introduction of a literature review

How to write a literature review introduction (+ examples)

The introduction to a literature review serves as your reader’s guide through your academic work and thought process. Explore the significance of literature review introductions in review papers, academic papers, essays, theses, and dissertations. We delve into the purpose and necessity of these introductions, explore the essential components of literature review introductions, and provide step-by-step guidance on how to craft your own, along with examples.

Why you need an introduction for a literature review

When you need an introduction for a literature review, what to include in a literature review introduction, examples of literature review introductions, steps to write your own literature review introduction.

A literature review is a comprehensive examination of the international academic literature concerning a particular topic. It involves summarizing published works, theories, and concepts while also highlighting gaps and offering critical reflections.

In academic writing , the introduction for a literature review is an indispensable component. Effective academic writing requires proper paragraph structuring to guide your reader through your argumentation. This includes providing an introduction to your literature review.

It is imperative to remember that you should never start sharing your findings abruptly. Even if there isn’t a dedicated introduction section .

Instead, you should always offer some form of introduction to orient the reader and clarify what they can expect.

There are three main scenarios in which you need an introduction for a literature review:

• Academic literature review papers: When your literature review constitutes the entirety of an academic review paper, a more substantial introduction is necessary. This introduction should resemble the standard introduction found in regular academic papers.
• Literature review section in an academic paper or essay: While this section tends to be brief, it’s important to precede the detailed literature review with a few introductory sentences. This helps orient the reader before delving into the literature itself.
• Literature review chapter or section in your thesis/dissertation: Every thesis and dissertation includes a literature review component, which also requires a concise introduction to set the stage for the subsequent review.

You may also like: How to write a fantastic thesis introduction (+15 examples)

It is crucial to customize the content and depth of your literature review introduction according to the specific format of your academic work.

In practical terms, this implies, for instance, that the introduction in an academic literature review paper, especially one derived from a systematic literature review , is quite comprehensive. Particularly compared to the rather brief one or two introductory sentences that are often found at the beginning of a literature review section in a standard academic paper. The introduction to the literature review chapter in a thesis or dissertation again adheres to different standards.

Here’s a structured breakdown based on length and the necessary information:

Academic literature review paper

The introduction of an academic literature review paper, which does not rely on empirical data, often necessitates a more extensive introduction than the brief literature review introductions typically found in empirical papers. It should encompass:

• The research problem: Clearly articulate the problem or question that your literature review aims to address.
• The research gap: Highlight the existing gaps, limitations, or unresolved aspects within the current body of literature related to the research problem.
• The research relevance: Explain why the chosen research problem and its subsequent investigation through a literature review are significant and relevant in your academic field.
• The literature review method: If applicable, describe the methodology employed in your literature review, especially if it is a systematic review or follows a specific research framework.
• The main findings or insights of the literature review: Summarize the key discoveries, insights, or trends that have emerged from your comprehensive review of the literature.
• The main argument of the literature review: Conclude the introduction by outlining the primary argument or statement that your literature review will substantiate, linking it to the research problem and relevance you’ve established.
• Preview of the literature review’s structure: Offer a glimpse into the organization of the literature review paper, acting as a guide for the reader. This overview outlines the subsequent sections of the paper and provides an understanding of what to anticipate.

By addressing these elements, your introduction will provide a clear and structured overview of what readers can expect in your literature review paper.

Regular literature review section in an academic article or essay

Most academic articles or essays incorporate regular literature review sections, often placed after the introduction. These sections serve to establish a scholarly basis for the research or discussion within the paper.

In a standard 8000-word journal article, the literature review section typically spans between 750 and 1250 words. The first few sentences or the first paragraph within this section often serve as an introduction. It should encompass:

• An introduction to the topic: When delving into the academic literature on a specific topic, it’s important to provide a smooth transition that aids the reader in comprehending why certain aspects will be discussed within your literature review.
• The core argument: While literature review sections primarily synthesize the work of other scholars, they should consistently connect to your central argument. This central argument serves as the crux of your message or the key takeaway you want your readers to retain. By positioning it at the outset of the literature review section and systematically substantiating it with evidence, you not only enhance reader comprehension but also elevate overall readability. This primary argument can typically be distilled into 1-2 succinct sentences.

In some cases, you might include:

• Methodology: Details about the methodology used, but only if your literature review employed a specialized method. If your approach involved a broader overview without a systematic methodology, you can omit this section, thereby conserving word count.

By addressing these elements, your introduction will effectively integrate your literature review into the broader context of your academic paper or essay. This will, in turn, assist your reader in seamlessly following your overarching line of argumentation.

Introduction to a literature review chapter in thesis or dissertation

The literature review typically constitutes a distinct chapter within a thesis or dissertation. Often, it is Chapter 2 of a thesis or dissertation.

Some students choose to incorporate a brief introductory section at the beginning of each chapter, including the literature review chapter. Alternatively, others opt to seamlessly integrate the introduction into the initial sentences of the literature review itself. Both approaches are acceptable, provided that you incorporate the following elements:

• Purpose of the literature review and its relevance to the thesis/dissertation research: Explain the broader objectives of the literature review within the context of your research and how it contributes to your thesis or dissertation. Essentially, you’re telling the reader why this literature review is important and how it fits into the larger scope of your academic work.
• Primary argument: Succinctly communicate what you aim to prove, explain, or explore through the review of existing literature. This statement helps guide the reader’s understanding of the review’s purpose and what to expect from it.
• Preview of the literature review’s content: Provide a brief overview of the topics or themes that your literature review will cover. It’s like a roadmap for the reader, outlining the main areas of focus within the review. This preview can help the reader anticipate the structure and organization of your literature review.
• Methodology: If your literature review involved a specific research method, such as a systematic review or meta-analysis, you should briefly describe that methodology. However, this is not always necessary, especially if your literature review is more of a narrative synthesis without a distinct research method.

By addressing these elements, your introduction will empower your literature review to play a pivotal role in your thesis or dissertation research. It will accomplish this by integrating your research into the broader academic literature and providing a solid theoretical foundation for your work.

Comprehending the art of crafting your own literature review introduction becomes significantly more accessible when you have concrete examples to examine. Here, you will find several examples that meet, or in most cases, adhere to the criteria described earlier.

Example 1: An effective introduction for an academic literature review paper

To begin, let’s delve into the introduction of an academic literature review paper. We will examine the paper “How does culture influence innovation? A systematic literature review”, which was published in 2018 in the journal Management Decision.

The entire introduction spans 611 words and is divided into five paragraphs. In this introduction, the authors accomplish the following:

• In the first paragraph, the authors introduce the broader topic of the literature review, which focuses on innovation and its significance in the context of economic competition. They underscore the importance of this topic, highlighting its relevance for both researchers and policymakers.
• In the second paragraph, the authors narrow down their focus to emphasize the specific role of culture in relation to innovation.
• In the third paragraph, the authors identify research gaps, noting that existing studies are often fragmented and disconnected. They then emphasize the value of conducting a systematic literature review to enhance our understanding of the topic.
• In the fourth paragraph, the authors introduce their specific objectives and explain how their insights can benefit other researchers and business practitioners.
• In the fifth and final paragraph, the authors provide an overview of the paper’s organization and structure.

In summary, this introduction stands as a solid example. While the authors deviate from previewing their key findings (which is a common practice at least in the social sciences), they do effectively cover all the other previously mentioned points.

Example 2: An effective introduction to a literature review section in an academic paper

The second example represents a typical academic paper, encompassing not only a literature review section but also empirical data, a case study, and other elements. We will closely examine the introduction to the literature review section in the paper “The environmentalism of the subalterns: a case study of environmental activism in Eastern Kurdistan/Rojhelat”, which was published in 2021 in the journal Local Environment.

The paper begins with a general introduction and then proceeds to the literature review, designated by the authors as their conceptual framework. Of particular interest is the first paragraph of this conceptual framework, comprising 142 words across five sentences:

“ A peripheral and marginalised nationality within a multinational though-Persian dominated Iranian society, the Kurdish people of Iranian Kurdistan (a region referred by the Kurds as Rojhelat/Eastern Kurdi-stan) have since the early twentieth century been subject to multifaceted and systematic discriminatory and exclusionary state policy in Iran. This condition has left a population of 12–15 million Kurds in Iran suffering from structural inequalities, disenfranchisement and deprivation. Mismanagement of Kurdistan’s natural resources and the degradation of its natural environmental are among examples of this disenfranchisement. As asserted by Julian Agyeman (2005), structural inequalities that sustain the domination of political and economic elites often simultaneously result in environmental degradation, injustice and discrimination against subaltern communities. This study argues that the environmental struggle in Eastern Kurdistan can be asserted as a (sub)element of the Kurdish liberation movement in Iran. Conceptually this research is inspired by and has been conducted through the lens of ‘subalternity’ ” ( Hassaniyan, 2021, p. 931 ).

In this first paragraph, the author is doing the following:

• The author contextualises the research
• The author links the research focus to the international literature on structural inequalities
• The author clearly presents the argument of the research
• The author clarifies how the research is inspired by and uses the concept of ‘subalternity’.

Thus, the author successfully introduces the literature review, from which point onward it dives into the main concept (‘subalternity’) of the research, and reviews the literature on socio-economic justice and environmental degradation.

While introductions to a literature review section aren’t always required to offer the same level of study context detail as demonstrated here, this introduction serves as a commendable model for orienting the reader within the literature review. It effectively underscores the literature review’s significance within the context of the study being conducted.

Examples 3-5: Effective introductions to literature review chapters

The introduction to a literature review chapter can vary in length, depending largely on the overall length of the literature review chapter itself. For example, a master’s thesis typically features a more concise literature review, thus necessitating a shorter introduction. In contrast, a Ph.D. thesis, with its more extensive literature review, often includes a more detailed introduction.

Numerous universities offer online repositories where you can access theses and dissertations from previous years, serving as valuable sources of reference. Many of these repositories, however, may require you to log in through your university account. Nevertheless, a few open-access repositories are accessible to anyone, such as the one by the University of Manchester . It’s important to note though that copyright restrictions apply to these resources, just as they would with published papers.

Master’s thesis literature review introduction

The first example is “Benchmarking Asymmetrical Heating Models of Spider Pulsar Companions” by P. Sun, a master’s thesis completed at the University of Manchester on January 9, 2024. The author, P. Sun, introduces the literature review chapter very briefly but effectively:

PhD thesis literature review chapter introduction

The second example is Deep Learning on Semi-Structured Data and its Applications to Video-Game AI, Woof, W. (Author). 31 Dec 2020, a PhD thesis completed at the University of Manchester . In Chapter 2, the author offers a comprehensive introduction to the topic in four paragraphs, with the final paragraph serving as an overview of the chapter’s structure:

PhD thesis literature review introduction

The last example is the doctoral thesis Metacognitive strategies and beliefs: Child correlates and early experiences Chan, K. Y. M. (Author). 31 Dec 2020 . The author clearly conducted a systematic literature review, commencing the review section with a discussion of the methodology and approach employed in locating and analyzing the selected records.

Having absorbed all of this information, let’s recap the essential steps and offer a succinct guide on how to proceed with creating your literature review introduction:

• Contextualize your review : Begin by clearly identifying the academic context in which your literature review resides and determining the necessary information to include.
• Outline your structure : Develop a structured outline for your literature review, highlighting the essential information you plan to incorporate in your introduction.
• Literature review process : Conduct a rigorous literature review, reviewing and analyzing relevant sources.
• Summarize and abstract : After completing the review, synthesize the findings and abstract key insights, trends, and knowledge gaps from the literature.
• Craft the introduction : Write your literature review introduction with meticulous attention to the seamless integration of your review into the larger context of your work. Ensure that your introduction effectively elucidates your rationale for the chosen review topics and the underlying reasons guiding your selection.

Get new content delivered directly to your inbox!

Subscribe and receive Master Academia's quarterly newsletter.

The best answers to "What are your plans for the future?"

10 tips for engaging your audience in academic writing, related articles.

Introduce yourself in a PhD interview (4 simple steps + examples)

The best way to cold emailing professors

How to prepare your viva opening speech

Dealing with conflicting feedback from different supervisors

Have a language expert improve your writing

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

• Knowledge Base

Methodology

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

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

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

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

There are five key steps to writing a literature review:

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

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

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

Table of contents

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

• Quick Run-through
• Step 1 & 2

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

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

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

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

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

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

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

Download Word doc Download Google doc

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

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

Make a list of keywords

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

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

Search for relevant sources

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

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

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

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

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

For each publication, ask yourself:

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

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

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

Take notes and cite your sources

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Chronological

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

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

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

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

Methodological

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

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

Theoretical

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

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

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

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

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

As you write, you can follow these tips:

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

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

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

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

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

Open Google Slides Download PowerPoint

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

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

 Statistics

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

Research bias

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Cite this Scribbr article

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

McCombes, S. (2023, September 11). How to Write a Literature Review | Guide, Examples, & Templates. Scribbr. Retrieved March 20, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/dissertation/literature-review/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

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

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

Purdue Online Writing Lab Purdue OWL® 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.

• UConn Library
• Literature Review: The What, Why and How-to Guide
• Introduction

Literature Review: The What, Why and How-to Guide — Introduction

• Getting Started
• How to Pick a Topic
• Strategies to Find Sources
• Evaluating Sources & Lit. Reviews
• Tips for Writing Literature Reviews
• Writing Literature Review: Useful Sites
• Citation Resources
• Other Academic Writings

What are Literature Reviews?

So, what is a literature review? "A literature review is an account of what has been published on a topic by accredited scholars and researchers. 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." Taylor, D.  The literature review: A few tips on conducting it . University of Toronto Health Sciences Writing Centre.

Goals of Literature Reviews

What are the goals of creating a Literature Review?  A literature could be written to accomplish different aims:

• To develop a theory or evaluate an existing theory
• To summarize the historical or existing state of a research topic
• Identify a problem in a field of research 

Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1997). Writing narrative literature reviews .  Review of General Psychology , 1 (3), 311-320.

What kinds of sources require a Literature Review?

• A research paper assigned in a course
• A thesis or dissertation
• A grant proposal
• An article intended for publication in a journal

All these instances require you to collect what has been written about your research topic so that you can demonstrate how your own research sheds new light on the topic.

Types of Literature Reviews

What kinds of literature reviews are written?

Narrative review: The purpose of this type of review is to describe the current state of the research on a specific topic/research and to offer a critical analysis of the literature reviewed. Studies are grouped by research/theoretical categories, and themes and trends, strengths and weakness, and gaps are identified. The review ends with a conclusion section which summarizes the findings regarding the state of the research of the specific study, the gaps identify and if applicable, explains how the author's research will address gaps identify in the review and expand the knowledge on the topic reviewed.

• Example : Predictors and Outcomes of U.S. Quality Maternity Leave: A Review and Conceptual Framework:  10.1177/08948453211037398  

Systematic review : "The authors of a systematic review use a specific procedure to search the research literature, select the studies to include in their review, and critically evaluate the studies they find." (p. 139). Nelson, L. K. (2013). Research in Communication Sciences and Disorders . Plural Publishing.

• Example : The effect of leave policies on increasing fertility: a systematic review:  10.1057/s41599-022-01270-w

Meta-analysis : "Meta-analysis is a method of reviewing research findings in a quantitative fashion by transforming the data from individual studies into what is called an effect size and then pooling and analyzing this information. The basic goal in meta-analysis is to explain why different outcomes have occurred in different studies." (p. 197). Roberts, M. C., & Ilardi, S. S. (2003). Handbook of Research Methods in Clinical Psychology . Blackwell Publishing.

• Example : Employment Instability and Fertility in Europe: A Meta-Analysis:  10.1215/00703370-9164737

Meta-synthesis : "Qualitative meta-synthesis is a type of qualitative study that uses as data the findings from other qualitative studies linked by the same or related topic." (p.312). Zimmer, L. (2006). Qualitative meta-synthesis: A question of dialoguing with texts .  Journal of Advanced Nursing , 53 (3), 311-318.

• Example : Women’s perspectives on career successes and barriers: A qualitative meta-synthesis:  10.1177/05390184221113735

Literature Reviews in the Health Sciences

• UConn Health subject guide on systematic reviews Explanation of the different review types used in health sciences literature as well as tools to help you find the right review type
• << Previous: Getting Started
• Next: How to Pick a Topic >>
• Last Updated: Sep 21, 2022 2:16 PM
• URL: https://guides.lib.uconn.edu/literaturereview

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, automatically generate references for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Dissertation
• What is a Literature Review? | Guide, Template, & Examples

What is a Literature Review? | Guide, Template, & Examples

Published on 22 February 2022 by Shona McCombes . Revised on 7 June 2022.

What is a literature review? A literature review is a survey of scholarly sources on a specific topic. It provides an overview of current knowledge, allowing you to identify relevant theories, methods, and gaps in the existing research.

There are five key steps to writing a literature review:

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

A good literature review doesn’t just summarise sources – it analyses, synthesises, and critically evaluates to give a clear picture of the state of knowledge on the subject.

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Be assured that you'll submit flawless writing. Upload your document to correct all your mistakes.

Table of contents

Why write a literature review, examples of literature reviews, step 1: search for relevant literature, step 2: evaluate and select sources, step 3: identify themes, debates and gaps, step 4: outline your literature review’s structure, step 5: write your literature review, frequently asked questions about literature reviews, introduction.

• Quick Run-through
• Step 1 & 2

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

• Demonstrate your familiarity with the topic and scholarly context
• Develop a theoretical framework and methodology for your research
• Position yourself in relation to other researchers and theorists
• Show how your dissertation addresses a gap or contributes to a debate

You might also have to write a literature review as a stand-alone assignment. In this case, the purpose is to evaluate the current state of research and demonstrate your knowledge of scholarly debates around a topic.

The content will look slightly different in each case, but the process of conducting a literature review follows the same steps. We’ve written a step-by-step guide that you can follow below.

The only proofreading tool specialized in correcting academic writing

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

Correct my document today

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

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

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

Download Word doc Download Google doc

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

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

If you are writing a literature review as a stand-alone assignment, you will have to choose a focus and develop a central question to direct your search. Unlike a dissertation research question, this question has to be answerable without collecting original data. You should be able to answer it based only on a review of existing publications.

Make a list of keywords

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

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

Search for relevant sources

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

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

You can use boolean operators to help narrow down your search:

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

To identify the most important publications on your topic, take note of recurring citations. If the same authors, books or articles keep appearing in your reading, make sure to seek them out.

You probably won’t be able to read absolutely everything that has been written on the topic – you’ll have to evaluate which sources are most relevant to your questions.

For each publication, ask yourself:

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

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

You can find out how many times an article has been cited on Google Scholar – a high citation count means the article has been influential in the field, and should certainly be included in your literature review.

The scope of your review will depend on your topic and discipline: in the sciences you usually only review recent literature, but in the humanities you might take a long historical perspective (for example, to trace how a concept has changed in meaning over time).

Remember that you can use our template to summarise and evaluate sources you’re thinking about using!

Take notes and cite your sources

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

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

You can use our free APA Reference Generator for quick, correct, consistent citations.

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

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

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

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

There are various approaches to organising the body of a literature review. You should have a rough idea of your strategy before you start writing.

Depending on the length of your literature review, you can combine several of these strategies (for example, your overall structure might be thematic, but each theme is discussed chronologically).

Chronological

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

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

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

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

Methodological

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

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

Theoretical

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

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

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

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

If you are writing the literature review as part of your dissertation or thesis, reiterate your central problem or research question and give a brief summary of the scholarly context. You can emphasise the timeliness of the topic (“many recent studies have focused on the problem of x”) or highlight a gap in the literature (“while there has been much research on x, few researchers have taken y into consideration”).

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

As you write, make sure to follow these tips:

• Summarise and synthesise: give an overview of the main points of each source and combine them into a coherent whole.
• Analyse and interpret: don’t just paraphrase other researchers – add your own interpretations, 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 transitions and topic sentences to draw connections, comparisons and contrasts.

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

If the literature review is part of your dissertation or thesis, reiterate how your research addresses gaps and contributes new knowledge, or discuss how you have drawn on existing theories and methods to build a framework for your research. This can lead directly into your methodology section.

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 dissertation , thesis, research paper , or proposal .

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

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

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

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

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 Reference Generator.

McCombes, S. (2022, June 07). What is a Literature Review? | Guide, Template, & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved 20 March 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/thesis-dissertation/literature-review/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, how to write a dissertation proposal | a step-by-step guide, what is a theoretical framework | a step-by-step guide, what is a research methodology | steps & tips.

How To Structure Your Literature Review

3 options to help structure your chapter.

By: Amy Rommelspacher (PhD) | Reviewer: Dr Eunice Rautenbach | November 2020 (Updated May 2023)

Writing the literature review chapter can seem pretty daunting when you’re piecing together your dissertation or thesis. As  we’ve discussed before , a good literature review needs to achieve a few very important objectives – it should:

• Demonstrate your knowledge of the research topic
• Identify the gaps in the literature and show how your research links to these
• Provide the foundation for your conceptual framework (if you have one)
• Inform your own  methodology and research design

To achieve this, your literature review needs a well-thought-out structure . Get the structure of your literature review chapter wrong and you’ll struggle to achieve these objectives. Don’t worry though – in this post, we’ll look at how to structure your literature review for maximum impact (and marks!).

But wait – is this the right time?

Deciding on the structure of your literature review should come towards the end of the literature review process – after you have collected and digested the literature, but before you start writing the chapter. 

In other words, you need to first develop a rich understanding of the literature before you even attempt to map out a structure. There’s no use trying to develop a structure before you’ve fully wrapped your head around the existing research.

Equally importantly, you need to have a structure in place before you start writing , or your literature review will most likely end up a rambling, disjointed mess. 

Importantly, don’t feel that once you’ve defined a structure you can’t iterate on it. It’s perfectly natural to adjust as you engage in the writing process. As we’ve discussed before , writing is a way of developing your thinking, so it’s quite common for your thinking to change – and therefore, for your chapter structure to change – as you write. 

Need a helping hand?

Like any other chapter in your thesis or dissertation, your literature review needs to have a clear, logical structure. At a minimum, it should have three essential components – an  introduction , a  body   and a  conclusion . 

Let’s take a closer look at each of these.

1: The Introduction Section

Just like any good introduction, the introduction section of your literature review should introduce the purpose and layout (organisation) of the chapter. In other words, your introduction needs to give the reader a taste of what’s to come, and how you’re going to lay that out. Essentially, you should provide the reader with a high-level roadmap of your chapter to give them a taste of the journey that lies ahead.

Here’s an example of the layout visualised in a literature review introduction:

Your introduction should also outline your topic (including any tricky terminology or jargon) and provide an explanation of the scope of your literature review – in other words, what you  will   and  won’t   be covering (the delimitations ). This helps ringfence your review and achieve a clear focus . The clearer and narrower your focus, the deeper you can dive into the topic (which is typically where the magic lies). 

Depending on the nature of your project, you could also present your stance or point of view at this stage. In other words, after grappling with the literature you’ll have an opinion about what the trends and concerns are in the field as well as what’s lacking. The introduction section can then present these ideas so that it is clear to examiners that you’re aware of how your research connects with existing knowledge .

2: The Body Section

The body of your literature review is the centre of your work. This is where you’ll present, analyse, evaluate and synthesise the existing research. In other words, this is where you’re going to earn (or lose) the most marks. Therefore, it’s important to carefully think about how you will organise your discussion to present it in a clear way. 

The body of your literature review should do just as the description of this chapter suggests. It should “review” the literature – in other words, identify, analyse, and synthesise it. So, when thinking about structuring your literature review, you need to think about which structural approach will provide the best “review” for your specific type of research and objectives (we’ll get to this shortly).

There are (broadly speaking)  three options  for organising your literature review.

Option 1: Chronological (according to date)

Organising the literature chronologically is one of the simplest ways to structure your literature review. You start with what was published first and work your way through the literature until you reach the work published most recently. Pretty straightforward.

The benefit of this option is that it makes it easy to discuss the developments and debates in the field as they emerged over time. Organising your literature chronologically also allows you to highlight how specific articles or pieces of work might have changed the course of the field – in other words, which research has had the most impact . Therefore, this approach is very useful when your research is aimed at understanding how the topic has unfolded over time and is often used by scholars in the field of history. That said, this approach can be utilised by anyone that wants to explore change over time .

For example , if a student of politics is investigating how the understanding of democracy has evolved over time, they could use the chronological approach to provide a narrative that demonstrates how this understanding has changed through the ages.

Here are some questions you can ask yourself to help you structure your literature review chronologically.

• What is the earliest literature published relating to this topic?
• How has the field changed over time? Why?
• What are the most recent discoveries/theories?

In some ways, chronology plays a part whichever way you decide to structure your literature review, because you will always, to a certain extent, be analysing how the literature has developed. However, with the chronological approach, the emphasis is very firmly on how the discussion has evolved over time , as opposed to how all the literature links together (which we’ll discuss next ).

Option 2: Thematic (grouped by theme)

The thematic approach to structuring a literature review means organising your literature by theme or category – for example, by independent variables (i.e. factors that have an impact on a specific outcome).

As you’ve been collecting and synthesising literature , you’ll likely have started seeing some themes or patterns emerging. You can then use these themes or patterns as a structure for your body discussion. The thematic approach is the most common approach and is useful for structuring literature reviews in most fields.

For example, if you were researching which factors contributed towards people trusting an organisation, you might find themes such as consumers’ perceptions of an organisation’s competence, benevolence and integrity. Structuring your literature review thematically would mean structuring your literature review’s body section to discuss each of these themes, one section at a time.

Here are some questions to ask yourself when structuring your literature review by themes:

• Are there any patterns that have come to light in the literature?
• What are the central themes and categories used by the researchers?
• Do I have enough evidence of these themes?

PS – you can see an example of a thematically structured literature review in our literature review sample walkthrough video here.

Option 3: Methodological

The methodological option is a way of structuring your literature review by the research methodologies used . In other words, organising your discussion based on the angle from which each piece of research was approached – for example, qualitative , quantitative or mixed  methodologies.

Structuring your literature review by methodology can be useful if you are drawing research from a variety of disciplines and are critiquing different methodologies. The point of this approach is to question  how  existing research has been conducted, as opposed to  what  the conclusions and/or findings the research were.

For example, a sociologist might centre their research around critiquing specific fieldwork practices. Their literature review will then be a summary of the fieldwork methodologies used by different studies.

Here are some questions you can ask yourself when structuring your literature review according to methodology:

• Which methodologies have been utilised in this field?
• Which methodology is the most popular (and why)?
• What are the strengths and weaknesses of the various methodologies?
• How can the existing methodologies inform my own methodology?

3: The Conclusion Section

Once you’ve completed the body section of your literature review using one of the structural approaches we discussed above, you’ll need to “wrap up” your literature review and pull all the pieces together to set the direction for the rest of your dissertation or thesis.

The conclusion is where you’ll present the key findings of your literature review. In this section, you should emphasise the research that is especially important to your research questions and highlight the gaps that exist in the literature. Based on this, you need to make it clear what you will add to the literature – in other words, justify your own research by showing how it will help fill one or more of the gaps you just identified.

Last but not least, if it’s your intention to develop a conceptual framework for your dissertation or thesis, the conclusion section is a good place to present this.

Example: Thematically Structured Review

In the video below, we unpack a literature review chapter so that you can see an example of a thematically structure review in practice.

Let’s Recap

In this article, we’ve  discussed how to structure your literature review for maximum impact. Here’s a quick recap of what  you need to keep in mind when deciding on your literature review structure:

• Just like other chapters, your literature review needs a clear introduction , body and conclusion .
• The introduction section should provide an overview of what you will discuss in your literature review.
• The body section of your literature review can be organised by chronology , theme or methodology . The right structural approach depends on what you’re trying to achieve with your research.
• The conclusion section should draw together the key findings of your literature review and link them to your research questions.

If you’re ready to get started, be sure to download our free literature review template to fast-track your chapter outline.

Psst… there’s more!

This post is an extract from our bestselling Udemy Course, Literature Review Bootcamp . If you want to work smart, you don't want to miss this .

You Might Also Like:

27 Comments

Great work. This is exactly what I was looking for and helps a lot together with your previous post on literature review. One last thing is missing: a link to a great literature chapter of an journal article (maybe with comments of the different sections in this review chapter). Do you know any great literature review chapters?

I agree with you Marin… A great piece

I agree with Marin. This would be quite helpful if you annotate a nicely structured literature from previously published research articles.

Awesome article for my research.

I thank you immensely for this wonderful guide

It is indeed thought and supportive work for the futurist researcher and students

Very educative and good time to get guide. Thank you

Great work, very insightful. Thank you.

Thanks for this wonderful presentation. My question is that do I put all the variables into a single conceptual framework or each hypothesis will have it own conceptual framework?

Thank you very much, very helpful

This is very educative and precise . Thank you very much for dropping this kind of write up .

Pheeww, so damn helpful, thank you for this informative piece.

I’m doing a research project topic ; stool analysis for parasitic worm (enteric) worm, how do I structure it, thanks.

comprehensive explanation. Help us by pasting the URL of some good “literature review” for better understanding.

great piece. thanks for the awesome explanation. it is really worth sharing. I have a little question, if anyone can help me out, which of the options in the body of literature can be best fit if you are writing an architectural thesis that deals with design?

I am doing a research on nanofluids how can l structure it?

Beautifully clear.nThank you!

Lucid! Thankyou!

Brilliant work, well understood, many thanks

I like how this was so clear with simple language 😊😊 thank you so much 😊 for these information 😊

Insightful. I was struggling to come up with a sensible literature review but this has been really helpful. Thank you!

You have given thought-provoking information about the review of the literature.

Thank you. It has made my own research better and to impart your work to students I teach

I learnt a lot from this teaching. It’s a great piece.

I am doing research on EFL teacher motivation for his/her job. How Can I structure it? Is there any detailed template, additional to this?

You are so cool! I do not think I’ve read through something like this before. So nice to find somebody with some genuine thoughts on this issue. Seriously.. thank you for starting this up. This site is one thing that is required on the internet, someone with a little originality!

I’m asked to do conceptual, theoretical and empirical literature, and i just don’t know how to structure it

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• Print Friendly

• University of Texas Libraries

Literature Reviews

• What is a literature review?
• Steps in the Literature Review Process
• Define your research question
• Determine inclusion and exclusion criteria
• Choose databases and search
• Review Results
• Synthesize Results
• Analyze Results
• Librarian Support

What is a Literature Review?

A literature or narrative review is a comprehensive review and analysis of the published literature on a specific topic or research question. The literature that is reviewed contains: books, articles, academic articles, conference proceedings, association papers, and dissertations. It contains the most pertinent studies and points to important past and current research and practices. It provides background and context, and shows how your research will contribute to the field. 

A literature review should: 

• Provide a comprehensive and updated review of the literature;
• Explain why this review has taken place;
• Articulate a position or hypothesis;
• Acknowledge and account for conflicting and corroborating points of view

From  S age Research Methods

Purpose of a Literature Review

A literature review can be written as an introduction to a study to:

• Demonstrate how a study fills a gap in research
• Compare a study with other research that's been done

Or it can be a separate work (a research article on its own) which:

• Organizes or describes a topic
• Describes variables within a particular issue/problem

Limitations of a Literature Review

Some of the limitations of a literature review are:

• It's a snapshot in time. Unlike other reviews, this one has beginning, a middle and an end. There may be future developments that could make your work less relevant.
• It may be too focused. Some niche studies may miss the bigger picture.
• It can be difficult to be comprehensive. There is no way to make sure all the literature on a topic was considered.
• It is easy to be biased if you stick to top tier journals. There may be other places where people are publishing exemplary research. Look to open access publications and conferences to reflect a more inclusive collection. Also, make sure to include opposing views (and not just supporting evidence).

Source: Grant, Maria J., and Andrew Booth. “A Typology of Reviews: An Analysis of 14 Review Types and Associated Methodologies.” Health Information & Libraries Journal, vol. 26, no. 2, June 2009, pp. 91–108. Wiley Online Library, doi:10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x.

Meryl Brodsky : Communication and Information Studies

Hannah Chapman Tripp : Biology, Neuroscience

Carolyn Cunningham : Human Development & Family Sciences, Psychology, Sociology

Larayne Dallas : Engineering

Janelle Hedstrom : Special Education, Curriculum & Instruction, Ed Leadership & Policy ​

Susan Macicak : Linguistics

Imelda Vetter : Dell Medical School

For help in other subject areas, please see the guide to library specialists by subject .

Periodically, UT Libraries runs a workshop covering the basics and library support for literature reviews. While we try to offer these once per academic year, we find providing the recording to be helpful to community members who have missed the session. Following is the most recent recording of the workshop, Conducting a Literature Review. To view the recording, a UT login is required.

• October 26, 2022 recording
• Last Updated: Oct 26, 2022 2:49 PM
• URL: https://guides.lib.utexas.edu/literaturereviews

• The Chicago School
• The Chicago School Library
• Research Guides

Conducting a Literature Review

• Introduction

What is a Literature Review?

Goals of the literature review, types of literature reviews, recommended reading.

• Planning Your Literature Review
• Choose Keywords
• Decide where to search
• Formulate Your Search Strategy
• Utilize Citation Chaining
• When to Stop Searching
• Using Ai for Searching the Literature
• Evaluate, Synthesize & Analyze the Literature
• Write a Literature Review

A literature review surveys, summarizes, critically analyzes, compares, and synthesizes multiple scholarly works, or published knowledge on a particular topic or specific subject area.

Literature can include peer-reviewed or scholarly  articles, books/ ebooks, conference proceedings, theses/ dissertations, documents published by governmental agencies and non-profit organizations, and other forms of gray literature.

Conducting a literature review is part of the research process and serves to establish a base of knowledge and overview of the principal works on a specific area of research as well as identify important themes, discoveries, areas of consensus and debate, changes over time, and provide a foundation for further research.

A literature review may be written to:

•     Synthesize past and current literature on a topic
•     Identify a problem in a field of research  
•     Show how the literature relates to one another
•     Place your work in the the context of other related research

What kinds of sources require a Literature Review?

•     A thesis or dissertation
•     A grant proposal
•     A research paper assigned in a course 
•     An article intended for publication in a journal

All these instances require you to collect what has been written about your research topic so that you can demonstrate how your own research sheds new light on the topic.

The following are common types of literature reviews:

Narrative or Traditional Review

The purpose of this type of review is to describe the current state of the research on a specific topic/research and to offer a critical analysis of the literature reviewed. Studies are grouped by research/theoretical categories, and themes and trends, strengths and weakness, and gaps are identified. The review ends with a conclusion section which summarizes the findings regarding the state of the research of the specific study, the gaps identify and if applicable, explains how the author's research will address gaps identify in the review and expand the knowledge on the topic reviewed.

Systematic Review

The authors of a systematic review use a specific procedure to search the research literature, select the studies to include in their review, and critically evaluate the studies they find.

Meta-analysis

This type of review utilizes quantitative methods to combine the results of independent studies and synthesize summaries and conclusions which can be used to evaluate therapeutic effectiveness, plan new studies, etc.

Meta-synthesis

A meta-synthesis is a type of qualitative study that uses as data the findings from other qualitative studies linked by the same or related topic.

Further Reading on Different Types of Literature Reviews

Grant, M. J., & Booth, A. (2009). A typology of reviews: An analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies . Health Information and Libraries Journal, 26(2), 91-108. doi:10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x Gough, D., Thomas, J., & Oliver, S. (2012). Clarifying differences between review designs and methods . Systematic Reviews, 1, 28. doi:10.1186/2046-4053-1-28

The library has a number of books on conducting and writing literature reviews. The following are some recommended ebooks available in the library:

Books on Conducting Systematic Literature Reviews:

• Next: Planning Your Literature Review >>
• Last Updated: Feb 23, 2024 10:29 AM
• URL: https://library.thechicagoschool.edu/litreview

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• PLoS Comput Biol
• v.9(7); 2013 Jul

Ten Simple Rules for Writing a Literature Review

Marco pautasso.

1 Centre for Functional and Evolutionary Ecology (CEFE), CNRS, Montpellier, France

2 Centre for Biodiversity Synthesis and Analysis (CESAB), FRB, Aix-en-Provence, France

Literature reviews are in great demand in most scientific fields. Their need stems from the ever-increasing output of scientific publications [1] . For example, compared to 1991, in 2008 three, eight, and forty times more papers were indexed in Web of Science on malaria, obesity, and biodiversity, respectively [2] . Given such mountains of papers, scientists cannot be expected to examine in detail every single new paper relevant to their interests [3] . Thus, it is both advantageous and necessary to rely on regular summaries of the recent literature. Although recognition for scientists mainly comes from primary research, timely literature reviews can lead to new synthetic insights and are often widely read [4] . For such summaries to be useful, however, they need to be compiled in a professional way [5] .

When starting from scratch, reviewing the literature can require a titanic amount of work. That is why researchers who have spent their career working on a certain research issue are in a perfect position to review that literature. Some graduate schools are now offering courses in reviewing the literature, given that most research students start their project by producing an overview of what has already been done on their research issue [6] . However, it is likely that most scientists have not thought in detail about how to approach and carry out a literature review.

Reviewing the literature requires the ability to juggle multiple tasks, from finding and evaluating relevant material to synthesising information from various sources, from critical thinking to paraphrasing, evaluating, and citation skills [7] . In this contribution, I share ten simple rules I learned working on about 25 literature reviews as a PhD and postdoctoral student. Ideas and insights also come from discussions with coauthors and colleagues, as well as feedback from reviewers and editors.

Rule 1: Define a Topic and Audience

How to choose which topic to review? There are so many issues in contemporary science that you could spend a lifetime of attending conferences and reading the literature just pondering what to review. On the one hand, if you take several years to choose, several other people may have had the same idea in the meantime. On the other hand, only a well-considered topic is likely to lead to a brilliant literature review [8] . The topic must at least be:

• interesting to you (ideally, you should have come across a series of recent papers related to your line of work that call for a critical summary),
• an important aspect of the field (so that many readers will be interested in the review and there will be enough material to write it), and
• a well-defined issue (otherwise you could potentially include thousands of publications, which would make the review unhelpful).

Ideas for potential reviews may come from papers providing lists of key research questions to be answered [9] , but also from serendipitous moments during desultory reading and discussions. In addition to choosing your topic, you should also select a target audience. In many cases, the topic (e.g., web services in computational biology) will automatically define an audience (e.g., computational biologists), but that same topic may also be of interest to neighbouring fields (e.g., computer science, biology, etc.).

Rule 2: Search and Re-search the Literature

After having chosen your topic and audience, start by checking the literature and downloading relevant papers. Five pieces of advice here:

• keep track of the search items you use (so that your search can be replicated [10] ),
• keep a list of papers whose pdfs you cannot access immediately (so as to retrieve them later with alternative strategies),
• use a paper management system (e.g., Mendeley, Papers, Qiqqa, Sente),
• define early in the process some criteria for exclusion of irrelevant papers (these criteria can then be described in the review to help define its scope), and
• do not just look for research papers in the area you wish to review, but also seek previous reviews.

The chances are high that someone will already have published a literature review ( Figure 1 ), if not exactly on the issue you are planning to tackle, at least on a related topic. If there are already a few or several reviews of the literature on your issue, my advice is not to give up, but to carry on with your own literature review,

The bottom-right situation (many literature reviews but few research papers) is not just a theoretical situation; it applies, for example, to the study of the impacts of climate change on plant diseases, where there appear to be more literature reviews than research studies [33] .

• discussing in your review the approaches, limitations, and conclusions of past reviews,
• trying to find a new angle that has not been covered adequately in the previous reviews, and
• incorporating new material that has inevitably accumulated since their appearance.

When searching the literature for pertinent papers and reviews, the usual rules apply:

• be thorough,
• use different keywords and database sources (e.g., DBLP, Google Scholar, ISI Proceedings, JSTOR Search, Medline, Scopus, Web of Science), and
• look at who has cited past relevant papers and book chapters.

Rule 3: Take Notes While Reading

If you read the papers first, and only afterwards start writing the review, you will need a very good memory to remember who wrote what, and what your impressions and associations were while reading each single paper. My advice is, while reading, to start writing down interesting pieces of information, insights about how to organize the review, and thoughts on what to write. This way, by the time you have read the literature you selected, you will already have a rough draft of the review.

Of course, this draft will still need much rewriting, restructuring, and rethinking to obtain a text with a coherent argument [11] , but you will have avoided the danger posed by staring at a blank document. Be careful when taking notes to use quotation marks if you are provisionally copying verbatim from the literature. It is advisable then to reformulate such quotes with your own words in the final draft. It is important to be careful in noting the references already at this stage, so as to avoid misattributions. Using referencing software from the very beginning of your endeavour will save you time.

Rule 4: Choose the Type of Review You Wish to Write

After having taken notes while reading the literature, you will have a rough idea of the amount of material available for the review. This is probably a good time to decide whether to go for a mini- or a full review. Some journals are now favouring the publication of rather short reviews focusing on the last few years, with a limit on the number of words and citations. A mini-review is not necessarily a minor review: it may well attract more attention from busy readers, although it will inevitably simplify some issues and leave out some relevant material due to space limitations. A full review will have the advantage of more freedom to cover in detail the complexities of a particular scientific development, but may then be left in the pile of the very important papers “to be read” by readers with little time to spare for major monographs.

There is probably a continuum between mini- and full reviews. The same point applies to the dichotomy of descriptive vs. integrative reviews. While descriptive reviews focus on the methodology, findings, and interpretation of each reviewed study, integrative reviews attempt to find common ideas and concepts from the reviewed material [12] . A similar distinction exists between narrative and systematic reviews: while narrative reviews are qualitative, systematic reviews attempt to test a hypothesis based on the published evidence, which is gathered using a predefined protocol to reduce bias [13] , [14] . When systematic reviews analyse quantitative results in a quantitative way, they become meta-analyses. The choice between different review types will have to be made on a case-by-case basis, depending not just on the nature of the material found and the preferences of the target journal(s), but also on the time available to write the review and the number of coauthors [15] .

Rule 5: Keep the Review Focused, but Make It of Broad Interest

Whether your plan is to write a mini- or a full review, it is good advice to keep it focused 16 , 17 . Including material just for the sake of it can easily lead to reviews that are trying to do too many things at once. The need to keep a review focused can be problematic for interdisciplinary reviews, where the aim is to bridge the gap between fields [18] . If you are writing a review on, for example, how epidemiological approaches are used in modelling the spread of ideas, you may be inclined to include material from both parent fields, epidemiology and the study of cultural diffusion. This may be necessary to some extent, but in this case a focused review would only deal in detail with those studies at the interface between epidemiology and the spread of ideas.

While focus is an important feature of a successful review, this requirement has to be balanced with the need to make the review relevant to a broad audience. This square may be circled by discussing the wider implications of the reviewed topic for other disciplines.

Rule 6: Be Critical and Consistent

Reviewing the literature is not stamp collecting. A good review does not just summarize the literature, but discusses it critically, identifies methodological problems, and points out research gaps [19] . After having read a review of the literature, a reader should have a rough idea of:

• the major achievements in the reviewed field,
• the main areas of debate, and
• the outstanding research questions.

It is challenging to achieve a successful review on all these fronts. A solution can be to involve a set of complementary coauthors: some people are excellent at mapping what has been achieved, some others are very good at identifying dark clouds on the horizon, and some have instead a knack at predicting where solutions are going to come from. If your journal club has exactly this sort of team, then you should definitely write a review of the literature! In addition to critical thinking, a literature review needs consistency, for example in the choice of passive vs. active voice and present vs. past tense.

Rule 7: Find a Logical Structure

Like a well-baked cake, a good review has a number of telling features: it is worth the reader's time, timely, systematic, well written, focused, and critical. It also needs a good structure. With reviews, the usual subdivision of research papers into introduction, methods, results, and discussion does not work or is rarely used. However, a general introduction of the context and, toward the end, a recapitulation of the main points covered and take-home messages make sense also in the case of reviews. For systematic reviews, there is a trend towards including information about how the literature was searched (database, keywords, time limits) [20] .

How can you organize the flow of the main body of the review so that the reader will be drawn into and guided through it? It is generally helpful to draw a conceptual scheme of the review, e.g., with mind-mapping techniques. Such diagrams can help recognize a logical way to order and link the various sections of a review [21] . This is the case not just at the writing stage, but also for readers if the diagram is included in the review as a figure. A careful selection of diagrams and figures relevant to the reviewed topic can be very helpful to structure the text too [22] .

Rule 8: Make Use of Feedback

Reviews of the literature are normally peer-reviewed in the same way as research papers, and rightly so [23] . As a rule, incorporating feedback from reviewers greatly helps improve a review draft. Having read the review with a fresh mind, reviewers may spot inaccuracies, inconsistencies, and ambiguities that had not been noticed by the writers due to rereading the typescript too many times. It is however advisable to reread the draft one more time before submission, as a last-minute correction of typos, leaps, and muddled sentences may enable the reviewers to focus on providing advice on the content rather than the form.

Feedback is vital to writing a good review, and should be sought from a variety of colleagues, so as to obtain a diversity of views on the draft. This may lead in some cases to conflicting views on the merits of the paper, and on how to improve it, but such a situation is better than the absence of feedback. A diversity of feedback perspectives on a literature review can help identify where the consensus view stands in the landscape of the current scientific understanding of an issue [24] .

Rule 9: Include Your Own Relevant Research, but Be Objective

In many cases, reviewers of the literature will have published studies relevant to the review they are writing. This could create a conflict of interest: how can reviewers report objectively on their own work [25] ? Some scientists may be overly enthusiastic about what they have published, and thus risk giving too much importance to their own findings in the review. However, bias could also occur in the other direction: some scientists may be unduly dismissive of their own achievements, so that they will tend to downplay their contribution (if any) to a field when reviewing it.

In general, a review of the literature should neither be a public relations brochure nor an exercise in competitive self-denial. If a reviewer is up to the job of producing a well-organized and methodical review, which flows well and provides a service to the readership, then it should be possible to be objective in reviewing one's own relevant findings. In reviews written by multiple authors, this may be achieved by assigning the review of the results of a coauthor to different coauthors.

Rule 10: Be Up-to-Date, but Do Not Forget Older Studies

Given the progressive acceleration in the publication of scientific papers, today's reviews of the literature need awareness not just of the overall direction and achievements of a field of inquiry, but also of the latest studies, so as not to become out-of-date before they have been published. Ideally, a literature review should not identify as a major research gap an issue that has just been addressed in a series of papers in press (the same applies, of course, to older, overlooked studies (“sleeping beauties” [26] )). This implies that literature reviewers would do well to keep an eye on electronic lists of papers in press, given that it can take months before these appear in scientific databases. Some reviews declare that they have scanned the literature up to a certain point in time, but given that peer review can be a rather lengthy process, a full search for newly appeared literature at the revision stage may be worthwhile. Assessing the contribution of papers that have just appeared is particularly challenging, because there is little perspective with which to gauge their significance and impact on further research and society.

Inevitably, new papers on the reviewed topic (including independently written literature reviews) will appear from all quarters after the review has been published, so that there may soon be the need for an updated review. But this is the nature of science [27] – [32] . I wish everybody good luck with writing a review of the literature.

Acknowledgments

Many thanks to M. Barbosa, K. Dehnen-Schmutz, T. Döring, D. Fontaneto, M. Garbelotto, O. Holdenrieder, M. Jeger, D. Lonsdale, A. MacLeod, P. Mills, M. Moslonka-Lefebvre, G. Stancanelli, P. Weisberg, and X. Xu for insights and discussions, and to P. Bourne, T. Matoni, and D. Smith for helpful comments on a previous draft.

Funding Statement

This work was funded by the French Foundation for Research on Biodiversity (FRB) through its Centre for Synthesis and Analysis of Biodiversity data (CESAB), as part of the NETSEED research project. The funders had no role in the preparation of the manuscript.

• Maps & Floorplans
• Libraries A-Z

• Ellis Library (main)
• Engineering Library
• Geological Sciences
• Journalism Library
• Law Library
• Mathematical Sciences
• MU Digital Collections
• Veterinary Medical
• More Libraries...
• Instructional Services
• Course Reserves
• Course Guides
• Schedule a Library Class
• Class Assessment Forms
• Recordings & Tutorials
• Research & Writing Help
• More class resources
• Places to Study
• Borrow, Request & Renew
• Call Numbers
• Computers, Printers, Scanners & Software
• Digital Media Lab
• Equipment Lending: Laptops, cameras, etc.
• Subject Librarians
• Writing Tutors
• More In the Library...
• Undergraduate Students
• Graduate Students
• Faculty & Staff
• Researcher Support
• Distance Learners
• International Students
• More Services for...
• View my MU Libraries Account (login & click on My Library Account)
• View my MOBIUS Checkouts
• Renew my Books (login & click on My Loans)
• Place a Hold on a Book
• Request Books from Depository
• View my ILL@MU Account
• Set Up Alerts in Databases
• More Account Information...

Introduction to Literature Reviews

Introduction.

• Step One: Define
• Step Two: Research
• Step Three: Write
• Suggested Readings

A literature review is a written work that :

• Compiles significant research published on a topic by accredited scholars and researchers;
• —Surveys scholarly articles, books, dissertations, conference proceedings, and other sources;
• —Examines contrasting perspectives, theoretical approaches, methodologies, findings, results, conclusions.
• —Reviews critically, analyzes, and synthesizes existing research on a topic; and,
• Performs a thorough “re” view, “overview”, or “look again” of past and current works on a subject, issue, or theory.

From these analyses, the writer then offers an overview of the current status of a particular area of knowledge from both a practical and theoretical perspective.

Literature reviews are important because they are usually a  required  step in a thesis proposal (Master's or PhD). The proposal will not be well-supported without a literature review. Also, literature reviews are important because they help you learn important authors and ideas in your field. This is useful for your coursework and your writing. Knowing key authors also helps you become acquainted with other researchers in your field.

Look at this diagram and imagine that your research is the "something new." This shows how your research should relate to major works and other sources.

Olivia Whitfield | Graduate Reference Assistant | 2012-2015

• Next: Step One: Define >>
• Last Updated: Jun 28, 2023 5:49 PM
• URL: https://libraryguides.missouri.edu/literaturereview

How to Write a Literature Review

What is a literature review.

• What Is the Literature
• Writing the Review

A literature review is much more than an annotated bibliography or a list of separate reviews of articles and books. It is a critical, analytical summary and synthesis of the current knowledge of a topic. Thus it should compare and relate different theories, findings, etc, rather than just summarize them individually. In addition, it should have a particular focus or theme to organize the review. It does not have to be an exhaustive account of everything published on the topic, but it should discuss all the significant academic literature and other relevant sources important for that focus.

This is meant to be a general guide to writing a literature review: ways to structure one, what to include, how it supplements other research. For more specific help on writing a review, and especially for help on finding the literature to review, sign up for a Personal Research Session .

The specific organization of a literature review depends on the type and purpose of the review, as well as on the specific field or topic being reviewed. But in general, it is a relatively brief but thorough exploration of past and current work on a topic. Rather than a chronological listing of previous work, though, literature reviews are usually organized thematically, such as different theoretical approaches, methodologies, or specific issues or concepts involved in the topic. A thematic organization makes it much easier to examine contrasting perspectives, theoretical approaches, methodologies, findings, etc, and to analyze the strengths and weaknesses of, and point out any gaps in, previous research. And this is the heart of what a literature review is about. A literature review may offer new interpretations, theoretical approaches, or other ideas; if it is part of a research proposal or report it should demonstrate the relationship of the proposed or reported research to others' work; but whatever else it does, it must provide a critical overview of the current state of research efforts. 

Literature reviews are common and very important in the sciences and social sciences. They are less common and have a less important role in the humanities, but they do have a place, especially stand-alone reviews.

Types of Literature Reviews

There are different types of literature reviews, and different purposes for writing a review, but the most common are:

• Stand-alone literature review articles . These provide an overview and analysis of the current state of research on a topic or question. The goal is to evaluate and compare previous research on a topic to provide an analysis of what is currently known, and also to reveal controversies, weaknesses, and gaps in current work, thus pointing to directions for future research. You can find examples published in any number of academic journals, but there is a series of Annual Reviews of *Subject* which are specifically devoted to literature review articles. Writing a stand-alone review is often an effective way to get a good handle on a topic and to develop ideas for your own research program. For example, contrasting theoretical approaches or conflicting interpretations of findings can be the basis of your research project: can you find evidence supporting one interpretation against another, or can you propose an alternative interpretation that overcomes their limitations?
• Part of a research proposal . This could be a proposal for a PhD dissertation, a senior thesis, or a class project. It could also be a submission for a grant. The literature review, by pointing out the current issues and questions concerning a topic, is a crucial part of demonstrating how your proposed research will contribute to the field, and thus of convincing your thesis committee to allow you to pursue the topic of your interest or a funding agency to pay for your research efforts.
• Part of a research report . When you finish your research and write your thesis or paper to present your findings, it should include a literature review to provide the context to which your work is a contribution. Your report, in addition to detailing the methods, results, etc. of your research, should show how your work relates to others' work.

A literature review for a research report is often a revision of the review for a research proposal, which can be a revision of a stand-alone review. Each revision should be a fairly extensive revision. With the increased knowledge of and experience in the topic as you proceed, your understanding of the topic will increase. Thus, you will be in a better position to analyze and critique the literature. In addition, your focus will change as you proceed in your research. Some areas of the literature you initially reviewed will be marginal or irrelevant for your eventual research, and you will need to explore other areas more thoroughly. 

Examples of Literature Reviews

See the series of Annual Reviews of *Subject* which are specifically devoted to literature review articles to find many examples of stand-alone literature reviews in the biomedical, physical, and social sciences. 

Research report articles vary in how they are organized, but a common general structure is to have sections such as:

• Abstract - Brief summary of the contents of the article
• Introduction - A explanation of the purpose of the study, a statement of the research question(s) the study intends to address
• Literature review - A critical assessment of the work done so far on this topic, to show how the current study relates to what has already been done
• Methods - How the study was carried out (e.g. instruments or equipment, procedures, methods to gather and analyze data)
• Results - What was found in the course of the study
• Discussion - What do the results mean
• Conclusion - State the conclusions and implications of the results, and discuss how it relates to the work reviewed in the literature review; also, point to directions for further work in the area

Here are some articles that illustrate variations on this theme. There is no need to read the entire articles (unless the contents interest you); just quickly browse through to see the sections, and see how each section is introduced and what is contained in them.

The Determinants of Undergraduate Grade Point Average: The Relative Importance of Family Background, High School Resources, and Peer Group Effects , in The Journal of Human Resources , v. 34 no. 2 (Spring 1999), p. 268-293.

This article has a standard breakdown of sections:

• Introduction
• Literature Review
• Some discussion sections

First Encounters of the Bureaucratic Kind: Early Freshman Experiences with a Campus Bureaucracy , in The Journal of Higher Education , v. 67 no. 6 (Nov-Dec 1996), p. 660-691.

This one does not have a section specifically labeled as a "literature review" or "review of the literature," but the first few sections cite a long list of other sources discussing previous research in the area before the authors present their own study they are reporting.

• Next: What Is the Literature >>
• Last Updated: Jan 11, 2024 9:48 AM
• URL: https://libguides.wesleyan.edu/litreview

• Licensing Information
• Contributing Authors
• 1. Let's Get Writing
• 1.1. The 5 C Guidelines
• 1.2. How to Write Articles Quickly and Expertly
• 2. Critical Thinking
• 2.1. Critical Thinking in the Classroom
• 2.2. Necessary and Sufficient Conditions
• 2.3. Good Logic
• 3. APA for Novices
• 3.1. Hoops and Barriers
• 3.2. Crafts and Puzzles
• 3.3. The Papers Trail
• 3.4. The Fine Art of Sentencing
• 3.5. Hurdles
• 3.6. Small Stressors
• 4. Literature Reviews
• 4.1. Introduction to Literature Reviews
• 4.2. What is a Literature Review?
• 4.3. How to Get Started
• 4.4. Where to Find the Literature
• 4.5. Evaluating Sources
• 4.6. Documenting Sources
• 4.7. Synthesizing Sources
• 4.8. Writing the Literature Review
• 4.9. Concluding Thoughts on Literature Reviews
• Technical Tutorials
• Constructing an Annotated Bibliography with Zotero
• Extracting Resource Metadata from a Citation List with AnyStyle.io
• Exporting Zotero to a Spreadsheet
• APA 7 Job Aid
• Index of Topics
• Translations

Introduction to Literature Reviews

Choose a sign-in option.

Tools and Settings

Questions and Tasks

Citation and Embed Code

Learning Objectives

At the conclusion of this chapter, you will be able to:

• Identify the purpose of the literature review in  the research process;
• Distinguish between different types of literature reviews.

What is a Literature Review?

Pick up nearly any book on research methods and you will find a description of a literature review.  At a basic level, the term implies a survey of factual or nonfiction books, articles, and other documents published on a particular subject.  Definitions may be similar across the disciplines, with new types and definitions continuing to emerge.  Generally speaking, a literature review is a:

• “comprehensive background of the literature within the interested topic area…” ( O’Gorman & MacIntosh, 2015, p. 31 [https://edtechbooks.org/-EaoJ] ).
• “critical component of the research process that provides an in-depth analysis of recently published research findings in specifically identified areas of interest.” ( House, 2018, p. 109 [https://edtechbooks.org/-EaoJ] ).
• “written document that presents a logically argued case founded on a comprehensive understanding of the current state of knowledge about a topic of study” ( Machi & McEvoy,  2012, p. 4 [https://edtechbooks.org/-EaoJ] ).

As a foundation for knowledge advancement in every discipline, it is an important element of any research project.  At the graduate or doctoral level, the literature review is an essential feature of thesis and dissertation, as well as grant proposal writing.  That is to say, “A substantive, thorough, sophisticated literature review is a precondition for doing substantive, thorough, sophisticated research…A researcher cannot perform significant research without first understanding the literature in the field.” ( Boote & Beile, 2005, p. 3 [https://edtechbooks.org/-EaoJ] ).  It is by this means, that a researcher demonstrates familiarity with a body of knowledge and thereby establishes credibility with a reader.  An advanced-level literature review shows how prior research is linked to a new project, summarizing and synthesizing what is known while identifying gaps in the knowledge base, facilitating theory development, closing areas where enough research already exists, and uncovering areas where more research is needed. ( Webster & Watson, 2002, p. xiii [https://edtechbooks.org/-EaoJ] )

A graduate-level literature review is a compilation of the most significant previously published research on your topic. Unlike an annotated bibliography or a research paper you may have written as an undergraduate, your literature review will outline, evaluate and synthesize relevant research and relate those sources to your own thesis or research question. It is much more than a summary of all the related literature.

It is a type of writing that demonstrate the importance of your research by defining the main ideas and the relationship between them. A good literature review lays the foundation for the importance of your stated problem and research question.

Literature reviews do the following:

• define a concept
• map the research terrain or scope
• systemize relationships between concepts
• identify gaps in the literature ( Rocco & Plathotnik, 2009, p. 128 [https://edtechbooks.org/-EaoJ] )

In the context of a research study, the purpose of a literature review is to demonstrate that your research question  is meaningful. Additionally, you may review the literature of different disciplines to find deeper meaning and understanding of your topic. It is especially important to consider other disciplines when you do not find much on your topic in one discipline. You will need to search the cognate literature before claiming there is “little previous research” on your topic.

Well developed literature reviews involve numerous steps and activities. The literature review is an iterative process because you will do at least two of them: a preliminary search to learn what has been published in your area and whether there is sufficient support in the literature for moving ahead with your subject. After this first exploration, you will conduct a deeper dive into the literature to learn everything you can about the topic and its related issues.

Literature Review Tutorial

Literature Review Basics

An effective literature review must:

• Methodologically analyze and synthesize quality literature on a topic
• Provide a firm foundation to a topic or research area
• Provide a firm foundation for the selection of a research methodology
• Demonstrate that the proposed research contributes something new to the overall body of knowledge of advances the research field’s knowledge base. ( Levy & Ellis, 2006 [https://edtechbooks.org/-EaoJ] ).

All literature reviews, whether they are qualitative, quantitative or both, will at some point:

• Introduce the topic and define its key terms
• Establish the importance of the topic
• Provide an overview of the amount of available literature and its types (for example: theoretical, statistical, speculative)
• Identify gaps in the literature
• Point out consistent finding across studies
• Arrive at a synthesis that organizes what is known about a topic
• Discusses possible implications and directions for future research

Types of Literature Reviews

There are many different types of literature reviews, however there are some shared characteristics or features that all share.  Remember a comprehensive literature review is, at its most fundamental level, an original work based on an extensive critical examination and synthesis of the relevant literature on a topic. As a study of the research on a particular topic, it is arranged by key themes or findings, which may lead up to or link to the  research question.  In some cases, the research question will drive the type of literature review that is undertaken.

The following section includes brief descriptions of the terms used to describe different literature review types with examples of each.   The included citations are open access, Creative Commons licensed or copyright-restricted.

Guided by an understanding of basic issues rather than a research methodology, the writer of a conceptual literature review is looking for key factors, concepts or variables and the presumed relationship between them. The goal of the conceptual literature review is to categorize and describe concepts relevant to the study or topic and outline a relationship between them, including relevant theory and empirical research.

Examples of a Conceptual Review:

• The formality of learning science in everyday life: A conceptual literature review ( Dohn, 2010 [https://edtechbooks.org/-EaoJ] ).
• Are we asking the right questions? A conceptual review of the educational development literature in higher education ( Amundsen & Wilson, 2012 [https://edtechbooks.org/-EaoJ] ).

An empirical literature review collects, creates, arranges, and analyzes numeric data reflecting the frequency of themes, topics, authors and/or methods found in existing literature. Empirical literature reviews present their summaries in quantifiable terms using descriptive and inferential statistics.

Examples of an Empirical Review:

• Impediments of e-learning adoption in higher learning institutions of Tanzania: An empirical review ( Mwakyusa & Mwalyagile, 2016 [https://edtechbooks.org/-EaoJ] ).
• Exploratory

The purpose of an exploratory review is to provide a broad approach to the topic area. The aim is breadth rather than depth and to get a general feel for the size of the topic area. A graduate student might do an exploratory review of the literature before beginning a more comprehensive one (e.g., synoptic).

Examples of an Exploratory Review:

• University research management: An exploratory literature review ( Schuetzenmeister, 2010 [https://edtechbooks.org/-EaoJ] ).
• An exploratory review of design principles in constructivist gaming learning environments ( Rosario & Widmeyer, 2009 [https://edtechbooks.org/-EaoJ] ).

This type of literature review is limited to a single aspect of previous research, such as methodology. A focused literature review generally will describe the implications of choosing a particular element of past research, such as methodology in terms of data collection, analysis, and interpretation.

Examples of a Focused Review:

• Language awareness: Genre awareness-a focused review of the literature ( Stainton, 1992 [https://edtechbooks.org/-EaoJ] ).

Integrative

An integrative review critiques past research and draws overall conclusions from the body of literature at a specified point in time. As such, it reviews, critiques, and synthesizes representative literature on a topic in an integrated way. Most integrative reviews may require the author to adopt a guiding theory, a set of competing models, or a point of view about a topic.  For more description of integrative reviews, see Whittemore & Knafl (2005) [https://edtechbooks.org/-EaoJ] .

Examples of an Integrative Review:

• Exploring the gap between teacher certification and permanent employment in Ontario: An integrative literature review ( Brock & Ryan, 2016 [https://edtechbooks.org/-EaoJ] ).
• Meta-analysis

A subset of a systematic review, a meta-analysis takes findings from several studies on the same subject and analyzes them using standardized statistical procedures to pool together data. As such, it integrates findings from a large body of quantitative findings to enhance understanding, draw conclusions, and detect patterns and relationships. By gathering data from many different, independent studies that look at the same research question and assess similar outcome measures, data can be combined and re-analyzed, providing greater statistical power than any single study alone. It’s important to note that not every systematic review includes a meta-analysis but a meta-analysis can’t exist without a systematic review of the literature.

Examples of a Meta-Analysis:

• Efficacy of the cooperative learning method on mathematics achievement and attitude: A meta-analysis research ( Capar & Tarim, 2015 [https://edtechbooks.org/-EaoJ] ).
• Gender differences in student attitudes toward science: A meta-analysis of the literature from 1970 to 1991 ( Weinburgh, 1995 [https://edtechbooks.org/-EaoJ] ).

Narrative/Traditional

A narrative or traditional review provides an overview of research on a particular topic that critiques and summarizes a body of literature. Typically broad in focus, these reviews select and synthesize relevant past research into a coherent discussion. Methodologies, findings and limits of the existing body of knowledge are discussed in narrative form. This requires a sufficiently focused research question, and the process may be subject to bias that supports the researcher’s own work.

Examples of a Narrative/Traditional Review:

• Adventure education and Outward Bound: Out-of-class experiences that make a lasting difference ( Hattie, Marsh, Neill, & Richards, 1997 [https://edtechbooks.org/-EaoJ] ).
• Good quality discussion is necessary but not sufficient in asynchronous tuition: A brief narrative review of the literature ( Fear & Erikson-Brown, 2014 [https://edtechbooks.org/-EaoJ] ).

This specific type of literature review is theory-driven and interpretative and is intended to explain the outcomes of a complex intervention program(s).

Examples of a Realist Review:

• Unravelling quality culture in higher education: A realist review ( Bendermacher, Egbrink, Wolfhagen, & Dolmans, 2017 [https://edtechbooks.org/-EaoJ] ).

This type of review tends to be a non-systematic approach that focuses on breadth of coverage rather than depth. It utilizes a wide range of materials and may not evaluate the quality of the studies as much as count the number. Thus, it aims to identify the nature and extent of research in an area by providing a preliminary assessment of size and scope of available research and may also include research in progress.

Examples of a Scoping Review:

• Interdisciplinary doctoral research supervision: A scoping review ( Vanstone, Hibbert, Kinsella, McKenzie, Pitman, & Lingard, 2013 [https://edtechbooks.org/-EaoJ] ).

In contrast to an exploratory review, the purpose of a synoptic review is to provide a concise but accurate overview of all material that appears to be relevant to a chosen topic. Both content and methodological material is included. The review should aim to be both descriptive and evaluative as it summarizes previous studies while also showing how the body of literature could be extended and improved in terms of content and method by identifying gaps.

Examples of a Synoptic Review:

• Theoretical framework for educational assessment: A synoptic review ( Ghaicha, 2016 [https://edtechbooks.org/-EaoJ] ).
• School effects research: A synoptic review of past efforts and some suggestions for the future ( Cuttance, 1981 [https://edtechbooks.org/-EaoJ] ).

Systematic Review

A rigorous review that follows a strict methodology designed with a presupposed selection of literature reviewed, systematic reviews are undertaken to clarify the state of existing research, evidence, and possible implications that can be drawn.  Using comprehensive and exhaustive searching of the published and unpublished literature, searching various databases, reports, and grey literature, these reviews seek to produce transparent and reproducible results that report details of time frame and methods to minimize bias.  Generally, these reviews must include teams of at least 2-3 to allow for the critical appraisal of the literature.  For more description of systematic reviews, including links to protocols, checklists, workflow processes, and structure see “ A Young Researcher’s Guide to a Systematic Review [https://edtechbooks.org/-oF] “.

Examples of a Systematic Review:

• The potentials of using cloud computing in schools: A systematic literature review ( Hartmann, Braae, Pedersen, & Khalid, 2017 [https://edtechbooks.org/-EaoJ] ).
• The use of research to improve professional practice: a systematic review of the literature ( Hemsley-Brown & Sharp, 2003 [https://edtechbooks.org/-EaoJ] ).

Umbrella/Overview of Reviews

An umbrella review compiles evidence from multiple systematic reviews into one document. It therefore focuses on broad conditions or problems for which there are competing interventions and highlights reviews that address those interventions and their effects, thereby allowing for recommendations for practice. For a brief discussion see “ Not all literature reviews are the same [https://edtechbooks.org/-xZ] ” (Thomson, 2013).

Examples of an Umbrella/Overview Review:

• Reflective practice in healthcare education: An umbrella review ( Fragknos, 2016 [https://edtechbooks.org/-EaoJ] ).

Why do a Literature Review?

The purpose of the literature review is the same regardless of the topic or research method. It tests your own research question against what is already known about the subject.

First – It’s part of the whole.

Omission of a literature review chapter or section in a graduate-level project represents a serious void or absence of a critical element in the research process.

The outcome of your review is expected to demonstrate that you:

• can systematically explore the research in your topic area
• can read and critically analyze the literature in your discipline and then use it appropriately to advance your own work
• have sufficient knowledge in the topic to undertake further investigation

Second – It’s good for you!

• You improve your skills as a researcher
• You become familiar with the discourse of your discipline and learn how to be a scholar in your field
• You learn through writing your ideas and finding your voice in your subject area
• You define, redefine and clarify your research question for yourself in the process

Third – It’s good for your reader.

Your reader expects you to have done the hard work of gathering, evaluating, and synthesizing the literature.  When you do a literature review you:

• Set the context for the topic and present its significance
• Identify what’s important to know about your topic – including individual material, prior research, publications, organizations and authors.
• Demonstrate relationships among prior research
• Establish limitations of existing knowledge
• Analyze trends in the topic’s treatment and gaps in the literature

So, why should you do a literature review?

• To locate gaps in the literature of your discipline
• To avoid reinventing the wheel
• To carry on where others have already been
• To identify other people working in the same field
• To increase your breadth of knowledge in your subject area
• To find the seminal works in your field
• To provide intellectual context for your own work
• To acknowledge opposing viewpoints
• To put your work in perspective
• To demonstrate you can discover and retrieve previous work in the area

Common Literature Review Errors

Graduate-level literature reviews are more than a summary of the publications you find on a topic.  As you have seen in this brief introduction, literature reviews are a very specific type of research, analysis, and writing.  We will explore these topics more in the next chapters.  Some things to keep in mind as you begin your own research and writing are ways to avoid the most common errors seen in the first attempt at a literature review.  For a quick review of some of the pitfalls and challenges a new researcher faces when he/she begins work, see “ Get Ready: Academic Writing, General Pitfalls and (oh yes) Getting Started! [https://edtechbooks.org/-GUc] ”.

As you begin your own graduate-level literature review, try to avoid these common mistakes:

• Accepting another researcher’s finding as valid without evaluating methodology and data
• Ignoring contrary findings and alternative interpretations
• Providing findings that are not clearly related to one’s own study or that are too general
• Allowing insufficient time to defining best search strategies and writing
• Reporting rather than synthesizing isolated statistical results
• Choosing problematic or irrelevant keywords, subject headings and descriptors
• Relying too heavily on secondary sources
• Failing to transparently report search methods
• Summarizing rather than synthesizing articles

In conclusion, the purpose of a literature review is three-fold:

• to survey the current state of knowledge or evidence in the area of inquiry,
• to identify key authors, articles, theories, and findings in that area, and
• to identify gaps in knowledge in that research area.

A literature review is commonly done today using computerized keyword searches in online databases, often working with a trained librarian or information expert. Keywords can be combined using the Boolean operators, “and”, “or” and sometimes “not”  to narrow down or expand the search results. Once a list of articles is generated from the keyword and subject heading search, the researcher must then manually browse through each title and abstract, to determine the suitability of that article before a full-text article is obtained for the research question.

Literature reviews should be reasonably complete and not restricted to a few journals, a few years, or a specific methodology or research design. Reviewed articles may be summarized in the form of tables and can be further structured using organizing frameworks such as a concept matrix.

A well-conducted literature review should indicate whether the initial research questions have already been addressed in the literature, whether there are newer or more interesting research questions available, and whether the original research questions should be modified or changed in light of findings of the literature review.

The review can also provide some intuitions or potential answers to the questions of interest and/or help identify theories that have previously been used to address similar questions and may provide evidence to inform policy or decision-making ( Bhattacherjee, 2012 [https://edtechbooks.org/-EaoJ] ).

Test Yourself

The purpose of a graduate-level literature review is to summarize in as many words as possible everything that is known about my topic.

A literature review is significant because in the process of doing one, the researcher learns to read and critically assess the literature of a discipline and then uses it appropriately to advance his/her own research.

Read the following abstract and choose the correct type of literature review it represents.

The focus of this paper centers around timing associated with early childhood education programs and interventions using meta-analytic methods. At any given assessment age, a child’s current age equals starting age, plus duration of program, plus years since program ended. Variability in assessment ages across the studies should enable everyone to identify the separate effects of all three time-related components. The project is a meta-analysis of evaluation studies of early childhood education programs conducted in the United States and its territories between 1960 and 2007. The population of interest is children enrolled in early childhood education programs between the ages of 0 and 5 and their control-group counterparts. Since the data come from a meta-analysis, the population for this study is drawn from many different studies with diverse samples. Given the preliminary nature of their analysis, the authors cannot offer conclusions at this point. ( Duncan, Leak, Li, Magnuson, Schindler, & Yoshikawa, 2011 [https://edtechbooks.org/-EaoJ] ).

In this review, Mary Vorsino writes that she is interested in keeping the potential influences of women pragmatists of Dewey’s day in mind while presenting modern feminist re readings of Dewey. She wishes to construct a narrowly-focused and succinct literature review of thinkers who have donned a feminist lens to analyze Dewey’s approaches to education, learning, and democracy and to employ Dewey’s works in theorizing on gender and education and on gender in society. This article first explores Dewey as both an ally and a problematic figure in feminist literature and then investigates the broader sphere of feminist pragmatism and two central themes within it: (1) valuing diversity, and diverse experiences; and (2) problematizing fixed truths. ( Vorsino, 2015 [https://edtechbooks.org/-EaoJ] ).

Linda Frederiksen is the Head of Access Services at Washington State University Vancouver.  She has a Master of Library Science degree from Emporia State University in Kansas. Linda is active in local, regional and national organizations, projects and initiatives advancing open educational resources and equitable access to information.

Sue F. Phelps is the Health Sciences and Outreach Services Librarian at Washington State University Vancouver. Her research interests include information literacy, accessibility of learning materials for students who use adaptive technology, diversity and equity in higher education, and evidence based practice in the health sciences

Brigham Young University

This content is provided to you freely by BYU Open Learning Network.

Access it online or download it at https://open.byu.edu/rapidwriting/lit_rev_intro .

 CREATE ACCOUNT  LOG IN

Writing: Literature Review Basics

• What is Synthesis?
• Organizing Your Research
• Paraphrasing, Summary, or Direct Quotation?
• Introductions
• Conclusions
• All Writing Guides: Home
• CORE Library Home

The Most Important Thing

The best time to write an introduction is AFTER you write the body of your paper.

Well, how do you know what to introduce until after you've figured out what you want to say?

The best time to write an introduction is as one of the last things you do.

Basic Introduction Template

For any other sort of scholarly writing, the following basic structure works well for an introduction:

• What has been said or done on this topic?  
• What is the problem with what has been said or done?
• What will you offer to solve the problem?  (The answer to this is your thesis statement.)
• How does your solution address necessary change?

Writing an Introduction

The job of an introduction is to preview what you are going to say so the audience knows what is coming.  A good introduction starts out generally and works towards a specific statement of what you intend to discuss in your writing. 

The introduction explains the focus and establishes the importance of the subject. It discusses what kind of work has been done on the topic and identifies any controversies within the field or any recent research which has raised questions about earlier assumptions. It may provide background or history, and it indicates why the topic is important, interesting, problematic, or relevant in some way.  It concludes with a purpose or thesis statement. In a stand-alone literature review, this statement will sum up and evaluate the state of the art in this field of research; in a review that is an introduction or preparatory to a larger work, such as the Culminating Project, it will suggest how the review findings will lead to the research the writer proposes to undertake.

In a literature review, an introduction may contain the following:

• A concise definition of a topic under consideration (this may be a descriptive or argumentative thesis, or proposal), as well as the scope of the related literature being investigated. (Example: If the topic under consideration is ‘women’s wartime diaries’, the scope of the review may be limited to published or unpublished works, works in English, works from a particular location, time period, or conflict, etc.)  
• The introduction should also note what topics are being included and what are intentional exclusions. (Example: “This review will not explore the diaries of adolescent girls.”)
• A final sentence should signal the list of key topics that will be used to discuss the selected sources.

Many theories have been proposed to explain what motivates human behavior. Although the literature covers a wide variety of such theories, this review will focus on five major themes which emerge repeatedly throughout the literature reviewed. These themes are incorporation of the self-concept into traditional theories of motivation, the influence of rewards on motivation, the increasing importance of internal forces of motivation, autonomy and self-control as sources of motivation, and narcissism as an essential component of motivation. Although the literature presents these themes in a variety of contexts, this paper will primarily focus on their application to self-motivation.

Let's break that apart.

• << Previous: Paraphrasing, Summary, or Direct Quotation?
• Next: Conclusions >>
• Last Updated: Feb 12, 2024 9:02 AM
• URL: https://azhin.org/cummings/basiclitreview

© 2015 - 2024

Literature Review Tips for the Introduction and Discussion Sections

A literature review is a summary of studies related to a particular area of research. It identifies and summarizes all the relevant research conducted on a particular topic. It is important that your literature review is focused . Therefore, you should choose a limited number of studies that are central to your topic rather than trying to collect a wide range of studies that might not be closely connected.

Literature reviews help you accomplish the following:

• Evaluate past research  Collecting relevant resources will help you see what research has already been done. This will also help avoid duplication.
• Identify experts It is important to identify credible researchers who have knowledge in a given field, in order to seek their help if you get stuck with certain aspects of your research.
• Identify key questions  Your ultimate aim is to bring something new to the conversation. Collecting resources will help you determine the important questions that need to be addressed.
• Determine methodologies used in past studies Knowing how others have approached a particular topic will give you the opportunity to identify problems and find new ways to research and study a topic. If the reported methodology was successful, you can use it and save time that you would otherwise be spending on optimization.

Presenting Literature Review in the Introduction and Discussion Sections

There are many benefits to presenting literature reviews in the introduction and discussion sections of your manuscripts . However, there are differences in how you can present literature reviews in each section.

What Should be Included in the Literature Review of the Introduction Section?

The literature reviewed in the introduction should:

• Introduce the topic
• Establish the significance of the study
• Provide an overview of the relevant literature
• Establish a context for the study using the literature
• Identify knowledge gaps
• Illustrate how the study will advance knowledge on the topic

As you can see, literature review plays a significant role in the introduction section. However, there are some things that you should avoid doing in this section. These include:

• Elaborating on the studies mentioned in the literature review
• Using studies from the literature review to aggressively support your research
• Directly quoting studies from the literature review

It is important to know how to integrate the literature review into the introduction in an effective way. Although you can mention other studies, they should not be the focus. Instead, focus on using the literature review to aid in setting a foundation for the manuscript.

What Goes in the Literature Review of the Discussion Section?

Literature reviews play an important role in the discussion section of a manuscript . In this section, your findings should be the focus, rather than those of other researchers. Therefore, you should only use the studies mentioned in the literature review as support and evidence for your study.

There are three ways in which you can use literature reviews in the discussion section:

• To Provide Context for Your Study Using studies from the literature review helps to set the foundation for how you will reveal your findings and develop your ideas.
• Compare your Findings to Other Studies You can use previous literature as a backdrop to compare your new findings. This helps describe and also advance your ideas.
• State the Contribution of Your Study In addition to developing your ideas, you can use literature reviews to explain how your study contributes to the field of study.

However, there are three common mistakes that researchers make when including literature reviews in the discussion section. First, they mention all sorts of studies, some of which are not even relevant to the topic under investigation. Second, instead of citing the original article, they cite a related article that mentions the original article. Lastly, some authors cite previous work solely based on the abstract, without even going through the entire paper.

We hope this article helps you effectively present your literature review in both the introduction as well as the discussion section of your manuscript. You can also mention any other tips that will add to this article in the comments section below.

References:

[1]  http://www.math.montana.edu/jobo/phdprep/documents/phd6.pdf 

[2]  https://libguides.unf.edu/c.php?g=177129&p=1163732

This Is a Very Useful Information… thank you. It helped me a lot. It is explained clearfully.

YOU ARE SO NASESESSRY

it explains everything sooo goood i thought it would be hard to understand

Rate this article Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Enago Academy's Most Popular Articles

• Reporting Research

Beyond Spellcheck: How copyediting guarantees error-free submission

Submitting a manuscript is a complex and often an emotional experience for researchers. Whether it’s…

• Old Webinars
• Webinar Mobile App

How to Find the Right Journal and Fix Your Manuscript Before Submission

Selection of right journal Meets journal standards Plagiarism free manuscripts Rated from reviewer's POV

• Manuscripts & Grants

Research Aims and Objectives: The dynamic duo for successful research

Picture yourself on a road trip without a destination in mind — driving aimlessly, not…

How Academic Editors Can Enhance the Quality of Your Manuscript

Avoiding desk rejection Detecting language errors Conveying your ideas clearly Following technical requirements

Effective Data Presentation for Submission in Top-tier Journals

Importance of presenting research data effectively How to create tables and figures How to avoid…

How to Choose Best Research Methodology for Your Study

How to Effectively Structure an Opinion Article

Top 10 Questions for a Complete Literature Review

Impressive Academic Phrases for Writing Manuscripts

Sign-up to read more

Subscribe for free to get unrestricted access to all our resources on research writing and academic publishing including:

• 2000+ blog articles
• 50+ Webinars
• 10+ Expert podcasts
• 50+ Infographics
• 10+ Checklists
• Research Guides

We hate spam too. We promise to protect your privacy and never spam you.

I am looking for Editing/ Proofreading services for my manuscript Tentative date of next journal submission:

What should universities' stance be on AI tools in research and academic writing?

How do I Write a Literature Review?: #5 Writing the Review

• Step #1: Choosing a Topic
• Step #2: Finding Information
• Step #3: Evaluating Content
• Step #4: Synthesizing Content
• #5 Writing the Review
• Citing Your Sources

WRITING THE REVIEW 

You've done the research and now you're ready to put your findings down on paper. When preparing to write your review, first consider how will you organize your review.

The actual review generally has 5 components:

Abstract  -  An abstract is a summary of your literature review. It is made up of the following parts:

• A contextual sentence about your motivation behind your research topic
• Your thesis statement
• A descriptive statement about the types of literature used in the review
• Summarize your findings
• Conclusion(s) based upon your findings

Introduction :   Like a typical research paper introduction, provide the reader with a quick idea of the topic of the literature review:

• Define or identify the general topic, issue, or area of concern. This provides the reader with context for reviewing the literature.
• Identify related trends in what has already been published about the topic; or conflicts in theory, methodology, evidence, and conclusions; or gaps in research and scholarship; or a single problem or new perspective of immediate interest.
• Establish your reason (point of view) for reviewing the literature; explain the criteria to be used in analyzing and comparing literature and the organization of the review (sequence); and, when necessary, state why certain literature is or is not included (scope)  - 

Body :  The body of a literature review contains your discussion of sources and can be organized in 3 ways-

• Chronological -  by publication or by trend
• Thematic -  organized around a topic or issue, rather than the progression of time
• Methodical -  the focusing factor usually does not have to do with the content of the material. Instead, it focuses on the "methods" of the literature's researcher or writer that you are reviewing

You may also want to include a section on "questions for further research" and discuss what questions the review has sparked about the topic/field or offer suggestions for future studies/examinations that build on your current findings.

Conclusion :  In the conclusion, you should:

Conclude your paper by providing your reader with some perspective on the relationship between your literature review's specific topic and how it's related to it's parent discipline, scientific endeavor, or profession.

Bibliography :   Since a literature review is composed of pieces of research, it is very important that your correctly cite the literature you are reviewing, both in the reviews body as well as in a bibliography/works cited. To learn more about different citation styles, visit the " Citing Your Sources " tab.

• Writing a Literature Review: Wesleyan University
• Literature Review: Edith Cowan University
• << Previous: Step #4: Synthesizing Content
• Next: Citing Your Sources >>
• Last Updated: Aug 22, 2023 1:35 PM
• URL: https://libguides.eastern.edu/literature_reviews

About the Library

• Collection Development
• Circulation Policies
• Mission Statement
• Staff Directory

Using the Library

• A to Z Journal List
• Library Catalog
• Research Guides

Interlibrary Services

• Research Help

Warner Memorial Library

Literature reviews

What this guide covers, what is a literature review, literature review resources, types of literature reviews, what is the difference between a literature review and a systematic review, related information and guides, further help.

• Conducting your search
• Store and organise the literature
• Evaluate and critique the literature
• Different subject areas
• Find literature reviews

Reusing content from this guide

Attribute our work under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

The literature review process involves a number of steps.

This guide focuses on:

• evaluating.

A literature review is a survey and critical analysis of what has been written on a particular topic, theory, question or method.

"In writing the literature review, the purpose is to explore what knowledge and ideas have been established on a topic, what approaches and viewpoints have been adopted, and what are their strengths and weaknesses."

Source: "Focus and frame". (2008). In Eriksson, P. & Kovalainen, A. Introducing Qualitative Methods: Qualitative methods in business research (pp. 44) . London: SAGE Publications Ltd. doi: 10.4135/9780857028044.

Get an overview on doing a literature review:

• Sage research methods online - Literature review methods map Information on the literature review methodology with links to further resources - the Project Planner, books, articles, videos and more.
• Ten simple rules for writing a literature review Gives 10 tips on how to approach and carry out a literature review. By Pautasso M (2013) Ten Simple Rules for Writing a Literature Review. PLoS Comput Biol9(7): e1003149.
• The literature review. In: Doing your undergraduate program This chapter looks at the purpose of literature reviews, how it is done, setting the boundaries of your search and more.

• More books on literature reviews A selection of literature review books available via UQ Library Search.

The type of literature review you do will depend on a variety of factors:

• Your discipline
• The purpose - undergraduate assessment, PHD thesis, journal article?
• Your lecturer or supervisor's requirements

Always follow the guidelines outlined by your lecturer or supervisor or consult the instructions for authors (for journal articles), when conducting your literature review.

• is an overview of the significant literature on a topic
• typically includes a critical analysis of each work included
• demonstrates the reviewers knowledge of the topic
• is a list of citations of research sources (books, journal articles, websites etc) on a topic
• includes a brief summary and analysis or evaluation of each citation = the annotation
• a critical assessment of all research studies on a particular research question
• has specific criteria for collecting and evaluating the literature
• includes a synthesis of the findings of the included studies
• This method developed by Griffith University's School of Environment bridges the gap between traditional narrative review methods and meta-analyses to enable students to produce results that are reliable, quantifiable and reproducible.

The requirements of narrative literature reviews are usually quite different than systematic reviews . However, you may be required to adopt some of the characteristics of a systematic approach when doing your literature review. Check the guidelines or criteria that have been set by your supervisor so you know what is expected of you.

Characteristics of reviews

• Meeting the review family: Exploring review types and associated information retrieval requirements This article defines different review types and discusses appropriate search methods for each type.
• Writing literature reviews - Student Support Student Support provides information on how to write effective literature reviews.
• Writing skills Learn strategies for good writing from the Graduate School.
• Systematic reviews An overview of systematic reviews and resources to support producing one.
• Subject guides See recommended resources in different subject areas.
• Grey literature Find literature that is not available in traditional channels of publishing and distribution.
• How to find guides Techniques and resources to find specific information formats.

Contact the Librarian team .

Phone: + 617 334 64312 during opening hours

Email: [email protected]

• Next: Conducting your search >>
• Last Updated: Dec 15, 2023 12:09 PM
• URL: https://guides.library.uq.edu.au/research-techniques/literature-reviews

No internet connection.

All search filters on the page have been cleared., your search has been saved..

• All content
• Dictionaries
• Encyclopedias
• Expert Insights
• Foundations
• How-to Guides
• Journal Articles
• Little Blue Books
• Little Green Books
• Project Planner
• Tools Directory
• Sign in to my profile My Profile

• Sign in Signed in
• My profile My Profile

• Offline Playback link

Have you created a personal profile? sign in or create a profile so that you can create alerts, save clips, playlists and searches.

An Introduction to Literature Reviews

• Watching now: Chapter 1: How Do You Conduct a Literature Review? Start time: 00:00:00 End time: 00:04:40
• Chapter 2: How Do You Find and Organize Sources of Information? Start time: 00:04:41 End time: 00:08:24
• Chapter 3: How Do You Assess These Sources of Information? Start time: 00:08:25 End time: 00:10:15
• Chapter 4: How Do You Write up Your Findings? Start time: 00:10:16 End time: 00:12:19
• Chapter 5: How Do You Identify Gaps in Literature? Start time: 00:12:20 End time: 00:15:08

Video Type: Tutorial

Jensen, E. (Academics). (2017). An introduction to literature reviews [Video]. Sage Research Methods. https:// doi. org/10.4135/9781473992283

Jensen, Eric. "An Introduction to Literature Reviews." In Sage Video . London: SAGE Publications Ltd, 2017. Video, 00:15:08. https:// doi. org/10.4135/9781473992283.

Jensen, E., 2017. An Introduction to Literature Reviews , Sage Video. [Streaming Video] London: Sage Publications Ltd. Available at: <https:// doi. org/10.4135/9781473992283 & gt; [Accessed 24 Mar 2024].

Jensen, Eric. An Introduction to Literature Reviews . Online video clip. SAGE Video. London: SAGE Publications, Ltd., 30 Sep 2016. doi: https:// doi. org/10.4135/9781473992283. 24 Mar 2024.

An Introduction to Literature Reviews [Streaming video]. 2017. doi:10.4135/9781473992283. Accessed 03/24/2024

Please log in from an authenticated institution or log into your member profile to access the email feature.

• Sign in/register

Add this content to your learning management system or webpage by copying the code below into the HTML editor on the page. Look for the words HTML or </>. Learn More about Embedding Video   icon link (opens in new window)

Sample View:

• Download PDF opens in new window
• icon/tools/download-video icon/tools/video-downloaded Download video Downloading... Video downloaded

Dr. Eric Jensen, Professor of Sociology at the University of Warwick, and Dr. Charles Laurie, Director of Research at Verisk Maplecroft, explain how to write a literature review, and why researchers need to do so. Literature reviews can be stand-alone research or part of a larger project. They communicate the state of academic knowledge on a given topic, specifically detailing what is still unknown.

Chapter 1: How Do You Conduct a Literature Review?

• Start time: 00:00:00
• End time: 00:04:40

Chapter 2: How Do You Find and Organize Sources of Information?

• Start time: 00:04:41
• End time: 00:08:24

Chapter 3: How Do You Assess These Sources of Information?

• Start time: 00:08:25
• End time: 00:10:15

Chapter 4: How Do You Write up Your Findings?

• Start time: 00:10:16
• End time: 00:12:19

Chapter 5: How Do You Identify Gaps in Literature?

• Start time: 00:12:20
• End time: 00:15:08
• Product: Sage Research Methods Video
• Type of Content: Tutorial
• Title: An Introduction to Literature Reviews
• Publisher: SAGE Publications Ltd
• Publication year: 2017
• Online pub date: September 30, 2016
• Discipline: Anthropology
• Methods: Literature review
• Duration: 00:15:08
• DOI: https:// doi. org/10.4135/9781473992283
• Keywords: accuracy in communication , awareness , gap problem , knowledge bases , knowledge creation , practices, strategies, and tools , relevance (education) , Social processes , Specific / diffuse , terminology as topic , understanding (epistemology) , voice and visibility , writing (communication) , writing (composition) Show all Show less

Academic: Eric Jensen

Practitioner: Charles Laurie

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day free trial, more like this, sage recommends.

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Have you created a personal profile? Login or create a profile so that you can save clips, playlists and searches

Navigating away from this page will delete your results

Please save your results to "My Self-Assessments" in your profile before navigating away from this page.

Sign in to my profile

Sign up for a free trial and experience all Sage Learning Resources have to offer.

You must have a valid academic email address to sign up.

Get off-campus access

• View or download all content my institution has access to.

Sign up for a free trial and experience all Sage Research Methods has to offer.

• view my profile
• view my lists

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

Chapter 1: Introduction

Learning objectives.

At the conclusion of this chapter, you will be able to:

• Identify the purpose of the literature review in  the research process
• Distinguish between different types of literature reviews

1.1 What is a Literature Review?

Pick up nearly any book on research methods and you will find a description of a literature review.  At a basic level, the term implies a survey of factual or nonfiction books, articles, and other documents published on a particular subject.  Definitions may be similar across the disciplines, with new types and definitions continuing to emerge.  Generally speaking, a literature review is a:

• “comprehensive background of the literature within the interested topic area…” ( O’Gorman & MacIntosh, 2015, p. 31 ).
• “critical component of the research process that provides an in-depth analysis of recently published research findings in specifically identified areas of interest.” ( House, 2018, p. 109 ).
• “written document that presents a logically argued case founded on a comprehensive understanding of the current state of knowledge about a topic of study” ( Machi & McEvoy,  2012, p. 4 ).

As a foundation for knowledge advancement in every discipline, it is an important element of any research project.  At the graduate or doctoral level, the literature review is an essential feature of thesis and dissertation, as well as grant proposal writing.  That is to say, “A substantive, thorough, sophisticated literature review is a precondition for doing substantive, thorough, sophisticated research…A researcher cannot perform significant research without first understanding the literature in the field.” ( Boote & Beile, 2005, p. 3 ).  It is by this means, that a researcher demonstrates familiarity with a body of knowledge and thereby establishes credibility with a reader.  An advanced-level literature review shows how prior research is linked to a new project, summarizing and synthesizing what is known while identifying gaps in the knowledge base, facilitating theory development, closing areas where enough research already exists, and uncovering areas where more research is needed. ( Webster & Watson, 2002, p. xiii )

A graduate-level literature review is a compilation of the most significant previously published research on your topic. Unlike an annotated bibliography or a research paper you may have written as an undergraduate, your literature review will outline, evaluate and synthesize relevant research and relate those sources to your own thesis or research question. It is much more than a summary of all the related literature.

It is a type of writing that demonstrate the importance of your research by defining the main ideas and the relationship between them. A good literature review lays the foundation for the importance of your stated problem and research question.

Literature reviews:

• define a concept
• map the research terrain or scope
• systemize relationships between concepts
• identify gaps in the literature ( Rocco & Plathotnik, 2009, p. 128 )

The purpose of a literature review is to demonstrate that your research question  is meaningful. Additionally, you may review the literature of different disciplines to find deeper meaning and understanding of your topic. It is especially important to consider other disciplines when you do not find much on your topic in one discipline. You will need to search the cognate literature before claiming there is “little previous research” on your topic.

Well developed literature reviews involve numerous steps and activities. The literature review is an iterative process because you will do at least two of them: a preliminary search to learn what has been published in your area and whether there is sufficient support in the literature for moving ahead with your subject. After this first exploration, you will conduct a deeper dive into the literature to learn everything you can about the topic and its related issues.

Literature Review Tutorial

1.2 Literature Review Basics

An effective literature review must:

• Methodologically analyze and synthesize quality literature on a topic
• Provide a firm foundation to a topic or research area
• Provide a firm foundation for the selection of a research methodology
• Demonstrate that the proposed research contributes something new to the overall body of knowledge of advances the research field’s knowledge base. ( Levy & Ellis, 2006 ).

All literature reviews, whether they are qualitative, quantitative or both, will at some point:

• Introduce the topic and define its key terms
• Establish the importance of the topic
• Provide an overview of the amount of available literature and its types (for example: theoretical, statistical, speculative)
• Identify gaps in the literature
• Point out consistent finding across studies
• Arrive at a synthesis that organizes what is known about a topic
• Discusses possible implications and directions for future research

1.3 Types of Literature Reviews

There are many different types of literature reviews, however there are some shared characteristics or features.  Remember a comprehensive literature review is, at its most fundamental level, an original work based on an extensive critical examination and synthesis of the relevant literature on a topic. As a study of the research on a particular topic, it is arranged by key themes or findings, which may lead up to or link to the  research question.  In some cases, the research question will drive the type of literature review that is undertaken.

The following section includes brief descriptions of the terms used to describe different literature review types with examples of each.   The included citations are open access, Creative Commons licensed or copyright-restricted.

1.3.1 Types of Review

1.3.1.1 conceptual.

Guided by an understanding of basic issues rather than a research methodology. You are looking for key factors, concepts or variables and the presumed relationship between them. The goal of the conceptual literature review is to categorize and describe concepts relevant to your study or topic and outline a relationship between them. You will include relevant theory and empirical research.

Examples of a Conceptual Review:

• Education : The formality of learning science in everyday life: A conceptual literature review. ( Dohn, 2010 ).
• Education : Are we asking the right questions? A conceptual review of the educational development literature in higher education. ( Amundsen & Wilson, 2012 ).

1.3.1.2 Empirical

An empirical literature review collects, creates, arranges, and analyzes numeric data reflecting the frequency of themes, topics, authors and/or methods found in existing literature. Empirical literature reviews present their summaries in quantifiable terms using descriptive and inferential statistics.

Examples of an Empirical Review:

• Nursing : False-positive findings in Cochrane meta-analyses with and without application of trial sequential analysis: An empirical review. ( Imberger, Thorlund, Gluud, & Wettersley, 2016 ).
• Education : Impediments of e-learning adoption in higher learning institutions of Tanzania: An empirical review ( Mwakyusa & Mwalyagile, 2016 ).

1.3.1.3 Exploratory

Unlike a synoptic literature review, the purpose here is to provide a broad approach to the topic area. The aim is breadth rather than depth and to get a general feel for the size of the topic area. A graduate student might do an exploratory review of the literature before beginning a synoptic, or more comprehensive one.

Examples of an Exploratory Review:

• Education : University research management: An exploratory literature review. ( Schuetzenmeister, 2010 ).
• Education : An exploratory review of design principles in constructivist gaming learning environments. ( Rosario & Widmeyer, 2009 ).

1.3.1.4 Focused

A type of literature review limited to a single aspect of previous research, such as methodology. A focused literature review generally will describe the implications of choosing a particular element of past research, such as methodology in terms of data collection, analysis and interpretation.

Examples of a Focused Review:

• Nursing : Clinical inertia in the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus: A focused literature review. ( Khunti, Davies, & Khunti, 2015 ).
• Education : Language awareness: Genre awareness-a focused review of the literature. ( Stainton, 1992 ).

1.3.1.5 Integrative

Critiques past research and draws overall conclusions from the body of literature at a specified point in time. Reviews, critiques, and synthesizes representative literature on a topic in an integrated way. Most integrative reviews are intended to address mature topics or  emerging topics. May require the author to adopt a guiding theory, a set of competing models, or a point of view about a topic.  For more description of integrative reviews, see Whittemore & Knafl (2005).

Examples of an Integrative Review:

• Nursing : Interprofessional teamwork and collaboration between community health workers and healthcare teams: An integrative review. ( Franklin,  Bernhardt, Lopez, Long-Middleton, & Davis, 2015 ).
• Education : Exploring the gap between teacher certification and permanent employment in Ontario: An integrative literature review. ( Brock & Ryan, 2016 ).

1.3.1.6 Meta-analysis

A subset of a  systematic review, that takes findings from several studies on the same subject and analyzes them using standardized statistical procedures to pool together data. Integrates findings from a large body of quantitative findings to enhance understanding, draw conclusions, and detect patterns and relationships. Gather data from many different, independent studies that look at the same research question and assess similar outcome measures. Data is combined and re-analyzed, providing a greater statistical power than any single study alone. It’s important to note that not every systematic review includes a meta-analysis but a meta-analysis can’t exist without a systematic review of the literature.

Examples of a Meta-Analysis:

• Education : Efficacy of the cooperative learning method on mathematics achievement and attitude: A meta-analysis research. ( Capar & Tarim, 2015 ).
• Nursing : A meta-analysis of the effects of non-traditional teaching methods on the critical thinking abilities of nursing students. ( Lee, Lee, Gong, Bae, & Choi, 2016 ).
• Education : Gender differences in student attitudes toward science: A meta-analysis of the literature from 1970 to 1991. ( Weinburgh, 1995 ).

1.3.1.7 Narrative/Traditional

An overview of research on a particular topic that critiques and summarizes a body of literature. Typically broad in focus. Relevant past research is selected and synthesized into a coherent discussion. Methodologies, findings and limits of the existing body of knowledge are discussed in narrative form. Sometimes also referred to as a traditional literature review. Requires a sufficiently focused research question. The process may be subject to bias that supports the researcher’s own work.

Examples of a Narrative/Traditional Review:

• Nursing : Family carers providing support to a person dying in the home setting: A narrative literature review. ( Morris, King, Turner, & Payne, 2015 ).
• Education : Adventure education and Outward Bound: Out-of-class experiences that make a lasting difference. ( Hattie, Marsh, Neill, & Richards, 1997 ).
• Education : Good quality discussion is necessary but not sufficient in asynchronous tuition: A brief narrative review of the literature. ( Fear & Erikson-Brown, 2014 ).
• Nursing : Outcomes of physician job satisfaction: A narrative review, implications, and directions for future research. ( Williams & Skinner, 2003 ).

1.3.1.8 Realist

Aspecific type of literature review that is theory-driven and interpretative and is intended to explain the outcomes of a complex intervention program(s).

Examples of a Realist Review:

• Nursing : Lean thinking in healthcare: A realist review of the literature. ( Mazzacato, Savage, Brommels, 2010 ).
• Education : Unravelling quality culture in higher education: A realist review. ( Bendermacher, Egbrink, Wolfhagen, & Dolmans, 2017 ).

1.3.1.9 Scoping

Tend to be non-systematic and focus on breadth of coverage conducted on a topic rather than depth. Utilize a wide range of materials; may not evaluate the quality of the studies as much as count the number. One means of understanding existing literature. Aims to identify nature and extent of research; preliminary assessment of size and scope of available research on topic. May include research in progress.

Examples of a Scoping Review:

• Nursing : Organizational interventions improving access to community-based primary health care for vulnerable populations: A scoping review. ( Khanassov, Pluye, Descoteaux, Haggerty,  Russell, Gunn, & Levesque, 2016 ).
• Education : Interdisciplinary doctoral research supervision: A scoping review. ( Vanstone, Hibbert, Kinsella, McKenzie, Pitman, & Lingard, 2013 ).
• Nursing : A scoping review of the literature on the abolition of user fees in health care services in Africa. ( Ridde, & Morestin, 2011 ).

1.3.1.10 Synoptic

Unlike an exploratory review, the purpose is to provide a concise but accurate overview of all material that appears to be relevant to a chosen topic. Both content and methodological material is included. The review should aim to be both descriptive and evaluative. Summarizes previous studies while also showing how the body of literature could be extended and improved in terms of content and method by identifying gaps.

Examples of a Synoptic Review:

• Education : Theoretical framework for educational assessment: A synoptic review. ( Ghaicha, 2016 ).
• Education : School effects research: A synoptic review of past efforts and some suggestions for the future. ( Cuttance, 1981 ).

1.3.1.11 Systematic Review

A rigorous review that follows a strict methodology designed with a presupposed selection of literature reviewed.  Undertaken to clarify the state of existing research, the evidence, and possible implications that can be drawn from that.  Using comprehensive and exhaustive searching of the published and unpublished literature, searching various databases, reports, and grey literature.  Transparent and reproducible in reporting details of time frame, search and methods to minimize bias.  Must include a team of at least 2-3 and includes the critical appraisal of the literature.  For more description of systematic reviews, including links to protocols, checklists, workflow processes, and structure see “ A Young Researcher’s Guide to a Systematic Review “.

Examples of a Systematic Review:

• Education : The potentials of using cloud computing in schools: A systematic literature review ( Hartmann, Braae, Pedersen, & Khalid, 2017 )
• Nursing : Is butter back? A systematic review and meta-analysis of butter consumption and risk of cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and total mortality. ( Pimpin, Wu, Haskelberg, Del Gobbo, & Mozaffarian, 2016 ).
• Education : The use of research to improve professional practice: a systematic review of the literature. ( Hemsley-Brown & Sharp, 2003 ).
• Nursing : Using computers to self-manage type 2 diabetes. ( Pal, Eastwood, Michie, Farmer, Barnard, Peacock, Wood, Inniss, & Murray, 2013 ).

1.3.1.12 Umbrella/Overview of Reviews

Compiles evidence from multiple systematic reviews into one document. Focuses on broad condition or problem for which there are competing interventions and highlights reviews that address those interventions and their effects. Often used in recommendations for practice.

Examples of an Umbrella/Overview Review:

• Education : Reflective practice in healthcare education: An umbrella review. ( Fragknos, 2016 ).
• Nursing : Systematic reviews of psychosocial interventions for autism: an umbrella review. ( Seida, Ospina, Karkhaneh, Hartling, Smith, & Clark, 2009 ).

For a brief discussion see “ Not all literature reviews are the same ” (Thomson, 2013).

1.4 Why do a Literature Review?

The purpose of the literature review is the same regardless of the topic or research method. It tests your own research question against what is already known about the subject.

1.4.1 First – It’s part of the whole. Omission of a literature review chapter or section in a graduate-level project represents a serious void or absence of critical element in the research process.

The outcome of your review is expected to demonstrate that you:

• can systematically explore the research in your topic area
• can read and critically analyze the literature in your discipline and then use it appropriately to advance your own work
• have sufficient knowledge in the topic to undertake further investigation

1.4.2 Second – It’s good for you!

• You improve your skills as a researcher
• You become familiar with the discourse of your discipline and learn how to be a scholar in your field
• You learn through writing your ideas and finding your voice in your subject area
• You define, redefine and clarify your research question for yourself in the process

1.4.3 Third – It’s good for your reader. Your reader expects you to have done the hard work of gathering, evaluating and synthesizes the literature.  When you do a literature review you:

• Set the context for the topic and present its significance
• Identify what’s important to know about your topic – including individual material, prior research, publications, organizations and authors.
• Demonstrate relationships among prior research
• Establish limitations of existing knowledge
• Analyze trends in the topic’s treatment and gaps in the literature

1.4.4 Why do a literature review?

• To locate gaps in the literature of your discipline
• To avoid reinventing the wheel
• To carry on where others have already been
• To identify other people working in the same field
• To increase your breadth of knowledge in your subject area
• To find the seminal works in your field
• To provide intellectual context for your own work
• To acknowledge opposing viewpoints
• To put your work in perspective
• To demonstrate you can discover and retrieve previous work in the area

1.5 Common Literature Review Errors

Graduate-level literature reviews are more than a summary of the publications you find on a topic.  As you have seen in this brief introduction, literature reviews are a very specific type of research, analysis, and writing.  We will explore these topics more in the next chapters.  Some things to keep in mind as you begin your own research and writing are ways to avoid the most common errors seen in the first attempt at a literature review.  For a quick review of some of the pitfalls and challenges a new researcher faces when he/she begins work, see “ Get Ready: Academic Writing, General Pitfalls and (oh yes) Getting Started! ”.

As you begin your own graduate-level literature review, try to avoid these common mistakes:

• Accepts another researcher’s finding as valid without evaluating methodology and data
• Contrary findings and alternative interpretations are not considered or mentioned
• Findings are not clearly related to one’s own study, or findings are too general
• Insufficient time allowed to define best search strategies and writing
• Isolated statistical results are simply reported rather than synthesizing the results
• Problems with selecting and using most relevant keywords, subject headings and descriptors
• Relies too heavily on secondary sources
• Search methods are not recorded or reported for transparency
• Summarizes rather than synthesizes articles

In conclusion, the purpose of a literature review is three-fold:

• to survey the current state of knowledge or evidence in the area of inquiry,
• to identify key authors, articles, theories, and findings in that area, and
• to identify gaps in knowledge in that research area.

A literature review is commonly done today using computerized keyword searches in online databases, often working with a trained librarian or information expert. Keywords can be combined using the Boolean operators, “and”, “or” and sometimes “not”  to narrow down or expand the search results. Once a list of articles is generated from the keyword and subject heading search, the researcher must then manually browse through each title and abstract, to determine the suitability of that article before a full-text article is obtained for the research question.

Literature reviews should be reasonably complete, and not restricted to a few journals, a few years, or a specific methodology or research design. Reviewed articles may be summarized in the form of tables, and can be further structured using organizing frameworks such as a concept matrix.

A well-conducted literature review should indicate whether the initial research questions have already been addressed in the literature, whether there are newer or more interesting research questions available, and whether the original research questions should be modified or changed in light of findings of the literature review.

The review can also provide some intuitions or potential answers to the questions of interest and/or help identify theories that have previously been used to address similar questions and may provide evidence to inform policy or decision-making. ( Bhattacherjee, 2012 ).

Read Abstract 1.  Refer to Types of Literature Reviews.  What type of literature review do you think this study is and why?  See the Answer Key for the correct response.

Nursing : To describe evidence of international literature on the safe care of the hospitalised child after the World Alliance for Patient Safety and list contributions of the general theoretical framework of patient safety for paediatric nursing.

An integrative literature review between 2004 and 2015 using the databases PubMed, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Scopus, Web of Science and Wiley Online Library, and the descriptors Safety or Patient safety, Hospitalised child, Paediatric nursing, and Nursing care.

Thirty-two articles were analysed, most of which were from North American, with a descriptive approach. The quality of the recorded information in the medical records, the use of checklists, and the training of health workers contribute to safe care in paediatric nursing and improve the medication process and partnerships with parents.

General information available on patient safety should be incorporated in paediatric nursing care. ( Wegner, Silva, Peres, Bandeira, Frantz, Botene, & Predebon, 2017 ).

Read Abstract 2.  Refer to Types of Literature Reviews.  What type of lit review do you think this study is and why?  See the Answer Key for the correct response.

Education : The focus of this paper centers around timing associated with early childhood education programs and interventions using meta-analytic methods. At any given assessment age, a child’s current age equals starting age, plus duration of program, plus years since program ended. Variability in assessment ages across the studies should enable everyone to identify the separate effects of all three time-related components. The project is a meta-analysis of evaluation studies of early childhood education programs conducted in the United States and its territories between 1960 and 2007. The population of interest is children enrolled in early childhood education programs between the ages of 0 and 5 and their control-group counterparts. Since the data come from a meta-analysis, the population for this study is drawn from many different studies with diverse samples. Given the preliminary nature of their analysis, the authors cannot offer conclusions at this point. ( Duncan, Leak, Li, Magnuson, Schindler, & Yoshikawa, 2011 ).

Test Yourself

See Answer Key for the correct responses.

The purpose of a graduate-level literature review is to summarize in as many words as possible everything that is known about my topic.

A literature review is significant because in the process of doing one, the researcher learns to read and critically assess the literature of a discipline and then uses it appropriately to advance his/her own research.

Read the following abstract and choose the correct type of literature review it represents.

Nursing: E-cigarette use has become increasingly popular, especially among the young. Its long-term influence upon health is unknown. Aim of this review has been to present the current state of knowledge about the impact of e-cigarette use on health, with an emphasis on Central and Eastern Europe. During the preparation of this narrative review, the literature on e-cigarettes available within the network PubMed was retrieved and examined. In the final review, 64 research papers were included. We specifically assessed the construction and operation of the e-cigarette as well as the chemical composition of the e-liquid; the impact that vapor arising from the use of e-cigarette explored in experimental models in vitro; and short-term effects of use of e-cigarettes on users’ health. Among the substances inhaled by the e-smoker, there are several harmful products, such as: formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, acroleine, propanal, nicotine, acetone, o-methyl-benzaldehyde, carcinogenic nitrosamines. Results from experimental animal studies indicate the negative impact of e-cigarette exposure on test models, such as ascytotoxicity, oxidative stress, inflammation, airway hyper reactivity, airway remodeling, mucin production, apoptosis, and emphysematous changes. The short-term impact of e-cigarettes on human health has been studied mostly in experimental setting. Available evidence shows that the use of e-cigarettes may result in acute lung function responses (e.g., increase in impedance, peripheral airway flow resistance) and induce oxidative stress. Based on the current available evidence, e-cigarette use is associated with harmful biologic responses, although it may be less harmful than traditional cigarettes. (J ankowski, Brożek, Lawson, Skoczyński, & Zejda, 2017 ).

• Meta-analysis
• Exploratory

Education: In this review, Mary Vorsino writes that she is interested in keeping the potential influences of women pragmatists of Dewey’s day in mind while presenting modern feminist re readings of Dewey. She wishes to construct a narrowly-focused and succinct literature review of thinkers who have donned a feminist lens to analyze Dewey’s approaches to education, learning, and democracy and to employ Dewey’s works in theorizing on gender and education and on gender in society. This article first explores Dewey as both an ally and a problematic figure in feminist literature and then investigates the broader sphere of feminist pragmatism and two central themes within it: (1) valuing diversity, and diverse experiences; and (2) problematizing fixed truths. ( Vorsino, 2015 ).

Image Attributions

Literature Reviews for Education and Nursing Graduate Students Copyright © by Linda Frederiksen is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Covid 19 - Lockdown, let out your PhD indagation with our Expert

• Live Support
• Quick Query
• [email protected]

Literature Review Introduction Sample

How to Write Literature Review Introduction Sample

Table of contents, literature review (lr) introduction: revelation of concept, sample text 1, conceptual framework, declaration on lr type, sample text 2, follow referencing style, in-text referencing for lr introduction, sample text 3.

Notes- Footnotes & Endnotes

Sample Text 4

• MLA Style (8th edition)

Sample Text 5

The Literature Review (LR) is an integral part of an in-depth research process, which involves critically scrutinized content attained from former research works and empirical reports. In a research paper , the LR is meant to address the identified issue and gain adequate knowledge to resolve it. However, since every research is unique in its way, soon the researcher discovers that the former research works are inadequate or limited in meeting the current research objectives. In this way, the LR brings forth the research gaps, which leads to further research process at the researcher’s end. 

It is important to note here that the Literature Review format may differ from one University to another. However, the process of analysis and declarations remain universal. For the formatting and the inclusion list always check the University module.

In this article, we will focus on understanding the relevance and content to be established in the Introduction part of the Literature Review.

On a standard basis, the structure of the Literature Review is meant to offer three sections – Introduction, Body, and the Conclusion. In the case of Introduction, the researcher must offer detailed information about the context and the intellectual narration about the topic. Historical contexts and the developmental process of the concern need to be summed up in this section. The researcher should declare the theories and the relevance of the theories to the research in a very comprehensive manner. While elaborating the relevance of the selected theories the key writers and philosophers should be introduced in the Introduction section of the LR. 

It is highly recommended that the researcher considers the inclusion of the Conceptual Framework in the LR Introduction. The objective behind the inclusion of the Conceptual Framework is to develop an in-depth thinking process and thereby understand the complexity of the identified issue of the research. This framework acts as a roadmap while constructing the Body and Conclusion or the Research Gaps. The conceptual framework as prescribed in Figure 1 should be considered while answering the specified questions one-by-one:

Figure 1: Map to Construct the Conceptual Framework

The Literature Review Introduction can vary as per the type of review process considered by the researcher. Following the selected topic and the availability of secondary sources the LR can be:

• A narrative or argumentative type,
• A systematic review type with either of meta-synthesis or meta-analysis approach, or
• A theoretical or integrative review type.

For all these types, it is necessary that the Literature Review Introduction makes clear declarations about the selection process and justify the selection of the type in the most intellectually logical manner.

If you select the narrative approach to review the collected literature, then mention it in the first few lines. You need to state that you will summarise the content of the selected literature and will derive the research gaps.

Alternatively, your literature review can be argumentative in approach. In this case, the Literature Review Introduction must declare the process of examining the biases and ways to identify the shortcomings of the selected literature.

In case, you select a systematic review of very narrowly selected literature; make sure that you identify the right process. Since systematic literature review can be shaped as meta-analysis or as meta-synthesis, the LR Introduction must clarify the approach. Mention how you follow statistical procedures to meet the meta-analysis approach and undergo a deductive process under quantitative methodology. For the meta-synthesis approach, give a clear idea about the non-statistical techniques under qualitative methodology.

For the theoretical approach of the literature review, introduce and establish the relevance of the selected theories in the LR Introduction. On the other hand, for the integrative review approach, generate the necessary framework about the process of leading the critiques.

The literature Review Introduction will not mention anything about the selected referencing style. The in-text citations will make it all clear. You must follow the right kind of in-text referencing style as per your selected subject and approach of your research.

In this article, we are offering three samples for a clear understanding. These exemplified referencing styles are:

• American Psychological Association (APA) referencing system,
• Chicago referencing or Chicago Manual of Style (CMOS), &
• Modern Languages Association (MLA) referencing system.

It is the presence of the references in the form of ‘parenthetical in-text citations, which determines the selected referencing style for the entire research work. Note that for subjects from Humanities, the common selection is of MLA style. Even in Humanities, if you are from dealing with History, Business Fine Arts, then you can consider the Chicago style of referencing. As for the APA referencing style the subjects from Social Sciences, Engineering, Education, etc. remains as the basic selection.  Still, we would recommend that always have a consultation with your Guide or Supervisor about the right selection of the referencing style.

APA Style (7 th edition)

APA style  of referencing under 7 th edition is a parenthetical way of declaring the references. The bracketed mode of references that you need to add to the Literature Review Introduction must comprise of –

• The Surname of the Author
• Publication Date
• Page number or numbers

For instance, in Sample Text 1 for a fictitious book, ‘Evaluation of Education System’ by Simon Hillary , published in 2019; the APA style in-text referencing should appear like- (Hillary, 2019, p. 84) or (Hillary, 2019, pp. 84-88). Note that ‘p.’ stands for a single page, whereas ‘pp.’ for consecutive multiple pages. The page or page numbers are used when you quote from a text directly. In case there is no direct quote, you can avoid using the page or page numbers. In some cases like old texts, it is recommended to use paragraph or couplet numbers.

This format is a general application that varies slightly in the case of multiple authors. Let’s add Walter as co-author for two authored books. The in-text citations under the APA system follow the following provisions of using the commas ‘,’: There is no difference while referring to in-text reference to any book, journal or web article, or internet sources.

• For a book with a single author: (Hillary, 2019, p. 84) or (Hillary, 2019, pp. 84-88)
• For a book with two authors: (Hillary and Walter, 2019, p. 84) or (Hillary and Walter, 2019, pp. 84-88)
• For a book with multiple authors: (Hillary et al., 2019, p. 84) or (Hillary et al., 2019, pp. 84-88)
• Journal Article (both Print & Electronic), single author: (Hillary, 2019, p. 84) or (Hillary, 2019, pp. 84-88)
• Journal Article (both Print & Electronic), two authors: (Hillary and Walter, 2019, p. 84) or (Hillary and Walter, 2019, pp. 84-88)
• Journal Article (both Print & Electronic), multiple authors: (Hillary et al., 2019, p. 84) or (Hillary et al., 2019, pp. 84-88)
• Web Articles or Internet Sources, single author: (Hillary, 2019, p. 84) or (Hillary, 2019, pp. 84-88)
• Web Articles or Internet Sources, two authors: (Hillary and Walter, 2019, p. 84) or (Hillary and Walter, 2019, pp. 84-88)
• Web Articles or Internet Sources, multiple authors: (Hillary et al., 2019, p. 84) or (Hillary et al., 2019, pp. 84-88)

For APA in-text citations always remember:

• To capitalise all the proper nouns, this will include the surname/s of the author or authors,
• To capitalise the first alphabet of every word of any title is included in the text. Here, the prepositions and articles can remain in small letters.
• Indent of ½ inch from left for every direct quote in the text.

Chicago Style (17 th edition)

Chicago referencing style (17 th edition) is used for documentations of –

• Author-date citations, &
• Notes and bibliography.

Though this style is very similar to the APA style of adding-

Yet the placement of the comma makes all the difference in the in-text citation process. Instead of putting the comma ‘,’ after the Surname of the Author, Chicago places it after the publication date and there is no space for ‘p.’ or ‘pp.’.

If we consider the same text ‘Evaluation of Education System’ by Simon Hillary, published in 2019 by Oxford Open Press in Oxford; the Chicago style in-text referencing should appear like- (Hillary 2019, 84) or (Hillary 2019, 84-88). Let’s add Walter as co-author for two authored books.

Author-date (in-text)

There is no difference while referring to in-text reference to any book, journal or web article, or internet sources.

• For a book with a single author: (Hillary 2019, 84) or (Hillary 2019, 84-88)
• For a book with two authors: (Hillary and Walter 2019, 84) or (Hillary and Walter 2019, 84-88)
• For a book with multiple authors: (Hillary et al 2019, 84) or (Hillary et al 2019, 84-88)
• Journal Article (both Print & Electronic), single author: (Hillary 2019, 84) or (Hillary 2019, 84-88)
• Journal Article (both Print & Electronic), two authors: (Hillary and Walter 2019, 84) or (Hillary and Walter 2019, 84-88)
• Journal Article (both Print & Electronic), multiple authors: (Hillary et al 2019, 84) or (Hillary et al 2019, 84-88)
• Web Articles or Internet Sources, single author: (Hillary 2019, 84) or (Hillary 2019, 84-88)
• Web Articles or Internet Sources, two authors: (Hillary and Walter 2019, 84) or (Hillary and Walter 2019, 84-88)
• Web Articles or Internet Sources, multiple authors: (Hillary et al 2019, 84) or (Hillary et al 2019, 84-88)

The usage of Chicago is more particular when it comes to the inclusion of footnote or endnote in a text. Here, if you need to add any footnote or endnote to the Literature Review Introduction, then follow the following rules:

• For book: Full name of the Author, Book title (Place of Publication: Publisher, Publication year) page number/s
• Simon Hillary, Evaluation of Education System (Oxford: Oxford Open Press, 2019), 84-88
• Following in-text mentions – Hillary, Evaluation of Education System, 84-88
• For Journal Article: Full name of the Author, “Article Title,” Journal Name, Journal Volume, Journal No., Journal Issue (Month, Year): page number/s. Add DOI for electronic Journal publication.
• Edmund Walter, “Education System and Global Policies.” Journal for Intellect, 26, no. 3 (Summer, 2019): 65. https://doi.org/16.2329/jfiunivbchro.26.3.0065.
• Following in-text mentions – Walter, “Education System and Global Policies,” 65.
• For Web Articles or Internet Sources- “Page Title,” Name of the Website, Date of Access (Month-date-year), URL.
• “About Education System,” Educationresearch, accessed July 13, 2021, http://www.wr.dn/en/about-referencing-style.
• Following in-text mentions – “About Education System.”

MLA Style (8 th edition)

MLA referencing style under 8 th edition is also a parenthetical way of declaring the references. The brackets in the in-text referencing process for the Introduction of your Literature Review must comprise of –

• The Surname of the Author, and
• Page number/s of the text or context.

Considering the same book, ‘Evaluation of Education System’ by Simon Hillary, published in 2019; the MLA style in-text referencing should appear like- (Hillary 84) or (Hillary 84-88). It is important that in the case of MLA the non-consecutive pages are just added by commas, as in- (Hillary 84, 26, 104). Let’s add Walter as co-author for two authored books. There is no difference while referring to in-text reference to any book, journal or web article, or internet sources. Note that there is no use of ‘p.’ or ‘pp.’ for page number/s and there is no space for commas ‘,’.

• For a book with a single author: (Hillary 84) or (Hillary 84-88)
• For a book with two authors: (Hillary and Walter 84) or (Hillary and Walter 84-88)
• For a book with multiple authors: (Hillary et al 84) or (Hillary et al 84-88)
• Journal Article (both Print & Electronic), single author: (Hillary 84) or (Hillary 84-88)
• Journal Article (both Print & Electronic), two authors: (Hillary and Walter 84) or (Hillary and Walter 84-88)
• Journal Article (both Print & Electronic), multiple authors: (Hillary et al 84) or (Hillary et al 84-88)
• Web Articles or Internet Sources, single author: (Hillary 84) or (Hillary 84-88)
• Web Articles or Internet Sources, two authors: (Hillary and Walter 84) or (Hillary and Walter 84-88)
• Web Articles or Internet Sources, multiple authors: (Hillary et al 84) or (Hillary et al 84-88)

The MLA style is popular for its facilities to accommodate various kinds of exceptional in-text citations. In your Literature Review Introduction, these exceptions can occur in the following manner, yet MLA holds solutions for the-

No Author Citation: The in-text citation needs to be added by matching the very foremost element in the entry of the Cited Work, which can be the organisation’s name or source title.

Example: For the source- United Nations International Children's Emergency Fund. International Annual Report for FY 2020-21, the in-text citation would be UNICEF (or United Nations International Children's Emergency Fund) 162.

No Page Number/s Citation: In an in-text citation, when there is no page number, then you can consider the number of the chapter, scene, section, or anything that can locate the page.

Example: For the source- ‘Evaluation of Education System’ by Simon Hillary, the in-text citation would be (Hillary ch 2).

Same Author Different Sources:   The in-text citation of different works by the same author, MLA follows the regulation of shortening the title of the sources.

Example: For the source- ‘Evaluation of Education System’ by Simon Hillary, and ‘Education in Global Platform’ by Simon Hillary, the in-text citation would be (Hillary, Evaluation 84; and Hilary, Global 65).

Same Last Names: The in-text citation of different authors with the same surnames, MLA follows the trend of adding the First name initial.

Example: For the authors- Thomas Hilary and Simon Hilary with different sources, the in-text citation would be (T. Hillary 65 & S. Hillary 84).

Indirect Citation: The in-text citation for the information attained from indirect sources, MLA prescribes the provision of adding the source with parentheses and by the end of the sentence.

Example: If a piece of information about Hillary has been gathered from James Walter’s text published in 2020, then the in-text citation would be Hillary declared that the style of referencing … (Walter ch.2)

MLA style is very peculiar for its art of paraphrasing or delivering the context with the sources. For instance, in your Introduction, you can have sentences like-

In the conclusion, it is suggested that the Literature Review Introduction is very important for the success of your research However, to get your research approved by the University you need to take care of all the aspects and points mentioned above. 

• Search This Site All UCSD Sites Faculty/Staff Search Term
• Contact & Directions
• Climate Statement
• Cognitive Behavioral Neuroscience
• Cognitive Psychology
• Developmental Psychology
• Social Psychology
• Adjunct Faculty
• Non-Senate Instructors
• Researchers
• Psychology Grads
• Affiliated Grads
• New and Prospective Students
• Honors Program
• Experiential Learning
• Programs & Events
• Psi Chi / Psychology Club
• Prospective PhD Students
• Current PhD Students
• Area Brown Bags
• Colloquium Series
• Anderson Distinguished Lecture Series
• Speaker Videos
• Undergraduate Program
• Academic and Writing Resources

Writing Research Papers

• Writing a Literature Review

When writing a research paper on a specific topic, you will often need to include an overview of any prior research that has been conducted on that topic.  For example, if your research paper is describing an experiment on fear conditioning, then you will probably need to provide an overview of prior research on fear conditioning.  That overview is typically known as a literature review.  

Please note that a full-length literature review article may be suitable for fulfilling the requirements for the Psychology B.S. Degree Research Paper .  For further details, please check with your faculty advisor.

Different Types of Literature Reviews

Literature reviews come in many forms.  They can be part of a research paper, for example as part of the Introduction section.  They can be one chapter of a doctoral dissertation.  Literature reviews can also “stand alone” as separate articles by themselves.  For instance, some journals such as Annual Review of Psychology , Psychological Bulletin , and others typically publish full-length review articles.  Similarly, in courses at UCSD, you may be asked to write a research paper that is itself a literature review (such as, with an instructor’s permission, in fulfillment of the B.S. Degree Research Paper requirement). Alternatively, you may be expected to include a literature review as part of a larger research paper (such as part of an Honors Thesis). 

Literature reviews can be written using a variety of different styles.  These may differ in the way prior research is reviewed as well as the way in which the literature review is organized.  Examples of stylistic variations in literature reviews include: 

• Summarization of prior work vs. critical evaluation. In some cases, prior research is simply described and summarized; in other cases, the writer compares, contrasts, and may even critique prior research (for example, discusses their strengths and weaknesses).
• Chronological vs. categorical and other types of organization. In some cases, the literature review begins with the oldest research and advances until it concludes with the latest research.  In other cases, research is discussed by category (such as in groupings of closely related studies) without regard for chronological order.  In yet other cases, research is discussed in terms of opposing views (such as when different research studies or researchers disagree with one another).

Overall, all literature reviews, whether they are written as a part of a larger work or as separate articles unto themselves, have a common feature: they do not present new research; rather, they provide an overview of prior research on a specific topic . 

How to Write a Literature Review

When writing a literature review, it can be helpful to rely on the following steps.  Please note that these procedures are not necessarily only for writing a literature review that becomes part of a larger article; they can also be used for writing a full-length article that is itself a literature review (although such reviews are typically more detailed and exhaustive; for more information please refer to the Further Resources section of this page).

Steps for Writing a Literature Review

1. Identify and define the topic that you will be reviewing.

The topic, which is commonly a research question (or problem) of some kind, needs to be identified and defined as clearly as possible.  You need to have an idea of what you will be reviewing in order to effectively search for references and to write a coherent summary of the research on it.  At this stage it can be helpful to write down a description of the research question, area, or topic that you will be reviewing, as well as to identify any keywords that you will be using to search for relevant research.

2. Conduct a literature search.

Use a range of keywords to search databases such as PsycINFO and any others that may contain relevant articles.  You should focus on peer-reviewed, scholarly articles.  Published books may also be helpful, but keep in mind that peer-reviewed articles are widely considered to be the “gold standard” of scientific research.  Read through titles and abstracts, select and obtain articles (that is, download, copy, or print them out), and save your searches as needed.  For more information about this step, please see the Using Databases and Finding Scholarly References section of this website.

3. Read through the research that you have found and take notes.

Absorb as much information as you can.  Read through the articles and books that you have found, and as you do, take notes.  The notes should include anything that will be helpful in advancing your own thinking about the topic and in helping you write the literature review (such as key points, ideas, or even page numbers that index key information).  Some references may turn out to be more helpful than others; you may notice patterns or striking contrasts between different sources ; and some sources may refer to yet other sources of potential interest.  This is often the most time-consuming part of the review process.  However, it is also where you get to learn about the topic in great detail.  For more details about taking notes, please see the “Reading Sources and Taking Notes” section of the Finding Scholarly References page of this website.

4. Organize your notes and thoughts; create an outline.

At this stage, you are close to writing the review itself.  However, it is often helpful to first reflect on all the reading that you have done.  What patterns stand out?  Do the different sources converge on a consensus?  Or not?  What unresolved questions still remain?  You should look over your notes (it may also be helpful to reorganize them), and as you do, to think about how you will present this research in your literature review.  Are you going to summarize or critically evaluate?  Are you going to use a chronological or other type of organizational structure?  It can also be helpful to create an outline of how your literature review will be structured.

5. Write the literature review itself and edit and revise as needed.

The final stage involves writing.  When writing, keep in mind that literature reviews are generally characterized by a summary style in which prior research is described sufficiently to explain critical findings but does not include a high level of detail (if readers want to learn about all the specific details of a study, then they can look up the references that you cite and read the original articles themselves).  However, the degree of emphasis that is given to individual studies may vary (more or less detail may be warranted depending on how critical or unique a given study was).   After you have written a first draft, you should read it carefully and then edit and revise as needed.  You may need to repeat this process more than once.  It may be helpful to have another person read through your draft(s) and provide feedback.

6. Incorporate the literature review into your research paper draft.

After the literature review is complete, you should incorporate it into your research paper (if you are writing the review as one component of a larger paper).  Depending on the stage at which your paper is at, this may involve merging your literature review into a partially complete Introduction section, writing the rest of the paper around the literature review, or other processes.

Further Tips for Writing a Literature Review

Full-length literature reviews

• Many full-length literature review articles use a three-part structure: Introduction (where the topic is identified and any trends or major problems in the literature are introduced), Body (where the studies that comprise the literature on that topic are discussed), and Discussion or Conclusion (where major patterns and points are discussed and the general state of what is known about the topic is summarized)

Literature reviews as part of a larger paper

• An “express method” of writing a literature review for a research paper is as follows: first, write a one paragraph description of each article that you read. Second, choose how you will order all the paragraphs and combine them in one document.  Third, add transitions between the paragraphs, as well as an introductory and concluding paragraph. 1
• A literature review that is part of a larger research paper typically does not have to be exhaustive. Rather, it should contain most or all of the significant studies about a research topic but not tangential or loosely related ones. 2   Generally, literature reviews should be sufficient for the reader to understand the major issues and key findings about a research topic.  You may however need to confer with your instructor or editor to determine how comprehensive you need to be.

Benefits of Literature Reviews

By summarizing prior research on a topic, literature reviews have multiple benefits.  These include:

• Literature reviews help readers understand what is known about a topic without having to find and read through multiple sources.
• Literature reviews help “set the stage” for later reading about new research on a given topic (such as if they are placed in the Introduction of a larger research paper). In other words, they provide helpful background and context.
• Literature reviews can also help the writer learn about a given topic while in the process of preparing the review itself. In the act of research and writing the literature review, the writer gains expertise on the topic .

Downloadable Resources

• How to Write APA Style Research Papers (a comprehensive guide) [ PDF ]
• Tips for Writing APA Style Research Papers (a brief summary) [ PDF ]
• Example APA Style Research Paper (for B.S. Degree – literature review) [ PDF ]

Further Resources

How-To Videos     

• Writing Research Paper Videos
• UCSD Library Psychology Research Guide: Literature Reviews

External Resources

• Developing and Writing a Literature Review from N Carolina A&T State University
• Example of a Short Literature Review from York College CUNY
• How to Write a Review of Literature from UW-Madison
• Writing a Literature Review from UC Santa Cruz  
• Pautasso, M. (2013). Ten Simple Rules for Writing a Literature Review. PLoS Computational Biology, 9 (7), e1003149. doi : 1371/journal.pcbi.1003149

1 Ashton, W. Writing a short literature review . [PDF]     

2 carver, l. (2014).  writing the research paper [workshop]. , prepared by s. c. pan for ucsd psychology.

Back to top

• Research Paper Structure
• Formatting Research Papers
• Using Databases and Finding References
• What Types of References Are Appropriate?
• Evaluating References and Taking Notes
• Citing References
• Writing Process and Revising
• Improving Scientific Writing
• Academic Integrity and Avoiding Plagiarism
• Writing Research Papers Videos

• Schools & departments

Literature review

A general guide on how to conduct and write a literature review.

Please check course or programme information and materials provided by teaching staff, including your project supervisor, for subject-specific guidance.

What is a literature review?

A literature review is a piece of academic writing demonstrating knowledge and understanding of the academic literature on a specific topic placed in context.  A literature review also includes a critical evaluation of the material; this is why it is called a literature review rather than a literature report. It is a process of reviewing the literature, as well as a form of writing.

To illustrate the difference between reporting and reviewing, think about television or film review articles.  These articles include content such as a brief synopsis or the key points of the film or programme plus the critic’s own evaluation.  Similarly the two main objectives of a literature review are firstly the content covering existing research, theories and evidence, and secondly your own critical evaluation and discussion of this content. 

Usually a literature review forms a section or part of a dissertation, research project or long essay.  However, it can also be set and assessed as a standalone piece of work.

What is the purpose of a literature review?

…your task is to build an argument, not a library. Rudestam, K.E. and Newton, R.R. (1992) Surviving your dissertation: A comprehensive guide to content and process. California: Sage, p49.

In a larger piece of written work, such as a dissertation or project, a literature review is usually one of the first tasks carried out after deciding on a topic.  Reading combined with critical analysis can help to refine a topic and frame research questions.  Conducting a literature review establishes your familiarity with and understanding of current research in a particular field before carrying out a new investigation. After doing a literature review, you should know what research has already been done and be able to identify what is unknown within your topic.

When doing and writing a literature review, it is good practice to:

• summarise and analyse previous research and theories;
• identify areas of controversy and contested claims;
• highlight any gaps that may exist in research to date.

Conducting a literature review

Focusing on different aspects of your literature review can be useful to help plan, develop, refine and write it.  You can use and adapt the prompt questions in our worksheet below at different points in the process of researching and writing your review.  These are suggestions to get you thinking and writing.

Developing and refining your literature review (pdf)

Developing and refining your literature review (Word)

Developing and refining your literature review (Word rtf)

Writing a literature review has a lot in common with other assignment tasks.  There is advice on our other pages about thinking critically, reading strategies and academic writing.  Our literature review top tips suggest some specific things you can do to help you submit a successful review.

Literature review top tips (pdf)

Literature review top tips (Word rtf)

Our reading page includes strategies and advice on using books and articles and a notes record sheet grid you can use.

Reading at university

The Academic writing page suggests ways to organise and structure information from a range of sources and how you can develop your argument as you read and write.

Academic writing

The Critical thinking page has advice on how to be a more critical researcher and a form you can use to help you think and break down the stages of developing your argument.

Critical thinking

As with other forms of academic writing, your literature review needs to demonstrate good academic practice by following the Code of Student Conduct and acknowledging the work of others through citing and referencing your sources.  

Good academic practice

As with any writing task, you will need to review, edit and rewrite sections of your literature review.  The Editing and proofreading page includes tips on how to do this and strategies for standing back and thinking about your structure and checking the flow of your argument.

Editing and proofreading

Guidance on literature searching from the University Library

The Academic Support Librarians have developed LibSmart I and II, Learn courses to help you develop and enhance your digital research skills and capabilities; from getting started with the Library to managing data for your dissertation.

Searching using the library’s DiscoverEd tool: DiscoverEd

Finding resources in your subject: Subject guides

The Academic Support Librarians also provide one-to-one appointments to help you develop your research strategies.

1 to 1 support for literature searching and systematic reviews

Advice to help you optimise use of Google Scholar, Google Books and Google for your research and study: Using Google

Managing and curating your references

A referencing management tool can help you to collect and organise and your source material to produce a bibliography or reference list. 

Referencing and reference management

Information Services provide access to Cite them right online which is a guide to the main referencing systems and tells you how to reference just about any source (EASE log-in may be required).

Cite them right

Published study guides

There are a number of scholarship skills books and guides available which can help with writing a literature review.  Our Resource List of study skills guides includes sections on Referencing, Dissertation and project writing and Literature reviews.

Study skills guides

Research trend in Sustainable Development Goals reporting: a systematic literature review

• Review Article
• Published: 11 October 2023
• Volume 30 , pages 111648–111675, ( 2023 )

Cite this article

• See Mei Low   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-4234-4795 1 , 2 ,
• Dewi Fariha Abdullah   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-7799-6972 1 &
• Saleh F. A. Khatib   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-7652-4191 1  

732 Accesses

Explore all metrics

This paper examines the common themes delivered in studies on corporate reporting in relation to Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Articles of the aforesaid studies were mostly acquired from Scopus and Web of Science (WoS) archives from year 2015 to 2022 in which the contents were carefully reviewed for selection. To systematise the literature, PRISMA 2020 statement is used. Descriptive analysis reveals an increase in publications on corporate SDG reporting, although most are focused on developed nations. The analysis also shows a scarcity of studies on the consumer goods, agricultural, fishery, and forestry sectors. Furthermore, current studies have yet to adopt a qualitative or mixed-method approach. There are fundamentally six themes that emerged from the review of literature—the degree of SDG engagement, the quality of SDG reporting, the determining factor in SDG reporting mechanism, the consequences of SDG reporting, the legitimisation approaches, as well as the institutional/stakeholder pressure. For determinants of SDG reporting, it is observed that environmental governance is not explored. This paper identifies the least addressed SDGs that businesses can focus on to accelerate their SDG contribution rate. This paper guides future research and informs decision-making by organisations and stakeholders interested in promoting sustainable development through SDG reporting.

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

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Data availability

Data available on request from the authors.

For an example of interview as the methodology used in corporate sustainable development reporting research, see Bebbington, J., Higgins, C., and Frame, B. ( 2009 ). Initiating sustainable development reporting: Evidence from New Zealand. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 22 (4), 588–625.

The definition of “enterprise value” can be found within the exposure draft titled “IFRS S1 General Requirements for Disclosure of Sustainability-related Financial Information”, which pertains to Sustainability Disclosure Standards, available at https://www.ifrs.org/content/dam/ifrs/project/general-sustainability-related-disclosures/exposure-draft-ifrs-s1-general-requirements-for-disclosure-of-sustainability-related-financialinformation.pdf .

Acuti D, Bellucci M, Manetti G (2020) Company disclosures concerning the resilience of cities from the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) perspective [Article]. Cities 99:102608. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2020.102608

Article   Google Scholar  

Adams CA (2017) Conceptualising the contemporary corporate value creation process [Article]. Account Audit Account J 30(4):906–931. https://doi.org/10.1108/aaaj-04-2016-2529

Adams CA, Druckman PB, Picot RC (2020) Sustainable development goals disclosure (SDGD) recommendations. ACCA, London

Google Scholar  

Al Lawati H, Hussainey K (2022) Does Sustainable Development Goals disclosure affect corporate financial performance? [Article]. Sustainability 14(13):7815. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14137815

Amran A, Haniffa R (2011) Evidence in development of sustainability reporting: a case of a developing country. Bus Strateg Environ 20(3):141–156

Andrew J, Baker M (2020) Corporate social responsibility reporting: the last 40 years and a path to sharing future insights [Article]. Abacus- J Account Fin Business Stud 56(1):35–65. https://doi.org/10.1111/abac.12181

Andrian T, Sulaeman P, Yuliana J, Agata YD (2021) Sustainable Development Goal disclosures in Indonesia: challenges and opportunities. Rev Int Geograph Educ Online 11(3):604–617. https://doi.org/10.33403/rigeo.800526

Aras G, Crowther D (2008) Governance and sustainability. Manag Decis 46(3):433–448. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251740810863870

Arena M, Azzone G, Ratti S, Urbano VM, Vecchio G (2022) Sustainable development goals and corporate reporting: an empirical investigation of the oil and gas industry [Article]. Sustain Dev. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2369

Avrampou A, Skouloudis A, Iliopoulos G, Khan N (2019) Advancing the Sustainable Development Goals: evidence from leading European banks [Article]. Sustain Dev 27(4):743–757. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.1938

Ba Y (2021) Corporate-led environmental governance: a theoretical model. Admin Soc 53(1):97–122

Bebbington J, Higgins C, Frame B (2009) Initiating sustainable development reporting: evidence from New Zealand. Account, Audit Accountab J 22(4):588–625

Bohnett E, Coulibaly A, Hulse D, Hoctor T, Ahmad B, An L, Lewison R (2022) Corporate responsibility and biodiversity conservation: challenges and opportunities for companies participating in China’s Belt and Road Initiative [Article]. Environ Conserv 49(1):42–52. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0376892921000436

Borges FMMG, Rampasso IS, Quelhas OLG, Leal Filho W, Anholon R (2022) Addressing the UN SDGs in sustainability reports: an analysis of Latin American oil and gas companies [Article]. Environ Challenges 7:100515. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envc.2022.100515

Bose S, Khan HZ (2022) Sustainable development goals (SDGs) reporting and the role of country-level institutional factors: an international evidence [Article]. J Cleaner Product 335(13):130290. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.130290

Brooks C, Oikonomou I (2018) The effects of environmental, social and governance disclosures and performance on firm value: a review of the literature in accounting and finance [Editorial Material]. British Account Rev 50(1):1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2017.11.005

Calabrese A, Costa R, Gastaldi M, LevialdiGhiron N, VillazonMontalvan RA (2021) Implications for Sustainable Development Goals: a framework to assess company disclosure in sustainability reporting [Article]. J Cleaner Product 319:128624. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.128624

Calabrese A, Costa R, LevialdiGhiron N, Tiburzi L, VillazonMontalvan RA (2022) Is the private sector becoming cleaner? Assessing the firms’ contribution to the 2030 Agenda [Article]. Journal of Cleaner Production 363:132324. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.132324

Calvo-Centeno E, Gragera-Pizarro E, Romero-Ramos E, Ropero-Moriones E (2022) Comparative analysis of the contribution to the united nations Sustainable Development Goals through non-financial information disclosed by Ibex 35 companies [Article]. Fin Int Quarterly 18(1):16–30. https://doi.org/10.2478/fiqf-2022-0002

Caputo F, Ligorio L, Pizzi S (2021) The contribution of higher education institutions to the SDGs-an evaluation of sustainability reporting practices [Article]. Admin Sci 11(3):97. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci11030097

Cho CH, Laine M, Roberts RW, Rodrigue M (2015) Organized hypocrisy, organizational façades, and sustainability reporting. Acc Organ Soc 40:78–94

Cosma S, Venturelli A, Schwizer P, Boscia V (2020) Sustainable development and European banks: a non-financial disclosure analysis [Article]. Sustainability 12(15):6146. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12156146

Costa R, Menichini T, Salierno G (2022) Do SDGs really matter for business? Using GRI sustainability reporting to answer the question [Article]. European J Sustain Dev 11(1), 113–123. https://doi.org/10.14207/ejsd.2022.v11n1p113

Creswell JW (2014) Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches. Sage

Creswell JW, Creswell JD (2018) Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed) SAGE Publications, Inc. Los Angeles

Curto-Pages F, Ortega-Rivera E, Castellon-Duran M, Jane-Llopis E (2021) Coming in from the cold: a longitudinal analysis of SDG reporting practices by Spanish listed companies since the approval of the 2030 Agenda [Article]. Sustainability 13(3):1178. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13031178

Datta S, Goyal S (2022) Determinants of SDG reporting by businesses: a literature analysis and conceptual model [Article]. Vision- J Business Perspect. https://doi.org/10.1177/09722629221096047

De la Poza E, Merello P, Barbera A, Celani A (2021) Universities’ reporting on SDGs: using the impact rankings to model and measure their contribution to sustainability [Article]. Sustainability 13(4):2038. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13042038

Di Vaio A, Varriale L (2020) SDGs and airport sustainable performance: evidence from Italy on organisational, accounting and reporting practices through financial and non-financial disclosure [Article]. Journal of Cleaner Production 249:11943. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119431

Di Vaio A, Varriale L, Di Gregorio A, Adomako S (2022) Corporate social performance and non-financial reporting in the cruise industry: paving the way towards UN Agenda 2030 [Article]. Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2292

Di Vaio A, Varriale L, Lekakou M, Stefanidaki E (2021) Cruise and container shipping companies: a comparative analysis of sustainable development goals through environmental sustainability disclosure [Article]. Marit Policy Manag 48(2):184–212. https://doi.org/10.1080/03088839.2020.1754480

Diaz-Sarachaga JM (2021) Monetizing impacts of Spanish companies toward the Sustainable Development Goals [Article]. Corp Soc Respons Environ Manag 28(4):1313–1323. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2149

Diaz-Sarachaga JM (2021) Shortcomings in reporting contributions towards the sustainable development goals [Article]. Corp Soc Respons Environ Manag 28(4):1299–1312. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2129

Dienes D, Sassen R, Fischer J (2016) What are the drivers of sustainability reporting? A systematic review [Review]. Sustain Account Manag Policy J 7(2):154–189. https://doi.org/10.1108/sampj-08-2014-0050

Diouf D, Boiral O (2017) The quality of sustainability reports and impression management. Account, Audit Account J 30(3):643–667. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-04-2015-2044

Elalfy A, Weber O, Geobey S (2021) The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): a rising tide lifts all boats? Global reporting implications in a post SDGs world. J Appl Acc Res 22(3):557–575. https://doi.org/10.1108/jaar-06-2020-0116

Erin OA, Bamigboye OA, Oyewo B (2022) Sustainable development goals (SDG) reporting: an analysis of disclosure [Article; Early Access]. J Account Emerg Econ 29. https://doi.org/10.1108/jaee-02-2020-0037

Fonseca L, Carvalho F (2019) The reporting of SDGs by quality, environmental, and occupational health and safety-certified organizations [Article]. Sustainability (Switzerland) 11(20):5797. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11205797

Gambetta N, Azcarate-Llanes F, Sierra-Garcia L, Garcia-Benau MA (2021) Financial institutions’ risk profile and contribution to the Sustainable Development Goals [Article]. Sustainability 13(14):7738. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13147738

García-Meca E, Martínez-Ferrero J (2021) Is SDG reporting substantial or symbolic? An examination of controversial and environmentally sensitive industries. J Clean Product 298:126781. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126781

García-Sánchez I-M, Suárez-Fernández O, Martínez-Ferrero J (2019) Female directors and impression management in sustainability reporting. Int Bus Rev 28(2):359–374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2018.10.007

García-Sánchez IM, Aibar-Guzmán B, Aibar-Guzmán C, Somohano-Rodríguez FM (2022) The drivers of the integration of the sustainable development goals into the non-financial information system: individual and joint analysis of their influence [Article]. Sustain Dev 30(4):513–524. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2246

Garcia-Sanchez IM, Amor-Esteban V, Galindo-Alvarez D (2020) Communication strategies for the 2030 Agenda Commitments: a multivariate approach [Article]. Sustainability 12(24):10554. https://doi.org/10.3390/su122410554

Garcia-Torres S, Rey-Garcia M, Albareda-Vivo L (2017) Effective disclosure in the fast-fashion industry: from sustainability reporting to action [Article]. Sustainability 9(12):2256. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9122256

Garcia LS, Bollas-Araya HM, Benau MAG (2022) Sustainable development goals and assurance of non-financial information reporting in Spain [Article]. Sustain Account Manag Policy J 13(4):878–898. https://doi.org/10.1108/sampj-04-2021-0131

Gazzola P, Pezzetti R, Amelio S, Grechi D (2020) Non-financial information disclosure in Italian public interest companies: a sustainability reporting perspective [Article]. Sustainability (Switzerland) 12(15):6063. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12156063

Gerged AM, Almontaser T (2021) Corporate adoption of SDG reporting in a non-enabling institutional environment: insights from Libyan oil industries [Article]. Resources Policy 74:102240. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2021.102240

Giron A, Kazemikhasragh A, Cicchiello AF, Panetti E (2022) Company characteristics and sustainability reporting: evidence From Asia and Africa [Article]. Int J Soc Ecol Sustain Dev 13(1). https://doi.org/10.4018/IJSESD.290309

Grainger-Brown J, Malekpour S (2019) Implementing the sustainable development goals: a review of strategic tools and frameworks available to organisations. Sustainability 11(5):1381. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11051381

Greene JC, Caracelli VJ, Graham WF (1989) Toward a conceptual framework for mixed-method evaluation designs. Educ Eval Policy Anal 11(3):255–274. https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737011003255

GRI & UNGC (2018) Integrating the SDGs into corporate reporting a practical guide. https://d306pr3pise04h.cloudfront.net/docs/publications%2FPractical_Guide_SDG_Reporting.pdf . Accessed 28 Apr 2023

GRI, UNGC and WBCSD (2015) SDG compass: the guide for business action on the SDGs. available at: https://sdgcompass.org/ . Accessed 17 Sep 2023

Gulluscio C, Puntillo P, Luciani V, Huisingh D (2020) Climate change accounting and reporting: a systematic literature review [Review]. Sustainability (Switzerland) 12(13):5455. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12135455

Gunawan J, Permatasari P, Tilt C (2020) Sustainable development goal disclosures: do they support responsible consumption and production? [Article]. J Clean Product 246:118989. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118989

Hahn R, Kühnen M (2013) Determinants of sustainability reporting: a review of results, trends, theory, and opportunities in an expanding field of research. J Clean Prod 59:5–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.07.005

Hamilton SN, Waters RD (2022) Mainstreaming standardized sustainability reporting: comparing Fortune 50 corporations’ and US News & World Report’s Top 50 global universities’ sustainability reports [Article]. Sustainability (Switzerland) 14(6):3442. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14063442

Harzing AW (2007) Publish or Perish. Retrieved 29/9/22 from https://harzing.com/resources/publish-or-perish

Hatayama H (2022) The metals industry and the Sustainable Development Goals: the relationship explored based on SDG reporting [Article]. Resour, Conserv Recycling 178:106081. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2021.106081

Haywood LK, Boihang M (2021) Business and the SDGs: examining the early disclosure of the SDGs in annual reports [Article]. Dev South Afr 38(2):175–188. https://doi.org/10.1080/0376835X.2020.1818548

Heras-Saizarbitoria I, Urbieta L, Boiral O (2022) Organizations’ engagement with sustainable development goals: from cherry-picking to SDG-washing? [Article]. Corp Soc Respons Environ Manage 29(2):316–328. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2202

Heras-Saizarbitoria I, Urbieta L, Boiral O (2022b) Organizations’ engagement with sustainable development goals: from cherry-picking to SDG-washing? Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag 29(2):316–328

Hsiao PCK, de Villiers C, Horner C, Oosthuizen H (2022) A review and synthesis of contemporary sustainability accounting research and the development of a research agenda [Review; Early Access]. Account Fin 31. https://doi.org/10.1111/acfi.12936

Hummel K, Szekely M (2022) Disclosure on the Sustainable Development Goals–evidence from Europe [Article]. Account Europe 19(1):152–189. https://doi.org/10.1080/17449480.2021.1894347

IIRC (2013) The international IR framework (IR Council: Zurich, Switzerland, Issue. https://www.integratedreporting.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/13-12-08-THE-INTERNATIONAL-IR-FRAMEWORK-2-1.pdf . Accessed 8 May 2023

IIRC (2021) The international IR framework (IR Council: Zurich, Switzerland, Issue. https://www.integratedreporting.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/InternationalIntegratedReportingFramework.pdf . Accessed 8 May 2023

Ike M, Donovan JD, Topple C, Masli EK (2019) The process of selecting and prioritising corporate sustainability issues: insights for achieving the Sustainable Development Goals. J Clean Prod 236:117661

Ioannou I, Serafeim G (2017) The consequences of mandatory corporate sustainability reporting. Harvard Business School research working paper (11–100)

Ionascu E, Mironiuc M, Anghel I, Huian MC (2020) The involvement of real estate companies in sustainable development-an analysis from the SDGs reporting perspective [Article]. Sustainability 12(3):798. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12030798

Izzo MF, Ciaburri M, Tiscini R (2020) The challenge of sustainable development goal reporting: the first evidence from Italian listed companies. Sustainability 12(8):3494. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12083494

Izzo MF, Dello Strologo A, Grana F (2020) Learning from the best: new challenges and trends in IR reporters’ disclosure and the role of SDGs [Article]. Sustainability 12(14):5545. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12145545

Jiménez-Yáñez R-M, Fontrodona J (2022) The impact of the SDGs on non-financial corporate communications: an analysis of CaixaBank reports (2013–2019). Ibérica 43:235–259

Kazemikhasragh A, Cicchiello AF, Pietronudo MC (2021) Factors influencing the adoption of SDG reporting by large African and Asian companies [Article]. Int J Technol Manag Sustain Dev 20(1):43–60. https://doi.org/10.1386/TMSD_00034_1

Khaled R, Ali H, Mohamed EKA (2021) The Sustainable Development Goals and corporate sustainability performance: mapping, extent and determinants. J Cleaner Product 311:127599. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127599

Kim HD (2021) Analyzing sutainability reports of global, public corporations by industrial sectors and national origins [Article]. Sustainability (Switzerland) 13(9):5125. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13095125

KPMG (2018) How to report on the SDGs: what good looks like and why it matters. https://assets.kpmg.com/content/dam/kpmg/xx/pdf/2018/02/how-to-report-on-sdgs.pdf . Accessed 9 Apr 2023

KPMG (2020) The time has come: the KPMG survey of sustainability reporting 2020. KPMG’s Global Center of Excellence for Climate Change and Sustainability. https://assets.kpmg/content/dam/kpmg/be/pdf/2020/12/The_Time_Has_Come_KPMG_Survey_of_Sustainability_Reporting_2020.pdf . Accessed 8 Mar 2023

Krasodomska J, Simnett R, Street DL (2021) Extended external reporting assurance: current practices and challenges. J Int Financ Manag Acc 32(1):104–142

Krasodomska J, Zieniuk P, Kostrzewska J (2022) Reporting on Sustainable Development Goals in the European Union: what drives companies’ decisions? [Article]. Compet Rev. https://doi.org/10.1108/CR-12-2021-0179

Kuswantoro H, Sholihin M, Djajadikerta HG (2022) Exploring the implementation of sustainable development goals: a comparison between private and state-owned enterprises in Indonesia [Article]. Environ Dev Sustain. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-022-02505-1

Landau T (2020) Action and progress on sustainability challenges: case examples from Marriott, Booking and Soneva [Article]. Worldwide Hospital Tourism Themes 12(5):563–573. https://doi.org/10.1108/WHATT-06-2020-0042

Lashitew AA (2021) Corporate uptake of the Sustainable Development Goals: mere greenwashing or an advent of institutional change? [Article]. J Int Business Policy 4(1):184–200. https://doi.org/10.1057/s42214-020-00092-4

Lee Brown D, Guidry RP, Patten DM (2009) Sustainability reporting and perceptions of corporate reputation: an analysis using fortune. In M. Freedman & B. Jaggi (Eds.), Sustainability, Environmental Performance and Disclosures (Vol. 4, pp. 83–104). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1479-3598(2010)0000004007

Lepak DP, Smith KG, Taylor MS (2007) Value creation and value capture: a multilevel perspective. Acad Manag Rev 32(1):180–194

Leung S, Parker L, Courtis J (2015) Impression management through minimal narrative disclosure in annual reports. Br Account Rev 47(3):275–289

Lodhia S, Kaur A, Kuruppu SC (2022) The disclosure of sustainable development goals (SDGs) by the top 50 Australian companies: substantive or symbolic legitimation? [Article; Early Access]. Meditari Account Res 28. https://doi.org/10.1108/medar-05-2021-1297

Lopez B (2020) Connecting business and sustainable development goals in Spain [Article]. Mark Intell Plan 38(5):573–585. https://doi.org/10.1108/MIP-08-2018-0367

Macellari M, Yuriev A, Testa F, Boiral O (2021) Exploring bluewashing practices of alleged sustainability leaders through a counter-accounting analysis [Article]. Environ Impact Assess Rev 86:106489. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2020.106489

Malay OE (2021) Improving government and business coordination through the use of consistent SDGs indicators. A comparative analysis of national (Belgian) and business (pharma and retail) sustainability indicators [Article]. Ecol Econ 184:106991. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2021.106991

Manes-Rossi F, Nicolo G (2022) Exploring sustainable development goals reporting practices: from symbolic to substantive approaches—evidence from the energy sector [Article]. Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag 29(5):1799–1815. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2328

Marshall JD, Toffel MW (2005) Framing the elusive concept of sustainability: a sustainability hierarchy. Environ Sci Technol 39(3):673–682

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Martínez-Ferrero J, García-Meca E (2020) Internal corporate governance strength as a mechanism for achieving sustainable development goals [Article]. Sustain Dev 28(5):1189–1198. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2068

Mehmood A, Hajdini J, Iaia L, De Luca F, Sakka G (2022) Stakeholder engagement and SDGs: the role of social media in the European context [Article]. EuroMed J Bus. https://doi.org/10.1108/EMJB-11-2021-0173

Mensah J (2019) Sustainable development: meaning, history, principles, pillars, and implications for human action: Literature review. Cogent Social Sciences 5(1):1653531

Merkl-Davies DM, Brennan NM (2007) Discretionary disclosure strategies in corporate narratives: incremental information or impression management? J Account Lit 27:116–196

Mhlanga R, Gneiting U, Agarwal N (2018) Walking the talk: assessing companies’ progress from SDG rhetoric to action. https://oxfamilibrary.openrepository.com/bitstream/handle/10546/620550/dp-walking-the-talk-business-sdgs-240918-en.pdf . Accessed 29 Nov 2022

Milne MJ, Gray R (2013) W(h)ither Ecology? The triple bottom line, the global reporting initiative, and corporate sustainability reporting [Article]. J Bus Ethics 118(1):13–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1543-8

Mio C, Panfilo S, Blundo B (2020) Sustainable development goals and the strategic role of business: a systematic literature review. Bus Strateg Environ 29(8):3220–3245

Moore DRJ, Sciulli N (2022) Sustainable Development Goal Disclosures within Australian Superannuation Funds: An Exploratory Study [Article]. Australasian Account, Business Fin J 16(2):72–90. Article 4 https://doi.org/10.14453/aabfj.v16i2.6

Nechita E, Manea CL, Nichita EM, Irimescu AM, Manea D (2020) Is financial information influencing the reporting on SDGs? Empirical evidence from central and eastern european chemical companies [Article]. Sustainability (Switzerland) 12(21), 1–35, Article 9251. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12219251

Nicolò G, Zanellato G, Tiron-Tudor A, Tartaglia Polcini P (2022) Revealing the corporate contribution to sustainable development goals through integrated reporting: a worldwide perspective [Article]. Soc Respons J. https://doi.org/10.1108/SRJ-09-2021-0373

Nylund PA, Agarwal N, Probst C, Brem A (2022) Firm engagement in UN Sustainable Development Goals: introduction of a constraints map from a corporate reports content analysis [Article]. J Clean Product 371:133446. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.133446

Olofsson L, Mark-Herbert C (2020) Creating shared values by integrating un sustainable development goals in corporate communication—the case of apparel retail [Article]. Sustainability (Switzerland) 12(21):1–15. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12218806 . (Article 8806)

Opferkuch K, Caeiro S, Salomone R, Ramos TB (2022) Circular economy disclosure in corporate sustainability reports: the case of European companies in sustainability rankings [Article]. Sustain Product Consumpt 32:436–456. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2022.05.003

Oppong NB (2022) Sustainable Development Goals and Small and Medium Enterprises: A comparative study of emerging economies and Sub-Saharan Africa [Article]. Glob Bus Rev. https://doi.org/10.1177/09721509221087848

Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, Shamseer L, Tetzlaff JM, Akl EA, Brennan SE (2021) The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Syst Rev 10(1):1–11

Pasko O, Chen FL, Oriekhova A, Brychko A, Shalyhina I (2021)4 Mapping the literature on sustainability reporting: a bibliometric analysis grounded in Scopus and Web of Science core collection [Article]. Euro J Sustain Dev 10(1):303–322. https://doi.org/10.14207/ejsd.2021.v10n1p303

Perello-Marin MR, Rodríguez-Rodríguez R, Alfaro-Saiz JJ (2022) Analysing GRI reports for the disclosure of SDG contribution in European car manufacturers [Article]. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 181:121744. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2022.121744

Perryman M, Besco L, Suleiman C, Lucato L (2022) Ready for take off: airline engagement with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals [Article]. Journal of Air Transport Management 103:102246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2022.102246

Pineda-Escobar MA (2019) Moving the 2030 agenda forward: SDG implementation in Colombia [Article]. Corp Govern (Bingley) 19(1):176–188. https://doi.org/10.1108/CG-11-2017-0268

Pizzi S, Caputo A, Corvino A, Venturelli A (2020) Management research and the UN sustainable development goals (SDGs): a bibliometric investigation and systematic review. J Clean Prod 276:124033. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124033

Pizzi S, Del Baldo M, Caputo F, Venturelli A (2022) Voluntary disclosure of Sustainable Development Goals in mandatory non-financial reports: the moderating role of cultural dimension [Article]. J Int Fin Manag Account 33(1):83–106. https://doi.org/10.1111/jifm.12139

Pizzi S, Rosati F, Venturelli A (2021) The determinants of business contribution to the 2030 Agenda: introducing the SDG Reporting Score. Business Strat Environ 30(1):404–421. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2628

Porter ME, Kramer MR (2011) Creating shared value. Harv Bus Rev 11:30

Preston M, Scott L (2015) Make it your business: engaging with the Sustainable Development Goals. PwC: London, UK. https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/sustainability/SDG/SDG%20Research_FINAL.pdf . Accessed 29 Nov 2022

PwC (2015) Make it your business: engaging with the Sustainable Development Goals. https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/sustainability/SDG/SDG%20Research_FINAL.pdf . Accessed 3 June 2023

Qian W, Tilt C, Belal A (2021) Social and environmental accounting in developing countries: contextual challenges and insights. Account, Audit Account J 34(5):1021–1050. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-03-2021-5172

Rajulton F (2001) The fundamentals of longitudinal research: an overview. Canadian Studies in Population [ARCHIVES] 169–185

Ramos DL, Chen S, Rabeeu A, Rahim ABA (2022) Does SDG coverage influence firm performance? [Article]. Sustainability (Switzerland) 14(9):4870. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14094870

Rosati F, Faria LGD (2019a) Addressing the SDGs in sustainability reports: the relationship with institutional factors [Article]. J Clean Prod 215:1312–1326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.12.107

Rosati F, Faria LGD (2019b) Business contribution to the Sustainable Development Agenda: organizational factors related to early adoption of SDG reporting [Article]. Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag 26(3):588–597. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1705

Sandberg M, Holmlund M (2015) Impression management tactics in sustainability reporting. Soc Respon J 11(4):677–689. https://doi.org/10.1108/SRJ-12-2013-0152

Sardianou E, Stauropoulou A, Evangelinos K, Nikolaou I (2021) Jul). A materiality analysis framework to assess sustainable development goals of banking sector through sustainability reports [Article]. Sustain Product Consump 27:1775–1793. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2021.04.020

Saunders MNK, Lewis P, Thornhill A (2019) Research methods for business students (8th ed) Pearson, New York

Sekarlangit LD, Wardhani R (2021) The effect of the characteristics and activities of the board of directors on Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) disclosures: empirical evidence from Southeast Asia [Article]. Sustainability 13(14):8007. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13148007

Sierra García L, Bollas-Araya HM, García Benau MA (2022) Sustainable development goals and assurance of non-financial information reporting in Spain [Article]. Sustain Account, Manag Policy J 13(4):878–898. https://doi.org/10.1108/SAMPJ-04-2021-0131

Silva S (2021) Corporate contributions to the Sustainable Development Goals: an empirical analysis informed by legitimacy theory. J Clean Prod 292:125962

Singh AP, Rahman Z (2021) Integrating corporate sustainability and sustainable development goals: towards a multi-stakeholder framework [Article]. Cogent Business Manag 8(1):1985686. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2021.1985686

Song L, Zhan X, Zhang H, Xu M, Liu J, Zheng C (2022) How much is global business sectors contributing to sustainable development goals? Sustain Horizons 1:100012. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.horiz.2022.100012

Tsalis TA, Malamateniou KE, Koulouriotis D, Nikolaou IE (2020) New challenges for corporate sustainability reporting: United Nations’ 2030 Agenda for sustainable development and the sustainable development goals [Article]. Corp Soc Respon Environ Manag 27(4):1617–1629. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1910

Turzo T, Marzi G, Favino C, Terzani S (2022) Non-financial reporting research and practice: lessons from the last decade [Review]. J Cleaner Product 345:131154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.131154

Unerman J, Bebbington J, O’dwyer B (2018) Corporate reporting and accounting for externalities. Account Business Res 48(5):497–522

United Nations (2016) World of business must play part in achieving new Sustainable Development Goals – UN chief. Retrieved 28/7/2022 from https://news.un.org/en/story/2016/01/520492-world-business-must-play-part-achieving-new-sustainable-development-goals-un#.VqJMIPkrLcs . Accessed 28 Jul 2022

Vallet-Bellmunt T, Fuertes-Fuertes I, Flor ML (2022) Reporting Sustainable Development Goal 12 in the Spanish food retail industry. An analysis based on Global Reporting Initiative performance indicators [Article; Early Access]. Corp Soc Respon Environ Manag 13. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2382

van den Broek O (2020) Narrative fidelity: making the UN Sustainable Development Goals fit [Article]. Corp Commun 26(3):441–460. https://doi.org/10.1108/CCIJ-01-2020-0032

van den Broek O (2021) Narrative fidelity: making the UN Sustainable Development Goals fit. Corp Commun: Int J 26(3):441–460

van der Waal JWH, Thijssens T (2020) Corporate involvement in Sustainable Development Goals: exploring the territory [Article]. J Clean Prod 252:119625. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119625

van der Waal JWH, Thijssens T, Maas K (2021) The innovative contribution of multinational enterprises to the Sustainable Development Goals [Article]. J Cleaner Product 285:125319. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125319

Wang X, Yuen KF, Wong YD, Li KX (2020) How can the maritime industry meet Sustainable Development Goals? An analysis of sustainability reports from the social entrepreneurship perspective. Transport Res D: Transport Environ 78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2019.11.002

Whittingham KL, Earle AG, Leyva-de la Hiz DI, Argiolas A (2022) The impact of the United Nations sustainable development goals on corporate sustainability reporting [Article]. BRQ Bus Res Q. https://doi.org/10.1177/23409444221085585

Zhou Y, Li X, Wang X, Yuen KF (2022) Intelligent container shipping sustainability disclosure via stakeholder sentiment views on social media. Mar Policy 135:104853. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2021.104853

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Faculty of Management, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, 81310, Skudai, Johor, Malaysia

See Mei Low, Dewi Fariha Abdullah & Saleh F. A. Khatib

Faculty of Business, Raffles University, 79250 Iskandar Puteri, Johor, Malaysia

See Mei Low

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection, and analysis were performed by Saleh F. A. Khatib, See Mei Low, and Dewi Fariha Abdullah. The first draft of the manuscript was written by See Mei Low and Saleh F. A. Khatib, and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Saleh F. A. Khatib .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval.

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Conflict of interest.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Responsible Editor: Philippe Garrigues

Publisher's Note

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

Rights and permissions

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

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Low, S.M., Abdullah, D.F. & Khatib, S.F.A. Research trend in Sustainable Development Goals reporting: a systematic literature review. Environ Sci Pollut Res 30 , 111648–111675 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-30122-6

Download citation

Received : 04 May 2023

Accepted : 24 September 2023

Published : 11 October 2023

Issue Date : November 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-30122-6

Share this article

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

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

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• SDG engagement
• Quality of SDG reporting
• Value creation
• Determinants of SDGs
• Legitimisation strategy
• Stakeholder pressure
• Institutional pressure
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

• Search Menu
• Volume 2024, Issue 3, March 2024 (In Progress)
• Volume 2024, Issue 2, February 2024
• Bariatric Surgery
• Breast Surgery
• Cardiothoracic Surgery
• Colorectal Surgery
• Colorectal Surgery, Upper GI Surgery
• Gynaecology
• Hepatobiliary Surgery
• Interventional Radiology
• Neurosurgery
• Ophthalmology
• Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
• Otorhinolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery
• Paediatric Surgery
• Plastic Surgery
• Transplant Surgery
• Trauma & Orthopaedic Surgery
• Upper GI Surgery
• Vascular Surgery
• Author Guidelines
• Submission Site
• Open Access
• Reasons to Submit
• About Journal of Surgical Case Reports
• Editorial Board
• Advertising and Corporate Services
• Journals Career Network
• Self-Archiving Policy
• Journals on Oxford Academic
• Books on Oxford Academic

Article Contents

Introduction, case report, conflict of interest statement.

• < Previous

A young female patient with multiple unilateral low-grade oncocytic renal tumors and angiomyolipoma: a case report and literature review

• Article contents
• Figures & tables
• Supplementary Data

Yi Xu, Xuewen Jiang, Hui Meng, A young female patient with multiple unilateral low-grade oncocytic renal tumors and angiomyolipoma: a case report and literature review, Journal of Surgical Case Reports , Volume 2024, Issue 3, March 2024, rjae125, https://doi.org/10.1093/jscr/rjae125

• Permissions Icon Permissions

We identified a young female patient admitted for suspected renal malignancy. Partial nephrectomy was performed after imaging evaluation and discussion. Postoperative biopsy pathology reported multiple low-grade eosinophilic renal tumors (LOTs) with angiomyolipoma growth. After reviewing the data, we found that LOT was mostly solitary and occurred in middle-aged and elderly patients. This case is unique and we share it to improve the understanding of this disease.

There are many types of eosinophilic renal tumors, ranging from benign to malignant. Low-grade eosinophilic renal tumors (LOTs) have long been classified into the category of other eosinophilic tumors because of their morphological similarity to renal eosinophilic tumors (RO) and eosinophilic smoky cell carcinoma (eCRCC). To further understand their immunohistochemistry and genetics, LOTs were listed as a separate category for the first time in the 2022 classification by the World Health Organization (WHO). According to previous reports, LOTs usually occur in middle-aged and elderly patients and are primarily unilateral solitary tumors that do not grow with other tumors. We encountered a young female patient with multiple LOTs that grew simultaneously with renal angiomyolipoma (AML). We believe that the LOTs in this patient are unique, and report it here with the hope of improving our understanding of this tumor.

A 29-year-old female was found to have abnormal echoes in her left kidney during a physical examination. The patient had no symptoms (frequent urination, urgency, dysuria, hematuria, low back pain, abdominal pain, fever, or fatigue). She had no history of chronic diseases such as hypertension and diabetes and was married with children. There was no history of food or drug allergies, smoking, alcohol consumption, or family history of hereditary diseases.

No obvious positive signs were found on general physical examination upon admission, and no signs of tuberous sclerosis were observed. No lumbar mass, percussion pain in the lumbar region, pressure pain in the ureteral tract, or abnormalities in the vulva were detected during specialized examination.

To further clarify the diagnosis, an intensive computed tomography (CT) examination of the abdominopelvic region was performed, revealing a soft tissue mass and renal tumor in the left kidney, multiple small cysts in both kidneys, and multiple high-density foci in the pelvis, lumbosacral vertebral body, and adnexa ( Fig. 1 ).

CT shows uneven density and disordered structure in the upper pole of the left kidney, with turbidity and increased density in the surrounding fat spaces.

Following a comprehensive discussion under the multidisciplinary team model, a decision was made to proceed with surgical excision of the tumor. The preoperative examination revealed no contraindications to surgery. The procedure used involved da Vinci robot-assisted laparoscopic partial left nephrectomy. Intraoperatively, a tumor measuring ~3 × 4 cm was identified at the upper pole of the left kidney, and additional satellite tumors ~0.8 cm in size were detected near the primary lesion. All tumors were excised and sent for pathological examination. Rapid intraoperative pathological analysis indicated an eosinophilic cell tumor, prompting a localized excision. The surgery progressed smoothly, and postoperative recovery was satisfactory. The patient refused further genetic testing, and a 3-month post-discharge follow-up examination revealed no abnormalities in the surgical area. The patient is currently undergoing regular follow-up.

Four nodular tissue samples were examined postoperatively. Nodules 1 and 2 were identified as low-grade oncocytic renal tumors (LOTs). Microscopic examination revealed a distinct boundary between the tumor cells and normal renal tissue. The tumor cells exhibited a sheet-like arrangement with an eosinophilic cytoplasm ( Fig. 2A ); the nuclei were round or oval, with visible nucleoli. Some regions showed inconspicuous perinuclear halos ( Fig. 2B ). Immunohistochemical staining indicated positive expression of CK7 ( Fig. 2C ), partial PAX-8, and SDHB in the tumor cells, with no CD117 ( Fig. 2D ), RCC, CD10, or CA-IX expression. The Ki-67 proliferation index was ~1–2%.

(A) (HE,×4). Eosinophilic cell tumor with well-defined tumor boundaries and acidophilic tumor cells in solid tubular, nested, and microcystic arrangements; (B) (HE,×10). Eosinophilic cell tumor, homogeneous eosinophilic or eosinophilic granular cytoplasm with no vacuoles in the cytoplasm, round to oval nuclei with some perinuclear halos and sparse binuclei with slender perinuclear vacuoles; (C&D) (×10). Immunohistochemistry showed tumor cells positive for CK7 but negative for CD117.

Nodule 3 contained both LOT and AML tissue. Microscopically, a clear demarcation was observed between the LOT, AML, and normal renal tissues ( Fig. 3A ). Immunohistochemistry revealed positive staining for smooth muscle actin (SMA) ( Fig. 3B ) in the AML as well as Desmin, HMB45, and Melan-A (occasionally), while CD117 was negative. Nodule 4 consisted exclusively of AML tissue.

(A) (HE,×4). LOT, AML, and normal kidney tissue boundaries, where region a is AML, region b is normal kidney tissue, and region c is LOT; (B) (×10). Immunohistochemistry showing AML cells positive for SMA.

Renal tumors that are eosinophilic, or that have eosinophilic characteristics, range from benign to malignant and often occur sporadically; multiple tumors have also been reported [ 1 ]. In 2019, Trpkov et al. reported 28 cases of tumors with low nuclear grade and eosinophilic cytoplasm that were CD117-negative/CK7-positive, naming them LOTs [ 2 ]. This term was then adopted as a new classification entity in the 2022 edition of the WHO classification of urological and male genital tumors [ 3 ].

In current reports, LOTs are sporadic solitary tumors that are more common in the elderly population. The average age of patients with LOTs is 63 years and they are more commonly found in women. The median tumor size is 2–3 cm, and there are typically no complications [ 2 ]. Microscopically, the tumors have round-to-oval-shaped nuclei and focal perinuclear halos, as well as areas of edema with scattered or irregularly distributed cells. Growing evidence suggests that they have characteristic immunohistochemical profiles (diffusely positive for CK7 and negative for CD117/KIT) [ 4 ].

Other immunohistochemical indicators in LOTs in addition to CK7 and CD117 were also studied. Chen et al. found that GATA3, E-cadherin, Pax-8, succinate dehydrogenase B (SDHB), and fumarate hydratase (FH) were all positive in five cases of LOT, while vimentin, carbonic anhydrase 9 (CA9), CD10, P504s, CK20, TFE3, TFEB, HMB45, ALK, and forkhead box protein I1 (FOXI1) were negative [ 1 ]. Williamson et al. found that GATA3 was positive in a study of 16 LOT tumors [ 5 ]. The immunohistochemical results of the patient presented here partially support this view. The detection of GATA3, PAX-8, SDHB, Pax-8, CD10, and other immune indicators may be significant for accurate clinical and differential diagnoses.

As molecular techniques such as next-generation sequencing are increasingly being used to evaluate LOTs, many case series have reported new findings. Ricci et al. found that MTOR, TCS1, and TSC2 mutations in the mTOR pathway were closely related to the pathogenesis of this tumor. Other mutated genes, including PIK3CA, NF2, and PTEN, were also identified that can act as both upstream and downstream effectors [ 6 ]. Williamson et al. also confirms the above conclusion [ 5 ]. Mutations in the mTOR pathway may play an important role in LOT diagnosis; however, these gene changes are nonspecific and are also common in several other eosinophilic tumors such as eosinophilic solid and cystic renal cell carcinoma (ESC RCC), renal eosinophilic vacuolated tumors (EVT), and renal cell carcinoma with vascular leiomyoma matrix (RCC FMS) [ 7 ]. For instance, Xia et al. recently found that LOTs, ESC RCC, EVT, and a group of similar tumors that do not fully meet these criteria all show TSC/mTOR mutations and have different RNA clustering expression profiles [ 8 ].

For LOTs, surgical resection is sufficient to achieve a satisfactory prognosis; no progression or metastasis has been reported with local resection or unilateral total nephrectomy. The key to the clinical diagnosis and treatment of this type of disease should therefore be the former. The prehospital diagnosis of the patient in this case was suspected to be malignant. The nature of the tumor was determined by rapid pathological examination during operation, and partial resection was performed. Clinical diagnosis requires knowledge of the pathological features of LOTs, timely puncture biopsy, or intraoperative pathological examination to avoid misdiagnosis and unnecessary treatment.

At present, English literature reports on the close growth of LOTs and AML are rare. In this case, the patient was only 29 years old but had multiple large tumors, which is relatively rare among reported cases. The patient refused to undergo genetic testing; genetic detection may have revealed a relationship between the LOTs and AML. An analysis of the diagnosis and treatment of these patients can enhance our understanding of LOTs.

None declared.

Lerma   LA , Schade   GR , Tretiakova   MS . Co-existence of ESC-RCC, EVT, and LOT as synchronous and metachronous tumors in six patients with multifocal neoplasia but without clinical features of tuberous sclerosis complex . Hum Pathol   2021 ; 116 : 1 – 11 .

Google Scholar

Trpkov   K , Williamson   SR , Gao   Y , et al.    Low-grade oncocytic tumour of kidney (CD117-negative, cytokeratin 7-positive): a distinct entity?   Histopathology   2019 ; 75 : 174 – 84 .

Hes   O , Michalová   K , Pivovarčíková   K . New insights in the new WHO classification of adult renal tumors . Cesk Patol   2022 ; 67 : 187 – 91 .

Trpkov   K , Williamson   SR , Gill   AJ , et al.    Novel, emerging and provisional renal entities: the Genitourinary Pathology Society (GUPS) update on renal neoplasia . Mod Pathol   2021 ; 34 : 1167 – 84 .

Williamson   SR , Hes   O , Trpkov   K , et al.    Low-grade oncocytic tumour of the kidney is characterised by genetic alterations of TSC1, TSC2, MTOR or PIK3CA and consistent GATA3 positivity . Histopathology   2023 ; 82 : 296 – 304 .

Ricci   C , Ambrosi   F , Franceschini   T , et al.    Evaluation of an institutional series of low-grade oncocytic tumor (LOT) of the kidney and review of the mutational landscape of LOT . Virchows Arch   2023 ; 483 : 687 – 98 .

Trpkov   K , Yilmaz   A , Uzer   D , et al.    Renal oncocytoma revisited: a clinicopathological study of 109 cases with emphasis on problematic diagnostic features . Histopathology   2010 ; 57 : 893 – 906 .

Xia   Q-Y , Wang   X-T , Zhao   M , et al.    TSC/MTOR-associated eosinophilic renal tumors exhibit a heterogeneous clinicopathologic spectrum : a targeted next-generation sequencing and gene expression profiling study . Am J Surg Pathol   2022 ; 46 : 1562 – 76 .

• angiomyolipoma
• kidney neoplasms
• proto-oncogene protein c-kit
• older adult

Email alerts

Citing articles via, affiliations.

• Online ISSN 2042-8812
• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press and JSCR Publishing Ltd
• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Institutional account management
• Rights and permissions
• Get help with access
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.