research theoretical literature review

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 This material may not be published, reproduced, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission.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.

USC Libraries
Research Guides

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper

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

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

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

Importance of a Good Literature Review

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

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

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

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

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

Types of Literature Reviews

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Structure and Writing Style

I. Thinking About Your Literature Review

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

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

The critical evaluation of each work should consider :

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

II. Development of the Literature Review

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

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

III. Ways to Organize Your Literature Review

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

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

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

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

IV. Writing Your Literature Review

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

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

V. Common Mistakes to Avoid

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

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

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

Writing Tip

Break Out of Your Disciplinary Box!

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

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

Another Writing Tip

Don't Just Review for Content!

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

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

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

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

Yet Another Writing Tip

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

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

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

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

<< Previous: Theoretical Framework
Next: Citation Tracking >>
Last Updated: Mar 26, 2024 10:40 AM
URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide

Research Methods

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

Literature Review

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

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

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

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

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

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

A literature review is important because it:

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

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

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

Not an essay

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

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

A literature review serves several purposes. For example, it

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Systematic review or meta-analysis?

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

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

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

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

Not all systematic reviews contain meta-analysis.

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

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

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

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

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

Have a language expert improve your writing

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

Knowledge Base
Dissertation

Theoretical Framework Example for a Thesis or Dissertation

Published on October 14, 2015 by Sarah Vinz . Revised on July 18, 2023 by Tegan George.

Your theoretical framework defines the key concepts in your research, suggests relationships between them, and discusses relevant theories based on your literature review .

A strong theoretical framework gives your research direction. It allows you to convincingly interpret, explain, and generalize from your findings and show the relevance of your thesis or dissertation topic in your field.

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

Sample problem statement and research questions, sample theoretical framework, your theoretical framework, other interesting articles.

Your theoretical framework is based on:

Your problem statement
Your research questions
Your literature review

A new boutique downtown is struggling with the fact that many of their online customers do not return to make subsequent purchases. This is a big issue for the otherwise fast-growing store.Management wants to increase customer loyalty. They believe that improved customer satisfaction will play a major role in achieving their goal of increased return customers.

To investigate this problem, you have zeroed in on the following problem statement, objective, and research questions:

Problem : Many online customers do not return to make subsequent purchases.
Objective : To increase the quantity of return customers.
Research question : How can the satisfaction of the boutique’s online customers be improved in order to increase the quantity of return customers?

The concepts of “customer loyalty” and “customer satisfaction” are clearly central to this study, along with their relationship to the likelihood that a customer will return. Your theoretical framework should define these concepts and discuss theories about the relationship between these variables.

Some sub-questions could include:

What is the relationship between customer loyalty and customer satisfaction?
How satisfied and loyal are the boutique’s online customers currently?
What factors affect the satisfaction and loyalty of the boutique’s online customers?

As the concepts of “loyalty” and “customer satisfaction” play a major role in the investigation and will later be measured, they are essential concepts to define within your theoretical framework .

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

Below is a simplified example showing how you can describe and compare theories in your thesis or dissertation . In this example, we focus on the concept of customer satisfaction introduced above.

Customer satisfaction

Thomassen (2003, p. 69) defines customer satisfaction as “the perception of the customer as a result of consciously or unconsciously comparing their experiences with their expectations.” Kotler & Keller (2008, p. 80) build on this definition, stating that customer satisfaction is determined by “the degree to which someone is happy or disappointed with the observed performance of a product in relation to his or her expectations.”

Performance that is below expectations leads to a dissatisfied customer, while performance that satisfies expectations produces satisfied customers (Kotler & Keller, 2003, p. 80).

The definition of Zeithaml and Bitner (2003, p. 86) is slightly different from that of Thomassen. They posit that “satisfaction is the consumer fulfillment response. It is a judgement that a product or service feature, or the product of service itself, provides a pleasurable level of consumption-related fulfillment.” Zeithaml and Bitner’s emphasis is thus on obtaining a certain satisfaction in relation to purchasing.

Thomassen’s definition is the most relevant to the aims of this study, given the emphasis it places on unconscious perception. Although Zeithaml and Bitner, like Thomassen, say that customer satisfaction is a reaction to the experience gained, there is no distinction between conscious and unconscious comparisons in their definition.

The boutique claims in its mission statement that it wants to sell not only a product, but also a feeling. As a result, unconscious comparison will play an important role in the satisfaction of its customers. Thomassen’s definition is therefore more relevant.

Thomassen’s Customer Satisfaction Model

According to Thomassen, both the so-called “value proposition” and other influences have an impact on final customer satisfaction. In his satisfaction model (Fig. 1), Thomassen shows that word-of-mouth, personal needs, past experiences, and marketing and public relations determine customers’ needs and expectations.

These factors are compared to their experiences, with the interplay between expectations and experiences determining a customer’s satisfaction level. Thomassen’s model is important for this study as it allows us to determine both the extent to which the boutique’s customers are satisfied, as well as where improvements can be made.

Figure 1 Customer satisfaction creation

Of course, you could analyze the concepts more thoroughly and compare additional definitions to each other. You could also discuss the theories and ideas of key authors in greater detail and provide several models to illustrate different concepts.

If you want to know more about AI for academic writing, AI tools, or research bias, make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples or go directly to our tools!

Research bias

Anchoring bias
Halo effect
The Baader–Meinhof phenomenon
The placebo effect
Nonresponse bias
Deep learning
Generative AI
Machine learning
Reinforcement learning
Supervised vs. unsupervised learning

(AI) Tools

Grammar Checker
Paraphrasing Tool
Text Summarizer
AI Detector
Plagiarism Checker
Citation Generator

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.

Vinz, S. (2023, July 18). Theoretical Framework Example for a Thesis or Dissertation. Scribbr. Retrieved March 25, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/dissertation/theoretical-framework-example/

Is this article helpful?

Sarah's academic background includes a Master of Arts in English, a Master of International Affairs degree, and a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science. She loves the challenge of finding the perfect formulation or wording and derives much satisfaction from helping students take their academic writing up a notch.

Other students also liked

What is a theoretical framework | guide to organizing, how to write a literature review | guide, examples, & templates, what is a research methodology | steps & tips, what is your plagiarism score.

University of Texas Libraries

Literature Reviews

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

What is a Literature Review?

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

A literature review should:

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

From S age Research Methods

Purpose of a Literature Review

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

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

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

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

Limitations of a Literature Review

Some of the limitations of a literature review are:

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

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

Meryl Brodsky : Communication and Information Studies

Hannah Chapman Tripp : Biology, Neuroscience

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

Larayne Dallas : Engineering

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

Susan Macicak : Linguistics

Imelda Vetter : Dell Medical School

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

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

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

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

What is a literature review?

A literature review is a critical analysis of the literature related to your research topic. It evaluates and critiques the literature to establish a theoretical framework for your research topic and/or identify a gap in the existing research that your research will address.

A literature review is not a summary of the literature. You need to engage deeply and critically with the literature. Your literature review should show your understanding of the literature related to your research topic and lead to presenting a rationale for your research.

A literature review focuses on:

the context of the topic
key concepts, ideas, theories and methodologies
key researchers, texts and seminal works
major issues and debates
identifying conflicting evidence
the main questions that have been asked around the topic
the organisation of knowledge on the topic
definitions, particularly those that are contested
showing how your research will advance scholarly knowledge (generally referred to as identifying the ‘gap’).

This module will guide you through the functions of a literature review; the typical process of conducting a literature review (including searching for literature and taking notes); structuring your literature review within your thesis and organising its internal ideas; and styling the language of your literature review.

The purposes of a literature review

A literature review serves two main purposes:

1) To show awareness of the present state of knowledge in a particular field, including:

seminal authors
the main empirical research
theoretical positions
controversies
breakthroughs as well as links to other related areas of knowledge.

2) To provide a foundation for the author’s research. To do that, the literature review needs to:

help the researcher define a hypothesis or a research question, and how answering the question will contribute to the body of knowledge;
provide a rationale for investigating the problem and the selected methodology;
provide a particular theoretical lens, support the argument, or identify gaps.

Before you engage further with this module, try the quiz below to see how much you already know about literature reviews.

Research and Writing Skills for Academic and Graduate Researchers Copyright © 2022 by RMIT University is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Literature Review: Types of Literature Reviews

Literature Review
Purpose of a Literature Review
Work in Progress
Compiling & Writing
Books, Articles, & Web Pages

Types of Literature Reviews

Departmental Differences
Citation Styles & Plagiarism
Know the Difference! Systematic Review vs. Literature Review

It is important to think of knowledge in a given field as consisting of three layers.

First, there are the primary studies that researchers conduct and publish.
Second, are the reviews of those studies that summarize and offer new interpretations built from and often extending beyond the original studies.
Third, there are the perceptions, conclusions, opinions, and interpretations that are shared informally that become part of the lore of the field.

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

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

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

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

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

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

<< Previous: Books, Articles, & Web Pages
Next: Departmental Differences >>
Last Updated: Oct 19, 2023 12:07 PM
URL: https://uscupstate.libguides.com/Literature_Review

Buy Me a Coffee

Home » Theoretical Framework – Types, Examples and Writing Guide

Theoretical Framework – Types, Examples and Writing Guide

Table of Contents

Theoretical Framework

Definition:

Theoretical framework refers to a set of concepts, theories, ideas , and assumptions that serve as a foundation for understanding a particular phenomenon or problem. It provides a conceptual framework that helps researchers to design and conduct their research, as well as to analyze and interpret their findings.

In research, a theoretical framework explains the relationship between various variables, identifies gaps in existing knowledge, and guides the development of research questions, hypotheses, and methodologies. It also helps to contextualize the research within a broader theoretical perspective, and can be used to guide the interpretation of results and the formulation of recommendations.

Types of Theoretical Framework

Types of Types of Theoretical Framework are as follows:

Conceptual Framework

This type of framework defines the key concepts and relationships between them. It helps to provide a theoretical foundation for a study or research project .

Deductive Framework

This type of framework starts with a general theory or hypothesis and then uses data to test and refine it. It is often used in quantitative research .

Inductive Framework

This type of framework starts with data and then develops a theory or hypothesis based on the patterns and themes that emerge from the data. It is often used in qualitative research .

Empirical Framework

This type of framework focuses on the collection and analysis of empirical data, such as surveys or experiments. It is often used in scientific research .

Normative Framework

This type of framework defines a set of norms or values that guide behavior or decision-making. It is often used in ethics and social sciences.

Explanatory Framework

This type of framework seeks to explain the underlying mechanisms or causes of a particular phenomenon or behavior. It is often used in psychology and social sciences.

Components of Theoretical Framework

The components of a theoretical framework include:

Concepts : The basic building blocks of a theoretical framework. Concepts are abstract ideas or generalizations that represent objects, events, or phenomena.
Variables : These are measurable and observable aspects of a concept. In a research context, variables can be manipulated or measured to test hypotheses.
Assumptions : These are beliefs or statements that are taken for granted and are not tested in a study. They provide a starting point for developing hypotheses.
Propositions : These are statements that explain the relationships between concepts and variables in a theoretical framework.
Hypotheses : These are testable predictions that are derived from the theoretical framework. Hypotheses are used to guide data collection and analysis.
Constructs : These are abstract concepts that cannot be directly measured but are inferred from observable variables. Constructs provide a way to understand complex phenomena.
Models : These are simplified representations of reality that are used to explain, predict, or control a phenomenon.

How to Write Theoretical Framework

A theoretical framework is an essential part of any research study or paper, as it helps to provide a theoretical basis for the research and guide the analysis and interpretation of the data. Here are some steps to help you write a theoretical framework:

Identify the key concepts and variables : Start by identifying the main concepts and variables that your research is exploring. These could include things like motivation, behavior, attitudes, or any other relevant concepts.
Review relevant literature: Conduct a thorough review of the existing literature in your field to identify key theories and ideas that relate to your research. This will help you to understand the existing knowledge and theories that are relevant to your research and provide a basis for your theoretical framework.
Develop a conceptual framework : Based on your literature review, develop a conceptual framework that outlines the key concepts and their relationships. This framework should provide a clear and concise overview of the theoretical perspective that underpins your research.
Identify hypotheses and research questions: Based on your conceptual framework, identify the hypotheses and research questions that you want to test or explore in your research.
Test your theoretical framework: Once you have developed your theoretical framework, test it by applying it to your research data. This will help you to identify any gaps or weaknesses in your framework and refine it as necessary.
Write up your theoretical framework: Finally, write up your theoretical framework in a clear and concise manner, using appropriate terminology and referencing the relevant literature to support your arguments.

Theoretical Framework Examples

Here are some examples of theoretical frameworks:

Social Learning Theory : This framework, developed by Albert Bandura, suggests that people learn from their environment, including the behaviors of others, and that behavior is influenced by both external and internal factors.
Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs : Abraham Maslow proposed that human needs are arranged in a hierarchy, with basic physiological needs at the bottom, followed by safety, love and belonging, esteem, and self-actualization at the top. This framework has been used in various fields, including psychology and education.
Ecological Systems Theory : This framework, developed by Urie Bronfenbrenner, suggests that a person’s development is influenced by the interaction between the individual and the various environments in which they live, such as family, school, and community.
Feminist Theory: This framework examines how gender and power intersect to influence social, cultural, and political issues. It emphasizes the importance of understanding and challenging systems of oppression.
Cognitive Behavioral Theory: This framework suggests that our thoughts, beliefs, and attitudes influence our behavior, and that changing our thought patterns can lead to changes in behavior and emotional responses.
Attachment Theory: This framework examines the ways in which early relationships with caregivers shape our later relationships and attachment styles.
Critical Race Theory : This framework examines how race intersects with other forms of social stratification and oppression to perpetuate inequality and discrimination.

When to Have A Theoretical Framework

Following are some situations When to Have A Theoretical Framework:

A theoretical framework should be developed when conducting research in any discipline, as it provides a foundation for understanding the research problem and guiding the research process.
A theoretical framework is essential when conducting research on complex phenomena, as it helps to organize and structure the research questions, hypotheses, and findings.
A theoretical framework should be developed when the research problem requires a deeper understanding of the underlying concepts and principles that govern the phenomenon being studied.
A theoretical framework is particularly important when conducting research in social sciences, as it helps to explain the relationships between variables and provides a framework for testing hypotheses.
A theoretical framework should be developed when conducting research in applied fields, such as engineering or medicine, as it helps to provide a theoretical basis for the development of new technologies or treatments.
A theoretical framework should be developed when conducting research that seeks to address a specific gap in knowledge, as it helps to define the problem and identify potential solutions.
A theoretical framework is also important when conducting research that involves the analysis of existing theories or concepts, as it helps to provide a framework for comparing and contrasting different theories and concepts.
A theoretical framework should be developed when conducting research that seeks to make predictions or develop generalizations about a particular phenomenon, as it helps to provide a basis for evaluating the accuracy of these predictions or generalizations.
Finally, a theoretical framework should be developed when conducting research that seeks to make a contribution to the field, as it helps to situate the research within the broader context of the discipline and identify its significance.

Purpose of Theoretical Framework

The purposes of a theoretical framework include:

Providing a conceptual framework for the study: A theoretical framework helps researchers to define and clarify the concepts and variables of interest in their research. It enables researchers to develop a clear and concise definition of the problem, which in turn helps to guide the research process.
Guiding the research design: A theoretical framework can guide the selection of research methods, data collection techniques, and data analysis procedures. By outlining the key concepts and assumptions underlying the research questions, the theoretical framework can help researchers to identify the most appropriate research design for their study.
Supporting the interpretation of research findings: A theoretical framework provides a framework for interpreting the research findings by helping researchers to make connections between their findings and existing theory. It enables researchers to identify the implications of their findings for theory development and to assess the generalizability of their findings.
Enhancing the credibility of the research: A well-developed theoretical framework can enhance the credibility of the research by providing a strong theoretical foundation for the study. It demonstrates that the research is based on a solid understanding of the relevant theory and that the research questions are grounded in a clear conceptual framework.
Facilitating communication and collaboration: A theoretical framework provides a common language and conceptual framework for researchers, enabling them to communicate and collaborate more effectively. It helps to ensure that everyone involved in the research is working towards the same goals and is using the same concepts and definitions.

Characteristics of Theoretical Framework

Some of the characteristics of a theoretical framework include:

Conceptual clarity: The concepts used in the theoretical framework should be clearly defined and understood by all stakeholders.
Logical coherence : The framework should be internally consistent, with each concept and assumption logically connected to the others.
Empirical relevance: The framework should be based on empirical evidence and research findings.
Parsimony : The framework should be as simple as possible, without sacrificing its ability to explain the phenomenon in question.
Flexibility : The framework should be adaptable to new findings and insights.
Testability : The framework should be testable through research, with clear hypotheses that can be falsified or supported by data.
Applicability : The framework should be useful for practical applications, such as designing interventions or policies.

Advantages of Theoretical Framework

Here are some of the advantages of having a theoretical framework:

Provides a clear direction : A theoretical framework helps researchers to identify the key concepts and variables they need to study and the relationships between them. This provides a clear direction for the research and helps researchers to focus their efforts and resources.
Increases the validity of the research: A theoretical framework helps to ensure that the research is based on sound theoretical principles and concepts. This increases the validity of the research by ensuring that it is grounded in established knowledge and is not based on arbitrary assumptions.
Enables comparisons between studies : A theoretical framework provides a common language and set of concepts that researchers can use to compare and contrast their findings. This helps to build a cumulative body of knowledge and allows researchers to identify patterns and trends across different studies.
Helps to generate hypotheses: A theoretical framework provides a basis for generating hypotheses about the relationships between different concepts and variables. This can help to guide the research process and identify areas that require further investigation.
Facilitates communication: A theoretical framework provides a common language and set of concepts that researchers can use to communicate their findings to other researchers and to the wider community. This makes it easier for others to understand the research and its implications.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

How to Cite Research Paper – All Formats and...

Data Collection – Methods Types and Examples

Delimitations in Research – Types, Examples and...

Research Paper Format – Types, Examples and...

Research Process – Steps, Examples and Tips

Research Design – Types, Methods and Examples

A Step-by-Step Guide to Writing a Stellar Literature Review (with Help from AI)

Aren’t all of us mini versions of Sherlock Holmes when browsing data and archives for a research piece? As we go through the process, a comprehensive literature review is an essential toolkit to make your research shine.

A literature review consists of scholarly sources that validate the content. Its primary objective is to offer a concise summary of the research and to let you explore relevant theories and methodologies. Through this review, you can identify gaps in the existing research and bridge them with your contribution.

The real challenge is how to write an excellent literature review. Let’s learn.

What is the purpose of a literature review?

A literature review is an introduction to your research. It helps you put your perspective to the table, along with a summary of the theme.

What does my literature review communicate?

Explanation of your research: how the information was collected, the research method, the justification of the chosen data sources, and an overview of the data analysis.
Framework: the journey from where the concept began and how it is presented.
Connects the previous and current research:

It presents the broader scope of your research by connecting it to the existing data and debates and underlining how your content fits the prevailing studies.

In an era of information overload, a literature review must be well-structured.

Let’s learn all about the structure and style of a literature review that’ll help you strengthen your research.

Literature review– structure and style

Begin with a question and end it with the solution– the key to structuring a literature review. It resembles an essay’s format, with the first paragraph introducing the readers to the topic and the following explaining the research in-depth.

The conclusion reiterates the question and summarizes the overall insights of your research. There’s no word count restriction. —it depends on the type of research. For example, a dissertation demands lengthy work, whereas a short paper needs a few pages.

In a literature review, maintaining high quality is vital, with a focus on academic writing style. Informal language should be avoided in favor of a more formal tone.

The content avoids contractions, clearly differentiating between previous and current research through the use of past and present tense. Wordtune assists in establishing a formal tone, enhancing your work with pertinent suggestions. This AI-powered tool ensures your writing remains genuine, lucid, and engaging.

The option of refining the tonality offers multiple possibilities for rephrasing a single sentence. Thus, pick the best and keep writing.

Get Wordtune for free > Get Wordtune for free >

Your friendly step-by-step guide to writing a literary review (with help from AI)

Do you find it challenging to begin the literature review? Don’t worry! We’re here to get you started with our step-by-step guide.

1. Narrow down the research scope

Simply begin with the question: What am I answering through my research?

Whether it’s cooking or painting, the real challenge is the prep-up for it rather than performing the task. Once you’re done, it smoothly progresses. Similarly, for your literature review, prepare the groundwork by narrowing down the research scope.

Browse and scoop out relevant data inclining well with your research. While you can’t cover every aspect of your research, pick a topic that isn’t too narrow nor too broad to keep your literature review well-balanced.

2. Hunt relevant literature

The next question: Does this data align with the issue I’m trying to address?

As you review sources of information, hunt out the best ones. Determine which findings help in offering a focused insight on your topic. The best way to pick primary sources is to opt for the ones featured in reliable publications. You can also choose secondary sources from other researchers from a reasonable time frame and a relevant background.

For example, if your research focuses on the Historical Architecture of 18th-century Europe, the first-hand accounts and surveys from the past would hold more weight than the new-age publications.

3. Observe the themes and patterns in sources

Next comes: What is the core viewpoint in most of the research? Has it stayed constant over time, or have the authors differed in their points of view?

Ensure to scoop out the essential aspects of what each source represents. Once you have collected all this information, combine it and add your interpretations at the end. This process is known as synthesis.

Synthesize ideas by combining arguments, findings and forming your new version.

4. Generate an outline

The next question: How can I organize my review effectively? When navigating multiple data sources, you must have noticed a structure throughout the research. Develop an outline to make the process easier. An outline is a skeletal format of the review, helping you connect the information more strategically.

Here are the three different ways to organize an outline– Chronologically, Thematically, or by Methodology.You can develop the outline chronologically, starting from the older sources and leading to the latest pieces. Another way of organizing is to thematically divide the sections and discuss each under the designated sub-heading.

You can even organize it per the research methods used by the respective authors. The choice of outline depends on the subject. For example, in the case of a science paper, you can divide the information into sections like introduction, types of equipment, method, procedure, findings, etc. In contrast, it’s best to present it in divisions based on timelines like Ancient, Middle Ages, Industrial revolutions, etc., for a history paper.

If you’re confused about how to structure the data, work with Wordtune.

With the Generate with AI feature, you can mention your research topic and let Wordtune curate a comprehensive outline for your study.

Having a precise prompt is the key to getting the best results.

5. Start filling!

Your next question must be: Am I ready to compose all the parts of the literature review?

Once you’re ready with the basic outline and relevant sources, start filling in the data. Go for an introductory paragraph first to ensure your readers understand the topic and how you will present it. Ensure you clearly explain the section in the first sentence.

However, if beginning from the first paragraph seems intimidating, don’t worry! Add the main body content to the sub-headings, then jump to the introduction.

Add headings wherever possible to make it more straightforward and guide your readers logically through different sources. Lastly, conclude your study by presenting a key takeaway and summarizing your findings. To make your task easier, work with Wordtune. It helps align your content with the desired tone and refine the structure.

6. Give attention to detail and edit

The last question: Am I satisfied with the language and content written in the literature review? Is it easy to understand?

Once you’re done writing the first draft of a literature review, it’s time to refine it. Take time between writing and reading the draft to ensure a fresh perspective. It makes it easier to spot errors when you disconnect from the content for some time. Start by looking at the document from a bird's eye to ensure the formatting and structure are in order.

After reviewing the content format, you must thoroughly check your work for grammar, spelling, and punctuation. One of the best approaches to editing and proofreading is to use Wordtune . It helps simplify complex sentences, enhance the content quality, and gain prowess over the tonality.

The dos and don’ts of writing a literature review

Writing a stellar literature review requires following a few dos and don'ts. Just like Sherlock Holmes would never overlook a hint, you must pay attention to every minute detail while writing a perfect narrative. To help you write, below are some dos and don'ts to remember.

Composing a literature review demands a holistic research summary, each part exhibiting your understanding and approach. As you write the content, make sure to cover the following points:

Keep a historical background of the field of research. Highlight the relevant relation between the old studies and your new research.
Discuss the core issue, question, and debate of your topic.
Theories lay the foundation of research. While you’re writing a literature review, make sure to add relevant concepts and ideas to support your statements.
Another critical thing to keep in mind is to define complex terminologies. It helps the readers understand the content with better clarity.

Examples of comprehensive literature reviews

Aren’t good examples the best way to understand a subject? Let’s look into a few examples of literature reviews and analyze what makes them well-written.

1. Critical Thinking and Transferability: A Review of the Literature (Gwendolyn Reece)

An overview of scholarly sources is included in the literature review, which explores critical thinking in American education. The introduction stating the subject’s importance makes it a winning literature review. Following the introduction is a well-defined purpose that highlights the importance of research.

As one keeps reading, there is more clarity on the pros and cons of the research. By dividing information into parts with relevant subheadings, the author breaks a lengthy literature review into manageable chunks, defining the overall structure.

Along with other studies and presented perspectives, the author also expresses her opinion. It is presented with minimal usage of ‘I,’ keeping it person-poised yet general. Toward the conclusion, the author again offers an overview of the study. A summary is further strengthened by presenting suggestions for future research as well.

2. The Use of Technology in English Language Learning: A Literature Review

This literature review is thematically organized on how technology affects language acquisition. The study begins with an introduction to the topic with well-cited sources. It presents the views of different studies to help readers get a sense of different perspectives. After giving these perspectives, the author offers a personalized opinion.

One of the critical aspects that makes this a good literature review is a dedicated paragraph for definitions. It helps readers proceed further with a clear understanding of the crucial terminologies. There’s a comparison of the modern and previous studies and approaches to give an overall picture of the research.

Once the main body is composed, the author integrates recommendations for action-based tips. Thus, the literature review isn’t just summarizing the sources but offering actions relevant to the topics. Finally, the concluding paragraph has a brief overview with key takeaways.

Wordtune: your writing buddy!

A literature review demands the right balance of language and clarity. You must refine the content to achieve a formal tone and clear structure. Do you know what will help you the most? Wordtune !.

The real-time grammar checker leaves no scope for errors and lets you retain precision in writing. This writing companion is all you need for stress-free working and comprehensive literature review development.

Let the narrative begin

A literary review isn't just about summarizing sources; it's about seamlessly bringing your perspective to the table. Always remember to set a narrative for added interest and a brilliant composition. With structure and style being the pillars of a stellar literature review, work with Wordtune to ensure zero compromises on the quality.

Share This Article:

How I Turned Clutter into Cash: 10 Proven Instagram Copywriting Hacks

How to Write a Wikipedia Page So It’ll Get Approved

6 Steps to Choosing the Right Social Media Platform for Your Audience

Looking for fresh content, thank you your submission has been received.

An official website of the United States government

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

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

Publications
Account settings
Browse Titles

NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

Lau F, Kuziemsky C, editors. Handbook of eHealth Evaluation: An Evidence-based Approach [Internet]. Victoria (BC): University of Victoria; 2017 Feb 27.

Cover of Handbook of eHealth Evaluation: An Evidence-based Approach

Handbook of eHealth Evaluation: An Evidence-based Approach [Internet].

Chapter 9 methods for literature reviews.

Guy Paré and Spyros Kitsiou .

9.1. Introduction

Literature reviews play a critical role in scholarship because science remains, first and foremost, a cumulative endeavour ( vom Brocke et al., 2009 ). As in any academic discipline, rigorous knowledge syntheses are becoming indispensable in keeping up with an exponentially growing eHealth literature, assisting practitioners, academics, and graduate students in finding, evaluating, and synthesizing the contents of many empirical and conceptual papers. Among other methods, literature reviews are essential for: (a) identifying what has been written on a subject or topic; (b) determining the extent to which a specific research area reveals any interpretable trends or patterns; (c) aggregating empirical findings related to a narrow research question to support evidence-based practice; (d) generating new frameworks and theories; and (e) identifying topics or questions requiring more investigation ( Paré, Trudel, Jaana, & Kitsiou, 2015 ).

Literature reviews can take two major forms. The most prevalent one is the “literature review” or “background” section within a journal paper or a chapter in a graduate thesis. This section synthesizes the extant literature and usually identifies the gaps in knowledge that the empirical study addresses ( Sylvester, Tate, & Johnstone, 2013 ). It may also provide a theoretical foundation for the proposed study, substantiate the presence of the research problem, justify the research as one that contributes something new to the cumulated knowledge, or validate the methods and approaches for the proposed study ( Hart, 1998 ; Levy & Ellis, 2006 ).

The second form of literature review, which is the focus of this chapter, constitutes an original and valuable work of research in and of itself ( Paré et al., 2015 ). Rather than providing a base for a researcher’s own work, it creates a solid starting point for all members of the community interested in a particular area or topic ( Mulrow, 1987 ). The so-called “review article” is a journal-length paper which has an overarching purpose to synthesize the literature in a field, without collecting or analyzing any primary data ( Green, Johnson, & Adams, 2006 ).

When appropriately conducted, review articles represent powerful information sources for practitioners looking for state-of-the art evidence to guide their decision-making and work practices ( Paré et al., 2015 ). Further, high-quality reviews become frequently cited pieces of work which researchers seek out as a first clear outline of the literature when undertaking empirical studies ( Cooper, 1988 ; Rowe, 2014 ). Scholars who track and gauge the impact of articles have found that review papers are cited and downloaded more often than any other type of published article ( Cronin, Ryan, & Coughlan, 2008 ; Montori, Wilczynski, Morgan, Haynes, & Hedges, 2003 ; Patsopoulos, Analatos, & Ioannidis, 2005 ). The reason for their popularity may be the fact that reading the review enables one to have an overview, if not a detailed knowledge of the area in question, as well as references to the most useful primary sources ( Cronin et al., 2008 ). Although they are not easy to conduct, the commitment to complete a review article provides a tremendous service to one’s academic community ( Paré et al., 2015 ; Petticrew & Roberts, 2006 ). Most, if not all, peer-reviewed journals in the fields of medical informatics publish review articles of some type.

The main objectives of this chapter are fourfold: (a) to provide an overview of the major steps and activities involved in conducting a stand-alone literature review; (b) to describe and contrast the different types of review articles that can contribute to the eHealth knowledge base; (c) to illustrate each review type with one or two examples from the eHealth literature; and (d) to provide a series of recommendations for prospective authors of review articles in this domain.

9.2. Overview of the Literature Review Process and Steps

As explained in Templier and Paré (2015) , there are six generic steps involved in conducting a review article:

formulating the research question(s) and objective(s),
searching the extant literature,
screening for inclusion,
assessing the quality of primary studies,
extracting data, and
analyzing data.

Although these steps are presented here in sequential order, one must keep in mind that the review process can be iterative and that many activities can be initiated during the planning stage and later refined during subsequent phases ( Finfgeld-Connett & Johnson, 2013 ; Kitchenham & Charters, 2007 ).

Formulating the research question(s) and objective(s): As a first step, members of the review team must appropriately justify the need for the review itself ( Petticrew & Roberts, 2006 ), identify the review’s main objective(s) ( Okoli & Schabram, 2010 ), and define the concepts or variables at the heart of their synthesis ( Cooper & Hedges, 2009 ; Webster & Watson, 2002 ). Importantly, they also need to articulate the research question(s) they propose to investigate ( Kitchenham & Charters, 2007 ). In this regard, we concur with Jesson, Matheson, and Lacey (2011) that clearly articulated research questions are key ingredients that guide the entire review methodology; they underscore the type of information that is needed, inform the search for and selection of relevant literature, and guide or orient the subsequent analysis. Searching the extant literature: The next step consists of searching the literature and making decisions about the suitability of material to be considered in the review ( Cooper, 1988 ). There exist three main coverage strategies. First, exhaustive coverage means an effort is made to be as comprehensive as possible in order to ensure that all relevant studies, published and unpublished, are included in the review and, thus, conclusions are based on this all-inclusive knowledge base. The second type of coverage consists of presenting materials that are representative of most other works in a given field or area. Often authors who adopt this strategy will search for relevant articles in a small number of top-tier journals in a field ( Paré et al., 2015 ). In the third strategy, the review team concentrates on prior works that have been central or pivotal to a particular topic. This may include empirical studies or conceptual papers that initiated a line of investigation, changed how problems or questions were framed, introduced new methods or concepts, or engendered important debate ( Cooper, 1988 ). Screening for inclusion: The following step consists of evaluating the applicability of the material identified in the preceding step ( Levy & Ellis, 2006 ; vom Brocke et al., 2009 ). Once a group of potential studies has been identified, members of the review team must screen them to determine their relevance ( Petticrew & Roberts, 2006 ). A set of predetermined rules provides a basis for including or excluding certain studies. This exercise requires a significant investment on the part of researchers, who must ensure enhanced objectivity and avoid biases or mistakes. As discussed later in this chapter, for certain types of reviews there must be at least two independent reviewers involved in the screening process and a procedure to resolve disagreements must also be in place ( Liberati et al., 2009 ; Shea et al., 2009 ). Assessing the quality of primary studies: In addition to screening material for inclusion, members of the review team may need to assess the scientific quality of the selected studies, that is, appraise the rigour of the research design and methods. Such formal assessment, which is usually conducted independently by at least two coders, helps members of the review team refine which studies to include in the final sample, determine whether or not the differences in quality may affect their conclusions, or guide how they analyze the data and interpret the findings ( Petticrew & Roberts, 2006 ). Ascribing quality scores to each primary study or considering through domain-based evaluations which study components have or have not been designed and executed appropriately makes it possible to reflect on the extent to which the selected study addresses possible biases and maximizes validity ( Shea et al., 2009 ). Extracting data: The following step involves gathering or extracting applicable information from each primary study included in the sample and deciding what is relevant to the problem of interest ( Cooper & Hedges, 2009 ). Indeed, the type of data that should be recorded mainly depends on the initial research questions ( Okoli & Schabram, 2010 ). However, important information may also be gathered about how, when, where and by whom the primary study was conducted, the research design and methods, or qualitative/quantitative results ( Cooper & Hedges, 2009 ). Analyzing and synthesizing data : As a final step, members of the review team must collate, summarize, aggregate, organize, and compare the evidence extracted from the included studies. The extracted data must be presented in a meaningful way that suggests a new contribution to the extant literature ( Jesson et al., 2011 ). Webster and Watson (2002) warn researchers that literature reviews should be much more than lists of papers and should provide a coherent lens to make sense of extant knowledge on a given topic. There exist several methods and techniques for synthesizing quantitative (e.g., frequency analysis, meta-analysis) and qualitative (e.g., grounded theory, narrative analysis, meta-ethnography) evidence ( Dixon-Woods, Agarwal, Jones, Young, & Sutton, 2005 ; Thomas & Harden, 2008 ).

9.3. Types of Review Articles and Brief Illustrations

EHealth researchers have at their disposal a number of approaches and methods for making sense out of existing literature, all with the purpose of casting current research findings into historical contexts or explaining contradictions that might exist among a set of primary research studies conducted on a particular topic. Our classification scheme is largely inspired from Paré and colleagues’ (2015) typology. Below we present and illustrate those review types that we feel are central to the growth and development of the eHealth domain.

9.3.1. Narrative Reviews

The narrative review is the “traditional” way of reviewing the extant literature and is skewed towards a qualitative interpretation of prior knowledge ( Sylvester et al., 2013 ). Put simply, a narrative review attempts to summarize or synthesize what has been written on a particular topic but does not seek generalization or cumulative knowledge from what is reviewed ( Davies, 2000 ; Green et al., 2006 ). Instead, the review team often undertakes the task of accumulating and synthesizing the literature to demonstrate the value of a particular point of view ( Baumeister & Leary, 1997 ). As such, reviewers may selectively ignore or limit the attention paid to certain studies in order to make a point. In this rather unsystematic approach, the selection of information from primary articles is subjective, lacks explicit criteria for inclusion and can lead to biased interpretations or inferences ( Green et al., 2006 ). There are several narrative reviews in the particular eHealth domain, as in all fields, which follow such an unstructured approach ( Silva et al., 2015 ; Paul et al., 2015 ).

Despite these criticisms, this type of review can be very useful in gathering together a volume of literature in a specific subject area and synthesizing it. As mentioned above, its primary purpose is to provide the reader with a comprehensive background for understanding current knowledge and highlighting the significance of new research ( Cronin et al., 2008 ). Faculty like to use narrative reviews in the classroom because they are often more up to date than textbooks, provide a single source for students to reference, and expose students to peer-reviewed literature ( Green et al., 2006 ). For researchers, narrative reviews can inspire research ideas by identifying gaps or inconsistencies in a body of knowledge, thus helping researchers to determine research questions or formulate hypotheses. Importantly, narrative reviews can also be used as educational articles to bring practitioners up to date with certain topics of issues ( Green et al., 2006 ).

Recently, there have been several efforts to introduce more rigour in narrative reviews that will elucidate common pitfalls and bring changes into their publication standards. Information systems researchers, among others, have contributed to advancing knowledge on how to structure a “traditional” review. For instance, Levy and Ellis (2006) proposed a generic framework for conducting such reviews. Their model follows the systematic data processing approach comprised of three steps, namely: (a) literature search and screening; (b) data extraction and analysis; and (c) writing the literature review. They provide detailed and very helpful instructions on how to conduct each step of the review process. As another methodological contribution, vom Brocke et al. (2009) offered a series of guidelines for conducting literature reviews, with a particular focus on how to search and extract the relevant body of knowledge. Last, Bandara, Miskon, and Fielt (2011) proposed a structured, predefined and tool-supported method to identify primary studies within a feasible scope, extract relevant content from identified articles, synthesize and analyze the findings, and effectively write and present the results of the literature review. We highly recommend that prospective authors of narrative reviews consult these useful sources before embarking on their work.

Darlow and Wen (2015) provide a good example of a highly structured narrative review in the eHealth field. These authors synthesized published articles that describe the development process of mobile health ( m-health ) interventions for patients’ cancer care self-management. As in most narrative reviews, the scope of the research questions being investigated is broad: (a) how development of these systems are carried out; (b) which methods are used to investigate these systems; and (c) what conclusions can be drawn as a result of the development of these systems. To provide clear answers to these questions, a literature search was conducted on six electronic databases and Google Scholar . The search was performed using several terms and free text words, combining them in an appropriate manner. Four inclusion and three exclusion criteria were utilized during the screening process. Both authors independently reviewed each of the identified articles to determine eligibility and extract study information. A flow diagram shows the number of studies identified, screened, and included or excluded at each stage of study selection. In terms of contributions, this review provides a series of practical recommendations for m-health intervention development.

9.3.2. Descriptive or Mapping Reviews

The primary goal of a descriptive review is to determine the extent to which a body of knowledge in a particular research topic reveals any interpretable pattern or trend with respect to pre-existing propositions, theories, methodologies or findings ( King & He, 2005 ; Paré et al., 2015 ). In contrast with narrative reviews, descriptive reviews follow a systematic and transparent procedure, including searching, screening and classifying studies ( Petersen, Vakkalanka, & Kuzniarz, 2015 ). Indeed, structured search methods are used to form a representative sample of a larger group of published works ( Paré et al., 2015 ). Further, authors of descriptive reviews extract from each study certain characteristics of interest, such as publication year, research methods, data collection techniques, and direction or strength of research outcomes (e.g., positive, negative, or non-significant) in the form of frequency analysis to produce quantitative results ( Sylvester et al., 2013 ). In essence, each study included in a descriptive review is treated as the unit of analysis and the published literature as a whole provides a database from which the authors attempt to identify any interpretable trends or draw overall conclusions about the merits of existing conceptualizations, propositions, methods or findings ( Paré et al., 2015 ). In doing so, a descriptive review may claim that its findings represent the state of the art in a particular domain ( King & He, 2005 ).

In the fields of health sciences and medical informatics, reviews that focus on examining the range, nature and evolution of a topic area are described by Anderson, Allen, Peckham, and Goodwin (2008) as mapping reviews . Like descriptive reviews, the research questions are generic and usually relate to publication patterns and trends. There is no preconceived plan to systematically review all of the literature although this can be done. Instead, researchers often present studies that are representative of most works published in a particular area and they consider a specific time frame to be mapped.

An example of this approach in the eHealth domain is offered by DeShazo, Lavallie, and Wolf (2009). The purpose of this descriptive or mapping review was to characterize publication trends in the medical informatics literature over a 20-year period (1987 to 2006). To achieve this ambitious objective, the authors performed a bibliometric analysis of medical informatics citations indexed in medline using publication trends, journal frequencies, impact factors, Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) term frequencies, and characteristics of citations. Findings revealed that there were over 77,000 medical informatics articles published during the covered period in numerous journals and that the average annual growth rate was 12%. The MeSH term analysis also suggested a strong interdisciplinary trend. Finally, average impact scores increased over time with two notable growth periods. Overall, patterns in research outputs that seem to characterize the historic trends and current components of the field of medical informatics suggest it may be a maturing discipline (DeShazo et al., 2009).

9.3.3. Scoping Reviews

Scoping reviews attempt to provide an initial indication of the potential size and nature of the extant literature on an emergent topic (Arksey & O’Malley, 2005; Daudt, van Mossel, & Scott, 2013 ; Levac, Colquhoun, & O’Brien, 2010). A scoping review may be conducted to examine the extent, range and nature of research activities in a particular area, determine the value of undertaking a full systematic review (discussed next), or identify research gaps in the extant literature ( Paré et al., 2015 ). In line with their main objective, scoping reviews usually conclude with the presentation of a detailed research agenda for future works along with potential implications for both practice and research.

Unlike narrative and descriptive reviews, the whole point of scoping the field is to be as comprehensive as possible, including grey literature (Arksey & O’Malley, 2005). Inclusion and exclusion criteria must be established to help researchers eliminate studies that are not aligned with the research questions. It is also recommended that at least two independent coders review abstracts yielded from the search strategy and then the full articles for study selection ( Daudt et al., 2013 ). The synthesized evidence from content or thematic analysis is relatively easy to present in tabular form (Arksey & O’Malley, 2005; Thomas & Harden, 2008 ).

One of the most highly cited scoping reviews in the eHealth domain was published by Archer, Fevrier-Thomas, Lokker, McKibbon, and Straus (2011) . These authors reviewed the existing literature on personal health record ( phr ) systems including design, functionality, implementation, applications, outcomes, and benefits. Seven databases were searched from 1985 to March 2010. Several search terms relating to phr s were used during this process. Two authors independently screened titles and abstracts to determine inclusion status. A second screen of full-text articles, again by two independent members of the research team, ensured that the studies described phr s. All in all, 130 articles met the criteria and their data were extracted manually into a database. The authors concluded that although there is a large amount of survey, observational, cohort/panel, and anecdotal evidence of phr benefits and satisfaction for patients, more research is needed to evaluate the results of phr implementations. Their in-depth analysis of the literature signalled that there is little solid evidence from randomized controlled trials or other studies through the use of phr s. Hence, they suggested that more research is needed that addresses the current lack of understanding of optimal functionality and usability of these systems, and how they can play a beneficial role in supporting patient self-management ( Archer et al., 2011 ).

9.3.4. Forms of Aggregative Reviews

Healthcare providers, practitioners, and policy-makers are nowadays overwhelmed with large volumes of information, including research-based evidence from numerous clinical trials and evaluation studies, assessing the effectiveness of health information technologies and interventions ( Ammenwerth & de Keizer, 2004 ; Deshazo et al., 2009 ). It is unrealistic to expect that all these disparate actors will have the time, skills, and necessary resources to identify the available evidence in the area of their expertise and consider it when making decisions. Systematic reviews that involve the rigorous application of scientific strategies aimed at limiting subjectivity and bias (i.e., systematic and random errors) can respond to this challenge.

Systematic reviews attempt to aggregate, appraise, and synthesize in a single source all empirical evidence that meet a set of previously specified eligibility criteria in order to answer a clearly formulated and often narrow research question on a particular topic of interest to support evidence-based practice ( Liberati et al., 2009 ). They adhere closely to explicit scientific principles ( Liberati et al., 2009 ) and rigorous methodological guidelines (Higgins & Green, 2008) aimed at reducing random and systematic errors that can lead to deviations from the truth in results or inferences. The use of explicit methods allows systematic reviews to aggregate a large body of research evidence, assess whether effects or relationships are in the same direction and of the same general magnitude, explain possible inconsistencies between study results, and determine the strength of the overall evidence for every outcome of interest based on the quality of included studies and the general consistency among them ( Cook, Mulrow, & Haynes, 1997 ). The main procedures of a systematic review involve:

Formulating a review question and developing a search strategy based on explicit inclusion criteria for the identification of eligible studies (usually described in the context of a detailed review protocol).
Searching for eligible studies using multiple databases and information sources, including grey literature sources, without any language restrictions.
Selecting studies, extracting data, and assessing risk of bias in a duplicate manner using two independent reviewers to avoid random or systematic errors in the process.
Analyzing data using quantitative or qualitative methods.
Presenting results in summary of findings tables.
Interpreting results and drawing conclusions.

Many systematic reviews, but not all, use statistical methods to combine the results of independent studies into a single quantitative estimate or summary effect size. Known as meta-analyses , these reviews use specific data extraction and statistical techniques (e.g., network, frequentist, or Bayesian meta-analyses) to calculate from each study by outcome of interest an effect size along with a confidence interval that reflects the degree of uncertainty behind the point estimate of effect ( Borenstein, Hedges, Higgins, & Rothstein, 2009 ; Deeks, Higgins, & Altman, 2008 ). Subsequently, they use fixed or random-effects analysis models to combine the results of the included studies, assess statistical heterogeneity, and calculate a weighted average of the effect estimates from the different studies, taking into account their sample sizes. The summary effect size is a value that reflects the average magnitude of the intervention effect for a particular outcome of interest or, more generally, the strength of a relationship between two variables across all studies included in the systematic review. By statistically combining data from multiple studies, meta-analyses can create more precise and reliable estimates of intervention effects than those derived from individual studies alone, when these are examined independently as discrete sources of information.

The review by Gurol-Urganci, de Jongh, Vodopivec-Jamsek, Atun, and Car (2013) on the effects of mobile phone messaging reminders for attendance at healthcare appointments is an illustrative example of a high-quality systematic review with meta-analysis. Missed appointments are a major cause of inefficiency in healthcare delivery with substantial monetary costs to health systems. These authors sought to assess whether mobile phone-based appointment reminders delivered through Short Message Service ( sms ) or Multimedia Messaging Service ( mms ) are effective in improving rates of patient attendance and reducing overall costs. To this end, they conducted a comprehensive search on multiple databases using highly sensitive search strategies without language or publication-type restrictions to identify all rct s that are eligible for inclusion. In order to minimize the risk of omitting eligible studies not captured by the original search, they supplemented all electronic searches with manual screening of trial registers and references contained in the included studies. Study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessments were performed independently by two coders using standardized methods to ensure consistency and to eliminate potential errors. Findings from eight rct s involving 6,615 participants were pooled into meta-analyses to calculate the magnitude of effects that mobile text message reminders have on the rate of attendance at healthcare appointments compared to no reminders and phone call reminders.

Meta-analyses are regarded as powerful tools for deriving meaningful conclusions. However, there are situations in which it is neither reasonable nor appropriate to pool studies together using meta-analytic methods simply because there is extensive clinical heterogeneity between the included studies or variation in measurement tools, comparisons, or outcomes of interest. In these cases, systematic reviews can use qualitative synthesis methods such as vote counting, content analysis, classification schemes and tabulations, as an alternative approach to narratively synthesize the results of the independent studies included in the review. This form of review is known as qualitative systematic review.

A rigorous example of one such review in the eHealth domain is presented by Mickan, Atherton, Roberts, Heneghan, and Tilson (2014) on the use of handheld computers by healthcare professionals and their impact on access to information and clinical decision-making. In line with the methodological guidelines for systematic reviews, these authors: (a) developed and registered with prospero ( www.crd.york.ac.uk/ prospero / ) an a priori review protocol; (b) conducted comprehensive searches for eligible studies using multiple databases and other supplementary strategies (e.g., forward searches); and (c) subsequently carried out study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessments in a duplicate manner to eliminate potential errors in the review process. Heterogeneity between the included studies in terms of reported outcomes and measures precluded the use of meta-analytic methods. To this end, the authors resorted to using narrative analysis and synthesis to describe the effectiveness of handheld computers on accessing information for clinical knowledge, adherence to safety and clinical quality guidelines, and diagnostic decision-making.

In recent years, the number of systematic reviews in the field of health informatics has increased considerably. Systematic reviews with discordant findings can cause great confusion and make it difficult for decision-makers to interpret the review-level evidence ( Moher, 2013 ). Therefore, there is a growing need for appraisal and synthesis of prior systematic reviews to ensure that decision-making is constantly informed by the best available accumulated evidence. Umbrella reviews , also known as overviews of systematic reviews, are tertiary types of evidence synthesis that aim to accomplish this; that is, they aim to compare and contrast findings from multiple systematic reviews and meta-analyses ( Becker & Oxman, 2008 ). Umbrella reviews generally adhere to the same principles and rigorous methodological guidelines used in systematic reviews. However, the unit of analysis in umbrella reviews is the systematic review rather than the primary study ( Becker & Oxman, 2008 ). Unlike systematic reviews that have a narrow focus of inquiry, umbrella reviews focus on broader research topics for which there are several potential interventions ( Smith, Devane, Begley, & Clarke, 2011 ). A recent umbrella review on the effects of home telemonitoring interventions for patients with heart failure critically appraised, compared, and synthesized evidence from 15 systematic reviews to investigate which types of home telemonitoring technologies and forms of interventions are more effective in reducing mortality and hospital admissions ( Kitsiou, Paré, & Jaana, 2015 ).

9.3.5. Realist Reviews

Realist reviews are theory-driven interpretative reviews developed to inform, enhance, or supplement conventional systematic reviews by making sense of heterogeneous evidence about complex interventions applied in diverse contexts in a way that informs policy decision-making ( Greenhalgh, Wong, Westhorp, & Pawson, 2011 ). They originated from criticisms of positivist systematic reviews which centre on their “simplistic” underlying assumptions ( Oates, 2011 ). As explained above, systematic reviews seek to identify causation. Such logic is appropriate for fields like medicine and education where findings of randomized controlled trials can be aggregated to see whether a new treatment or intervention does improve outcomes. However, many argue that it is not possible to establish such direct causal links between interventions and outcomes in fields such as social policy, management, and information systems where for any intervention there is unlikely to be a regular or consistent outcome ( Oates, 2011 ; Pawson, 2006 ; Rousseau, Manning, & Denyer, 2008 ).

To circumvent these limitations, Pawson, Greenhalgh, Harvey, and Walshe (2005) have proposed a new approach for synthesizing knowledge that seeks to unpack the mechanism of how “complex interventions” work in particular contexts. The basic research question — what works? — which is usually associated with systematic reviews changes to: what is it about this intervention that works, for whom, in what circumstances, in what respects and why? Realist reviews have no particular preference for either quantitative or qualitative evidence. As a theory-building approach, a realist review usually starts by articulating likely underlying mechanisms and then scrutinizes available evidence to find out whether and where these mechanisms are applicable ( Shepperd et al., 2009 ). Primary studies found in the extant literature are viewed as case studies which can test and modify the initial theories ( Rousseau et al., 2008 ).

The main objective pursued in the realist review conducted by Otte-Trojel, de Bont, Rundall, and van de Klundert (2014) was to examine how patient portals contribute to health service delivery and patient outcomes. The specific goals were to investigate how outcomes are produced and, most importantly, how variations in outcomes can be explained. The research team started with an exploratory review of background documents and research studies to identify ways in which patient portals may contribute to health service delivery and patient outcomes. The authors identified six main ways which represent “educated guesses” to be tested against the data in the evaluation studies. These studies were identified through a formal and systematic search in four databases between 2003 and 2013. Two members of the research team selected the articles using a pre-established list of inclusion and exclusion criteria and following a two-step procedure. The authors then extracted data from the selected articles and created several tables, one for each outcome category. They organized information to bring forward those mechanisms where patient portals contribute to outcomes and the variation in outcomes across different contexts.

9.3.6. Critical Reviews

Lastly, critical reviews aim to provide a critical evaluation and interpretive analysis of existing literature on a particular topic of interest to reveal strengths, weaknesses, contradictions, controversies, inconsistencies, and/or other important issues with respect to theories, hypotheses, research methods or results ( Baumeister & Leary, 1997 ; Kirkevold, 1997 ). Unlike other review types, critical reviews attempt to take a reflective account of the research that has been done in a particular area of interest, and assess its credibility by using appraisal instruments or critical interpretive methods. In this way, critical reviews attempt to constructively inform other scholars about the weaknesses of prior research and strengthen knowledge development by giving focus and direction to studies for further improvement ( Kirkevold, 1997 ).

Kitsiou, Paré, and Jaana (2013) provide an example of a critical review that assessed the methodological quality of prior systematic reviews of home telemonitoring studies for chronic patients. The authors conducted a comprehensive search on multiple databases to identify eligible reviews and subsequently used a validated instrument to conduct an in-depth quality appraisal. Results indicate that the majority of systematic reviews in this particular area suffer from important methodological flaws and biases that impair their internal validity and limit their usefulness for clinical and decision-making purposes. To this end, they provide a number of recommendations to strengthen knowledge development towards improving the design and execution of future reviews on home telemonitoring.

9.4. Summary

Table 9.1 outlines the main types of literature reviews that were described in the previous sub-sections and summarizes the main characteristics that distinguish one review type from another. It also includes key references to methodological guidelines and useful sources that can be used by eHealth scholars and researchers for planning and developing reviews.

Typology of Literature Reviews (adapted from Paré et al., 2015).

As shown in Table 9.1 , each review type addresses different kinds of research questions or objectives, which subsequently define and dictate the methods and approaches that need to be used to achieve the overarching goal(s) of the review. For example, in the case of narrative reviews, there is greater flexibility in searching and synthesizing articles ( Green et al., 2006 ). Researchers are often relatively free to use a diversity of approaches to search, identify, and select relevant scientific articles, describe their operational characteristics, present how the individual studies fit together, and formulate conclusions. On the other hand, systematic reviews are characterized by their high level of systematicity, rigour, and use of explicit methods, based on an “a priori” review plan that aims to minimize bias in the analysis and synthesis process (Higgins & Green, 2008). Some reviews are exploratory in nature (e.g., scoping/mapping reviews), whereas others may be conducted to discover patterns (e.g., descriptive reviews) or involve a synthesis approach that may include the critical analysis of prior research ( Paré et al., 2015 ). Hence, in order to select the most appropriate type of review, it is critical to know before embarking on a review project, why the research synthesis is conducted and what type of methods are best aligned with the pursued goals.

9.5. Concluding Remarks

In light of the increased use of evidence-based practice and research generating stronger evidence ( Grady et al., 2011 ; Lyden et al., 2013 ), review articles have become essential tools for summarizing, synthesizing, integrating or critically appraising prior knowledge in the eHealth field. As mentioned earlier, when rigorously conducted review articles represent powerful information sources for eHealth scholars and practitioners looking for state-of-the-art evidence. The typology of literature reviews we used herein will allow eHealth researchers, graduate students and practitioners to gain a better understanding of the similarities and differences between review types.

We must stress that this classification scheme does not privilege any specific type of review as being of higher quality than another ( Paré et al., 2015 ). As explained above, each type of review has its own strengths and limitations. Having said that, we realize that the methodological rigour of any review — be it qualitative, quantitative or mixed — is a critical aspect that should be considered seriously by prospective authors. In the present context, the notion of rigour refers to the reliability and validity of the review process described in section 9.2. For one thing, reliability is related to the reproducibility of the review process and steps, which is facilitated by a comprehensive documentation of the literature search process, extraction, coding and analysis performed in the review. Whether the search is comprehensive or not, whether it involves a methodical approach for data extraction and synthesis or not, it is important that the review documents in an explicit and transparent manner the steps and approach that were used in the process of its development. Next, validity characterizes the degree to which the review process was conducted appropriately. It goes beyond documentation and reflects decisions related to the selection of the sources, the search terms used, the period of time covered, the articles selected in the search, and the application of backward and forward searches ( vom Brocke et al., 2009 ). In short, the rigour of any review article is reflected by the explicitness of its methods (i.e., transparency) and the soundness of the approach used. We refer those interested in the concepts of rigour and quality to the work of Templier and Paré (2015) which offers a detailed set of methodological guidelines for conducting and evaluating various types of review articles.

To conclude, our main objective in this chapter was to demystify the various types of literature reviews that are central to the continuous development of the eHealth field. It is our hope that our descriptive account will serve as a valuable source for those conducting, evaluating or using reviews in this important and growing domain.

Ammenwerth E., de Keizer N. An inventory of evaluation studies of information technology in health care. Trends in evaluation research, 1982-2002. International Journal of Medical Informatics. 2004; 44 (1):44–56. [ PubMed : 15778794 ]
Anderson S., Allen P., Peckham S., Goodwin N. Asking the right questions: scoping studies in the commissioning of research on the organisation and delivery of health services. Health Research Policy and Systems. 2008; 6 (7):1–12. [ PMC free article : PMC2500008 ] [ PubMed : 18613961 ] [ CrossRef ]
Archer N., Fevrier-Thomas U., Lokker C., McKibbon K. A., Straus S.E. Personal health records: a scoping review. Journal of American Medical Informatics Association. 2011; 18 (4):515–522. [ PMC free article : PMC3128401 ] [ PubMed : 21672914 ]
Arksey H., O’Malley L. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology. 2005; 8 (1):19–32.
A systematic, tool-supported method for conducting literature reviews in information systems. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 19th European Conference on Information Systems ( ecis 2011); June 9 to 11; Helsinki, Finland. 2011.
Baumeister R. F., Leary M.R. Writing narrative literature reviews. Review of General Psychology. 1997; 1 (3):311–320.
Becker L. A., Oxman A.D. In: Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Higgins J. P. T., Green S., editors. Hoboken, nj : John Wiley & Sons, Ltd; 2008. Overviews of reviews; pp. 607–631.
Borenstein M., Hedges L., Higgins J., Rothstein H. Introduction to meta-analysis. Hoboken, nj : John Wiley & Sons Inc; 2009.
Cook D. J., Mulrow C. D., Haynes B. Systematic reviews: Synthesis of best evidence for clinical decisions. Annals of Internal Medicine. 1997; 126 (5):376–380. [ PubMed : 9054282 ]
Cooper H., Hedges L.V. In: The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis. 2nd ed. Cooper H., Hedges L. V., Valentine J. C., editors. New York: Russell Sage Foundation; 2009. Research synthesis as a scientific process; pp. 3–17.
Cooper H. M. Organizing knowledge syntheses: A taxonomy of literature reviews. Knowledge in Society. 1988; 1 (1):104–126.
Cronin P., Ryan F., Coughlan M. Undertaking a literature review: a step-by-step approach. British Journal of Nursing. 2008; 17 (1):38–43. [ PubMed : 18399395 ]
Darlow S., Wen K.Y. Development testing of mobile health interventions for cancer patient self-management: A review. Health Informatics Journal. 2015 (online before print). [ PubMed : 25916831 ] [ CrossRef ]
Daudt H. M., van Mossel C., Scott S.J. Enhancing the scoping study methodology: a large, inter-professional team’s experience with Arksey and O’Malley’s framework. bmc Medical Research Methodology. 2013; 13 :48. [ PMC free article : PMC3614526 ] [ PubMed : 23522333 ] [ CrossRef ]
Davies P. The relevance of systematic reviews to educational policy and practice. Oxford Review of Education. 2000; 26 (3-4):365–378.
Deeks J. J., Higgins J. P. T., Altman D.G. In: Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Higgins J. P. T., Green S., editors. Hoboken, nj : John Wiley & Sons, Ltd; 2008. Analysing data and undertaking meta-analyses; pp. 243–296.
Deshazo J. P., Lavallie D. L., Wolf F.M. Publication trends in the medical informatics literature: 20 years of “Medical Informatics” in mesh . bmc Medical Informatics and Decision Making. 2009; 9 :7. [ PMC free article : PMC2652453 ] [ PubMed : 19159472 ] [ CrossRef ]
Dixon-Woods M., Agarwal S., Jones D., Young B., Sutton A. Synthesising qualitative and quantitative evidence: a review of possible methods. Journal of Health Services Research and Policy. 2005; 10 (1):45–53. [ PubMed : 15667704 ]
Finfgeld-Connett D., Johnson E.D. Literature search strategies for conducting knowledge-building and theory-generating qualitative systematic reviews. Journal of Advanced Nursing. 2013; 69 (1):194–204. [ PMC free article : PMC3424349 ] [ PubMed : 22591030 ]
Grady B., Myers K. M., Nelson E. L., Belz N., Bennett L., Carnahan L. … Guidelines Working Group. Evidence-based practice for telemental health. Telemedicine Journal and E Health. 2011; 17 (2):131–148. [ PubMed : 21385026 ]
Green B. N., Johnson C. D., Adams A. Writing narrative literature reviews for peer-reviewed journals: secrets of the trade. Journal of Chiropractic Medicine. 2006; 5 (3):101–117. [ PMC free article : PMC2647067 ] [ PubMed : 19674681 ]
Greenhalgh T., Wong G., Westhorp G., Pawson R. Protocol–realist and meta-narrative evidence synthesis: evolving standards ( rameses ). bmc Medical Research Methodology. 2011; 11 :115. [ PMC free article : PMC3173389 ] [ PubMed : 21843376 ]
Gurol-Urganci I., de Jongh T., Vodopivec-Jamsek V., Atun R., Car J. Mobile phone messaging reminders for attendance at healthcare appointments. Cochrane Database System Review. 2013; 12 cd 007458. [ PMC free article : PMC6485985 ] [ PubMed : 24310741 ] [ CrossRef ]
Hart C. Doing a literature review: Releasing the social science research imagination. London: SAGE Publications; 1998.
Higgins J. P. T., Green S., editors. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions: Cochrane book series. Hoboken, nj : Wiley-Blackwell; 2008.
Jesson J., Matheson L., Lacey F.M. Doing your literature review: traditional and systematic techniques. Los Angeles & London: SAGE Publications; 2011.
King W. R., He J. Understanding the role and methods of meta-analysis in IS research. Communications of the Association for Information Systems. 2005; 16 :1.
Kirkevold M. Integrative nursing research — an important strategy to further the development of nursing science and nursing practice. Journal of Advanced Nursing. 1997; 25 (5):977–984. [ PubMed : 9147203 ]
Kitchenham B., Charters S. ebse Technical Report Version 2.3. Keele & Durham. uk : Keele University & University of Durham; 2007. Guidelines for performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering.
Kitsiou S., Paré G., Jaana M. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of home telemonitoring interventions for patients with chronic diseases: a critical assessment of their methodological quality. Journal of Medical Internet Research. 2013; 15 (7):e150. [ PMC free article : PMC3785977 ] [ PubMed : 23880072 ]
Kitsiou S., Paré G., Jaana M. Effects of home telemonitoring interventions on patients with chronic heart failure: an overview of systematic reviews. Journal of Medical Internet Research. 2015; 17 (3):e63. [ PMC free article : PMC4376138 ] [ PubMed : 25768664 ]
Levac D., Colquhoun H., O’Brien K. K. Scoping studies: advancing the methodology. Implementation Science. 2010; 5 (1):69. [ PMC free article : PMC2954944 ] [ PubMed : 20854677 ]
Levy Y., Ellis T.J. A systems approach to conduct an effective literature review in support of information systems research. Informing Science. 2006; 9 :181–211.
Liberati A., Altman D. G., Tetzlaff J., Mulrow C., Gøtzsche P. C., Ioannidis J. P. A. et al. Moher D. The prisma statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: Explanation and elaboration. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2009; 151 (4):W-65. [ PubMed : 19622512 ]
Lyden J. R., Zickmund S. L., Bhargava T. D., Bryce C. L., Conroy M. B., Fischer G. S. et al. McTigue K. M. Implementing health information technology in a patient-centered manner: Patient experiences with an online evidence-based lifestyle intervention. Journal for Healthcare Quality. 2013; 35 (5):47–57. [ PubMed : 24004039 ]
Mickan S., Atherton H., Roberts N. W., Heneghan C., Tilson J.K. Use of handheld computers in clinical practice: a systematic review. bmc Medical Informatics and Decision Making. 2014; 14 :56. [ PMC free article : PMC4099138 ] [ PubMed : 24998515 ]
Moher D. The problem of duplicate systematic reviews. British Medical Journal. 2013; 347 (5040) [ PubMed : 23945367 ] [ CrossRef ]
Montori V. M., Wilczynski N. L., Morgan D., Haynes R. B., Hedges T. Systematic reviews: a cross-sectional study of location and citation counts. bmc Medicine. 2003; 1 :2. [ PMC free article : PMC281591 ] [ PubMed : 14633274 ]
Mulrow C. D. The medical review article: state of the science. Annals of Internal Medicine. 1987; 106 (3):485–488. [ PubMed : 3813259 ] [ CrossRef ]
Evidence-based information systems: A decade later. Proceedings of the European Conference on Information Systems ; 2011. Retrieved from http://aisel .aisnet.org/cgi/viewcontent .cgi?article =1221&context =ecis2011 .
Okoli C., Schabram K. A guide to conducting a systematic literature review of information systems research. ssrn Electronic Journal. 2010
Otte-Trojel T., de Bont A., Rundall T. G., van de Klundert J. How outcomes are achieved through patient portals: a realist review. Journal of American Medical Informatics Association. 2014; 21 (4):751–757. [ PMC free article : PMC4078283 ] [ PubMed : 24503882 ]
Paré G., Trudel M.-C., Jaana M., Kitsiou S. Synthesizing information systems knowledge: A typology of literature reviews. Information & Management. 2015; 52 (2):183–199.
Patsopoulos N. A., Analatos A. A., Ioannidis J.P. A. Relative citation impact of various study designs in the health sciences. Journal of the American Medical Association. 2005; 293 (19):2362–2366. [ PubMed : 15900006 ]
Paul M. M., Greene C. M., Newton-Dame R., Thorpe L. E., Perlman S. E., McVeigh K. H., Gourevitch M.N. The state of population health surveillance using electronic health records: A narrative review. Population Health Management. 2015; 18 (3):209–216. [ PubMed : 25608033 ]
Pawson R. Evidence-based policy: a realist perspective. London: SAGE Publications; 2006.
Pawson R., Greenhalgh T., Harvey G., Walshe K. Realist review—a new method of systematic review designed for complex policy interventions. Journal of Health Services Research & Policy. 2005; 10 (Suppl 1):21–34. [ PubMed : 16053581 ]
Petersen K., Vakkalanka S., Kuzniarz L. Guidelines for conducting systematic mapping studies in software engineering: An update. Information and Software Technology. 2015; 64 :1–18.
Petticrew M., Roberts H. Systematic reviews in the social sciences: A practical guide. Malden, ma : Blackwell Publishing Co; 2006.
Rousseau D. M., Manning J., Denyer D. Evidence in management and organizational science: Assembling the field’s full weight of scientific knowledge through syntheses. The Academy of Management Annals. 2008; 2 (1):475–515.
Rowe F. What literature review is not: diversity, boundaries and recommendations. European Journal of Information Systems. 2014; 23 (3):241–255.
Shea B. J., Hamel C., Wells G. A., Bouter L. M., Kristjansson E., Grimshaw J. et al. Boers M. amstar is a reliable and valid measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 2009; 62 (10):1013–1020. [ PubMed : 19230606 ]
Shepperd S., Lewin S., Straus S., Clarke M., Eccles M. P., Fitzpatrick R. et al. Sheikh A. Can we systematically review studies that evaluate complex interventions? PLoS Medicine. 2009; 6 (8):e1000086. [ PMC free article : PMC2717209 ] [ PubMed : 19668360 ]
Silva B. M., Rodrigues J. J., de la Torre Díez I., López-Coronado M., Saleem K. Mobile-health: A review of current state in 2015. Journal of Biomedical Informatics. 2015; 56 :265–272. [ PubMed : 26071682 ]
Smith V., Devane D., Begley C., Clarke M. Methodology in conducting a systematic review of systematic reviews of healthcare interventions. bmc Medical Research Methodology. 2011; 11 (1):15. [ PMC free article : PMC3039637 ] [ PubMed : 21291558 ]
Sylvester A., Tate M., Johnstone D. Beyond synthesis: re-presenting heterogeneous research literature. Behaviour & Information Technology. 2013; 32 (12):1199–1215.
Templier M., Paré G. A framework for guiding and evaluating literature reviews. Communications of the Association for Information Systems. 2015; 37 (6):112–137.
Thomas J., Harden A. Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews. bmc Medical Research Methodology. 2008; 8 (1):45. [ PMC free article : PMC2478656 ] [ PubMed : 18616818 ]
Reconstructing the giant: on the importance of rigour in documenting the literature search process. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 17th European Conference on Information Systems ( ecis 2009); Verona, Italy. 2009.
Webster J., Watson R.T. Analyzing the past to prepare for the future: Writing a literature review. Management Information Systems Quarterly. 2002; 26 (2):11.
Whitlock E. P., Lin J. S., Chou R., Shekelle P., Robinson K.A. Using existing systematic reviews in complex systematic reviews. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2008; 148 (10):776–782. [ PubMed : 18490690 ]

This publication is licensed under a Creative Commons License, Attribution-Noncommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0): see https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

Cite this Page Paré G, Kitsiou S. Chapter 9 Methods for Literature Reviews. In: Lau F, Kuziemsky C, editors. Handbook of eHealth Evaluation: An Evidence-based Approach [Internet]. Victoria (BC): University of Victoria; 2017 Feb 27.
PDF version of this title (4.5M)
Disable Glossary Links

In this Page

Introduction
Overview of the Literature Review Process and Steps
Types of Review Articles and Brief Illustrations
Concluding Remarks

Related information

PMC PubMed Central citations
PubMed Links to PubMed

Recent Activity

Chapter 9 Methods for Literature Reviews - Handbook of eHealth Evaluation: An Ev... Chapter 9 Methods for Literature Reviews - Handbook of eHealth Evaluation: An Evidence-based Approach

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

Connect with NLM

National Library of Medicine 8600 Rockville Pike Bethesda, MD 20894

Web Policies FOIA HHS Vulnerability Disclosure

Help Accessibility Careers

Empowering education development through AIGC: A systematic literature review

Published: 29 February 2024

Cite this article

Xiaojiao Chen 1 ,
Zhebing Hu 2 &
Chengliang Wang ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-2208-3508 3

545 Accesses

Explore all metrics

As an exemplary representative of AIGC products, ChatGPT has ushered in new possibilities for the field of education. Leveraging its robust text generation and comprehension capabilities, it has had a revolutionary impact on pedagogy, learning experiences, personalized education and other aspects. However, to date, there has been no comprehensive review of AIGC technology’s application in education. In light of this gap, this study employs a systematic literature review and selects 134 relevant publications on AIGC’s educational application from 4 databases: EBSCO, EI Compendex, Scopus, and Web of Science. The study aims to explore the macro development status and future trends in AIGC’s educational application. The following findings emerge: 1) In the AIGC’s educational application field, the United States is the most active country. Theoretical research dominates the research types in this domain; 2) Research on AIGC’s educational application is primarily published in journals and academic conferences in the fields of educational technology and medicine; 3) Research topics primarily focus on five themes: AIGC technology performance assessment, AIGC technology instructional application, AIGC technology enhancing learning outcomes, AIGC technology educational application’s Advantages and Disadvantages analysis, and AIGC technology educational application prospects. 4) Through Grounded Theory, the study delves into the core advantages and potential risks of AIGC’s educational application, deconstructing the scenarios and logic of AIGC’s educational application. 5) Based on a review of existing literature, the study provides valuable future agendas from both theoretical and practical application perspectives. Discussing the future research agenda contributes to clarifying key issues related to the integration of AI and education, promoting more intelligent, effective, and sustainable educational methods and tools, which is of great significance for advancing innovation and development in the field of education.

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

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Students’ voices on generative AI: perceptions, benefits, and challenges in higher education

Cecilia Ka Yuk Chan & Wenjie Hu

The AI generation gap: Are Gen Z students more interested in adopting generative AI such as ChatGPT in teaching and learning than their Gen X and millennial generation teachers?

Cecilia Ka Yuk Chan & Katherine K. W. Lee

How should we change teaching and assessment in response to increasingly powerful generative Artificial Intelligence? Outcomes of the ChatGPT teacher survey

Matt Bower, Jodie Torrington, … Mark Alfano

Data availability

The datasets (Coding results) generated during and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Abdelghani, R., Wang, Y. H., Yuan, X., Wang, T., Lucas, P., Sauzéon, H., & Oudeyer, P. Y. (2023). Gpt-3-driven pedagogical agents to train children’s curious question-asking skills. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education , 1–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-023-00340-7

Abdulai, A. F., & Hung, L. (2023). Will ChatGPT undermine ethical values in nursing education, research, and practice. Nursing Inquiry . e12556–e12556. https://doi.org/10.1111/nin.12556

Ahmed, S. K. (2023). The Impact of ChatGPT on the Nursing Profession: Revolutionizing Patient Care and Education. Annals of Biomedical Engineering , 1–2. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10439-023-03262-6

Albeshri, A., & Thayananthan, V. (2018). Analytical techniques for decision making on information security for big data breaches. International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making, 17 (02), 527–545. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219622017500432

Article Google Scholar

Allen, B., Dreyer, K., Stibolt Jr, R., Agarwal, S., Coombs, L., Treml, C., ... & Wald, C. (2021). Evaluation and real-world performance monitoring of artificial intelligence models in clinical practice: Try it, buy it, check it. Journal of the American College of Radiology , 18 (11), 1489–1496. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2021.08.022

Alnaqbi, N. M., & Fouda, W. (2023). Exploring the role of ChatGPT and social media in enhancing student evaluation of teaching styles in higher education using neutrosophic sets. International Journal of Neutrosophic Science, 20 (4), 181–190. https://doi.org/10.1111/nin.12556

Alqahtani, T., Badreldin, H. A., Alrashed, M., Alshaya, A. I., Alghamdi, S. S., bin Saleh, K., ... & Albekairy, A. M. (2023). The emergent role of artificial intelligence, natural learning processing, and large language models in higher education and research. Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sapharm.2023.05.016

Ancillai, C., Sabatini, A., Gatti, M., & Perna, A. (2023). Digital technology and business model innovation: A systematic literature review and future research agenda. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 188 , 122307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2022.122307

Banić, B., Konecki, M., & Konecki, M. (2023, May). Pair Programming Education Aided by ChatGPT. In 2023 46th MIPRO ICT and Electronics Convention (MIPRO) (pp. 911–915). IEEE.

Busch, F., Adams, L. C., & Bressem, K. K. (2023). Biomedical ethical aspects towards the implementation of artificial intelligence in medical education. Medical Science Educator., 33 , 1007–1012. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-023-01815-x

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Chang, C.-Y., Kuo, S.-Y., & Hwang, G.-H. (2022). Chatbot-facilitated nursing education: Incorporating a knowledge-based Chatbot system into a nursing training program. Educational Technology & Society , 25 (1), 15–27. Retrieved December 19, 2023, from https://www.jstor.org/stable/48647027

Charmaz, K., & Thornberg, R. (2021). The pursuit of quality in grounded theory. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 18 (3), 305–327. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2020.1780357

Choi, E. P. H., Lee, J. J., Ho, M. H., Kwok, J. Y. Y., & Lok, K. Y. W. (2023). Chatting or cheating? The impacts of ChatGPT and other artificial intelligence language models on nurse education. Nurse Education Today, 125 , 105796–105796. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2023.105796

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Cooper, G. (2023). Examining science education in chatgpt: An exploratory study of generative artificial intelligence. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 32 (3), 444–452. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-023-10039-y

Article ADS Google Scholar

Cross, J., Robinson, R., Devaraju, S., Vaughans, A., Hood, R., Kayalackakom, T., ... & Robinson, R. E. (2023). Transforming medical education: Assessing the integration of ChatGPT into faculty workflows at a Caribbean medical school. Cureus , 15 (7). https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.41399

Currie, G. M. (2023, May). Academic integrity and artificial intelligence: Is ChatGPT hype, hero or heresy? In Seminars in Nuclear Medicine. WB Saunders. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2023.04.008

Das, D., Kumar, N., Longjam, L. A., Sinha, R., Roy, A. D., Mondal, H., & Gupta, P. (2023). Assessing the capability of ChatGPT in answering first-and second-order knowledge questions on microbiology as per competency-based medical education curriculum. Cureus , 15 (3). https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.36034

Deacon, B., Laufer, M., & Schäfer, L. O. (2023). Infusing educational technologies in the heart of the university-a systematic literature review from an organisational perspective. British Journal of Educational Technology, 54 (2), 441–466. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13277

Deeley, S. J. (2018). Using technology to facilitate effective assessment for learning and feedback in higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43 (3), 439–448. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2017.1356906

Deng, X., & Yu, Z. (2023). A meta-analysis and systematic review of the effect of chatbot technology use in sustainable education. Sustainability, 15 (4), 2940. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15042940

Diekemper, R. L., Ireland, B. K., & Merz, L. R. (2015). Development of the documentation and appraisal review tool for systematic reviews. World Journal of Meta-Analysis, 3 (3), 142–150. https://doi.org/10.13105/wjma.v3.i3.142

Engel, A., & Coll, C. (2022). Hybrid teaching and learning environments to promote personalized learning. RIED-Revista Iberoamericana de Educacion a Distancia , 225–242. https://doi.org/10.5944/ried.25.1.31489

Escotet, M. Á. (2023). The optimistic future of Artificial Intelligence in higher education. Prospects, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-023-09642-z

Esplugas, M. (2023). The use of artificial intelligence (AI) to enhance academic communication, education and research: A balanced approach. Journal of Hand Surgery (European Volume) , 48 (8), 819–822. https://doi.org/10.1177/17531934231185746

Extance, A. (2023). ChatGPT has entered the classroom: How LLMs could transform education. Nature, 623 , 474–477. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-023-03507-3

Article CAS PubMed ADS Google Scholar

Foroughi, B., Senali, M. G., Iranmanesh, M., Khanfar, A., Ghobakhloo, M., Annamalai, N., & Naghmeh-Abbaspour, B. (2023). Determinants of Intention to Use ChatGPT for Educational Purposes: Findings from PLS-SEM and fsQCA. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction , 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2023.2226495

Gaur, A., & Kumar, M. (2018). A systematic approach to conducting review studies: An assessment of content analysis in 25 years of IB research. Journal of World Business, 53 (2), 280–289. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2017.11.003

Ghorbani, M., Bahaghighat, M., Xin, Q., & Özen, F. (2020). ConvLSTMConv network: A deep learning approach for sentiment analysis in cloud computing. Journal of Cloud Computing, 9 (1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13677-020-00162-1

Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (2017). Discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research . Routledge https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2017.11.003

Gough, D., Oliver, S., & Thomas, J. (Eds.). (2017). An introduction to systematic reviews . Sage https://doi.org/10.5124/jkma.2014.57.1.49

Grant, N., & Metz, C. (2022). A new chat bot is a ‘code red’ for Google's search business, The New York Times. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/21/technology/ai-chatgpt-google-search.html . Accessed 19 Dec 2023

Hadi, M. S., & Junor, R. S. (2022). Speaking to devices: Can we use Google assistant to Foster Students' speaking skills? Journal of Languages and Language Teaching, 10 (4), 570–578. https://doi.org/10.33394/jollt.v10i4.5808

Heng, J. J., Teo, D. B., & Tan, L. F. (2023). The impact of Chat Generative Pre-trained Transformer (ChatGPT) on medical education. Postgraduate Medical Journal , qgad058. https://doi.org/10.1093/postmj/qgad058

Ho, W., & Lee, D. (2023). Enhancing engineering education in the roblox metaverse: Utilizing chatgpt for game development for electrical machine course. International Journal on Advanced Science, Engineering & Information Technology , 13 (3). https://doi.org/10.18517/ijaseit.13.3.18458

Holmes, W., & Kay, J. (2023, June). AI in education. Coming of age? The community voice. In International conference on artificial intelligence in education (pp. 85–90). Springer Nature Switzerland.

Google Scholar

Hsu, Y. C., & Ching, Y. H. (2023). Generative Artificial Intelligence in Education, Part One: the Dynamic Frontier. TechTrends , 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-023-00863-9

Hwang, G. J., & Chang, C. Y. (2021). A review of opportunities and challenges of chatbots in education. Interactive Learning Environments , 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2021.1952615

Jalil, S., Rafi, S., LaToza, T. D., Moran, K., & Lam, W. (2023, April). Chatgpt and software testing education: Promises & perils. In 2023 IEEE International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation Workshops (ICSTW) (pp. 4130–4137). IEEE.

Jeon, J., & Lee, S. (2023). Large language models in education: A focus on the complementary relationship between human teachers and ChatGPT. Education and Information Technologies , 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11834-1

Jing, Y., Wang, C., Chen, Y., Wang, H., Yu, T., & Shadiev, R. (2023). Bibliometric mapping techniques in educational technology research: A systematic literature review. Education and Information Technologies , 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12178-6

Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33 (7), 14–26. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X033007014

Karabacak, M., Ozkara, B. B., Margetis, K., Wintermark, M., & Bisdas, S. (2023). The advent of generative language models in medical education. JMIR Medical Education, 9 , e48163. https://doi.org/10.2196/48163

Kasneci, E., Seßler, K., Küchemann, S., Bannert, M., Dementieva, D., Fischer, F., … Kasneci, G. (2023). ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learning and Individual Differences, 103 , 102274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274

Kepuska, V., & Bohouta, G. (2018, January). Next-generation of virtual personal assistants (microsoft cortana, apple siri, amazon alexa and google home). In 2018 IEEE 8th annual computing and communication workshop and conference (CCWC) (pp. 99–103). IEEE.

Kerneža, M. (2023). Fundamental And Basic Cognitive Skills Required For Teachers To Effectively Use Chatbots In Education. In Science And Technology Education: New Developments And Innovations (pp. 99–110). Scientia Socialis, UAB.

Kılıçkaya, F. (2020). Using a chatbot, Replika, to practice writing through conversations in L2 English: A Case study. In New Technological applications for foreign and second language learning and teaching (pp. 221–238). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-2591-3.ch011

Killian, C. M., Marttinen, R., Howley, D., Sargent, J., & Jones, E. M. (2023). “Knock, Knock... Who’s There?” ChatGPT and Artificial Intelligence-Powered Large Language Models: Reflections on Potential Impacts Within Health and Physical Education Teacher Education. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education , 1 (aop), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1123/jtpe.2023-0058

Kohnke, L. (2022). A pedagogical Chatbot: A supplemental language learning Tool. RELC Journal , 00336882211067054. https://doi.org/10.1177/00336882211067054

Kung, T. H., Cheatham, M., Medenilla, A., Sillos, C., De Leon, L., Elepaño, C., ... & Tseng, V. (2023). Performance of ChatGPT on USMLE: Potential for AI-assisted medical education using large language models. PLoS Digital Health, 2 (2), e0000198. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pdig.0000198

Lee, D., & Yeo, S. (2022). Developing an AI-based chatbot for practicing responsive teaching in mathematics. Computers & Education, 191 , 104646. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104646

Lee, L. W., Dabirian, A., McCarthy, I. P., & Kietzmann, J. (2020). Making sense of text: Artificial intelligence-enabled content analysis. European Journal of Marketing, 54 (3), 615–644. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJM-02-2019-0219

Li, L., Ma, Z., Fan, L., Lee, S., Yu, H., & Hemphill, L. (2023). ChatGPT in education: A discourse analysis of worries and concerns on social media. arXiv preprint arXiv :2305.02201. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2305.02201

Lim, W. M., Gunasekara, A., Pallant, J. L., Pallant, J. I., & Pechenkina, E. (2023). Generative AI and the future of education: Ragnarök or reformation? A paradoxical perspective from management educators. The International Journal of Management Education, 21 (2), 100790. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2023.100790

Lin, T. J., & Lan, Y. J. (2015). Language learning in virtual reality environments: Past, present, and future. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 18 (4), 486–497. Retrieved December 19, 2023, from http://www.jstor.org/stable/jeductechsoci.18.4.486

Lodge, J. M., Thompson, K., & Corrin, L. (2023). Mapping out a research agenda for generative artificial intelligence in tertiary education. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 39 (1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.8695

Luo, H., Li, G., Feng, Q., Yang, Y., & Zuo, M. (2021). Virtual reality in K-12 and higher education: A systematic review of the literature from 2000 to 2019. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 37 (3), 887–901. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12538

Mariani, M. M., Hashemi, N., & Wirtz, J. (2023). Artificial intelligence empowered conversational agents: A systematic literature review and research agenda. Journal of Business Research, 161 , 113838. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2023.113838

Mohamed, A. M. (2023). Exploring the potential of an AI-based Chatbot (ChatGPT) in enhancing English as a Foreign Language (EFL) teaching: perceptions of EFL Faculty Members. Education and Information Technologies, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11917-z

Mohammad, B., Supti, T., Alzubaidi, M., Shah, H., Alam, T., Shah, Z., & Househ, M. (2023). The pros and cons of using ChatGPT in medical education: A scoping review. Student Health Technology Information, 305 , 644–647. https://doi.org/10.3233/SHTI230580

Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & PRISMA Group. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. Annals of Internal Medicine, 151 , 264–269. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00135

Mokmin, N. A. M., & Ibrahim, N. A. (2021). The evaluation of chatbot as a tool for health literacy education among undergraduate students. Education and Information Technologies, 26 (5), 6033–6049. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10542-y

Patel, N., Nagpal, P., Shah, T., Sharma, A., Malvi, S., & Lomas, D. (2023). Improving mathematics assessment readability: Do large language models help? Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 39 (3), 804–822. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12776

Paul, J., Lim, W. M., O’Cass, A., Hao, A. W., & Bresciani, S. (2021). Scientific procedures and rationales for systematic literature reviews (SPAR-4-SLR). International Journal of Consumer Studies, 45 (4), O1–O16. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12695

Pentina, I., Xie, T., Hancock, T., & Bailey, A. (2023). Consumer–machine relationships in the age of artificial intelligence: Systematic literature review and research directions. Psychology & Marketing, 40 (8), 1593–1614. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21853

Pereira, R., Reis, A., Barroso, J., Sousa, J., & Pinto, T. (2022). Virtual assistants applications in education. In International conference on technology and innovation in learning, teaching and education (pp. 468–480). Springer Nature Switzerland.

Pinto, A. S., Abreu, A., Costa, E., & Paiva, J. (2023). How Machine Learning (ML) is transforming higher education: A systematic literature review. Journal of Information Systems Engineering and Management, 8 (2). https://doi.org/10.55267/iadt.07.13227

Prikshat, V., Islam, M., Patel, P., Malik, A., Budhwar, P., & Gupta, S. (2023). AI-augmented HRM: Literature review and a proposed multilevel framework for future research. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 193 , 122645. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2023.122645

Radianti, J., Majchrzak, T. A., Fromm, J., & Wohlgenannt, I. (2020). A systematic review of immersive virtual reality applications for higher education: Design elements, lessons learned, and research agenda. Computers & Education, 147 , 103778. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103778

Rahimzadeh, V., Kostick-Quenet, K., Blumenthal Barby, J., & McGuire, A. L. (2023). Ethics education for healthcare professionals in the era of chatGPT and other large language models: Do we still need it?. The American Journal of Bioethics , 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/15265161.2023.2233358

Rahman, M. M., & Watanobe, Y. (2023). ChatGPT for education and research: Opportunities, threats, and strategies. Applied Sciences, 13 (9), 5783. https://doi.org/10.3390/app13095783

Article CAS Google Scholar

Rasul, T., Nair, S., Kalendra, D., Robin, M., de Oliveira Santini, F., Ladeira, W. J., ... & Heathcote, L. (2023). The role of ChatGPT in higher education: Benefits, challenges, and future research directions. Journal of Applied Learning and Teaching, 6 (1). https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1

Sallam, M. (2023a). ChatGPT utility in healthcare education, research, and practice: systematic review on the promising perspectives and valid concerns. In Healthcare (Vol. 11, No. 6, p. 887). MDPI. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare11060887

Sallam, M. (2023b). ChatGPT utility in healthcare education, research, and practice: Systematic review on the promising perspectives and valid concerns. Healthcare, 11 (6), 887. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare11060887

Sánchez-Ruiz, L. M., Moll-López, S., Nuñez-Pérez, A., Moraño-Fernández, J. A., & Vega-Fleitas, E. (2023). ChatGPT challenges blended learning methodologies in engineering education: A case study in mathematics. Applied Sciences, 13 (10), 6039. https://doi.org/10.3390/app13106039

Sandu, N., & Gide, E. (2019). Adoption of AI-Chatbots to enhance student learning experience in higher education in India. In 2019 18th International Conference on Information Technology Based Higher Education and Training (ITHET) (pp. 1–5). IEEE.

Schmulian, A., & Coetzee, S. A. (2019). Students’ experience of team assessment with immediate feedback in a large accounting class. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 44 (4), 516–532. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1522295

Seetharaman, R. (2023). Revolutionizing medical education: Can ChatGPT boost subjective learning and expression? Journal of Medical Systems, 47 (1), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10916-023-01957-w

Sharma, M., & Sharma, S. (2023). A holistic approach to remote patient monitoring, fueled by ChatGPT and Metaverse technology: The future of nursing education. Nurse Education Today, 131 , 105972. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2023.105972

Shlonsky, A., Noonan, E., Littell, J. H., & Montgomery, P. (2011). The role of systematic reviews and the Campbell collaboration in the realization of evidence-informed practice. Clinical Social Work Journal, 39 , 362–368. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10615-010-0307-0

Shoja, M. M., Van de Ridder, J. M., & Rajput, V. (2023). The emerging role of generative artificial intelligence in medical education, research, and practice. Cureus, 15 (6), e40883. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.40883

Siegle, D. (2023). A role for ChatGPT and AI in gifted education. Gifted Child Today, 46 (3), 211–219. https://doi.org/10.1177/10762175231168443

Smith, A., Hachen, S., Schleifer, R., Bhugra, D., Buadze, A., & Liebrenz, M. (2023). Old dog, new tricks? Exploring the potential functionalities of ChatGPT in supporting educational methods in social psychiatry. International Journal of Social Psychiatry . https://doi.org/10.1177/0020764023117845

Strzelecki, A. (2023). To use or not to use ChatGPT in higher education? A study of students’ acceptance and use of technology. Interactive Learning Environments , 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2023.2209881

Tam, W., Huynh, T., Tang, A., Luong, S., Khatri, Y., & Zhou, W. (2023). Nursing education in the age of artificial intelligence powered Chatbots (AI-Chatbots): Are we ready yet? Nurse Education Today, 129 , 105917. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2023.105917

Teel, Z. A., Wang, T., & Lund, B. (2023). ChatGPT conundrums: Probing plagiarism and parroting problems in higher education practices. College & Research Libraries News, 84 (6), 205. https://doi.org/10.5860/crln.84.6.205

Tlili, A., Shehata, B., Adarkwah, M. A., Bozkurt, A., Hickey, D. T., Huang, R., & Agyemang, B. (2023). What if the devil is my guardian angel: ChatGPT as a case study of using chatbots in education. Smart Learning Environments, 10 (1), 15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-023-00237-x

Tsang, R. (2023). Practical applications of ChatGPT in undergraduate medical education. Journal of Medical Education and Curricular Development , 10 . https://doi.org/10.1177/23821205231178449

Yan, D. (2023). Impact of ChatGPT on learners in a L2 writing practicum: An exploratory investigation. Education and Information Technologies, 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11742-4

Zhang, R., Zou, D., & Cheng, G. (2023a). A review of chatbot-assisted learning: pedagogical approaches, implementations, factors leading to effectiveness, theories, and future directions. Interactive Learning Environments , 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2023.2202704

Zhang, S., Shan, C., Lee, J. S. Y., Che, S., & Kim, J. H. (2023b). Effect of chatbot-assisted language learning: A meta-analysis. Education and Information Technologies , 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11805-6

Zhu, C., Sun, M., Luo, J., Li, T., & Wang, M. (2023). How to harness the potential of ChatGPT in education? Knowledge Management & E-Learning, 15 (2), 133. https://doi.org/10.34105/j.kmel.2023.15.008

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

College of Educational Science and Technology, Zhejiang University of Technology, Hangzhou, China

Xiaojiao Chen

College of Foreign Languages, Zhejiang University of Technology, Hangzhou, China

Department of Education Information Technology, Faculty of Education, East China Normal University, Shanghai, China

Chengliang Wang

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chengliang Wang .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

During the research, the authors indicate that no commercial or financial ties that may be regarded a possible conflict of interest existed.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

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

Rights and permissions

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

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Chen, X., Hu, Z. & Wang, C. Empowering education development through AIGC: A systematic literature review. Educ Inf Technol (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12549-7

Download citation

Received : 19 October 2023

Accepted : 05 February 2024

Published : 29 February 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12549-7

Share this article

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

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

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Artificial intelligence generated content
Artificial intelligence
Systematic literature review
Educational technology
Find a journal
Publish with us
Track your research

Ask a Librarian

Artificial Intelligence (AI)

Ai for systematic review.

How to Cite AI Generated Content
Prompt Design
Resources for Educators
Purdue AI Resources
AI and Ethics
Publisher Policies
Selected Journals in AI

Various AI tools are invaluable throughout the systematic review or evidence synthesis process. While the consensus acknowledges the significant utility of AI tools across different review stages, it's imperative to grasp their inherent biases and weaknesses. Moreover, ethical considerations such as copyright and intellectual property must be at the forefront.

Application ChatGPT in conducting systematic reviews and meta-analyses
Are ChatGPT and large language models “the answer” to bringing us closer to systematic review automation?
Artificial intelligence in systematic reviews: promising when appropriately used
Harnessing the power of ChatGPT for automating systematic review process: methodology, case study, limitations, and future directions
In-depth evaluation of machine learning methods for semi-automating article screening in a systematic review of mechanistic
Tools to support the automation of systematic reviews: a scoping review
The use of a large language model to create plain language summaries of evidence reviews in healthcare: A feasibility study
Using artificial intelligence methods for systematic review in health sciences: A systematic review

AI Tools for Systematic Review

DistillerSR Securely automate every stage of your literature review to produce evidence-based research faster, more accurately, and more transparently at scale.
Rayyan A web-tool designed to help researchers working on systematic reviews, scoping reviews and other knowledge synthesis projects, by dramatically speeding up the process of screening and selecting studies.
RobotReviewer A machine learning system aiming which aims to automate evidence synthesis.
<< Previous: AI Tools
Next: How to Cite AI Generated Content >>
Last Edited: Mar 25, 2024 4:20 PM
URL: https://guides.lib.purdue.edu/ai

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

The paradoxical effects of high involvement work practices on employees and service outcomes: a trichromatic perspective.

1 School of Economics and Management, Southwest Petroleum University, Chengdu, China
2 Department of Management Sciences, Riphah International University, Faisalabad, Pakistan
3 Institute of Business Management Sciences, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad, Pakistan
4 Lyallpur Business School, Government College University, Faisalabad, Pakistan

This research delves into the complex impact of High Involvement Work Practices (HIWPs) on various facets of employee well-being and service outcomes within the framework of the trichromatic service conception. Utilizing the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) model, the study uncovers the dual, both beneficial and detrimental, effects of HIWPs on service performance, work–family conflict, subjective well-being, and work-family enrichment. Examining the conflicting paths of job demands (workload) and job resources (customer orientation), the analysis incorporates the moderating influence of a strategic contextual factor—supervisor support. Data was collected through self-administered questionnaires from 475 respondents in Pakistani banks, and the analysis employed moderated mediation analysis using SPSS, AMOS, and the PROCESS Macro. All proposed hypotheses received support. The results indicate that HIWPs enhance service performance by promoting customer orientation but concurrently escalate workload, leading to adverse consequences for subjective well-being and work–family conflict. The study underscores the importance of implementing HIWPs under supportive leadership to maximize positive outcomes and mitigate negative consequences. Ultimately, this approach enables employees to effectively serve customers, maintain a healthy work-family balance, and contribute to the long-term growth and sustainability of organizations.

Introduction

In today’s modern and highly competitive world, the service industry has emerged as a powerful element behind the global economy ( Wang et al., 2022 ). Consequently, organizations recognize the pivotal role of employees as valuable assets ( Wattoo et al., 2020 ; Collins, 2021 ). Effective management of employees directly impacts organizational efficiency, product quality, effectiveness, and profitability. To improve employee performance, researchers have extensively explored various factors ( Bowen and Schneider, 2022 ) and shown particular interest in inclusive practices and processes that contribute to organizational success. However, researchers have disagreed on a singular approach to interpreting and operationalizing employee involvement ( Litwin, 2015 ). High-involvement work practices (HIWPs) aim to establish more functional organizations by enhancing employees’ skills, motivation, and opportunities for participation, ultimately driving both employee and firm performance ( Kim et al., 2021 ; Kaushik and Mukherjee, 2022 ). HIWPs are a set of exclusive but cooperative HR practices aimed at launching a better progressive organization ( Ogbonnaya and Messersmith, 2019 ). These signify a “set” of mutually fortifying, overlying, and interdependent HR practices that highlight power, information, rewards, and knowledge, which provides assistance for participation and commitment of an employee” ( Lawler, 1986 ; Lawler and Ledford, 1992 ; MacDuffie, 1995 ).

There are so many gaps pointed out by the researchers over time. Firstly, studies often focus on either positive or negative impacts, overlooking two contrasting perspectives: the optimistic view (mutual gains) and the pessimistic view (conflicting outcomes; Islam et al., 2023 ). Studies on positive relationships between HIWPs and employee outcomes are common, suggesting that employers and employees benefit from HIWPs, leading to positive employee behavior and improved organizational performance ( Dongsen, 2023 ). However, research on potential harmful influences is rare ( Han et al., 2023 ; Xiong, 2023 ), indicating either no effect or negative consequences on employees’ well-being ( Bai et al., 2023 ). For balancing perspectives, additional research is required to assess HIWPs’ effects comprehensively with respect to organizational performance and their impact on the employee’s personal and family domains ( Han et al., 2023 ).

Secondly, research in Western countries on HIWPs and employee outcomes is extensive, but there is a need for more research in Asian countries like Pakistan ( Ahmad et al., 2020 ; Wang et al., 2022 ; Zhou et al., 2023 ) in order to determine the applicability and adaptability of these practices across different cultures and organizational perspectives. Cultural influences, workplace practices and organizational dynamics, may vary significantly across diverse counties and societies. Organizational objectives and employee well-being may have different connotations and implications. Family roles and work responsibilities are often deeply intertwined in these cultures. The existing research mainly mirrors Western organizational settings and perspectives. HIWPs effectiveness and applicability can vary in different settings because of the differences in employee expectations, leadership styles, and cultural norms. Understanding factors, boundary conditions, and job resources in these contexts is vital for maximizing HIWPs’ benefits and minimizing adverse effects.

Thirdly, identifying job resources or boundary conditions and parameters like supervisory support is crucial to coping with workplace intensification and job demands ( Wattoo et al., 2020 ; Kaushik and Mukherjee, 2022 ). Studies emphasize the need for a framework incorporating HIWPs and the supportive role of supervisors to comprehensively understand their impact on employee well-being ( Hauff et al., 2020 ; Bai et al., 2023 ). Organizational resources, such as supervisor support (SS), can effectively empower employees to handle work overload and associated job demands ( Han et al., 2023 ). Research in this area, as highlighted by Kaushik and Mukherjee (2022) , is essential for organizations to leverage strengths and address weaknesses through HIWPs implementation ( Wang et al., 2022 ). Moreover, for a balanced and effective work environment, understanding the influence of HIWPs on work–family conflict and enrichment in these settings can provide valuable insights. This research, using two contrasting trajectories, the Job Demands-Resources model (JD-R model), explores HIWPs’ positive and negative effects on service outcomes, integrating ‘job demands and job resources’ perspectives ( Kloutsiniotis and Mihail, 2020 ; Mokhtar and Krishnan, 2023 ).

Fourthly, researchers highlight the interconnectedness of personal, work, and family domains, with potential positive or negative effects ( Han et al., 2023 ). Excessive work demands deplete employees’ time and energy, leading to work–family conflict (WFC) because more job involvement constrains full engagement in family roles ( Allen et al., 2023 ). Moreover, unfavorable outcomes include decreased well-being and job dissatisfaction ( Carlson et al., 2019 ). Conversely, research shows that balanced involvement in work and family domains can be advantageous, leading to work-family enrichment (WFE) and improved performance in both domains ( Greenhaus and Powell, 2006 ). Limited research, especially in third-world countries, explores the impact of HIWPs on the work-family interface ( Aubouin-Bonnaventure et al., 2023 ).

Fourthly, HIWPs aim to develop organizational competencies and achieve set goals, but often lead to strict performance measures and increased work demands ( Ehrnrooth and Björkman, 2012 ). This results in employee distress due to heavy workloads and the continuous need for skill improvement, leading to physical, emotional, and behavioral distress ( Xiong, 2023 ). While organizational goals and employee concerns may sometimes align, they can also diverge, potentially impeding employees’ ability to pursue personal life ambitions or corporate objectives. The relationship between HIWPs and their impact on well-being, including stress, health, and happiness, is underexplored, especially in third-world countries like Pakistan ( Kaushik and Mukherjee, 2022 ; Han et al., 2023 ; Palumbo, 2023 ). The Pakistan Banking Perspective (2022) emphasizes a value-driven organizational culture, allowing employees to make informed decisions.

Fifthly, in this research, HIWPs aim to enhance skills, motivation, information sharing, and empowerment, measured using the PIRK framework proposed by Lawler (1986) . These practices are expected to contribute to top-notch customer service ( Liao et al., 2009 ), influencing employees’ service performance (SP) and subjective well-being (SWB). Existing literature often focuses on HIWPs’ positive effects, neglecting potential trade-offs employees may face in serving themselves or their families ( Rubio-Andrés et al., 2022 ). This study aims to comprehensively evaluate the effectiveness of HIWPs by simultaneously addressing both positive and negative aspects.

Organizations can better understand how HIWPs affect service delivery by using a customer-oriented (CO) approach. It is necessary to conduct research to better understand the complex relationship between HIWPs and their impact on the delivery of services. Due to the significance of the banking sector in Pakistan’s economy, this study focuses on this sector ( Chung et al., 2019 ). In order to improve HR management effectiveness, Pakistani banks have taken a number of initiatives to integrate HIWPs into their long-term strategic management frameworks ( Hong et al., 2017 ). In light of these findings, researchers are urging further study of the fundamental mechanisms associated with these practices, which reaffirms their significance.

HIWPs have a dual impact, generating both work demands and work resources ( Han et al., 2020 ). This study, using the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) model, explores the conflicting effects of HIWPs on service outcomes and examines alternative job resources as potential buffers in the service industry ( Han et al., 2023 ). For a number of reasons, authors examine the consequences within the context of the trichromatic service idea and explore the complex relationships that exist between workers, their clients, their families, and themselves. This study seeks to understand how frontline service employees simultaneously serve their clients (through CO), their families (via WFE and WFC; Li, 2023 ), and themselves (regarding SWB). The study adopts a two-fold approach, considering WL as a job demand and CO as a job resource, and examines the role of SS as a situational factor, which may amplify the positive effects of HIWPs through CO and mitigate the negative impacts through WL. Moreover, to fill the mentioned gaps, this study evaluates the positive and negative effects of HIWPs on Pakistani banking employee outcomes. Doing this will advance research on cultural and contextual aspects affecting HIWP effectiveness, a neglected field. Theoretically, this will enrich HIWP discourse using the JD-R model and PIRK framework. This unique method will systematically examine how HIWPs affect job demands, resources, service delivery, employee well-being, and work-family interactions. HR experts and organizational leaders in emerging nations and areas like banking where HIWP integration is still evolving can use these insights. This research may help them understand whether HIWPs are useful or harmful by giving a roadmap for designing and executing them to maximize their advantages and minimize their drawbacks by exploring even the effect of just a single element, like supervisory support, that will buffer HIWPs, work pressures, and employee well-being.

Literature review and hypotheses development

Theoretical framework.

The JD-R model is widely recognized as one of the field’s most extensively researched and validated empirical frameworks ( Lesener et al., 2019 ). This model proposes two fundamental pathways through which it operates: the straining and motivating processes. The straining process, also known as the destructive well-being pathway, suggests that long-term job demands or poorly designed work environments can lead to stress, deplete an employee’s psychological and physical resources, and negatively impact their SWB ( Wang et al., 2022 ). In contrast, the motivational process posits that the accessibility of job resources within organizations, influenced by intrinsic and/or extrinsic factors, alleviates job pressures, facilitates goal achievement, fosters personal growth, and enhances SS.

This research focuses on HIWPs and their dual impact (i.e.) simultaneously providing job resources, such as service-oriented capabilities, ethics, and values, while also imposing job demands that can negatively affect employees’ SWB to enhance their skills and knowledge ( Han et al., 2023 ) and JD-R model is uniquely positioned model to analyze this duality as it distinguishes between job demands and resources, providing a structured approach to assess how HIWPs can both strain and motivate employees. Further, this distinction can enhance the reader’s understanding of what type of effect HIWPs will have on employee well-being and performance (like increased responsibilities and skill development opportunities), which can either contribute to stress and resource depletion or foster employee engagement and resource accumulation. Moreover, this study also investigates the spillover effects of HIWPs on the work-family interface. The JD-R model has the capability to explain how job demands and resources influence work–family conflict and enrichment and delineates the pathways through which HIWPs impact employees’ personal lives, thereby offering a holistic view of the work-life balance. Besides, this study’s focus is Pakistan’s banking sector, a region-specific context. JD-R model is chosen here as it has flexibility and proven applicability across various cultural and organizational settings and has the capability to gauge the unique characteristics of Eastern workplaces and their impact on employee outcomes.

HIWPs encompass various inclusive practices, such as information exchange, training, and empowerment, that aim to enhance employees’ knowledge, abilities, and skills and grant them access to diverse social and economic resources ( Jiang et al., 2012 ). However, the primary objective of HIWPs is to improve employee and organizational performance, which requires employees to invest greater commitment, time, and effort in skill development, resulting in increased responsibilities ( Kroon et al., 2009 ). HIWPs can imbalance employees’ job needs and available work resources as claimed in the JD-R model. The resulting work pressures can deplete employees’ resources, leading to fatigue and stress ( Boxall and Macky, 2014 ) and contributing to a heavy workload ( Jensen et al., 2013 ).

The JD-R model also explains the spillover process, which describes how job resources and job demands influence the work-family interface, resulting in the employee’s family-related outcomes ( Tement et al., 2023 ). The straining process suggests that high job demands may add to WFC, whereas the motivating process shows that job resources can lead to WFE. To enhance their performance and fulfill their responsibilities in their personal and work lives, employees often have to make sacrifices in terms of their time and energy, which can result in stress and challenges such as conflicts or emotional exhaustion between their job and family domains ( Mariappanadar, 2014 ).

Considering the conservation of resources (COR) theory ( Hobfoll, 2001 ), a dearth of resources frequently causes a decline in further resource loss, while preserving and/or gaining resources causes other resource gain. Moreover, when employees endeavor to achieve additional resources, they usually utilize the existing resources, creating “resource caravans” that support them in challenging times while helping them to thrive ( Hobfoll, 2002 ). Further, it proposes that job resources act as the positive predictors of WFE, inferring that when employees have adequate job resources, it adds to a fulfilling and positive situation in their personal lives ( Hakanen et al., 2011 ).

Further, the JD-R model proposes that employee outcomes are affected by the integrated effect of job resources and demands ( Bakker and Demerouti, 2007 ). The model’s safeguarding hypothesis further states that job resources can act as protective factors against the adverse effect of job demands on job stress ( Bakker et al., 2003 ). Therefore, the COR theory and JD-R model argue that high work demands can deplete employees’ resources, leading to increased stress levels and negative behavioral and social outcomes. However, if employees can access work resources that help them cope with stress and overcome obstacles, they can better manage work demands. Both the JD-R model and the COR theory propose that the interplay between work resources and demands influences various outcomes examined in this study, including employee performance, the work-family interface and SWB. Figure 1 depicts the theoretical framework of the study.

Figure 1 . Conceptual framework.

Development of hypotheses

In a service context employee’s customer orientation is a vital job resource and a guarantee of organizational success. It is a service value-system which draw the degree to which an employee’s work acuities, approaches, and actions are directed by a continuing credence in the significance of customer satisfaction ( Zablah et al., 2012 ). According to Sousa et al. (2023) , CO is a crucial job resource enabling employees to achieve service objectives, manage potential conflicts, and grow as service professionals ( Park and Hur, 2023 ). These functions align with the PIRK model (measuring HIWPs) that predicted characteristics of job resources ( Demerouti et al., 2001 ). Employee customer service and customer-centered perceptions, approaches, behaviors, and practices, encouraged and rewarded by the organizations, are enhanced and emphasized by HIWPs ( Ali et al., 2022 ). Firstly, service-centered information-sharing practices emphasize the importance of planning and communicating customer-oriented strategies to employees. Secondly, financial and non-financial rewards are associated with employees’ SS through rewards-related practices. Thirdly, service-related training focuses on customer-centered approaches and actions, preparing employees to be attentive to customers’ needs and desires ( Conduit and Mavondo, 2001 ). HIWPs may empower employees by granting them the authority to handle customer complaints in ways they deem appropriate, thereby enabling them to provide better customer service and potentially increasing their level of CO ( Chan and Lam, 2011 ). Hence, it is proposed:

H 1 : HIWPs have a positive association with employees’ CO.

However, HIWPs also impose job demands on employees, which the employees can perceive as an increased workload ( Ogbonnaya and Messersmith, 2019 ). To make employees high performers, training practices are provided to enhance their service skills, which are often provided during their regular working schedules, which can be burdensome for employees ( Oppenauer and Van De Voorde, 2018 ). Additionally, performance evaluations and reward-related procedures usually emphasize the importance of service quality. This requires employees to work harder to achieve higher performance ratings, increasing job stress and burden ( Palumbo, 2023 ). So,

H 2 : HIWPs have a positive association with employees’ workload.

Besides, customer-focused employees invest their time and effort in understanding and fulfilling the customers’ perceptions and needs, resulting in exceptional service quality ( Aryee et al., 2019 ). They strive to maintain long-term relationships with customers, employ innovative sales techniques, pay close attention to customer preferences, and resolve any issues that may arise ( Franke and Park, 2006 ). Knowing customer needs, participation, and involvement allows employees to make decisions and recommend refinements in service procedures but also necessitates an extra mental effort ( Ogbonnaya and Messersmith, 2019 ). HIWPs incorporate training programs to help employees enhance their customer service-focused skills, knowledge, and abilities, while performance evaluations and rewards highlight employees’ commitment to delivering outstanding SP ( Hong et al., 2013 ). By fostering a customer-focused workforce that prioritizes customer satisfaction, HIWPs are expected to impact SP positively ( Aryee et al., 2019 ). Therefore,

H 3 : Through the mediating effect of CO, HIWPs have a positive indirect impact on employees’ SP.

HIWPs also impact how employees fulfill their responsibilities toward their families, as reflected in WFE and WFC, which are specifically related to job demands and job resources by representing two distinct aspects of the work-family interface. Particularly, WFE is expected to be developed by generating job resources via the motivating process, with CO as an intermediary factor ( Tement et al., 2023 ). Based on the JD-R model ( Bakker et al., 2011 ), previous research has shown that when employees have access to greater empowerment, enhanced skills, and even financial resources that can be utilized in their family domain, they are more likely to effectively manage their obligations at both work and home, resulting in positive work-family spillover ( Wattoo et al., 2020 ). For nurturing HIWPs, the training programs that foster service attitudes may facilitate a positive spillover from the workplace to the home (i.e.) supporting employees in managing family-related issues and cultivating positive family behaviors ( Han et al., 2023 ). Hence, it is proposed:

H 4 : HIWPs have a positive indirect impact on employees’ WFE through the mediating effect of CO.

Research has shown that WL drains employees’ resources and makes it difficult to allocate these effectively to family responsibilities, leading to higher levels of WFC ( Michel et al., 2011 ). Following the straining process outlined in the JD-R model, WFC develops due to resource depletion and a straining process imposed by work tasks ( Tement et al., 2023 ). HIWPs can potentially contribute to WFC through WL ( Aubouin-Bonnaventure et al., 2023 ), making it difficult for employees to fulfill their family obligations and increasing their stress levels ( Kim et al., 2021 ). Employees may feel compelled to extend their working hours, expedite service delivery, or exceed expectations to accommodate unpredictable client requests. This conflict between work and family domains arises due to the psychological, emotional, and physical energy expended at work, leaving fewer resources available for fulfilling family responsibilities ( Kim et al., 2021 ). So, the researchers assume that,

H 5 : HIWPs have a positive indirect impact on employees’ WFC, through the mechanism of WL.

Furthermore, a higher workload can deplete employees’ emotional, cognitive, and physical resources, negatively affecting their physical and psychological health ( Bowling et al., 2015 ). Although, HIWPs may promote employee empowerment, self-sufficiency, involvement, and decision-making, yet all these also introduce new responsibilities, requiring additional employee effort ( Ramsay et al., 2000 ). Moreover, extensive training programs can enhance work complexity, elaborate performance evaluations, and demanding reward systems, which may lead to heightened job pressure and anxiety and culminate in negatively impacting employees’ SWB ( Han et al., 2023 ). So, HIWPs are expected to positively associate with WL, a job demand that can potentially harm employees’ SWB. Therefore, it is hypothesized that:

H 6 : HIWPs have a negative indirect impact on employees’ SWB through the mechanism of WL.

According to the social exchange theory, employees who perceive their supervisors as supportive and helpful are more likely to increase their internal resources and improve customer-oriented behavior and service performance. So, the role of supervisors is crucial in guiding and motivating their employees as well as serving as role models in effectively meeting customers’ needs ( Liaw et al., 2010 ) and enhancing employees’ customer-oriented behavior ( Karatepe et al., 2007 ). Therefore, it is hypothesized that:

H 7 : The indirect effect of HIWPs on employees’ service performance through CO will be strengthened when SS increases.

Organizational resources are vital in facilitating personal development, learning, progress, and advancement across various aspects of an individual’s life, including physical, social, emotional, and work-related dimensions ( Hakanen et al., 2006 ). According to the COR theory, individuals are motivated to acquire and protect resources as they recognize the value of resources in overcoming challenges. By having supportive supervisors, a perception is developed in the employees that their treatment at work is fair. Hence, their self-esteem increases, leading to higher motivation, commitment, and performance at work and in their family roles ( Liao et al., 2016 ). The supervisor’s support can help employees balance their work and home responsibilities ( Marais et al., 2014 ). Hence the researcher expects that:

H 8 : SS will positively moderate the positive indirect relationship between HIWPs and WFE through CO.

The COR theory posits that individuals experience stress when they perceive a scarcity or depletion of resources and strive to attain and preserve them ( Hobfoll, 2001 ). Job intensification, characterized by increased workload and demands, can deplete an employee’s resources and negatively impact their performance in family roles. This leads to daily WFC, where individuals allocate more time and energy to work while neglecting family obligations ( Boyar et al., 2024 ). SS is considered a valuable resource that helps employees effectively manage responsibilities in both work and family domains, promoting a sense of balance ( Litano et al., 2016 ). SS facilitates employees in meeting work expectations and devoting sufficient time and effort to their families, thereby reducing WFC and alleviating job stress ( Di Milia and Jiang, 2024 ). So, it is proposed that:

H 9 : The positive indirect relationship between employees’ HIWPs and WFC through WL will be negatively moderated by SS.

As previously mentioned, implementing HIWPs can lead to a straining process and increased job demands, potentially making work more complex and intense for employees ( Kroon et al., 2009 ). This, in turn, depletes their valuable resources and negatively affects their well-being. Employees may experience decreased life satisfaction, hopelessness, emotional exhaustion, and physical strain ( Kossek et al., 2024 ). SS is vital in helping workers manage the increased workload, reducing stress levels, enhancing well-being, and improving performance ( Zhang and Song, 2020 ). Supportive managers prioritize their employees’ interests and professional development, creating a sense of recognition, belongingness, and inclusion. This helps employees mitigate the harmful effects of work overload and stress and significantly enhances their SWB ( Han et al., 2023 ). On the contrary, a lack of supportive supervision deprives employees of the resources necessary to replenish their drained energy caused by HIWPs ( Han et al., 2023 ). This leads to higher stress levels and, subsequently, poorer SWB. Therefore,

H 10 : SS negatively moderated the negative indirect relationship between employees’ HIWPs and SWB through WL.

Data and methodology

This quantitative study focused on private banks in Faisalabad, as the banking industry is a significant contributor to Pakistan’s economy. This industry is characterized by its dynamic work environments and competitive pressures. It reflects Pakistani collectivistic culture that influences organizational dynamics, so it is ideal for studying how HIWPs interact with cultural values in a non-Western setting. The claim reflects that the collectivist nature of Pakistan is substantiated by the pervasive influence of collectivistic cultural values in organizational dynamics. Pakistani culture emphasizes strong interpersonal relationships, group harmony, and collective well-being over individual pursuits. In the banking sector, this manifests through organizational practices prioritizing group cohesion, loyalty, and employee mutual support. Teamwork and collaboration are highly valued, aligning with the collectivist ethos. This cultural backdrop, integral to Pakistan’s societal fabric, significantly shapes how HIWPs are adopted and impact organizational processes within the non-Western setting of Faisalabad.

The study employs a predictive, non-experimental survey design. The research adopted a cross-sectional approach, collecting data through a self-administered online questionnaire. Nonetheless, the questionnaire has received approval from the board of study, specifically the Department of Management Sciences at Riphah International University Islamabad, during its 13th meeting held on 6 July 2021. This research is conducted in Pakistan, which has a collectivistic culture that plays a pivotal role in shaping organizational dynamics and implementing HIWPs. Its norms and values about the organization, family and own self are quite different from those of the advanced countries with an individualistic culture. Pakistan, like many other Asian countries, is known for its collectivistic cultural values, emphasizing strong interpersonal relationships, group harmony, and collective well-being over individual pursuits. Organizations often prioritize group cohesion, loyalty, and mutual support among employees. Teamwork and collaboration are highly valued, and consensus-building may influence decisions rather than individual autonomy. This cultural backdrop has implications for the adoption and impact of HIWPs. The study seeks to unravel the intricacies of these connections within a cultural setting that differs significantly from the individualistic cultures often studied in advanced countries.

To gather responses, the researchers collaborated with the HR departments of selected private banks, sharing the URL link of the Google form with employees via WhatsApp and e-mail during personal visits to the bank offices. Clarification regarding the distribution process is vital for assessing any biases in the sample and understanding the influence of HR involvement in the data collection. Participants were identified, approached and assured that their information would be used only for study purposes and that their anonymity would be preserved. Hence, data was collected without identifying information such as names, employee IDs, or specific bank branches; responses were aggregated and analyzed at the group level to prevent individual identification. The online survey platform was configured to not collect IP addresses or any other tracking information. These measures were communicated to participants to encourage participation while maintaining anonymity and confidentiality. Data Collection took four and a half months. This study examined private Pakistani banks with more than 450 branches out of which at least 10 branches in Faisalabad spread across different areas, with a minimum of 20 years of existence, a total asset base of approximately PKR 500 billion (approx.), and a deposit base of approximately PKR 600 billion (approx.), having a market share of at least 5%, offering a comprehensive range of retail services, like savings accounts, loans, credit cards, etc., demonstrating consistent profitability and positive growth over the last three fiscal years, with a mix of recently established institutions (within the last 5 years). However, this criterion neglects smaller banks’ unique insights and practices. Focusing on banks with constant profitability and growth risks missing out on variations in HIWP implementation and outcomes across banking services. While covering banks of different eras offers diversity, it may not fully depict the evolving nature of HIWPs or long-term banking sector dynamics, particularly in Faisalabad’s private banks. Private banks are ideal for examining HIWPs’ organizational effects. Due to their decision-making autonomy, they can investigate more deeply without bureaucratic intervention than public banks. The flexibility of private banks’ HR policy shows how HIWPs adjust to organizational environments and market needs. Private banks’ willingness to adopt innovative HR practices makes them suitable for studying cutting-edge HIWP adoption and employee well-being and service outcomes. Private banks can respond quickly to market changes, allowing researchers to explore how HIWPs assist firms in overcoming challenges in a dynamic economy. Nonetheless, the questionnaire received approval from the board of study, specifically the Department of Management Sciences at Riphah International University Islamabad, during its 13th meeting held on July 6, 2021.

To ensure an appropriate sample size for SEM analysis, it was determined that the sample size must be more than five times the total number of questionnaire items ( O’Rourke and Hatcher, 2013 ), which were 64 for this study. Consequently, the researchers initially aimed for a sample size of 320. However, to fulfill the SEM requirement for a sufficient sample size, the researchers opted for a single-stage increase, raising the final sample size to 475 ( Wolf et al., 2013 ). The researchers used the simple random sampling technique, as it ensures every individual has an equal chance of selection, thereby offering a genuine representation of the population. This method not only reduces potential bias but is also cost and time-efficient. Its straightforward nature ensures replicability, enhancing the study’s credibility and utility for future comparative research. After an initial screening, 470 out of 650 survey questionnaires were selected for further analysis. All the questionnaires with missing values and erroneous responses were discarded.

Demographic profile

The sample of 475 employees comprised of 63.8% (303) males 36.2% (172) females, 34.5% (164) Single 52.2% (248) Married, 7.4% (35) Divorced 5.9% (28) Widowed, 11.2% (53) employees belonged to 25–35 years age group, 32.8% (156) belonged to 36–45 years group, 31.6% (150) belonged to 36–45 years group, 6.7% (32) belonged to 56 and above age group, 19.4% (164) have Bachelor’s degree, 60.0% (285) have Master’s degree, 17.5% (83) have MS/MPhil, and 5.9% (15) have PhD degree, 50.3% (239), Frontline Service Employee, 33.5% (159) Middle Level Managers, 16.2% (77) Lower Level Managers, 14.7% (70) respondents have less than 5 years’ work experience, 29.7% (141) have 5–10 years’ experience, 28.8% (137) have 11–15 years’ experience, 15.4% (73) have 16–20 years, and 11.4% (54) respondents have more than 20 years of professional experience, 5.5% (26) have 40–50 working hours, 53.7% (255) have 51–60 working hours, 40.8% (194) have more than 60 working hours, see Table 1 .

Table 1 . Demographic profile of the respondents.

Measurements

The assessment of 64 elements in the survey was conducted using validated and reliable instruments, see Annexure 1. The Likert scale, consisting of five possible outcomes that ranged from “strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5),” was used to assess the respondents’ attitudes and opinions. Mostly items were adopted, while others were slightly adapted to fit the context of the Pakistani banking sector.

Riordan et al. (2005) developed the PIRK model, which encompasses four standard practices: Power (3 items), Information Sharing (6 items), Reward (5 items) and Knowledge (4 items). In the study, these practices were used to evaluate HIWPs. A five-item scale developed by Bettencourt and Brown (1997) was used to measure Service Performance, while a nine-item scale developed by Carlson et al. (2019) had three dimensions: developmental, emotional, and capital-based work-family enrichment. Work-family enrichment based on development includes three items, work-family enrichment based on emotions includes three items and work-family enrichment based on capital includes three items. For measuring work–family conflict, a five-item scale by Netemeyer et al. (2005) , subjective well-being a five-item ‘Satisfaction with Life Scale’ by Diener and Fujita (1995) , and Customer Orientation, a five-item scale by Susskind et al. (2003) , workload, a six-item scale by Harris and Bladen (1994) and Supervisor Support, a four-item scale by Karatepe and Olugbade (2009) were used.

The study utilized several measures to assess different constructs, as shown in Table 2 . An online survey was conducted using Google Forms to collect data and obtain real-time responses. Participants were assured of their participation’s confidentiality, ensuring their responses’ privacy and anonymity. Only carefully completed and fully filled questionnaires were included. The collected data were coded and entered into an SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences) spreadsheet. Following data entry, multivariate assumptions were assessed to ensure the validity of subsequent analyses. CB-SEM instead of PLS-SEM was chosen due to its suitability for theory testing and confirmation, as this study focuses on validating existing theoretical frameworks in a new context and also due to the nature of its objectives and the characteristics of the data. Moreover, the sample size and the scale of measurement models were adequate for CB-SEM having rigorous model fit assessment capabilities. All four assumptions of SEM were met in this study. The normality of the data was assessed by examining kurtosis and skewness values, which were within the acceptable range, pointing to a normal distribution of the data.

Table 2 . Summary of measurement scales.

To address the concern of common method bias (CMB), a methodological framework (Harman One Factor Test) suggested by Henseler et al. (2015) was adopted. The universally accepted threshold for common variance is below 50%. This criterion serves as a reliable indicator, suggesting that when the common variance is less than 50%, there are no concerns related to CMB ( Henseler et al., 2015 ). The outcomes of the Harman One Factor Test reveal a common variance of 46.079% for the dataset. This value falls below the established threshold of 50%. For a comprehensive breakdown of the Harman One Factor Test results pertaining to CMB, refer to the detailed findings in Annexure 2. The results from this analysis indicates that CMB is not a predominant issue.

Multicollinearity was evaluated using Variance Inflation Factor (VIF), and all VIF values were below 3, ranging between 1.5 to 2.3, indicating that multicollinearity was not an issue. Data analysis was performed using the SEM approach with the AMOS software. First-order confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and second-order CFA were conducted in accordance with the recommendations by Anderson and Gerbing (1988) .

A specification search for CFA involved 70 first-order latent variables and 57 observable variables. Maximum likelihood estimation (MLE) was employed for model assessment. To evaluate model fit, first-order factor analysis was conducted, which provided factor loadings, AVE, SMC range, and Cronbach’s alpha (α) values. The measurement model results demonstrated that α scores of the measures ranged from 0.905 to 0.982, indicating satisfactory reliability (as shown in Table 3 ). Moreover, composite reliability (CR) values exceeded the acceptable threshold, ranging from 0.934 to 0.974 (see Table 4 ). The AVE measurement for all variables ranged from 0.752 to 0.905, surpassing the minimum criterion of 0.50 (as shown in Table 5 ), confirming convergent validity. Furthermore, the substantial factor loadings of the measurement items provided additional evidence for convergent validity.

Table 3 . Study constructs’ Cronbach’s alpha (α).

Table 4 . Composite reliability and convergent validity.

Table 5 . Discriminant validity.

Six constructs, namely SWB, CO, SP, WFC, WL, and SS, were considered first-order constructs during the CFA. Additionally, WFE and HIWPs were treated as second-order or higher-order reflective constructs. Reliability, discriminant, and convergent validity were assessed while examining the measurement model. All factor loadings were significant, so convergent validity was proven.

To establish discriminant validity, the squared inter-construct correlation coefficients were compared with AVE square root. The results confirmed the presence of discriminant validity, as the correlation coefficients between constructs were all below the square root of AVE, indicating that they were significantly different from one another. Table 4 provides further details on these results.

However, the initial model statistics fell slightly below the suggested threshold, indicating that re-specification of the measurement model was necessary to achieve an excellent fit. The decision to re-specify the model was made to improve the overall model fit, as shown in Table 6 . Moreover, Table 6 presents the values of default model before modification (known as initial model) indices and the values of the model after modification (known as final model) indices during CFA. After modification indices are the values after all adjustments in the measurement and structural models.

Table 6 . Initial and final measurement and structural models.

Hypotheses testing

The next step was evaluating the structural model fit to examine the hypothesized relationships among all exogenous and endogenous variables. It was derived from Hayes’ theoretical/conceptual model, consisting of eight variables and 15 indicators. Within the model, one variable (SS) served as a moderator, two variables (CO and WL) functioned as mediators, one variable (HIWPs) acted as an exogenous variable, and four variables (WFC, WFE, SP, SWB) were considered endogenous variables. All model fit indices in Table 6 exceeded the acceptable lower-limit values presented by Hu and Bentler (1999) , indicating a good fit of the structural model to the data. No paths needed to be eliminated from the model. The model demonstrated a satisfactory level of fit according to the specified threshold criteria.

Direct effect analysis

From Table 7 , the relationship between HIWPs and CO was highly significant (0.638, p < 0.05), supporting H1. Similarly, the results indicated that HIWPs accounted for 58.6% of the variance in WL (0.586, p < 0.05). This significant and positive association between HIWPs and WL further supported H2.

Table 7 . The standardized direct effect.

Mediation analysis

A bootstrapping method was employed using 5,000 bootstrap samples and a 95% bias-corrected confidence interval to assess total, direct, and indirect effects. Mediation analysis (shown in Table 8 ) was conducted in AMOS-24, which allowed for simultaneous evaluation of these effects. With a two-tailed test, the bootstrapping significance value provided information on the significance levels of the direct, indirect, and total effects. According to the study, HIWPs accounted for 30.4% of SP variance directly related to HIWPs. However, when CO was added between HIWPs and SP, this influence increased to 45.2%. CO significantly mediated the relationship between HIWPs and SP, but the mediation was only partially due to the weakened direct relationship. However, a statistically significant relationship remained between these, as indicated by less than 0.05 significance value of the bootstrapping two-tailed test. These findings support the presence of partial mediation and highlight the importance of the indirect impact of CO, thus accepting H3.

Table 8 . The standardized indirect, direct, and total effect.

The mediating factor between HIWPs and WFE was identified as CO, which was found to strongly but only partially mediate the relationship between the two. The indirect effect (43.8%) was considerably stronger than the direct effect (22.4%). The total effect showed a positive relationship between HIWPs and WFE (0.662; p < 0.05). So H4 was proved. According to H5, HIWPs had a statistically significant positive relationship with WFC (0.538, p < 0.05). When the mediating variable WL was included, the direct impact of HIWPs on WFC remained significant (0.170, p < 0.05), indicating that mediation existed in this relationship, and the indirect effect was 36.8%. As a result, H5 was accepted. The direct impact analysis showed that between HIWPs and SWB, a significant negative relationship existed (−0.356; p < 0.05). Even after including WL as a mediating variable, the direct effect remained significant (−0.140), while the indirect effect became more pronounced and significant (−0.216; p < 0.05). These results indicate that WL partially mediated the association between HIWPs and SWB. Therefore, H6 was also accepted.

Moderation mediation analyses

Moderated mediation analysis (as shown in Table 9 ) was conducted using the PROCESS Macro for SPSS version 3.4.1 ( Hayes, 2015 ). The index of moderated mediation was generated by employing a bootstrapping method with 5,000 samples to obtain bias-corrected confidence intervals at a 95% level ( Preacher et al., 2007 ). The results indicated that SS significantly strengthens the direct relationship between HIWPs and SP, as evidenced by both the interactions’ Z-Score and value of p being less than 0.05. The index of moderated mediation further confirmed this effect, with the lower-level confidence interval (LLCI) and upper-level confidence interval (ULCI) values reported as [0.0078, 0.0096], [0.0041, 0.0053], [−0.1635, −0.0565], and [0.0539, 0.1580] for SP, WFE, WFC, and SWB, respectively. These results demonstrate moderated differences in the conditional indirect effect when the bootstrapping two-tailed significance values were below 0.05. Therefore, it can be concluded that SS independently enhances the indirect impact of HIWPs on SP, WFE, WFC, and SWB through the mediating variables of CO, and WL. Consequently, H7, H8, H9, and H10 are accepted.

Table 9 . The conditional indirect effect of moderated mediations.

This study is grounded in the JD-R model and the COR theory, providing insights into the effects of HIWPs on various outcomes. The key findings confirm the dual nature effect of HIWPs, by proposing two offsetting mechanisms of customer orientation and workload acting as mediators. HIWPs positively and significantly contribute to Service Performance by enhancing Customer Orientation while negatively impacting Subjective Well-being through Work Load. The perception of HIWPs regarding employee support for their families, as reflected in Customer Orientation and Work Load, exhibited variation. Furthermore, the results demonstrate that Supervisor Support, as a job resource, is a strong moderator, as evident from its amplifying the positive effects of HIWPs, such as Service Performance and Work-Family Enrichment, while attenuating the adverse effects, such as Work–Family Conflict and Subjective Well-being.

All the results confirmed the prior literature. It is evident coinciding with the results of Wang and Chang (2016) , the results of H1 indicate that HIWPs in bank employees lead to increased customer satisfaction by enhancing their customer-centered insights and behaviors, due to their focus on skill enhancement, empowerment, and participatory decision-making. This alignment helps employees fulfill service goals and gives them the tools and mentality to manage disagreements and flourish as service professionals. Moreover, these findings align with the PIRK model suggesting that HIWPs are employment resources that help enhance service delivery skills. H2 findings reveal similar findings as those of Zahoor et al. (2021) that HIWPs also contribute to increased work-life conflict among employees due to the demands of working longer hours, delivering services quickly, and meeting client expectations. Since HIWPs strive to improve service quality and employee engagement, they also increase job expectations, which supports the hypothesis. Extensive training, performance assessments, and pressure to fulfill greater service standards can increase staff workload. H3 results demonstrate that HIWPs enhance employees’ CO, leading to improved performance and exceeding expectations in their roles, increasing their job satisfaction. The findings were consistent with those of Karatepe et al. (2018) and Lapierre et al. (2018) . Moreover, customer-focused employees are more likely to understand and meet client needs, resulting in better service. HIWPs provide customer-focused training, incentives, and rewards, indirectly impacting SP through CO. H4 results indicate that HIWPs promote customer-focused behaviors, positively impacting employees’ work and family lives and generating psychological and emotional resources that help them effectively fulfill their family responsibilities. These results are consistent with prior research by Michel et al. (2011) . CO’s mediating role shows that customer service personnel who feel supported are more likely to feel accomplished and satisfied, which benefits their family life. Findings of H5 propose that the widespread use of HIWPs strengthens employees’ work engagement, resulting in depleted resources for addressing family issues and consequently leading to higher WFC. These findings support the conclusions of Michel et al. (2011) . H6 demonstrates that HIWPs indirectly negatively impact employees’ SWB through increased WFC. HIWPs impose additional responsibilities on employees, which leads to higher work expectations, longer working hours, increased anxiety, feelings of despair, fatigue, and physical symptoms that negatively affect employee SWB. These findings correspond to those of Bowling et al. (2015) . Conclusively, HIWPs have positive and negative effects on employees, impacting customer satisfaction, work-life balance, job satisfaction, work engagement, and subjective well-being. The results highlight the importance of considering the potential benefits and drawbacks of HIWPs in the banking sector.

In line with the findings of Eren et al. (2013) , H7 results demonstrate that employees who perceive Supervisor Support have additional internal resources that enable them to meet customer requirements and exhibit customer-oriented behavior, leading to enhanced customer satisfaction and Service Performance. H8 and H9 findings indicate that employees with supportive supervisors experience positive outcomes at work and home or vice versa. The findings coincide with COR theory and also with the prior studies by Karatepe et al. (2007) , Marais et al. (2014) , Goh et al. (2015) , and Mansour and Tremblay (2016) demonstrating the vital role that support from organizations plays in achieving an effective integration of job and family duties. HIWPs are prone to work overload, which exhausts individuals’ energy, time, and emotional resources. WFC may result from an employee’s constant depletion of resources due to increased work demands; by empowering workers with the mental and practical resources needed to meet these demands and providing them with the flexibility needed to dedicate more time and energy to their families, supportive managers can mitigate the adverse effects of HIWPs like WFC. Employees engage in affectionate and responsive interactions with their families, promoting WFE. Moreover, supportive leadership reduces the stress that results from increased job demands. Employees working in supportive organizational environments with supportive managers can better meet customer needs, achieve a work-family balance, and manage the challenges posed by HIWPs, which is essential to the well-being of employees and the organization’s success.

Hypothesis 10 findings indicate that HIWPs may increase employees’ challenges and demands by potentially depleting their vital resources, leading to decreased life satisfaction, despondency, emotional exhaustion, and physical strain ( Goh et al., 2015 ). These harmful effects can, however, be mitigated by the supervisor’s supportive behavior. Supervisors’ perception of inclusion, belonging, and acknowledgment can increase workers’ life satisfaction and subjective well-being (SWB). Consequently, supervisory support can act as a shield, minimizing the adverse effects of job stress and overload. Employees who feel valued and supported are less likely to experience the negative consequences of job tension and overload, leading to higher life satisfaction and job satisfaction.

Overall findings of this study unearth and prove many facts about different relationships and their theoretical background. Human nature, attitude, and behavior remain the same regardless of culture. It is collectivistic or individualistic; the only difference in the manifestation is its intensity, duration, and how it is expressed. Based on the JD-R model and COR theory, this study was conducted in a country with a collectivistic culture; the findings confirm the dual impact of HIWPs on employee outcomes, expand the literature in various ways, and provide unique insights into how HIWPs affect service performance and staff well-being in the banking sector, where supervisor support acting as a moderator reveals how managerial actions can maximize or minimize these effects. In Pakistan, where hierarchical and relational dynamics are prominent, the supportive role of supervisors is magnified and can significantly influence the effectiveness of HIWPs. It can lead to heightened employee loyalty and a strong sense of belonging, pivotal in collectivistic societies. Moreover, the findings provide empirical evidence of how customer orientation and workload as mediators can affect these mechanisms through which HIWPs influence positive and negative employee outcomes. Moreover, customer orientation enhances service performance through collective efforts and shared successes. However, it poses a complex situation as HIWPs are aimed at improving employee engagement and organizational performance, they also inadvertently increase workload, which can be particularly challenging in a collectivistic context where work-life boundaries are often blurred, and familial obligations are deeply ingrained. This can intensify work–family conflict, challenging the traditional support structures central to Pakistani society. This detailed knowledge clarifies the conditions under which HIWPs can be most effective and beneficial. Finally, the findings provide evidence-based, culturally appropriate guidelines for using HIWPs to improve service performance and work-family enrichment in ways that respect collectivism without exacerbating work–family conflict or undermining subjective well-being. So, the findings present a balanced HIWPs’ implementation approach, which gives organizations new ways to navigate the complexities of modern work practices while honoring traditional values of collectivism and family cohesiveness.

Practical implications

This research has a number of practical implications for managers in Pakistan’s banking sector. This research focused not only on enriching the global academic discourse but also on helping to develop more contextually relevant management practices. First, in line with prior literature, the study findings demonstrate that HIWPs are an effective and advantageous management practice system for improving employee performance. Hence, to maintain service quality and profitability, private banks are supposed to implement HIWP practices. Although this study reveals the detrimental effects of HIWPs on the subjective well-being of employees as well as work–family conflict, banks must develop a more advanced vision of HIWPs to reach their objectives. The most crucial aspect of HIWP is to be cognizant of its effects on employees’ perception of added workload. There must be implementation of policies that promote work-life balance; that is, employees must be provided with stress management programs and policies to cope with job demands, along with work-family supportive plans and policies. As a means of resolving conflicts between work and family responsibilities ( Butts et al., 2013 ), banks should provide flexible working hours, child care facilitation on-site, etc. In line with the results of Wang et al. (2022) , the findings suggest that banks should promote the happiness, pleasure and life satisfaction of their employees by providing such programs and protecting them from the destructive effects that may result from the increased job demands caused by HIWPs.

Additionally, banks should enhance employees’ customer orientation, which enhances their service performance and enriches their work-family balance. Lastly, it is essential to note that it is not suggested by this research that HIWPs should not be implemented in service organizations when managing employees in the service sector. Besides, the study recommends that care should be done while applying HIWPs, the managers and organizations should also be aware of the possible costs associated with this initiative. So, the study’s empirical findings highlight the importance of managers demonstrating supportive leadership behavior to their employees when implementing their HIWPs. Organizations should invest in training programs that equip supervisors with the skills to provide emotional and instrumental support, recognize employee efforts, and foster a supportive team environment. Such training should also emphasize managing workloads and helping employees balance work and family demands. The behavior of Supervisor Support contributes to increasing the desirable effects of HR practices and decreasing their undesirable effects. Moreover, employees play a crucial role in service performance, as their work-family integration and personal life satisfaction are vital for the sustainability and profitability of an organization.

Theoretical implications

This research makes substantial theoretical contributions by extending and enriching the understanding of COR and JD-R models in the context of HIWPs and their impact on employee outcomes. Firstly, by challenging the prevailing assumption that HIWPs uniformly yield positive outcomes, this study prompts a reevaluation of the existing theoretical paradigms. The dual perspective of HIWPs aligns with the COR theory, which posits that individuals strive to acquire, retain, and protect resources, thereby emphasizing the need to consider potential resource losses and gains associated with HIWPs. Moreover, this aligns with the foundational principles of both COR and the JD-R model, as the former underscores the importance of resource investment and conservation, while the latter explicates the dual influence of job demands and resources on employee outcomes. Secondly, in alignment with the JD-R model’s emphasis on the dual processes of job demands and resources influencing employee well-being and performance, our study extends the JD-R model’s application to encompass broader organizational dynamics by empirically demonstrating the impact of HIWPs on workers’ attitudes toward customers, coupled with insights into balancing work and family obligations.

Another contribution of the study is that it enhances our understanding of how HIWPs and WFB interact. HIWPs are empirically demonstrated to impact workers’ attitudes toward customers and family and demand that work and family obligations should be balanced. The study findings underscore the complexity of this dynamic by providing insight into the benefits and disadvantages of HIWPs by demonstrating the advantages and disadvantages they introduce to diverse employee outcomes via multiple processes. In addition, this complex awareness provides a basis for identifying contextual limitations and highlighting the need for proactive measures to enhance the positive effects of HIWPs while minimizing their adverse consequences.

Based on the findings of this study, HIWPs do not represent an all-encompassing solution, nor are they inherently detrimental. As a result, the authors emphasize the importance of developing a comprehensive strategy that considers both the positive and negative aspects of HIWPs. Organizations should devise policies that can help employees perform their family and work obligations, so taking initiatives for stress management and helping employees achieve work-family balance has been recommended to minimize potential conflicts and improve employee well-being. Besides, it also emphasizes the importance of management support in maximizing the positive effects of HIWPs. In short, it suggests that HIWPs should not be rejected but rather be applied carefully, considering their potential costs and using those practices that promote employee satisfaction and well-being.

Limitations and future recommendations

To enhance precision and clarity, future research may focus on a few key areas to overcome this study’s limitations. This study is limited by using self-reported instruments to measure nearly all variables, which may contribute to a common method bias. In order to mitigate this issue, it is suggested that future research diversify its data sources and ensure the anonymity of the respondents. This may involve incorporating objective performance indicators, peer and supervisor feedback, or direct observations. In addition, employees’ reluctance to share work-related information with their families may have affected the study’s findings. Further research may benefit from a longitudinal design to provide a more comprehensive understanding of employee outcomes.

This method would circumvent the limitations imposed by the cross-sectional nature of the current study. It should also be noted that the present research is situated within the collectivistic culture of Pakistan. Consequently, research findings cannot be similarly applied to other sectors or cultures. This study’s theoretical framework should be applied to various business and social settings in future studies. The study also demonstrates that banks priorities customer satisfaction over employee well-being and work-life balance. It is necessary to identify industry-specific patterns and cultural factors that may influence the outcomes of HIWPs in order to understand their impact. HIWPs can be better understood through studies across various industries and cultures. This study uses the JD-R paradigm to understand the complex implications of HIWPs; however, there is the possibility that other mechanisms may also contribute to the results. In order to enhance the positive effects of HIWPs and mitigate their negative effects, future research should investigate alternative mechanisms and additional limitations. Other resources, both personal and environmental, such as resilience, self-efficacy, work engagement and peer support, may need to be examined.

Data availability statement

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/supplementary material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding authors.

Author contributions

XY: Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Software, Visualization, Writing – review & editing. AQ: Data curation, Investigation, Software, Visualization, Writing – review & editing, Supervision, Writing – original draft. BS: Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Methodology, Resources, Software, Writing – original draft, Data curation, Writing – review & editing. ST: Funding acquisition, Project administration, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Writing – review & editing.

The author(s) declare financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. Supported by the Ministry of Education of the People’s Republic of China (grant number 20XJC630009).

Conflict of interest

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

Publisher’s note

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

Ahmad, M., Raziq, M. M., Rehman, W. U., and Allen, M. M. (2020). High-performance work practices and organizational performance in Pakistan. Int. J. Manpow. 41, 318–338. doi: 10.1108/IJM-01-2019-0016

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Ali, M., Freeman, S., Shen, L., Xiong, L., and Chudhery, M. A. Z. (2022). High-performance work systems in public service units: examining the social capital and ambidexterity as mediating process. Pers. Rev. 53, 56–75. doi: 10.1108/PR-11-2021-0835

Allen, T. D., Regina, J., Wiernik, B. M., and Waiwood, A. M. (2023). Toward a better understanding of the causal effects of role demands on work–family conflict: a genetic modeling approach. J. Appl. Psychol. 108, 520–539. doi: 10.1037/apl0001032

Anderson, J. C., and Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: a review and recommended two-step approach. Psychol. Bull. 103, 411–423. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.411

Aryee, S., Kim, T. Y., Zhou, Q., and Ryu, S. (2019). Customer service at altitude: effects of empowering leadership. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 31, 3722–3741. doi: 10.1108/IJCHM-11-2018-0900

Aubouin-Bonnaventure, J., Fouquereau, E., Coillot, H., Lahiani, F. J., and Chevalier, S. (2023). A new gain spiral at work: relationships between virtuous organizational practices, psychological capital, and well-being of workers. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 20:1823. doi: 10.3390/ijerph20031823

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Bai, P., Heidarian Ghaleh, H., Chang, H., Li, L., and Pak, J. (2023). The dark side of high-performance work systems and self-sacrificial leadership: an empirical examination. Empl. Relat. 45, 1083–1097. doi: 10.1108/ER-04-2022-0192

Bakker, A. B., and Demerouti, E. (2007). The job demands-resources model: state of the art. J. Manag. Psychol. 22, 309–328. doi: 10.1108/02683940710733115

Bakker, A. B., ten Brummelhuis, L. L., Prins, J. T., and Van der Heijden, F. M. (2011). Applying the job demands–resources model to the work–home interface: a study among medical residents and their partners. J. Vocat. Behav. 79, 170–180. doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2010.12.004

Bakker, A., Demerouti, E., and Schaufeli, W. (2003). Dual processes at work in a call Centre: an application of the job demands–resources model. Eur. J. Work Organ. Psy. 12, 393–417. doi: 10.1080/13594320344000165

Bettencourt, L. A., and Brown, S. W. (1997). Contact employees: relationships among workplace fairness, job satisfaction and prosocial service behaviors. J. Retail. 73, 39–61. doi: 10.1016/S0022-4359(97)90014-2

Bowen, D. E., and Schneider, B. (2022). “Service management strategic mindsets: that create positive customer and employee experiences” in The Palgrave handbook of service management , (Eds.) Edvardsson, Bo, Tronvoll, B. (Cham: Springer International Publishing), 129–149.

Google Scholar

Bowling, N. A., Alarcon, G. M., Bragg, C. B., and Hartman, M. J. (2015). A meta-analytic examination of the potential correlates and consequences of workload. Work Stress 29, 95–113. doi: 10.1080/02678373.2015.1033037

Boxall, P., and Macky, K. (2014). High-involvement work processes, work intensification and employee well-being. Work Employ. Soc. 28, 963–984. doi: 10.1177/0950017013512714

Boyar, S. L., Smit, B. W., and Maertz, C. P. Jr. (2024). Empowered or overwhelmed? Procrastination extinguishes the positive effects of work flexibility on work–family conflict. J. Occup. Organ. Psychol. doi: 10.1111/joop.12490

Butts, M., Casper, W., and Yang, T. (2013). How important are work-family support policies A meta-analytic investigation of their effects on employee outcomes. The Journal of Applied Psychology , 98, 1–25. doi: 10.1037/a0030389

Carlson, D., Kacmar, K., Wayne, J., and Grzywacz, J. (2006). Measuring the positive side of the work–family interface: Development and validation of a work–family enrichment scale. Journal of Vocational Behavior 68, 131–164. doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2005.02.002

Carlson, D. S., Thompson, M. J., and Kacmar, K. M. (2019). Double crossed: the spillover and crossover effects of work demands on work outcomes through the family. J. Appl. Psychol. 104, 214–228. doi: 10.1037/apl0000348

Chan, K. W., and Lam, W. (2011). The trade-off of servicing empowerment on employees’ service performance: examining the underlying motivation and workload mechanisms. J. Acad. Market Sci. 39, 609–628. doi: 10.1007/s11747-011-0250-9

Chung, P. T., Sun, S., and Vo, D. T. H. (2019). How does financial development interact with economic growth in five ASEAN countries? Singapore Econ Rev 64, 441–460. doi: 10.1142/S0217590816500120

Collins, C. J. (2021). Expanding the resource based view model of strategic human resource management. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 32, 331–358. doi: 10.1080/09585192.2019.1711442

Conduit, J., and Mavondo, F. T. (2001). How critical is internal customer orientation to market orientation? J. Bus. Res. 51, 11–24. doi: 10.1016/S0148-2963(99)00044-2

Demerouti, E., Bakker, A. B., Nachreiner, F., and Schaufeli, W. B. (2001). The job demands-resources model of burnout. J. Appl. Psychol. 86, 499–512. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.86.3.499

Diener, E., and Fujita, F. (1995). Resources, personal strivings, and subjective well-being: a nomothetic and idiographic approach. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 68, 926–935. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.68.5.926

Di Milia, L., and Jiang, Z. (2024). Linking leader-member exchange and work–nonwork balance: the mediating role of thriving at work and the moderating role of gender. Pers. Rev. 53, 155–172. doi: 10.1108/PR-03-2022-0211

Dongsen, S. (2023). Assessing the impact of human resource management strategies on distribution efficiency in China's small and medium enterprises (SMEs). J Digitainabil Realism Mastery 2, 7–11. doi: 10.56982/dream.v2i05.103

Ehrnrooth, M., and Björkman, I. (2012). An integrative HRM process theorization: beyond signalling effects and mutual gains. J. Manag. Stud. 49, 1109–1135. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6486.2012.01055.x

Eren, S. S., Eren, M. Ş., Ayas, N., and Hacioglu, G. (2013). The effect of service orientation on financial performance: the mediating role of job satisfaction and customer satisfaction. Procedia. Soc. Behav. Sci. 99, 665–672. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.10.537

Franke, G. R., and Park, J. E. (2006). Salesperson adaptive selling behavior and customer orientation: a meta-analysis. J. Market. Res. 43, 693–702. doi: 10.1509/jmkr.43.4.693

Goh, Z., Ilies, R., and Wilson, K. S. (2015). Supportive supervisors improve employees’ daily lives: the role supervisors play in the impact of daily workload on life satisfaction via work–family conflict. J. Vocat. Behav. 89, 65–73. doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2015.04.009

Greenhaus, J. H., and Powell, G. N. (2006). When work and family are allies: a theory of work-family enrichment. Acad. Manage. Rev. 31, 72–92. doi: 10.5465/amr.2006.19379625

Hakanen, J. J., Bakker, A. B., and Schaufeli, W. B. (2006). Burnout and work engagement among teachers. J. Sch. Psychol. 43, 495–513. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2005.11.001

Hakanen, J. J., Peeters, M. C., and Perhoniemi, R. (2011). Enrichment processes and gain spirals at work and at home: a 3-year cross-lagged panel study. J. Occup. Organ. Psychol. 84, 8–30. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8325.2010.02014.x

Han, J., Sun, J. M., and Wang, H. L. (2020). Do high performance work systems generate negative effects? How and when? Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev. 30:100699. doi: 10.1016/j.hrmr.2019.100699

Han, M., Hu, E., Zhao, J., and Shan, H. (2023). High performance work systems and employee performance: the roles of employee well-being and workplace friendship. Hum. Resour. Dev. Int. , 1–20. doi: 10.1080/13678868.2023.2268488

Harris, M. M., and Bladen, A. (1994). Wording effects in the measurement of role conflict and role ambiguity: a multitrait-multimethod analysis. J. Manag. 20, 887–901. doi: 10.1177/014920639402000409

Hauff, S., Felfe, J., and Klug, K. (2020). High-performance work practices, employee well-being, and supportive leadership: spillover mechanisms and boundary conditions between HRM and leadership behavior. The International Journal of Human Resource Management 33, 2109–2137. doi: 10.1080/09585192.2020.1841819

Hayes, A. F. (2015). An index and test of linear moderated mediation. Multivar. Behav. Res. 50, 1–22. doi: 10.1080/00273171.2014.962683

Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., and Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the academy of marketing science 43, 115–135. doi: 10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8

Hobfoll, S. E. (2001). The influence of culture, community, and the nested-self in the stress process: advancing conservation of resources theory. Appl. Psychol. 50, 337–421. doi: 10.1111/1464-0597.00062

Hobfoll, S. E. (2002). Social and psychological resources and adaptation. Rev. Gen. Psychol. 6, 307–324. doi: 10.1037/1089-2680.6.4.307

Hong, Y., Jiang, Y., Liao, H., and Sturman, M. C. (2017). High performance work systems for service quality: boundary conditions and influence processes. Hum. Resour. Manage. 56, 747–767. doi: 10.1002/hrm.21801

Hong, Y., Liao, H., Hu, J., and Jiang, K. (2013). Missing link in the service profit chain: a meta-analytic review of the antecedents, consequences, and moderators of service climate. J. Appl. Psychol. 98, 237–267. doi: 10.1037/a0031666

Hu, L., and Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct. Equ. Model. Multidiscip. J. 6, 1–55. doi: 10.1080/10705519909540118

Islam, M. S., Amin, M., Feranita, F., and Karatepe, O. M. (2023). High-involvement work practices, work engagement and their effects on bank employees' turnover intentions: the moderating role of functional competence. Int. J. Bank Mark. 41, 1360–1388. doi: 10.1108/IJBM-04-2022-0157

Jensen, J. M., Patel, P. C., and Messersmith, J. G. (2013). High-performance work systems and job control: consequences for anxiety, role overload, and turnover intentions. J. Manag. 39, 1699–1724. doi: 10.1177/0149206311419663

Jiang, K., Lepak, D., Hu, J., and Baer, J. (2012). How does human resource management influence organizational outcomes? A meta-analytic investigation of mediating mechanisms. Academy of Management Journal 55, 1264–1294. doi: 10.5465/amj.2011.0088

Karatepe, O. M., and Olugbade, O. A. (2009). The effects of job and personal resources on hotel employees’ work engagement. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 28, 504–512. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhm.2009.02.003

Karatepe, O. M., Yavas, U., and Babakus, E. (2007). The effects of customer orientation and job resources on frontline employees’ job outcomes. Serv. Mark. Q. 29, 61–79. doi: 10.1300/J396v29n01_04

Karatepe, O. M., Yavas, U., Babakus, E., and Deitz, G. D. (2018). The effects of organizational and personal resources on stress, engagement, and job outcomes. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 74, 147–161. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhm.2018.04.005

Kaushik, D., and Mukherjee, U. (2022). High-performance work system: a systematic review of literature. Int. J. Organ. Anal. 30, 1624–1643. doi: 10.1108/IJOA-07-2020-2282

Kim, K., Ok, C., Kang, S.-C., Bae, J., and Kwon, K. (2021). High-performance work systems with internal and external contingencies: the moderating roles of organizational slack and industry instability. Hum. Resour. Manage. 60, 415–433. doi: 10.1002/hrm.22030

Kloutsiniotis, P., and Mihail, D. (2020). Is it worth it? Linking perceived high-performance work systems and emotional exhaustion: the mediating role of job demands and job resources. Eur. Manag. J. 38, 565–579. doi: 10.1016/j.emj.2019.12.012

Kossek, E. E., Porter, C. M., Rosokha, L. M., Wilson, K. S., Rupp, D. E., and Law-Penrose, J. (2024). Advancing work–life supportive contexts for the “haves” and “have nots”: integrating supervisor training with work–life flexibility to impact exhaustion or engagement. Hum. Resour. Manage. doi: 10.1002/hrm.22207

Kroon, B., Van de Voorde, K., and Van Veldhoven, M. J. P. M. (2009). Cross-level effects of high-performance work practices on burnout: two counteracting mediating mechanisms compared. Pers. Rev. 38, 509–525. doi: 10.1108/00483480910978027

Lapierre, L. M., Li, Y., Kwan, H. K., Greenhaus, J. H., DiRenzo, M. S., and Shao, P. (2018). A meta-analysis of the antecedents of work–family enrichment. J. Organ. Behav. 39, 385–401. doi: 10.1002/job.2234

Lawler, E. E. (1986). High-involvement management. Participative strategies for improving Organisational performance . Jossey-Bass Inc., Publishers, San Francisco, CA.

Lawler, E., and Ledford, G. (1992). A skill-based approach to human resource management. European Management Journal 10, 383–391. doi: 10.1016/0263-2373(92)90002-L

Lesener, T., Gusy, B., and Wolter, C. (2019). The job demands-resources model: a meta-analytic review of longitudinal studies. Work Stress 33, 76–103. doi: 10.1080/02678373.2018.1529065

Liao, H., Toya, K., Lepak, D. P., and Hong, Y. (2009). Do they see eye to eye? Management and employee perspectives of high-performance work systems and influence processes on service quality. J. Appl. Psychol. 94, 371–391. doi: 10.1037/a0013504

Liao, Y., Yang, Z., Wang, M., and Kwan, H. K. (2016). Work–family effects of LMX: the moderating role of work–home segmentation preferences. Leadersh. Q. 27, 671–683. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2016.03.003

Liaw, Y. J., Chi, N. W., and Chuang, A. (2010). Examining the mechanisms linking transformational leadership, employee customer orientation, and service performance: the mediating roles of perceived supervisor and coworker support. J. Bus. Psychol. 25, 477–492. doi: 10.1007/s10869-009-9145-x

Li, H. T. (2023). Escalation of relationship conflict into work disengagement: uncovering mediation mechanisms. Int. J. Confl. Manag. 34, 80–103. doi: 10.1108/IJCMA-05-2021-0071

Litano, M. L., Major, D. A., Landers, R. N., Streets, V. N., and Bass, B. I. (2016). A meta-analytic investigation of the relationship between leader-member exchange and work-family experiences. Leadersh. Q. 27, 802–817. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2016.06.003

Litwin, A. S. (2015). “Nose to tail: using the whole employment relationship to link worker participation to operational performance” in Advances in industrial and labor relations (Leeds: Emerald Group Publishing Limited), 143–176.

MacDuffie, J. P. (1995). Human resource bundles and manufacturing performance: Organizational logic and flexible production systems in the world auto industry. ilr Review 48, 197–221. doi: 10.1177/001979399504800201

Mansour, S., and Tremblay, D. G. (2016). Workload, generic and work–family specific social supports and job stress: mediating role of work–family and family–work conflict. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 28, 1778–1804. doi: 10.1108/IJCHM-11-2014-0607

Marais, E., De Klerk, M., Nel, J. A., and De Beer, L. (2014). The antecedents and outcomes of work-family enrichment amongst female workers. SA J. Ind. Psychol. 40, 1–14. doi: 10.4102/sajip.v40i1.1186

Mariappanadar, S. (2014). Stakeholder harm index: a framework to review work intensification from the critical HRM perspective. Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev. 24, 313–329. doi: 10.1016/j.hrmr.2014.03.009

Michel, J. S., Kotrba, L. M., Mitchelson, J. K., Clark, M. A., and Baltes, B. B. (2011). Antecedents of work–family conflict: a meta-analytic review. J. Organ. Behav. 32, 689–725. doi: 10.1002/job.695

Mokhtar, N., and Krishnan, R. (2023). A proposed framework for the relationship between emotional intelligence and Employee’s performance: mediating role of job demand. Informat Manage Bus Rev 15, 200–207. doi: 10.22610/imbr.v15i4(SI)I.3593

Netemeyer, R. G., Maxham, J. G. III, and Pullig, C. (2005). Conflicts in the work–family interface: links to job stress, customer service employee performance, and customer purchase intent. J. Mark. 69, 130–143. doi: 10.1509/jmkg.69.2.130.60758

O’Rourke, N., and Hatcher, L. (2013). A step-by-step approach to using the SAS system for factor analysis and structural equation modeling (2nd Edn.). New York: SAS Institute, Inc.

Ogbonnaya, C., and Messersmith, J. (2019). Employee performance, well-being, and differential effects of human resource management subdimensions: mutual gains or conflicting outcomes? Hum. Resour. Manag. J. 29, 509–526. doi: 10.1111/1748-8583.12203

Oppenauer, V., and Van De Voorde, K. (2018). Exploring the relationships between high involvement work system practices, work demands and emotional exhaustion: a multi-level study. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 29, 311–337. doi: 10.1080/09585192.2016.1146321

Pakistan Banking Perspective (2022). Pakistan banking perspective. KPMG Taseer Hadi & Co. Chartered Accountants. Available at: www.kpmg.com.pk

Palumbo, R. (2023). Making sense of the relationship between involvement and work–life balance: empirical insights from the public sector. Int. J. Public Adm. , 1–17. doi: 10.1080/01900692.2023.2166065

Park, H., and Hur, W. M. (2023). Customer showrooming behavior, customer orientation, and emotional labor: sales control as a moderator. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 72:103268. doi: 10.1016/j.jretconser.2023.103268

Preacher, K. J., Rucker, D. D., and Hayes, A. F. (2007). Addressing moderated mediation hypotheses: theory, methods, and prescriptions. Multivar. Behav. Res. 42, 185–227. doi: 10.1080/00273170701341316

Ramsay, H., Scholarios, D., and Harley, B. (2000). Employees and high-performance work systems: testing inside the black box. Br. J. Ind. Relat. 38, 501–531. doi: 10.1111/1467-8543.00178

Riordan, C. M., Vandenberg, R. J., and Richardson, H. A. (2005). Employee involvement climate and organizational effectiveness. Hum Resourc Manag 44, 471–488. doi: 10.1002/hrm.20085

Rubio-Andrés, M., Ramos-González, M. D. M., Gutiérrez-Broncano, S., and Sastre-Castillo, M. Á. (2022). Creating financial and social value by improving employee well-being: a PLS-SEM application in SMEs. Mathematics 10:4456. doi: 10.3390/math10234456

Sousa, C. M., Coelho, F., and Silva, S. C. (2023). Do goal orientations really influence performance? Int. J. Retail Distrib. Manag. 51, 262–283. doi: 10.1108/IJRDM-12-2021-0593

Susskind, A. M., Kacmar, K. M., and Borchgrevink, C. P. (2003). Customer service providers’ attitudes relating to customer service and customer satisfaction in the customer-server exchange. J. Appl. Psychol. 88, 179–187. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.88.1.179

Tement, S., Mihelič, K. K., and Kubicek, B. (2023). Time pressure, work-related spousal support seeking, and relationship satisfaction: spillover and crossover effects among dual-earner couples. Stress. Health 39, 871–883. doi: 10.1002/smi.3232

Wang, M. L., and Chang, S. C. (2016). The impact of job involvement on emotional labor to customer-oriented behavior: an empirical study of hospital nurses. J. Nurs. Res. 24, 153–162. doi: 10.1097/jnr.0000000000000114

Wang, Z., Xing, L., Song, L. J., and Moss, S. E. (2022). Serving the customer, serving the family, and serving the employee: toward a comprehensive understanding of the effects of service-oriented high-performance work systems. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 33, 2052–2082. doi: 10.1080/09585192.2020.1837201

Wattoo, M. A., Zhao, S., and Xi, M. (2020). High-performance work systems and work–family interface: job autonomy and self-efficacy as mediators. Asia Pac. J. Hum. Resour. 58, 128–148. doi: 10.1111/1744-7941.12231

Wolf, E. J., Harrington, K. M., Clark, S. L., and Miller, M. W. (2013). Sample size requirements for structural equation models: an evaluation of power, bias, and solution propriety. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 73, 913–934. doi: 10.1177/0013164413495237

Xiong, X. Y. (2023). Linking high-performance work systems to work engagement: exploring the mediating role of perceived internal marketability. J. Manag. Organ. , 1–13. doi: 10.1017/jmo.2023.30

Zablah, A., Franke, G., Brown, T., and Bartholomew, D. (2012). How and when does customer orientation influence frontline employee job outcomes? A meta-analytic evaluation. Journal of Marketing , 76, 21–40. doi: 10.1509/jm.10.0231

Zahoor, N., Abdullah, N., and Zakaria, N. (2021). The role of high performance work practices, work-family conflict, job stress and personality in affecting work life balance. Manage Sci Lett 11, 1367–1378. doi: 10.5267/j.msl.2020.11.003

Zhang, Z., and Song, P. (2020). Multi-level effects of humble leadership on employees’ work well-being: the roles of psychological safety and error management climate. Front. Psychol. 11:571840. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.571840

Zhou, Y., Zheng, G., Liu, G., and Zhang, Z. (2023). Complementary effects of high-performance work systems and temporal leadership on employee creativity: a social embeddedness perspective of thriving. Asia Pac. J. Hum. Resour. doi: 10.1111/1744-7941.12365

Keywords: subjective well-being, high involvement work practices, workload, customer orientation, work–family conflict, supportive leadership

Citation: Yang X, Qadir A, Shahid B and Tahir SH (2024) The paradoxical effects of high involvement work practices on employees and service outcomes: a trichromatic perspective. Front. Psychol . 15:1338171. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1338171

Received: 14 November 2023; Accepted: 26 February 2024; Published: 19 March 2024.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2024 Yang, Qadir, Shahid and Tahir. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Xiaoxi Yang, [email protected] ; Safdar Husain Tahir, [email protected]

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

IMAGES

(PDF) Theoretical Literature Review: Tracing the Life Cycle of a Theory
50 Smart Literature Review Templates (APA) ᐅ TemplateLab
(PDF) Theoretical Perspectives of Research Output based on Literature
Chapter 2 Literature Review And Theoretical Framework
Literature Review: Outline, Strategies, and Examples
Literature Review Guidelines

VIDEO

Research theoretical framework part 03
Approaches , Analysis And Sources Of Literature Review ( RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND IPR)
Research
Literature Review
What is literature review?
Background, Literature Review, and Theoretical Framework -- Sarah Lynne Bowman

COMMENTS

How to Write a Literature Review
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 ...
Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines
This is generally referred to as the "literature review," "theoretical framework," or "research background." However, for a literature review to become a proper research methodology, as with any other research, follow proper steps need to be followed and action taken to ensure the review is accurate, precise, and trustworthy.
Writing a Literature Review
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. ... 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 ...
Literature Reviews, Theoretical Frameworks, and Conceptual Frameworks
Conducting a literature review, selecting a theoretical framework, and building a conceptual framework are some of the most difficult elements of a research study. ... Scholars before researchers: On the centrality of the dissertation literature review in research preparation. Educational Researcher, 34 (6), 3-15. 10.3102/0013189x034006003 ...
5. The Literature Review
A literature review surveys prior research published in books, scholarly articles, and any other sources relevant to a particular issue, area of research, or theory, and by so doing, provides a description, summary, and critical evaluation of these works in relation to the research problem being investigated. ... Theoretical Review The purpose ...
Guidance on Conducting a Systematic Literature Review
Literature review is an essential feature of academic research. Fundamentally, knowledge advancement must be built on prior existing work. To push the knowledge frontier, we must know where the frontier is. By reviewing relevant literature, we understand the breadth and depth of the existing body of work and identify gaps to explore.
Methodological Approaches to Literature Review
A literature review is defined as "a critical analysis of a segment of a published body of knowledge through summary, classification, and comparison of prior research studies, reviews of literature, and theoretical articles." (The Writing Center University of Winconsin-Madison 2022) A literature review is an integrated analysis, not just a summary of scholarly work on a specific topic.
Writing a literature review
Writing a literature review requires a range of skills to gather, sort, evaluate and summarise peer-reviewed published data into a relevant and informative unbiased narrative. Digital access to research papers, academic texts, review articles, reference databases and public data sets are all sources of information that are available to enrich ...
Approaching literature review for academic purposes: The Literature
A sophisticated literature review (LR) can result in a robust dissertation/thesis by scrutinizing the main problem examined by the academic study; anticipating research hypotheses, methods and results; and maintaining the interest of the audience in how the dissertation/thesis will provide solutions for the current gaps in a particular field.
Literature Review Research
Literature Review is a comprehensive survey of the works published in a particular field of study or line of research, usually over a specific period of time, in the form of an in-depth, critical bibliographic essay or annotated list in which attention is drawn to the most significant works. Also, we can define a literature review as the ...
Ten Simple Rules for Writing a Literature Review
The bottom-right situation (many literature reviews but few research papers) is not just a theoretical situation; it applies, ... A diversity of feedback perspectives on a literature review can help identify where the consensus view stands in the landscape of the current scientific understanding of an issue . Rule 9: Include Your Own Relevant ...
PDF LITERATURE REVIEWS
2. MOTIVATE YOUR RESEARCH in addition to providing useful information about your topic, your literature review must tell a story about how your project relates to existing literature. popular literature review narratives include: ¡ plugging a gap / filling a hole within an incomplete literature ¡ building a bridge between two "siloed" literatures, putting literatures "in conversation"
Critically reviewing literature: A tutorial for new researchers
Critically reviewing the literature is an indispensible skill which is used throughout a research career. This article demystifies the processes involved in systematically and critically reviewing the literature to demonstrate knowledge, identify research ideas, position research and develop theory. Although aimed primarily at research students ...
Theoretical Framework Example for a Thesis or Dissertation
Theoretical Framework Example for a Thesis or Dissertation. Published on October 14, 2015 by Sarah Vinz . Revised on July 18, 2023 by Tegan George. Your theoretical framework defines the key concepts in your research, suggests relationships between them, and discusses relevant theories based on your literature review.
Theoretical Literature Review: Tracing the Life Cycle of a Theory and
The Academy of Human Resource Development (AHRD) has proven to be a source of knowledge providing research in the forms of theory development, literature reviews, ... The current article proposes a format for conducting a theoretical literature review, using path-goal leadership theory and the learning organization as two examples to showcase ...
What is a literature review?
A literature or narrative review is a comprehensive review and analysis of the published literature on a specific topic or research question. The literature that is reviewed contains: books, articles, academic articles, conference proceedings, association papers, and dissertations. It contains the most pertinent studies and points to important ...
What is a literature review?
A literature review serves two main purposes: 1) To show awareness of the present state of knowledge in a particular field, including: seminal authors. the main empirical research. theoretical positions. controversies. breakthroughs as well as links to other related areas of knowledge. 2) To provide a foundation for the author's research.
Types of Literature Reviews
Listed below are definitions of types of literature reviews: Argumentative Review. This form examines literature selectively in order to support or refute an argument, deeply embedded assumption, or philosophical problem already established in the literature. The purpose is to develop a body of literature that establishes a contrarian viewpoint.
Theoretical Framework
In research, a theoretical framework explains the relationship between various variables, identifies gaps in existing knowledge, and guides the development of research questions, hypotheses, and methodologies. ... Review relevant literature: Conduct a thorough review of the existing literature in your field to identify key theories and ideas ...
Theoretical Literature Review: Tracing the Life Cycle of a Theory and
theoretical literature review, theory, literature review, knowledge base, reference discipline Popper (2002) explained that theories are "perpetually changing" (p. 50), leading to
Difference between theoretical literature review and empirical
Most recent answer. Theoretical literature review focuses on the existing theories, models and concepts that are relevant to a research topic. It does not collect or analyze primary data, but ...
A Step-by-Step Guide to Writing a Stellar Literature Review
Composing a literature review demands a holistic research summary, each part exhibiting your understanding and approach. As you write the content, make sure to cover the following points: Keep a historical background of the field of research. Highlight the relevant relation between the old studies and your new research.
Self-Compassion: Theory, Method, Research, and Intervention
Self-compassion refers to being supportive toward oneself when experiencing suffering or pain—be it caused by personal mistakes and inadequacies or external life challenges. This review presents my theoretical model of self-compassion as comprised of six different elements: increased self-kindness, common humanity, and mindfulness as well as reduced self-judgment, isolation, and ...
A Literature Review on Digital Entrepreneurship: A Comparative
A Literature Review on Digital Entrepreneurship: A Comparative Theoretical Analysis from the Perspectives of Economics, Psychology and Management January 2024 Open Journal of Business and ...
Consumer ethnocentrism: What we learned and what we need to know?
The mechanics of a systematic literature review need to be organized about theories, features, settings, and methodologies (Paul & Criado, Citation 2020); as a result, this research deploys Paul and Rosado-Serrano (Citation 2019) TCCM framework to synthesize the literature in consumer ethnocentrism research and recommend avenues for future ...
Chapter 9 Methods for Literature Reviews
9.3. Types of Review Articles and Brief Illustrations. EHealth researchers have at their disposal a number of approaches and methods for making sense out of existing literature, all with the purpose of casting current research findings into historical contexts or explaining contradictions that might exist among a set of primary research studies conducted on a particular topic.
Empowering education development through AIGC: A systematic literature
3.2 Initial literature search. According to the PRISMA guidelines, SLR generally requires three or more databases as sources of literature (Moher et al., 2009).To comprehensively obtain the required literature data for this study, we drew inspiration from existing SLR studies in the field of educational technology (Radianti et al., 2020; Luo et al., 2021) and selected four English literature ...
AI for Systematic Review
Securely automate every stage of your literature review to produce evidence-based research faster, more accurately, and more transparently at scale. Rayyan A web-tool designed to help researchers working on systematic reviews, scoping reviews and other knowledge synthesis projects, by dramatically speeding up the process of screening and ...
Frontiers
Literature review and hypotheses development Theoretical framework. The JD-R model is widely recognized as one of the field's most extensively researched and validated empirical frameworks (Lesener et al., 2019). This model proposes two fundamental pathways through which it operates: the straining and motivating processes.

Writing a Literature Review

Welcome to the Purdue OWL

Where, when, and why would I write a lit review?

What are the parts of a lit review?

How should I organize my lit review?

What are some strategies or tips I can use while writing my lit review?

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper

Importance of a Good Literature Review

Structure and Writing Style

Writing Tip

Another Writing Tip

Yet Another Writing Tip

Research Methods

Literature Review

Have a language expert improve your writing

Theoretical Framework Example for a Thesis or Dissertation

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Table of contents

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

Cite this Scribbr article

Is this article helpful?

Other students also liked

Literature Reviews

What is a Literature Review?

Purpose of a Literature Review

Limitations of a Literature Review

What is a literature review?

The purposes of a literature review

Share This Book

Literature Review: Types of Literature Reviews

Types of Literature Reviews

Theoretical Framework – Types, Examples and Writing Guide

Theoretical Framework

Types of Theoretical Framework

Conceptual Framework

Deductive Framework

Inductive Framework

Empirical Framework

Normative Framework

Explanatory Framework

Components of Theoretical Framework

How to Write Theoretical Framework

Theoretical Framework Examples

When to Have A Theoretical Framework

Purpose of Theoretical Framework

Characteristics of Theoretical Framework

Advantages of Theoretical Framework

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

You may also like

How to Cite Research Paper – All Formats and...

Data Collection – Methods Types and Examples

Delimitations in Research – Types, Examples and...

Research Paper Format – Types, Examples and...

Research Process – Steps, Examples and Tips

Research Design – Types, Methods and Examples

A Step-by-Step Guide to Writing a Stellar Literature Review (with Help from AI)

Table of contents

What is the purpose of a literature review?

Literature review– structure and style

Your friendly step-by-step guide to writing a literary review (with help from AI)

1. Narrow down the research scope

2. Hunt relevant literature

3. Observe the themes and patterns in sources

4. Generate an outline

5. Start filling!

6. Give attention to detail and edit

The dos and don’ts of writing a literature review

Examples of comprehensive literature reviews

1. Critical Thinking and Transferability: A Review of the Literature (Gwendolyn Reece)

2. The Use of Technology in English Language Learning: A Literature Review

Wordtune: your writing buddy!

Let the narrative begin

Share This Article:

How I Turned Clutter into Cash: 10 Proven Instagram Copywriting Hacks

How to Write a Wikipedia Page So It’ll Get Approved

6 Steps to Choosing the Right Social Media Platform for Your Audience

Handbook of eHealth Evaluation: An Evidence-based Approach [Internet].

9.1. Introduction

9.2. Overview of the Literature Review Process and Steps