Definition

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

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

Importance of a Good Literature Review

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

•Give a new interpretation of old material or combine new with old interpretations,
•Trace the intellectual progression of the field, including major debates,
•Depending on the situation, evaluate the sources and advise the reader on the most
pertinent or relevant research, or
• Usually in the conclusion of a literature review, identify where gaps exist in how a
problem has been researched to date.
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 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 a number of
approaches you could adopt depending upon the type of analysis underpinning your study.

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 whe n 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 an alysis 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 u sed 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.

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, C onceptual 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 :

• 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 other s,
• 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?
• Value -- 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 Stages

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 very specific about what form your literature review should take, seek
clarification from your professor by asking these questions:

1. Roughly how many sources should I 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?
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 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 your job easier if you first
limit scope of the research problem. A good strategy is to begin by searching the USC Libraries
Catalog for 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 revie w 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 tre nds follow a clear chronological
order of development. For example, a literature review that focuses on continuing research about
the emergence of German economic power after the fall of the Soviet Union.

By Publication
Order your sources by publication chronology, then, only if the order demonstrates a more
important trend. For instance, you could order a review of literature on environmental studies of
brown fields if the progression revealed, for example, a change in the soil collection practices of
the researchers who wrote and/or conducted the studies.

Thematic [“conceptual categories”]

Thematic reviews of literature are organized around a topic or issue, rather than the progression
of time. However, progression of time may still be an important facto r in a thematic review. For
example, a review of the Internet’s impact on American presidential politics could focus on the
development of online political satire. While the study focuses on one topic, the Internet’s impact
on American presidential politics, it will still be organized chronologically reflecting technological
developments in media. The only difference here between a "chronological" and a "thematic"
approach is what is emphasized the most: the role of the Internet in presidential politics. No te
however that more authentic thematic reviews tend to break away from chronological order. A
review organized in this manner would shift between time periods within each section according
to the point made.

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 but include only what is necessary for the reader to locate your
study within the larger scholarship framework.

Here are examples of other sections you may need to include depending on the type of review
you write:

• 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.
• Selection Methods: the criteria you used to select (and perhaps exclude) sources in
your literature review. For instance, you might explain that your review includes only
peer-reviewed articles and journals.
• Standards: 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 highlig ht 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 okay 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, not common knowledge, or taken directly from the study. Do not use extensive quotes
as a substitute for your own summary and interpretation of 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.

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 b ut 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 relevent sources to us e
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 establi shes 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, 1998.

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 the Web of Science [a.k.a., Web of Knowledge] Citation database and Google
Scholar to identify who has subsequently cited leading scholars already identified in your
literature review. 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.