Write a Literature Review

1. Introduction

Not to be confused with a book review, a literature review surveys scholarly articles, books and other sources (e.g. dissertations,
conference proceedings) relevant to a particular issue, area of research, or theory, providing a description, summary, and critical
evaluation of each work. The purpose is to offer an overview of significant literature published on a topic.

2. Components

Similar to primary research, development of the literature review requires four stages:

• Problem formulation—which topic or field is being examined and what are its component issues?
• Literature search—finding materials relevant to the subject being explored
• Data evaluation—determining which literature makes a significant contribution to the understanding of the topic
• Analysis and interpretation—discussing the findings and conclusions of pertinent literature

Literature reviews should comprise the following elements:

• An overview of the subject, issue or theory under consideration, along with the objectives of the literature review
• Division of works under review into categories (e.g. those in support of a particular position, those against, and
those offering alternative theses entirely)
• 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

In assessing each piece, consideration should be given to:

• 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)?
• 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/least convincing?
• Value—Are the author's arguments and conclusions convincing? Does the work ultimately contribute in any
significant way to an understanding of the subject?

3. Definition and Use/Purpose

A literature review may constitute an essential chapter of a thesis or dissertation, or may be a self-contained review of writings on
a subject. In either case, its purpose is to:

• Place each work in the context of its contribution to the understanding of the subject under review
• Describe the relationship of each work to the others under consideration
• Identify new ways to interpret, and shed light on any gaps in, previous research
• Resolve conflicts amongst seemingly contradictory previous studies
• Identify areas of prior scholarship to prevent duplication of effort
• Point the way forward for further research
• Place one's original work (in the case of theses or dissertations) in the context of existing literature

The literature review itself, however, does not present new primary scholarship..

Literature Reviews
 What this handout is about

This handout will explain what a literature review is and offer insights into the form and construction of a literature review in the
humanities, social sciences, and sciences.

Introduction

OK. You've got to write a literature review. You dust off a novel and a book of poetry, settle down in your chair, and get ready to
issue a "thumbs up" or "thumbs down" as you leaf through the pages. "Literature review" done. Right?

Wrong! The "literature" of a literature review refers to any collection of materials on a topic, not necessarily the great literary
texts of the world. "Literature" could be anything from a set of government pamphlets on British colonial methods in Africa to
scholarly articles on the treatment of a torn ACL. And a review does not necessarily mean that your reader wants you to give
your personal opinion on whether or not you liked these sources.

What is a literature review, then?

A literature review discusses published information in a particular subject area, and sometimes information in a particular subject
area within a certain time period.

A literature review can be just a simple summary of the sources, but it usually has an organizational pattern and combines both
summary and synthesis. A summary is a recap of the important information of the source, but a synthesis is a re-organization, or
a reshuffling, of that information. It might give a new interpretation of old material or combine new with old interpretations. Or it
might trace the intellectual progression of the field, including major debates. And depending on the situation, the literature review
may evaluate the sources and advise the reader on the most pertinent or relevant.

But how is a literature review different from an academic research paper?

The main focus of an academic research paper is to develop a new argument, and a research paper will contain a literature review
as one of its parts. In a research paper, you use the literature as a foundation and as support for a new insight that you contribute.
The focus of a literature review, however, is to summarize and synthesize the arguments and ideas of others without adding new
contributions.

Why do we write literature reviews?

Literature reviews provide you with a handy guide to a particular topic. If you have limited time to conduct research, literature
reviews can give you an overview or act as a stepping stone. For professionals, they are useful reports that keep them up to date
with what is current in the field. For scholars, the depth and breadth of the literature review emphasizes the credibility of the
writer in his or her field. Literature reviews also provide a solid background for a research paper's investigation. Comprehensive
knowledge of the literature of the field is essential to most research papers.

Who writes these things, anyway?

Literature reviews are written occasionally in the humanities, but mostly in the sciences and social sciences; in experiment and
lab reports, they constitute a section of the paper. Sometimes a literature review is written as a paper in itself.

Let's get to it! What should I do before writing the literature review?

Clarify

If your assignment is not very specific, seek clarification from your instructor:

• Roughly how many sources should you include?

• What types of sources (books, journal articles, websites)?
• Should you summarize, synthesize, or critique your sources by discussing a common theme or issue?
 • Should you evaluate your sources?
• Should you provide subheadings and other background information, such as definitions and/or a history?

Find models

Look for other literature reviews in your area of interest or in the discipline and read them to get a sense of the types of themes
you might want to look for in your own research or ways to organize your final review. You can simply put the word "review" in
your search engine along with your other topic terms to find articles of this type on the Internet or in an electronic database. The
bibliography or reference section of sources you've already read are also excellent entry points into your own research.

Narrow your topic

There are hundreds or even thousands of articles and books on most areas of study. The narrower your topic, the easier it will be
to limit the number of sources you need to read in order to get a good survey of the material. Your instructor will probably not
expect you to read everything that's out there on the topic, but you'll make your job easier if you first limit your scope.

And don't forget to tap into your professor's (or other professors') knowledge in the field. Ask your professor questions such as:
"If you had to read only one book from the 70's on topic X, what would it be?" Questions such as this help you to find and
determine quickly the most seminal pieces in the field.

Consider whether your sources are current

Some disciplines require that you use information that is as current as possible. In the sciences, for instance, treatments for
medical problems are constantly changing according to the latest studies. Information even two years old could be obsolete.
However, if you are writing a review in the humanities, history, or social sciences, a survey of the history of the literature may be
what is needed, because what is important is how perspectives have changed through the years or within a certain time period.
Try sorting through some 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 consider what is currently of interest to scholars in this field and what is not.

Strategies for writing the literature review

Find a focus

A literature review, like a term paper, is usually organized around ideas, not the sources themselves as an annotated bibliography
would be organized. This means that you will not just simply list your sources and go into detail about each one of them, one at a
time. No. As you read widely but selectively in your topic area, consider instead what themes or issues connect your sources
together. Do they present one or different solutions? Is there an aspect of the field that is missing? How well do they present the
material and do they portray it according to an appropriate theory? Do they reveal a trend in the field? A raging debate? Pick one
of these themes to focus the organization of your review.

Construct a working thesis statement

Then use the focus you've found to construct a thesis statement. Yes! Literature reviews have thesis statements as well! However,
your thesis statement will not necessarily argue for a position or an opinion; rather it will argue for a particular perspective on the
material. Some sample thesis statements for literature reviews are as follows:

The current trend in treatment for congestive heart failure combines surgery and medicine.

More and more cultural studies scholars are accepting popular media as a subject worthy of academic consideration.

Consider organization

You've got a focus, and you've narrowed it down to a thesis statement. Now what is the most effective way of presenting the
information? What are the most important topics, subtopics, etc., that your review needs to include? And in what order should
you present them? Develop an organization for your review at both a global and local level:
First, cover the basic categories

Just like most academic papers, literature reviews also must contain at least three basic elements: an introduction or background
information section; the body of the review containing the discussion of sources; and, finally, a conclusion and/or
recommendations section to end the paper.

Introduction: Gives a quick idea of the topic of the literature review, such as the central theme or organizational pattern.

Body: Contains your discussion of sources and is organized either chronologically, thematically, or methodologically (see below
for more information on each).

Conclusions/Recommendations: Discuss what you have drawn from reviewing literature so far. Where might the discussion
proceed?

Organizing the body

Once you have the basic categories in place, then you must consider how you will present the sources themselves within the body
of your paper. Create an organizational method to focus this section even further.

To help you come up with an overall organizational framework for your review, consider the following scenario and then three
typical ways of organizing the sources into a review:

You've decided to focus your literature review on materials dealing with sperm whales. This is because you've just finished
reading Moby Dick, and you wonder if that whale's portrayal is really real. You start with some articles about the physiology of
sperm whales in biology journals written in the 1980's. But these articles refer to some British biological studies performed on
whales in the early 18th century. So you check those out. Then you look up a book written in 1968 with information on how
sperm whales have been portrayed in other forms of art, such as in Alaskan poetry, in French painting, or on whale bone, as the
whale hunters in the late 19th century used to do. This makes you wonder about American whaling methods during the time
portrayed in Moby Dick, so you find some academic articles published in the last five years on how accurately Herman Melville
portrayed the whaling scene in his novel.

Chronological

If your review follows the chronological method, you could write about the materials above according to when they were
published. For instance, first you would talk about the British biological studies of the 18th century, then about Moby Dick,
published in 1851, then the book on sperm whales in other art (1968), and finally the biology articles (1980s) and the recent
articles on American whaling of the 19th century. But there is relatively no continuity among subjects here. And notice that even
though the sources on sperm whales in other art and on American whaling are written recently, they are about other
subjects/objects that were created much earlier. Thus, the review loses its chronological focus.

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 biological studies of sperm whales if the progression revealed a change in dissection
practices of the researchers who wrote and/or conducted the studies.

By trend

A better way to organize the above sources chronologically is to examine the sources under another trend, such as the history of
whaling. Then your review would have subsections according to eras within this period. For instance, the review might examine
whaling from pre-1600-1699, 1700-1799, and 1800-1899. Under this method, you would combine the recent studies on American
whaling in the 19th century with Moby Dick itself in the 1800-1899 category, even though the authors wrote a century apart.

Thematic
Thematic reviews of literature are organized around a topic or issue, rather than the progression of time. However, progression of
time may still be an important factor in a thematic review. For instance, the sperm whale review could focus on the development
of the harpoon for whale hunting. While the study focuses on one topic, harpoon technology, it will still be organized
chronologically. The only difference here between a "chronological" and a "thematic" approach is what is emphasized the most:
the development of the harpoon or the harpoon technology.

But more authentic thematic reviews tend to break away from chronological order. For instance, a thematic review of material on
sperm whales might examine how they are portrayed as "evil" in cultural documents. The subsections might include how they are
personified, how their proportions are exaggerated, and their behaviors misunderstood. A review organized in this manner would
shift between time periods within each section according to the point made.

Methodological

A methodological approach differs from the two above in that the focusing factor usually does not have to do with the content of
the material. Instead, it focuses on the "methods" of the researcher or writer. For the sperm whale project, one methodological
approach would be to look at cultural differences between the portrayal of whales in American, British, and French art work. Or
the review might focus on the economic impact of whaling on a community. A methodological scope will influence either the
types of documents in the review or the way in which these documents are discussed.

Once you've decided on the organizational method for the body of the review, the sections you need to include in the paper
should be easy to figure out. They should arise out of 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.

Sometimes, though, you might 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. Put in only what is necessary. Here
are a few other sections you might want to consider:

Current Situation: Information necessary to understand the topic or focus of the literature review.

History: The chronological progression of the field, the literature, or an idea that is necessary to understand the literature review,
if the body of the literature review is not already a chronology.

Methods and/or Standards: The criteria you used to select the sources in your literature review or the way in which you present
your information. For instance, you might explain that your review includes only peer-reviewed articles and journals.

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?

Begin composing

Once you've settled on a general pattern of organization, you're ready to write each section. There are a few guidelines you
should follow during the writing stage as well. Here is a sample paragraph from a literature review about sexism and language to
illuminate the following discussion:

However, other studies have shown that even gender-neutral antecedents are more likely to produce masculine images than
feminine ones (Gastil, 1990). Hamilton (1988) asked students to complete sentences that required them to fill in pronouns that
agreed with gender-neutral antecedents such as "writer," "pedestrian," and "persons." The students were asked to describe any
image they had when writing the sentence. Hamilton found that people imagined 3.3 men to each woman in the masculine
"generic" condition and 1.5 men per woman in the unbiased condition. Thus, while ambient sexism accounted for some of the
masculine bias, sexist language amplified the effect. (Source: Erika Falk and Jordan Mills, "Why Sexist Language Affects
Persuasion: The Role of Homophily, Intended Audience, and Offense," Women and Language19:2.
 Use evidence

In the example above, the writers refer to several other sources when making their point. A literature review in this sense is just
like any other academic research paper. Your interpretation of the available sources must be backed up with evidence to show
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 review's focus, whether it is thematic, methodological, or chronological.

Use quotes sparingly

Falk and Mills do not use any direct quotes. That is because the survey nature of the literature review does not allow for in-depth
discussion or detailed quotes from the text. Some short quotes here and there are okay, though, if you want to emphasize a point,
or if what the author said just cannot be rewritten in your own words. Notice that Falk and Mills do quote certain terms that were
coined by the author, not common knowledge, or taken directly from the study. But if you find yourself wanting to put in more
quotes, check with your instructor.

Summarize and synthesize

Remember to summarize and synthesize your sources within each paragraph as well as throughout the review. The authors here
recapitulate important features of Hamilton's study, but then synthesize it by rephrasing the study's significance and relating it to
their own work.

Keep your own voice

While the literature review presents others' ideas, your voice (the writer's) should remain front and center. Notice that Falk and
Mills weave references to other sources into their own text, but they still maintain their own voice by starting and ending the
paragraph with their own ideas and their own words. The sources support what Falk and Mills are saying.

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. In the preceding example, Falk and Mills either directly refer in the text to the author of their source, such as
Hamilton, or they provide ample notation in the text when the ideas they are mentioning are not their own, for example, Gastil's.
For more information, please see our handout on plagiarism.

Revise, revise, revise

Draft in hand? Now you're ready to revise. Spending a lot of time revising is a wise idea, because your main objective is to
present the material, not the argument. So check over your review again to make sure it follows the assignment and/or your
outline. Then, just as you would for most other academic forms of writing, rewrite or rework the language of your review so that
you've presented your information in the most concise manner possible. Be sure to use terminology familiar to your audience; get
rid of unnecessary jargon or slang. Finally, double check that you've documented your sources and formatted the review
appropriately for your discipline. For tips on the revising and editing process, see our handout on revising drafts.

Works consulted

We consulted these works while writing the original version of this handout. This is not a comprehensive list of resources on the
handout's topic, and we encourage you to do your own research to find the latest publications on this topic. Please do not use this
list as a model for the format of your own reference list, as it may not match the citation style you are using. For guidance on
formatting citations, please see the UNC Libraries citation tutorial.

www.unc.edu/depts/wcweb 1998 - 2007

Characteristics of exemplary literature reviews

Exemplary literature reviews are as thorough and systematic as the research they are reviewing. Although the degree of
completion of your literature review at the proposal stage is a matter of deliberation with your committee, in most cases it is
important that the literature review in a proposal accomplishes the following:

• it demonstrates your thorough understanding of the subject of your dissertation, through your review and analysis
of previous research;
• your thorough review of previous literature demonstrates gaps in knowledge of the topic, that your proposed
research will address.
• very importantly, your thorough and complete literature review, based on specified search criteria, demonstrates
that someone has not already done your dissertation research!

According to Jackson (1980), effective literature reviews should do the following (any of these may be more or less helpful for
your own purposes):

1. Define and delimit the topic. Your review should include a careful definition of your topic, and describe carefully what your
topic will not include. For example, you may state that your topic includes attribution retraining, but not locus of control research,
and state the reason for this.

2. Review previous reviews. What have previous reviews of the literature concluded? How will your literature review differ?

3. State procedures for obtaining relevant literature. If your review is unbiased, it should include systematic procedures for
obtaining relevant literature, procedures that could be replicated by someone else who would then obtain the same literature. This
demonstrates that you have attempted to find all relevant research, not just the most easily obtained research, and that you have
not been deliberately selective (using only that research that reinforces your own opinion) or inadvertently selective (using
certain journals because they are known to you, not realizing they only present one perspective). Search criteria can include:

• computer search of relevant databases (e.g, Psycinfo, ERIC, web of science, Dissertation Abstracts) by topic (list
descriptors). In my experience, I have found that computer searches reveal about ½ to 1/3 of available articles,
although they are getting more thorough over the years.
• hand search of relevant journals (e.g., search of specific journals that may be specifically relevant to your topic).
Since most journals have only 4 issues per year, this task may not be as time consuming as it may seem!
• "ancestry" search, i.e., search of references in relevant articles, chapters and books, for relevant citations
• "descendant" search, i.e., search Social Science Citation Index, for relevant articles, important authors. SSCI will
provide you with a list of articles that have cited these articles or authors
• contact experts in the topic area for suggestions about additional references.

4. Describe common independent and dependent variables. This will show how different studies are interrelated.

5. State criteria for evaluating outcomes (this is most relevant for intervention research). If you say a particular treatment was
"effective", what are your criteria for saying so? Author’s conclusion? Statistical significance? Criterion measure? Some other
metric of your own?

6. Examine covariation of study outcomes with study characteristics. This is a mouthful, but it means, an educational treatment
was effective (outcome), but only with elementary and not secondary students (study characteristics).

7. Support conclusions of the review with data presented in the review. Sometimes authors review an enormous amount of
literature, then just conclude what their biases were in the first place! When you make specific conclusions at the end of a review,
you should clearly state how and from what data sources you reached your conclusions.

Remember the gaps or limitations in the literature reviewed can directly provide your own research question!! Often, the
"Discussion" section of relevant research articles provides implications for future research, which may provide ideas and
justification for your own proposed research.

*see Jackson, G.B. (1980). Methods for integrative reviews. Review of Educational Research, 50, 438-460.
Characteristics of a Good Literature Review

How Do You Know If Your Literature Review is Well Written? Check Out These Tips to Improve!
Have to write a literature review for your paper or research? "No problem," you say. So you type it up. But then you get to
wondering if it's any good. You ask people to read it for you. Unfortunately,

maybe not many of your friends are interested in the connections between depression and hypothalamic function, so they give it
a once over, smile, and say "Looks good." That's not quite the constructive criticism you were looking for, right? Well, here
are some criteria and questions you can ask yourself that will help you break your piece down into seven simple categories.

1) Content. Look at the content of your piece. Is the topic clearly stated? Do you show why the topic is important? Do you
suggest other places where the reader can get more information on the topic? Be sure that you have enough background and
description on the topic that the reader gets a complete picture without any additional information being given.

2) Writing Style. Do your sentences flow well? Are they broken up into small enough phrases that they don't lose the reader
in logic or terminology? How are the sentences organized? Do they follow the topic sentences at the beginning of
paragraphs? Is there any unnecessary verbiage thrown in? Often you will find words that you can cut out, such as "that" and
"very" that do not look good in a professional literature review. Be concise and to the point. Do the paragraphs in the body
follow the thesis statement in the introductory paragraph? Do you have direct quotes every other line? Try to paraphrase
some of this rather than extensively quoting everything.

3) References. Do you have the appropriate reference page format? For example, if it is APA, are all references listed
correctly? Check them here. Make sure your reference page is double spaced, in alphabetical order, and has hanging
indents. Are your references legitimate? Have they been peer-reviewed? 4) Citations. Is the reader left wondering what
study is being referred to or with whom the material originated? Be sure that it is clear when you are using another's work.
This entails correct (APA) format with in

text citations that have parentheses and quotation marks in the appropriate places. Check them here. Do you have more than one
source per paragraph? The point of the literature review is to weave the information together so your sources work together.
You should have, at least two (if not three) citations per paragraph.

5) Grammar/Spelling. Did you spell-check? Surprisingly, many people forget to do this. Read your paper aloud to yourself.
You may find errors you did not catch before (such as run-on sentences or the use of the wrong tense).

6) Punctuation. Don't use exclamation points! They don't belong in literature reviews. Watch out for correct apostrophe use
in possessive words. Can't tell if there should be a comma, colon, or semi-colon? Then it's probably awkward anyway. If
you can, just break the sentence up (or reword it) and use a confident period.

7) Paper Layout. Check to make sure you have appropriate use of margins, headings, hanging indents, block quotes, page
numbers, and font.

9. Writing the Literature Review

1. What is a Literature � Review?

A literature review is the � effective evaluation of selected documents on a research topic. A review � may
form an essential part of the research process or may constitute a � research project in itself.

In the context of a research � paper or thesis the literature review is a critical synthesis of previous �
research. The evaluation of the literature leads logically to the research � question.

A ‘good’ literature � review….. A ‘poor’ literature review � is…..

….. is a synthesis of � available research …..an annotated � bibliography

….. is a critical evaluation ….. confined to description
….. has � appropriate breadth and depth ….. narrow and � shallow
….. has clarity and � conciseness ….. confusing and longwinded
….. uses rigorous and consistent � methods ….. constructed in an � arbitrary way

2. � Purposes of a Literature � Review

In the context of a research paper on a thesis, � the literature review provides a background to the study being
proposed. � The background may consider one or more of the following aspects depending � on the research
question being posed:

• Theoretical background – past, present or � future

• Clinical practice – previous or � contemporary
• Methodology and/or research methods
• Previous findings
• Rationale and/or relevance of the current � study

In a broader context Hart (1998) lists � the following purposes of a review:

• Distinguishing what has been done from what � needs to be done;

• Discovering important variables relevant to � the topic;
• Synthesising and gaining a new � perspective;
• Identifying relationships between ideas and � practice;
• Establishing the context of the topic or � problem;
• Rationalising the significance of the � problem;
• Enhancing and acquiring the subject � vocabulary;
• Understanding the structure of the � subject;
• Relating ideas and theory to � applications;
• Identifying methodologies and techniques � that have been used;
• Placing the research in a historical context � to show familiarity with state-of-the-art
developments.

The above purposes are not ranked � in order of importance. In many cases, there may be merging of purposes
or � different manifestations.

3. How to � Review

The whole process of � reviewing includes:

a. Searching for � literature

b. Sorting and prioritising the retrieved literature
c. � Analytical reading of papers
d. Evaluative reading of papers
e. � Comparison across studies
f. Organising the content
g. Writing the � review

Stages (a) to (d) have been � covered in previous Study Notes and through previous Workshops. Hence the �
last 3 stages will be dealt with here.

Comparison across studies

The aim is to extract key points � by comparing and contrasting ACROSS studies, instead of reading one
paper � after another.

Key points for a review may � concern areas of similarities and/or differences in:

• Research aim(s) or hypotheses

• Research design and sampling
• Instruments and procedures used
• How data were analysed
• Results or findings
• Interpretations

Organising the content

There are diverse ways of doing � this depending on your preferred mode of thinking.
For example, you may � use tables, notes on cards, charts, trees, spider maps.
More ideas can � be found in Tips on organising material for a review.

Writing the review

As with any essay, the review � should have

• an introduction,
• a body,
• a conclusion

The length of each section � depends on whether you are writing a brief literature review for a � research
paper or a whole chapter (or more) as part of a � dissertation.

The introduction should � provide the reader with the scale and structure of your review. It serves � as a
kind of map.

The body of the review � depends on how you have organised your key points. Literature reviews at �
postgraduate level should be evaluative and not merely descriptive. For � example possible reasons for
similarities or differences between studies � are considered rather than a mere identification of them.

The conclusion of the review needs to sum up the main findings of your research into the � literature. The
findings can be related to the aims of the study you are � proposing to do. The reader is thus provided with a
coherent background to � the current study.

Other tips on writing can be � found in Section � 5 of these Study Notes they will be added to in future
depending on � the feedback received.

4. � Tips on Organising Material for a � Review

1. Find similarities and � differences between studies at different levels, e.g.:

- philosophy
- � epistemology
- morality
- methodology
- methods
- types of � data
- data analysis
- interpretation

2. Set out your thinking on paper � through maps and trees.

Examples:

Feature � map Classifies and categorises � your thought in tabular form

Concept � map Links between concepts and � processes, or shows relationship between ideas and
� practice
Shows how topic branches out � into subthemes and related questions or represents
Tree � construction