Purdue Online Writing Lab College of Liberal Arts
Writing a Literature Review
Welcome to the Purdue OWL
This page is brought to you by the OWL at Purdue University. When printing this page, you must include the entire legal notice.
Copyright ©1995-2018 by The Writing Lab & The OWL at Purdue and Purdue University. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, reproduced, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our terms and conditions of fair use.
A literature review is a document or section of a document that collects key sources on a topic and discusses those sources in conversation with each other (also called synthesis ). The lit review is an important genre in many disciplines, not just literature (i.e., the study of works of literature such as novels and plays). When we say “literature review” or refer to “the literature,” we are talking about the research ( scholarship ) in a given field. You will often see the terms “the research,” “the scholarship,” and “the literature” used mostly interchangeably.
Where, when, and why would I write a lit review?
There are a number of different situations where you might write a literature review, each with slightly different expectations; different disciplines, too, have field-specific expectations for what a literature review is and does. For instance, in the humanities, authors might include more overt argumentation and interpretation of source material in their literature reviews, whereas in the sciences, authors are more likely to report study designs and results in their literature reviews; these differences reflect these disciplines’ purposes and conventions in scholarship. You should always look at examples from your own discipline and talk to professors or mentors in your field to be sure you understand your discipline’s conventions, for literature reviews as well as for any other genre.
A literature review can be a part of a research paper or scholarly article, usually falling after the introduction and before the research methods sections. In these cases, the lit review just needs to cover scholarship that is important to the issue you are writing about; sometimes it will also cover key sources that informed your research methodology.
Lit reviews can also be standalone pieces, either as assignments in a class or as publications. In a class, a lit review may be assigned to help students familiarize themselves with a topic and with scholarship in their field, get an idea of the other researchers working on the topic they’re interested in, find gaps in existing research in order to propose new projects, and/or develop a theoretical framework and methodology for later research. As a publication, a lit review usually is meant to help make other scholars’ lives easier by collecting and summarizing, synthesizing, and analyzing existing research on a topic. This can be especially helpful for students or scholars getting into a new research area, or for directing an entire community of scholars toward questions that have not yet been answered.
What are the parts of a lit review?
Most lit reviews use a basic introduction-body-conclusion structure; if your lit review is part of a larger paper, the introduction and conclusion pieces may be just a few sentences while you focus most of your attention on the body. If your lit review is a standalone piece, the introduction and conclusion take up more space and give you a place to discuss your goals, research methods, and conclusions separately from where you discuss the literature itself.
Introduction:
- An introductory paragraph that explains what your working topic and thesis is
- A forecast of key topics or texts that will appear in the review
- Potentially, a description of how you found sources and how you analyzed them for inclusion and discussion in the review (more often found in published, standalone literature reviews than in lit review sections in an article or research paper)
- 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 sentence to draw connections, comparisons, and contrasts.
Conclusion:
- Summarize the key findings you have taken from the literature and emphasize their significance
- Connect it back to your primary research question
How should I organize my lit review?
Lit reviews can take many different organizational patterns depending on what you are trying to accomplish with the review. Here are some examples:
- Chronological : The simplest approach is to trace the development of the topic over time, which helps familiarize the audience with the topic (for instance if you are introducing something that is not commonly known in your field). If you choose this strategy, be careful to avoid simply listing and summarizing sources in order. Try to analyze the patterns, turning points, and key debates that have shaped the direction of the field. Give your interpretation of how and why certain developments occurred (as mentioned previously, this may not be appropriate in your discipline — check with a teacher or mentor if you’re unsure).
- Thematic : If you have found some recurring central themes that you will continue working with throughout your piece, you can organize your literature review into subsections that address different aspects of the topic. For example, if you are reviewing literature about women and religion, key themes can include the role of women in churches and the religious attitude towards women.
- Qualitative versus quantitative research
- Empirical versus theoretical scholarship
- Divide the research by sociological, historical, or cultural sources
- Theoretical : In many humanities articles, the literature review is the foundation for the theoretical framework. You can use it to discuss various theories, models, and definitions of key concepts. You can argue for the relevance of a specific theoretical approach or combine various theorical concepts to create a framework for your research.
What are some strategies or tips I can use while writing my lit review?
Any lit review is only as good as the research it discusses; make sure your sources are well-chosen and your research is thorough. Don’t be afraid to do more research if you discover a new thread as you’re writing. More info on the research process is available in our "Conducting Research" resources .
As you’re doing your research, create an annotated bibliography ( see our page on the this type of document ). Much of the information used in an annotated bibliography can be used also in a literature review, so you’ll be not only partially drafting your lit review as you research, but also developing your sense of the larger conversation going on among scholars, professionals, and any other stakeholders in your topic.
Usually you will need to synthesize research rather than just summarizing it. This means drawing connections between sources to create a picture of the scholarly conversation on a topic over time. Many student writers struggle to synthesize because they feel they don’t have anything to add to the scholars they are citing; here are some strategies to help you:
- It often helps to remember that the point of these kinds of syntheses is to show your readers how you understand your research, to help them read the rest of your paper.
- Writing teachers often say synthesis is like hosting a dinner party: imagine all your sources are together in a room, discussing your topic. What are they saying to each other?
- Look at the in-text citations in each paragraph. Are you citing just one source for each paragraph? This usually indicates summary only. When you have multiple sources cited in a paragraph, you are more likely to be synthesizing them (not always, but often
- Read more about synthesis here.
The most interesting literature reviews are often written as arguments (again, as mentioned at the beginning of the page, this is discipline-specific and doesn’t work for all situations). Often, the literature review is where you can establish your research as filling a particular gap or as relevant in a particular way. You have some chance to do this in your introduction in an article, but the literature review section gives a more extended opportunity to establish the conversation in the way you would like your readers to see it. You can choose the intellectual lineage you would like to be part of and whose definitions matter most to your thinking (mostly humanities-specific, but this goes for sciences as well). In addressing these points, you argue for your place in the conversation, which tends to make the lit review more compelling than a simple reporting of other sources.
Quantitative Research: Literature Review
- Archer Library
- Locating Books
- Library eBook Collections
- A to Z Database List
- Research & Statistics
- Literature Review Resources
- Citations & Reference
Exploring the literature review
Literature review model: 6 steps.
Adapted from The Literature Review , Machi & McEvoy (2009, p. 13).
Your Literature Review
Step 2: search, boolean search strategies, search limiters, ★ ebsco & google drive.
1. Select a Topic
"All research begins with curiosity" (Machi & McEvoy, 2009, p. 14)
Selection of a topic, and fully defined research interest and question, is supervised (and approved) by your professor. Tips for crafting your topic include:
- Be specific. Take time to define your interest.
- Topic Focus. Fully describe and sufficiently narrow the focus for research.
- Academic Discipline. Learn more about your area of research & refine the scope.
- Avoid Bias. Be aware of bias that you (as a researcher) may have.
- Document your research. Use Google Docs to track your research process.
- Research apps. Consider using Evernote or Zotero to track your research.
Consider Purpose
What will your topic and research address?
In The Literature Review: A Step-by-Step Guide for Students , Ridley presents that literature reviews serve several purposes (2008, p. 16-17). Included are the following points:
- Historical background for the research;
- Overview of current field provided by "contemporary debates, issues, and questions;"
- Theories and concepts related to your research;
- Introduce "relevant terminology" - or academic language - being used it the field;
- Connect to existing research - does your work "extend or challenge [this] or address a gap;"
- Provide "supporting evidence for a practical problem or issue" that your research addresses.
★ Schedule a research appointment
At this point in your literature review, take time to meet with a librarian. Why? Understanding the subject terminology used in databases can be challenging. Archer Librarians can help you structure a search, preparing you for step two. How? Contact a librarian directly or use the online form to schedule an appointment. Details are provided in the adjacent Schedule an Appointment box.
2. Search the Literature
Collect & Select Data: Preview, select, and organize
Archer Library is your go-to resource for this step in your literature review process. The literature search will include books and ebooks, scholarly and practitioner journals, theses and dissertations, and indexes. You may also choose to include web sites, blogs, open access resources, and newspapers. This library guide provides access to resources needed to complete a literature review.
Books & eBooks: Archer Library & OhioLINK
Databases: scholarly & practitioner journals.
Review the Library Databases tab on this library guide, it provides links to recommended databases for Education & Psychology, Business, and General & Social Sciences.
Expand your journal search; a complete listing of available AU Library and OhioLINK databases is available on the Databases A to Z list . Search the database by subject, type, name, or do use the search box for a general title search. The A to Z list also includes open access resources and select internet sites.
Databases: Theses & Dissertations
Review the Library Databases tab on this guide, it includes Theses & Dissertation resources. AU library also has AU student authored theses and dissertations available in print, search the library catalog for these titles.
Did you know? If you are looking for particular chapters within a dissertation that is not fully available online, it is possible to submit an ILL article request . Do this instead of requesting the entire dissertation.
Newspapers: Databases & Internet
Consider current literature in your academic field. AU Library's database collection includes The Chronicle of Higher Education and The Wall Street Journal . The Internet Resources tab in this guide provides links to newspapers and online journals such as Inside Higher Ed , COABE Journal , and Education Week .
Search Strategies & Boolean Operators
There are three basic boolean operators: AND, OR, and NOT.
Used with your search terms, boolean operators will either expand or limit results. What purpose do they serve? They help to define the relationship between your search terms. For example, using the operator AND will combine the terms expanding the search. When searching some databases, and Google, the operator AND may be implied.
Overview of boolean terms
About the example: Boolean searches were conducted on November 4, 2019; result numbers may vary at a later date. No additional database limiters were set to further narrow search returns.
Database Search Limiters
Database strategies for targeted search results.
Most databases include limiters, or additional parameters, you may use to strategically focus search results. EBSCO databases, such as Education Research Complete & Academic Search Complete provide options to:
- Limit results to full text;
- Limit results to scholarly journals, and reference available;
- Select results source type to journals, magazines, conference papers, reviews, and newspapers
- Publication date
Keep in mind that these tools are defined as limiters for a reason; adding them to a search will limit the number of results returned. This can be a double-edged sword. How?
- If limiting results to full-text only, you may miss an important piece of research that could change the direction of your research. Interlibrary loan is available to students, free of charge. Request articles that are not available in full-text; they will be sent to you via email.
- If narrowing publication date, you may eliminate significant historical - or recent - research conducted on your topic.
- Limiting resource type to a specific type of material may cause bias in the research results.
Use limiters with care. When starting a search, consider opting out of limiters until the initial literature screening is complete. The second or third time through your research may be the ideal time to focus on specific time periods or material (scholarly vs newspaper).
★ Truncating Search Terms
Expanding your search term at the root.
Truncating is often referred to as 'wildcard' searching. Databases may have their own specific wildcard elements however, the most commonly used are the asterisk (*) or question mark (?). When used within your search. they will expand returned results.
Asterisk (*) Wildcard
Using the asterisk wildcard will return varied spellings of the truncated word. In the following example, the search term education was truncated after the letter "t."
Explore these database help pages for additional information on crafting search terms.
- EBSCO Connect: Basic Searching with EBSCO
- EBSCO Connect: Searching with Boolean Operators
- EBSCO Connect: Searching with Wildcards and Truncation Symbols
- ProQuest Help: Search Tips
- ERIC: How does ERIC search work?
★ EBSCO Databases & Google Drive
Tips for saving research directly to Google drive.
Researching in an EBSCO database?
It is possible to save articles (PDF and HTML) and abstracts in EBSCOhost databases directly to Google drive. Select the Google Drive icon, authenticate using a Google account, and an EBSCO folder will be created in your account. This is a great option for managing your research. If documenting your research in a Google Doc, consider linking the information to actual articles saved in drive.
EBSCO Databases & Google Drive
EBSCOHost Databases & Google Drive: Managing your Research
This video features an overview of how to use Google Drive with EBSCO databases to help manage your research. It presents information for connecting an active Google account to EBSCO and steps needed to provide permission for EBSCO to manage a folder in Drive.
About the Video: Closed captioning is available, select CC from the video menu. If you need to review a specific area on the video, view on YouTube and expand the video description for access to topic time stamps. A video transcript is provided below.
- EBSCOhost Databases & Google Scholar
Defining Literature Review
What is a literature review.
A definition from the Online Dictionary for Library and Information Sciences .
A 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" (Reitz, 2014).
A systemic review is "a literature review focused on a specific research question, which uses explicit methods to minimize bias in the identification, appraisal, selection, and synthesis of all the high-quality evidence pertinent to the question" (Reitz, 2014).
Recommended Reading
About this page
EBSCO Connect [Discovery and Search]. (2022). Searching with boolean operators. Retrieved May, 3, 2022 from https://connect.ebsco.com/s/?language=en_US
EBSCO Connect [Discover and Search]. (2022). Searching with wildcards and truncation symbols. Retrieved May 3, 2022; https://connect.ebsco.com/s/?language=en_US
Machi, L.A. & McEvoy, B.T. (2009). The literature review . Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press:
Reitz, J.M. (2014). Online dictionary for library and information science. ABC-CLIO, Libraries Unlimited . Retrieved from https://www.abc-clio.com/ODLIS/odlis_A.aspx
Ridley, D. (2008). The literature review: A step-by-step guide for students . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Archer Librarians
Schedule an appointment.
Contact a librarian directly (email), or submit a request form. If you have worked with someone before, you can request them on the form.
- ★ Archer Library Help • Online Reqest Form
- Carrie Halquist • Reference & Instruction
- Jessica Byers • Reference & Curation
- Don Reams • Corrections Education & Reference
- Diane Schrecker • Education & Head of the IRC
- Tanaya Silcox • Technical Services & Business
- Sarah Thomas • Acquisitions & ATS Librarian
- << Previous: Research & Statistics
- Next: Literature Review Resources >>
- Last Updated: Feb 18, 2023 2:47 PM
- URL: https://libguides.ashland.edu/quantitative
Archer Library • Ashland University © Copyright 2022. An Equal Opportunity/Equal Access Institution.
Please note that Internet Explorer version 8.x is not supported as of January 1, 2016. Please refer to this support page for more information.
- Purchase PDF
Applied Nursing Research
Writing a useful literature review for a quantitative research project.
- Previous article in issue
- Next article in issue
First page preview
Cited by (0)
Have a language expert improve your writing
Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.
- Knowledge Base
- Methodology
- Systematic Review | Definition, Example, & Guide
Systematic Review | Definition, Example & Guide
Published on June 15, 2022 by Shaun Turney . Revised on December 7, 2022.
A systematic review is a type of review that uses repeatable methods to find, select, and synthesize all available evidence. It answers a clearly formulated research question and explicitly states the methods used to arrive at the answer.
They answered the question “What is the effectiveness of probiotics in reducing eczema symptoms and improving quality of life in patients with eczema?”
In this context, a probiotic is a health product that contains live microorganisms and is taken by mouth. Eczema is a common skin condition that causes red, itchy skin.
Table of contents
What is a systematic review, systematic review vs. meta-analysis, systematic review vs. literature review, systematic review vs. scoping review, when to conduct a systematic review, pros and cons of systematic reviews, step-by-step example of a systematic review, frequently asked questions about systematic reviews.
A review is an overview of the research that’s already been completed on a topic.
What makes a systematic review different from other types of reviews is that the research methods are designed to reduce bias . The methods are repeatable, and the approach is formal and systematic:
- Formulate a research question
- Develop a protocol
- Search for all relevant studies
- Apply the selection criteria
- Extract the data
- Synthesize the data
- Write and publish a report
Although multiple sets of guidelines exist, the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews is among the most widely used. It provides detailed guidelines on how to complete each step of the systematic review process.
Systematic reviews are most commonly used in medical and public health research, but they can also be found in other disciplines.
Systematic reviews typically answer their research question by synthesizing all available evidence and evaluating the quality of the evidence. Synthesizing means bringing together different information to tell a single, cohesive story. The synthesis can be narrative ( qualitative ), quantitative , or both.
Systematic reviews often quantitatively synthesize the evidence using a meta-analysis . A meta-analysis is a statistical analysis, not a type of review.
A meta-analysis is a technique to synthesize results from multiple studies. It’s a statistical analysis that combines the results of two or more studies, usually to estimate an effect size .
Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.
A literature review is a type of review that uses a less systematic and formal approach than a systematic review. Typically, an expert in a topic will qualitatively summarize and evaluate previous work, without using a formal, explicit method.
Although literature reviews are often less time-consuming and can be insightful or helpful, they have a higher risk of bias and are less transparent than systematic reviews.
Similar to a systematic review, a scoping review is a type of review that tries to minimize bias by using transparent and repeatable methods.
However, a scoping review isn’t a type of systematic review. The most important difference is the goal: rather than answering a specific question, a scoping review explores a topic. The researcher tries to identify the main concepts, theories, and evidence, as well as gaps in the current research.
Sometimes scoping reviews are an exploratory preparation step for a systematic review, and sometimes they are a standalone project.
A systematic review is a good choice of review if you want to answer a question about the effectiveness of an intervention , such as a medical treatment.
To conduct a systematic review, you’ll need the following:
- A precise question , usually about the effectiveness of an intervention. The question needs to be about a topic that’s previously been studied by multiple researchers. If there’s no previous research, there’s nothing to review.
- If you’re doing a systematic review on your own (e.g., for a research paper or thesis ), you should take appropriate measures to ensure the validity and reliability of your research.
- Access to databases and journal archives. Often, your educational institution provides you with access.
- Time. A professional systematic review is a time-consuming process: it will take the lead author about six months of full-time work. If you’re a student, you should narrow the scope of your systematic review and stick to a tight schedule.
- Bibliographic, word-processing, spreadsheet, and statistical software . For example, you could use EndNote, Microsoft Word, Excel, and SPSS.
A systematic review has many pros .
- They minimize research bias by considering all available evidence and evaluating each study for bias.
- Their methods are transparent , so they can be scrutinized by others.
- They’re thorough : they summarize all available evidence.
- They can be replicated and updated by others.
Systematic reviews also have a few cons .
- They’re time-consuming .
- They’re narrow in scope : they only answer the precise research question.
The 7 steps for conducting a systematic review are explained with an example.
Step 1: Formulate a research question
Formulating the research question is probably the most important step of a systematic review. A clear research question will:
- Allow you to more effectively communicate your research to other researchers and practitioners
- Guide your decisions as you plan and conduct your systematic review
A good research question for a systematic review has four components, which you can remember with the acronym PICO :
- Population(s) or problem(s)
- Intervention(s)
- Comparison(s)
You can rearrange these four components to write your research question:
- What is the effectiveness of I versus C for O in P ?
Sometimes, you may want to include a fifth component, the type of study design . In this case, the acronym is PICOT .
- Type of study design(s)
- The population of patients with eczema
- The intervention of probiotics
- In comparison to no treatment, placebo , or non-probiotic treatment
- The outcome of changes in participant-, parent-, and doctor-rated symptoms of eczema and quality of life
- Randomized control trials, a type of study design
Their research question was:
- What is the effectiveness of probiotics versus no treatment, a placebo, or a non-probiotic treatment for reducing eczema symptoms and improving quality of life in patients with eczema?
Step 2: Develop a protocol
A protocol is a document that contains your research plan for the systematic review. This is an important step because having a plan allows you to work more efficiently and reduces bias.
Your protocol should include the following components:
- Background information : Provide the context of the research question, including why it’s important.
- Research objective (s) : Rephrase your research question as an objective.
- Selection criteria: State how you’ll decide which studies to include or exclude from your review.
- Search strategy: Discuss your plan for finding studies.
- Analysis: Explain what information you’ll collect from the studies and how you’ll synthesize the data.
If you’re a professional seeking to publish your review, it’s a good idea to bring together an advisory committee . This is a group of about six people who have experience in the topic you’re researching. They can help you make decisions about your protocol.
It’s highly recommended to register your protocol. Registering your protocol means submitting it to a database such as PROSPERO or ClinicalTrials.gov .
Step 3: Search for all relevant studies
Searching for relevant studies is the most time-consuming step of a systematic review.
To reduce bias, it’s important to search for relevant studies very thoroughly. Your strategy will depend on your field and your research question, but sources generally fall into these four categories:
- Databases: Search multiple databases of peer-reviewed literature, such as PubMed or Scopus . Think carefully about how to phrase your search terms and include multiple synonyms of each word. Use Boolean operators if relevant.
- Handsearching: In addition to searching the primary sources using databases, you’ll also need to search manually. One strategy is to scan relevant journals or conference proceedings. Another strategy is to scan the reference lists of relevant studies.
- Gray literature: Gray literature includes documents produced by governments, universities, and other institutions that aren’t published by traditional publishers. Graduate student theses are an important type of gray literature, which you can search using the Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations (NDLTD) . In medicine, clinical trial registries are another important type of gray literature.
- Experts: Contact experts in the field to ask if they have unpublished studies that should be included in your review.
At this stage of your review, you won’t read the articles yet. Simply save any potentially relevant citations using bibliographic software, such as Scribbr’s APA or MLA Generator .
- Databases: EMBASE, PsycINFO, AMED, LILACS, and ISI Web of Science
- Handsearch: Conference proceedings and reference lists of articles
- Gray literature: The Cochrane Library, the metaRegister of Controlled Trials, and the Ongoing Skin Trials Register
- Experts: Authors of unpublished registered trials, pharmaceutical companies, and manufacturers of probiotics
Step 4: Apply the selection criteria
Applying the selection criteria is a three-person job. Two of you will independently read the studies and decide which to include in your review based on the selection criteria you established in your protocol . The third person’s job is to break any ties.
To increase inter-rater reliability , ensure that everyone thoroughly understands the selection criteria before you begin.
If you’re writing a systematic review as a student for an assignment, you might not have a team. In this case, you’ll have to apply the selection criteria on your own; you can mention this as a limitation in your paper’s discussion.
You should apply the selection criteria in two phases:
- Based on the titles and abstracts : Decide whether each article potentially meets the selection criteria based on the information provided in the abstracts.
- Based on the full texts: Download the articles that weren’t excluded during the first phase. If an article isn’t available online or through your library, you may need to contact the authors to ask for a copy. Read the articles and decide which articles meet the selection criteria.
It’s very important to keep a meticulous record of why you included or excluded each article. When the selection process is complete, you can summarize what you did using a PRISMA flow diagram .
Next, Boyle and colleagues found the full texts for each of the remaining studies. Boyle and Tang read through the articles to decide if any more studies needed to be excluded based on the selection criteria.
When Boyle and Tang disagreed about whether a study should be excluded, they discussed it with Varigos until the three researchers came to an agreement.
Step 5: Extract the data
Extracting the data means collecting information from the selected studies in a systematic way. There are two types of information you need to collect from each study:
- Information about the study’s methods and results . The exact information will depend on your research question, but it might include the year, study design , sample size, context, research findings , and conclusions. If any data are missing, you’ll need to contact the study’s authors.
- Your judgment of the quality of the evidence, including risk of bias .
You should collect this information using forms. You can find sample forms in The Registry of Methods and Tools for Evidence-Informed Decision Making and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations Working Group .
Extracting the data is also a three-person job. Two people should do this step independently, and the third person will resolve any disagreements.
They also collected data about possible sources of bias, such as how the study participants were randomized into the control and treatment groups.
Step 6: Synthesize the data
Synthesizing the data means bringing together the information you collected into a single, cohesive story. There are two main approaches to synthesizing the data:
- Narrative ( qualitative ): Summarize the information in words. You’ll need to discuss the studies and assess their overall quality.
- Quantitative : Use statistical methods to summarize and compare data from different studies. The most common quantitative approach is a meta-analysis , which allows you to combine results from multiple studies into a summary result.
Generally, you should use both approaches together whenever possible. If you don’t have enough data, or the data from different studies aren’t comparable, then you can take just a narrative approach. However, you should justify why a quantitative approach wasn’t possible.
Boyle and colleagues also divided the studies into subgroups, such as studies about babies, children, and adults, and analyzed the effect sizes within each group.
Step 7: Write and publish a report
The purpose of writing a systematic review article is to share the answer to your research question and explain how you arrived at this answer.
Your article should include the following sections:
- Abstract : A summary of the review
- Introduction : Including the rationale and objectives
- Methods : Including the selection criteria, search method, data extraction method, and synthesis method
- Results : Including results of the search and selection process, study characteristics, risk of bias in the studies, and synthesis results
- Discussion : Including interpretation of the results and limitations of the review
- Conclusion : The answer to your research question and implications for practice, policy, or research
To verify that your report includes everything it needs, you can use the PRISMA checklist .
Once your report is written, you can publish it in a systematic review database, such as the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews , and/or in a peer-reviewed journal.
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.
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 .
A systematic review is secondary research because it uses existing research. You don’t collect new data yourself.
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.
Turney, S. (2022, December 07). Systematic Review | Definition, Example & Guide. Scribbr. Retrieved February 27, 2023, from https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/systematic-review/
Is this article helpful?
Shaun Turney
Other students also liked, how to write a literature review | guide, examples, & templates, how to write a research proposal | examples & templates, what is critical thinking | definition & examples, what is your plagiarism score.
Research Process :: Step by Step
- Introduction
- Select Topic
- Identify Keywords
- Background Information
- Develop Research Questions
- Refine Topic
- Search Strategy
- popular databases
- Evaluate Sources
- Reading Scholarly Articles
- Types of Periodicals
- Primary & Secondary Sources
- Organize / Take Notes
- Writing & Grammar Resources
- Annotated Bibliography
- Literature Review
- Citation Styles
- Paraphrasing
- Privacy / Confidentiality
Organize the literature review into sections that present themes or identify trends, including relevant theory. You are not trying to list all the material published, but to synthesize and evaluate it according to the guiding concept of your thesis or research question.
What is a literature review?
A literature review is an account of what has been published on a topic by accredited scholars and researchers. Occasionally you will be asked to write one as a separate assignment, but more often it is part of the introduction to an essay, research report, or thesis. In writing the literature review, your purpose is to convey to your reader what knowledge and ideas have been established on a topic, and what their strengths and weaknesses are. As a piece of writing, the literature review must be defined by a guiding concept (e.g., your research objective, the problem or issue you are discussing, or your argumentative thesis). It is not just a descriptive list of the material available, or a set of summaries
A literature review must do these things:
- be organized around and related directly to the thesis or research question you are developing
- synthesize results into a summary of what is and is not known
- identify areas of controversy in the literature
- formulate questions that need further research
Ask yourself questions like these:
- What is the specific thesis, problem, or research question that my literature review helps to define?
- What type of literature review am I conducting? Am I looking at issues of theory? methodology? policy? quantitative research (e.g. on the effectiveness of a new procedure)? qualitative research (e.g., studies of loneliness among migrant workers)?
- What is the scope of my literature review? What types of publications am I using (e.g., journals, books, government documents, popular media)? What discipline am I working in (e.g., nursing psychology, sociology, medicine)?
- How good was my information seeking? Has my search been wide enough to ensure I've found all the relevant material? Has it been narrow enough to exclude irrelevant material? Is the number of sources I've used appropriate for the length of my paper?
- Have I critically analyzed the literature I use? Do I follow through a set of concepts and questions, comparing items to each other in the ways they deal with them? Instead of just listing and summarizing items, do I assess them, discussing strengths and weaknesses?
- Have I cited and discussed studies contrary to my perspective?
- Will the reader find my literature review relevant, appropriate, and useful?
Ask yourself questions like these about each book or article you include:
- Has the author formulated a problem/issue?
- Is it clearly defined? Is its significance (scope, severity, relevance) clearly established?
- Could the problem have been approached more effectively from another perspective?
- What is the author's research orientation (e.g., interpretive, critical science, combination)?
- What is the author's theoretical framework (e.g., psychological, developmental, feminist)?
- What is the relationship between the theoretical and research perspectives?
- Has the author evaluated the literature relevant to the problem/issue? Does the author include literature taking positions she or he does not agree with?
- In a research study, how good are the basic components of the study design (e.g., population, intervention, outcome)? How accurate and valid are the measurements? Is the analysis of the data accurate and relevant to the research question? Are the conclusions validly based upon the data and analysis?
- In material written for a popular readership, does the author use appeals to emotion, one-sided examples, or rhetorically-charged language and tone? Is there an objective basis to the reasoning, or is the author merely "proving" what he or she already believes?
- How does the author structure the argument? Can you "deconstruct" the flow of the argument to see whether or where it breaks down logically (e.g., in establishing cause-effect relationships)?
- In what ways does this book or article contribute to our understanding of the problem under study, and in what ways is it useful for practice? What are the strengths and limitations?
- How does this book or article relate to the specific thesis or question I am developing?
Text written by Dena Taylor, Health Sciences Writing Centre, University of Toronto
http://www.writing.utoronto.ca/advice/specific-types-of-writing/literature-review
- << Previous: Annotated Bibliography
- Next: Step 5: Cite Sources >>
- Last Updated: Feb 9, 2023 2:15 PM
- URL: https://libguides.uta.edu/researchprocess
University of Texas Arlington Libraries 702 Planetarium Place · Arlington, TX 76019 · 817-272-3000
- Internet Privacy
- Accessibility
- Problems with a guide?Contact Us.
We use cookies to enhance our website for you. Proceed if you agree to this policy or learn more about it.
- Essay Database >
- Essay Examples >
- Essays Topics >
- Essay on Criticism
Free Literature Review On Quantitative And Qualitative Research
Type of paper: Literature Review
Topic: Criticism , Combination , Study , Literature , Treatment , Skills , Arthritis , Ability
Words: 1700
Published: 11/24/2021
ORDER PAPER LIKE THIS
Both quantitative and qualitative research are equally important for the studying any discipline as they allow see the subject from different perspectives. In her article, Susan Peck turns to quantitative research with the purpose of determining whether therapeutic touch really helps elders with arthritis to maintain or improve their functional ability. The research is based on a solid theoretical basis, as the author tries to understand the intervention of TT by addressing the Roger’s theory. The quantitative research of the author is indeed sizeable. Therefore, only 108 of 60, 000 entered research, with more than twenty dropping out almost with the beginning of treatment. There were graphs provided that is very practical and demonstrates high competence of the author. Qualitative research is another dimension. The authors themselves refer to their study as to the descriptive one that demonstrates views of teachers about teaching combination classes. The research employs qualitative methods that included the selection of 35 combination class teachers out of 65 volunteers. The entire survey took place in the form of telephone interview. Such approach allows a prompt and satisfactory level of understanding how the majority thinks. “The Efficacy of Therapeutic Touch for Improving Functional Ability in Elders with Degenerative Arthritis” by Peck, Susan D. (Eckes). (1998). Nursing Science Quarterly, 11(3), 123-131.
The Efficacy of Therapeutic Touch for Improving Functional Ability in Elders with Degenerative Arthritis
Critique. The long title provides the readers with the opportunity to understand what the paper is about in detail.
Introduction
The introduction of the research explains what should be considered as functional ability and disability and how the latter may influence the quality of life. Arthritis is one of the biggest problems of the modern time as it grows in number and terribly affects the sick people. Peck (1998) writes that there are some tools such as routine treatment and progressive muscle relaxation used as common interventions (p. 123). Critique. The author uses addresses only two tools, while there are many others.
Purpose of the Study
In her article, Susan Peck (1998) tries to determine whether therapeutic touch really helps elders with arthritis to maintain or improve their functional ability (p. 123). Critique. The purpose of the study demonstrates that this study is a part of the bigger one, therefore its purpose and practical implications are limited.
Theoretical Framework
Critique. The theoretic basis of the research is really overwhelming. However, it should be mentioned that what is studied in the research is not the same as the real life treatment.
Literature Review
Therefore, she addresses lots of scholars such as Dorfman, Hitchcock, Wright and others in order to emphasize that “as elders are the most rapidly growing portion of the United States population, the management of arthritis pain and its adverse effects on functional ability are significant problems” (Peck, 1998, p. 123). Critique. The author fairly notices that the problem of having chronic pain is now one of the most pervasive and expensive. This section allows understanding that it has numerous negative effects and they are studied.
Methodology
The quantitative research of the author is indeed sizeable. It employed almost 60,000 people who lived in different farming communities and received routine treatment. The selection criteria were quite strict as it allowed people of age between 55 to 99 years with officially confirmed diagnosis and chronic pain felt for more than 6 months. Moreover, the sample was limited to those who can speak and read English that may be seen as a serious limitation. Therefore, only 108 of 60, 000 entered research, with more than twenty dropping out almost with the beginning of treatment. The author divided people into two groups: those who took TT and PMR. She used the Arthritis Impact Measurement Scale, version 2 for the results determination. Critique. Peck (1998) stated that age, sex and other factors did not have their influence on the results of six treatments, but it is obvious that they should have been also taken into account (p. 126). The results that come from the AIMS2 were carefully mathematically processed.
Significant differences were found in hand function, pain, tension, mood and satisfaction subscales (Peck, 1998, p. 127). The research also employed ANOVA in order to determine the significance of these differences. In general, quantitative analysis was made thoroughly and with adherence to all the established rules. In order to better understand the outcome, there were graphs provided. Analysis of mobility, hand function and arm function subscales were given particular attention due to their specific importance. Critique. This analysis is very practical and demonstrates high competence of the author. It is worth pointing out that the author also observed post-sixth treatment progress that differed between groups.
Discussion, Implications and Suggestions
There was a statistically significant improvement after TT compared to PMR after the sixth treatment. However, the research at hand has some distinctive features from all previous studies such as multiple treatments, a full TT treatment and mobilizing patient’s resources. Peck (1998) suggests further research in the field with the help of other methodological approaches but does not (p. 131). Therefore, further researches should determine whether therapeutic touch can be of exceptional use in the arthritis treatment compared to the abovementioned interventions. Critique. The author gives full and complete answer to the hypotheses that were discussed. She also provides a framework for further research giving advice and pointing at limitations that may exist for future studies. “Teacher’s Views of Combination Classes” by Mason, D. E. & Burns, R. B. (1995). The Journal of Educational Research, 89 (1), 36-45. Critique. The title is brief but includes all the necessary information for a clear message to the reader. Mason and Burns (1995) tried to find out teachers’ opinion about combination classes that are often the result of uneven enrollment. Teachers’ ideas regarding the issue concerned cannot be scored that easily because the ideas about education strategy may vary from teacher to teacher.
Background of the Study
Critique. The present research turns to practical evidence more than it does to theoretical basis, because it often happens in the educational field that practice differs from theory a lot. Teachers themselves report that students do not benefit from such classes; instead they become less focused and more interrupted. Purpose of the Study The questions that this research puts are very important. They are aimed at finding out what are the origins of the combination class, what approaches teachers use to teach students, and their personal attitude to combination class. Critique. The issue is very topical because the studies on combination class are so rare despite their long history. Understanding of teachers’ attitude and thoughts towards such classes may explain their declining effectiveness in providing good learning environment.
The research employs qualitative methods that included the selection of 35 combination class teachers out of 65 volunteers. The selected educational settings were famous for their cultural diversity. The sample also included teachers of various years of experience and different grades. The idea of the method is putting questions to teachers in the form of a questionnaire, with the time being limited to 1 hour. The entire survey took place in the form of telephone interview. Critique. The sample is formed from such examples that has the most obvious characteristics of the issue in question. The strength of a quantitative method is in the fact that it allows making conclusions immediately after questioning all the participants. Such qualitative method is very effective and practical, as it requires minimum efforts from the interviewers and participants (Mason and Burns, 1995, p. 38-39). Therefore, qualitative research in this case allows better understanding and individual approach.
After some analyzing and combining the data received, it turned out that 85% of the sample insists on homogeneous enrollment to a class. The class should be formed either by student ability, or independence, or behavior. It seems to be quite wise suggestion as teachers are exposed merely to students of the same level, that allows application of the same approaches. However, small sizes of the selected educational setting allow some freedom in the question of combination class. Teaching such classes also proved to be quite difficult for teachers of various experience. Mason and Burns (1995) come to conclusion that the most obvious are problems with curriculum and instructions. Teachers have no time for instruction working with one group of students in the class. It also slows the process of providing new information. Critique. The format of interview allows finding out more about negative effects of combination classes on the learning process. All this information is expressed through a simple comparison of the number of similar answers to the number of representatives in the sample. Such approach allows a prompt and satisfactory level of understanding how the majority thinks.
Practitioners mostly have negative feelings towards the teaching process in the combination class. They need to find different grades, prepare numerous additional curriculums, and still find no correspondence in the level of knowledge of students in the same class. Two curriculums may be an option in such case, but teachers find it extremely difficult. Also, this research helped solving the problem of choosing wrong strategy. They apply same approaches as they do for multiage and internationally organized classes. They treat them similar, but indeed they are very distinctive. Critique. The research that includes interviews and opinions is important not only for study of some issues, but also for identification of other problems and drawbacks. The authors in their previous work found that combination classes have a slightly negative effect on achievement and this study shows it by employing qualitative instrument. If they do not feel satisfied about the idea of combination class, it means that its effectiveness is deemed from the very beginning.
Mason, D. E. & Burns, R. B. (1995). Teacher’s Views of Combination Classes. The Journal of Educational Research, 89 (1), 36-45. Peck, Susan D. (Eckes). (1998). The Efficacy of Therapeutic Touch for Improving Functional Ability in Elders with Degenerative Arthritis. Nursing Science Quarterly, 11(3), 123-131.
Cite this page
Share with friends using:
Removal Request
Finished papers: 2303
This paper is created by writer with
ID 257167197
If you want your paper to be:
Well-researched, fact-checked, and accurate
Original, fresh, based on current data
Eloquently written and immaculately formatted
275 words = 1 page double-spaced
Can't find a free sample that matches your requirements?
Subscribe to WowEssays Premium and get access to over 1 MILLION high-quality downloadable samples
GET ACCESS NOW
Related Topics
Libel essay.
Password recovery email has been sent to [email protected]
Use your new password to log in
You are not register!
Short on a deadline?
Don't waste time. Get help with 11% off using code - GETWOWED
No, thanks! I'm fine with missing my deadline
- University of Arkansas
- Blackboard Learn
- Exchange Mail
- Research Guides
Literature Reviews
- Qualitative or Quantitative?
- Getting Started
- Finding articles
- Primary sources? Peer-reviewed?
- Review Articles/ Annual Reviews...?
- Books, ebooks, dissertations, book reviews
Qualitative researchers TEND to:
Researchers using qualitative methods tend to:
- t hink that social sciences cannot be well-studied with the same methods as natural or physical sciences
- feel that human behavior is context-specific; therefore, behavior must be studied holistically, in situ, rather than being manipulated
- employ an 'insider's' perspective; research tends to be personal and thereby more subjective.
- do interviews, focus groups, field research, case studies, and conversational or content analysis.
Qualitative Research (an operational definition)
Qualitative Research: an operational description
Purpose : explain; gain insight and understanding of phenomena through intensive collection and study of narrative data
Approach: inductive; value-laden/subjective; holistic, process-oriented
Hypotheses: tentative, evolving; based on the particular study
Lit. Review: limited; may not be exhaustive
Setting: naturalistic, when and as much as possible
Sampling : for the purpose; not necessarily representative; for in-depth understanding
Measurement: narrative; ongoing
Design and Method: flexible, specified only generally; based on non-intervention, minimal disturbance, such as historical, ethnographic, or case studies
Data Collection: document collection, participant observation, informal interviews, field notes
Data Analysis: raw data is words/ ongoing; involves synthesis
Data Interpretation: tentative, reviewed on ongoing basis, speculative
- Qualitative research with more structure and less subjectivity
- Increased application of both strategies to the same study ("mixed methods")
- Evidence-based practice emphasized in more fields (nursing, social work, education, and others).
Some Other Guidelines
- How to Design Graphs and Tables (Univ. of Oregon's guide)
- Critical Appraisal Checklist for an Article On Qualitative Research
Quantitative researchers TEND to:
Researchers using quantitative methods tend to:
- think that both natural and social sciences strive to explain phenomena with confirmable theories derived from testable assumptions
- attempt to reduce social reality to variables, in the same way as with physical reality
- try to tightly control the variable(s) in question to see how the others are influenced.
- Do experiments, have control groups, use blind or double-blind studies; use measures or instruments.
Quantitative Research (an operational definition)
Quantitative research: an operational description
Purpose: explain, predict or control phenomena through focused collection and analysis of numberical data
Approach: deductive; tries to be value-free/has objectives/ is outcome-oriented
Hypotheses : Specific, testable, and stated prior to study
Lit. Review: extensive; may significantly influence a particular study
Setting: controlled to the degree possible
Sampling: uses largest manageable random/randomized sample, to allow generalization of results to larger populations
Measurement: standardized, numberical; "at the end"
Design and Method: Strongly structured, specified in detail in advance; involves intervention, manipulation and control groups; descriptive, correlational, experimental
Data Collection: via instruments, surveys, experiments, semi-structured formal interviews, tests or questionnaires
Data Analysis: raw data is numbers; at end of study, usually statistical
Data Interpretation: formulated at end of study; stated as a degree of certainty
This page on qualitative and quantitative research has been adapted and expanded from a handout by Suzy Westenkirchner. Used with permission. NPG
- << Previous: Books, ebooks, dissertations, book reviews
- Last Updated: Feb 24, 2023 10:26 AM
- URL: https://uark.libguides.com/litreview
- See us on Instagram
- Follow us on Twitter
- Like us on Facebook
- Libraries on Pinterest
- Phone: 479-575-4104
Qualitative versus Quantitative Resources in Literature Review
When writing a literature review, one needs to carefully differentiate between quantitative and qualitative research. Though both resources are essential for a holistic overview of the theoretical framework, the choice of the academic literature should remain consistent with the methodology chosen. At its core, quantitative resources seek causation or explanation through the usage of numerical data, while qualitative build an understanding of phenomena through descriptive inquiry.
On the one hand, quantitative sources use precise, objective, and measurable data that can be interpreted with statistical analysis. According to Salvador, the goal of such research lies in the formation of generalized, predictable statements with the usage of deductive thinking (1852). With a strictly controlled research design, resources comprise a controlled representation of the reality (Salvador 1853). In literature review, quantitative sources serve as mere exhibits of precise measurements, testing hypotheses, and mathematical formulas.
On the other hand, qualitative sources are frequently focused on meaning and may be descriptive in nature. As suggested by Aspers and Corte, the data utilized contains words, images, and behaviors (141). With the help of inductive thinking, researchers rely on the principle of categorization, embedding results on the larger scale of cultural and historical context (Hammamberg, et al 499). In literature review, qualitative sources are used as means of exploring concepts and building phenomena through complexity of voices.
In my literature review, I choose sources based on the topic and merit cause of the research. When investigating nursing attitudes toward shift work, for example, I gave preference to qualitative sources since they provided utmost explanation for the healthcare professionals’ behavior. Yet, quantitative resources proved to be useful in the analysis of readmission rates to the hospital. Ultimately, before opting for one of the aforementioned research types, one needs to consider the scope of the study and its primary functions.
Works Cited
Aspers, Patrik, and Ugo Corte. “What is Qualitative in Qualitative Research.” Qualitative Sociology , vol. 42, no. 2, 2019, pp. 139-160. Web.
Hammamberg, Karin, et al. “Qualitative Research Methods: When to Use Them and How to Judge Them.” Human Reproduction, vol. 31, no. 3, 2016, pp. 498-501. Web.
Salvador, Jordan Tovera. “Exploring Quantitative and Qualitative Methodologies: A Guide to Novice Nursing Researchers.” European Scientific Journal, vol. 12, no. 18, 2016, pp. 1857-7781. Web.
Cite this paper
- Chicago (N-B)
- Chicago (A-D)
StudyCorgi. (2021, July 29). Qualitative versus Quantitative Resources in Literature Review. Retrieved from https://studycorgi.com/qualitative-versus-quantitative-resources-in-literature-review/
StudyCorgi. (2021, July 29). Qualitative versus Quantitative Resources in Literature Review. https://studycorgi.com/qualitative-versus-quantitative-resources-in-literature-review/
"Qualitative versus Quantitative Resources in Literature Review." StudyCorgi , 29 July 2021, studycorgi.com/qualitative-versus-quantitative-resources-in-literature-review/.
1. StudyCorgi . "Qualitative versus Quantitative Resources in Literature Review." July 29, 2021. https://studycorgi.com/qualitative-versus-quantitative-resources-in-literature-review/.
Bibliography
StudyCorgi . "Qualitative versus Quantitative Resources in Literature Review." July 29, 2021. https://studycorgi.com/qualitative-versus-quantitative-resources-in-literature-review/.
StudyCorgi . 2021. "Qualitative versus Quantitative Resources in Literature Review." July 29, 2021. https://studycorgi.com/qualitative-versus-quantitative-resources-in-literature-review/.
StudyCorgi . (2021) 'Qualitative versus Quantitative Resources in Literature Review'. 29 July.
This paper was written and submitted to our database by a student to assist your with your own studies. You are free to use it to write your own assignment, however you must reference it properly.
If you are the original creator of this paper and no longer wish to have it published on StudyCorgi, request the removal .
- Locations and Hours
- UCLA Library
- Research Guides
- Biomedical Library Guides
Systematic Reviews
- Types of Literature Reviews
- Our Service
What Makes a Systematic Review Different from Other Types of Reviews?
- Planning Your Systematic Review
- Database Searching
- Creating the Search
- Search Filters & Hedges
- Grey Literature
- Managing & Appraising Results
- Further Resources
Reproduced from Grant, M. J. and Booth, A. (2009), A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 26: 91–108. doi:10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x
- << Previous: Our Service
- Next: Planning Your Systematic Review >>
- Last Updated: Oct 26, 2022 10:51 AM
- URL: https://guides.library.ucla.edu/systematicreviews
- 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
- 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
- Bibliography
A literature review surveys 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 explored while researching a particular topic and to demonstrate to your readers how your research fits within a larger field of study.
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”] Thematic reviews of literature are organized around a topic or issue, rather than the progression of time. However, progression of time may still be an important factor in 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 will still be organized chronologically reflecting technological developments in media. The only difference here between a "chronological" and a "thematic" approach is what is emphasized the most: the role of the Internet in presidential politics. Note however 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 made. Note that this is the most common approach in the social and behavioral sciences. 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 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 articles and journals.
- 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: Feb 16, 2023 1:36 PM
- URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
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 Frequently asked questions Introduction Quick Run-through Step 1 & 2 Step 3 Step 4
For example, if you are reviewing literature about women and religion, key themes can include the role of women in churches and the religious attitude towards women.
A systemic review is "a literature review focused on a specific research question, which uses explicit methods to minimize bias in the identification, appraisal, selection, and synthesis of all the high-quality evidence pertinent to the question" (Reitz, 2014). Recommended Reading Writing Literature Reviews About this page References
Reviewing related literature provides a great deal of guidance in quantitative research studies. Learning what others have done previously can inform decisions regarding research design, sampling, instrumentation, data col-lection procedures, and data analysis. 4. Development of a written literature review. Once the related literature has been
The amount of detail should match the amount needed by the audience. Use the guidelines (e.g., proposal guidelines, publisher guidelines for authors) to write a literature review as a back- ground to the proposed research. Previous findings are usually needed and frequently previous meth- ods are also important.
In fact, review of related literature is required in every chapter of the thesis. It helps in defining your problem, identifying variables, framing objectives and hypotheses, linking it with...
The metal-catalyzed addition of disilanes to unsaturated organic molecules—including alkenes, allenes, alkynes, carbonyls, and combinations of these groups—is reviewed, with emphasis given to...
The need for a literature review in a publication will vary from one situation to the other and the field/discipline of research. These two factors determine what is expected from the lit review. For example, a scientific review will be more analytical on the methods and results of previous research.
Review of the Literature Following the introduction, the researchers used the review of the literature to define the variables as well as explain how those variables have been previously studied. That helped me gather a better understanding of the amount of research that had been done on each variable. I
Good Literature Review On Quantitative Research Type of paper: Literature Review Topic: Education, Medicine, Psychology, Community, Family, Therapy, Pharmacy, Treatment Pages: 2 Words: 500 Published: 03/08/2020 ORDER PAPER LIKE THIS
A literature review is a written document that presents a logically argued case founded on a comprehensive understanding of the current state of knowledge about a topic of study. This case establishes a convincing thesis to answer the study's question. (p. 4) Despite this complexity, most research methodology textbooks only devote at most one ...
Answer: A review of related literature (RRL) is a detailed review of existing literature related to the topic of a thesis or dissertation. In an RRL, you talk about knowledge and findings from existing literature relevant to your topic.
The 7 steps for conducting a systematic review are explained with an example. Step 1: Formulate a research question Formulating the research question is probably the most important step of a systematic review. A clear research question will: Allow you to more effectively communicate your research to other researchers and practitioners
In writing the literature review, your purpose is to convey to your reader what knowledge and ideas have been established on a topic, and what their strengths and weaknesses are. As a piece of writing, the literature review must be defined by a guiding concept (e.g., your research objective, the problem or issue you are discussing, or your ...
Free Literature Review On Quantitative And Qualitative Research Type of paper: Literature Review Topic: Criticism, Combination, Study, Literature, Treatment, Skills, Arthritis, Ability Pages: 6 Words: 1700 Published: 11/24/2021 ORDER PAPER LIKE THIS Abstract
Quantitative researchers TEND to: Researchers using quantitative methods tend to: think that both natural and social sciences strive to explain phenomena with confirmable theories derived from testable assumptions attempt to reduce social reality to variables, in the same way as with physical reality
Quantitative Research _Chapter II Review of Related LiteraturePractical Research 2
In literature review, quantitative sources serve as mere exhibits of precise measurements, testing hypotheses, and mathematical formulas. On the other hand, qualitative sources are frequently focused on meaning and may be descriptive in nature. As suggested by Aspers and Corte, the data utilized contains words, images, and behaviors (141).
Mixed studies review/mixed methods review: Refers to any combination of methods where one significant component is a literature review (usually systematic). Within a review context it refers to a combination of review approaches for example combining quantitative with qualitative research or outcome with process studies
from quantitative research studies and qualitative findings stemming from qualitative research studies. Synthesizing both quantitative and qualitative findings within the same literature review automatically renders the literature review process as a mixed research study (Onwuegbuzie, Collins, et al., 2010). Using Multiple Sections of a Report
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 ...