011 ; Huang and Wyer, 2015 ; Zhang and Guo, 2019 ).

First, people’s past experiences can affect variety-seeking in the future. When individuals’ past behaviors associated with “same” were primed, they would get the feeling of boredom and then switch to a “different” decision rule (e.g., various types of herbal tea for four consecutive days) when performing a later task to eliminate this negative feeling ( Shen and Wyer, 2010 ).

Second, the influence of semantic concepts on variety-seeking is nonconscious. For example, Fishbach et al. (2011) showed that when the negative concept related to “repetition” (e.g., boredom) was primed, it triggered an individual’s consumption structure based on satisfaction, that is, encouraging them to seek variety in order selection (e.g., buying smaller bottles of different shampoo, preferring CDs from different artists, staying in different hotels in the same city, visiting different cities in Europe, shopping at different stores, and choosing different snacks). Moreover, the influence of semantics is not only manifested in words related to choice behaviors but also has the same effect in words unrelated to choice behavior. For instance, Huang and Wyer (2015) found two opposite effects of mortality on variety-seeking: anxiety-inducing and concept-activation effects. The former was driven by the desire for stability and decreased the variety of individuals’ choices in an unrelated multiple-choice decision situation, whereas the latter induced a global processing style and increased variety-seeking. In addition, individuals’ temporal perspectives also trigger different seeking mindsets and affect variety-seeking behavior. Zhang and Guo (2019) demonstrated that past thinking brings familiar seeking and decreases variety-seeking, whereas future thinking induces novelty seeking and increases variety-seeking.

External Factors

Whether or not people seek variety in the choice and decision-making process of consumption is not only affected by internal factors but also external environmental factors. These external environmental factors include social environment, physical environment, and marketing strategies.

Social Environment

The social environment’s influence on people’s daily behavior is subtle and has potential that is not easy to detect. Social factors that influence consumption variety are mainly from the two aspects of social relationships and social culture.

People would like to make various decisions to maintain well social relationships. The first social relationship comes from social pressure. Ratner and Kahn (2002) demonstrated that people choose more variety when they make decisions in public than in private because they expect to receive positive evaluations from others (perceived as “social pressure”; Ratner and Kahn, 2002 ). The second social relationship comes from interpersonal motivation. According to Ratner and Kahn (2002) , Choi et al. (2006) showed that people have a stronger tendency to seek variety when they make choices for others. The explanations are as follows: (a) people should be responsible for their choices (the interpersonal mechanism; b) people expect to be satisfied more quickly when they choose for others (the intrapersonal mechanism). In addition, to maintain the self and interpersonal relationships, individuals’ perceived relational threat affects variety seeking in snack choices. Across three studies, Finkelstein et al. (2019) experimentally manipulated relational self-threat and found that those who experience high (vs. low) threat seek less variety, even when the same choice set is construed as having more (vs. less) variety. The third social relationship comes from the acquisition of interpersonal resources, that is, social influence. Ariely and Levav (2000) showed that the original groups choose more varied dishes than created groups, which is attributable to the interaction among group members and help individual satisfy goals of information gathering and self-presentation in the form of uniqueness in the group context. Chuang et al. (2013) maintained that to derive more enjoyment from a shared product, people show less variety and make choices consistent with the opinions of others in online information.

Furthermore, people in love form a special social relationship. For example, Etkin (2016) argued that consumers prefer more variety for joint consumption with their partners (e.g., going out to dinner, a movie, and a concert on a weekend), when they perceive more (vs. less) time ahead in a committed relationship. Huang and Dong (2019) found that a salient relationship state—romantic crush—can increase consumers’ variety-seeking tendency in unrelated consumption situations.

Variety-seeking behaviors in consumption could be influenced by the root of social culture. Kim and Drolet (2003) highlighted that as a choice rule, people in a unique culture display greater variety. Similarly, Yoon et al. (2011) reported that because members of a collectivist culture tend to follow group members’ choices, their choices in snacks are associated with a higher uniformity-seeking tendency than those of individualistic cultural backgrounds. Moreover, building on the compensation consumption literature, Yoon and Kim (2018) demonstrated that consumers with low socioeconomic status and perceive low economic mobility (e.g., economically stuck consumers) seek more variety than others to compensate for their lack of personal control. Finally, political ideology has a counterintuitive effect on variety-seeking. Fernandes and Mandel (2014) showed that conservatism is positively related to variety-seeking because of social normative concerns.

Physical Environment

The physical environment factors that affect variety-seeking in consumption mainly include the space environment and time point.

First, the constraints of a physical space enhance variety-seeking in consumption. Based on resistance theory, Levav and Zhu (2009) found that consumers confined by space make more various and unique choices to resist the invasion of their private space and seek freedom. The authors revealed that people in narrower aisles sought more varied candies than people in wider aisles (Study 1), and this effect of confinement in narrow aisles is extended to more unique choices in charities (Study 2), particularly in those with high chronic reactance tendency (Study 3). Moreover, the field study (94,110,967 usable transactions) used crowding as a proxy for confinement and found a positive relationship between crowding and variety-seeking in real grocery purchases.

As another type of space environment, the restaurant atmosphere, store environment, and web feature also could influence consumers’ variety-seeking. For example, Ha and Jang (2013a) collected 309 useable responses and pointed out that consumers’ desired hedonic and utilitarian values of the restaurant positively influence their variety-seeking intentions. Similarly, according to 617 usable responses to the restaurant experience, Ha and Jang (2013b) showed that atmospheric quality, overall boredom, and boredom with atmospheric attributes significantly influence dinners’ variety-seeking intentions positively. For the off-line store environment, Mohan et al. (2012) investigated 350 shoppers in Dubai and established that the store environment (including lighting, scent, and music) affects variety-seeking positively. For the online web feature, with 698 usable responses, Hung et al. (2011) demonstrated that quality web features affect interpersonal trust and platform credibility positively, and both constructs drive a user’s online community usage and brand variety-seeking behavior.

Second, the objective time of day could further influence variety-seeking in consumption. Given the influence of physical laws, people exhibit different levels of variety-seeking in consumption at different time points. For example, Roehm and Roehm (2004) found that people are more likely to seek variety in candy choices at low arousal (e.g., 9 AM; 10:00 AM–11:20 AM) than peak arousal (e.g., 4 PM; 3:10 PM–4:20 PM) moments of the day. However, the latest research provided an inconsistent result of diurnal variation in variety-seeking. Based on circadian rhythms in chronobiology, Gullo et al. (2019) applied four studies, including an empirical analysis of millions of purchases, and stated that individuals pick less varied flavors of yogurt when choosing in the morning. Furthermore, different external environments and changes in life events can change people’s variety-seeking. Koschate-Fischer et al. (2018) showed that consumers reduce their variety-seeking tendency after experiencing a life event (1,475 panelists).

Marketing Strategy

The marketing strategy influences consumers’ variety-seeking behaviors primarily in the purchase stage. Kahn and Louie (1990) first studied the relationship between retail stores’ promotion strategy and variety-seeking. They found that if only one shampoo brand is promoted and people are generally loyal to the last brand purchased, they tend to switch among shampoo brands when the promotion is withdrawn.

In the later stages, the research on the impact of marketing strategy has become in-depth, such as product packaging, product bundle strategy, product category and information, and product assortment. For example, product packaging uniformity is associated with arousal potential and influences consumers’ variety-seeking. Roehm and Roehm (2012) showed that consumers’ variety-seeking is greater in product categories where packaging is similar among competitors.

Furthermore, the product bundle strategy affects consumers’ variety-seeking when they experience multiple products. Mittelman et al. (2014) found that consumers seek more variety when choosing from single offerings (e.g., a choice of two individual candy bars) than from bundled offerings (e.g., a choice of a bundle of two candy bars), which is termed “offer framing effect.” Kim et al. (2018) based on the decision-framing effect and found that travelers show higher variety-seeking in travel package decisions when the bundle package is selected from a combined decision rather than from two single decisions.

Moreover, product category and product information affect variety-seeking behavior. For the product category, several researches were conducted from various perspectives. Based on a specific-abstract categorization strategy, Kim and Yoon (2016) showed the “category specificity effect” and revealed that individuals are likely to order a greater variety of dishes when the menu contains no category labels or abstract category labels due to the enhanced perception of variety offered in the menu. Baltas et al. (2017) indicated that in hedonic product categories, consumers seek more variety in sensory attributes, whereas, in utilitarian product categories, they seek more variety in functional attributes. What is the difference between digital and consumable goods? Adomavicius et al. (2015) showed a reduction in behavioral effects of bundle cohesion and timing on variety of preferences for digital goods. For the product information, Lin et al. (2017) indicated that when people purchase products for themselves, the presence of risky information and health claims, and high product involvement promote more variety-seeking.

Finally, as detailed in Section “Theoretical Perspective and Underlying Mechanism”, the displays and assortments of products affect consumers’ variety-seeking behaviors. For example, the display of novel geometric figure arrangement combinations (various shapes) increases consumers’ variety-seeking ( Maimaran and Wheeler, 2008 ). The horizontal assortment is easier to process and can increase individuals’ perceived variety, thereby ultimately leading to greater variety-seeking ( Deng et al., 2016 ; Table 1 ).

Table 1 . Factors investigated in variety-seeking bahavior in consumption.

Theoretical Perspective and Underlying Mechanism

Many theories and effects are used in the extent of variety-seeking behaviors in consumption research to explain the underlying mechanism that consumers seek variety during decision making and purchasing. The theoretical perspectives and underlying mechanism can be summarized in six groups: optimal stimulus level, personality characteristics perspective, emotional coping perspective, compensatory consumption perspective, environmental psychology perspective, and evolutionary psychology perspective. Several significant theories and effects were selected in each group and briefly discussed.

Optimal Stimulus Level

Optimal stimulation level theory is an early and fundamental theory to explore variety-seeking behavior in consumption, which is widely applied in the existing literature. One reason consumers seek variety in product selection is to meet their demand for stimulation ( Menon and Kahn, 1995 ). According to optimal stimulus level theory , the relationship among internal individual factors, external environmental factors, and consumer preference response can be represented by an inverted U-shaped curve function. In this curve function, the peak vertex of the curve is the optimal stimulus level, the attribute set under this level can cause the consumer’s satisfaction to reach the highest level, and the stimulus level on both sides of the vertex is too low or too high to satisfy the consumer ( McAlister, 1982 ). If consumers often buy the same product or category, their effective stimulus level in decision-making decreases. Therefore, to obtain greater stimulation, consumers attempt to buy different products or products to achieve their goals ( Roehm and Roehm, 2005 ). In addition, because of physiological stimulation and arousal (e.g., body temperature), consumers receive the least stimulation in the morning and produce a lower variety-seeking ( Gullo et al., 2019 ). Arouse theory was also applied by Roehm and Roehm (2004) and Huang et al. (2019) to explain consumers’ need for stimulation.

As the internal influencing factors, much research focus on the effect of personality characteristics on variety-seeking behavior in consumption from the individual perspective. As a result, theories and underlying mechanism of these effects are in varied forms, which are mostly based on the consumers’ personality traits. For example, Self-awareness theory and Goal orientation theory were adopted to explore how consumers’ self-awareness and promotion–prevention orientation affect their variety-seeking behaviors ( Goukens et al., 2009 ; Wu and Kao, 2011 ). According to Implicit Theory , consumers with a growth (vs. fixed) mindset are more likely to engage in variety seeking due to their changing preferences ( Li and Sun, 2021 ). Based on Signal theory , Sela et al. (2019) found that variety-seeking behavior can serve as a signal to indicate expertise. Personality characteristics also can shape consumers’ variety-seeking mindset and then promote variety-seeking behaviors ( Kim and Yoon, 2016 ; Zhang and Guo, 2019 ).

Emotional Coping

Emotions are the psychological states that people need to face every day. Different emotional states bring different stimulation levels to consumers. Based on the Mood evaluation framework , compared with positive emotions (such as happiness), negative emotions (such as sadness) bring low satisfaction to consumers; therefore, consumers experiencing negative emotions increase their satisfaction through variety-seeking behaviors ( Roehm and Roehm, 2004 ; Lin and Lin, 2009 ; Chien-Huang and Hung-Chou, 2010 , 2012 ; Lin et al., 2011 ; Lin, 2014 ). Building on Processing style theory , mortality salience increases variety-seeking behaviors in consumption by influencing an individual’s global processing style ( Huang and Wyer, 2015 ). Variety-seeking behavior in consumption is observed to help cope with and alleviate the negative effects of negative emotions. Optimal stimulus level theory also can help explain this. In an extremely positive mood state, consumers reduce their variety-seeking behaviors because the stimulus provided by variety-seeking behaviors in consumption belongs to the middle level, which is not enough to meet the demand for extreme positive emotions for stimulation ( Roehm and Roehm, 2005 ). However, consumers’ variety-seeking behavior when in a mildly positive mood (moderate degree) is influenced by product characteristics, such as security and pleasantness ( Roehm and Roehm, 2005 ).

Compensatory Consumption

The theory of sense of control is the core element in the compensatory consumption perspective. Compensatory consumption means that consumers engage in certain consumption behaviors to make up for the lack of psychological needs because of the lack of overall self-esteem or self-realization ( Gronmo, 1988 ). The essential feature of compensatory consumption is to make up for psychological defects or threats through consumption behavior, emphasizing consumption behavior as an alternative means and tool—rather than functional value—to meet demand. Compensatory consumption is a kind of pure psychological consumption and self-presentation of psychological imbalance. Therefore, in a variety of scenarios in which psychological defects and threats might occur, variety-seeking in consumption can be used as an alternative means to meet psychological needs and cope with threats. For example, because consumers with low social status and perceived low social mobility tend to have a low sense of personal control, they show more variety-seeking behaviors in consumption to compensate for their psychological defects ( Yoon and Kim, 2018 ). If people in love are “left out,” their sense of control in a romantic relationship is reduced—to restore a sense of control, they seek a variety of choices in consumption ( Huang and Dong, 2019 ).

Environmental Psychology

As mentioned earlier, environmental psychology focuses on the relationship between the environment and individuals’ psychology and behavior. The environment includes the physical and social environments, both of which have an important impact on people’s behavior.

First, spatial perception is a physical environment. According to the Resistance theory , if consumers feel constrained (such as in narrow aisles and among crowded people), they resist the invasion of private space through more various and unique choices, which is equivalent to resisting the constraint ( Levav and Zhu, 2009 ). In addition, according to the spontaneous effect , a diversified display of commodities stimulates consumers’ variety mindset, leading to the emergence of variety-seeking in consumption ( Maimaran and Wheeler, 2008 ). Finally, because of a match between the human binocular vision field and the dominant direction of eye movements (which are both horizontal in direction), it is easier for horizontal (vs. vertical) displays to be processed. This processing fluency allows people to browse information more efficiently, which increases perceived assortment variety and ultimately leads to more variety being chosen ( Deng et al., 2016 ).

Second, social groups and the cultural and political factors in the social environment affect variety-seeking behaviors in consumption from different aspects. The influence of society on consumer behavior is mainly constrained by social norms, which could be generalized by interpersonal and intrapersonal motivation . To maintain consistency with the group (normative constraints) and given the influence of group norms or opinion leaders, people might change their original consumption habits that are inconsistent with the reference group (to promote variety-seeking in consumption) or insist that the original consumption habits are consistent with the group (to prevent variety-seeking in consumption; Ariely and Levav, 2000 ; Ratner and Kahn, 2002 ; Choi et al., 2006 ; Fernandes and Mandel, 2014 ; Etkin, 2016 ; Finkelstein et al., 2019 ). Cross-culture theory explains the individual difference in variety-seeking from the root cultural perspective, and collectivism vs. individualism is the main cultural difference. Members of a collectivist culture tend to consist of group members, and their choices are associated with a less variety-seeking tendency than those of individualistic cultural backgrounds ( Kim and Drolet, 2003 ; Yoon et al., 2011 ).

Evolutionary Psychology

Evolutionary psychology research focuses on the influence of women’s ovulation period and gender differences, and scholars use the carry-over effect to investigate variety-seeking behavior in consumption between men and women. Given the influence of hormonal changes during the physiological cycle and to meet reproduction needs, women may be more sensitive to rewards and seek variety when seeking a spouse; therefore, they seek various and novel choices extend to irrelevant consumption choice tasks ( Faraji-Rad et al., 2013 ; Durante and Arsena, 2015 ; Chen et al., 2016 ). From an evolutionary perspective, Life-history theory demonstrates that people from relatively resource-abundant or relatively resource-scarce childhoods (i.e., childhood SES) often respond differently when faced with an environmental threat ( Griskevicius et al., 2013 ). Variety-seeking may be a risk reduction strategy against uncertainty about future taste preferences in simultaneous choices for future sequential consumptions among people from different degrees of resource childhoods ( Zhao et al., 2021a ; Table 2 ).

Table 2 . Theories and underlying mechanism used in variery-seeking behavior in consumption.

Measurement Method

Presently, variety-seeking behavior in consumption could be measured by the survey and experimental methods. Although the diversified consumption scenarios and variety-seeking measurement methods used by scholars are different in research using the experimental method as the paradigm, they also can be roughly divided into three types: scenario simulation, real choices in experiments, and real shopping behavior data.

Measurement Scale

In the survey method, five-point and seven-point Likert scales are applied to measure participants’ variety-seeking. The items in the scales were adopted from the previous studies. Participants assess how much they would like to purchase or consider new and unfamiliar brands and products. To test the hypothesized relationships, structural equation modeling (SEM) is performed in research. For example, Hung et al. (2011) measured variety-seeking from Kahn et al. (1986) , which used five-point Likert scales (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree). In the research of Fu et al. (2021) , variety seeking was measured by three items from Grünhagen et al. (2012) , with a five-point probability scale ranging from 1 (not probable) to 5 (very probable). A sample item is “I am willing to see different food products and brands.” In the research of Zhao et al. (2021b) , variety seeking was measured with the five-item Variety Seeking Scale ( Helm and Landschulze, 2009 ). A sample item is “Buying the same product or brand is boring, even if the product or brand is good.” Furthermore, Van Trijp et al.’s (1996) seven-point Likert type scale is also used by Ha and Jang (2013a , b) and Liu et al. (2021) . A sample item is “I am very cautious in trying new or different products.”

Scenario Simulation

In the experimental method, researchers usually describe a consumption scenario and ask participants to imagine a choice in this scenario. The two common choices are simultaneous selection (multiple products or services choices at one time) and sequential selection (one product or service at a time, multiple choices in a row). These choice scenarios include food consumption, purchasing behavior, tourism consumption, and so on. Typically, researchers use the number of products or services selected by participants as the variety-seeking index.

Purchasing and selecting products tasks are frequently used as selection scenarios in the research, the majority of which are used for the food selection task. For example, Simonson (1990) asked participants to imagine that they are going to the supermarket, and their shopping list contained eight products, each a different type of good. The author asked the participants to choose one good every day or choose for three days at a time ( Simonson, 1990 ). Many studies followed this research design ( Mukherjee et al., 2017 ; Gullo et al., 2019 ), such as the purchasing socks task (five out of nine; Yoon and Kim, 2018 ), the outing task (potato chips choose three out of four; Chen et al., 2016 ), the teatime reservation task (25 snacks, 20 options; Roehm and Roehm, 2005 ), and the sandwich pre-arranged task (seven out of nine; Goukens et al., 2007 ). The number of brand categories that participants selected is recorded as variety-seeking. In addition, the drinks choosing task is also applied in the research. For example, Goukens et al. (2007) designed a drink-selection scenario, in which participants imagined that they received a gift basket and could choose six drinks among eight flavors. Similarly, volunteer tasks (five out of six; Chen et al., 2016 ) and the tea beverage task (four options) exist ( Shen and Wyer, 2010 ).

Some studies also adopted other forms of selection scenarios. For example, Levav and Zhu (2009) designed the charitable donation task, in which participants can donate their reward for participating in the experiment to one, several, or all six charities. Goukens et al. (2007) designed a holiday scenario, in which participants imagined that they had won a free trip to Sri Lanka, including air tickets, accommodations, and four experience activities. They could choose four out of 16 activities: four beach activities, four outdoor adventures, four sports activities, and four cultural experiences ( Goukens et al., 2007 , 2009 ; Huang and Wyer, 2015 ). Furthermore, other studies considered cross-product categories’ choice tasks, such as food and stationery categories (tea drinks, potato chips, and books; Shen and Wyer, 2010 ; Huang and Wyer, 2015 ), daily necessities categories (lipstick, high heels, yogurt, candy, nail polish, and restaurant; Durante and Arsena, 2015 ), and entertainment activities (drinks, movies, weekend activities; Etkin, 2016 ; Gullo et al., 2019 ). In addition, some studies also used behavior switching to measure the variety-seeking in consumption ( Jiang et al., 2014 ). For example, Yang and Urminsky (2015) used magazines, music, and movies as experimental materials and measured their preference conversion through participants’ choices before and after.

Real Choice in the Experiment

This measurement method requires participants to make real choices during the experiment, but participants were not aware that their choices were influenced and recorded. This measurement method makes the variety-seeking behavior appear in a more realistic scenario, reflecting people’s relatively real, and potential choices and increasing the validity of the research results. Researchers usually let participants choose by selecting experimental rewards or compensation.

In the real selection task, many studies use candies or chocolate as the selection stimuli that are finally selected as rewards or compensation for participation considering the convenience of the experiment and the sample. For example, Simonson (1990) rewarded participants with snacks and asked them to choose between sweet and salty snacks (three total groups). Similarly, five rewards were available for choosing among nine snacks ( Choi et al., 2006 ; Durante and Arsena, 2015 ), up to five desserts, candies, or yogurts ( Yoon and Kim, 2018 ; Huang et al., 2019 ), the candy list selection task ( Ratner and Kahn, 2002 ; Roehm and Roehm, 2004 ), choosing three out of six types of candies ( Levav and Zhu, 2009 ), rewarding three of four lollipop flavors ( Chen et al., 2016 ), and the chocolate selection design for three out of four choices and six choices ( Maimaran and Wheeler, 2008 ; Yoon and Kim, 2018 ). In addition, Deng et al. (2016) fabricated a research purpose as investigating the influence of virtual store lighting on shopping patterns and gave each participant two dollars to buy the displayed candies.

In addition to snack choice tasks, researchers also asked participants to choose stationery frequently used by college student samples. For example, Levav and Zhu (2009) asked participants to choose three out of six color highlighters as rewards in Experiment 4, which was also applied in Gullo et al. (2019) . Another distinct and interesting selection task was the flower arrangement task designed by Mittelman et al. (2014) , who provided participants with differently colored roses that needed to be put in vases, and used the number of selected colors as a variety-seeking measure.

Real Purchase Behavior Data

In recent years, researchers began to call for the study of consumer behavior in the real environment. Scholars used purchasing data generated by consumers to measure the variety-seeking in consumption and analyzed variety-seeking using data obtained from various methods. Among them, consumer panel data from Nielsen and retail stores are often used by researchers ( Inman, 2001 ; Levav and Zhu, 2009 ; Yoon et al., 2011 ; Gullo et al., 2019 ); in such research, researchers typically used the ratio of the number of categories purchased to the total number of categories as a variety-seeking measure. In addition, some researchers conducted field studies among cities ( Koschate-Fischer et al., 2018 ), field experiments ( Yoon et al., 2011 ; Deng et al., 2016 ), or natural experiments ( Huang et al., 2019 ) to obtain real behavior data. Kahn et al. (1986) provided an analytical framework for how to use panel data to define and measure variety-seeking and offered seven simple and verifiable models commonly used in the marketing domain.

Universal Product Codes (UPCs) are useful and helpful when adopted to calculate consumers’ variety-seeking behaviors. Inman (2001) used UPCs to construct two indexes to measure consumers’ observed switching (the observable flavor or brand switching percentage) and expected switching (which is calculated based on Zero Order; Grover and Srinivasan, 1987 ). The switching index is then calculated as: Relative Switching Intensity = (Observed – Expected) Flavor –(Observed – Expected) Brand .

Levav and Zhu (2009) used purchasing data in Study 5 to compute a variety-seeking index that captured the extent of variation in a transaction. This was computed for each customer by dividing the number of unique UPCs purchased in a category by the category’s total purchases. The authors used its log odds to conduct an OLS regression using this variety index, with log (variety/(1- variety)), as the dependent variable. Gullo et al. (2019) followed Levav and Zhu (2009) , using scanner panel data from a major grocery chain’s single California location. They defined variety as the number of unique UPCs purchased in a category relative to the number of total items purchased. Similarly, Huang et al. (2019) used the Chicago Nielsen consumer panel data set and the number of UPCs per trip to measure variety-seeking.

In addition, Koschate-Fischer et al. (2018) combined two datasets, an individual-level consumer panel and a survey, collected over 3 years. They used the change in SOW and SOU to compute variety-seeking. SOW is the share of wallet, defined as the percentage of money a customer allocates to the preferred brand in a category (our unit of analysis). SOU is the share of units, defined as the percentage of units purchased for the preferred brand in a particular category, controlling for price level effects ( Table 3 ).

Table 3 . Summary of measurements of variety-seeking behavior in consumption in literature.

Implications and Future Research Directions

Based on the proposed research framework of variety-seeking behaviors in consumption, this section discusses the implications of the aforementioned findings and identifies opportunities for future research in variety-seeking.

Implications of the Findings

This literature review shows that numerous researchers have studied the relationships between various internal and external factors and variety-seeking behaviors from distinct theoretical perspectives by using various measurement methods. All these attributes are delineated in the proposed framework of variety-seeking behaviors in consumption (see Figure 2 ).

Figure 2 . Research framework of variety-seeking behavior in consumption. Based on the previous research on variety-seeking behavior in consumption.

Concerning internal factors, gender and age in the category of individual demographics are the two most adopted aspects. Researchers have attempted to discover the different effects of variety-seeking between males and females and between younger and older people. Power, indecisiveness, and novice have attracted considerable research attention for personality characteristics. Some researchers also study the effects of various emotions, such as positive moods, sadness and happiness, local optimism and pessimism, and winning-losing perception. In addition, some notable and interesting physiological states, such as hunger and sleepiness, are discussed in variety-seeking behaviors in consumption. In the category of sensory clues, researchers have focused on investigating the effect of vision (e.g., novel visual stimulus, the display way of products, a superficial feature) and taste (e.g., flavor and spicy). A few papers examine how consumers’ mindset affects variety-seeking behaviors.

Regarding external factors, social relationships and social culture are widely used to investigate the effect of the macro social environment on variety-seeking, as variety-seeking behaviors could meet some social motivations. Space and temporal factors from the external environment can also influence variety-seeking in consumption. Moreover, some researchers are concerned with marketing strategies in variety-seeking, including product packaging, product category, attribute type, and the displays and assortments of products.

Among the theoretical perspectives and underlying mechanisms, optimal stimulus level theory is the most fundamental and widely applied theory to explain consumers’ variety-seeking behaviors when facing external stimuli. Personality characteristics perspective is applied in much research. How these traits affect variety-seeking depends on core characteristics of individual difference, which is mostly related to “changing” or “uniqueness.” Emotional coping is another common perspective used by researchers, and it has been explored from the board mood (e.g., positive mood) to the specific mood (e.g., happiness, sadness, mortality salience). Some researchers found that variety-seeking can meet the lack of psychological needs: the compensatory consumption perspective. In recent years, researchers have drawn on environmental psychology and evolutionary psychology theories to examine how environmental factors and gender differences affect consumers’ variety-seeking behaviors, which provides novel insights into the literature.

The four main measurement methods used by researchers include measurement scale, scenario simulation, real choices in experiments, and real shopping behavior data. The measurement scale is adopted from previous studies. Scenario simulation is applied primarily to the experiment method, and the number of consumers’ various choices is used as the variety-seeking index. Researchers also adopt real choices in experiments and real shopping behavior data from real retailers to investigate consumers’ variety-seeking behaviors, reflecting their actual choices and behaviors.

Future Research Directions

This paper reviews and combs through the related research on variety-seeking behavior in consumption. The current framework summarizes internal and external influencing factors, theoretical perspective, and underlying mechanisms and measurement methods of variety-seeking behavior in consumption, which has theoretical value for further insights into the literature. Despite the ongoing progress, future research can focus on the following aspects.

First, additional research is needed to widely and deeply explore the external factors influencing consumption variety-seeking behavior. The proposed research framework shows that most past research concentrated on internal factors; thus, future research should extend to external environmental factors. Regarding the social environment, other factors, such as economic inequality ( Goya-Tocchetto and Payne, 2022 ) and perceived social mobility ( Wang et al., 2022 ), are also rooted in people’s lives and determine their thinking styles and behaviors; therefore, it should be determined how these societal factors drive the variety-seeking behavior in consumption. Regarding the physical environment, the space environment has many presentation modes. Excepting narrow space, individuals may also experience a chaotic physical environment ( Vohs et al., 2013 ), encouraging them to break the tradition and change consumers’ preferences, choices, and behaviors. Future research could explore whether physical order in the external consumption environment influences variety-seeking behaviors. In terms of marketing strategy, the influence of salespersons has been little concerned. Many characteristics of salespersons affect consumers’ emotional or irrational decision-making and purchase intentions, such as appearance attractiveness ( Li et al., 2021 ) and tone and voice ( Liu et al., 2021 ). Future research could investigate variety-seeking behavior in consumption from the aspect of salespersons.

Second, future research could investigate variety-seeking behavior in consumption with specific situations, such as catastrophes and significant public health affairs. In these specific situations, variety-seeking behavior in consumption also shows particular functions. For example, consumers’ psychology and behavior have changed during the COVID-19 pandemic. Given that this period differs from previous times, the factors affecting consumers’ variety-seeking behavior should be determined, along with the psychological process and underlying mechanisms. From the perspective of compensatory consumption theory, it is also worth considering whether the health, economic, social, informational, and environmental threats caused by the epidemic can influence variety-seeking behavior in consumption ( Campbell et al., 2020 ). These threats may decrease consumers’ perceived personal control ( Burger et al., 2011 ) and ontological security ( Banham, 2020 ). As an “adaptive” response, the variety-seeking behavior may help consumers largely cope with sudden threats ( Min and Schwarz, 2021 ). Future research should further explore this question.

Third, future research could explore variety-seeking behaviors in diversified consumption contexts. Current studies primarily examined purchasing or shopping for daily essentials ( Choi et al., 2006 ; Shen and Wyer, 2010 ; Durante and Arsena, 2015 ; Gullo et al., 2019 ). Some scholars also tried to extend research scenarios to other consumption contexts, such as dining in restaurants ( Huang and Kwong, 2016 ) and charitable donations ( Levav and Zhu, 2009 ). Future researchers could investigate more variety-seeking behaviors in other common consumption behaviors in daily life, which lack attention. In addition, people could also have consumption behaviors in other situations, such as online shopping, purchasing service in massage shops, traveling across cities or countries, sporting goods purchases, or medical inquiries in the online community. The factors influencing consumers’ variety-seeking behaviors in such different situations have not been discussed in detail or sufficiently. This research gap provides an opportunity for scholars to introduce variety-seeking into the domains of e-marketing, service marketing, cause-related marketing, the online health community, and others. It is an essential step to enrich the current findings and provide novel research perspectives for other research fields.

Fourth, future research could explore variety-seeking behavior in the digital consumption world, which the current field has not fully discussed. As a digital platform to promote information sharing and user-created content, social media has innovated the way people connect, communicate, and develop relationships. The unique characteristics of social media may challenge the existing theories and frameworks explaining cognition, emotion, and behaviors ( McFarland and Ployhart, 2015 ), meaning that future research on variety-seeking behavior should also consider the impact of the new media environment ( Woolley and Sharif, 2022 ). For example, because people have anonymous perceptions, their communication on social media could avoid the negative influence of face-to-face connections. Future research can determine if social pressure from traditional communication still has the same effect on variety-seeking behaviors. Since social media provides more opportunities to share information across an extensive range of people, future studies can examine whether this broad mindset triggers variety-seeking behaviors. Furthermore, social media is an essential platform for companies to deliver brand information to target consumers, and future research could investigate the impact of brand display style in social media on variety-seeking behaviors in consumption.

Fifth, with the development and application of emerging technology in marketing (such as artificial intelligence, virtual reality, and augmented reality), future research could focus more on the relationship between these high-end technologies and variety-seeking behaviors. For instance, service robots may bring novelty experiences to consumers. Service robots in the consumption context may influence variety-seeking behaviors because the satisfaction of novelty and curiosity is a significant internal motivation for individuals seeking variety ( McAlister, 1982 ). Service robots could bring novelty and curiosity or result in fear and rejection if anthropomorphic forms are overused ( Mende et al., 2019 ). Consumers could adopt self-defense and protection mechanisms out of vigilance against fear and threats. Affected by a sense of identity threat, consumers may seek additional choices among similar commodities to avoid risks and make compensatory consumption ( White et al., 2013 ). Meißner et al. (2020) explored how virtual reality affects consumer choice and found that consumers show more variety-seeking in high-immersive than low-immersive virtual reality. Future research could investigate the underlying mechanism of the effect of virtual reality on variety-seeking behaviors and how augmented reality could affect such behaviors ( Rauschnabel et al., 2019 ).

Sixth, future research could consider solving inconsistencies in the existing literature, such as the effect of personal arousal level. Roehm and Roehm (2004) showed that people seek more variety at low arousal than high arousal moments. In contrast, Gullo et al. (2019) pointed out that individuals’ variety-seeking is lower in the early morning due to the lower arousal and stimulations. Another inconsistency is the effect of lack of personal control. Chang et al. (2021) found that failure weakens consumers’ perception of control, and consumers who have failed in a competition or not achieved a goal tend to seek less variety in subsequent consumption; however, according to compensatory consumption, prior research illustrated that variety-seeking as a compensatory strategy could restore the lack of personal control ( Yoon and Kim, 2018 ; Huang et al., 2019 ). Thus, researchers could investigate the deeper mechanism and boundary conditions of these incongruent findings.

Last, future research requires more diversified research designs and data collections. Most studies measured variety-seeking behavior in consumption in the laboratory environment or adopted simulated or physical selections to explore consumers’ more real choice behavior. Furthermore, some scholars used actual shopping panel data to explore variety-seeking behavior in consumption at different times ( Levav and Zhu, 2009 ; Yoon et al., 2011 ; Gullo et al., 2019 ); however, the current research on measuring variety-seeking behavior in consumption in the real environment is still insufficient. Researchers can increase their use of field experiments in future studies and explore more diverse and abundant physiological and behavioral data in real sales scenes to measure variety-seeking behavior in consumption. Additionally, more eye-tracking and neuromarketing EEG technologies also could be applied to obtain more accurate physiological data.

Variety-seeking, as a common choice strategy for consumers, benefits market segmentation, promotion performance, and consumers’ welfare, which has led directly to the increase in academic research and studies in recent years ( Koschate-Fischer et al., 2018 ; Gullo et al., 2019 ; Huang et al., 2019 ; Huang and Dong, 2019 ; Sela et al., 2019 ; Chang et al., 2021 ). The current article provides an intensive review of 61 identified papers in the marketing literature to understand how prior scholars explore the influencing factors of variety-seeking, investigate the underlying mechanism from distinct perspectives, and measure variety-seeking behaviors by various methods. These three parts are incorporated into a proposed research framework.

The influencing factors that researchers have adopted are classified into two categories: internal and external factors. Notably, internal factors have been widely discussed from five aspects: individual demographic, personality characteristics, emotion and physical state, sensory clues, and mindset. External factors involve three aspects at the present stage: social environment, physical environment, and marketing strategy, which are needed to extend. Thus, previous research is bound to various theoretical perspectives due to different influencing factors. Optimal stimulus level theory is a fundamental theory that has been widely applied in many studies to explain variety-seeking behavior. Other theoretical perspectives are also adopted to interpret variety-seeking behaviors in consumption, including personality traits, emotional coping, compensatory consumption, environmental psychology, and evolutionary psychology. These perspectives extend research fields of variety-seeking. Given measurement methods, survey scales are used to measure people’s intentions of variety-seeking, and scenario simulation is the most used approach to measure consumers’ variety-seeking in the experiment. Meanwhile, to observe variety-seeking behavior more objectively, researchers record participants’ real behaviors in experiments and analysis individuals’ real purchase behavior data from retailers.

Conversely, other important areas, such as digital consumption, emerging technology, and physiological measurement technology, have not received sufficient research attention, as well as other influencing factors and consumption contexts. Accordingly, this study identified several research gaps and proposed seven potential research directions for these areas. In addition, there are inconsistent findings in the existing literature. Future research could address these inconsistencies and provide explanations.

Overall, the contribution of this study is significant. Qualitatively, this paper conducted an intensive review of identified articles to reveal the influencing factors, theoretical perspectives, and measure methods of variety-seeking behavior in consumption and key findings, which can be used as an immediate reference for other researchers in this area. Quantitatively, this paper devised one research framework to incorporate the influencing factors, theoretical perspectives and underlying mechanisms, and measurement methods used in the 61 empirical studies, which provides a pictorial summary and enables readers to understand the body of research conducted on variety-seeking behavior in consumption. Further, this paper suggested seven future research directions, which may help researchers identify related topics in this subject area. The results of this study also have practical implications for the real world. Marketing managers could make segmentation based on internal factors, such as individual demographic and personality characteristics. Other internal factors, including emotion and physical state, sensory clues, and mindset, as well as external factors, could be manipulated in marketing activities, help to shape consumers’ variety-seeking behaviors and benefit promotion performance.

While this research has its merits, certain limitations remain. First, the review of the extant literature may not be exhaustive. More works are required to include relevant papers from different sources. Second, variety-seeking behavior in consumption is still in its concerning stage. Thus, additional journal papers with empirical results will continue to surface. More recently published variety-seeking research should be considered in future studies. Finally, in terms of article types, this paper focused on empirical studies, other conceptual or qualitative research is required.

Author Contributions

The author confirms being the sole contributor of this work and has approved it for publication.

Funding was provided by Huaqiao University’s Academic Project Supported by the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (21SKGC-QG05).

Conflict of Interest

The author declares that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher’s Note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Adomavicius, G., Bockstedt, J., and Curley, S. P. (2015). Bundling effects on variety seeking for digital information goods. J. Manage. Inform. Syst. 31, 182–212. doi: 10.1080/07421222.2014.1001266

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Ariely, D., and Levav, J. (2000). Sequential choice in group settings: taking the road less traveled and less enjoyed. J. Consum. Res. 27, 279–290. doi: 10.1086/317585

Baltas, G., Kokkinaki, F., and Loukopoulou, A. (2017). Does variety seeking vary between hedonic and utilitarian products? The role of attribute type. J Consumer Behav. 16, e1–e12. doi: 10.1002/cb.1649

Banham, R. (2020). Emotion, vulnerability, ontology: Operationalising ‘ontological security’ for qualitative environmental sociology. Environ. Sociol. 6, 132–142. doi: 10.1080/23251042.2020.1717098

Burger, J. M., Brown, R., and Allen, C. K. (2011). Negative reactions to personal control. J. Soc. Clin. Psychol. 1, 322–342. doi: 10.1521/jscp.1983.1.4.322

Campbell, M. C., Jeffrey, I. J., Amna, K., and Price, L. L. (2020). In times of trouble: a framework for understanding consumers’ responses to threats. J. Consum. Res. 47, 311–326. doi: 10.1093/jcr/ucaa036

Chan, Y. Y. Y., and Ngai, E. W. T. (2011). Conceptualising electronic word of mouth activity: An input-process-output perspective. Mark. Intell. Plan. 29, 488–516. doi: 10.1108/02634501111153692

Chang, E. C., Wen, B., and Tang, X. (2021). The effect of winning-losing perception on consumers’ variety-seeking behavior. Europ. J. Mark. 55, 1624–1642. doi: 10.1108/EJM-07-2019-0565

Chen, R., Zheng, Y., and Zhang, Y. (2016). Fickle men, faithful women: effects of mating cues on men’s and women’s variety-seeking behavior in consumption. J. Consum. Psychol. 26, 275–282. doi: 10.1016/j.jcps.2015.07.002

Chien-Huang, L., and Hung-Chou, L. (2010). How health information affects college students’ inclination toward variety-seeking tendency. Scand. J. Psychol. 51, 503–508. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9450.2010.00815.x

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Chien-Huang, L., and Hung-Chou, L. (2012). Effects of mood states on variety seeking: the moderating roles of personality. Psychol. Mark. 29, 157–166. doi: 10.1002/mar.20512

Choi, S. C. (1991). Price competition in a channel structure with a common retailer. Mark. Sci. 10, 271–296. doi: 10.1287/mksc.10.4.271

Choi, J., Kim, B. K., Choi, I., and Yi, Y. (2006). Variety-seeking tendency in choice for others: interpersonal and intrapersonal causes. J. Consum. Res. 32, 590–595. doi: 10.1086/500490

Chuang, S. C., Cheng, Y. H., Wang, S. M., and Cheng, S. Y. (2013). The impact of the opinions of others on variety-seeking behavior. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 43, 917–927. doi: 10.1111/jasp.12054

Chuang, S. C., Kung, C. Y., and Sun, Y. C. (2008). The effects of emotions on variety-seeking behavior. Soc. Behav. Pers. 36, 425–432. doi: 10.2224/sbp.2008.36.3.425

Deng, X., Kahn, B. E., Unnava, H. R., and Hyojin, L. E. E. (2016). A “wide” variety: effects of horizontal versus vertical display on assortment processing, perceived variety, and choice. J. Mark. Res. 53, 682–698. doi: 10.1509/jmr.13.0151

Drolet, A., and He, D. (2010). “Variety-seeking,” in Consumer Behavior . eds. R. P. Bagozzi and A. Ruvio (New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons)

Google Scholar

Durante, K. M., and Arsena, A. R. (2015). Playing the field: The effect of fertility on women’s desire for variety. J. Consum. Res. 41, 1372–1391. doi: 10.1086/679652

Etkin, J. (2016). Choosing variety for joint consumption. J. Mark. Res. 53, 1019–1033. doi: 10.1509/jmr.14.0209

Faraji-Rad, A., Moeini-Jazani, M., and Warlop, L. (2013). Women seek more variety in rewards when closer to ovulation. J. Consum. Psychol. 23, 503–508. doi: 10.1016/j.jcps.2013.05.001

Fernandes, D., and Mandel, N. (2014). Political conservatism and variety-seeking. J. Consum. Psychol. 24, 79–86. doi: 10.1016/j.jcps.2013.05.003

Finkelstein, S. R., Xu, X., and Connell, P. M. (2019). When variety is not the spice of life: The influence of perceived relational self-threat on variety seeking in snack choices. Appetite 136, 154–159. doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2019.02.001

Fishbach, A., Ratner, R. K., and Zhang, Y. (2011). Inherently loyal or easily bored? Nonconscious activation of consistency versus variety-seeking behavior. J. Consum. Psychol. 21, 38–48. doi: 10.1016/j.jcps.2010.09.006

Fu, X., Lin, B., and Wang, Y. C. (2021). Healthy food exposition attendees’ purchasing strategies: a mental budgeting perspective. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 33, 2352–2370. doi: 10.1108/IJCHM-07-2020-0774

Goukens, C., Dewitte, S., Pandelaere, M., and Warlop, L. U. K. (2007). Wanting a bit(e) of everything: extending the valuation effect to variety seeking. J. Consum. Res. 34, 386–394. doi: 10.1086/518542

Goukens, C., Dewitte, S., and Warlop, L. (2009). Me, myself, and my choices: The influence of private self-awareness on choice. J. Mark. Res. 46, 682–692. doi: 10.1509/jmkr.46.5.682

Goya-Tocchetto, D., and Payne, B. K. (2022). How economic inequality shapes thought and action. J. Consum. Psychol. 32, 146–161. doi: 10.1002/jcpy.1277

Griskevicius, V., Ackerman, J. A., Cantu, S. M., Delton, A. W., Robertson, T. E., Simpson, J. A., et al. (2013). When the economy falters, do people spend or save? Responses to resource scarcity depend on childhood environments. Psychol. Sci. 24, 197–205. doi: 10.1177/0956797612451471

Gronmo, S. (1988). “Compensatory consumer behavior: elements of a critical sociology of consumption,” in The Sociology of Consumption . ed. I. P. Otnes (New York: Humanities Press)

Grover, R., and Srinivasan, V. (1987). A Simultaneous approach to market segmentation and market structuring. J. Mark. Res. 24, 139–153. doi: 10.2307/3151504

Grünhagen, M., Dant, R. P., and Zhu, M. (2012). Emerging consumer perspectives on American franchise offerings: variety seeking behavior in China. J. Small Bus. Manag. 50, 596–620. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-627X.2012.00368.x

Gullo, K., Berger, J., Etkin, J., and Bollinger, B. (2019). Does time of day affect variety-seeking? J. Consum. Res. 46, 20–35. doi: 10.1093/jcr/ucy061

Ha, J., and Jang, S. S. (2013a). Determinants of diners’ variety seeking intentions. J. Serv. Mark. 27, 155–165. doi: 10.1108/08876041311309289

Ha, J., and Jang, S. S. (2013b). Variety seeking in restaurant choice and its drivers. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 32, 155–168. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhm.2012.05.007

Helm, R., and Landschulze, S. (2009). Optimal stimulation level theory, exploratory consumer behaviour and product adoption: an analysis of underlying structures across product categories. Rev. Manag. Sci. 3, 41–73. doi: 10.1007/s11846-009-0024-7

Herrmann, A., and Heitmann, M. (2006). Providing more or providing less? Int. Mark. Rev. 23, 7–24. doi: 10.1108/02651330610646278

Huang, X., and Dong, P. (2019). Romantic crushes promote variety-seeking behavior. J. Consum. Psychol. 29, 226–242. doi: 10.1002/jcpy.1070

Huang, Z., and Kwong, J. Y. (2016). Illusion of variety: lower readability enhances perceived variety. Int. J. Res. Mark. 33, 674–687. doi: 10.1016/j.ijresmar.2015.11.006

Huang, Z., Liang, Y., Weinberg, C. B., and Gorn, G. J. (2019). The sleepy consumer and variety seeking. J. Mark. Res. 56, 179–196. doi: 10.1177/0022243718811334

Huang, Z., and Wyer, R. S. (2015). Diverging effects of mortality salience on variety seeking: The different roles of death anxiety and semantic concept activation. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 58, 112–123. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2015.01.008

Hung, K., Li, S. Y., and Tse, D. K. (2011). Interpersonal trust and platform credibility in a Chinese multibrand online community. J. Advert. 40, 99–112. doi: 10.2753/JOA0091-3367400308

Inman, J. J. (2001). The role of sensory-specific satiety in attribute-level variety seeking. J. Consum. Res. 28, 105–120. doi: 10.1086/321950

Jeong, H. G., Christensen, K., and Drolet, A. (2016). The short-lived benefits of variety seeking among the chronically indecisive. J. Exp. Psychol. Appl. 22, 423–435. doi: 10.1037/xap0000098

Jeong, H., and Drolet, A. (2016). Variety-seeking as an emotional coping strategy for chronically indecisive consumers. Mark. Lett. 27, 55–62. doi: 10.1007/s11002-014-9300-7

Jiang, Y., Zhan, L., and Rucker, D. D. (2014). Power and action orientation: power as a catalyst for consumer switching behavior. J. Consum. Res. 41, 183–196. doi: 10.1086/675723

Kahn, B. E., and Isen, A. M. (1993). The influence of positive affect on variety seeking among safe, enjoyable products. J. Consum. Res. 20, 257–270. doi: 10.1086/209347

Kahn, B. E. (1995). Consumer variety-seeking among goods and services: An integrative review. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2, 139–148. doi: 10.1016/0969-6989(95)00038-0

Kahn, B. E., Kalwani, M. U., and Morrison, D. G. (1986). Measuring variety-seeking and reinforcement behaviors using panel data. J. Mark. Res. 23, 89–100. doi: 10.2307/3151656

Kahn, B. E., and Louie, T. A. (1990). Effects of retraction of price promotions on brand choice behavior for variety-seeking and last-purchase-loyal consumers. J. Mark. Res. 27, 279–289. doi: 10.2307/3172586

Kim, H. S., and Drolet, A. (2003). Choice and self-expression: A cultural analysis of variety-seeking. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 85, 373–382. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.85.2.373

Kim, J., Kim, P. B., and Kim, J. E. (2018). Different or similar choices: The effect of decision framing on variety seeking in travel bundle packages. J. Travel Res. 57, 99–115. doi: 10.1177/0047287516684977

Kim, H. J., and Yoon, S. O. (2016). The effect of category label specificity on consumer choice. Mark. Lett. 27, 765–777. doi: 10.1007/s11002-015-9379-5

Koschate-Fischer, N., Hoyer, W. D., Stokburger-Sauer, N. E., and Engling, J. (2018). Do life events always lead to change in purchase? The mediating role of change in consumer innovativeness, the variety seeking tendency, and price consciousness. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 46, 516–536. doi: 10.1007/s11747-017-0548-3

Lee, S. H. M., and Sergueeva, K. (2017). Chewing increases consumers’ thought-engagement during retail shopping. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 35, 127–132. doi: 10.1016/j.jretconser.2016.12.010

Levav, J., and Zhu, R. (2009). Seeking freedom through variety. J. Consum. Res. 36, 600–610. doi: 10.1086/599556

Li, Y., Liu, B., Chen, P., and Huan, T.-C. (2021). Tourism service providers’ physical attractiveness and customers’ service quality evaluation: is warmth or competence more important? Tour. Rev. 76, 1260–1278. doi: 10.1108/TR-05-2020-0241

Li, J., and Sun, L. (2021). Mindset predicts consumer variety seeking through learning goal orientation: The role of susceptibility to interpersonal influence. Soc. Behav. Pers. 49:e10126, 1–11. doi: 10.2224/sbp.10126

Lin, H. C. (2014). The effects of food product types and affective states on consumers’ decision making. Br. Food J. 116, 1550–1560. doi: 10.1108/BFJ-11-2012-0273

Lin, H. C., Kuo, S. H., and Lin, C. H. (2017). Making decisions for other people: The moderating roles of risky information, health claims and product involvement. Curr. Psychol. 36, 530–539. doi: 10.1007/s12144-016-9440-4

Lin, C. H., and Lin, H. C. (2009). The effect of mood states on variety-seeking behavior: The moderating role of price promotion. Soc. Behav. Pers. 37, 1307–1311. doi: 10.2224/sbp.2009.37.10.1307

Lin, C. H., Lin, H. C., and Lee, S. H. (2011). The influence of health-related information on variety-seeking behavior: The moderating roles of mood states and gender. Br. Food J. 113, 1379–1392. doi: 10.1108/00070701111179997

Liu, T., Wang, W., Xu, J., Ding, D., and Deng, H. (2021). Interactive effects of advising strength and brand familiarity on users’ trust and distrust in online recommendation agents. Inf. Technol. People 34, 1920–1948. doi: 10.1108/ITP-08-2019-0448

Maimaran, M., and Wheeler, S. C. (2008). Circles, squares, and choice: the effect of shape arrays on uniqueness and variety seeking. J. Mark. Res. 45, 731–740. doi: 10.1509/jmkr.45.6.731

McAlister, L. (1982). A dynamic attribute satiation model of variety-seeking behavior. J. Consum. Res. 9, 141–150. doi: 10.1086/208907

McAlister, L., and Pessemier, E. (1982). Variety seeking behavior: an interdisciplinary review. J. Consum. Res. 9, 311–322. doi: 10.1086/208926

McFarland, L. A., and Ployhart, R. E. (2015). Social media: a contextual framework to guide research and practice. J. Appl. Psychol. 100, 1653–1677. doi: 10.1037/a0039244

Meißner, M., Pfeiffer, J., Peukert, C., Dietrich, H., and Pfeiffer, T. (2020). How virtual reality affects consumer choice. J. Bus. Res. 117, 219–231. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.06.004

Mende, M., Scott, M. L., Van Doorn, J., Grewal, D., and Shanks, I. (2019). Service robots rising: how humanoid robots influence service experiences and elicit compensatory consumer responses. J. Mark. Res. 56, 535–556. doi: 10.1177/002224371882282

Menon, S., and Kahn, B. E. (1995). The impact of context on variety seeking in product choices. J. Consum. Res. 22, 285–295. doi: 10.1086/209450

Min, B., and Schwarz, N. (2021). Novelty as opportunity and risk: a situated cognition analysis of psychological control and novelty seeking. J. Consum. Psychol. forthcomming. doi: 10.1002/jcpy.1264

Mittelman, M., Andrade, E. B., Chattopadhyay, A., and Brendl, C. M. (2014). The offer framing effect: choosing single versus bundled offerings affects variety seeking. J. Consum. Res. 41, 953–964. doi: 10.1086/678193

Mohan, G., Sivakumaran, B., and Sharma, P. (2012). Store environment’s impact on variety seeking behavior. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 19, 419–428. doi: 10.1016/j.jretconser.2012.04.003

Mukherjee, S., Kramer, T., and Kulow, K. (2017). The effect of spicy gustatory sensations on variety-seeking. Psychol. Mark. 34, 786–794. doi: 10.1002/mar.21022

Ngai, E. W., Tao, S. S., and Moon, K. K. (2015). Social media research: theories, constructs, and conceptual frameworks. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 35, 33–44. doi: 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2014.09.004

Novak, D. L., and Mather, M. (2007). Aging and variety seeking. Psychol. Aging 22, 728–737. doi: 10.1037/0882-7974.22.4.728

Ratner, R. K., and Kahn, B. E. (2002). The impact of private versus public consumption on variety-seeking behavior. J. Consum. Res. 29, 246–257. doi: 10.1086/341574

Ratner, R. K., Kahn, B. E., and Kahneman, D. (1999). Choosing less-preferred experiences for the sake of variety. J. Consum. Res. 26, 1–15. doi: 10.1086/209547

Rauschnabel, P. A., Felix, R., and Hinsch, C. (2019). Augmented reality marketing: how mobile AR-apps can improve brands through inspiration. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 49, 43–53. doi: 10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.03.004

Roehm, H. A. Jr., and Roehm, M. L. (2004). Variety-seeking and time of day: why leader brands hope young adults shop in the afternoon, but follower brands hope for morning. Mark. Lett. 15, 213–221. doi: 10.1007/s11002-005-0457-y

Roehm, H. A. Jr., and Roehm, M. L. (2005). Revisiting the effect of positive mood on variety seeking. J. Consum. Res. 32, 330–336. doi: 10.1086/432242

Roehm, M. L., and Roehm, H. A. Jr. (2012). The relationship between packaging uniformity and variety seeking. Psychol. Mark. 27, 1122–1133. doi: 10.1002/mar.20376

Seetharaman, P. B., and Che, H. (2009). Price competition in markets with consumer variety seeking. Mark. Sci. 28, 516–525. doi: 10.1287/mksc.1080.0434

Sela, A., Hadar, L., Morgan, S., and Maimaran, M. (2019). Variety-seeking and perceived expertise. J. Consum. Psychol. 29, 671–679. doi: 10.1002/jcpy.1110

Sevilla, J., Lu, J., Kahn, B. E., and John, D. R. (2019). Variety seeking, satiation, and maximizing enjoyment over time. J. Consum. Psychol. 29, 89–103. doi: 10.1002/jcpy.1068

Sevilla, J., Zhang, J., and Kahn, B. E. (2016). Anticipation of future variety reduces satiation from current experiences. J. Mark. Res. 53, 954–968. doi: 10.1509/jmr.14.0360

Shaddy, F., Fishbach, A., and Simonson, I. (2021). Trade-offs in choice. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 72, 181–206. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-072420-125709

Shen, H., and Wyer, R. S. (2010). The effect of past behavior on variety seeking: automatic and deliberative influences. J. Consum. Psychol. 20, 33–42. doi: 10.1016/j.jcps.2009.07.002

Simonson, I. (1990). The effect of purchase quantity and timing on variety-seeking behavior. J. Mark. Res. 27, 150–162. doi: 10.2307/3172842

Simonson, I., and Winer, R. S. (1992). The influence of purchase quantity and display format on consumer preference for variety. J. Consum. Res. 19, 133–138. doi: 10.1086/209292

Trivedi, M. (1999). Using variety-seeking-based segmentation to study promotional response. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 27, 37–49. doi: 10.1177/0092070399271003

Van Trijp, H. C. M., Hoyer, W. D., and Inman, J. J. (1996). Why switch? Product categorylevel explanations for true variety seeking. J. Mark. Res. 33, 281–292. doi: 10.2307/3152125

Vohs, K. D., Redden, J. P., and Rahinel, R. (2013). Physical order produces healthy choices, generosity, and conventionality, whereas disorder produces creativity. Psychol. Sci. 24, 1860–1867. doi: 10.1177/0956797613480186

Wang, X., Chen, W. F., Hong, Y. Y., and Chen, Z. (2022). Perceiving high social mobility breeds materialism: The mediating role of socioeconomic status uncertainty. J. Bus. Res. 139, 629–638. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.10.014

White, A. E., Kenrick, D. T., and Neuberg, S. L. (2013). Beauty at the ballot box: disease threats predict preferences for physically attractive leaders. Psychol. Sci. 24, 2429–2436. doi: 10.1177/0956797613493642

Woolley, K., and Sharif, M. A. (2022). Down a rabbit hole: how prior media consumption shapes subsequent media consumption. J. Mark. Res. forthcomming. 59, 453–471. doi: 10.1177/00222437211055403

Wu, P. H., and Kao, D. T. (2011). Goal orientation and variety seeking behavior: The role of decision task. J. Econ. Psychol. 32, 65–72. doi: 10.1016/j.joep.2010.11.005

Yang, A. X., and Urminsky, O. (2015). The foresight effect: local optimism motivates consistency and local pessimism motivates variety. J. Consum. Res. 42, 361–377. doi: 10.1093/jcr/ucv039

Yoon, S., and Kim, H. C. (2018). Feeling economically stuck: The effect of perceived economic mobility and socioeconomic status on variety seeking. J. Consum. Res. 44, 1141–1156. doi: 10.1093/jcr/

Yoon, S. O., Suk, K., Lee, S. M., and Park, E. Y. (2011). To seek variety or uniformity: the role of culture in consumers’ choice in a group setting. Mark. Lett. 22, 49–64. doi: 10.1007/s11002-010-9102-5ucx091

Zhang, Y., and Guo, Z. (2019). Loyal past, fickle future: The effects of temporal thinking on consumers’ variety-seeking behaviors. Soc. Behav. Pers. 47, 1–15. doi: 10.2224/sbp.7975

Zhao, J., Childers, C., Sang, H., Cheng, J., and Vigo, R. (2021a). The effect of anger on variety seeking for consumers of differing socio-economic backgrounds. Curr. Psychol. 40, 5278–5285. doi: 10.1007/s12144-019-00476-7

Zhao, J., Li, Z., and Xiong, G. (2021b). Effects of luck beliefs on consumers’ variety-seeking behavior. Soc. Behav. Pers. 49, 1–12. doi: 10.2224/sbp.9243

Keywords: variety-seeking, theoretical perspective, underlying mechanism, measurement methods, consumption

Citation: Zhang Y (2022) Variety-Seeking Behavior in Consumption: A Literature Review and Future Research Directions. Front. Psychol . 13:874444. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.874444

Received: 12 February 2022; Accepted: 18 May 2022; Published: 06 June 2022.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2022 Zhang. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Yuan Zhang, [email protected]

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

• USC Libraries
• Research Guides

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper

• 5. The Literature Review
• Purpose of Guide
• Design Flaws to Avoid
• Independent and Dependent Variables
• Glossary of Research Terms
• Reading Research Effectively
• Narrowing a Topic Idea
• Broadening a Topic Idea
• Extending the Timeliness of a Topic Idea
• Academic Writing Style
• Applying Critical Thinking
• Choosing a Title
• Making an Outline
• Paragraph Development
• Research Process Video Series
• Executive Summary
• The C.A.R.S. Model
• Background Information
• The Research Problem/Question
• Theoretical Framework
• Citation Tracking
• Content Alert Services
• Evaluating Sources
• Primary Sources
• Secondary Sources
• Tiertiary Sources
• Scholarly vs. Popular Publications
• Qualitative Methods
• Quantitative Methods
• Insiderness
• Using Non-Textual Elements
• Limitations of the Study
• Common Grammar Mistakes
• Writing Concisely
• Avoiding Plagiarism
• Footnotes or Endnotes?
• Further Readings
• Generative AI and Writing
• USC Libraries Tutorials and Other Guides
• Bibliography

A literature review surveys prior research published in books, scholarly articles, and any other sources relevant to a particular issue, area of research, or theory, and by so doing, provides a description, summary, and critical evaluation of these works in relation to the research problem being investigated. Literature reviews are designed to provide an overview of sources you have used in researching a particular topic and to demonstrate to your readers how your research fits within existing scholarship about the topic.

Fink, Arlene. Conducting Research Literature Reviews: From the Internet to Paper . Fourth edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, 2014.

Importance of a Good Literature Review

A literature review may consist of simply a summary of key sources, but in the social sciences, a literature review usually has an organizational pattern and combines both summary and synthesis, often within specific conceptual categories . A summary is a recap of the important information of the source, but a synthesis is a re-organization, or a reshuffling, of that information in a way that informs how you are planning to investigate a research problem. The analytical features of a literature review might:

• Give a new interpretation of old material or combine new with old interpretations,
• Trace the intellectual progression of the field, including major debates,
• Depending on the situation, evaluate the sources and advise the reader on the most pertinent or relevant research, or
• Usually in the conclusion of a literature review, identify where gaps exist in how a problem has been researched to date.

Given this, the purpose of a literature review is to:

• Place each work in the context of its contribution to understanding the research problem being studied.
• Describe the relationship of each work to the others under consideration.
• Identify new ways to interpret prior research.
• Reveal any gaps that exist in the literature.
• Resolve conflicts amongst seemingly contradictory previous studies.
• Identify areas of prior scholarship to prevent duplication of effort.
• Point the way in fulfilling a need for additional research.
• Locate your own research within the context of existing literature [very important].

Fink, Arlene. Conducting Research Literature Reviews: From the Internet to Paper. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2005; Hart, Chris. Doing a Literature Review: Releasing the Social Science Research Imagination . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1998; Jesson, Jill. Doing Your Literature Review: Traditional and Systematic Techniques . Los Angeles, CA: SAGE, 2011; Knopf, Jeffrey W. "Doing a Literature Review." PS: Political Science and Politics 39 (January 2006): 127-132; Ridley, Diana. The Literature Review: A Step-by-Step Guide for Students . 2nd ed. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE, 2012.

Types of Literature Reviews

It is important to think of knowledge in a given field as consisting of three layers. First, there are the primary studies that researchers conduct and publish. Second are the reviews of those studies that summarize and offer new interpretations built from and often extending beyond the primary studies. Third, there are the perceptions, conclusions, opinion, and interpretations that are shared informally among scholars that become part of the body of epistemological traditions within the field.

In composing a literature review, it is important to note that it is often this third layer of knowledge that is cited as "true" even though it often has only a loose relationship to the primary studies and secondary literature reviews. Given this, while literature reviews are designed to provide an overview and synthesis of pertinent sources you have explored, there are a number of approaches you could adopt depending upon the type of analysis underpinning your study.

Argumentative Review This form examines literature selectively in order to support or refute an argument, deeply embedded assumption, or philosophical problem already established in the literature. The purpose is to develop a body of literature that establishes a contrarian viewpoint. Given the value-laden nature of some social science research [e.g., educational reform; immigration control], argumentative approaches to analyzing the literature can be a legitimate and important form of discourse. However, note that they can also introduce problems of bias when they are used to make summary claims of the sort found in systematic reviews [see below].

Integrative Review Considered a form of research that reviews, critiques, and synthesizes representative literature on a topic in an integrated way such that new frameworks and perspectives on the topic are generated. The body of literature includes all studies that address related or identical hypotheses or research problems. A well-done integrative review meets the same standards as primary research in regard to clarity, rigor, and replication. This is the most common form of review in the social sciences.

Historical Review Few things rest in isolation from historical precedent. Historical literature reviews focus on examining research throughout a period of time, often starting with the first time an issue, concept, theory, phenomena emerged in the literature, then tracing its evolution within the scholarship of a discipline. The purpose is to place research in a historical context to show familiarity with state-of-the-art developments and to identify the likely directions for future research.

Methodological Review A review does not always focus on what someone said [findings], but how they came about saying what they say [method of analysis]. Reviewing methods of analysis provides a framework of understanding at different levels [i.e. those of theory, substantive fields, research approaches, and data collection and analysis techniques], how researchers draw upon a wide variety of knowledge ranging from the conceptual level to practical documents for use in fieldwork in the areas of ontological and epistemological consideration, quantitative and qualitative integration, sampling, interviewing, data collection, and data analysis. This approach helps highlight ethical issues which you should be aware of and consider as you go through your own study.

Systematic Review This form consists of an overview of existing evidence pertinent to a clearly formulated research question, which uses pre-specified and standardized methods to identify and critically appraise relevant research, and to collect, report, and analyze data from the studies that are included in the review. The goal is to deliberately document, critically evaluate, and summarize scientifically all of the research about a clearly defined research problem . Typically it focuses on a very specific empirical question, often posed in a cause-and-effect form, such as "To what extent does A contribute to B?" This type of literature review is primarily applied to examining prior research studies in clinical medicine and allied health fields, but it is increasingly being used in the social sciences.

Theoretical Review The purpose of this form is to examine the corpus of theory that has accumulated in regard to an issue, concept, theory, phenomena. The theoretical literature review helps to establish what theories already exist, the relationships between them, to what degree the existing theories have been investigated, and to develop new hypotheses to be tested. Often this form is used to help establish a lack of appropriate theories or reveal that current theories are inadequate for explaining new or emerging research problems. The unit of analysis can focus on a theoretical concept or a whole theory or framework.

NOTE : Most often the literature review will incorporate some combination of types. For example, a review that examines literature supporting or refuting an argument, assumption, or philosophical problem related to the research problem will also need to include writing supported by sources that establish the history of these arguments in the literature.

Baumeister, Roy F. and Mark R. Leary. "Writing Narrative Literature Reviews."  Review of General Psychology 1 (September 1997): 311-320; Mark R. Fink, Arlene. Conducting Research Literature Reviews: From the Internet to Paper . 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2005; Hart, Chris. Doing a Literature Review: Releasing the Social Science Research Imagination . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1998; Kennedy, Mary M. "Defining a Literature." Educational Researcher 36 (April 2007): 139-147; Petticrew, Mark and Helen Roberts. Systematic Reviews in the Social Sciences: A Practical Guide . Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers, 2006; Torracro, Richard. "Writing Integrative Literature Reviews: Guidelines and Examples." Human Resource Development Review 4 (September 2005): 356-367; Rocco, Tonette S. and Maria S. Plakhotnik. "Literature Reviews, Conceptual Frameworks, and Theoretical Frameworks: Terms, Functions, and Distinctions." Human Ressource Development Review 8 (March 2008): 120-130; Sutton, Anthea. Systematic Approaches to a Successful Literature Review . Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications, 2016.

Structure and Writing Style

I.  Thinking About Your Literature Review

The structure of a literature review should include the following in support of understanding the research problem :

• An overview of the subject, issue, or theory under consideration, along with the objectives of the literature review,
• Division of works under review into themes or categories [e.g. works that support a particular position, those against, and those offering alternative approaches entirely],
• An explanation of how each work is similar to and how it varies from the others,
• Conclusions as to which pieces are best considered in their argument, are most convincing of their opinions, and make the greatest contribution to the understanding and development of their area of research.

The critical evaluation of each work should consider :

• Provenance -- what are the author's credentials? Are the author's arguments supported by evidence [e.g. primary historical material, case studies, narratives, statistics, recent scientific findings]?
• Methodology -- were the techniques used to identify, gather, and analyze the data appropriate to addressing the research problem? Was the sample size appropriate? Were the results effectively interpreted and reported?
• Objectivity -- is the author's perspective even-handed or prejudicial? Is contrary data considered or is certain pertinent information ignored to prove the author's point?
• Persuasiveness -- which of the author's theses are most convincing or least convincing?
• Validity -- are the author's arguments and conclusions convincing? Does the work ultimately contribute in any significant way to an understanding of the subject?

II.  Development of the Literature Review

Four Basic Stages of Writing 1.  Problem formulation -- which topic or field is being examined and what are its component issues? 2.  Literature search -- finding materials relevant to the subject being explored. 3.  Data evaluation -- determining which literature makes a significant contribution to the understanding of the topic. 4.  Analysis and interpretation -- discussing the findings and conclusions of pertinent literature.

Consider the following issues before writing the literature review: Clarify If your assignment is not specific about what form your literature review should take, seek clarification from your professor by asking these questions: 1.  Roughly how many sources would be appropriate to include? 2.  What types of sources should I review (books, journal articles, websites; scholarly versus popular sources)? 3.  Should I summarize, synthesize, or critique sources by discussing a common theme or issue? 4.  Should I evaluate the sources in any way beyond evaluating how they relate to understanding the research problem? 5.  Should I provide subheadings and other background information, such as definitions and/or a history? Find Models Use the exercise of reviewing the literature to examine how authors in your discipline or area of interest have composed their literature review sections. Read them to get a sense of the types of themes you might want to look for in your own research or to identify ways to organize your final review. The bibliography or reference section of sources you've already read, such as required readings in the course syllabus, are also excellent entry points into your own research. Narrow the Topic The narrower your topic, the easier it will be to limit the number of sources you need to read in order to obtain a good survey of relevant resources. Your professor will probably not expect you to read everything that's available about the topic, but you'll make the act of reviewing easier if you first limit scope of the research problem. A good strategy is to begin by searching the USC Libraries Catalog for recent books about the topic and review the table of contents for chapters that focuses on specific issues. You can also review the indexes of books to find references to specific issues that can serve as the focus of your research. For example, a book surveying the history of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict may include a chapter on the role Egypt has played in mediating the conflict, or look in the index for the pages where Egypt is mentioned in the text. Consider Whether Your Sources are Current Some disciplines require that you use information that is as current as possible. This is particularly true in disciplines in medicine and the sciences where research conducted becomes obsolete very quickly as new discoveries are made. However, when writing a review in the social sciences, a survey of the history of the literature may be required. In other words, a complete understanding the research problem requires you to deliberately examine how knowledge and perspectives have changed over time. Sort through other current bibliographies or literature reviews in the field to get a sense of what your discipline expects. You can also use this method to explore what is considered by scholars to be a "hot topic" and what is not.

III.  Ways to Organize Your Literature Review

Chronology of Events If your review follows the chronological method, you could write about the materials according to when they were published. This approach should only be followed if a clear path of research building on previous research can be identified and that these trends follow a clear chronological order of development. For example, a literature review that focuses on continuing research about the emergence of German economic power after the fall of the Soviet Union. By Publication Order your sources by publication chronology, then, only if the order demonstrates a more important trend. For instance, you could order a review of literature on environmental studies of brown fields if the progression revealed, for example, a change in the soil collection practices of the researchers who wrote and/or conducted the studies. Thematic [“conceptual categories”] A thematic literature review is the most common approach to summarizing prior research in the social and behavioral sciences. Thematic reviews are organized around a topic or issue, rather than the progression of time, although the progression of time may still be incorporated into a thematic review. For example, a review of the Internet’s impact on American presidential politics could focus on the development of online political satire. While the study focuses on one topic, the Internet’s impact on American presidential politics, it would still be organized chronologically reflecting technological developments in media. The difference in this example between a "chronological" and a "thematic" approach is what is emphasized the most: themes related to the role of the Internet in presidential politics. Note that more authentic thematic reviews tend to break away from chronological order. A review organized in this manner would shift between time periods within each section according to the point being made. Methodological A methodological approach focuses on the methods utilized by the researcher. For the Internet in American presidential politics project, one methodological approach would be to look at cultural differences between the portrayal of American presidents on American, British, and French websites. Or the review might focus on the fundraising impact of the Internet on a particular political party. A methodological scope will influence either the types of documents in the review or the way in which these documents are discussed.

Other Sections of Your Literature Review Once you've decided on the organizational method for your literature review, the sections you need to include in the paper should be easy to figure out because they arise from your organizational strategy. In other words, a chronological review would have subsections for each vital time period; a thematic review would have subtopics based upon factors that relate to the theme or issue. However, sometimes you may need to add additional sections that are necessary for your study, but do not fit in the organizational strategy of the body. What other sections you include in the body is up to you. However, only include what is necessary for the reader to locate your study within the larger scholarship about the research problem.

Here are examples of other sections, usually in the form of a single paragraph, you may need to include depending on the type of review you write:

• Current Situation : Information necessary to understand the current topic or focus of the literature review.
• Sources Used : Describes the methods and resources [e.g., databases] you used to identify the literature you reviewed.
• History : The chronological progression of the field, the research literature, or an idea that is necessary to understand the literature review, if the body of the literature review is not already a chronology.
• Selection Methods : Criteria you used to select (and perhaps exclude) sources in your literature review. For instance, you might explain that your review includes only peer-reviewed [i.e., scholarly] sources.
• Standards : Description of the way in which you present your information.
• Questions for Further Research : What questions about the field has the review sparked? How will you further your research as a result of the review?

IV.  Writing Your Literature Review

Once you've settled on how to organize your literature review, you're ready to write each section. When writing your review, keep in mind these issues.

Use Evidence A literature review section is, in this sense, just like any other academic research paper. Your interpretation of the available sources must be backed up with evidence [citations] that demonstrates that what you are saying is valid. Be Selective Select only the most important points in each source to highlight in the review. The type of information you choose to mention should relate directly to the research problem, whether it is thematic, methodological, or chronological. Related items that provide additional information, but that are not key to understanding the research problem, can be included in a list of further readings . Use Quotes Sparingly Some short quotes are appropriate if you want to emphasize a point, or if what an author stated cannot be easily paraphrased. Sometimes you may need to quote certain terminology that was coined by the author, is not common knowledge, or taken directly from the study. Do not use extensive quotes as a substitute for using your own words in reviewing the literature. Summarize and Synthesize Remember to summarize and synthesize your sources within each thematic paragraph as well as throughout the review. Recapitulate important features of a research study, but then synthesize it by rephrasing the study's significance and relating it to your own work and the work of others. Keep Your Own Voice While the literature review presents others' ideas, your voice [the writer's] should remain front and center. For example, weave references to other sources into what you are writing but maintain your own voice by starting and ending the paragraph with your own ideas and wording. Use Caution When Paraphrasing When paraphrasing a source that is not your own, be sure to represent the author's information or opinions accurately and in your own words. Even when paraphrasing an author’s work, you still must provide a citation to that work.

V.  Common Mistakes to Avoid

These are the most common mistakes made in reviewing social science research literature.

• Sources in your literature review do not clearly relate to the research problem;
• You do not take sufficient time to define and identify the most relevant sources to use in the literature review related to the research problem;
• Relies exclusively on secondary analytical sources rather than including relevant primary research studies or data;
• Uncritically accepts another researcher's findings and interpretations as valid, rather than examining critically all aspects of the research design and analysis;
• Does not describe the search procedures that were used in identifying the literature to review;
• Reports isolated statistical results rather than synthesizing them in chi-squared or meta-analytic methods; and,
• Only includes research that validates assumptions and does not consider contrary findings and alternative interpretations found in the literature.

Cook, Kathleen E. and Elise Murowchick. “Do Literature Review Skills Transfer from One Course to Another?” Psychology Learning and Teaching 13 (March 2014): 3-11; Fink, Arlene. Conducting Research Literature Reviews: From the Internet to Paper . 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2005; Hart, Chris. Doing a Literature Review: Releasing the Social Science Research Imagination . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1998; Jesson, Jill. Doing Your Literature Review: Traditional and Systematic Techniques . London: SAGE, 2011; Literature Review Handout. Online Writing Center. Liberty University; Literature Reviews. The Writing Center. University of North Carolina; Onwuegbuzie, Anthony J. and Rebecca Frels. Seven Steps to a Comprehensive Literature Review: A Multimodal and Cultural Approach . Los Angeles, CA: SAGE, 2016; Ridley, Diana. The Literature Review: A Step-by-Step Guide for Students . 2nd ed. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE, 2012; Randolph, Justus J. “A Guide to Writing the Dissertation Literature Review." Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation. vol. 14, June 2009; Sutton, Anthea. Systematic Approaches to a Successful Literature Review . Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications, 2016; Taylor, Dena. The Literature Review: A Few Tips On Conducting It. University College Writing Centre. University of Toronto; Writing a Literature Review. Academic Skills Centre. University of Canberra.

Writing Tip

Break Out of Your Disciplinary Box!

Thinking interdisciplinarily about a research problem can be a rewarding exercise in applying new ideas, theories, or concepts to an old problem. For example, what might cultural anthropologists say about the continuing conflict in the Middle East? In what ways might geographers view the need for better distribution of social service agencies in large cities than how social workers might study the issue? You don’t want to substitute a thorough review of core research literature in your discipline for studies conducted in other fields of study. However, particularly in the social sciences, thinking about research problems from multiple vectors is a key strategy for finding new solutions to a problem or gaining a new perspective. Consult with a librarian about identifying research databases in other disciplines; almost every field of study has at least one comprehensive database devoted to indexing its research literature.

Frodeman, Robert. The Oxford Handbook of Interdisciplinarity . New York: Oxford University Press, 2010.

Another Writing Tip

Don't Just Review for Content!

While conducting a review of the literature, maximize the time you devote to writing this part of your paper by thinking broadly about what you should be looking for and evaluating. Review not just what scholars are saying, but how are they saying it. Some questions to ask:

• How are they organizing their ideas?
• What methods have they used to study the problem?
• What theories have been used to explain, predict, or understand their research problem?
• What sources have they cited to support their conclusions?
• How have they used non-textual elements [e.g., charts, graphs, figures, etc.] to illustrate key points?

When you begin to write your literature review section, you'll be glad you dug deeper into how the research was designed and constructed because it establishes a means for developing more substantial analysis and interpretation of the research problem.

Hart, Chris. Doing a Literature Review: Releasing the Social Science Research Imagination . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1 998.

Yet Another Writing Tip

When Do I Know I Can Stop Looking and Move On?

Here are several strategies you can utilize to assess whether you've thoroughly reviewed the literature:

• Look for repeating patterns in the research findings . If the same thing is being said, just by different people, then this likely demonstrates that the research problem has hit a conceptual dead end. At this point consider: Does your study extend current research?  Does it forge a new path? Or, does is merely add more of the same thing being said?
• Look at sources the authors cite to in their work . If you begin to see the same researchers cited again and again, then this is often an indication that no new ideas have been generated to address the research problem.
• Search Google Scholar to identify who has subsequently cited leading scholars already identified in your literature review [see next sub-tab]. This is called citation tracking and there are a number of sources that can help you identify who has cited whom, particularly scholars from outside of your discipline. Here again, if the same authors are being cited again and again, this may indicate no new literature has been written on the topic.

Onwuegbuzie, Anthony J. and Rebecca Frels. Seven Steps to a Comprehensive Literature Review: A Multimodal and Cultural Approach . Los Angeles, CA: Sage, 2016; Sutton, Anthea. Systematic Approaches to a Successful Literature Review . Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications, 2016.

• << Previous: Theoretical Framework
• Next: Citation Tracking >>
• Last Updated: Apr 11, 2024 1:27 PM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide

Mapping social innovation impact evaluation: a comprehensive literature review and prospects for future research

• Published: 12 April 2024

Cite this article

• Mohsen Nazari   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-2861-2052 1 , 2 ,
• Iman Mostashar Nezami 2 &
• Ali Asgary 3  

In recent years, SI initiatives have emerged as a promising approach to addressing pressing social and environmental challenges. However, despite their proliferation and potential benefits, the evaluation frameworks for assessing their impact effectively are often lacking. This gap in the current literature on SI impact evaluation is further compounded by fragmentation, with limited established frameworks or methods for evaluating the impact of SI initiatives. To address this research gap, we conducted a comprehensive bibliometric analysis of 185 studies published in the Web of Science database from 2008 to 2023. Our rigorous analysis revealed significant research gaps and identified four thematic areas related to the development of evaluation frameworks, including collaboration and co-creation in impact evaluation of SIs, comprehensive and context-specific approaches to evaluating SI initiatives, financial factors in SI impact evaluation, and technology acceptance and SI impact. Through a content analysis of these thematic areas, our study provides key insights into the current state of research on SI impact evaluation and identifies potential avenues for future research. The findings of our study contribute to a deeper understanding of the challenges and opportunities associated with SI impact evaluation and offer valuable insights for researchers, practitioners, and policymakers working in this area.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Social innovation.

Ahmadi, H.B., Lo, H.W., Pourhejazy, P., Gupta, H., Liou, J.J.H.: Exploring the mutual influence among the social innovation factors amid the COVID-19 pandemic. Appl. Soft Comput.comput. 125 , 109157 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2022.109157

Article   Google Scholar  

Albertson, K., Fox, C., O’Leary, C., Painter, G.: Towards a theoretical framework for social impact bonds. Nonprofit Policy Forum 11 (2), 20190056 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1515/npf-2019-0056

Alfalih, A.A.: The role of sustainable entrepreneurship and corporate social performance on social innovation: the case of the private industrial sector in Saudi Arabia. J. Knowl. Econ.knowl. Econ. 13 (3), 1928–1943 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-021-00798-7

Ali, I., Balta, M., Papadopoulos, T.: Social media platforms and social enterprise: bibliometric analysis and systematic review. Int. J. Inf. Manag.manag. 63 , 102510 (2022)

Google Scholar  

Alijani, S., Luna, A., Castro-Spila, J., Unceta, A.: Building capabilities through social innovation: implications for the economy and society. In: Alijani, S., Karyotis, C. (eds.) Finance and Economy for Society: Integrating Sustainability, vol. 11, pp. 293–313. Emerald Group Publishing Limited (2017)

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Alonso-Martinez, D., Gonzalez-Alvarez, N., Nieto, M.: The influence of financial performance on corporate social innovation. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag.responsib. Environ. Manag. 26 (4), 859–871 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1726

Aman, S., Seuring, S., Khalid, R.U.: Sustainability performance measurement in risk and uncertainty management: an analysis of base of the pyramid supply chain literature. Bus. Strategy Environ. 26 , 3254 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3254

Asongu, S.A., Odhiambo, N.M.: Mobile technology supply factors and mobile money innovation: thresholds for complementary policies. J. Bank. Regul.regul. 23 (3), 288–301 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41261-021-00167-z

Belcher, B.M., Claus, R., Davel, R., Jones, S.M.: Evaluating and improving the contributions of university research to social innovation. Soc. Enterp. J.enterp. J. 18 (1), 51–120 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1108/sej-10-2020-0099

Blondel, V.D., Guillaume, J.-L., Lambiotte, R., Lefebvre, E.: Fast unfolding of communities in large networks. J. Stat. Mech: Theory Exp. 2008 (10), P10008 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-5468/2008/10/p10008

Botha, L., Grobbelaar, S., Bam, W.: Towards a framework to guide the evaluation of inclusive innovation systems. S. Afr. J. Ind. Eng. 27 (3), 64–78 (2016). https://doi.org/10.7166/27-3-1632

Chen, C., Ibekwe-SanJuan, F., Hou, J.: The structure and dynamics of cocitation clusters: a multiple-perspective cocitation analysis. J. Am. Soc. Inform. Sci. Technol. 61 (7), 1386–1409 (2010)

Corvo, L., Pastore, L., Antonelli, A., Petruzzella, D.: Social impact and sustainability in short food supply chains: an experimental assessment tool. New Medit 20 (3), 175–189 (2021). https://doi.org/10.30682/nm2103l

Courtney, P., Powell, J.: Evaluating innovation in European rural development programmes: application of the social return on investment (SROI) method. Sustainability 12 (7), 2657 (2020). https://doi.org/10.3390/su12072657

Cunha, J., Ferreira, C., Araujo, M., Nunes, M.L.: The mediating role of entrepreneurial intention between creativity and social innovation tendency. Soc. Enterp. J.enterp. J. 18 (2), 383–405 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1108/SEJ-04-2021-0022

Das, D.: Development and validation of a scale for measuring sustainable supply chain management practices and performance. J. Clean. Prod. 164 , 1344–1362 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.07.006

Diaz-Perdomo, Y., Alvarez-Gonzalez, L.I., Sanzo-Perez, M.J.: A way to boost the impact of business on 2030 United Nations sustainable development goals: co-creation with non-profits for social innovation. Front. Psychol. 12 , 719907 (2021). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.719907

Diogo, V., Helfenstein, J., Mohr, F., Varghese, V., Debonne, N., Levers, C., Swart, R., Sonderegger, G., Nemecek, T., Schader, C.: Developing context-specific frameworks for integrated sustainability assessment of agricultural intensity change: an application for Europe. Environ Sci PolicySci Policy 137 , 128–142 (2022)

Edwards-Schachter, M., Wallace, M.L.: ‘Shaken, but not stirred’: sixty years of defining social innovation. Technol. Forecast. Social Change 119 , 64–79 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.03.012

Fahimnia, B., Tang, C.S., Davarzani, H., Sarkis, J.: Quantitative models for managing supply chain risks: a review. Eur. J. Operat. Res. 247 (1), 1–15 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.04.034

Faruk, M., Rahman, M., Hasan, S.: How digital marketing evolved over time: a bibliometric analysis on scopus database. Heliyon 7 (12), e08603 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e08603

Feng, C.C., Chang, K.F., Lin, J.X., Lee, T.C., Lin, S.M.: Toward green transition in the post Paris agreement era: the case of Taiwan. Energy Policy 165 , 112996 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2022.112996

Gao, Q., Cheng, C.M., Sun, G.L., Li, J.F.: The impact of digital inclusive finance on agricultural green total factor productivity: evidence from China. Front. Ecol. Evol.evol. 10 , 905644 (2022). https://doi.org/10.3389/fevo.2022.905644

Greene, M., Van Rid, A.C.R.: Learning from the resourceness blind spot for service innovation at the base of the pyramid. J. Serv. Mark. 35 (7), 933–946 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1108/jsm-06-2020-0254

Hoffecker, E.: Understanding inclusive innovation processes in agricultural systems: a middle-range conceptual model. World Dev. 140 , 105382 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2020.105382

Huang, Y., Huang, B.J., Song, J.L., Xu, X.Z., Chen, X., Zhang, Z.L., Xue, B.: Social impact assessment of photovoltaic poverty alleviation program in China. J. Clean. Prod. 290 , 125208 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125208

Islam, S.M.: Impact investing in social sector organisations: a systematic review and research agenda. Account. Finance 62 (1), 709–737 (2022)

Jiang, M.: The impact of digital inclusive finance on green total factor productivity of the service industry: new evidence from China. Transf. Bus. Econ. 21 (2B), 753–771 (2022)

Khanra, S., Dhir, A., Islam, A.K.M.N., Mäntymäki, M.: Big data analytics in healthcare: a systematic literature review. Enterp. Inf. Syst. 14 (7), 878–912 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1080/17517575.2020.1812005

Khanra, S., Dhir, A., Kaur, P., Mäntymäki, M.: Bibliometric analysis and literature review of ecotourism : toward sustainable development. Tour. Manag. Perspect. TMP 37 (1), 1–15 (2021a). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2020.100777

Khanra, S., Dhir, A., Parida, V., Kohtamäki, M.: Servitization research: a review and bibliometric analysis of past achievements and future promises. J. Bus. Res. 131 , 151–166 (2021b). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.03.056

Knorringa, P., Pesa, I., Leliveld, A., van Beers, C.: Frugal innovation and development: aides or adversaries? Eur. J. Dev. Res. 28 (2), 143–153 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1057/ejdr.2016.3

Lee, E.K.M., Lee, H., Kee, C.H., Kwan, C.H., Ng, C.H.: Social impact measurement in incremental social innovation. J. Social Entrep. 12 (1), 69–86 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1080/19420676.2019.1668830

Li, C., Bacete, G.: Mapping the technology footprint in design for social innovation. Int. J. Innov. Stud. 6 (3), 216–227 (2022)

Li, J.R., Li, B.W.: Digital inclusive finance and urban innovation: evidence from China. Rev. Dev. Econ. 26 (2), 1010–1034 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1111/rode.12846

Liu, R.R., Chen, D., Yang, S.C., Chen, Y.: Evaluation of green development efficiency of the major cities in Gansu Province, China. Sustainability 13 (6), 3034 (2021). https://doi.org/10.3390/su13063034

Lombardi, M., Lopolito, A., Andriano, A.M., Prosperi, M., Stasi, A., Iannuzzi, E.: Network impact of social innovation initiatives in marginalised rural communities. Social Netw. 63 , 11–20 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2020.04.001

London, T., Esper, H.: Assessing poverty-alleviation outcomes of an enterprise-led approach to sanitation. In: Dube, L., Webb, P., Arora, N.K., Pingalid, P. (eds.) Paths of Convergence for Agriculture, Health, and Wealth, vol. 1331, pp. 90–105. Blackwell Science Publ. (2014)

MacRoberts, M.H., MacRoberts, B.R.: The mismeasure of science: citation analysis. J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 69 (3), 474–482 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23970

Meister Broekema, P., Horlings, L.G., Bulder, E.: Tackling societal challenges together: co-creation strategies and social innovation in EU policy and funded projects. Eur. Policy Anal. 8 (1), 68–86 (2022)

Milley, P., Szijarto, B., Svensson, K., Cousins, J.B.: The evaluation of social innovation: a review and integration of the current empirical knowledge base. Evaluation 24 (2), 237–258 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1177/1356389018763242

Molina-Maturano, J., Bucher, J., Speelman, S.: Understanding and evaluating the sustainability of frugal water innovations in Mexico: an exploratory case study. J. Clean. Prod. 274 , 122692 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122692

Mortazavi, S., Eslami, M.H., Hajikhani, A., Väätänen, J.: Mapping inclusive innovation: a bibliometric study and literature review. J. Bus. Res. 122 , 736–750 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.07.030

Mostashar Nezami, I., Nazari, M., Ansari, M.: Money matters in social innovation: exploring social innovation revenue models through bibliometric analysis. J. Advert. Sales Manag. 4 (3), 35008 (2023)

Nazari, M., Asgary, A., Nezami, I.M., Ghayourisales, S.: From resistance to resilience: a comprehensive bibliometric analysis of carbon pricing public acceptance. Energy Res. Social Sci. 107 , 103340 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2023.103340

Novikova, M.: Social innovation impacts and their assessment: an exploratory study of a social innovation initiative from a Portuguese rural region. Social Sci. Basel 11 (3), 122 (2022). https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci11030122

Okitasari, M., Mishra, R., Suzuki, M.: Socio-economic drivers of community acceptance of sustainable social housing: evidence from Mumbai. Sustainability 14 (15), 9321 (2022). https://doi.org/10.3390/su14159321

Özmen Uysal, Ö.: Business ethics research with an accounting focus: a bibliometric analysis from 1988 to 2007. J. Bus. Ethics 93 (1), 137–160 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-009-0187-9

Page, L., Brin, S., Motwani, R., Winograd, T.: The pagerank citation ranking: bringing order to the web. In Proc. of the 7th International World Wide Web Conf. (1998)

Perikangas, S., Kostilainen, H., Paananen, R., Määttä, A., Kainulainen, S.: A human-centric co-creation platform for solving wicked social challenges. Social Innov. Higher Education 11 , 227 (2022)

Pesa, I.: The developmental potential of frugal innovation among mobile money agents in Kitwe, Zambia. Eur. J. Dev. Res. 30 (1), 49–65 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41287-017-0114-3

Phillips, W., Lee, H., Ghobadian, A., O’Regan, N., James, P.: Social innovation and social entrepreneurship: a systematic review. Group Org. Manag.manag. 40 (3), 428–461 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601114560063

Pigatto, G.A.S., Brunori, G.: Social innovation in high-quality agricultural systems: metrics for assessing processes and outcomes. Innov. Eur. J. Social Sci. Res. 34 (2), 222–250 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1080/13511610.2020.1867519

Pranckutė, R.: Web of science (WoS) and scopus: the Titans of bibliographic information in today’s academic world. Publications 9 (1), 12 (2021)

Radner, J.M., Ferrer, M.J.S., McMahon, D., Shankar, A.H., Silver, K.L.: Practical considerations for transitioning early childhood interventions to scale: lessons from the saving brains portfolio. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 1419 (1), 230–248 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1111/nyas.13684

Ravazzoli, E., Dalla Torre, C., Da Re, R., Govigli, V.M., Secco, L., Gorriz-Mifsud, E., Pisani, E., Barlagne, C., Baselice, A., Bengoumi, M., Dijskhoorn-Dekker, M., Labidi, A., Lopolito, A., Melnykovych, M., Perlik, M., Polman, N., Sarkki, S., Vassilopoulos, A., Koundouri, P., Nijnik, M.: Can social innovation make a change in European and mediterranean marginalized areas? Social innovation impact assessment in agriculture, fisheries, forestry, and rural development. Sustainability 13 (4), 1823 (2021). https://doi.org/10.3390/su13041823

Slee, B., Burlando, C., Pisani, E., Secco, L., Polman, N.: Social innovation: a preliminary exploration of a contested concept. Local Environ. 26 (7), 791–807 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1080/13549839.2021.1933404

Spacek, M., Melnykovych, M., Kozova, M., Pauditsova, E., Kluvankova, T.: The role of knowledge in supporting the revitalisation of traditional landscape governance through social innovation in Slovakia. Environ. Policy Govern. 32 (6), 560–574 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1002/eet.2026

Szijarto, B., Milley, P., Svensson, K., Cousins, J.B.: On the evaluation of social innovations and social enterprises: recognizing and integrating two solitudes in the empirical knowledge base. Eval. Progr. Plann. 66 , 20–32 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2017.08.010

Tang, K.Y., Chang, C.Y., Hwang, G.J.: Trends in artificial intelligence-supported e-learning: a systematic review and co-citation network analysis (1998–2019). Interact. Learn. Environ. (2021). https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2021.1875001

Tohari, A., Parsons, C., Rammohan, A.: Targeting poverty under complementarities: evidence from Indonesia’s unified targeting system. J. Dev. Econ. 140 , 127–144 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdeveco.2019.06.002

Tranfield, D., Denyer, D., Smart, P.: Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review. Br. J. Manag.manag. 14 (3), 207–222 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.00375

Unceta, A., Luna, Á., Castro, J., Wintjes, R.: Social innovation regime: an integrated approach to measure social innovation. Eur. Plan. Stud. 28 (5), 906–924 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2019.1578338

van der Merwe, M.D., Grobbelaar, S.S., Meyer, I.A., Schutte, C.S.L., von Leipzig, K.H.: A framework of key growth factors for small enterprises operating at the base of the pyramid. Sustainability 12 (22), 9327 (2020). https://doi.org/10.3390/su12229327

van Niekerk, L., Manderson, L., Balabanova, D.: The application of social innovation in healthcare: a scoping review. Infect. Dis. Poverty 10 (1), 26 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40249-021-00794-8

Vossenberg, S.: frugal innovation through a gender lens: towards an analytical framework. Eur. J. Dev. Res. 30 (1), 34–48 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41287-017-0118-z

Vrontis, D., Morea, D., Basile, G., Bonacci, I., Mazzitelli, A.: Consequences of technology and social innovation on traditional business model. Technol. Forecast. Social Change 170 , 120877 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.120877

Wang, Y.P., Fahad, S., Wei, L.Q., Luo, B.W., Luo, J.C.: Assessing the role of financial development and financial inclusion to enhance environmental sustainability: do financial inclusion and eco-innovation promote sustainable development? Front. Environ. Sci. 10 , 1056478 (2022). https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2022.1056478

White, L.: A Cook’s tour: Towards a framework for measuring the social impact of social purpose organisations. Eur. J. Oper. Res.oper. Res. 268 (3), 784–797 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2017.06.015

Wu, M.R.: Measurement and spatial statistical analysis of green science and technology innovation efficiency among Chinese Provinces. Environ. Ecol. Stat. 28 (2), 423–444 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10651-021-00491-7

Xu, X., Chen, X., Jia, F., Brown, S., Gong, Y., Xu, Y.: Supply chain finance: a systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 204 , 160–173 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2018.08.003

Yee, J., Raijmakers, B., Ichikawa, F.: Transformative learning as impact in social innovation. Des. Cult. 11 (1), 109–132 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1080/17547075.2019.1567984

Zhao, G., Liu, S., Wang, Y., Lopez, C., Ong, A., Chen, X.: Reducing food waste from social innovation perspective: a review of measures, research gaps and future directions. Int. Food Agribus. Manag. Rev. 26 , 1–26 (2022)

Download references

The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

York University, Toronto, Canada

Mohsen Nazari

Department of Business Management, Faculty of Management, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

Mohsen Nazari & Iman Mostashar Nezami

Disaster and Emergency Management Program, School of Administrative Studies, York University, Toronto, ON, Canada

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mohsen Nazari .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

The authors have no competing interests to declare that are relevant to the content of this article. Authors declare no affiliations or involvement with any organization or entity having financial or non-financial interests in the discussed subject matter or materials. The authors have no financial or proprietary interests in any material discussed in this article.

Human and animal rights

Human Research did not involve Human Participants and/or Animals.

Informed consent

Not applicable.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Nazari, M., Mostashar Nezami, I. & Asgary, A. Mapping social innovation impact evaluation: a comprehensive literature review and prospects for future research. Qual Quant (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-024-01868-z

Download citation

Accepted : 27 February 2024

Published : 12 April 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-024-01868-z

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Social innovation
• Social innovation impact
• Impact evaluation
• Bibliometric studies
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

• Privacy Policy

Buy Me a Coffee

Home » Literature Review – Types Writing Guide and Examples

Literature Review – Types Writing Guide and Examples

Table of Contents

Literature Review

Definition:

A literature review is a comprehensive and critical analysis of the existing literature on a particular topic or research question. It involves identifying, evaluating, and synthesizing relevant literature, including scholarly articles, books, and other sources, to provide a summary and critical assessment of what is known about the topic.

Types of Literature Review

Types of Literature Review are as follows:

• Narrative literature review : This type of review involves a comprehensive summary and critical analysis of the available literature on a particular topic or research question. It is often used as an introductory section of a research paper.
• Systematic literature review: This is a rigorous and structured review that follows a pre-defined protocol to identify, evaluate, and synthesize all relevant studies on a specific research question. It is often used in evidence-based practice and systematic reviews.
• Meta-analysis: This is a quantitative review that uses statistical methods to combine data from multiple studies to derive a summary effect size. It provides a more precise estimate of the overall effect than any individual study.
• Scoping review: This is a preliminary review that aims to map the existing literature on a broad topic area to identify research gaps and areas for further investigation.
• Critical literature review : This type of review evaluates the strengths and weaknesses of the existing literature on a particular topic or research question. It aims to provide a critical analysis of the literature and identify areas where further research is needed.
• Conceptual literature review: This review synthesizes and integrates theories and concepts from multiple sources to provide a new perspective on a particular topic. It aims to provide a theoretical framework for understanding a particular research question.
• Rapid literature review: This is a quick review that provides a snapshot of the current state of knowledge on a specific research question or topic. It is often used when time and resources are limited.
• Thematic literature review : This review identifies and analyzes common themes and patterns across a body of literature on a particular topic. It aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the literature and identify key themes and concepts.
• Realist literature review: This review is often used in social science research and aims to identify how and why certain interventions work in certain contexts. It takes into account the context and complexities of real-world situations.
• State-of-the-art literature review : This type of review provides an overview of the current state of knowledge in a particular field, highlighting the most recent and relevant research. It is often used in fields where knowledge is rapidly evolving, such as technology or medicine.
• Integrative literature review: This type of review synthesizes and integrates findings from multiple studies on a particular topic to identify patterns, themes, and gaps in the literature. It aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of the current state of knowledge on a particular topic.
• Umbrella literature review : This review is used to provide a broad overview of a large and diverse body of literature on a particular topic. It aims to identify common themes and patterns across different areas of research.
• Historical literature review: This type of review examines the historical development of research on a particular topic or research question. It aims to provide a historical context for understanding the current state of knowledge on a particular topic.
• Problem-oriented literature review : This review focuses on a specific problem or issue and examines the literature to identify potential solutions or interventions. It aims to provide practical recommendations for addressing a particular problem or issue.
• Mixed-methods literature review : This type of review combines quantitative and qualitative methods to synthesize and analyze the available literature on a particular topic. It aims to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the research question by combining different types of evidence.

Parts of Literature Review

Parts of a literature review are as follows:

Introduction

The introduction of a literature review typically provides background information on the research topic and why it is important. It outlines the objectives of the review, the research question or hypothesis, and the scope of the review.

Literature Search

This section outlines the search strategy and databases used to identify relevant literature. The search terms used, inclusion and exclusion criteria, and any limitations of the search are described.

Literature Analysis

The literature analysis is the main body of the literature review. This section summarizes and synthesizes the literature that is relevant to the research question or hypothesis. The review should be organized thematically, chronologically, or by methodology, depending on the research objectives.

Critical Evaluation

Critical evaluation involves assessing the quality and validity of the literature. This includes evaluating the reliability and validity of the studies reviewed, the methodology used, and the strength of the evidence.

The conclusion of the literature review should summarize the main findings, identify any gaps in the literature, and suggest areas for future research. It should also reiterate the importance of the research question or hypothesis and the contribution of the literature review to the overall research project.

The references list includes all the sources cited in the literature review, and follows a specific referencing style (e.g., APA, MLA, Harvard).

How to write Literature Review

Here are some steps to follow when writing a literature review:

• Define your research question or topic : Before starting your literature review, it is essential to define your research question or topic. This will help you identify relevant literature and determine the scope of your review.
• Conduct a comprehensive search: Use databases and search engines to find relevant literature. Look for peer-reviewed articles, books, and other academic sources that are relevant to your research question or topic.
• Evaluate the sources: Once you have found potential sources, evaluate them critically to determine their relevance, credibility, and quality. Look for recent publications, reputable authors, and reliable sources of data and evidence.
• Organize your sources: Group the sources by theme, method, or research question. This will help you identify similarities and differences among the literature, and provide a structure for your literature review.
• Analyze and synthesize the literature : Analyze each source in depth, identifying the key findings, methodologies, and conclusions. Then, synthesize the information from the sources, identifying patterns and themes in the literature.
• Write the literature review : Start with an introduction that provides an overview of the topic and the purpose of the literature review. Then, organize the literature according to your chosen structure, and analyze and synthesize the sources. Finally, provide a conclusion that summarizes the key findings of the literature review, identifies gaps in knowledge, and suggests areas for future research.
• Edit and proofread: Once you have written your literature review, edit and proofread it carefully to ensure that it is well-organized, clear, and concise.

Examples of Literature Review

Here’s an example of how a literature review can be conducted for a thesis on the topic of “ The Impact of Social Media on Teenagers’ Mental Health”:

• Start by identifying the key terms related to your research topic. In this case, the key terms are “social media,” “teenagers,” and “mental health.”
• Use academic databases like Google Scholar, JSTOR, or PubMed to search for relevant articles, books, and other publications. Use these keywords in your search to narrow down your results.
• Evaluate the sources you find to determine if they are relevant to your research question. You may want to consider the publication date, author’s credentials, and the journal or book publisher.
• Begin reading and taking notes on each source, paying attention to key findings, methodologies used, and any gaps in the research.
• Organize your findings into themes or categories. For example, you might categorize your sources into those that examine the impact of social media on self-esteem, those that explore the effects of cyberbullying, and those that investigate the relationship between social media use and depression.
• Synthesize your findings by summarizing the key themes and highlighting any gaps or inconsistencies in the research. Identify areas where further research is needed.
• Use your literature review to inform your research questions and hypotheses for your thesis.

For example, after conducting a literature review on the impact of social media on teenagers’ mental health, a thesis might look like this:

“Using a mixed-methods approach, this study aims to investigate the relationship between social media use and mental health outcomes in teenagers. Specifically, the study will examine the effects of cyberbullying, social comparison, and excessive social media use on self-esteem, anxiety, and depression. Through an analysis of survey data and qualitative interviews with teenagers, the study will provide insight into the complex relationship between social media use and mental health outcomes, and identify strategies for promoting positive mental health outcomes in young people.”

Reference: Smith, J., Jones, M., & Lee, S. (2019). The effects of social media use on adolescent mental health: A systematic review. Journal of Adolescent Health, 65(2), 154-165. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2019.03.024

Reference Example: Author, A. A., Author, B. B., & Author, C. C. (Year). Title of article. Title of Journal, volume number(issue number), page range. doi:0000000/000000000000 or URL

Applications of Literature Review

some applications of literature review in different fields:

• Social Sciences: In social sciences, literature reviews are used to identify gaps in existing research, to develop research questions, and to provide a theoretical framework for research. Literature reviews are commonly used in fields such as sociology, psychology, anthropology, and political science.
• Natural Sciences: In natural sciences, literature reviews are used to summarize and evaluate the current state of knowledge in a particular field or subfield. Literature reviews can help researchers identify areas where more research is needed and provide insights into the latest developments in a particular field. Fields such as biology, chemistry, and physics commonly use literature reviews.
• Health Sciences: In health sciences, literature reviews are used to evaluate the effectiveness of treatments, identify best practices, and determine areas where more research is needed. Literature reviews are commonly used in fields such as medicine, nursing, and public health.
• Humanities: In humanities, literature reviews are used to identify gaps in existing knowledge, develop new interpretations of texts or cultural artifacts, and provide a theoretical framework for research. Literature reviews are commonly used in fields such as history, literary studies, and philosophy.

Role of Literature Review in Research

Here are some applications of literature review in research:

• Identifying Research Gaps : Literature review helps researchers identify gaps in existing research and literature related to their research question. This allows them to develop new research questions and hypotheses to fill those gaps.
• Developing Theoretical Framework: Literature review helps researchers develop a theoretical framework for their research. By analyzing and synthesizing existing literature, researchers can identify the key concepts, theories, and models that are relevant to their research.
• Selecting Research Methods : Literature review helps researchers select appropriate research methods and techniques based on previous research. It also helps researchers to identify potential biases or limitations of certain methods and techniques.
• Data Collection and Analysis: Literature review helps researchers in data collection and analysis by providing a foundation for the development of data collection instruments and methods. It also helps researchers to identify relevant data sources and identify potential data analysis techniques.
• Communicating Results: Literature review helps researchers to communicate their results effectively by providing a context for their research. It also helps to justify the significance of their findings in relation to existing research and literature.

Purpose of Literature Review

Some of the specific purposes of a literature review are as follows:

• To provide context: A literature review helps to provide context for your research by situating it within the broader body of literature on the topic.
• To identify gaps and inconsistencies: A literature review helps to identify areas where further research is needed or where there are inconsistencies in the existing literature.
• To synthesize information: A literature review helps to synthesize the information from multiple sources and present a coherent and comprehensive picture of the current state of knowledge on the topic.
• To identify key concepts and theories : A literature review helps to identify key concepts and theories that are relevant to your research question and provide a theoretical framework for your study.
• To inform research design: A literature review can inform the design of your research study by identifying appropriate research methods, data sources, and research questions.

Characteristics of Literature Review

Some Characteristics of Literature Review are as follows:

• Identifying gaps in knowledge: A literature review helps to identify gaps in the existing knowledge and research on a specific topic or research question. By analyzing and synthesizing the literature, you can identify areas where further research is needed and where new insights can be gained.
• Establishing the significance of your research: A literature review helps to establish the significance of your own research by placing it in the context of existing research. By demonstrating the relevance of your research to the existing literature, you can establish its importance and value.
• Informing research design and methodology : A literature review helps to inform research design and methodology by identifying the most appropriate research methods, techniques, and instruments. By reviewing the literature, you can identify the strengths and limitations of different research methods and techniques, and select the most appropriate ones for your own research.
• Supporting arguments and claims: A literature review provides evidence to support arguments and claims made in academic writing. By citing and analyzing the literature, you can provide a solid foundation for your own arguments and claims.
• I dentifying potential collaborators and mentors: A literature review can help identify potential collaborators and mentors by identifying researchers and practitioners who are working on related topics or using similar methods. By building relationships with these individuals, you can gain valuable insights and support for your own research and practice.
• Keeping up-to-date with the latest research : A literature review helps to keep you up-to-date with the latest research on a specific topic or research question. By regularly reviewing the literature, you can stay informed about the latest findings and developments in your field.

Advantages of Literature Review

There are several advantages to conducting a literature review as part of a research project, including:

• Establishing the significance of the research : A literature review helps to establish the significance of the research by demonstrating the gap or problem in the existing literature that the study aims to address.
• Identifying key concepts and theories: A literature review can help to identify key concepts and theories that are relevant to the research question, and provide a theoretical framework for the study.
• Supporting the research methodology : A literature review can inform the research methodology by identifying appropriate research methods, data sources, and research questions.
• Providing a comprehensive overview of the literature : A literature review provides a comprehensive overview of the current state of knowledge on a topic, allowing the researcher to identify key themes, debates, and areas of agreement or disagreement.
• Identifying potential research questions: A literature review can help to identify potential research questions and areas for further investigation.
• Avoiding duplication of research: A literature review can help to avoid duplication of research by identifying what has already been done on a topic, and what remains to be done.
• Enhancing the credibility of the research : A literature review helps to enhance the credibility of the research by demonstrating the researcher’s knowledge of the existing literature and their ability to situate their research within a broader context.

Limitations of Literature Review

Limitations of Literature Review are as follows:

• Limited scope : Literature reviews can only cover the existing literature on a particular topic, which may be limited in scope or depth.
• Publication bias : Literature reviews may be influenced by publication bias, which occurs when researchers are more likely to publish positive results than negative ones. This can lead to an incomplete or biased picture of the literature.
• Quality of sources : The quality of the literature reviewed can vary widely, and not all sources may be reliable or valid.
• Time-limited: Literature reviews can become quickly outdated as new research is published, making it difficult to keep up with the latest developments in a field.
• Subjective interpretation : Literature reviews can be subjective, and the interpretation of the findings can vary depending on the researcher’s perspective or bias.
• Lack of original data : Literature reviews do not generate new data, but rather rely on the analysis of existing studies.
• Risk of plagiarism: It is important to ensure that literature reviews do not inadvertently contain plagiarism, which can occur when researchers use the work of others without proper attribution.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

Data Collection – Methods Types and Examples

Delimitations in Research – Types, Examples and...

Research Process – Steps, Examples and Tips

Research Design – Types, Methods and Examples

Institutional Review Board – Application Sample...

Evaluating Research – Process, Examples and...

Safe route-finding: A review of literature and future directions

Affiliations.

• 1 Safe Transportation Research and Education Center, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA. Electronic address: [email protected].
• 2 Zachry Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843, USA.
• 3 Texas State University, 601 University Drive, San Marcos, TX 78666, USA.
• PMID: 36116230
• DOI: 10.1016/j.aap.2022.106816

While road navigation systems seek to determine the shortest routes between a given set of origin and destination points, there are certain situations in which the fastest route increases the risk of being involved in road crashes. This implies the necessity of integrating safe route-finding into road navigation systems. This study is designed to synthesize the literature on safe route-finding and identify the gaps in the literature for future research. Specifically, a scoping literature review methodology is applied to understand how safety is incorporated in route-finding, even beyond motor vehicle navigation systems. Three databases (Scopus, Web of Science, and IEEE Xplore) are explored, and controlling for inclusion criteria, 40 studies are included in this review. The findings of this review indicated five areas through which safety was considered in route-finding: motor vehicle navigation, public safety, public health, pedestrian and cyclist navigation, and hazardous material transportation. The measurement of safety was found challenging with inconsistencies in safety quantification approaches. The safe route-finding algorithms were investigated based on their predictive/reactive, static/dynamic, and centralized/decentralized characteristics. Based on the critical review of the safe route-finding algorithms, availability of real-time data sources, accurate real-time and disaggregated crash risk prediction models, trade-off between time and safety in road navigation tools, and centralized safe route-finding are highlighted as the requirements and challenges in considering safety in road navigation systems. This study outlines a research agenda to address the identified challenges in safe route-finding.

Keywords: Navigation; Route-finding; Safe routes; Safety.

Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Publication types

• Accidents, Traffic* / prevention & control
• Hazardous Substances
• Motor Vehicles
• Pedestrians*

• Open access
• Published: 23 August 2022

Prognostic risk factors for moderate-to-severe exacerbations in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a systematic literature review

• John R. Hurst 1 ,
• MeiLan K. Han 2 ,
• Barinder Singh 3 ,
• Sakshi Sharma 4 ,
• Gagandeep Kaur 3 ,
• Enrico de Nigris 5 ,
• Ulf Holmgren 6 &
• Mohd Kashif Siddiqui 3  

Respiratory Research volume  23 , Article number:  213 ( 2022 ) Cite this article

6377 Accesses

20 Citations

42 Altmetric

Metrics details

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. COPD exacerbations are associated with a worsening of lung function, increased disease burden, and mortality, and, therefore, preventing their occurrence is an important goal of COPD management. This review was conducted to identify the evidence base regarding risk factors and predictors of moderate-to-severe exacerbations in patients with COPD.

A literature review was performed in Embase, MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). Searches were conducted from January 2015 to July 2019. Eligible publications were peer-reviewed journal articles, published in English, that reported risk factors or predictors for the occurrence of moderate-to-severe exacerbations in adults age ≥ 40 years with a diagnosis of COPD.

The literature review identified 5112 references, of which 113 publications (reporting results for 76 studies) met the eligibility criteria and were included in the review. Among the 76 studies included, 61 were observational and 15 were randomized controlled clinical trials. Exacerbation history was the strongest predictor of future exacerbations, with 34 studies reporting a significant association between history of exacerbations and risk of future moderate or severe exacerbations. Other significant risk factors identified in multiple studies included disease severity or bronchodilator reversibility (39 studies), comorbidities (34 studies), higher symptom burden (17 studies), and higher blood eosinophil count (16 studies).

Conclusions

This systematic literature review identified several demographic and clinical characteristics that predict the future risk of COPD exacerbations. Prior exacerbation history was confirmed as the most important predictor of future exacerbations. These prognostic factors may help clinicians identify patients at high risk of exacerbations, which are a major driver of the global burden of COPD, including morbidity and mortality.

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is the third leading cause of death worldwide [ 1 ]. Based upon disability-adjusted life-years, COPD ranked sixth out of 369 causes of global disease burden in 2019 [ 2 ]. COPD exacerbations are associated with a worsening of lung function, and increased disease burden and mortality (of those patients hospitalized for the first time with an exacerbation, > 20% die within 1 year of being discharged) [ 3 ]. Furthermore, patients with COPD consider exacerbations or hospitalization due to exacerbations to be the most important disease outcome, having a large impact on their lives [ 4 ]. Therefore, reducing the future risk of COPD exacerbations is a key goal of COPD management [ 5 ].

Being able to predict the level of risk for each patient allows clinicians to adapt treatment and patients to adjust their lifestyle (e.g., through a smoking cessation program) to prevent exacerbations [ 3 ]. As such, identifying high-risk patients using measurable risk factors and predictors that correlate with exacerbations is critical to reduce the burden of disease and prevent a cycle of decline encompassing irreversible lung damage, worsening quality of life (QoL), increasing disease burden, high healthcare costs, and early death.

Prior history of exacerbations is generally thought to be the best predictor of future exacerbations; however, there is a growing body of evidence suggesting other demographic and clinical characteristics, including symptom burden, airflow obstruction, comorbidities, and inflammatory biomarkers, also influence risk [ 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 ]. For example, in the prospective ECLIPSE observational study, the likelihood of patients experiencing an exacerbation within 1 year of follow-up increased significantly depending upon several factors, including prior exacerbation history, forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV 1 ), St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) score, gastroesophageal reflux, and white blood cell count [ 9 ].

Many studies have assessed predictors of COPD exacerbations across a variety of countries and patient populations. This systematic literature review (SLR) was conducted to identify and compile the evidence base regarding risk factors and predictors of moderate-to-severe exacerbations in patients with COPD.

• Systematic literature review

A comprehensive search strategy was designed to identify English-language studies published in peer-reviewed journals providing data on risk factors or predictors of moderate or severe exacerbations in adults aged ≥ 40 years with a diagnosis of COPD (sample size ≥ 100). The protocol is summarized in Table 1 and the search strategy is listed in Additional file 1 : Table S1. Key biomedical electronic literature databases were searched from January 2015 until July 2019. Other sources were identified via bibliographic searching of relevant systematic reviews.

Study selection process

Implementation and reporting followed the recommendations and standards of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement [ 10 ]. An independent reviewer conducted the first screening based on titles and abstracts, and a second reviewer performed a quality check of the excluded evidence. A single independent reviewer also conducted the second screening based on full-text articles, with a quality check of excluded evidence performed by a second reviewer. Likewise, data tables of the included studies were generated by one reviewer, and another reviewer performed a quality check of extracted data. Where more than one publication was identified describing a single study or trial, data were compiled into a single entry in the data-extraction table to avoid double counting of patients and studies. One publication was designated as the ‘primary publication’ for the purposes of the SLR, based on the following criteria: most recently published evidence and/or the article that presented the majority of data (e.g., journal articles were preferred over conference abstracts; articles that reported results for the full population were preferred over later articles providing results of subpopulations). Other publications reporting results from the same study were designated as ‘linked publications’; any additional data in the linked publications that were not included in the primary publication were captured in the SLR. Conference abstracts were excluded from the SLR unless they were a ‘linked publication.’

Included studies

A total of 5112 references (Fig.  1 ) were identified from the database searches. In total, 76 studies from 113 publications were included in the review. Primary publications and ‘linked publications’ for each study are detailed in Additional file 1 : Table S2, and study characteristics are shown in Additional file 1 : Table S3. The studies included clinical trials, registry studies, cross-sectional studies, cohort studies, database studies, and case–control studies. All 76 included studies were published in peer-reviewed journals. Regarding study design, 61 of the studies were observational (34 retrospective observational studies, 19 prospective observational studies, four cross-sectional studies, two studies with both retrospective and prospective cohort data, one case–control study, and one with cross-sectional and longitudinal data) and 15 were randomized controlled clinical trials.

PRISMA flow diagram of studies through the systematic review process. CA conference abstract, CENTRAL Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PRISMA  Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses

Of the 76 studies, 16 were conducted in North America (13 studies in the USA, two in Canada, and one in Mexico); 26 were conducted in Europe (seven studies in Spain, four in the UK, three in Denmark, two studies each in Bulgaria, the Netherlands, and Switzerland, and one study each in Sweden, Serbia, Portugal, Greece, Germany, and France) and 17 were conducted in Asia (six studies in South Korea, four in China, three in Taiwan, two in Japan, and one study each in Singapore and Israel). One study each was conducted in Turkey and Australia. Fifteen studies were conducted across multiple countries.

The majority of the studies (n = 54) were conducted in a multicenter setting, while 22 studies were conducted in a single-center setting. The sample size among the included studies varied from 118 to 339,389 patients.

Patient characteristics

A total of 75 studies reported patient characteristics (Additional file 1 : Table S4). The mean age was reported in 65 studies and ranged from 58.0 to 75.2 years. The proportion of male patients ranged from 39.7 to 97.6%. The majority of included studies (85.3%) had a higher proportion of males than females.

Exacerbation history (as defined per each study) was reported in 18 of 76 included studies. The proportion of patients with no prior exacerbation was reported in ten studies (range, 0.1–79.5% of patients), one or fewer prior exacerbation in ten studies (range, 46–100%), one or more prior exacerbation in eight studies (range, 18.4–100%), and two or more prior exacerbations in 12 studies (range, 6.1–55.0%).

Prognostic factors of exacerbations

A summary of the risk factors and predictors reported across the included studies is provided in Tables 2 and 3 . The overall findings of the SLR are summarized in Figs. 2 and 3 .

Risk factors for moderate-to-severe exacerbations in patients with COPD. Factors with > 30 supporting studies shown as large circles; factors with ≤ 30 supporting studies shown as small circles and should be interpreted cautiously. BDR bronchodilator reversibility, BMI body mass index, COPD chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, EOS eosinophil, QoL quality of life

Summary of risk factors for exacerbation events. a Treatment impact studies removed. BDR bronchodilator reversibility, BMI body mass index, COPD chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, EOS eosinophil, QoL quality of life

Exacerbation history within the past 12 months was the strongest predictor of future exacerbations. Across the studies assessing this predictor, 34 out of 35 studies (97.1%) reported a significant association between history of exacerbations and risk of future moderate-to-severe exacerbations (Table 3 ). Specifically, two or more exacerbations in the previous year or at least one hospitalization for COPD in the previous year were identified as reliable predictors of future moderate or severe exacerbations. Even one moderate exacerbation increased the risk of a future exacerbation, with the risk increasing further with each subsequent exacerbation (Fig.  4 ). A severe exacerbation was also found to increase the risk of subsequent exacerbation and hospitalization (Fig.  5 ). Patients experiencing one or more severe exacerbations were more likely to experience further severe exacerbations than moderate exacerbations [ 11 , 12 ]. In contrast, patients with a history of one or more moderate exacerbations were more likely to experience further moderate exacerbations than severe exacerbations [ 11 , 12 ].

Exacerbation history as a risk factor for moderate-to-severe exacerbations. Yun 2018 included two studies; the study from which data were extracted (COPDGene or ECLIPSE) is listed in parentheses. CI confidence interval, ES effect size

Exacerbation history as a risk factor for severe exacerbations. Where data have been extracted from a linked publication rather than the primary publication, the linked publication is listed in parentheses. CI confidence interval, ES , effect size

Overall, 35 studies assessed the association of comorbidities with the risk of exacerbation. All studies except one (97.1%) reported a positive association between comorbidities and the occurrence of moderate-to-severe exacerbations (Table 3 ). In addition to the presence of any comorbidity, specific comorbidities that were found to significantly increase the risk of moderate-to-severe exacerbations included anxiety and depression, cardiovascular comorbidities, gastroesophageal reflux disease/dyspepsia, and respiratory comorbidities (Fig.  6 ). Comorbidities that were significant risk factors for severe exacerbations included cardiovascular, musculoskeletal, and respiratory comorbidities, diabetes, and malignancy (Fig.  7 ). Overall, the strongest association between comorbidities and COPD readmissions in the emergency department was with cardiovascular disease. The degree of risk for both moderate-to-severe and severe exacerbations also increased with the number of comorbidities. A Dutch cohort study found that 88% of patients with COPD had at least one comorbidity, with hypertension (35%) and coronary heart disease (19%) being the most prevalent. In this cohort, the comorbidities with the greatest risk of frequent exacerbations were pulmonary cancer (odds ratio [OR] 1.85) and heart failure (OR 1.72) [ 7 ].

Comorbidities as risk factors for moderate-to-severe exacerbations. Yun 2018 included two studies; the study from which data were extracted (COPDGene or ECLIPSE) is listed in parentheses. Where data have been extracted from a linked publication rather than the primary publication, the linked publication is listed in parentheses. CI confidence interval, ES effect size, GERD gastroesophageal disease

Comorbidities as risk factors for severe exacerbations. Where data have been extracted from a linked publication rather than the primary publication, the linked publication is listed in parentheses. CI confidence interval, CKD , chronic kidney disease, ES effect size

The majority of studies assessing disease severity or bronchodilator reversibility (39/41; 95.1%) indicated a significant positive relation between risk of future exacerbations and greater disease severity, as assessed by greater lung function impairment (in terms of lower FEV 1 , FEV 1 /forced vital capacity ratio, or forced expiratory flow [25–75]/forced vital capacity ratio) or more severe Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) class A − D, and a positive relationship between risk of future exacerbations and lack of bronchodilator reversibility (Table 3 , Figs. 8 and 9 ).

Disease severity as a risk factor for moderate-to-severe exacerbations. Yun 2018 included two studies; the study from which data were extracted (COPDGene or ECLIPSE) is listed in parentheses. Where data have been extracted from a linked publication rather than the primary publication, the linked publication is listed in parentheses. CI confidence interval, ES effect size, FEV 1 f orced expiratory volume in 1 s, FVC , forced vital capacity, GOLD Global Initiative for Obstructive Lung Disease, HR hazard ratio, OR odds ratio

Disease severity and BDR as risk factors for severe exacerbations. ACCP American College of Chest Physicians, ACOS Asthma-COPD overlap syndrome, ATS  American Thoracic Society, BDR bronchodilator reversibility, CI confidence interval, ERS  European Respiratory Society, ES effect size, FEV 1 forced expiratory volume in 1 s, FVC  forced vital capacity, GINA Global Initiative for Asthma, GOLD Global Initiative for Obstructive Lung Disease

Of 21 studies assessing the relationship between blood eosinophil count and exacerbations (Table 3 ), 16 reported estimates for the risk of moderate or severe exacerbations by eosinophil count. A positive association was observed between higher eosinophil count and a higher risk of moderate or severe exacerbations, particularly in patients not treated with an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS); however, five studies reported a significant positive association irrespective of intervention effects. The risk of moderate-to-severe exacerbations was observed to be positively associated with various definitions of higher eosinophil levels (absolute counts: ≥ 200, ≥ 300, ≥ 340, ≥ 400, and ≥ 500 cells/mm 3 ; % of blood eosinophil count: ≥ 2%, ≥ 3%, ≥ 4%, and ≥ 5%). Of note, one study found reduced efficacy of ICS in lowering moderate-to-severe exacerbation rates for current smokers versus former smokers at all eosinophil levels [ 13 ].

Of 12 studies assessing QoL scales, 11 (91.7%) studies reported a significant association between the worsening of QoL scores and the risk of future exacerbations (Table 3 ). Baseline SGRQ [ 14 , 15 ], Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (for which increased scores may indicate impaired QoL) [ 16 ], and Clinical COPD Questionnaire [ 17 , 18 ] scores were found to be associated with future risk of moderate and/or severe COPD exacerbations. For symptom scores, six out of eight studies assessing the association between moderate-to-severe or severe exacerbations with COPD Assessment Test (CAT) scores reported a significant and positive relationship. Furthermore, the risk of moderate-to-severe exacerbations was found to be significantly higher in patients with higher CAT scores (≥ 10) [ 15 , 19 , 20 , 21 ], with one study demonstrating that a CAT score of 15 increased predictive ability for exacerbations compared with a score of 10 or more [ 18 ]. Among 15 studies that assessed the association of modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) scores with the risk of moderate-to-severe or severe exacerbation, 11 found that the risk of moderate-to-severe or severe exacerbations was significantly associated with higher mMRC scores (≥ 2) versus lower scores. Furthermore, morning and night symptoms (measured by Clinical COPD Questionnaire) were associated with poor health status and predicted future exacerbations [ 17 ].

Of 36 studies reporting the relationship between smoking status and moderate-to-severe or severe exacerbations, 22 studies (61.1%) reported a significant positive association (Table 3 ). Passive smoking was also significantly associated with an increased risk of severe exacerbations (OR 1.49) [ 20 ]. Of note, three studies reported a significantly lower rate of moderate-to-severe exacerbations in current smokers compared with former smokers [ 22 , 23 , 24 ].

A total of 14 studies assessed the association of body mass index (BMI) with the occurrence of frequent moderate-to-severe exacerbations in patients with COPD. Six out of 14 studies (42.9%) reported a significant negative association between exacerbations and BMI (Table 3 ). The risk of moderate and/or severe COPD exacerbations was highest among underweight patients compared with normal and overweight patients [ 23 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 ].

In the 29 studies reporting an association between age and moderate or severe exacerbations, more than half found an association of older age with an increased risk of moderate-to-severe exacerbations (58.6%; Table 3 ). Four of these studies noted a significant increase in the risk of moderate-to-severe or severe exacerbations for every 10-year increase in age [ 25 , 26 , 29 , 30 ]. However, 12 studies reported no significant association between age and moderate-to-severe or severe exacerbation risk.

Sixteen out of 33 studies investigating the impact of sex on exacerbation risk found a significant association (48.5%; Table 3 ). Among these, ten studies reported that female sex was associated with an increased risk of moderate-to-severe exacerbations, while six studies showed a higher exacerbation risk in males compared with females. There was some variation in findings by geographic location and exacerbation severity (Additional file 2 : Figs. S1 and S2). Notably, when assessing the risk of severe exacerbations, more studies found an association with male sex compared with female sex (6/13 studies vs 1/13 studies, respectively).

Both studies evaluating associations between exacerbations and environmental factors reported that colder temperature and exposure to major air pollution (NO 2 , O 3 , CO, and/or particulate matter ≤ 10 μm in diameter) increased hospital admissions due to severe exacerbations and moderate-to-severe exacerbation rates [ 31 , 32 ].

Four studies assessed the association of 6-min walk distance with the occurrence of frequent moderate-to-severe exacerbations (Table 3 ). One study (25.0%) found that shorter 6-min walk distance (representing low physical activity) was significantly associated with a shortened time to severe exacerbation, but the effect size was small (hazard ratio 0.99) [ 33 ].

Five out of six studies assessing the relationship between race or ethnicity and exacerbation risk reported significant associations (Table 3 ). Additionally, one study reported an association between geographic location in the US and exacerbations, with living in the Northeast region being the strongest predictor of severe COPD exacerbations versus living in the Midwest and South regions [ 34 ].

Overall, seven studies assessed the association of biomarkers with risk of future exacerbations (Table 3 ), with the majority identifying significant associations between inflammatory biomarkers and increased exacerbation risk, including higher C-reactive protein levels [ 8 , 35 ], fibrinogen levels [ 8 , 30 ], and white blood cell count [ 8 , 15 , 16 ].

This SLR has identified several demographic and clinical characteristics that predict the future risk of COPD exacerbations. Key factors associated with an increased risk of future moderate-to-severe exacerbations included a history of prior exacerbations, worse disease severity and bronchodilator reversibility, the presence of comorbidities, a higher eosinophil count, and older age (Fig.  2 ). These prognostic factors may help clinicians identify patients at high risk of exacerbations, which are a major driver of the burden of COPD, including morbidity and mortality [ 36 ].

Findings from this review summarize the existing evidence, validating the previously published literature [ 6 , 9 , 23 ] and suggesting that the best predictor of future exacerbations is a history of exacerbations in the prior year [ 8 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 26 , 29 , 34 , 35 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 ]. In addition, the effect size generally increased with the number of prior exacerbations, with a stronger effect observed with prior severe versus moderate exacerbations. This effect was observed across regions, including in Europe and North America, and in several global studies. This relationship represents a vicious circle, whereby one exacerbation predisposes a patient to experience future exacerbations and leading to an ever-increasing disease burden, and emphasizes the importance of preventing the first exacerbation event through early, proactive exacerbation prevention. The finding that prior exacerbations tended to be associated with future exacerbations of the same severity suggests that the severity of the underlying disease may influence exacerbation severity. However, the validity of the traditional classification of exacerbation severity has recently been challenged [ 61 ], and further work is required to understand relationships with objective assessments of exacerbation severity.

In addition to exacerbation history, disease severity and bronchodilator reversibility were also strong predictors for future exacerbations [ 8 , 14 , 16 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 26 , 28 , 29 , 33 , 37 , 40 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 48 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 56 , 59 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 , 67 , 68 , 69 , 70 , 71 , 72 , 73 , 74 , 75 , 76 , 77 , 78 ]. The association with disease severity was noted in studies that used GOLD disease stages 1–4 and those that used FEV 1 percent predicted and other lung function assessments as continuous variables. Again, this risk factor is self-perpetuating, as evidence shows that even a single moderate or severe exacerbation may almost double the rate of lung function decline [ 79 ]. Accordingly, disease severity and exacerbation history may be correlated. Margüello et al. concluded that the severity of COPD could be associated with a higher risk of exacerbations, but this effect was partly determined by the exacerbations suffered in the previous year [ 23 ]. It should be noted that FEV 1 is not recommended by GOLD for use as a predictor of exacerbation risk or mortality alone due to insufficient precision when used at the individual patient level [ 5 ].

Another factor that should be considered when assessing individual exacerbation risk is the presence of comorbidities [ 7 , 14 , 16 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 30 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 40 , 41 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 56 , 58 , 59 , 63 , 64 , 73 , 74 , 76 , 77 , 80 , 81 , 82 , 83 , 84 , 85 ]. Comorbidities are common in COPD, in part due to common risk factors (e.g., age, smoking, lifestyle factors) that also increase the risk of other chronic diseases [ 7 ]. Significant associations were observed between exacerbation risk and comorbidities, such as anxiety and depression, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and respiratory comorbidities. As with prior exacerbations, the strength of the association increased with the number of comorbidities. Some comorbidities that were found to be associated with COPD exacerbations share a common biological mechanism of systemic inflammation, such as cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and depression [ 86 ]. Furthermore, other respiratory comorbidities, including asthma and bronchiectasis, involve inflammation of the airways [ 87 ]. In these patients, optimal management of comorbidities may reduce the risk of future COPD exacerbations (and improve QoL), although further research is needed to confirm the efficacy of this approach to exacerbation prevention. As cardiovascular conditions, including hypertension and coronary heart disease, are the most common comorbidities in people with COPD [ 7 ], reducing cardiovascular risk may be a key goal in reducing the occurrence of exacerbations. For other comorbidities, the mechanism for the association with exacerbation risk may be related to non-biological factors. For example, in depression, it has been suggested that the mechanism may relate to greater sensitivity to symptom changes or more frequent physician visits [ 88 ].

There is now a growing body of evidence reporting the relationship between blood eosinophil count and exacerbation risk [ 8 , 13 , 14 , 20 , 37 , 48 , 52 , 56 , 59 , 60 , 62 , 89 , 90 , 91 , 92 , 93 , 94 , 95 , 96 , 97 , 98 , 99 ]. Data from many large clinical trials (SUNSET [ 89 ], FLAME [ 96 ], WISDOM [ 98 ], IMPACT [ 13 ], TRISTAN [ 99 ], INSPIRE [ 99 ], KRONOS [ 91 ], TRIBUTE [ 48 ], TRILOGY [ 52 ], TRINITY [ 56 ]) have also shown relationships between treatment, eosinophil count, and exacerbation rates. Evidence shows that eosinophil count, along with other effect modifiers (e.g., exacerbation history), can be used to predict reductions in exacerbations with ICS treatment. Identifying patients most likely to respond to ICS should contribute to personalized medicine approaches to treat COPD. One challenge in drawing a strong conclusion from eosinophil counts is the choice of a cut-off value, with a variety of absolute and percentage values observed to be positively associated with the risk of moderate-to-severe exacerbations. The use of absolute counts may be more practical, as these are not affected by variations in other immune cell numbers; however, there is a lack of consensus on this point [ 100 ].

Across the studies examined, associations between sex and the risk of moderate and/or severe exacerbations were variable [ 14 , 16 , 18 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 37 , 40 , 42 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 51 , 52 , 56 , 58 , 59 , 63 , 73 , 74 , 77 , 80 , 83 , 84 , 85 ]. A greater number of studies showed an increased risk of exacerbations in females compared with males. In contrast, some studies failed to detect a relationship, suggesting that country-specific or cultural factors may play a role. A majority of the included studies evaluated more male patients than female patients; to further elucidate the relationship between sex and exacerbations, more studies in female patients are warranted. Over half of the studies that assessed the relationship between age and exacerbation risk found an association between increasing age and increasing risk of moderate-to-severe COPD exacerbations [ 14 , 16 , 18 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 33 , 40 , 42 , 44 , 45 , 47 , 51 , 52 , 54 , 56 , 63 , 73 , 74 , 77 , 80 , 83 , 85 ].

Our findings also suggested that patients with low BMI have greater risk of moderate and/or severe exacerbations. The mechanism underlying this increased risk in underweight patients is poorly understood; however, loss of lean body mass in patients with COPD may be related to ongoing systemic inflammation that impacts skeletal muscle mass [ 101 , 102 , 103 ].

A limitation of this SLR, that may have resulted in some studies with valid results being missed, was the exclusion of non-English-language studies and the limitation by date; however, the search strategy was otherwise broad, resulting in the review of a large number of studies. The majority of studies captured in this SLR were from Europe, North America, and Asia. The findings may therefore be less generalizable to patients in other regions, such as Africa or South America. Given that one study reported an association between geographic location within different regions of the US and exacerbations [ 34 ], it is plausible that risk of exacerbations may be impacted by global location. As no formal meta-analysis was planned, the assessments are based on a qualitative synthesis of studies. A majority of the included studies looked at exposures of certain factors (e.g., history of exacerbations) at baseline; however, some of these factors change over time, calling into question whether a more sophisticated statistical analysis should have been conducted in some cases to consider time-varying covariates. Our results can only inform on associations, not causation, and there are likely bidirectional relationships between many factors and exacerbation risk (e.g., health status). Finally, while our review of the literature captured a large number of prognostic factors, other variables such as genetic factors, lung microbiome composition, and changes in therapy over time have not been widely studied to date, but might also influence exacerbation frequency [ 104 ]. Further research is needed to assess the contribution of these factors to exacerbation risk.

This SLR captured publications up to July 2019. However, further studies have since been published that further support the prognostic factors identified here. For example, recent studies have reported an increased risk of exacerbations in patients with a history of exacerbations [ 105 ], comorbidities [ 106 ], poorer lung function (GOLD stage) [ 105 ], higher symptomatic burden [ 107 ], female sex [ 105 ], and lower BMI [ 106 , 108 ].

In summary, the literature assessing risk factors for moderate-to-severe COPD exacerbations shows that there are associations between several demographic and disease characteristics with COPD exacerbations, potentially allowing clinicians to identify patients most at risk of future exacerbations. Exacerbation history, comorbidities, and disease severity or bronchodilator reversibility were the factors most strongly associated with exacerbation risk, and should be considered in future research efforts to develop prognostic tools to estimate the likelihood of exacerbation occurrence. Importantly, many prognostic factors for exacerbations, such as symptom burden, QoL, and comorbidities, are modifiable with optimal pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic treatments or lifestyle modifications. Overall, the evidence suggests that, taken together, predicting and reducing exacerbation risk is an achievable goal in COPD.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Abbreviations

Body mass index

COPD Assessment Test

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Forced expiratory volume in 1 s

Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease

Inhaled corticosteroid

Modified Medical Research Council

Quality of life

St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire

World Health Organization. The top 10 causes of death. 2018. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/the-top-10-causes-of-death . Accessed 22 Jul 2020.

GBD 2019 Diseases and Injuries Collaborators. Global burden of 369 diseases and injuries in 204 countries and territories, 1990–2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. The Lancet. 2020;396:1204–22.

Article   Google Scholar  

Hurst JR, Skolnik N, Hansen GJ, Anzueto A, Donaldson GC, Dransfield MT, Varghese P. Understanding the impact of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbations on patient health and quality of life. Eur J Intern Med. 2020;73:1–6.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Zhang Y, Morgan RL, Alonso-Coello P, Wiercioch W, Bała MM, Jaeschke RR, Styczeń K, Pardo-Hernandez H, Selva A, Ara Begum H, et al. A systematic review of how patients value COPD outcomes. Eur Respir J. 2018;52:1800222.

Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease. 2022 GOLD Report. Global strategy for the diagnosis, management and prevention of COPD. 2022. https://goldcopd.org/2022-gold-reports-2/ . Accessed 02 Feb 2022.

Müllerová H, Shukla A, Hawkins A, Quint J. Risk factors for acute exacerbations of COPD in a primary care population: a retrospective observational cohort study. BMJ Open. 2014;4: e006171.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Westerik JAM, Metting EI, van Boven JFM, Tiersma W, Kocks JWH, Schermer TR. Associations between chronic comorbidity and exacerbation risk in primary care patients with COPD. Respir Res. 2017;18:31.

Vedel-Krogh S, Nielsen SF, Lange P, Vestbo J, Nordestgaard BG. Blood eosinophils and exacerbations in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The Copenhagen General Population Study. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2016;193:965–74.

Hurst JR, Vestbo J, Anzueto A, Locantore N, Müllerová H, Tal-Singer R, Miller B, Lomas DA, Agusti A, Macnee W, et al. Susceptibility to exacerbation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. N Engl J Med. 2010;363:1128–38.

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, The PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009;6:e1000097.

Çolak Y, Afzal S, Marott JL, Nordestgaard BG, Vestbo J, Ingebrigtsen TS, Lange P. Prognosis of COPD depends on severity of exacerbation history: a population-based analysis. Respir Med. 2019;155:141–7.

Rothnie KJ, Müllerová H, Smeeth L, Quint JK. Natural history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbations in a general practice-based population with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2018;198:464–71.

Pascoe S, Barnes N, Brusselle G, Compton C, Criner GJ, Dransfield MT, Halpin DMG, Han MK, Hartley B, Lange P, et al. Blood eosinophils and treatment response with triple and dual combination therapy in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: analysis of the IMPACT trial. Lancet Respir Med. 2019;7:745–56.

Yun JH, Lamb A, Chase R, Singh D, Parker MM, Saferali A, Vestbo J, Tal-Singer R, Castaldi PJ, Silverman EK, et al. Blood eosinophil count thresholds and exacerbations in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2018;141:2037-2047.e10.

Yoon HY, Park SY, Lee CH, Byun MK, Na JO, Lee JS, Lee WY, Yoo KH, Jung KS, Lee JH. Prediction of first acute exacerbation using COPD subtypes identified by cluster analysis. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2019;14:1389–97.

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Yohannes AM, Mulerova H, Lavoie K, Vestbo J, Rennard SI, Wouters E, Hanania NA. The association of depressive symptoms with rates of acute exacerbations in patients with COPD: results from a 3-year longitudinal follow-up of the ECLIPSE cohort. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2017;18:955-959.e6.

Tsiligianni I, Metting E, van der Molen T, Chavannes N, Kocks J. Morning and night symptoms in primary care COPD patients: a cross-sectional and longitudinal study. An UNLOCK study from the IPCRG. NPJ Prim Care Respir Med. 2016;26:16040.

Jo YS, Yoon HI, Kim DK, Yoo CG, Lee CH. Comparison of COPD Assessment Test and Clinical COPD Questionnaire to predict the risk of exacerbation. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2018;13:101–7.

Marçôa R, Rodrigues DM, Dias M, Ladeira I, Vaz AP, Lima R, Guimarães M. Classification of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) according to the new Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) 2017: comparison with GOLD 2011. COPD. 2018;15:21–6.

Han MK, Quibrera PM, Carretta EE, Barr RG, Bleecker ER, Bowler RP, Cooper CB, Comellas A, Couper DJ, Curtis JL, et al. Frequency of exacerbations in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: an analysis of the SPIROMICS cohort. Lancet Respir Med. 2017;5:619–26.

Yii ACA, Loh CH, Tiew PY, Xu H, Taha AAM, Koh J, Tan J, Lapperre TS, Anzueto A, Tee AKH. A clinical prediction model for hospitalized COPD exacerbations based on “treatable traits.” Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2019;14:719–28.

McGarvey L, Lee AJ, Roberts J, Gruffydd-Jones K, McKnight E, Haughney J. Characterisation of the frequent exacerbator phenotype in COPD patients in a large UK primary care population. Respir Med. 2015;109:228–37.

Margüello MS, Garrastazu R, Ruiz-Nuñez M, Helguera JM, Arenal S, Bonnardeux C, León C, Miravitlles M, García-Rivero JL. Independent effect of prior exacerbation frequency and disease severity on the risk of future exacerbations of COPD: a retrospective cohort study. NPJ Prim Care Respir Med. 2016;26:16046.

Engel B, Schindler C, Leuppi JD, Rutishauser J. Predictors of re-exacerbation after an index exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in the REDUCE randomised clinical trial. Swiss Med Wkly. 2017;147: w14439.

PubMed   Google Scholar  

Benson VS, Müllerová H, Vestbo J, Wedzicha JA, Patel A, Hurst JR. Evaluation of COPD longitudinally to identify predictive surrogate endpoints (ECLIPSE) investigators. Associations between gastro-oesophageal reflux, its management and exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Respir Med. 2015;109:1147–54.

Santibáñez M, Garrastazu R, Ruiz-Nuñez M, Helguera JM, Arenal S, Bonnardeux C, León C, García-Rivero JL. Predictors of hospitalized exacerbations and mortality in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. PLoS ONE. 2016;11: e0158727.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   CAS   Google Scholar  

Jo YS, Kim YH, Lee JY, Kim K, Jung KS, Yoo KH, Rhee CK. Impact of BMI on exacerbation and medical care expenses in subjects with mild to moderate airflow obstruction. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2018;13:2261–9.

Alexopoulos EC, Malli F, Mitsiki E, Bania EG, Varounis C, Gourgoulianis KI. Frequency and risk factors of COPD exacerbations and hospitalizations: a nationwide study in Greece (Greek Obstructive Lung Disease Epidemiology and health ecoNomics: GOLDEN study). Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2015;10:2665–74.

PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Liu D, Peng SH, Zhang J, Bai SH, Liu HX, Qu JM. Prediction of short term re-exacerbation in patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2015;10:1265–73.

Müllerová H, Maselli DJ, Locantore N, Vestbo J, Hurst JR, Wedzicha JA, Bakke P, Agusti A, Anzueto A. Hospitalized exacerbations of COPD: risk factors and outcomes in the ECLIPSE cohort. Chest. 2015;147:999–1007.

de Miguel-Díez J, Hernández-Vázquez J, López-de-Andrés A, Álvaro-Meca A, Hernández-Barrera V, Jiménez-García R. Analysis of environmental risk factors for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbation: a case-crossover study (2004–2013). PLoS ONE. 2019;14: e0217143.

Krachunov II, Kyuchukov NH, Ivanova ZI, Yanev NA, Hristova PA, Borisova ED, Popova TP, Pavlov PS, Nikolova PT, Ivanov YY. Impact of air pollution and outdoor temperature on the rate of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbations. Folia Med (Plovdiv). 2017;59:423–9.

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Baumeler L, Papakonstantinou E, Milenkovic B, Lacoma A, Louis R, Aerts JG, Welte T, Kostikas K, Blasi F, Boersma W, et al. Therapy with proton-pump inhibitors for gastroesophageal reflux disease does not reduce the risk for severe exacerbations in COPD. Respirology. 2016;21:883–90.

Annavarapu S, Goldfarb S, Gelb M, Moretz C, Renda A, Kaila S. Development and validation of a predictive model to identify patients at risk of severe COPD exacerbations using administrative claims data. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2018;13:2121–30.

Crisafulli E, Torres A, Huerta A, Méndez R, Guerrero M, Martinez R, Liapikou A, Soler N, Sethi S, Menéndez R. C-reactive protein at discharge, diabetes mellitus and ≥1 hospitalization during previous year predict early readmission in patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. COPD. 2015;12:311–20.

Bollmeier SG, Hartmann AP. Management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a review focusing on exacerbations. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2020;77:259–68.

Bafadhel M, Peterson S, De Blas MA, Calverley PM, Rennard SI, Richter K, Fagerås M. Predictors of exacerbation risk and response to budesonide in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a post-hoc analysis of three randomised trials. Lancet Respir Med. 2018;6:117–26.

Calverley PM, Anzueto AR, Dusser D, Mueller A, Metzdorf N, Wise RA. Treatment of exacerbations as a predictor of subsequent outcomes in patients with COPD. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2018;13:1297–308.

Calverley PM, Tetzlaff K, Dusser D, Wise RA, Mueller A, Metzdorf N, Anzueto A. Determinants of exacerbation risk in patients with COPD in the TIOSPIR study. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2017;12:3391–405.

Eklöf J, Sørensen R, Ingebrigtsen TS, Sivapalan P, Achir I, Boel JB, Bangsborg J, Ostergaard C, Dessau RB, Jensen US, et al. Pseudomonas aeruginosa and risk of death and exacerbations in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: an observational cohort study of 22 053 patients. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2020;26:227–34.

Estirado C, Ceccato A, Guerrero M, Huerta A, Cilloniz C, Vilaró O, Gabarrús A, Gea J, Crisafulli E, Soler N, Torres A. Microorganisms resistant to conventional antimicrobials in acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Respir Res. 2018;19:119.

Fuhrman C, Moutengou E, Roche N, Delmas MC. Prognostic factors after hospitalization for COPD exacerbation. Rev Mal Respir. 2017;34:1–18.

Krachunov I, Kyuchukov N, Ivanova Z, Yanev NA, Hristova PA, Pavlov P, Glogovska P, Popova T, Ivanov YY. Stability of frequent exacerbator phenotype in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Folia Med (Plovdiv). 2018;60:536–45.

Make BJ, Eriksson G, Calverley PM, Jenkins CR, Postma DS, Peterson S, Östlund O, Anzueto A. A score to predict short-term risk of COPD exacerbations (SCOPEX). Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2015;10:201–9.

Montserrat-Capdevila J, Godoy P, Marsal JR, Barbé F. Predictive model of hospital admission for COPD exacerbation. Respir Care. 2015;60:1288–94.

Montserrat-Capdevila J, Godoy P, Marsal JR, Barbé F, Galván L. Risk factors for exacerbation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a prospective study. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2016;20:389–95.

Orea-Tejeda A, Navarrete-Peñaloza AG, Verdeja-Vendrell L, Jiménez-Cepeda A, González-Islas DG, Hernández-Zenteno R, Keirns-Davis C, Sánchez-Santillán R, Velazquez-Montero A, Puentes RG. Right heart failure as a risk factor for severe exacerbation in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: prospective cohort study. Clin Respir J. 2018;12:2635–41.

Papi A, Vestbo J, Fabbri L, Corradi M, Prunier H, Cohuet G, Guasconi A, Montagna I, Vezzoli S, Petruzzelli S, et al. Extrafine inhaled triple therapy versus dual bronchodilator therapy in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (TRIBUTE): a double-blind, parallel group, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2018;391:1076–84.

Lipson DA, Barnhart F, Brealey N, Brooks J, Criner GJ, Day NC, Dransfield MT, Halpin DMG, Han MK, Jones CE, et al. Once-daily single-inhaler triple versus dual therapy in patients with COPD. N Engl J Med. 2018;378:1671–80.

Pasquale MK, Xu Y, Baker CL, Zou KH, Teeter JG, Renda AM, Davis CC, Lee TC, Bobula J. COPD exacerbations associated with the modified Medical Research Council scale and COPD assessment test among Humana Medicare members. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2016;11:111–21.

Schuler M, Wittmann M, Faller H, Schultz K. Including changes in dyspnea after inpatient rehabilitation improves prediction models of exacerbations in COPD. Respir Med. 2018;141:87–93.

Singh D, Papi A, Corradi M, Pavlišová I, Montagna I, Francisco C, Cohuet G, Vezzoli S, Scuri M, Vestbo J. Single inhaler triple therapy versus inhaled corticosteroid plus long-acting β 2 -agonist therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (TRILOGY): a double-blind, parallel group, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2016;388:963–73.

Søgaard M, Madsen M, Løkke A, Hilberg O, Sørensen HT, Thomsen RW. Incidence and outcomes of patients hospitalized with COPD exacerbation with and without pneumonia. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2016;11:455–65.

Stanford RH, Nag A, Mapel DW, Lee TA, Rosiello R, Schatz M, Vekeman F, Gauthier-Loiselle M, Merrigan JFP, Duh MS. Claims-based risk model for first severe COPD exacerbation. Am J Manag Care. 2018;24:e45–53.

Stanford RH, Lau MS, Li Y, Stemkowski S. External validation of a COPD risk measure in a commercial and medicare population: the COPD treatment ratio. J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2019;25:58–69.

Vestbo J, Papi A, Corradi M, Blazhko V, Montagna I, Francisco C, Cohuet G, Vezzoli S, Scuri M, Singh D. Single inhaler extrafine triple therapy versus long-acting muscarinic antagonist therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (TRINITY): a double-blind, parallel group, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2017;389:1919–29.

Wei X, Ma Z, Yu N, Ren J, Jin C, Mi J, Shi M, Tian L, Gao Y, Guo Y. Risk factors predict frequent hospitalization in patients with acute exacerbation of COPD. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2018;13:121–9.

Whalley D, Svedsater H, Doward L, Crawford R, Leather D, Lay-Flurrie J, Bosanquet N. Follow-up interviews from The Salford Lung Study (COPD) and analyses per treatment and exacerbations. NPJ Prim Care Respir Med. 2019;29:20.

Zeiger RS, Tran TN, Butler RK, Schatz M, Li Q, Khatry DB, Martin U, Kawatkar AA, Chen W. Relationship of blood eosinophil count to exacerbations in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2018;6:944-954.e945.

Vogelmeier CF, Kostikas K, Fang J, Tian H, Jones B, Morgan CL, Fogel R, Gutzwiller FS, Cao H. Evaluation of exacerbations and blood eosinophils in UK and US COPD populations. Respir Res. 2019;20:178.

Celli BR, Fabbri LM, Aaron SD, Agusti A, Brook R, Criner GJ, Franssen FME, Humbert M, Hurst JR, O’Donnell D, et al. An updated definition and severity classification of COPD exacerbations: the Rome proposal. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2021;204:1251–8.

Adir Y, Hakrush O, Shteinberg M, Schneer S, Agusti A. Circulating eosinophil levels do not predict severe exacerbations in COPD: a retrospective study. ERJ Open Research. 2018;4:00022–2018.

Bartels W, Adamson S, Leung L, Sin DD, van Eeden SF. Emergency department management of acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: factors predicting readmission. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2018;13:1647–54.

Kim V, Zhao H, Regan E, Han MK, Make BJ, Crapo JD, Jones PW, Curtis JL, Silverman EK, Criner GJ, COPDGene Investigators. The St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire definition of chronic bronchitis may be a better predictor of COPD exacerbations compared with the classic definition. Chest. 2019;156:685–95.

Abston E, Comellas A, Reed RM, Kim V, Wise RA, Brower R, Fortis S, Beichel R, Bhatt S, Zabner J, et al. Higher BMI is associated with higher expiratory airflow normalised for lung volume (FEF25-75/FVC) in COPD. BMJ Open Respir Res. 2017;4: e000231.

Emura I, Usuda H, Satou K. Appearance of large scavenger receptor A-positive cells in peripheral blood: a potential risk factor for severe exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Pathol Int. 2019;69:187–92.

Erol S, Sen E, Gizem Kilic Y, Yousif A, Akkoca Yildiz O, Acican T, Saryal S. Does the 2017 revision improve the ability of GOLD to predict risk of future moderate and severe exacerbation? Clin Respir J. 2018;12:2354–60.

Han MZ, Hsiue TR, Tsai SH, Huang TH, Liao XM, Chen CZ. Validation of the GOLD 2017 and new 16 subgroups (1A–4D) classifications in predicting exacerbation and mortality in COPD patients. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2018;13:3425–33.

Huang TH, Hsiue TR, Lin SH, Liao XM, Su PL, Chen CZ. Comparison of different staging methods for COPD in predicting outcomes. Eur Resp J. 2018;51:1700577.

Jung YH, Lee DY, Kim DW, Park SS, Heo EY, Chung HS, Kim DK. Clinical significance of laryngopharyngeal reflux in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2015;10:1343–51.

CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Kim J, Kim WJ, Lee CH, Lee SH, Lee MG, Shin KC, Yoo KH, Lee JH, Lim SY, Na JO, et al. Which bronchodilator reversibility criteria can predict severe acute exacerbation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients? Respir Res. 2017;18:107.

Kobayashi S, Hanagama M, Ishida M, Sato H, Ono M, Yamanda S, Yamada M, Aizawa H, Yanai M. Clinical characteristics and outcomes in Japanese patients with COPD according to the 2017 GOLD classification: the Ishinomaki COPD Network Registry. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2018;13:3947–55.

Lee SH, Lee JH, Yoon HI, Park HY, Kim TH, Yoo KH, Oh YM, Jung KS, Lee SD, Lee SW. Change in inhaled corticosteroid treatment and COPD exacerbations: an analysis of real-world data from the KOLD/KOCOSS cohorts. Respir Res. 2019;20:62.

Pavlovic R, Stefanovic S, Lazic Z, Jankovic S. Factors associated with the rate of COPD exacerbations that require hospitalization. Turk J Med Sci. 2017;47:134–41.

Song JH, Lee CH, Um SJ, Park YB, Yoo KH, Jung KS, Lee SD, Oh YM, Lee JH, Kim EK, Kim DK. Clinical impacts of the classification by 2017 GOLD guideline comparing previous ones on outcomes of COPD in real-world cohorts. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2018;13:3473–84.

Sundh J, Johansson G, Larsson K, Lindén A, Löfdahl CG, Sandström T, Janson C. The phenotype of concurrent chronic bronchitis and frequent exacerbations in patients with severe COPD attending Swedish secondary care units. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2015;10:2327–34.

Urwyler P, Hussein NA, Bridevaux PO, Chhajed PN, Geiser T, Grendelmeier P, Zellweger LJ, Kohler M, Maier S, Miedinger D, et al. Predictive factors for exacerbation and reexacerbation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: an extension of the Cox model to analyze data from the Swiss COPD cohort. Multidiscip Respir Med. 2019;14:7.

Wallace AE, Kaila S, Bayer V, Shaikh A, Shinde MU, Willey VJ, Napier MB, Singer JR. Health care resource utilization and exacerbation rates in patients with COPD stratified by disease severity in a commercially insured population. J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2019;25:205–17.

Halpin DMG, Decramer M, Celli BR, Mueller A, Metzdorf N, Tashkin DP. Effect of a single exacerbation on decline in lung function in COPD. Respir Med. 2017;128:85–91.

Bade BC, DeRycke EC, Ramsey C, Skanderson M, Crothers K, Haskell S, Bean-Mayberry B, Brandt C, Bastian LA, Akgün KM. Sex differences in veterans admitted to the hospital for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbation. Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2019;16:707–14.

Iyer AS, Bhatt SP, Dransfield M, Kinney G, Holm K, Wamboldt FS, Hanania N, Martinez C, Regan E, Foreman MG, et al. Psychological distress prospectively predicts severe exacerbations in smokers with and without airflow limitation—a longitudinal follow-up study of the COPDGene cohort [abstract]. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1164/ajrccm-conference.2017.195.1_MeetingAbstracts.A4709 .

Diamond M, Zhao H, Armstrong HF, Morrison M, Bailey KL, Carretta EE, Criner GJ, Han MK, Bleeker E, Cooper CB, et al. Anxiety and depression, either alone or in combination, are associated with respiratory exacerbations in smokers with and without COPD [abstract]. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2017;195:1615–31.

Google Scholar  

Lau CS, Siracuse BL, Chamberlain RS. Readmission After COPD Exacerbation Scale: determining 30-day readmission risk for COPD patients. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2017;12:1891–902.

Pikoula M, Quint JK, Nissen F, Hemingway H, Smeeth L, Denaxas S. Identifying clinically important COPD sub-types using data-driven approaches in primary care population based electronic health records. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2019;19:86.

Wei YF, Tsai YH, Wang CC, Kuo PH. Impact of overweight and obesity on acute exacerbations of COPD—subgroup analysis of the Taiwan Obstructive Lung Disease cohort. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2017;12:2723–9.

Barnes PJ, Celli BR. Systemic manifestations and comorbidities of COPD. Eur Resp J. 2009;33:1165–85.

Polverino E, Dimakou K, Hurst J, Martinez-Garcia MA, Miravitlles M, Paggiaro P, Shteinberg M, Aliberti S, Chalmers JD. The overlap between bronchiectasis and chronic airway diseases: state of the art and future directions. Eur Respir J. 2018;52:1800328.

Xu W, Collet JP, Shapiro S, Lin Y, Yang T, Platt RW, Wang C, Bourbeau J. Independent effect of depression and anxiety on chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbations and hospitalizations. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2008;178:913–20.

Chapman KR, Hurst JR, Frent SM, Larbig M, Fogel R, Guerin T, Banerji D, Patalano F, Goyal P, Pfister P, et al. Long-term triple therapy de-escalation to indacaterol/glycopyrronium in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (SUNSET): a randomized, double-blind, triple-dummy clinical trial. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2018;198:329–39.

Couillard S, Larivée P, Courteau J, Vanasse A. Eosinophils in COPD exacerbations are associated with increased readmissions. Chest. 2017;151:366–73.

Ferguson GT, Rabe KF, Martinez FJ, Fabbri LM, Wang C, Ichinose M, Bourne E, Ballal S, Darken P, DeAngelis K, et al. Triple therapy with budesonide/glycopyrrolate/formoterol fumarate with co-suspension delivery technology versus dual therapies in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (KRONOS): a double-blind, parallel-group, multicentre, phase 3 randomised controlled trial. Lancet Respir Med. 2018;6:747–58.

Ko FWS, Chan KP, Ngai J, Ng SS, Yip WH, Ip A, Chan TO, Hui DSC. Blood eosinophil count as a predictor of hospital length of stay in COPD exacerbations. Respirology. 2019;25:259–66.

MacDonald MI, Osadnik CR, Bulfin L, Hamza K, Leong P, Wong A, King PT, Bardin PG. Low and high blood eosinophil counts as biomarkers in hospitalized acute exacerbations of COPD. Chest. 2019;156:92–100.

Müllerová H, Hahn B, Simard EP, Mu G, Hatipoğlu U. Exacerbations and health care resource use among patients with COPD in relation to blood eosinophil counts. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2019;14:683–92.

Bafadhel M, Greening NJ, Harvey-Dunstan TC, Williams JEA, Morgan MD, Brightling CE, Hussain SF, Pavord ID, Singh SJ, Steiner MC. Blood eosinophils and outcomes in severe hospitalised exacerbations of COPD. Chest. 2016;150:320–8.

Roche N, Chapman KR, Vogelmeier CF, Herth FJF, Thach C, Fogel R, Olsson P, Patalano F, Banerji D, Wedzicha JA. Blood eosinophils and response to maintenance chronic obstructive pulmonary disease treatment. Data from the FLAME trial. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2017;195:1189–97.

Vestbo J, Vogelmeier CF, Small M, Siddall J, Fogel R, Kostikas K. Inhaled corticosteroid use by exacerbations and eosinophils: a real-world COPD population. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2019;14:853–61.

Watz H, Tetzlaff K, Wouters EFM, Kirsten A, Magnussen H, Rodriguez-Roisin R, Vogelmeier C, Fabbri LM, Chanez P, Dahl R, et al. Blood eosinophil count and exacerbations in severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease after withdrawal of inhaled corticosteroids: a post-hoc analysis of the WISDOM trial. Lancet Respir Med. 2016;4:390–8.

Pavord ID, Lettis S, Locantore N, Pascoe S, Jones PW, Wedzicha JA, Barnes NC. Blood eosinophils and inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting beta-2 agonist efficacy in COPD. Thorax. 2016;71:118–25.

Singh D. Predicting corticosteroid response in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Blood eosinophils gain momentum. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2017;196:1098–100.

Vestbo J, Prescott E, Almdal T, Dahl M, Nordestgaard BG, Andersen T, Sørensen TIA, Lange P. Body mass, fat-free body mass, and prognosis in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease from a random population sample: findings from the Copenhagen City Heart Study. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2006;173:79–83.

Agustí AGN, Noguera A, Sauleda J, Sala E, Pons J, Busquets X. Systemic effects of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Eur Respir J. 2003;21:347–60.

Agustí AGN, Sauleda J, Miralles C, Gomez C, Togores B, Sala E, Batle S, Busquets X. Skeletal muscle apoptosis and weight loss in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2002;166:485–9.

Labaki WW, Martinez FJ. Time to understand the infrequency of the frequent exacerbator phenotype in COPD. Chest. 2018;153:1087–8.

Hartley BF, Barnes NC, Lettis S, Compton CH, Papi A, Jones P. Risk factors for exacerbations and pneumonia in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a pooled analysis. Respir Res. 2020;21:5.

Kim Y, Kim YJ, Kang YM, Cho WK. Exploring the impact of number and type of comorbidities on the risk of severe COPD exacerbations in Korean Population: a Nationwide Cohort Study. BMC Pulm Med. 2021;21:151.

Mackay AJ, Kostikas K, Roche N, Frent SM, Olsson P, Pfister P, Gupta P, Patalano F, Banerji D, Wedzicha JA. Impact of baseline symptoms and health status on COPD exacerbations in the FLAME study. Respir Res. 2020;21:93.

Smulders L, van der Aalst A, Neuhaus EDET, Polman S, Franssen FME, van Vliet M, de Kruif MD. Decreased risk of COPD exacerbations in obese patients. COPD. 2020;17:485–91.

Battisti WP, Wager E, Baltzer L, Bridges D, Cairns A, Carswell CI, Citrome L, Gurr JA, Mooney LA, Moore BJ, et al. Good publication practice for communicating company-sponsored medical research: GPP3. Ann Intern Med. 2015;163:461–4.

Putcha N, Barr RG, Han M, Woodruff PG, Bleecker ER, Kanner RE, Martinez FJ, Tashkin DP, Rennard SI, Breysse P, et al. Understanding the impact of passive smoke exposure on outcomes in COPD [abstract]. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2015;191:411–20.

Wu Z, Yang D, Ge Z, Yan M, Wu N, Liu Y. Body mass index of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease is associated with pulmonary function and exacerbations: a retrospective real world research. J Thorac Dis. 2018;10:5086–99.

Download references

Acknowledgements

Medical writing support, under the direction of the authors, was provided by Julia King, PhD, and Sarah Piggott, MChem, CMC Connect, McCann Health Medical Communications, funded by AstraZeneca in accordance with Good Publication Practice (GPP3) guidelines [ 109 ].

This study was supported by AstraZeneca.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

UCL Respiratory, University College London, London, WC1E 6BT, UK

John R. Hurst

Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

MeiLan K. Han

Formerly of Parexel International, Mohali, India

Barinder Singh, Gagandeep Kaur & Mohd Kashif Siddiqui

Parexel International, Mohali, India

Sakshi Sharma

Formerly of AstraZeneca, Cambridge, UK

Enrico de Nigris

AstraZeneca, Gothenburg, Sweden

Ulf Holmgren

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

The authors have made the following declaration about their contributions. JRH and MKH made substantial contributions to the interpretation of data; BS, SS, GK, and MKS made substantial contributions to the acquisition, analysis, and interpretation of data; EdN and UH made substantial contributions to the conception and design of the work and the interpretation of data. All authors contributed to drafting or critically revising the article, have approved the submitted version, and agree to be personally accountable for their own contributions and to ensure that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work, even ones in which the author was not personally involved, are appropriately investigated, resolved, and the resolution documented in the literature. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to John R. Hurst .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Competing interests.

JRH reports consulting fees from AstraZeneca; speaker fees from AstraZeneca, Chiesi, Pfizer, and Takeda; and travel support from GlaxoSmithKline and AstraZeneca. MKH reports assistance with conduction of this research and publication from AstraZeneca; personal fees from Aerogen, Altesa Biopharma, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, Cipla, DevPro, GlaxoSmithKline, Integrity, Medscape, Merck, Mylan, NACE, Novartis, Polarean, Pulmonx, Regeneron, Sanofi, Teva, Verona, United Therapeutics, and UpToDate; either in kind research support or funds paid to the institution from the American Lung Association, AstraZeneca, Biodesix, Boehringer Ingelheim, the COPD Foundation, Gala Therapeutics, the NIH, Novartis, Nuvaira, Sanofi, and Sunovion; participation in Data Safety Monitoring Boards for Novartis and Medtronic with funds paid to the institution; and stock options from Altesa Biopharma and Meissa Vaccines. BS, GK, and MKS are former employees of Parexel International. SS is an employee of Parexel International, which was funded by AstraZeneca to conduct this analysis. EdN is a former employee of AstraZeneca and previously held stock and/or stock options in the company. UH is an employee of AstraZeneca and holds stock and/or stock options in the company.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Additional file1: table s1..

Search strategies. Table S2. List of included studies with linked publications. Table S3. Study characteristics across the 76 included studies. Table S4. Clinical characteristics of the patients assessed across the included studies.

Additional file 2: Fig. S1.

Sex (male vs female) as a risk factor for moderate-to-severe exacerbations. Fig. S2. Sex (male vs female) as a risk factor for severe exacerbations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Hurst, J.R., Han, M.K., Singh, B. et al. Prognostic risk factors for moderate-to-severe exacerbations in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a systematic literature review. Respir Res 23 , 213 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12931-022-02123-5

Download citation

Received : 02 March 2022

Accepted : 20 July 2022

Published : 23 August 2022

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12931-022-02123-5

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Exacerbations
• Comorbidities
• Hospitalization

Respiratory Research

ISSN: 1465-993X

• General enquiries: [email protected]