literature review bibliography

• Search Website
• Office Directory
• Employee Directory
• Learning Commons
• Topic Sentences

Annotated Bibliography vs. Literature Review

What's the big deal.

There are fundamental differences between an annotated bibliography and a literature review that are crucial to completing the assignment correctly. The chart below is provides an overview of the biggest differences between the two types of assignments in a side-by-side comparison. However, if you need more specific information about either assignment, visit our Annotated Bibliography and/or Literature Review pages for more detailed information on how to complete them. 

Differences between an annotated bibliography and literature review

Have a language expert improve your writing

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

• Knowledge Base

Methodology

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

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

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

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

There are five key steps to writing a literature review:

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

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

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

Table of contents

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

• Quick Run-through
• Step 1 & 2

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

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

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

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

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

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

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

Download Word doc Download Google doc

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

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

Make a list of keywords

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

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

Search for relevant sources

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

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

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

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

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

For each publication, ask yourself:

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

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

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

Take notes and cite your sources

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

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

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

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

Try for free

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

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

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

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

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

Chronological

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

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

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

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

Methodological

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

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

Theoretical

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

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

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

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

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

As you write, you can follow these tips:

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

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

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

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

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

Open Google Slides Download PowerPoint

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

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

 Statistics

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

Research bias

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Cite this Scribbr article

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

McCombes, S. (2023, September 11). How to Write a Literature Review | Guide, Examples, & Templates. Scribbr. Retrieved March 25, 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, "i thought ai proofreading was useless but..".

I've been using Scribbr for years now and I know it's a service that won't disappoint. It does a good job spotting mistakes”

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.

• Chester Fritz Library
• Library of the Health Sciences
• Thormodsgard Law Library

Literature Reviews

• Get started
• What is a Literature Review?
• Finding Literature Reviews
• Your Literature Search
• Library Books
• How to Videos
• Communicating & Citing Research

References & Further Reading

Manuals & guidelines, print books.

• Beyond PICO: the SPIDER tool for qualitative evidence synthesis Cooke, A., Smith, D., & Booth, A. (2012). Qualitative Health Research, 22(10), 1435-1443.
• Checking reference lists to find additional studies for systematic reviews Horsley, T., Dingwall, O., & Sampson, M. (2011). The Cochrane Library, 8.
• Domain Definition and Search Techniques in Meta-analyses of L2 Research (Or why 18 meta-analyses of feedback have different results) Plonsky, L., & Brown, D. (2015). Second Language Research, 31(2), 267–278.
• Effectiveness and Efficiency of Search Methods in Systematic Reviews of Complex Evidence: Audit of Primary Sources Greenhalgh, T., & Peacock, R. (2005). BMJ, 331(7524), 1064-1065. Only 30% of sources were obtained from the protocol defined at the outset of the study (that is, from the database and hand searches). Fifty one per cent were identified by “snowballing” (such as pursuing references of references), and 24% by personal knowledge or personal contacts. Conclusion: Systematic reviews of complex evidence cannot rely solely on protocol-driven search strategies.
• An Empirical Assessment of A Systematic Search Process for Systematic Reviews Zhang, H., Babar, M. A., Bai, X., Li, J., & Huang, L. (2011, April). In Evaluation & Assessment in Software Engineering (EASE 2011), 15th Annual Conference on (pp. 56-65). IET.
• The Impact of Limited Search Procedures for Systematic Literature Reviews – A Participant-Observer Case Study Kitchenham, B., Brereton, P., Turner, M., Niazi, M., Linkman, S., Pretorius, R., & Budgen, D. (2009, October). In Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement, 2009. ESEM 2009. 3rd International Symposium on (pp. 336-345). IEEE.
• Information retrieval in systematic reviews: Challenges in the public health arena Beahler, C. C., Sundheim, J. J., & Trapp, N. I. (2000). American Journal of Preventive Medicine, (18)4, 6-10.
• Literature Searching for Social Science Systematic Reviews: Consideration of a range of search techniques. Papaioannou, D. , Sutton, A. , Carroll, C. , Booth, A. and Wong, R. (2010). Health Information & Libraries Journal, 27, 114-122.
• Literature search strategies for conducting knowledge‐building and theory‐generating qualitative systematic reviews Finfgeld‐Connett, D., & Johnson, E. D. (2013). Journal of Advanced Nursing, 69(1), 194-204.
• Performing a Literature Review. Reed, L. E. (1998, November). In fie (pp. 380-383). IEEE.
• Searching for qualitative research for inclusion in Systematic Reviews: A Structured Methodological Review Booth, A. (2016). Systematic Reviews, (5)74, 1-23.
• Should We Exclude Inadequately Reported Studies From Qualitative Systematic Reviews? An Evaluation of Sensitivity Analyses in Two Case Study Reviews Carroll, C., Booth, A., & Lloyd-Jones, M. (2012). Qualitative Health Research, 22(10), 1425-1434.
• Systematic Literature Studies: Database Searches vs. Backward Snowballing Jalali, S., & Wohlin, C. (2012, September). In Proceedings of the ACM-IEEE international symposium on Empirical software engineering and measurement (pp. 29-38). ACM.
• Text-Mining Techniques and Tools for Systematic Literature Reviews: A Systematic Literature Review Feng, L., Chiam, Y. K., & Lo, S. K. (2017, December). In Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference (APSEC), 2017 24th (pp. 41-50). IEEE. Also available open access: http://eprints.um.edu.my/18515/1/All.pdf
• Use of information-seeking strategies for developing systematic reviews and engaging in evidence-based practice: the application of traditional and comprehensive Pearl Growing. A review Schlosser, R. W., Wendt, O., Bhavnani, S., & Nail‐Chiwetalu, B. (2006). International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 41(5), 567-582.
• What is your research question? An introduction to the PICOT format for clinicians. Riva, J. J., Malik, K. M., Burnie, S. J., Endicott, A. R., & Busse, J. W. (2012). The Journal of the Canadian Chiropractic Association, 56(3), 167-71.
• Writing a Literature Review
• ECO 495: Senior Economic Project: Literature Review
• Ethical use of Sources and Writing

For Conducting a Systematic Review or Meta-analysis

• Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (Version 5.1.0) Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011.
• Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses: The PRISMA Statement Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2009). Annals of Internal Medicine, 151(4), 264-269.
• Standards for Systematic Reviews (Report) The National Academies of Science, Engineering, Medicine. Released 3/23/2011. Copyright © 2018 National Academy of Sciences.
• Systematic Reviews: CRD's guidance for undertaking reviews in health care Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York (2008). York, UK: York Publishing Services Ltd.
• Procedures for Performing Systematic Reviews Kitchenham, B. (2004). Keele University, 33(2004), 1-26. Software Engineering Group, Department of Computer Science, Keele, UK.
• A Roadmap for Systematic Reviews & Meta-analyses Adapted from: Pai, M. et al. (2004). The National Medical Journal of India, 17(2):86-95.
• Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses: An Illustrated, Step-By-Step Guide. Pai, M., McCulloch, M., Gorman, J. D., Pai, N., Enanoria, W., Kennedy, G., ... & Colford, J. J. (2004). The National Medical Journal of India, 17(2), 86-95.
• Systematic Reviews of Health Promotion and Public Health Interventions (Version 2) July 2007. Armstrong, R., & Waters, E. on behalf of the Guidelines for Systematic Reviews in Health Promotion and Public Health Taskforce.
• A Guideline for Applying Systematic Reviews to Child Language Intervention Hargrove, P., Lund, B., & Griffer, M. (2005). Communication Disorders Quarterly, 26(4), 226–235.
• A Tutorial on Conducting Meta-Analyses of Clinical Outcome Research Robey, R. R., & Dalebout, S. D. (1998). Journal of Speech, Language & Hearing Research, 41(6), 1227-1241.
• Handbook of Meta-analysis in Ecology and Evolution Koricheva J., Gurevitch J., & Mengersen K. (Eds.). (2013). Princeton University Press.

Across Disciplines

• Qualitative Case Study Methodology: Study Design and Implementation for Novice Researchers Baxter, P., & Jack, S. (2008). The Qualitative Report, 13(4), 544-559. Discusses differences between exploratory and other types of case studies.
• Research Methods for Postgraduates Greenfield, Tony, and Sue Greener. Research Methods for Postgraduates. Third ed. 2016. Print.
• Case Study Research and Applications: Design and methods (3rd ed.). Summary Yin, R. K. (1994). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Summary only. 6th edition (2018) available in Chester Fritz Library. Discusses exploratory and other types of case studies.
• The Book Review: Scholarly and Editorial Responsibility Felber, L. (2002). Journal of Scholarly Publishing, 33(3), 166.
• Special Section on the Value of Scholarly Book Reviews. Gump, S. E. (2018). Journal of Scholarly Publishing, 50(1), 1-7. University of Toronto Press.
• Use of Scholarly Book Reviews: Implications for Electronic Publishing and Scholarly Communication Spink, A., Robins, D., & Schamber, L. (1998). Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 49(4), 364-374.
• What Synthesis Methodology Should I Use? A Review and Analysis of Approaches to Research Synthesis Schick-Makaroff, K., MacDonald, M., Plummer, M., Burgess, J., Neander, W. (2016). AIMS Public Health, 3(1), 172–215. From health and social sciences perspectives.
• Use of Content Analysis to Conduct Knowledge-Building and Theory-Generating Qualitative Systematic Reviews Finfgeld-Connett, D. (2014). Qualitative Research, 14(3), 341-352.
• HARKing: Hypothesizing After the Results are Known Kerr, N. L. (1998). Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2(3), 196–217.
• p-Curve and Effect Size: Correcting for Publication Bias Using Only Significant Results Simonsohn, U., Nelson, L. D., & Simmons, J. P. (2014). Perspectives on Psychological Science, 9(6), 666–681.

Medicine & Public Health

• How to Write a Scholarly Book Review for Publication in a Peer-reviewed Journal: A Review of the Literature Lee, A. D., Green, B. N., Johnson, C. D., & Nyquist, J. (2010). Journal of Chiropractic Education, 24(1), 57-69.
• Writing a Literature Review Steward, B. (2004). British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 67(11), 495–500.
• How to Read a Paper: Papers that Summarise other Papers: Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis. Greenalgh, T. (1997). British Medical Journal, 315, 672-675.
• A Typology of Reviews: An Analysis of 14 Review Types and Associated Methodologies Grant, M. J., & Booth, A. (2009). Health Information And Libraries Journal, 26(2), 91–108.
• Five Steps to Conducting a Systematic Review Khan, K. S., Kunz, R., Kleijnen, J., & Antes, G. (2003). Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 96(3), 118-121.
• Criteria for the Systematic Review of Health Promotion and Public Health Interventions Jackson, N. & Waters, E. for the Guidelines for Systematic Reviews in Health Promotion and Public Health Taskforce. (2005). Health Promotion International, Volume 20, Issue 4(1), Pages 367–374.
• Qualitative Research in Systematic Reviews -- Has established a place for itself Dixon-Woods, M., & Fitzpatrick, R. (2001). BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 323(7316), 765-6.
• A Brief History of Research Synthesis Chalmers, I., Hedges, L. V., & Cooper, H. (2002). Evaluation & the Health Professions, 25(1), 12–37.
• Methods for the Thematic Synthesis of Qualitative Research in Systematic Reviews Thomas, J., & Harden, A. (2008). BMC Medical Research Methodology, 8(1), 45.
• The Mass Production of Redundant, Misleading, and Conflicted Systematic Reviews and Meta‐analyses Ioannidis, J. P. (2016). The Milbank Quarterly, 94(3), 485-514.
• Methodologic Issues in Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses Montori, V. M., Swiontkowski, M. F., & Cook, D. J. (2003). Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research®, 413, 43-54.
• I Have the Answer, Now What's the Question?: Why Metaanalyses Do Not Provide Definitive Solutions Streiner, D. L. (2005). The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 50(13), 829–831.

Social Sciences

• Book Reviews and Scientist-Practitioner Currency: A Critical Lever. Jones RG, Fleenor JW, Summers L. (2004). The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist, 41, 22-25.
• All in the Family: Systematic Reviews, Rapid Reviews, Scoping Reviews, Realist Reviews, and More Moher, D., Stewart, L., & Shekelle, P. (2015). Systematic Reviews, 4(183), 1–2.
• Writing a Literature Review Baumeister, R. F. (2013). In M. J. Prinstein (Ed.), The Portable Mentor (pp. 119–132). New York, NY: Springer New York.
• Writing a Review Article for Psychological Bulletin Bem, D. J. (1995). Psychological Bulletin, 118(2), 172-177.
• Systematic Reviews in the Social Sciences: A Practical Guide [Book Review] Suri, H. (2009). Evaluation Journal of Australaisa, 9(1), 62-63. Book Reviewed: Petticrew, M. & Roberts, H. (2006). Malden, MA: Blackwell. ISBN: 978-1-4051-2110-1 Book in library collection: https://odin-primo.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com:443/und:all:ODIN_ALEPH008277698
• Using Logic Models to Capture Complexity in Systematic Reviews Anderson, L. M., Petticrew, M. , Rehfuess, E., Armstrong, R. , Ueffing, E. , Baker, P. , Francis, D. and Tugwell, P. (2011). Research Synthesis Methods, (2), 33-42.
• Scoping Studies: Towards a Methodological Framework. Arksey, H., & O'Malley, L. (2005). International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(1), 19-32.
• Face Validity of Meta-Analyses in Emotional or Behavioral Disorders. Mostert, M. (2004). Behavioral Disorders, 29(2), 89-118.
• Meta-analytic Decisions and Reliability: A Serendipitous Case of Three Independent Telecommuting Meta-analyses. Nieminen, L., Nicklin, J., McClure, T., & Chakrabarti, M. (2011). Journal of Business and Psychology, 26(1), 105-121.
• Research Transparency in Psychological Science: How & Why? Gernsbacher, M. A. (2018a, October 26. [Video File]. Presented at the Northern Lights Psychology Conference 2018, UND, Grand Forks, ND, https://commons.und.edu/nlp-conference/2018/
• Rewarding Research Transparency Gernsbacher, M. A. (2018). Trends in Cognitive Sciences.
• Writing Empirical Articles: Transparency, Reproducibility, Clarity, and Memorability Gernsbacher, M. A. (2018). Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 1, 403-414.

Education & Public Policy

• Teaching the Literature Review: A Practical Approach for College Instructors Cisco, J. (2014). Teaching & Learning Inquiry: The ISSOTL Journal, 2(2), 41-57.
• Producing Policy Relevant Systematic Reviews: Navigating the Policy-Research Interface Oliver, S., Bangpan, M., & Dickson, K. (2018). Evidence & Policy: A Journal of Research, Debate and Practice, 14(2), 197-220.
• Use and Impacts of Campbell Systematic Reviews on Policy, Practice, and Research Maynard, B. R. & Dell, N. A. (2018). Research on Social Work Practice, 28(1), 13 -18.
• The Relevance of Systematic Reviews to Educational Policy and Practice. Davies, P. (2000). Oxford Review of Education, 26(3/4), 365-378.
• The Place of Systematic Reviews in Education Research Andrews, R. (2005). British Journal of Educational Studies, 53(4), 399-416.
• The Relationship Between Sample Sizes and Effect Sizes in Systematic Reviews in Education Slavin, R., & Smith, D. (2009). Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 31(4), 500-506.
• Application of Systematic Reviews in Speech‐and‐Language Therapy Marshall, J. (2011). International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 46(3), 261 -272.
• A Review of Meta-Analyses in Education: Methodological Strengths and Weaknesses. Ahn, S., Ames, A., & Myers, N. (2012). Review of Educational Research, 82(4), 436-476.
• Deficiencies of Reporting in Meta-Analyses and Some Remedies. Harwell, M., & Maeda, Y. (2008). The Journal of Experimental Education, 76(4), 403-428.
• Effect Sizes and Statistical Methods for Meta-Analysis in Higher Education. Bowman, N. (2012). Research in Higher Education, 53(3), 375-382.
• Meta-Analysis With Complex Research Designs: Dealing With Dependence From Multiple Measures and Multiple Group Comparisons. Scammacca, N., Roberts, G., & Stuebing, K. (2014). Review of Educational Research, 84(3), 328-364.
• Meta-Analysis in Higher Education: An Illustrative Example Using Hierarchical Linear Modeling Denson, N., & Seltzer, M. (2011). Research in Higher Education, 52(3), 215-244.

(Science, Technology, Engineering & Mathematics)

• The Evolving Practice of Scholarly Book Reviews. Jinfa Cai. (2015). Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 46(3), 250-252.
• Workshop in Conducting Integrative Literature Reviews Carliner, S. (2011, October). In Professional Communication Conference (IPCC), 2011 IEEE International (pp. 1-3). IEEE.
• Repeatability of Systematic Literature Reviews Kitchenham, B., Brereton, P., Li, Z., Budgen, D., & Burn, A. (2011). Proceedings of EASE 2011 (15th Annual Conference on Evaluation & Assessment in Software Engineering)
• Methodology for Systematic Literature Review Applied to Engineering and Education Torres-Carrión, P. V., González-González, C. S., Aciar, S., & Rodríguez-Morales, G. (2018, April). In Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), 2018 IEEE (pp. 1364-1373). IEEE.
• Identifying Barriers to the Systematic Literature Review Process Carver, J. C., Hassler, E., Hernandes, E., & Kraft, N. A. (2013, October). In Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement, 2013 ACM/IEEE International Symposium on (pp. 203-212). IEEE.
• Visualizing Systematic Literature Reviews to Identify New Areas of Research Godwin, A. (2016, October). In Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), 2016 IEEE (pp. 1-8). IEEE.
• Review: Power and Information Technology Research: A Metatriangulation Review Jasperson, J., Carte, T. A., Saunders, C. S., Butler, B. S., Croes, H. J. P., & Zheng, W. (2002). MIS Quarterly, 26(4), 397–459.
• Statistical Issues in Ecological Meta-Analyses Gurevitch, J., & Hedges, L. (1999). Ecology, 80(4), 1142-1149.

Business & Management

• Extending a Provocative Tradition: Book Reviews and Beyond at AMR Bartunek, J. M., & Ragins, B. R. (2015). The Academy of Management Review, 40(3), 474–479
• Compliments and Criticisms in Book Reviews About Business Communication Mackiewicz, J. (2007). Journal of Business & Technical Communication, 21(2), 188–215.
• Writing Integrative Literature Reviews: Guidelines and Examples Torraco, R. J. (2005). Human Resource Development Review, 4(3), 356–367.
• Towards a Methodology for Developing Evidence‐informed Management Knowledge by Means of Systematic Review Tranfield, D., Denyer, D., & Smart, P. (2003). British Journal of Management, 14(3), 207-222.
• Shades of Grey: Guidelines for Working with the Grey Literature in Systematic Reviews for Management and Organizational Studies Adams, R. J., Smart, P., & Huff, A. S. (2017). International Journal of Management Reviews, 19(4), 432–454.
• Meta-Analysis in Advertising Research. Eisend, M. (2017). Journal of Advertising, 46(1), 21–35.
• Meta-analyses in Sales Research. Johnson, J. S., & Jaramillo, F. (2017). Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 37(2), 134–152.
• Qualitative Inquiry in Management: Methodological Dilemmas and Concerns in Meta-Analysis. Point, S., Fendt, J., & Jonsen, K. (2017). European Management Review, 14(2), 185–204.
• The Suitability of Simulations and Meta-Analyses for Submissions to Academy of Management Journal Shaw, J. D., & Ertug, G. (2017). Academy of Management Journal, 60(6), 2045–2049. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2017.4006
• The Scholarly Book Review in the Humanities: An Academic Cinderella? East, J. W. (2011). Journal of Scholarly Publishing 43(1), 52-67. University of Toronto Press.
• H-Net Book Reviews: Enhancing Scholarly Communication with Technology McGrath, E. L., Metz, W. F., & Rutledge, J. B. (2005). College & Research Libraries, 66(1), 8-19.
• Literature Reviews and the Hermeneutic Circle Boell, S. K., & Cecez-Kecmanovic, D. (2010) Australian Academic & Research Libraries, (41)2, 129-144.
• Meta-analysis in Second Language Research: Choices and Challenges Annual Review of Applied Linguistics (2010), 30, 85–110
• Publication Practices in Motion: The Benefits of Open Access Publishing for the Humanities. Adema, J., & Ferwerda, E. (2014). In Dávidházi P. (Ed.), New Publication Cultures in the Humanities: Exploring the Paradigm Shift (pp. 131-146). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
• Going Open Smith, S. (2016). In Manifesto for the Humanities: Transforming Doctoral Education in Good Enough Times (pp. 67-84). ANN ARBOR: University of Michigan Press.
• Qualitative Research
• Journal of Scholarly Publishing
• Systematic Reviews
• International Journal of Social Research Methodology
• Campbell Systematic Reviews

Hover over the title for a brief overview and click on the title to be taken to the listing in the catalog where you can find more information such as location and call number. If you want to find additional print books on literature reviews, send me an email or ask a librarian around the clock using our  Ask Us 24/7  chat service!

Need a book that we don't have in the collection? Borrow it using our  interlibrary loan service .

• << Previous: Communicating & Citing Research
• Last Updated: Dec 5, 2023 8:31 PM
• URL: https://libguides.und.edu/literature-reviews

Community Blog

Keep up-to-date on postgraduate related issues with our quick reads written by students, postdocs, professors and industry leaders.

Annotated Bibliography vs Literature Review

• By Prof M Lambert
• November 12, 2020

If you’re undertaking a research project or writing a thesis in the US, be it at undergraduate, postgraduate, or PhD level, you may be wondering what the difference between an annotated bibliography and a literature review is.

Both are important sections of a research paper and aim to give context to the sources cited around a particular research problem. A literature review places a stronger emphasis on the importance of the findings of a paper, whilst an annotated bibliography focuses on the quality, validity, and relevance of the source of information itself.

What is a Literature Review?

A literature review summarises the research findings of others in a specific topic (this can be from a range of publications including scholarly journal articles, textbooks, interviews, and magazines), critically appraises their work, and uses this information to develop the research project at hand. The purpose of this section is also to identify any gaps in knowledge that exist in the research topic and how your research project can help address them. The literature review also allows you to question the research carried out, for example: does one author’s argument conflict with another’s?, or are a particular author’s conclusions valid?

What is an Annotated Bibliography?

Firstly, a bibliography is the list of sources referred to in a body of work. You should be familiar with this for any essay you have written – think of the APA style references you normally include. This includes important information about the source such as the author name, document title, date of publication, and page number (if applicable). The exact information differs depending on the source type – for example, a scholarly journal article may require a DOI ( Digital Object Identifier ) to be included in the citation, whilst a website will require a URL. The bibliography has several uses, primarily it serves as a reference point for readers who wish to read further into the statements made in a body of work. It also allows readers to question statements and verify the information provided in the body of work.

An annotated bibliography is a list of sources used in your body of work, which includes a brief summary for each source. These summary annotations evaluate the sources of information with regards to their accuracy and quality and identify any potential reasons for bias. As with a standard bibliography, an annotated bibliography should present sources alphabetically in a list-style format. The source summaries are typically around 150 words, though this can vary depending on the nature of the source.

Annotated Bibliography vs Literature Review – What are the differences?

The literature review is presented in a more conversational tone (essay format), as it looks to relate the findings of the source to the research question under review. In comparison, the annotated bibliography is much more structured and factual. It may evaluate sources that only have an indirect relevance to the current project.

Another difference is the length. As mentioned earlier, the annotation summaries are around 150 words per source. The literature review, on the other hand, is typically somewhere between 6,000 – 12,000 words. This reinforces the fact that the annotated bibliography is a concise assessment of the source, whilst the literature review is a comprehensive appraisal of the current knowledge and contributions around a particular topic. For example, the annotated bibliography may comment on a research paper which conducted a similar study and note information such as the scale of the experiments, how they were conducted, and which parameters were controlled. In the literature review this same source of information may be discussed further: what were the limitations of this type of experiment, how does the methodology compare to other studies, do the findings support your argument, and was the scale big enough to draw valid conclusions.

Students preparing a dissertation or thesis should use their annotation summaries to help develop their literary review. This can be done by using the information provided in the bibliography as a reference point to help paint the bigger picture in the literature review.

Thinking about applying to a PhD? Then don’t miss out on these 4 tips on how to best prepare your application.

Impostor Syndrome is a common phenomenon amongst PhD students, leading to self-doubt and fear of being exposed as a “fraud”. How can we overcome these feelings?

There are various types of research that are classified by objective, depth of study, analysed data and the time required to study the phenomenon etc.

Join thousands of other students and stay up to date with the latest PhD programmes, funding opportunities and advice.

Browse PhDs Now

You’ve impressed the supervisor with your PhD application, now it’s time to ace your interview with these powerful body language tips.

Statistical treatment of data is essential for all researchers, regardless of whether you’re a biologist, computer scientist or psychologist, but what exactly is it?

Elmira is in the third year of her PhD program at the Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology; Engelhardt Institute of Molecular Biology, researching the mechanisms of acute myeloid leukemia cells resistance to targeted therapy.

Sammy is a second year PhD student at Cardiff Metropolitan University researching how secondary school teachers can meet the demands of the Digital Competence Framework.

Join Thousands of Students

Annotated Bibliographies and Literature Reviews

• Organizing and Managing your Resources
• Define Your Research Question
• Search The Literature

What is an Annotated Bibliography

What is a Literature Review - video

Michelle Early

Difference Between a Literature Review and an Annotated Bibliography

Literature review.

A literature review should not be confused with an annotated bibliography. A literature review is not simply a summary of information you have found on a topic. Literature reviews are more in depth and provides analysis of multiple works relating to a research question. An annotated bibliography is a list of the resources, that you consulted when working on a research project. Each citation is accompanied by a brief written analysis of its usefulness to your research.

Courtesy of Washington University Library

“Library Guides: Annotated Bibliographies: Overview.” Overview - Annotated Bibliographies - Library Guides at University of Washington Libraries , guides.lib.uw.edu/tacoma/annotated.

Purdue Owl Annotated Bibliographies

Purdue owl annotated bibliography information, annotated bibliography breakdown, stem cell research: an annotated bibliography.

Holland, Suzanne. The Human Embryonic Stem Cell Debate: Science, Ethics, and Public Policy . Boston: MIT P, 2001.

This is the annotation of the above source, which is formatted according to MLA 2016 (8 th ed.) guidelines for the bibliographic information listed above. If one were really writing an annotation for this source, one would offer a brief summary of what this book says about stem cell research.

After a brief summary, it would be appropriate to assess this source and offer some criticisms of it. Does it seem like a reliable and current source? Why? Is the research biased or objective? Are the facts well documented? Who is the author? Is she qualified in this subject? Is this source scholarly, popular, some of both?

The length of your annotation will depend on the assignment or on the purpose of your annotated bibliography. After summarizing and assessing, you can now reflect on this source. How does it fit into your research? Is this a helpful resource? Too scholarly? Not scholarly enough? Too general/specific? Since "stem cell research" is a very broad topic, has this source helped you to narrow your topic?

Senior, K. "Extending the Ethical Boundaries of Stem Cell Research." Trends in Molecular Medicine , vol. 7, 2001, pp. 5-6.

Not all annotations have to be the same length. For example, this source is a very short scholarly article. It may only take a sentence or two to summarize. Even if you are using a book, you should only focus on the sections that relate to your topic.

Not all annotated bibliographies assess and reflect; some merely summarize. That may not be the most helpful for you, but, if this is an assignment, you should always ask your instructor for specific guidelines.

Wallace, Kelly. "Bush Stands Pat on Stem Cell Policy." CNN . 13 Aug. 2001.

Using a variety of sources can help give you a broader picture of what is being said about your topic. You may want to investigate how scholarly sources are treating this topic differently than more popular sources. But again, if your assignment is to only use scholarly sources, then you will probably want to avoid magazines and popular web sites.

• Next: Organizing and Managing your Resources >>
• Last Updated: Feb 20, 2024 2:20 PM
• URL: https://libguides.xavier.edu/Bib_lit

Research Methods at SCS

• Basic Strategies

Literature Reviews

Annotated bibliographies, writing the literature review, matrix for organizing sources for literature reviews / annotated bibliographies, sample literature reviews.

• Qualitative & Quantitative Methods
• Case Studies, Interviews & Focus Groups
• White Papers

A literature review is a synthesis of published information on a particular research topics. The purpose is to map out what is already known about a certain subject, outline methods previously used, prevent duplication of research, and, along these lines, reveal gaps in existing literature to justify the research project.

Unlike an annotated bibliography, a literature review is thus organized around ideas/concepts, not the individual sources themselves. Each of its paragraphs stakes out a position identifying related themes/issues, research design, and conclusions in existing literature.

An annotated bibliography  is a bibliography that gives a summary of each article or book. The purpose of annotations is to provide the reader with a summary and an evaluation of the source. Each summary should be a concise exposition of the source's central idea(s) and give the reader a general idea of the source's content.

The purpose of an annotated bibliography is to:

• review the literature of a particular subject;
• demonstrate the quality and depth of reading that you have done;
• exemplify the scope of sources available—such as journals, books, websites and magazine articles;
• highlight sources that may be of interest to other readers and researchers;
• explore and organize sources for further research.

Further Reading:

• Annotated Bibliographies (Purdue OWL)
• How to Prepare an Annotated Bibliography (Cornell University)

" Literature Reviews: An Overview for Graduate Students " 2009. NC State University Libraries

Review the following websites for tips on writing a literature review:

Literature Reviews. The Writing Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. 

Write a Literature Review: Virginia Commonwealth University. 

• Matrix for Organizing Sources

Levac, J., Toal-Sullivan, D., & O`Sullivan, T. (2012). Household Emergency Preparedness: A Literature Review.  Journal Of Community Health ,  37 (3), 725-733. doi:10.1007/s10900-011-9488-x

Geale, S. K. (2012). The ethics of disaster management.  Disaster Prevention and Management,  21 (4), 445-462. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09653561211256152

• << Previous: Basic Strategies
• Next: Qualitative & Quantitative Methods >>
• Last Updated: Jan 26, 2024 10:52 AM
• URL: https://guides.library.georgetown.edu/research

OASIS: Writing Center

Webinar transcripts, literature review and annotated bibliography basics.

View the recording

Presented February 13, 2019

Last updated 3/14/2019

Visual: Slide changes to the following: Housekeeping

• Will be available online within 24 hours.
• Polls, files, and links are interactive.
• Now: Use the Q&A box.
• Later: Send to [email protected] or visit our  Live Chat Hours .
• Ask in the Q&A box.
• Choose “Help” in the upper right-hand corner of the webinar room

Audio: Hello, everyone. Welcome to today's webinar. I'm Claire Helakoski and I'll be facilitating this webinar. Let's go ahead and get started. But before we do, I want to go over just a few housekeeping notes. So first, I want to note that this session is being recorded. So, if you need to leave during, or if the timing doesn't work for you, or if your internet drops out, then you can view the recording. It will be available within 24 hours in our webinar recording archive which I'll link to at the end of the presentation and is also available in our slides.

Throughout the webinar the polls, files and links will be interactive and Michaels prepared a couple of chats for you as well. During the webinar if you have questions, you can use the question and answers box and I will be in there to respond as best as I am able. If you think of questions later or you’re watching this recording, then you can go ahead and send questions to [email protected] or visit us during our live chat hours to have an immediate response.

During the webinar if you’re having any kind of technical issues, then you can let me know in the Q & A box. And I do have a couple of tips and tricks that may help resolve your issues. But you can also you can find the Adobe help button at the top right of the adobe connect panel, so at the top right there. And that is Adobe’s official support, so if you’re having major technical issues then I would suggest going there. But do let me know first, so that I can give you any tips tricks that I have. All right. So, with that we will go ahead and hand it over to the representor today, Michael.

Visual: Slide changes to the title of the webinar, “Literature Review and Annotated Bibliography Basics” and the speaker’s name and information: Michael Dusek, Writing Instructor, Walden University Writing Center

Audio: Hello, everyone. Welcome to today's webinar regarding lit reviews and annotated bibliographies. My name is Michael Dusek and I'm really happy to be leading this webinar today, excited. Essentially what we are going to be doing is we’re going to be taking a look at these two genres at these two written genres. Both the literature review and the annotated bibliography. We’re going to discuss some conventions. Or some typical characteristics that you might see or encounter in literature reviews and annotated biliographies. And we’re just going to go through general formatting and organizational tips as to how to organize these documents and get them to a place where they are useful to both you and to your reader.

Visual: Slide changes to the following: Webinar Objectives

• Formatting & Organization
• Writing Tips & Examples
• Relationship Between the Two

Audio: So that was kind of my broad stroke overview. Here are the more specific objectives of this particular webinar. We will overview these things. We are going to talk about conventions of these two genres, the purpose of them, what are they meant to accomplish? I think the literature review and annotated bibliography are somewhat related, but they really are meant to accomplish different things; they have different purposes.

We are going to look at the formatting and organization of these documents which are significantly different. So, we are going to see how they are different and how one could perhaps inform the other. We are going to look at writing tips and some examples of this, some things that can save you time and perhaps some anxiety and headaches and some examples to show you how these are typically formatted and what they look like typically in the academic community.

And lastly as I mentioned, we are going to discuss the relationship between the two genres, and how one can lead into the other and how really these are some ways working with the same materials even though they are doing pretty significantly different things.

Visual: Slide changes to the following: Alternative Names:

• Annotated bib =
• annotated bibliography
• Annotation =
• part of annotated bibliography
• Lit review =
• literature review

Audio: But, yeah, to break this down a little, to talk about these, alternative names, you can see this is an annotated bib. Right? This is kind of a shortened version of a bibliography there. For annotated, a part of annotated bibliography, think of annotated as really anything. Any time you are interacting with a source.

A broad definition of annotation is any mark that you make in a document. So, if you are highlighting something, if you are underlining a piece that you’re working with, maybe writing some notes in the margin or putting a question mark next to something that you need to look up, these are all considered annotations. For the purpose of annotated bibliography, it's sufficient to think of this as working with a draft or working with a source, excuse me, working with a piece of scholarship you might potentially use in your research.

Lit review is a shortened version of word literature review. These are really used interchangeably. If you see these shortened versions, you can assume that they are referring to these two documents or one of the two.

Visual: Slide changes to the following: The Annotated Bibliography

Annotate : “to make or furnish critical or

explanatory notes or comment”

Bibliography : “the history, identification, or

description of writings or publications”

                          (Merriam-Webster’s Online Dictionary, 2012)

Audio: So, to begin with then, let's pick one. And for the purpose of this webinar we pick the annotated bibliography to start with. But before we get into breaking this up, I want to talk about how the annotated bibliography is primarily a research tool. It is meant to aid you in collecting your research and kind of sussing out both what this source is doing; how it could do this thing better. And then how this might be useful or applicable to you in your research.

But to ground this, I want to start with the foundation that an annotated bibliography is a research tool. It's meant to help you organize your research. Right? Okay.

Now that we’ve established that foundational definition here, let's break up these two words. Annotate, to make or furnish critical or explanatory notes or comments. Yeah, it's to work with a draft. As you guys are scholars now, in a higher level of post-secondary level here, generally speaking, you really can think of yourself as professional readers. When you read a scholarly source or read a source you are thinking of using in your research, you don't want to be a passive party to that. You want to actively engage with that source and annotations are part of doing this. Making notes in a source, underlining things, highlighting things that you may need to look up again. These are all considered annotations. But, again, for the purpose of this discussion, an annotation is really working with a source, is this kind of critical or explanatory note that you provide for that source.

A bibliography is defined by Merriam Webster, as the history or identification or discription of writings or publications. Really what we are looking for here is publication information, history, identification, description; where is this source coming from. Right? Where are you getting this from and how does this compile into a list of other sources on a related topic.

I know that's a little wishy washy on the second part of this definition, but this is going to become a little bit more clear as we take a look at how to compile this, what elements go into, an annotation or annotated bibliography entry, and that will be a little bit more clear as we go on here.

For those of you looking for a resource outside of this webinar discussing annotated bibliographies, in the bottom right corner of this slid, you can see we have a link to our annotated page. What this is, it's a website, web page, that explains how annotated bibliographies work, the elements that need to be included in a typical annotated bibliography. And it gives you an example of what an annotated bibliography could look like, as well as should look like, better said. So, if you are watching this recording or downloaded the slides and want to refer to a resource about this topic after the fact, after this webinar, this is a great one. Right there on the bottom right.

Visual: Slide changes to the following: Annotated Bibliography: Purpose

• Teaches about a particular topic
• Demonstrates a source’s value
• Shows depth/breadth of research
• Helpful note-taking and reflection exercise
• Promotes analysis and critical reading
• Preparation for a writing project

Audio: Thinking about the purpose of annotated bibliographies, you can think of it as certain purposes for the reader. It has certain purposes for yourself. As I mention, this is primarily used as a research topic, but a research tool, excuse me. But it's not uncommon to get an assignment to complete an annotated bibliography within a course. So, there's something of a reader awareness or a purpose for the reader, as well as for you, the researcher, compiling this.

So, for the reader what an annotated bibliography can do. Is it can inform the reader about a particular topic. It can demonstrate a source's value or why a source is important within a topic area, and it can show depth or breadth of research. And annotated bibliography is generally going to consist of a many entries. Throughout your research process you are going to continue to add to this probably, but it's going to show again a breadth of research, what information is out there on a topic.

For yourself, again, this is a research tool. This is helpful in note taking and reflecting on your source. A lot of the difficulty of writing is knowing where to look and being able to save yourself time in referring to a source that you’ve already read can be valuable in that you don't have to reread that source. You can look at an annotated bibliography and say that's what that source is about and here's why I thought it was useful to me in my research process. So really, it's to save you time, promotes analysis and critical thinking.

With an annotated bibliography pushes you to do, is not just summarize a source, but critique it and take that critical eye to it. One of the paragraphs in an annotated bibliography focuses specifically on critiquing that source. What is that source doing well, what could that source do better, perhaps. And in this way you are joining that conversation as a scholar. So this does this as well.

So lastly it prepares you for a writing project. It's a way of compiling your research so that you can kind of have it all in one place before you get off and get towards creating and outline or drafting. It's a place to store the research that you have already done, so in that way it can be really valuable.

• Course assignments
• Prewriting for large projects

Audio: Where will you encounter annotated bibliographies? As I mentioned you might see these in course assignments. When I would teach writing, this would not be uncommon for me to give students. Walden will assign an annotated bibliography as a beginning or as a jumping off point to a larger research project. I think they do this because they think that this is an important element in the research process. So yeah, you might encounter these as course assignments. Beyond that, for those of you working on a larger project like a capstone or a dissertation document, these are really meant as a prewriting strategy, or again, a tool, to allow you to approach that larger piece more efficiently and being from a place of being more informed. You will research more and you will be more informed individually about that topic. But it's not uncommon to see these in course assignments. So, there's a do it for the professor side and there’s the do it for yourself side. And as you get to these capstone or dissertation documents, the do it for yourself to save yourself the anxiety, is going to become the dominant purpose here. But alas you might see these in course assignments too.

Visual: Slide changes to the following: Annotated Bibliography: Format & Organization

Alphabetized list of reference entries + annotations

Reference entry listed in alphabetical order.

                             Annotation of source in paragraph format.

Reference entry.

                             Annotation.

Audio: Okay. Talking about formatting and organizing, annotated bibliography, the first thing to note, is that these are like a reference list. These are going to be alphabetized. So, you’re going to start with the sources that begin with A in their reference entry. This is kind of a brief out line here that discusses this. So, as you can see, you will start with a reference entry in alphabetical order. And then you’re going to below that, put your annotations. These are a number of paragraphs that we are going to break apart in an upcoming slide, but for the purposes of right now you can think of an annotated bibliography or each annotation, as having two pieces. You are going to have your reference entry, which is APA formatted. Looks like a reference entry at the end of a piece you have composed. And you are going to have your annotation part.

So, these two parts. Again, as I mentioned the annotation part is going to be broken down further, but let's start here for now, shall we. And this is how this is going to look in this brief outline, you’ll have a reference entry, and below it you’ll have your annotation piece and you will keep listing those sources in an alphabetized order there.

• Reference :
• Common Reference List Examples
• Annotation :
• 3 paragraphs: Summary, Analysis, and Application
• 2 paragraphs: Summary/Analysis and Application
• Depends on your purpose and faculty’s expectations

Audio: And to break this down a little farther as I promised, as I said that I would do. You start again with this reference entry that is in APA formatting. A helpful resource that I know I use a lot and I think, I know Claire uses allot too, is this link here for common reference list examples. What this link has is, it provides some formatting for some commonly used sources. Things like journal articles, like books, like web pages. Even down to things like course materials or interviews and these types of things. It will have a number of different formats and each source has a different formatting. Right? This link will give you some examples of those that you can use as examples to double check that your reference entries are correct.

Now this second part, as I mentioned, can be kind of broken down into a number of parts. This annotation. And for this you’re going to use consistent paragraph formatting. It will be double spaced. But this annotation part often times is broken down into two to three paragraphs. Right? In a three-paragraph annotation you’re going to have one paragraph that summarizes the source, what does it say, what are these authors doing, what are their conclusions and what does this study find. You are going to have a paragraph analyzing or criticizing the source. What did this piece do well, what are some opportunities for this piece to have been better? Is there potentially opportunities for furthering research that this piece brought up. Right? That would be another kind of analysis piece.

And lastly, in a three-paragraph annotation you’re going to have an application paragraph which essentially states why this piece is important broadly in that, in your field. But more importantly, how is this piece useful for your resource process, in your resource project. Something that would be typical to include in an application paragraph would be something like, I feel I'm going to use the data from page 12 on, in my background section or something like this. My point is, is that this is how this applies to you, how is it useful in your specific research product.

A shorter version of an annotation can only have two paragraphs, where you combine the summary and analysis and then have a separate application paragraph. In an even simpler annotation maybe for yourself as you’re reading a number of sources, you might just have a summary paragraph. But my point is, there's a number of ways to do this. If you are encountering this as a course assignment it's likely the professor is going to ask you to include a three-paragraph annotation. If you are doing this on your own, and this is not part of a course assignment, this is just a research tool for you, you can choose to format this however you want. Right? Because it's about finding what is useful to you personally. This is the format that we think is quite effective. And, again, in course assignments where you’re being assigned an annotated bibliography to complete it's usually going to be either one of these two and I would say primarily the three-paragraph annotation.

And again, it expands on your purpose and the faculty expectations. I would like to remind you guys, it is certainly appropriate to reach out to your faculty and to ask those questions. To clarify: Are you expecting a three-paragraph annotation or is a two-paragraph appropriate for this piece. I guess the reason I say this, often times I find students are a little reticent about contacting professors with questions, but I want to reassure you this is an appropriate question to reach out to your faculty or to your professor with.

Visual: Slide changes to the following: Annotated Bibliography: Writing Tips

• Take factual notes
• Use the past tense
• Use your own words
• Focus on purpose, methods and findings
• Include the most relevant information
• Take questioning notes
• Focus on strengths and then weaknesses
• Go broad à narrow
• Do not feel the need to be “nice.”
• Take notes of your reactions
• Relate the source to yourself, your field, other scholars, the community, etc.
• How could this source be useful?
• Potentially use “I”

Audio: To break this down a little further from the annotation piece here, a summary paragraph is going to be your first paragraph of your annotation. And again, this is factual notes. This is what your summarizing this piece. You want to use the past tense. In APA, specifically you want to use past tense when referring to pieces that have already been published. A good way to think about this, is this has been already said. As it was published, say, in the year 2012, it has already been said in the year 2012 so it is appropriate to discuss that piece in the past tense.

In your summary paragraph you’re going to use your own words. Really you want to focus on the purpose, the methods and the findings of the study. What did the study set out to do, how did they plan to accomplish that goal or test that hypothesis? And then at the end what did they find. Right? What were their conclusions, what were they able to draw from this study?

And in your summary when thinking about what to include and what to omit, what to leave out, you really want to include the most relevant information there. Right? What’s the meat of this study, what did these authors really look for and what did they really find. These are things to include, maybe smaller pieces about the methodology or some smaller details that the author includes that didn't turn out to be as important to the conclusions of the study. These can be things to omit. But again, it's what relevant to your research topic. That's the information that should be included in the summary paragraph.

Now, the analysis paragraph, your second paragraph of an annotation, I often refer to as the critique paragraph, is really about bringing this critical eye to your engagement with the source. Right? You want to take questioning notes. Focus on the strengths and on the weaknesses of a source. Right? What could this source have done better. We’re going to look at a couple of examples later on in this presentation of some ways to critique a source and to pick apart ways a source that could have tested something more accurately.

In an analysis paragraph you want to start broadly and work specifically. Broadly this study is doing this well, more specifically it could do this better. That's a general way to approach an analysis paragraph.

And lastly, don't feel the need to be nice here. I think this is an important point about scholarship at the graduate or PhD level in general, and that's that you’re entering this conversation. Right? So, it's okay to disagree with the author. I would encourage you to keep a professional tone, but it's okay to encounter a study where you say I don't think this is a very accurate study for these three reasons. That's okay. That as a scholar, someone who studies in this field and who is familiar with scientific methods and other ways to test hypotheses, it's appropriate for you to add your voice to this even if it's in disagreement. Just a general note for you all there.

Your last paragraph again, is this application paragraph. Take notes as to your reactions. That's a good tip there. But again, you want to relate the source to yourself, to your field, to other scholars, to your intellectual communities that you are a part of, etcetera, in an effort to recognize how this could be useful to you and to your research project. 

So, again, to simplify this a little bit, a good application paragraph will talk about maybe the significance of the study in the field; so, and so study is foundational in the field of psychology because it studied X, Y and Z that produced a lot more research. That would be an appropriate detail to include in an application paragraph. But, again, where it's most important to you as a researcher would be this, how it is useful to my research product; I would like to use the methodology of this study to then test a different hypothesis in my dissertation. Something like that. But, again, it's going to be different for every person. But the application paragraph, as you think about this as you approach this, the important part is how is this source useful to me. That's how it applies. That's where the rubber meets the road here. So, again, a typical annotation has three paragraphs and each does something significantly different.

Visual: Slide changes to the following: Annotated Bibliography:

• Summary Paragraph

       Thompson, Kirk, and Brown conducted a study to determine how burnout and emotional exhaustion of female police officers affect their family environment based upon role ambiguity and role overload.  Thompson et al. mailed out surveys to 1,081 female police officers employed by the Australian State Police; however, only 421 surveys were useable.  The researchers predicted that supervisor support would reduce role stressors and emotional exhaustion and improve family cohesion and conflict.  They found a relationship between supervisor support and reduced role stressors, family functioning, and emotional exhaustion, but did not find a correlation between coworker support and work stress.  Thompson et al. suggested that further research is needed on how emotional exhaustion affects family stressors in policewoman.

Audio: Next we’re going to have some examples of these. For the summary paragraph I don't think I'll read this whole thing because I think at this level you guys are familiar with summarizing a piece, but this is what this could look like. (Reading) Thompson Kirk and Brown conducted a study to determine how burnout and emotional exhaustion of female police officers affect their family environment based upon role ambiguity and role overload.

This goes on to summarize the rest of this piece. As you can see it talks about the sample size here. It talks about the methodology. This male survey thing. And at the end it talks about these findings. They found a relationship between supervisor support and role stressors.

To get back to our slide and in an example here, what this does is talks about what the authors were looking to find, it talks about how they plan to find that or test that hypothesis, and then at the end it talks about what they did find. The conclusions of that piece. So, you can see all the parts are here.

One thing that’s important to note as we look at this example as you can see there are no citations here. Right? In an annotated bibliography the reason why often times we don't include citations, this can be seen a bit as redundant. So, if you have a reference entry above your annotations it's kind of implied that what follows here based on the genre of annotated bibliographies is a summary critique and an application of the above source.

However, in some course assignments you may be required to cite within the paragraphs of an annotated bibliography. So that would be the expectation of the instructor and the purpose which you are using this for. If you are using this annotated bibliography as a research tool, you don't need to necessarily include citations there because you know where you are drawing this from. If you are turning this in for a grade you might want to include citations, because that's conventional in APA formatting in general. But if you have a question about this, this is something to reach out to your professor about and would be a perfectly appropriate question to ask. To wrap up this slide, the summary paragraph it summarizes. You talk about what the study is doing.

• Analysis Paragraph

Although Thompson et al. made a significant contribution to the field of police research, the article had several limitations.  First, the researchers chose a small and specialized sample that did not include policewomen or other minorities.  Second, the researchers potentially influenced results by asking leading questions in the interviews and focus group meetings.  Therefore, further research is needed with a wider demographic range and completely impartial interviewers.

Audio: The analysis paragraph, then you are working with this piece. Right? You are talking about the strengths and the weaknesses. Although (reading) Thompson, et al made a significant contribution to the field of police research, the article had several limitations.  First, the researchers chose a small and specialized sample that did not include policewomen or other minorities.  Second, the researchers potentially influenced results by asking leading questions in the interviews and focus group meetings.  Therefore, further research is needed with a wider demographic range and completely impartial interviewers.

Now again, this has a professional tone. But you can see the author in this example analysis paragraph is really pointing out the shortcomings of this study. After reading it and evaluating the methods that this study, this hypothetical study uses, this author concluded that it could be done better in a couple of ways. There could be a wider sample size and there could be an impartial questionnaire or an impartial person asking the questions. So, it's in this way you can really work with the source and point out some ways it could be done better. That's really what the critique or analysis paragraph is all about. What did the study do well, but also what is it not doing so well? What are some opportunities for the study to have been more accurate or been done better more broadly?

Visual: Slide changes to the following: Annotated Bibliography

• Application Paragraph

This study was valuable to understanding the relationship between employees’ views of change and the coping mechanisms used. Based on the results, the business sector should reinforce positive emotions to reduce withdrawal and increase commitment to the change. This implication aligns with Kotter’s 8-step change model emphasizing the positive and reinforcing employees for their efforts. This study, as well as Kotter’s model, will serve as the basis for the Business Change Strategy of my Application.

Audio: Excuse me. Lastly, we are going to, you would include an application paragraph. And as I mentioned, this is where the rubber meets the road as a researcher. Here’s what an application would sound like. (Reading) This study was valuable to understanding the relationship between employees’ views of change and the coping mechanisms used. Based on the results, the business sector should reinforce positive emotions to reduce withdrawal and increase commitment to the change. This implication aligns with Kotter’s 8-step change model emphasizing the positive and reinforcing employees for their efforts. This study, as well as Kotter’s model, will serve as the basis for the Business Change Strategy of my Application.

So, as you can see here, this author is talking about what this study does well and how it contributes to this larger field. How it is applied to the field in general. In this case comparing it to Kotter's eight step change model. And then at the end is where this author talks about what this is study means to their project. This is going to serve as the basis for my application of a business strategy change. So yeah, the application is what are you going to do, how is this useful to you?

All Together

[Reference Entry] Thompson, B. M., Kirk, A., & Brown, D. (2006). Sources of stress in policewomen: A three factor model. International Journal of Stress Management, 13(3), 309-328. doi:10.1037/1072-5245.13.3.309 

    [1. Summary] Thompson, Kirk, and Brown conducted a study to determine how burnout and emotional exhaustion of female police officers affect their family environment based upon role ambiguity and role overload…

    [2. Analysis] Although Thompson et al. made a significant contribution to the field of police research, the article had several limitations…  

    [3. Application] This study was valuable to understanding the relationship between employees’ views of change and the coping mechanisms used…

Audio: Altogether then, it can look something like this, start off with this reference entry. We then have our summary, our analysis paragraph and our application paragraph.

Let’s Take a Look!

Annotated Bibliography Example

Audio: So, let's take a look at what this can actually look like on paper. What this is formatted like on an entire annotated bibliography. As you can see we start with this title page. As we go on this starts with something of an introduction paragraph, something to lead the reader in and introduce them to the topic this annotated bibliography will be covering.

As a note here, not all professors are going to require you to have an introduction paragraph in your annotated bibliography, but I would recommend if you are turning it in for a grade and the reason is you want to bring the reader up to speed and tell them what topic this annotated bibliography will be covering, I think it's really important in general to give the reader enough background information to understand what you are doing in any piece. So, if you turn this in for a grade, I would recommend an introduction paragraph.

But as this is a research tool, if you are, you don't necessarily need that if you are just using it for your own research. If it's not being turned in and you don't think an introductory paragraph is important, by all means don't include one. But moving on, to take a look at this. We have our first annotation here. Starting with a reference entry. It goes on to have our three paragraphs, of one being a summary, the second an analysis or a critique, and the third being an application. And then it ends. We have another reference entry here that starts another annotation.

This is exactly how these are typically listed, one annotation after the other. You can see that they are alphabetized. And lastly, it is typical and conventional to include a reference list at the end of the piece. Again, as with citing within the piece, some professors and some instructors might find this to be redundant. I would have a hard time disagreeing with them. But this is something that you might be required to include also. So, if that's the case, definitely include that.

One reason I guess to the contrary I would say you should include a reference page, is that you can take these reference entries from here and then just plug them into your document once you are drafting. You have compiled these reference entries, so you can kind of just copy and paste there if you wish. But again, this is really up to the instructor's discretion as to whether or not you need to include this reference list. 

Let’s take a Look!

Audio: Okay. So that was kind of the first bit here about annotated bibliographies. I think this would be a good time to stop for questions.  Claire is there any questions in the Q & A box that you think the large group would benefit from me explaining or talking through?

Claire: Sure, thanks Michael We did have one and it was about the analysis or critique paragraph, that second paragraph in the annotated bibliography. Other than biases, are there other things that students could kind of talk about in that section or that are covered depending on the assignment?

Michael: Sure. That's a great question. Identifying bias in a source is really an important point and something as scholars you really want to be on guard for always, is when a piece is displaying some type of bias. That's one thing you can talk about in that analysis or critique paragraph. Other than that, really anything that you see as being something of a deficiency in a study. So, in our example one thing that they commented on was sample size. And this is something I think that's really common to look at.

In a study, a study has a specific sample or population they are look at or testing. This is something that can be easily manipulated and that isn't always generalizable to a larger population. So, if a sample size is too small, then the implication there is that you can't say the findings are generalizable to the rest of the population. So, sample size is one thing that I see commented on a lot there.

As in our example, again, this kind of the way a question is asked or the method, the methodology of the study would be better said here is another thing that is commented on a lot in a critique or analysis paragraph. How could this study have been done better would be another question to ask? And one often times the answer is the methodology could have been more sound. To refer to our example once more, if you are asking leading questions or if you’re asking questions that have some bias in them inherent, then you could write better questions. That would be another way to approach critiquing or using your own analysis on a study.

Generally speaking, though, it's really anything that you see that can be done better in a study. So, I mentioned a couple here, but there are many more, there are many more ways that a study can be done better. So, finding those and pointing those out is really what the analysis and critique paragraph is really all about. Any others Claire?

Claire: No, That was really great. Thank you, Michael.

Michael: Cool. All right. So that's our annotated bibliography section of this webinar.

Visual: Slide changes to the following: Relationship Between Annotated Bibliographies & Literature Reviews

Annotated bibliography = preparation for any writing project

Literature review = foundation for research

Audio: (laughing) Moving on then. We are going to talk a little bit about the relationship between annotated bibliographies and literature reviews. In an effort to kind of transition to talk about lit reviews.

So, to kind of ping pong off this slide here, annotated bibliography is something that's really meant to prepare you for any writing project. It's a research tool that you can use to inform a project of any length, essentially. A literature review is going to be a foundation for the research that you are conducting. So, an annotated bibliography compiles the research out there that you looked at. A literature review talks about the specific studies that are applicable to your narrowed topic that you are then going to be building from in your research project. So that's a little wishy washy, but I'm going to unpack how a literature review function differently. So, I'm hoping this will be clear as we get towards the end of this webinar and I think it will. So, stick with me.

Visual: Slide changes to the following: The Literature Review

“a written approach to examining published information on a particular topic or field. Authors use this review of literature to create a foundation and justification for their research or to demonstrate knowledge on the current state of a field.” (Walden Writing Center, n.d., para. 1)

More Resources!

“Reviewing the Literature and Incorporating Previous Research ” recorded webinar

Audio: The literature review, to use our definition here, is a written approach to examining published information on a particular topic or field. Authors use this review of literature to create a foundation and justification for their research or to demonstrate the knowledge on the current state of the field.

Yeah. That's a great definition. (Laughing). Really what I think about literature review as, its something that, it's a portion of a larger document. Right? That shows the reader what research is out there already on a narrowed topic.

One metaphor that people often use to talk about a literature review is that a literature review it's like a dinner party. So, each source is a scholar in this field and they are talking to each other about the specific topic. The literature review is, to go off this analogy, is compiling what is said at that conversation and that dinner table. Right? What are these different sources adding on this topic. How are they agreeing, how are they disagreeing? And you use that as the definition indicates, as a foundation for your own research. So, having this conversation in front of me, I think that the next place for this conversation would go in this direction. That's how the literature review functions.

More resources here on the bottom right hand corner. We have another webinar that discusses reviewing the literature and incorporating previous research specifically. If that’s something that interests you, go ahead and take a look at that too. Again, you are developing a foundation for your own research and telling the reader what research has been done on an narrowed topic already.

Visual: Slide changes to the following: Literature Review: Purpose

• Overviews your chosen topic or field
• Demonstrates your depth of knowledge
• Can show a gap or your research focus
• Supports and guides research
• Can help you find a gap or your research focus

Audio: For your reader then, these are overviews literature reviews, excuse me, overviews of your chosen topic or field; that again demonstrates this depth of knowledge. This is what has been published on this topic thus far. It can even show a gap in research that you can then focus on. Like, what's an opportunity for furthering research there.

For yourself, it supports and guides the research. It can promote analysis and critical reading. There's a really strong analysis or synthesis part of a literature review. And lastly, it can help you find a gap in the literature that you can focus on. Everyone is looking for this gap in the literature that they can then use their study to fill and so this again can be something that helps you do that, the literature review.

Examination of all the scholarship on a particular topic or field written in narrative form via synthesis .

• Not summary or report
• Not just research that agrees
• Not a list of annotations or organized alphabetically or chronologically
• Not just summary or analysis

Audio: So, again, the purpose of a literature review to break this down a little bit farther is an examination of all of the scholarship on a particular topic or field written in narrative form via synthesis. There's a lot going on there, so were going to unpack this a little bit more.

It's an examination. It's not a summary or a report. You are not just regurgitating what a source says. You are not just reporting about this source. You are examining it. So, what's implied is that you will be working with this source and looking at some of the elements within a source and comparing it to other sources that way. So, it's not just a summary.

It's going to be all the resources within a certain narrowed topic area. Not all research is going to agree. You’re going to have those different voices at the dinner table. One scholar might not agree with another. So, you will highlight where they differ and how that disagreement comes about and what they are disagreeing about.

A topic will be a focus or a narrowed topic. You don't want this to be too broad. If you think about a topic like climate change, if you go into academic search premiere or another database to search for a different journal articles and type in climate change, you’re going to get thousands upon thousands of published articles. So, you need to focus that down so you are really narrowing your topic to focus on a specific conversation within that large umbrella topic area.

It's a narrative, so it's not a list of annotation. Or organized alphabetically or chronologically. You are putting it into writing could be another way to say that it's a narrative. You are not just listing or bulleting; you are bringing these together in paragraph form.

And, lastly, it is not just summary or analysis it’s synthesis, which is a kind of a big word that we use a lot here, synthesis, really the way I think of it is bringing two distinct things together to make a new whole. We’re going to talk about this in another slide. Is synthesis is putting two things together to create something new.

Visual: Slide changes to the following: Literature Review: Organization

Annotated bibliography = Organized by sources

Literature review = Organized by theme

Literature reviews are about synthesis

Audio: Here's our difference again. Annotated bibliography organized by sources. Literature review is not organized by sources; it's organized by themes. Right? So, if you are crafting a literature review, logistically speaking each one of your paragraphs in a literature review should contain more than one source. Part of synthesis is putting these sources in conversation with one another. Right? So, it's kind of hard to have a conversation alone (laughing). So, in a literature review each paragraph should cover a theme that multiple sources approach. And I’m going to explain that a little bit further as well. But again, don't organize your literature review by source; organize it by theme.

What is synthesis ?

• Identifying patterns among sources
• Analyzing strengths/weaknesses of the sources or field
• Comparing and contrasting the authors’ findings
• Interpreting what is known in your field and what is missing

Adding to the conversation

…Although Benson (2015) suggested technical innovations make providing health care easier, Campbell et al. (2014) noted that technology is only helpful if hospital staff are adequately trained on the new system. Thus, adequately training hospital staff is essential to successfully implementing new technology….

Audio: And, again, this brings in the synthesis piece which we will talk about right here. Synthesis. As I mention, bringing two different things together to make a new whole. The example that I like to give here is with chemistry. Synthesizing chemicals. You are taking two chemicals that are completely distinct from one another, they are different, and when you combine them, you’re creating something new. It's not just these two chemicals together now, it is something completely different. It's a new chemical. That is kind of how synthesis works in writing as well.

You’re going to identify patterns among sources. So, I have five sources that all talk about making a grill cheese sandwich. Two of these sources have the same methodology. They say to make a grill cheese sandwich in the same way. This is a theme or pattern within these sources. It would be appropriate then to discuss these two sources together and how they are subtly different in making a grill cheese sandwich.

Your analyzing strengths and weaknesses of a source or field. Comparing and contrasting an authors' findings. As you research in a topic area not every source is going to agree with each other. You will have authors that sometimes very distinctly or drastically disagree with each other. So again, you want to include all of the voices at that dinner party. You want to bring everyone's voice in and give them some time to express their views and relate that to the other views at the table.

You’re going to be interpreting what is known in your field and what is missing. And here's an example of this source synthesis idea. (Reading) Although Benson suggested technical innovations make providing health care easier, Campbell et al. (2014) noted that technology is only helpful if hospital staff are adequately trained on the new system. So, these are the two sources. We have two bits of information here. Benson says this and if the other side of the dinner table Campbell et al., says this, we’re bringing these two ideas together to make a new idea. That's the bolded portion on the slide. Thus, adequately training hospital staff is essential to successfully implement new technology. So, we say Benson says that new technology is makes giving healthcare, makes it easier to provide healthcare. Campbell et al, says it's important that all staff are trained properly on anything. To bring these together it's important to train hospital staff on new technology. It's two pieces that together yield this new point. Okay.

For those of you maybe feel confused or intimidated at this point, synthesis is a pre ‑‑ it's a high order scholarly or intellectual activity. It's something that needs to be practiced. It's a skill that needs to be developed. So, if you are not seeing how sources fit together right away, that's totally fine. You are going to be working with these sources more and these kinds of things will become more clear to you as you research more and deal with sources more. For those starting out, don't be intimidated. You will get it. Synthesis is a muscle that needs to be flexed it’s something that can be practiced and improved upon, so don't get discouraged is what I'm saying.

Yeah. This bit of synthesis adds to this conversation.

…After Kroll (2016) suggested that streamlining workflow using technology would allow for more time with patients, Macijewski (2017) noted that technology is only able to save time when hospital hardware is kept updated.

Is this a strong or weak example of synthesis?

Audio: Okay. We have our first chat here. And essentially, I’ve got a bit of a source, an excerpt from a literature review here. I'm looking for you to in this chat box speak about the strengths or weaknesses of this example, how well or lack thereof maybe are these; is synthesis being brought into this example. I'll give you a couple of minutes to do this. Again, put your answers in the chat box.

[silence as students respond]

Alright for the sake of time here, I’m going to move along. Let’s take a look at this. After Kroll 2017 suggested streamlining workflow using technology allowed for more time with patients... Macjewski (2017) noted that technology is only able to save time when hospital hardware is kept updated. Yeah, this is a, I would say this is an example of weak synthesis or a lack of synthesis at all. I see a couple of you kind of agreed with me in the chat box. I like how one student said it's a weak synthesis and the next student said no synthesis at all (laughing). It’s a little less diplomatic. But you are right, there's no synthesis here. What this is doing is presenting Kroll's idea and then it’s presenting Macijewski’s ideas. These are two separate things. Two voices in the conversation. But what this is forgetting that synthesis piece. Right? Is bringing these two things together. Given that these two ideas are both valid, what does that leave us with. Combining these, how do we make that whole. Here's an example of how that could look.

…After Kroll (2016) suggested that streamlining workflow using technology would allow for more time with patients, Macijewski (2017) noted that technology is only able to save time when hospital hardware is kept updated. Thus, hospitals must invest both in software and IT departments to support and update technology to be effective.

Audio: Again, we have Krolls idea here, we have Macijewski’s idea there. The synthesis that would make this a strong synthesis (laughing), the sentence that would make this a strong synthesis is highlighted in bold here. (Reading) Thus, hospitals must invest both in software and IT departments to support and update technology to be effective.

Yes, so this is bringing these together. Kroll saying technology could streamline this and make for more time with patients. Macijewski is saying the hardware needs to be up‑to‑date. Putting these two things together, hospitals need to make sure the software and the IT departments are supported for technology to be effective. Right? That's the new idea that we have created here.

Kroll isn’t talking about hardware systems within technology. Kroll is talking about how hardware could affect the delivery of services to a patient. Combining these two you have this new thing, new elements.

• Unique organization
• Talk about multiple authors in sections and paragraphs
• Allow authors to “talk to each other”
• Creates narrative form
• Limits organization
• Limits a paragraph to one source
• Doesn’t allow synthesis of sources
• Creates summary or book report feel

Audio: I'll move on. Some kind of do's and don'ts of a literature review and the organization. Do organize this by theme. Says a Unique organization. So, we have a link there can help you with this. You want to talk about multiple authors in the same section and paragraph. Absolutely. You want to allow the authors to talk to each other, to voice their specific ideas. Sure. And you want to create this kind of narrative, this paragraph displaying these authors' ideas.

When you don't do that, when you don't organize this by theme, when you only organize this by author, there's some pretty negative outcomes in terms of the effectiveness of that literature review. This limits your objection. This limit paragraphs to one source. You can only talk about one source at a time. That's not putting them in conversation with one another. Doesn't allow for synthesis of sources. Yeah, you can't create a new whole if you only have one thing. You just have the one thing (laughing). So yeah, that makes it ineffective also. And if you organize this by author, it just creates a summary or book report feel to it.  When really, we need this conversational piece and synthesis of these sources for this to be a true and effective literature review.

Visual: Slide changes to the following: Literature Review: Writing Tips

Use Paragraphs

No required or prescribed headings

Audio: Some general writing tips. Use paragraphs. You are not required or prescribed to use headings here. But as you can see this can be something that can be useful to use headings. You are not required, but it can be useful.

Use headings and comparative terms to direct the reader and organize the literature review

Cue your reader to organization and changing topics

Note subtopics of themes

Comparative Terms

Demonstrate where authors agree or disagree

Highlight your interpretation of the authors’ findings

Audio: A heading can cue a reader to an organization or changing of a topic. You can also use headings to explore subtopics of certain themes. Headings I don’t think are a bad idea within a literature review at all. So, yeah, if it helps you organize your thoughts that way, I would say go for it. This bit on the slide about comparative terms is really important also. The idea here being, and I know it sounds kind of silly, but words matter. Words have meanings, specific meanings, so you need to use a language that shows an accurate relationship between these sources. You want to demonstrate where authors agree and where authors disagree.

So, to give you an example how this could sound, you might use the word similarly to show how one author agrees with another. You might use the phrase on the contrary or conversely to show where one author disagrees with another.

Again, my point here being be careful about the language you use in combining and synthesizing sources, because it does have specific meanings. And if sources disagree, saying something like similarly would kind of be confusing to the reader. So, again, be cognizant of the terms that you are using in comparing these sources. Some mean they are agreeing, some mean they are conceding the point. Some mean that they are flat out disagreeing with another source. So be cognizant and aware of the comparative terms that you are using.

Organization

Note themes & patterns as you read

Use a matrix

Use a software program (like Zotero )

Develop an outline

Stay flexible as research develops

Use general good scholarly writing guidelines:

Effective Paraphrasing

Transitions

Literature Reviews: 5-Part Blog Series

Audio: Some tips here for creating a literature review. In terms of the organization, note the themes and patterns as you read. This is the annotation piece. If you look back at your annotated bibliography you’d say, okay, these three sources and their source summaries have all discussed this one idea, this one narrow idea. That's a theme that can be noted. Use the matrix, the library offers, a resource called the literature matrix, which can really be helpful in organizing your ideas as you compile sources. What this is, is it’s essentially an excel spreadsheet that asks you break down sources by different attributes. Things like sample size, like methodology, theoretical framework that sources are using. There's a link here that’ll get you to that matrix I would highly recommend that, I think it’s a really good resource that Walden provides.

Beyond Walden, is a program called Zotero. Which I’ve heard a lot of students at residency say is really useful, I think it has some added features that can be useful, so if that's something that interests you, go ahead and take a look at that and seek that out.  Developing an outline is important because then you’re taking those themes and you’re saying well I'm going to do one paragraph about this theme and one paragraph about that theme. So that can be useful in reviewing your literature as well. Also, you want to stay flexible as your research develope. This is just strong advice for research in general. Be open to the sources that you find and don't discard a source because you maybe disagree or it doesn't agree with some of your other sources.

In terms of resources, use general good scholarly writing guidelines. Things like Synthesis, effective paragraphing, paragraphs. Transitions are really useful in literature reviews. We have another resource here, literature reviews five-part blog series. That can be a good resource for you if you are compiling a literature review. Again, as with everything with writing, it's about finding what works for you. So, yeah, if you find a matrix or Zotero useful, by all means use that. Find a resource that works well for you is my point here.

Visual: Slide changes to the following: Literature Review: Example Headings

• Introduction
• Historical Context of Continuing Education
• The Need for Continuing Professional Educations in the Human Services
• Professionals’ Views of Continuing Education
• Continuing Education in the Funeral Profession
• Issues Regarding Mandatory versus Voluntary Continuing Education
• Advantages and Disadvantages of Mandatory versus Voluntary Continuing Education
• Formal and Informal Continuing Education
• Differing Methodologies

Audio: Here's is what an outline for a literature review could like look. These are some, potentially examples headings you could use. Introduction, paragraph. Then this author is going to talk about strategy. How different sources approach strategy. Historical context and continuing education. You get it. These are the different themes this author would have identified in the research. Then breaking it down. They’re going to talk about instances where the research they have gathered addresses the specific themes. And how maybe they agree, how maybe they disagree. Again, this is an example outline you can use, that gives you an idea how a literature review can be broken apart.

Visual: Slide changes to the following: Literature Review: Example Paragraph

As Stragalas (2016) argued, sharing specific details about the change will help to eliminate any difficulties. Steele-Johnson et al. (2015) echoed these sentiments when they reported that revealing all of the details about a change process can help those involved better understand and support the change. Steele-Johnson et al. also asserted that a high level of transparency during the change can help those involved prepare for and welcome the change. Similarly, Nahata et al. (2011) showed that transparency through excessive communication can allow for a wider range of acceptance of the change.

What are the strengths and weaknesses of this paragraph?

Audio: In the interest of time, I think I’m going to burn this second chat because I want to leave a little bit of time for questions. But by all means go back in and take a look at that if you downloaded these slides.

Visual: Slide changes to the following: Recap

Annotated Bibliographies

Individual authors/sources

Reference + Annotation

Literature Reviews

Patterns and themes

Annotated Bibliographies (master’s and doctoral students)

Reviewing the Literature and Incorporating Previous Research (doctoral students)

Literature Reviews for Graduate Coursework (master’s students)

Audio: To recap, annotated bibliographies you really focus on an individual author and a source. You have your reference entry and your annotation. All of those refer to one specific source. This is a research tool that's meant to help you compile your research and see maybe how that research fits together. But it's really meant to see, compile research, and see what individual sources are doing, how are they approaching this topic? What did they find, how could they have done that better, how is this useful to me?

In a literature review, from that annotated bibliography, from the research you compiled you need to identify themes and patterns and reorganize that information around those themes or patterns. Under the theme of X, these three authors talk about that and they approach it in a different way. So that paragraph would unpack these three authors view views and some synthesis at the end, that when combined what these things say together, what is important here. That type of thing.

Here’s a resource on annotated bibliographies and here’s a few resources on a literature review. Both are master levels and doctoral level resource there.

Visual: Slide changes to the following: Questions: Ask Now or Later

[email protected] •  Live Chat Hours

Learn More:

Reviewing the Literature and Incorporating Previous Research

(for doctoral students)

Literature Reviews for Graduate Coursework (for master’s students)

Annotated Bibliographies (for master’s and doctoral students)

Make a Paper Review Appointment!

Assist students in becoming better academic writers by providing online, asynchronous feedback by appointment.

Audio : Okay. With that then, I'll ask you again, Claire, any questions you would like me to talk through before we adjourn this webinar?

Claire: Thanks, Michael. I did have a good one which was: Do you recommend working on an annotated bibliography and a literature review at the same time? Or should one or the other potentially come first?

Michael: That is a good one. That's a good question. Well, first and foremost I would point towards this individual thing for different people. Right? If it works well for you to work on them side‑by‑side, I guess I can see a situation in which that might be useful. For me, in my opinion, I think you should do the annotated bibliography first before you do a literature review. Here's why. The literature review, again, it’s really important that you identify these themes and patterns within the research that you have collected. That identifying these themes and patterns informs how your literature review will be ordered and set up and how that synthesis is brought in. So, before you can do that you need to identify these themes. I think that the annotated bibliography as a tool can be really useful in looking at different sources in identifying those themes. I would say, personally, that you do the annotated bibliography before the literature review.

On a broader note, once again it's really about finding what works for you. So, if that's works for you to do them at the same time and to add to individual paragraphs separately, then go for that. That's your method. That's your process. But I would say do the annotated bibliography before the literature review.

Claire: Great. Thanks so much, Michael. I think that's all the questions we have for today. So, thank you for presenting. If you do have questions you can email us at [email protected] or again visit us during our live chat hours. I know that some of the links were not active during this presentation. Adobe Connect has been really finicky with us lately about doing some weird things with links when we transfer it to the presentation mode, but all the links should be just fine in the actual slides. So, if you want to download the slides, you can go to the pod at the bottom it’s right next to Michaels picture there and click slides lit review and annotated bibliography basics.

If you were looking for any of the links that were not functional during this presentation, they will all be active and correct in that slide show itself. I also want it have a quick plug for additional webinars. We do have some recommendations here. You can review them in our archive or check out ones that are coming up in our webinar schedule. And we are happy to review our next literature review as long as it's not for your dissertation itself. If it's for your course work assignments, those are great things to send into the Writing Center. We are here to support you that way as well.

Thank you all for a great presentation. Have a good rest of your day.

(End of webinar)

• Previous Page: Life Cycle of a Paper
• Next Page: Literature Review Panel with the Library and Writing Center
• Office of Student Disability Services

Walden Resources

Departments.

• Academic Residencies
• Academic Skills
• Career Planning and Development
• Customer Care Team
• Field Experience
• Military Services
• Student Success Advising
• Writing Skills

Centers and Offices

• Center for Social Change
• Office of Academic Support and Instructional Services
• Office of Degree Acceleration
• Office of Research and Doctoral Services
• Office of Student Affairs

Student Resources

• Doctoral Writing Assessment
• Form & Style Review
• Quick Answers
• ScholarWorks
• SKIL Courses and Workshops
• Walden Bookstore
• Walden Catalog & Student Handbook
• Student Safety/Title IX
• Legal & Consumer Information
• Website Terms and Conditions
• Cookie Policy
• Accessibility
• Accreditation
• State Authorization
• Net Price Calculator
• Contact Walden

Walden University is a member of Adtalem Global Education, Inc. www.adtalem.com Walden University is certified to operate by SCHEV © 2024 Walden University LLC. All rights reserved.

Literature Reviews

• Getting started

What is a literature review?

Why conduct a literature review, stages of a literature review, lit reviews: an overview (video), check out these books.

• Types of reviews
• 1. Define your research question
• 2. Plan your search
• 3. Search the literature
• 4. Organize your results
• 5. Synthesize your findings
• 6. Write the review
• Artificial intelligence (AI) tools
• Thompson Writing Studio This link opens in a new window
• Need to write a systematic review? This link opens in a new window

Contact a Librarian

Ask a Librarian

Definition: A literature review is a systematic examination and synthesis of existing scholarly research on a specific topic or subject.

Purpose: It serves to provide a comprehensive overview of the current state of knowledge within a particular field.

Analysis: Involves critically evaluating and summarizing key findings, methodologies, and debates found in academic literature.

Identifying Gaps: Aims to pinpoint areas where there is a lack of research or unresolved questions, highlighting opportunities for further investigation.

Contextualization: Enables researchers to understand how their work fits into the broader academic conversation and contributes to the existing body of knowledge.

tl;dr  A literature review critically examines and synthesizes existing scholarly research and publications on a specific topic to provide a comprehensive understanding of the current state of knowledge in the field.

What is a literature review NOT?

❌ An annotated bibliography

❌ Original research

❌ A summary

❌ Something to be conducted at the end of your research

❌ An opinion piece

❌ A chronological compilation of studies

The reason for conducting a literature review is to:

Literature Reviews: An Overview for Graduate Students

While this 9-minute video from NCSU is geared toward graduate students, it is useful for anyone conducting a literature review.

Writing the literature review: A practical guide

Available 3rd floor of Perkins

Writing literature reviews: A guide for students of the social and behavioral sciences

Available online!

So, you have to write a literature review: A guided workbook for engineers

Telling a research story: Writing a literature review

The literature review: Six steps to success

Systematic approaches to a successful literature review

Request from Duke Medical Center Library

Doing a systematic review: A student's guide

• Next: Types of reviews >>
• Last Updated: Mar 21, 2024 11:32 AM
• URL: https://guides.library.duke.edu/lit-reviews

Services for...

• Faculty & Instructors
• Graduate Students
• Undergraduate Students
• International Students
• Patrons with Disabilities

• Harmful Language Statement
• Re-use & Attribution / Privacy
• Support the Libraries

• WESTCHESTER CAMPUS
• Social Media Center
• Directories

ENG 201: Research Introduction, Annotated Bibliography & Literature Review (PLV)

• Research Introduction

Annotated Bibliographies & Literature Reviews

Writing an annotated bibliography, why do we write literature reviews, what are scholarly journals & peer review.

• Strategic Searching
• Locating Sources Online & At Pace
• Citing Your Sources

How are annotated bibliographies and literature reviews related? 

Annotated bibliographies collect sources and present citations along with a summary and analysis that connects the information to your research question. In a literature review , the author synthesizes multiple sources together to present the major themes, arguments and theories around a topic. 

Therefore, an annotated bibliography can provide an opportunity to review and analyze individual sources before o rganizing them around common denominators found across sources. 

Creating an annotated bibliography: 

• Review your assignment to determine how your professor would like your annotated bibliography to look.
• Search ! The "Strategic Searching" and "Locating Sources Online & At Pace" pages on this guide for assistance in locating potential sources. 
• Create the citations for your sources. 
• Write a paragraph for each citation summarizing, analyzing and determining the relevance of that source to your paper.                                                                       Icon by freepik

Examples: 

• University of Wisconsin: Annotated Bibliographies Research Guide This Research Guide page walks through the step by step process of creating an annotated bibliography.
• Rasmussen College: Annotated Bibliography Research Guide Watch the video and see an example of an annotated bibliography.

Literature reviews serve a purpose in research by: 

• Showing the writer's understanding of their topic area including key concepts, terminology, theories and definitions
• Identifying what research has been done in that area
• Finding gaps in the research or current areas of interest to help the writer tweak their own research question, if needed
• Identifying main areas of agreement, disagreement or controversy within the topic area
• Convincing the reader that your research question is significant, important and interesting

You are writing a MAP to the scholarly conversation on your topic.

• Planning and Creating a Literature Review Video Tips for searching, analyzing, and organizing sources for your literature review.

For your Literature Review you will summarize, evaluate, and synthesize, existing scholarship related to your research question. This "scholarship" is found in academic, scholarly, peer-reviewed journals. These differ from magazines and articles written for the general public because scholarly journals are written for researchers and experts in the discipline area. 

Click the link below titled, "Anatomy of a Scholarly Journal Article" to view an  interactive journal article and review what each section means.

You may need a few peer reviewed sources for your literature review. But what does that mean?

Peer-reviewed and refereed publications  include articles that are read and approved by an editor and one or more experts in that field to confirm accuracy of information and the contribution of that information to the scholarly conversation. 

• Anatomy of a Scholarly Journal Article Click to explore what makes up a "scholarly journal article." From the North Carolina State University Library.
• How to Read a Scholarly Article A visual demonstration, from Western Libraries.
• Example of a Scholarly Article
• Example #2 of a Scholarly Journal
• << Previous: Research Introduction
• Next: Strategic Searching >>
• Last Updated: Feb 20, 2024 3:45 PM
• URL: https://libguides.pace.edu/eng201
• © Pace University
• Work at Pace
• Privacy Policy

• How to Prepare an Annotated Bibliography
• East Tennessee State University
• Literature Reviews
• What is an Annotated Bibliography?
• Examples of Annotated Bibliographies

Difference between Annotated Bibliography and Literature Review

Although both types of writing involve examining sources, a literature review attempts to correlate the information and draw connections between the sources.

Examples of Literature Reviews

• Student Example
• Journal Example

Citation Help

• MLA Center The Modern Language Association website can help you cite sources in MLA style.
• APA Style Blog The American Psychology Association can help you cite sources in APA style.
• Chicago Manual of Style Use this site to help you site sources in Chicago Manual of Style.
• Purdue's Online Writing Lab (OWL) Purdue's Online Language Writing Lab contains up-to-date information on MLA and APA styles.

What is a Literature Review?

Literature Review - from The Writing Center at UNC Chapel Hill

A literature review discusses published information in a particular subject area, and sometimes information in a particular subject area within a certain time period. It usually has an organizational pattern and combines both summary and synthesis. A summary is a recap of the important information of the source, but a synthesis is a re-organization, or a reshuffling, of that information. It might give a new interpretation of old material or combine new with old interpretations. Or it might trace the intellectual progression of the field, including major debates.

Organizing a Literature Review

There is not one "standard" for literature reviews but they should include the following:

• Introduction: Gives a quick idea of the topic of the literature review, such as the central theme or organizational pattern.
• Body: Contains your discussion of sources and is organized either chronologically, thematically, or methodologically (see below for more information on each).
• Conclusions/Recommendations: Discuss what you have drawn from reviewing literature so far. Where might the discussion proceed?

Organizing your literature review:

• Chronological: If your review follows the chronological method, you write about your materials according to when they were published. The oldest date is first and the most recent publication date is last.
• By publication: Order your sources by publication chronology, then, only if the order demonstrates a more important trend.
• By trend: A better way to organize sources chronologically is to examine the sources under another trend, such as the history of whaling. Then your review would have subsections according to eras within this period.
• Thematic: Thematic reviews of literature are organized around a topic or issue, rather than the progression of time. However, progression of time may still be an important factor in a thematic review. For instance, a thematic review of material on sperm whales might examine how they are portrayed as "evil" in cultural documents. The subsections might include how they are personified, how their proportions are exaggerated, and their behaviors misunderstood. A review organized in this manner would shift between time periods within each section according to the point made.
• Methodological: A methodological approach differs from the two above in that the focusing factor usually does not have to do with the content of the material. Instead, it focuses on the "methods" of the researcher or writer. A methodological scope will influence either the types of documents in the review or the way in which these documents are discussed.
• << Previous: Examples of Annotated Bibliographies

Call Local Call Toll-Free Text Email Research Help

Call Toll-Free

Things to remember.

Be Selective

Summarize and Synthesize

Keep Your Own Voice

Use Caution When Paraphrasing

Revise, Revise, Revise

Source: Literature Reviews - The Writing Center at UNC Chapel Hill

Things to Clarify

Items to clarify if not in assignment:

• How many sources should be included?
• What types of sources should be included? (scholarly articles, books, websites, etc.)
• Should information be reviewed by a common theme or issue?
• Should subheadings and background information be provided? (i.e. definitions and/or a history?)
• Should the review be in chronological or publication order?
• Last Updated: Aug 14, 2023 10:48 AM
• URL: https://libraries.etsu.edu/guides/howto/lib101annotatedbibliographies

• Library Accounts

Writing a Literature Review

About this guide, what is a literature review, trials and tribulations of writing.

• Planning a review
• Exploring the Literature
• Managing the Review
• Organizing and writing the review

Science Librarian

The guide instructs students on how to write the literature review in scientific research papers. It illustrates the principles and practices that enable students to write a cogent and relevant literature review that frames their research study in terms of structure, scope and content. Using steps delineated in this guide illustrates to the researcher the process of writing a literature review. It allows the reader, when reading the review, to understand the justification for the research study as supported through the literature.. 

The process of writing a literature review encompasses four phases:

1. P lanning the Review.  Provides a strategic roadmap for the writing process. 

2. Exploring the Literature.  Searching the literature for relevant sources for addition into their review.

3. Managing the Literature.  Compiling and evaluating relevant sources for inclusion into the review.

4. Organizing and   Writing the Review.  Involves outlining and writing the literature review.  

A literature review surveys the scholarly literature for relevant sources that address the scope of a research topic. Neither an annotated bibliography, nor a systematic review, it lays the groundwork for justification of the research study by identifying the research problem, formulating the study’s research questions, and defining the objectives of the study.

There are two types of literature reviews. The first type, article literature review, provides a comprehensive coverage of a research topic, problem or area of interest. The second type is a chapter embedded within a research article, which cites relevant literature sources that support the research study findings and discussion. This libguide focuses on how to write a literature review for a research article.

• Next: Planning a review >>
• Last Updated: Jul 3, 2023 4:49 PM
• URL: https://guides.library.unlv.edu/LiteratureReview
• Special Collections
• Architecture Library
• Medical Library
• Music Library
• Teacher Library
• Law Library

Literature Reviews and Annotated Bibliographies

Initial databases for a literature review.

What is a Literature Review?

• How to Write a Literature Review?
• Graduate Research and the Literature Review
• What is an Annotated Bibliography?
• How to Evaluate Sources?
• Citation & Avoiding Plagiarism

The databases listed here are interdisciplinary and suitable for most disciplines. For databases specific to your discipline see our Research Guides  

Academic Search Ultimate  Includes some full text

A great place to start to search for magazine and journal articles on almost all topics. Tip : Check "peer reviewed" box to limit your search to scholarly journals.

Dissertations and Theses   (1861+) Indexes dissertations accepted for doctoral degrees by accredited North American educational institutions and over 200 other institutions. Also covers masters theses since 1962. Starting in the early to mid-1900's, the full text is included for an increasingly comprehensive number of dissertations and theses. 

Google Scholar   Enables you to search specifically for scholarly literature, including peer-reviewed papers, theses, books, preprints, abstracts and technical reports from all broad areas of research. Use Google Scholar to find articles from a widevariety of academic publishers, professional societies, preprint repositories and universities, as well as scholarly articles available across the web

Humanities and Social Science Retrospective   Bibliographic database that provides citations to articles in a wide range of English language journals in the humanities and social sciences for the period 1907-1984.

  JSTOR Includes full text Includes long runs of backfiles of scholarly journals. Subjects covered include Anthropology, Asian Studies, Ecology, Economics, Education, Finance, History, Mathematics, Philosophy, Political Science, Population Studies, and Sociology.

Periodical Archives Online- (1770-1995) Includes full text; Full text archive of hundreds of periodicals in the humanities and social sciences from their first issues to 1995 Allows date-limited searching. Periodical Index Online, 1665 - 1995

"A literature review is an account of what has been published on a topic by accredited scholars and researchers. Occasionally you will be asked to write one as a separate assignment, ..., but more often it is part of the introduction to an essay, research report, or thesis. In writing the literature review, your purpose is to convey to your reader what knowledge and ideas have been established on a topic, and what their strengths and weaknesses are. As a piece of writing, the literature review must be defined by a guiding concept (e.g., your research objective, the problem or issue you are discussing, or your argumentative thesis). It is not just a descriptive list of the material available, or a set of summaries."

--Written by Dena Taylor, Health Sciences Writing Centre and available at http://www.writing.utoronto.ca/advice/specific-types-of-writing/literature-review (Accessed August 8th, 2011)

Writing the Literature Review sites :

  Literature Reviews: UNC - Chapel Hill

Write a Literature Review: UC-Santa Cruz  

Writing a Literature Review: Perdue OWL

Methods Map: Literature Review

What are the goals of creating a Literature Review?

• To develop a new theory
• To evaluate a theory or theories
• To survey what’s known about a topic
• Identify a problem in a field of research 
• Provide a historical overview of the development of a topic

Type of Literature Reviews:

• Mature and/or established topic: Topic is well-known and the purpose of this type of review is to analyze and synthesize this accumulated body of research.
• Emerging Topic: The purpose of this type of review to identify understudy or new emerging research area.
• << Previous: Home
• Next: How to Write a Literature Review? >>
• Last updated: Jan 8, 2024 2:52 PM
• URL: https://libguides.asu.edu/LiteratureReviews

The ASU Library acknowledges the twenty-three Native Nations that have inhabited this land for centuries. Arizona State University's four campuses are located in the Salt River Valley on ancestral territories of Indigenous peoples, including the Akimel O’odham (Pima) and Pee Posh (Maricopa) Indian Communities, whose care and keeping of these lands allows us to be here today. ASU Library acknowledges the sovereignty of these nations and seeks to foster an environment of success and possibility for Native American students and patrons. We are advocates for the incorporation of Indigenous knowledge systems and research methodologies within contemporary library practice. ASU Library welcomes members of the Akimel O’odham and Pee Posh, and all Native nations to the Library.

Module 10: The Research Process—Finding and Evaluating Sources

Annotated bibliographies and literature reviews, learning objectives.

• Describe the structure and value of an annotated bibliography

Annotated Bibliographies

Figure 1 . Annotated bibliographies are helpful when finding sources and determining how that source might be helpful for your paper.

An annotated bibliography is a list of all your sources, including full citation information and notes on how you will use the sources. Writers often create annotated bibliographies as a part of a research project, as a means of recording their thoughts and deciding which sources to actually use to support the purpose of their research. Some writers include annotated bibliographies at the end of a research paper as a way of offering their insights about the sources’ usability to their readers.

College instructors often assign annotated bibliographies as a way to help students think through their sources’ quality and appropriateness to their research question or topic. Although it may take a while to complete the annotated bibliography, the annotations themselves are relatively brief.

Link to Learning

You can  see a sample annotated bibliography from a student if you have not completed an annotated bibliography in the past.

Why Annotated Bibliographies?

Annotated bibliographies are useful for several reasons. If you keep one while you research, the annotated bibliography will function as a useful guide. It will be easier for you to revisit sources later because you will already have notes explaining how you want to use each source. If you find an annotated bibliography attached to one of the sources you are using, you can look at it to find other possible resources.

Constructing Your Citations

The first part of each entry in an annotated bibliography is the source’s full citation. We examine citations in another section of this course, and detailed instructions for creating the citation can be found in the style manual for whatever format (APA, MLA, etc.) your professor wants you to use.

What to Include in Each Annotation

A good annotation has three parts, in addition to the complete bibliographic information for the source:

• a brief summary of the source ,
• a critique and evaluation of credibility, and
• an explanation of how you will use the source in your essay .

Start by stating the main idea of the source. If you have space, note the specific information that you want to use from the source, such as quotations, chapters, or page numbers. Then explain if the source is credible, and note any potential bias you observe. Finally, explain how that information is useful to your own work.

You may also consider including the following information:

• an explanation about the authority and/or qualifications of the author
• the main purpose of the work
• any detectable bias or interpretive stance
• the intended audience and level of reading

Writing the Annotated bibliography

Keep these suggestions in mind as you construct an annotated bibliography:

• a relatively narrow focus:  a relatively narrow research question or a working thesis sentence with a clear angle
• select the sources most related:  skim the sources first; then more carefully read those that seem useful to your research focus.
• summarize the source: reproduce the author’s main ideas in your own words. Be careful to change the wording and the structure as you put the information from the source into your own words.
• analyze the source: ask yourself questions. Is there enough relevant information to address my narrow focus? Does the author delve deeply into the subject as opposed to offering a general overview? What type of evidence does the author use? Does the author use statistical information accurately, to the best of my knowledge?
• evaluate the source’s usefulness  to the narrow focus of your research. Make connections between the source and your focus for your project.
• use the assigned bibliographic style  (usually MLA or APA style) to create the bibliography entry that begins each annotated source on your list.

In most annotated bibliographies, the summary, analysis, and evaluation for each source becomes the body of the annotation for that source. Some annotated bibliographies may not require all three of these elements, but most will. Be sure to consult your instructor, and ask questions if you’re unsure about the required elements within each entry of your annotated bibliography.

Example Annotation

Source: Farley, John. “The Spontaneous-Generation Controversy (1700–1860): The Origin of Parasitic Worms.”  Journal of the History of Biology , 5 (Spring 1972), 95–125.

• Notes: This essay discusses the conversation about spontaneous generation that was taking place around the time that  Frankenstein  was written. In addition, it introduces a distinction between abiogenesis and heterogenesis. The author argues that the accounts of spontaneous generation from this time period were often based on incorrect assumptions: that the discussion was focused primarily on micro-organisms, and that spontaneous-generation theories were disproved by experiments. The author takes a scientific approach to evaluating theories of spontaneous generation, and the presentation of his argument is supported with sources. It is a reliable and credible source. The essay will be helpful in forming a picture of the early 19th-century conversation about how life is formed, as well as explaining the critical perception of spontaneous-generation theories during the 19th century.

Literature Review

The literature of a literature review is not made up of novels and short stories and poetry—but is the collection of writing and research that has been produced on a particular topic.

The purpose of the literature review is to give you an overview of a particular topic. Your job is to discover the research that has already been done, the major perspectives, and the significant thinkers and writers (experts) who have published on the topic you’re interested in. In other words, it’s a survey of what has been written and argued about your topic.

By the time you complete your literature review you should have written an essay that demonstrates that you:

• Understand the history of what’s been written and researched on your topic.
• Know the significance of the current academic thinking on your topic, including what the controversies are.
• Have a perspective about what work remains to be done on your topic.

Thus, a literature review synthesizes your research into an explanation of what is known and what is not known on your topic. If the topic is one from which you want to embark on a major research project, doing a literature review will save you time and help you figure out where you might focus your attention so you don’t duplicate research that has already been done.

Just to be clear: a literature review differs from a research paper in that a  literature review  is a summary and synthesis of the major arguments and thinking of experts on the topic you’re investigating, whereas a research paper supports a position or an opinion you have developed yourself as a result of your own analysis of a topic.

Another advantage of doing a literature review is that it summarizes the intellectual discussion that has been going on over the decades—or centuries—on a specific topic and allows you to join in that conversation (what academics call academic discourse) from a knowledgeable position.

The following presentation will provide you with the basic steps to follow as you work to complete a literature review.

Literature Reviews

annotated bibliography:  a list of your sources for your research, including full citation information and notes on how you will use the sources

literature review:  a summary and synthesis of the major arguments and thinking of experts on the topic you’re investigating

Contribute!

Improve this page Learn More

• Literature Reviews. Provided by : Excelsior College Online Writing Lab. Located at : https://owl.excelsior.edu/research/literature-reviews/ . License : CC BY: Attribution
• Annotated Bibliographies. Provided by : Excelsior OWL. Located at : https://owl.excelsior.edu/research/annotated-bibliographies/ . License : CC BY: Attribution
• Using Your Sources. Provided by : Boundless. Located at : https://courses.lumenlearning.com/boundless-writing/chapter/using-your-sources/ . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike

Reference Guide: Annotated Bibliography vs. Literature Review

• Open Access Journals
• Requesting Items from OneSearch
• Submitting an ILL request manually
• Checking on your Requests/Loans
• Google Scholar
• Faculty Resources
• Primary & Secondary Sources
• Looking up if it is Peer-Reviewed
• Grey Literature
• Videos & Tutorials
• Searching for Empirical Articles
• Impact Factors

Annotated Bibliography vs. Literature Review

Sample literature review handouts.

• Online Writing Lab (OWL) at Purdue University
• Writing Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
• Literature Reviews This guide from the librarians at the University of Pittsburgh offers information and suggestions on writing your own literature review.

Layout comparison

• << Previous: Impact Factors
• Last Updated: Mar 13, 2024 3:37 PM
• URL: https://libraryguides.fullerton.edu/reference

This site is maintained by Pollak Library .

To report problems or comments with this site, please contact [email protected] . © California State University, Fullerton. All Rights Reserved.

Web Accessibility

CSUF is committed to ensuring equal accessibility to our users. Let us know about any accessibility problems you encounter using this website. We'll do our best to improve things and get you the information you need.

• Adobe Reader
• Microsoft Viewers
• Report An ATI Issue
• Accessible @ CSUF

•   [email protected]

Getting Started with Research at Shapiro Library

Writing help.

• SNHU Wolak Learning Center (Campus Students) This link opens in a new window
• SNHU Academic Support (Online) This link opens in a new window

Writing Literature Reviews

What is a literature review.

"A literature review discusses published information in a particular subject area, and sometimes information in a particular subject area within a certain time period. A literature review can be just a simple summary of the sources, but it usually has an organizational pattern and combines both summary and synthesis. A summary is a recap of the important information of the source, but a synthesis is a re-organization, or a reshuffling, of that information. It might give a new interpretation of old material or combine new with old interpretations. Or it might trace the intellectual progression of the field, including major debates. And depending on the situation, the literature review may evaluate the sources and advise the reader on the most pertinent or relevant." Source: The Writing Center at UNC-Chapel Hill. (2013). Literature Reviews. Retrieved from https://writingcenter.unc.edu/handouts/literature-reviews/ This link opens in a new window

Need help writing a literature review?

Check out these resources:

Helpful Books from the Library

Helpful Web Resources

• Literature Reviews (UNC Writing Center) This link opens in a new window
• Learn How to Write a Review of Literature (The Writing Center at the Univ. of Wisconsin) This link opens in
• The Literature Review (Univ. of Toronto) This link opens in a new window
• Write a Literature Review (University Library at Univ. Of California Santa Cruz) This link opens in a new wi
• Literature Reviews (Ithaca) This link opens in a new window
• << Previous: Writing Papers
• Next: APA Annotated Bibliography >>

Annotated Bibliography: Annotated Bibliography vs. Literature Review

• Research Help
• Example of MLA Annotated Bibliography
• Citation Help
• Annotated Bibliography vs. Literature Review

Literature Review vs. Annotated Bibliography

The purpose of a literature review is to provide an overview of existing academic literature on a specific topic and an evaluation of the strengths and weaknesses of the author’s arguments. You are summarizing what research is available on a certain topic and then drawing conclusions about the topic.

An annotated bibliography is a list of resources that you have gathered on a topic that includes an annotation following the reference.  Like a References list, annotated bibliographies gather all resources discovered in the research process in one document. Each citation in the bibliography is followed by an annotation, a summary of that source.

An annotated bibliography is different from a literature review because it serves a different purpose. Annotated bibliographies focus on sources gathered for a specific research project. A literature review attempts to take a comprehensive approach to evaluate all of the research available on a particular question or a topic to create the foundation for a research paper. This review is often incorporated at the beginning of a research paper in its own section but it may also form the thesis for the paper.

Or as the University of North Alabama puts it " An annotated bibliography examines each source based on its relationship to the topic; a literature review draws together multiple sources to examine where they agree or disagree ."

Comparison Chart

Literature Review Example

• << Previous: Citation Help
• Last Updated: Feb 22, 2024 4:22 PM
• URL: https://libguides.sctech.edu/annotatedbib

• UWF Libraries

Literature Review: Conducting & Writing

• Sample Literature Reviews
• Steps for Conducting a Lit Review
• Finding "The Literature"
• Organizing/Writing
• APA Style This link opens in a new window
• Chicago: Notes Bibliography This link opens in a new window
• MLA Style This link opens in a new window

Sample Lit Reviews from Communication Arts

Have an exemplary literature review.

• Literature Review Sample 1
• Literature Review Sample 2
• Literature Review Sample 3

Have you written a stellar literature review you care to share for teaching purposes?

Are you an instructor who has received an exemplary literature review and have permission from the student to post?

Please contact Britt McGowan at [email protected] for inclusion in this guide. All disciplines welcome and encouraged.

• << Previous: MLA Style
• Next: Get Help! >>
• Last Updated: Mar 22, 2024 9:37 AM
• URL: https://libguides.uwf.edu/litreview

McNair Scholars: Annotated Bibliographies vs. Literature Reviews

• Starting Your Search
• Investigate
• Fact-checking AI with Lateral Reading
• Citation Management Tools
• Annotated Bibliographies vs. Literature Reviews

What is the difference between an Annotated Bibliography and a Literature Review?

Annotated Bibliography - an annotated bibliography is a list of citations with brief notes added below each citation summarizing the content of the article cited (the annotation) included. The annotation accompanying a citation may also contain a short evaluation of the article in addition to a summary. 

Literature Review  - a systematic review of the published material, or scholarly writings, on a specific topic or research question that can be part of a scholarly work or a stand-alone product. The primary goal is analysis - and not simply summarization - of these scholarly writings. This analysis serves to provide background information on your topic and detail the connection between those writings and your research question. 

Learn More - Annotated Bibliographies

Annotated bibliographies are:

• Brief - about 150 words or so
• Summarize and evaluate a source
• Are located under the citation in a bibliography or works cited list
• Are distinct from abstracts, which are mostly a condensed description of an article
• Are distinct from literature reviews.
• Purdue OWL's Annotated Bibliography Page Purdue's Online Writing Lab's page on annotated bibliographies has examples of from the major citation styles and more.
• Writing Center's MLA Annotated Bibliography Handout This handout from the Writing Center is a guide to MLA format annotated bibliographies.

Learn More - Literature Reviews

A Literature Review will help you achieve the following:

• Provides background on research topic
• Guides you in detailing or focusing your own research question
• Provides a framework for research or future research - identifying major themes and concepts
• Offers insights on unexplored ideas related to a topic, gaps in the research
• Assists with avoiding repetition of earlier research
• Tests assumptions; may help counter preconceived ideas and remove unconscious bias
• Identifies points of disagreement, or potentially flawed methodology or theoretical approaches

Searching databases such as  Web of Science, Google Scholar,   and  Dissertations & Theses   is the way you are able to discover the research that has been done on any given subject.

There are many resources available to help you understand what a literature review is and how to write one. Here are a few:

• Literature Reviews: An Overview for Graduate Students. A video overview of what a literature review is.
• The Literature Review: A Few Tips On Conducting It Includes an overview and a set of questions to ask of each source included in the review. This guide is hosted on the University of Toronto's Writing Advice website.
• Writing A Literature Review and Using a Synthesis Matrix This tutorial describes a method of notetaking to help you organize the content of your literature review so you can synthesize a coherent presentation of what different authors have said about different parts of your topic. This method may be useful.

• << Previous: Citation Management Tools
• Last Updated: Feb 8, 2024 3:29 PM
• URL: https://guides.library.tamucc.edu/mcnair

Literature Review vs. Annotated Bibliography vs. Research Paper... What's the difference?

Literature Review

The purpose of a literature review is to provide an overview of existing academic literature on a specific topic and an evaluation of the strengths and weaknesses of the author’s arguments. You are summarizing what research is available on a certain topic and then drawing conclusions about the topic. To make gathering your research easier, be sure to start with a narrow/specific topic and then widen your topic if necessary.

A literature review is helpful when determining what research has already been discovered through academic research and what further research still needs to be done. Are there gaps? Are there opportunities for further research? What is missing from my collection of resources? Are more resources needed?

It is important to note that the conclusions described in the literature you gather may contradict each other completely or in part.  A literature review gives the researcher an overview and understanding of research findings to date on a particular topic or issue.

Annotated Bibliography

An annotated bibliography is a list of resources that you have gathered on a topic that includes an annotation following the reference.  Like a References list, annotated bibliographies gather all resources discovered in the research process in one document. Each citation in the bibliography is followed by an annotation a 5-7 sentence paragraph consisting of a summary, an evaluation, and a reflection of that resource.

An annotated bibliography is different from a literature review because it serves a different purpose. Annotated bibliographies focus on sources gathered for a specific research project. A literature review attempts to take a comprehensive approach to evaluate all of the research available on a particular question or a topic to create the foundation for a research paper. 

For more information, please visit the annotated bibliography page of our APA guide.

Research Paper

A research paper presents a single argument/idea on a topic supported by research that you have gathered. Your own thoughts and opinions will be supported by research that you have gathered on your topic. The resources used in your research paper typically support the argument that you are making.

For more information on writing a research paper, check out our Writing guide .

Generally, either an annotated bibliography or a literature review are written first and set the framework for the final product: your research paper. 

• Reading and Writing
• Research and Library
• General Education & Other
• Annotated Bibliographies
• Research Papers
• Last Updated May 14, 2021
• Views 38039
• Answered By Kate Anderson, Librarian

FAQ Actions

• Share on Facebook

Comments (0)

Hello! We're here to help! Please log in to ask your question.

Need an answer now? Search our FAQs !

How can I find my course textbook?

You can expect a prompt response, Monday through Friday, 8:00 AM-4:00 PM Central Time (by the next business day on weekends and holidays).

Questions may be answered by a Librarian, Learning Services Coordinator, Instructor, or Tutor. 

Subject Guides

Literature Review and Evidence Synthesis

• Reviews as Assignments

What is an Annotated Bibliography?

• Narrative Literature Review
• Integrative Review
• Scoping Review This link opens in a new window
• Systematic Review This link opens in a new window
• Other Review Types
• Subject Librarian Assistance with Reviews
• Grey Literature This link opens in a new window

Subject Librarians

Find your Subject Librarian Here

Description : 

An annotated bibliography is a list of citations such as books, articles, and documents (a bibliography) with a brief summary and/or evaluation (annotation) for each citation. The purpose of the annotation is to inform the reader of the relevance, accuracy, and quality of the sources cited. Unlike other types of reviews, annotated bibliographies do not have established standards. Your bibliography will be guided primarily by its purpose and instructor guidelines (for class assignments).

What to cover in an annotation:

• Main focus, purpose, or claim of the work
• The usefulness of the citation to your research topic or goal
• The reliability, trustworthiness and quality of the source
• * Always refer to the requirements of the assignment

The Process: 

• Creating an annotated bibliography involves a concise background explanation, succinct analysis and informed research. 
• Search and collect relevant citations
• Examine and review the articles
• These articles should include a variety of viewpoints, address disagreements and controversies around a research topic
• Cite the works using an appropriate citation style
• Write a brief annotation for each citation

Guidance for Annotated Bibliographies : 

• Purdue OWL: Annotated Bibliographies
• << Previous: Reviews as Assignments
• Next: Narrative Literature Review >>
• Last Updated: Feb 29, 2024 1:20 PM
• URL: https://libraryguides.binghamton.edu/literaturereview
• share facebook
• share twitter
• share pinterest
• share linkedin
• share email

• About the Hub
• Announcements
• Faculty Experts Guide
• Subscribe to the newsletter

Explore by Topic

• Arts+Culture
• Politics+Society
• Science+Technology
• Student Life
• University News
• Voices+Opinion
• About Hub at Work
• Gazette Archive
• Benefits+Perks
• Health+Well-Being
• Current Issue
• About the Magazine
• Past Issues
• Support Johns Hopkins Magazine
• Subscribe to the Magazine

You are using an outdated browser. Please upgrade your browser to improve your experience.

Credit: Mark Smith

A Literary Revival

While many journals of its type have perished owing to budget cuts, the reborn 'hopkins review' defies the odds and continues to champion eminent and emerging writers..

By Aleyna Rentz

T he inaugural 1947 issue of Johns Hopkins University's literary magazine, The Hopkins Review , begins with a poem by then undergraduate John Stephen called "Revaluation":

Mightier than swords, They said- a soothing token Of power's impotence When peace has softly spoken; But blades continue keen, And pens too soon get broken.

These lines speak to the frustration of a young writer who's realized that many things are, in fact, mightier than the pen. Off the heels of World War II, Stephen was probably thinking of land mines and atomic bombs, but his words make me think of money. Mightier than the pen and deadlier than the sword, it's the thing that, only six years later, killed The Hopkins Review .

But in those six brief years, The Hopkins Review had an impressive run. It was established by Writing Seminars founder Professor Elliott Coleman, who felt editorial training and publishing experience were essential for the success of his students. It would become the first literary journal published by a degree-granting creative writing department, setting a precedent for others to come. While Coleman's editorial staff took chances on undergraduates like Stephen, they also solicited work from celebrated poets like E.E. Cummings, Richard Wilbur, and Kenneth Burke. The Hopkins Review launched careers, as well; the Fall 1950 edition included John Barth's first published story, "Lilith and the Lion." Like any cultural institution literary journals are a necessary investment for any society that values the humanities. While putting together the Spring/Summer 1953 edition of the journal, editors Robert K. Burns and H.L. Scharf sensed the end was near and braced readers for the worst. In a foreword titled "Last of the Mohicans?" they warned, "It is entirely possible that this will be the last issue of The Hopkins Review , though that is not a certainty." They were frank about why:

The trouble is finances. Like all literary quarterlies, 'The Hopkins Review' cannot pay its own way. Its revenues during the course of a year amount to something less than the printing costs of a single issue of the magazine. Its subsidy from the university has been $1,000 a year, or just over the cost of one of the four annual numbers. … To say that *The Hopkins Review* is a nonprofit publication would be to belabor litotes. It is not only noncommercial; it is nonsalaried. No contributor has ever been paid for his contribution. Not one of the editors and associate editors has ever received a salary for working on the magazine.

Flipping through the original journals chronologically, one gets a sense of mounting financial unease. In a scholarly publication, I hardly expected to find Mr. Boh, the one-eyed cartoon mascot for National Bohemian beer, but there he was, on the inside covers of every issue from 1950 onward, proclaiming, "Oh boy, what a beer!" By contrast, the previous issues had no ads. Through the years, however, they became ubiquitous: beauty salon and soda fountain ads sandwiched between poems, tear-out forms for mail-ordering the latest paperbacks. Whatever money the editors received for these concessions to capitalism was evidently not enough to sustain the publication.

The 1953 issue was indeed the last issue—for the time being, that is. It would be nearly 60 years before they published the next one.

I f swift and early success, coupled with institutional support, could not guarantee The Hopkins Review 's longevity, it's mind-boggling that any literary publication survives more than a few years. As noted in The Hopkins Review 's farewell letter, these journals are nonprofit enterprises in the most literal sense. They do not make money. The people who start them likely expect to lose a few dollars, a worthy exchange for giving writers space to explore and reinvent. Like any cultural institution—art museums, local theaters, graduate programs in film production—literary journals are a necessary investment for any society that values the humanities.

Typically, the survival of university-based literary publications is not contingent on their ability to make money. Writing Seminars professor and Hopkins Review editor-in-chief emeritus David Yezzi emphasized this fact: "No magazine of this type balances the budget based on subscriptions," he said. "It requires institutional commitment to literature and the humanities." Indeed, subscription fees are almost never enough to cover production costs, let alone pay writers and staff, so magazines usually subsist on a mix of grant and institutional funding. But grant applications aren't always successful, and institutional support has become increasingly unreliable. In 2022, Bard College announced the closure of its elite literary journal, Conjunctions , citing its unsustainable production costs, a move that came on the heels of a $500 million endowment. Perhaps letting these journals die with dignity is better than what the University of Nevada at Las Vegas did to The Believer . In 2017, UNLV bought the popular publication from its parent company, McSweeney's, but in 2022, they decided the production costs were too high, so they sold it to a company called Paradise Media. Replacing the magazine's usual online content—Toni Morrison poems, Bob Odenkirk humor writing—were such headlines as "25 Best Hookup Sites for Flings, New Trysts, and Casual Dating." To introduce the internet's newest salacious search engine optimization farm, the new owners tweeted, "Hi, this is the new owner of The Believer " from a subsidiary company's account called the Sex Toy Collective. The literary community's uproar was so great that Paradise Media quickly sold the journal back to McSweeney's. All this so UNLV could pocket a mere $225,000.

Budget shortfalls in higher education are a nationwide trend. An analysis by the National Education Association revealed that 32 states spent less on public colleges and universities in 2020 than in 2008, with an average decline of nearly $1,500 per student. When faced with uneasy decisions about where to cut costs, universities take aim at less formidable targets—like literary journals and, even more dramatically, sometimes the departments that house them. When the University of Alaska Anchorage defunded its creative writing MFA program, it also ceased funding its publication The Alaska Quarterly Review , a prestigious outlet for poets and fiction writers. Purdue University killed the Sycamore Review after dismantling its highly competitive and esteemed MFA program. And Gettysburg College recently overhauled its budget, choosing to shut down the highly successful Gettysburg Review because it did not, in the administration's view, contribute to "student experience" or "outcomes."

D uring John T. Irwin's 19-year tenure chairing the Writing Seminars at Johns Hopkins, he surely also cared about student outcomes and expectations, but his metrics for measuring them clearly differed from those of today's decision-makers in higher education. From the outset, he was determined to have a campus literary publication for students to work on, arguing that every top-ranking writing program needed one. Ultimately, he would make his vision a reality by reviving The Hopkins Review in 2008, but it took decades—and a lot of fundraising—for him to get there.

Irwin came to Baltimore from Texas, bringing with him a Southern geniality that made him well liked by most everyone. He was known for his infectious humor and boisterous laugh; Writing Seminars Professor Jean McGarry recalls him having "a real knack with people," though students might have been intimidated by him at first glance. He wore a three-piece suit every day to work, liked to spring pop quizzes on unsuspecting students, and could recite countless poems from memory. His choice of office door decoration aptly captured the two poles of his personality: Next to a stoic photograph of Edgar Allan Poe was a banner declaring "Don't mess with Texas."

His first attempt at creating a lit mag resulted in the short-lived Strivers' Row , a joint venture with the English Department that published exactly one issue, in January 1974. It is impossible to know how Irwin, who died in 2019, felt about the fleeting existence of Strivers' Row , but if his next move is any indication, one can guess he was disappointed—that same year, he left Hopkins for the University of Georgia to edit The Georgia Review . His editorial stint there was also brief; according to McGarry, Irwin was dissatisfied by The Georgia Review 's aesthetic.

"He told me it was a very old-fashioned literary magazine," she says. "Even though it was the '70s, it really reflected the '50s. John was interested in modern, very contemporary fiction, critical theory, and psychoanalysis, so he basically went scorched earth. And so, all the oldtimers couldn't publish [in The Georgia Review ] anymore. He told me after a while he had to leave because he had so many enemies. That's what he said. But he came back to Hopkins in 1980 and was hired by John Barth."

Irwin probably felt much more at home working with Barth, a luminary of postmodern fiction, but The Georgia Review must've made an impression on him. Like The Hopkins Review , it debuted in 1947; unlike The Hopkins Review , it never went under. If its traditionalism wasn't inspiring, its longevity must've been.

Why Irwin waited nearly two decades to undertake another editorial venture is a mystery. Nevertheless, in 2005, he announced his intentions to revive The Hopkins Review , which published its first new issue in winter 2008. The three intervening years were spent soliciting funding, securing authors and editors, and coordinating printing with the Johns Hopkins University Press, potentially tricky tasks at which the affable Irwin excelled.

Rob Friedman, A&S '81, who audited Writing Seminars Master of Fine Arts classes during Irwin's tenure and helped relaunch the journal, notes how much the journal's success hinged on Irwin: "I really salute John. He hungered to do this thing, and he did everything he could to make it work. He really pulled in a lot of heavy hitters to give weight to [the journal]. And it is a testament to the respect that people have for John that they gladly came aboard to help him get this thing going."

If the first iteration of the journal ended with a whimper, it returned with a bang. The "new series," as Irwin dubbed it, launched with a mix of fresh and recognizable voices. The first issue included two unpublished stories by the late experimental writer Donald Barthelme, prefaced with a touching note from his longtime friend and peer John Barth. Award-winning poets Mary Jo Salter, John Hollander, and Richard Wilbur appeared in its pages, and future issues would feature venerated literary critics Harold Bloom and Helen Vendler and decorated novelists Alice McDermott and Colm Tóibín. Fifty-five years after the first editors mourned the journal's uncertain future, it was more alive than ever.

Irwin helmed the journal until 2015, when a stroke forced him to scale back his professorial and editorial duties. At that time, poetry Professor David Yezzi was guest editing an issue of the review, a position he hadn't expected to become permanent. But with Irwin unable to continue, Yezzi volunteered to take over.

"I wanted to stabilize everything," Yezzi says, "kind of keep [the journal] on track and grow it from what John had built without doing a major overhaul—extend and innovate within the existing format."

Yezzi upheld the journal's reputation of publishing excellent writers by including the likes of William Logan, Andrew Motion, and Natalie Shapero. Irwin's efforts were not forgotten—when he retired in 2016, the journal honored him with a 36-page Festschrift , a book of tributes for a retiring academic, with contributions (some in poetic form) from 13 of his colleagues.

Yezzi has since passed the torch to poetry Professor Dora Malech, who became editor-in-chief in 2022, just in time for a 15th anniversary redesign. Malech and her editorial team spent a lot of time reimagining the journal for a new generation.

"We had the opportunity to really do some soul-searching," Malech says. "What are we about? What can we be?"

A lot of things, as it turns out. The covers, once uniformly blue and white with a staid black logo, are now full color and full bleed, featuring vibrant art from Baltimore-based artists. Inside, readers will find art folios, visual essays, and a diverse selection of fiction, poetry, nonfiction, and criticism from a roster of esteemed writers including Claudia Rankine, Paul Muldoon, Terrance Hayes, Michael Martone, and John Barth. Each issue also contains works in translation from a variety of languages, from Spanish to Yiddish to Swahili. It's the kind of quarterly that Irwin, wary of traditionalism, would've loved.

The journal is not confined to its physical copies. On its website, readers will find podcast episodes and online exclusive features. In the wider Baltimore community, magazine contributors participate in local literary festivals and gather to recite their work at Bird in Hand, a cafe and bookshop across the street from the Homewood campus.

The new series of the journal has received broad acclaim, especially in the past few years.

Michael Dumanis, editor of Bennington College's literary journal, Bennington Review , praised The Hopkins Review 's precise artistic vision: "I think The Hopkins Review is a terrific reclamation, in a digital age of spontaneous website clicks and a glut of decontextualized literary content floating through the internet, of the value of a bound, tangible, unified art object that carefully selects, compiles, and arranges a spectrum of new fiction, poetry, nonfiction, and criticism through a distinct editorial lens. What you get is a cohesive, engaging volume full of varied literary textures ordered into a beginning, a middle, and an end. Every few months, you can read it like a new book."

Since Malech took over, the number of subscribers has doubled. The editorial team, a mix of undergraduates, graduate students, faculty, and professional editors and writers, cull work from a large pool of unsolicited submissions. Their ability to recognize good writing and collaborate with writers during the editing process has resulted in individual pieces (from each editor-in-chief's tenure) being reprinted in wide-ranging anthologies such as Best American Poetry , Best American Short Stories , Pushcart Prize: Best of the Small Presses , Best Spiritual Literature , and Best Literary Translations . The journal won a 2022 Phoenix Award for Significant Editorial and Design Achievement from the Council of Editors of Learned Journals, with the judges noting: "The design changes have brought this important arts journal into the social stream of twenty-first-century cultural connections."

D espite the larger trend of colleges defunding their literary journals, The Hopkins Review 's future seems secure, in large part because it belongs to an institution that chooses to invest in the humanities. The journal has a three-year partnership with the Alexander Grass Humanities Institute and funding from the Krieger School of Arts & Sciences, in alignment with its five-year strategic plan, Priorities for the Future . Under Dean Christopher Celenza, KSAS outlined four major priorities: revitalize the undergraduate experience, grow the size of our faculty, enhance the graduate student experience, and promote public-facing scholarship and community engagement.

Faculty size aside, this list could easily be presented in answer to any college administrator questioning the purpose of their campus literary magazine. Literary journals might contain the most accessible, and most enjoyable, form of public-facing scholarship, and hands-on editorial work certainly enhances both the undergraduate and graduate experience. Malech called it "one of the more meaningful experiences outside of the workshop that a program can provide for its students."

Phoebe Oathout, A&S '23 (MFA), who is the journal's current senior editor, agreed: "Before I arrived at Johns Hopkins, I was working in a Wyoming town that fluctuated between 20,000 and 30,000 living in it between the seasons," she says. "I knew I wanted to be a writer but had no idea what the publishing process looked like. When I started my MFA, I heard about the opportunity to edit THR through my closest friend in the program, and primarily joined because she said it was fun. Within my first few months as an editor, I learned what the evaluation side of Submittable looks like, the primary tool used by literary magazines to read submissions, along with what helps a piece stand out from the pile. I was given the opportunity to work with an emerging trans author one-on-one about a piece that I really related to, about a nonbinary character in rural North America navigating homelessness. I got to edit work by some of the nation's leading artists, including Terrance Hayes, Claudia Rankine, Vauhini Vara, and Alejandro Varela. It was the kind of responsibility I had no idea I could have access to, and instead only thought I could dream about."

Oathout's experience, coupled with The Hopkins Review 's indelible impact in literary circles, might serve as proof to skeptical college leaders that there is in fact a return on investment in the humanities. For those who remain in doubt, come to the next reading at Bird in Hand. Grab a latte, peruse the bookstore shelves while mingling with Baltimore's literary community, and find a seat among the stacks—maybe you'll change your mind.

"When we had our end-of-year event at Bird in Hand the other day," Malech told me, "I was watching incredible graduate students from Miami, from New Mexico, meeting members of the Baltimore literary community, interfacing, connecting, celebrating one another's work as editors, as writers, getting to know one another, and I just thought that those are the kind of connections that don't show up in a numerical sense. They're qualitative, not quantitative—but they're also, I think, really invaluable."

Aleyna Rentz is a communications specialist at Johns Hopkins University.

Posted in Arts+Culture

You might also like

News network.

• Johns Hopkins Magazine
• Get Email Updates
• Submit an Announcement
• Submit an Event
• Privacy Statement
• Accessibility

Discover JHU

• About the University
• Schools & Divisions
• Academic Programs
• Plan a Visit
• my.JohnsHopkins.edu
• © 2024 Johns Hopkins University . All rights reserved.
• University Communications
• 3910 Keswick Rd., Suite N2600, Baltimore, MD
• X Facebook LinkedIn YouTube Instagram