literary research methodology

University Library

• Research Guides

Literature and Literary Research

• Getting Started
• Finding Books and Articles
• Finding and Using Archival Sources
• Finding and Using Reference Sources
• Working Smarter

What's a good topic?

Choosing a topic can be one of the hardest parts of writing a paper. There are so many possible things to write about, and even if you have a general idea, it can be hard to know whether your topic is a good one. 

Writing a literature paper is different from writing many other kinds of papers. In literary analysis, it's not the ideas of other people that matter as much as your own interpretation of the texts you're reading. The bulk of your paper will be made up of your analysis of the text: the use of language, imagery, rhythm and repetition, word choice, the structure of the plot, or the representations of characters, emotions, events, or places. Your job is to analyze these elements of the text and through your analysis to assert an idea, or a claim, about the text, the author, or the context in which the text was written.

So what makes a good topic? A good topic is a theme that you think is represented in the text you're reading. But how do you get from a good topic to a good research question? 

What's a good research question?

Once you recognize a theme in a text or texts, your next step is to determine what you think the texts are saying about that theme. Read the text again, paying particular attention to your theme. What does your interpretation lead you think about the theme or idea? This is your claim, and your paper is structured around using analysis of the text or texts to support your claim. 

For example, you may be interested in looking at community or society in Thoreau's "Walden." You may have read the text and noticed a contradiction between Thoreau's claims of self-reliance and his interaction with society. You would then re-read the text, asking yourself as you read "What is the representation of society and Thoreau's relationship to it in 'Walden'?" After reading the text closely and paying special attention to these aspects of "Walden," you may be ready to make the claim that while Thoreau believed he was self-reliant, in truth he was still part of a network of people, and still part of his society and community. Or you may discover that your initial thought was wrong, and that Thoreau really did separate himself from his community in the way he wrote about. 

Types of Sources

There are a lot of different kinds of sources that you can use in your analysis. This guide will show you how to find and use these by type. 

Primary Sources  are the main pieces of evidence you will use to make your claim. The texts you are reading are a primary source; they are the most important primary source you're working with. Other examples are newspaper and magazine articles, diaries and letters, photographs, maps, and reviews written or created at the same time as your text. These sources can help you put your subject into context. 

Reference Sources  give you a broad overview of a person, place, event, or idea. They provide commonly known facts. Reference sources are not cited in your paper, but can be very useful for grounding you in your subject and ensuring that you have solid background information.  Literary biographies   are a form of reference material, and give you lots of information about authors, with an emphasis on how their lives are related to their writing. 

Secondary Sources  are also sometimes referred to as  criticism.  These are books and articles that scholars have written about a particular work of literature, movement, or author. Criticism can help you get a sense of the themes that other scholars read in a particular text. They may help inform your own understanding of a text, either because they reinforce your interpretation, or differ from it. Criticism is usually published in books or as articles in scholarly journals. 

So how do I use sources?

Primary sources are the evidence that we use to support our claims. They aren't the articles that other scholars and researchers have written, but original source material that we can use to better understand our topic. Primary sources in literary research include the text or texts that you're analyzing, but might also include additional material like letters written by the author, photographs, reviews written when the text was published, newspapers articles. Many different kinds of things can be used as primary sources, depending on your subject. 

For example, if you're studying Thoreau's relationships with others, you may want to find out more about Thoreau's role in his community by reading primary source material (letters that he wrote to friends and colleagues, newspaper articles about him or about his community) or by reading more about the context of his life in Massachusetts (the political and artistic movements of which he was part, the actual location of his cabin in relation to the town of Concord). These additional sources are used to support your interpretation of the text you're analyzing. 

You may want to use secondary sources to discuss other scholars' ideas and interpretations of the topic and text you're writing about, especially if you don't agree with their interpretations. Pay especially close attention to aspects of your topic that scholars don't agree about, and to different interpretations or ideas about a text. If there are major debates about the authors or texts you're studying, you'll want to reference them in the paper to help inform your reader and provide context to your own interpretation. 

• Next: Finding Books and Articles >>
• Last Updated: Feb 2, 2024 12:45 PM
• URL: https://libguides.sonoma.edu/literature

• Harvard Library
• Research Guides
• Faculty of Arts & Sciences Libraries

Literary Research in Harvard Libraries

• Get Organized
• Find Background
• Where to Search
• Search Vocabulary
• Obscure/Recent Topics
• Literary Journalism Search (under construction!)
• Find Primary or Archival Material
• Literary Theory
• Foreign Language Literatures
• Distant Reading, Close Reading

KEY DATABASES

• For every project : MLA International Bibliography - a subject-specific index to worldwide scholarship on literature and media studies since 1926. Also includes linguistics and folklore. Strongest for Europe, the Americas, and Anglophone scholarship.
• For an overview :Oxford Bibliographies Online - use this database when you need to understand the full picture of scholarship on an author, genre, or critical concept. Frequently updated. If you do not find a relevant Oxford Bibliography, visit Find Background for more options.
• For theory and schools of criticism : Johns Hopkins Guide to Theory and Criticism - use this encyclopedia when you need to understand literary theories and schools of criticism. An old standby.

SEARCH WORDS

Search terms that can help you improve your results in HOLLIS , Academic Search Premier , and other multidisciplinary resources:

• Literature, “criticism and interpretation,” rhetoric
• genre terms (novel, fiction, poetry, drama)
• geographic terms (United States, American)
• time period terms (19th, "to 1500")
• Terms for region or language (Italian, Asian)

See Search Vocabulary for more details

HOW TO USE THIS GUIDE

Each page of this guide recommends my favorite tools and strategies:

• Get Organized - access, organize, and cite
• Find Background - from simple encyclopedia entries to detailed guides and histories
• Basics - understand what you're looking for
• Where to Search - specialized search engines and techniques for using them
• Search Vocabulary - the specialized language search engines use for literary topics
• Obscure/Recent Topics - tips for when standard research methods won't find the material you need
• Find Primary or Archival Material - when you need newspaper articles, first editions, manuscripts...
• Literary Theory - deceptively tricky to search for!
• Foreign Language Literatures - if you're working with languages other than English
• Distant Reading, Close Reading - computational tools (e.g. chart word usage over time), the OED, rhetorical figures

Literature: A Guide for Graduate Students supplements this guide with:

• Get Started - a to-do list for new graduate students
• Find a Database - how to locate the best search engines for your field or project
• Research Dos & Don'ts - tips to help you be productive and efficient

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Literary Research in Harvard Libraries was originally written by Sue Gilroy and Laura Farwell Blake, and remains deeply indebted to their work.

FURTHER GUIDANCE

Odile Harter

Research & Pedagogy Librarian

Email Odile

• Next: Get Organized >>

Except where otherwise noted, this work is subject to a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License , which allows anyone to share and adapt our material as long as proper attribution is given. For details and exceptions, see the Harvard Library Copyright Policy ©2021 Presidents and Fellows of Harvard College.

Encyclopedia of Evidence in Pharmaceutical Public Health and Health Services Research in Pharmacy pp 1–15 Cite as

Methodological Approaches to Literature Review

• Dennis Thomas 2 ,
• Elida Zairina 3 &
• Johnson George 4  
• Living reference work entry
• First Online: 09 May 2023

461 Accesses

The literature review can serve various functions in the contexts of education and research. It aids in identifying knowledge gaps, informing research methodology, and developing a theoretical framework during the planning stages of a research study or project, as well as reporting of review findings in the context of the existing literature. This chapter discusses the methodological approaches to conducting a literature review and offers an overview of different types of reviews. There are various types of reviews, including narrative reviews, scoping reviews, and systematic reviews with reporting strategies such as meta-analysis and meta-synthesis. Review authors should consider the scope of the literature review when selecting a type and method. Being focused is essential for a successful review; however, this must be balanced against the relevance of the review to a broad audience.

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

Akobeng AK. Principles of evidence based medicine. Arch Dis Child. 2005;90(8):837–40.

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Alharbi A, Stevenson M. Refining Boolean queries to identify relevant studies for systematic review updates. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2020;27(11):1658–66.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Arksey H, O’Malley L. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. Int J Soc Res Methodol. 2005;8(1):19–32.

Article   Google Scholar  

Aromataris E MZE. JBI manual for evidence synthesis. 2020.

Google Scholar  

Aromataris E, Pearson A. The systematic review: an overview. Am J Nurs. 2014;114(3):53–8.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Aromataris E, Riitano D. Constructing a search strategy and searching for evidence. A guide to the literature search for a systematic review. Am J Nurs. 2014;114(5):49–56.

Babineau J. Product review: covidence (systematic review software). J Canad Health Libr Assoc Canada. 2014;35(2):68–71.

Baker JD. The purpose, process, and methods of writing a literature review. AORN J. 2016;103(3):265–9.

Bastian H, Glasziou P, Chalmers I. Seventy-five trials and eleven systematic reviews a day: how will we ever keep up? PLoS Med. 2010;7(9):e1000326.

Bramer WM, Rethlefsen ML, Kleijnen J, Franco OH. Optimal database combinations for literature searches in systematic reviews: a prospective exploratory study. Syst Rev. 2017;6(1):1–12.

Brown D. A review of the PubMed PICO tool: using evidence-based practice in health education. Health Promot Pract. 2020;21(4):496–8.

Cargo M, Harris J, Pantoja T, et al. Cochrane qualitative and implementation methods group guidance series – paper 4: methods for assessing evidence on intervention implementation. J Clin Epidemiol. 2018;97:59–69.

Cook DJ, Mulrow CD, Haynes RB. Systematic reviews: synthesis of best evidence for clinical decisions. Ann Intern Med. 1997;126(5):376–80.

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Counsell C. Formulating questions and locating primary studies for inclusion in systematic reviews. Ann Intern Med. 1997;127(5):380–7.

Cummings SR, Browner WS, Hulley SB. Conceiving the research question and developing the study plan. In: Cummings SR, Browner WS, Hulley SB, editors. Designing Clinical Research: An Epidemiological Approach. 4th ed. Philadelphia (PA): P Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2007. p. 14–22.

Eriksen MB, Frandsen TF. The impact of patient, intervention, comparison, outcome (PICO) as a search strategy tool on literature search quality: a systematic review. JMLA. 2018;106(4):420.

Ferrari R. Writing narrative style literature reviews. Medical Writing. 2015;24(4):230–5.

Flemming K, Booth A, Hannes K, Cargo M, Noyes J. Cochrane qualitative and implementation methods group guidance series – paper 6: reporting guidelines for qualitative, implementation, and process evaluation evidence syntheses. J Clin Epidemiol. 2018;97:79–85.

Grant MJ, Booth A. A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Inf Libr J. 2009;26(2):91–108.

Green BN, Johnson CD, Adams A. Writing narrative literature reviews for peer-reviewed journals: secrets of the trade. J Chiropr Med. 2006;5(3):101–17.

Gregory AT, Denniss AR. An introduction to writing narrative and systematic reviews; tasks, tips and traps for aspiring authors. Heart Lung Circ. 2018;27(7):893–8.

Harden A, Thomas J, Cargo M, et al. Cochrane qualitative and implementation methods group guidance series – paper 5: methods for integrating qualitative and implementation evidence within intervention effectiveness reviews. J Clin Epidemiol. 2018;97:70–8.

Harris JL, Booth A, Cargo M, et al. Cochrane qualitative and implementation methods group guidance series – paper 2: methods for question formulation, searching, and protocol development for qualitative evidence synthesis. J Clin Epidemiol. 2018;97:39–48.

Higgins J, Thomas J. In: Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, Welch VA, editors. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions version 6.3, updated February 2022). Available from www.training.cochrane.org/handbook.: Cochrane; 2022.

International prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO). Available from https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/ .

Khan KS, Kunz R, Kleijnen J, Antes G. Five steps to conducting a systematic review. J R Soc Med. 2003;96(3):118–21.

Landhuis E. Scientific literature: information overload. Nature. 2016;535(7612):457–8.

Lockwood C, Porritt K, Munn Z, Rittenmeyer L, Salmond S, Bjerrum M, Loveday H, Carrier J, Stannard D. Chapter 2: Systematic reviews of qualitative evidence. In: Aromataris E, Munn Z, editors. JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis. JBI; 2020. Available from https://synthesismanual.jbi.global . https://doi.org/10.46658/JBIMES-20-03 .

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Lorenzetti DL, Topfer L-A, Dennett L, Clement F. Value of databases other than medline for rapid health technology assessments. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2014;30(2):173–8.

Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, the PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for (SR) and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Ann Intern Med. 2009;6:264–9.

Mulrow CD. Systematic reviews: rationale for systematic reviews. BMJ. 1994;309(6954):597–9.

Munn Z, Peters MDJ, Stern C, Tufanaru C, McArthur A, Aromataris E. Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018;18(1):143.

Munthe-Kaas HM, Glenton C, Booth A, Noyes J, Lewin S. Systematic mapping of existing tools to appraise methodological strengths and limitations of qualitative research: first stage in the development of the CAMELOT tool. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2019;19(1):1–13.

Murphy CM. Writing an effective review article. J Med Toxicol. 2012;8(2):89–90.

NHMRC. Guidelines for guidelines: assessing risk of bias. Available at https://nhmrc.gov.au/guidelinesforguidelines/develop/assessing-risk-bias . Last published 29 August 2019. Accessed 29 Aug 2022.

Noyes J, Booth A, Cargo M, et al. Cochrane qualitative and implementation methods group guidance series – paper 1: introduction. J Clin Epidemiol. 2018b;97:35–8.

Noyes J, Booth A, Flemming K, et al. Cochrane qualitative and implementation methods group guidance series – paper 3: methods for assessing methodological limitations, data extraction and synthesis, and confidence in synthesized qualitative findings. J Clin Epidemiol. 2018a;97:49–58.

Noyes J, Booth A, Moore G, Flemming K, Tunçalp Ö, Shakibazadeh E. Synthesising quantitative and qualitative evidence to inform guidelines on complex interventions: clarifying the purposes, designs and outlining some methods. BMJ Glob Health. 2019;4(Suppl 1):e000893.

Peters MD, Godfrey CM, Khalil H, McInerney P, Parker D, Soares CB. Guidance for conducting systematic scoping reviews. Int J Evid Healthcare. 2015;13(3):141–6.

Polanin JR, Pigott TD, Espelage DL, Grotpeter JK. Best practice guidelines for abstract screening large-evidence systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Res Synth Methods. 2019;10(3):330–42.

Article   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Shea BJ, Grimshaw JM, Wells GA, et al. Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2007;7(1):1–7.

Shea BJ, Reeves BC, Wells G, et al. AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both. Brit Med J. 2017;358

Sterne JA, Hernán MA, Reeves BC, et al. ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. Br Med J. 2016;355

Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC, et al. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. JAMA. 2000;283(15):2008–12.

Tawfik GM, Dila KAS, Mohamed MYF, et al. A step by step guide for conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis with simulation data. Trop Med Health. 2019;47(1):1–9.

The Critical Appraisal Program. Critical appraisal skills program. Available at https://casp-uk.net/ . 2022. Accessed 29 Aug 2022.

The University of Melbourne. Writing a literature review in Research Techniques 2022. Available at https://students.unimelb.edu.au/academic-skills/explore-our-resources/research-techniques/reviewing-the-literature . Accessed 29 Aug 2022.

The Writing Center University of Winconsin-Madison. Learn how to write a literature review in The Writer’s Handbook – Academic Professional Writing. 2022. Available at https://writing.wisc.edu/handbook/assignments/reviewofliterature/ . Accessed 29 Aug 2022.

Thompson SG, Sharp SJ. Explaining heterogeneity in meta-analysis: a comparison of methods. Stat Med. 1999;18(20):2693–708.

Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, et al. A scoping review on the conduct and reporting of scoping reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2016;16(1):15.

Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, et al. PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation. Ann Intern Med. 2018;169(7):467–73.

Yoneoka D, Henmi M. Clinical heterogeneity in random-effect meta-analysis: between-study boundary estimate problem. Stat Med. 2019;38(21):4131–45.

Yuan Y, Hunt RH. Systematic reviews: the good, the bad, and the ugly. Am J Gastroenterol. 2009;104(5):1086–92.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Centre of Excellence in Treatable Traits, College of Health, Medicine and Wellbeing, University of Newcastle, Hunter Medical Research Institute Asthma and Breathing Programme, Newcastle, NSW, Australia

Dennis Thomas

Department of Pharmacy Practice, Faculty of Pharmacy, Universitas Airlangga, Surabaya, Indonesia

Elida Zairina

Centre for Medicine Use and Safety, Monash Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Faculty of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Monash University, Parkville, VIC, Australia

Johnson George

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Johnson George .

Section Editor information

College of Pharmacy, Qatar University, Doha, Qatar

Derek Charles Stewart

Department of Pharmacy, University of Huddersfield, Huddersfield, United Kingdom

Zaheer-Ud-Din Babar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this entry

Cite this entry.

Thomas, D., Zairina, E., George, J. (2023). Methodological Approaches to Literature Review. In: Encyclopedia of Evidence in Pharmaceutical Public Health and Health Services Research in Pharmacy. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-50247-8_57-1

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-50247-8_57-1

Received : 22 February 2023

Accepted : 22 February 2023

Published : 09 May 2023

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-50247-8

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-50247-8

eBook Packages : Springer Reference Biomedicine and Life Sciences Reference Module Biomedical and Life Sciences

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Literacy Research Methodologies

Third edition, edited by marla h. mallette and nell k. duke foreword by seth a. parsons.

• Many of the exemplary studies are new. -->

• sample chapter
• All titles by Marla H. Mallette
• All titles by Nell K. Duke
• contributors Gwynne Ellen Ash , PhD, Department of Curriculum and Instruction, Texas State University James J. Bason , PhD, Director, Survey Research Center, University of Georgia, Athens James F. Baumann , PhD, Chancellor’s Chair for Excellence in Literacy Education Emeritus, University of Missouri Adriana G. Bus , PhD, Professor in Early Childhood Education, University of Stavanger, Norway; Honorary Professor, ELTE Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest, Hungary; Professor Emeritus, Leiden University, Netherlands Byeong-Young Cho , PhD, College of Education, Hanyang University, Seoul, South Korea Jessica A. Church , PhD, Department of Psychology, University of Texas at Austin; Psychiatry Department, Institute for Neuroscience, and Biomedical Imaging Center; Texas Center for Learning Disabilities Catherine Compton- Lilly , EdD, John C. Hungerpiller Chair, College of Education, University of South Carolina Samuel DeJulio , PhD, Department of Interdisciplinary Learning and Teaching, University of Texas at San Antonio Nell K. Duke , EdD, Combined Program in Education and Psychology, University of Michigan Jack M. Fletcher , PhD, Hugh Roy and Lillie Cranz Cullen Distinguished Professor and Chair, Department of Psychology, University of Houston Sarah Galvin , Educational Psychology and Educational Technology Program, Michigan State University Christine Greenhow , EdD, Educational Psychology and Educational Technology Program, College of Education, Michigan State University Douglas K. Hartman , PhD, College of Education, Michigan State University James V. Hoffman , PhD, Meadows Endowed Chair for Excellence in Literacy, University of North Texas Gay Ivey , PhD, William E. Moran Distinguished Professor in Literacy, University of North Carolina at Greensboro Michael J. Kieffer , EdD, Steinhardt School of Culture, Education, and Human Development, New York University Alice Y. Lee , PhD, Graduate School of Education, University of California, Riverside Amos J. Lee , PhD, Graduate School of Education,University of California, Riverside Julia Lindsey , School of Education, University of Michigan Marla H. Mallette , Department of Teaching, Learning and Educational Leadership, Binghamton University, State University of New York Ramón A. Martínez , PhD, Graduate School of Education and the Center for Comparative Studies in Race and Ethnicity, Stanford University Sarah J. McCarthey , PhD, Department Head of Curriculum and Instruction, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Suzanne E. Mol , PhD, Institute of Education and Child Studies, Leiden University, Netherlands M. Kristiina Montero , PhD, Faculty of Education at Wilfrid Laurier University, Waterloo, Canada Susan B. Neuman , EdD, Chair of the Teaching and Learning Department, Steinhardt School of Culture, Education, and Human Development, New York University Anthony J. Onwuegbuzie , PhD, University of Cambridge; Distinguished Visiting Professor, University of Johannesburg; Honorary Professor, University of South Africa Misty Sailors , PhD, Chair of the Department of Teacher Education and Administration, College of Education, University of North Texas Melissa Schieble , PhD, Hunter College, City University of New York Anna Shapiro , PhD, School of Education and Human Development, University of Virginia Norman A. Stahl , PhD, Professor Emeritus of Literacy Education, Northern Illinois University K. Bret Staudt Willet , Educational Psychology and Educational Technology Program, Michigan State University John Z. Strong , PhD, Graduate School of Education, University at Buffalo, State University of New York Marinus H. van IJzendoorn , PhD, Department of Psychology, Education and Child Studies, Erasmus University Rotterdam; Honorary Senior Visiting Fellow, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, School of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge; Professor Emeritus, Leiden University Amy Vetter , PhD, School of Education, University of North Carolina at Greensboro Meaghan N. Vitale , MA, University of Delaware Sharon Walpole , PhD, School of Education, Director of the Professional Learning Center for Educators, University of Delaware Rachelle D. Washington , PhD, Executive Director of First Year Experience and Honors Programs, Allen University, Columbia, South Carolina Christina Weiland , EdD, School of Education, University of Michigan Melissa B. Wilson , PhD, independent scholar -->
• prior editions Second Edition, © 2011 ISBN: 9781609181628 First Edition, © 2004 ISBN: 9781593850593 -->

Save 15% + Free Shipping on Online Orders!

• Offer does not apply to self-help & general interest titles.
• Applies only to prepaid online orders from the U.S., Canada, and other non-distributed countries , using promotional code SPRING2024 .
• Discount is applied to the suggested retail prices that we believe to be charged by retailers.
• You can take advantage of other special offers by entering a different promotional code in the shopping cart.
• You may return Guilford books (undamaged) within 30 days of receipt for a full refund.
• Not applicable to journal renewals.
• Offer expires May 30, 2024.

Free Shipping:

• Applies only to prepaid online orders from U.S. customers.
• Packages sent via USPS Media Mail. You may choose to pay for rush shipping instead.
• Shipping charges to Canada are a flat $10.00 per order via CanPar.

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.

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 analyse data from the studies that are included in the review. 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?"

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

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

The Handbook to Literary Research

Edited by Delia da Sousa Correa and W.R. Owens The Handbook to Literary Research is a practical guide for students embarking on postgraduate work in Literary Studies. It introduces and explains research techniques, methodologies and approaches to information resources, paying careful attention to the differences between countries and institutions, and providing a range of key examples. This fully updated second edition is divided into five sections which cover: • Tools of the trade-a brand new chapter outlining how to make the most of literary resources; • Textual scholarship and book history-explains key concepts and variations in editing, publishing and bibliography; • Issues and approaches in literary research-presents a critical overview of theoretical approaches essential to literary studies; • The dissertation-demonstrates how to approach, plan and write this important research exercise; • Glossary-provides comprehensive explanations of key terms, and a checklist of resources. Packed with useful tips and exercises and written by scholars with extensive experience as teachers and researchers in the field, this volume is the ideal handbook for those beginning postgraduate research in literature. Delia da Sousa Correa is Senior Lecturer in English at

Related Papers

anita nur azizah

Anthony Adams

This course will introduce graduate students to the most essential methods and standards for research in graduate literary studies. Students will be expected to demonstrably advance from amateur toward quasi-professional status during the scope of the course. Assignments will include historical and analytical bibliographies, state-of-the-field research presentations, and analyses of scholarship history and field formation. Students will be encouraged to pursue research in those fields they find themselves most motivated by; however, a range of literary and historical materials and methods will be covered, possibly including but not limited to manuscript culture, early printed books and book history, textual editing, the archive, the article, the review, the abstract, and the production and management of digital materials.

Emelia Samanhyia

Question: The Setting of a literary work contributes to the development of characters and themes, among other relevance. Examine this notion with reference to at least two of the texts studied in this course.

wassila Rouabah , Linda Tint

A Reader's Guide to Contemporary Literary Theory is a classic introduction to the ever-evolving field of modern literary theory, now expanded and updated in its fifth edition. This book presents the full range of positions and movements in contemporary literary theory. It organises the theories into clearly defined sections and presents them in an accessible and lucid style.

Javed Hussain Khan

Drawing upon Hillway’s three types of research, this paper seeks to take a look at the nature and scope of literary research. It focuses on early works on the subject: Altick (1950, 1963), Sanders (1951), and Bateson (1972) – to demonstrate how some facts lying there can be uncovered through a slightly different reading of these texts. It highlights the similarities that make literary criticism, literary research, and literary scholarship synonymous, if not the same. It ends by mentioning briefly the approaches and methods of literary research.

Jean-Pierre Devroey

Markéta Gregorová

Lesson 5 in a one-term course of academic writing. The course aims at providing students with basic instruction in essay writing, with a special emphasis on literary critical essays. The students are guided through all the stages involved in the process of writing, ranging from choosing the topic to compiling a bibliography. The course deals with a logical structure of the essay, its unity and coherence, with using secondary sources as well as with the issue of plagiarism. Other topics include the suitable language and style and formal requirements in academic writing.

CENTRAL ASIAN JOURNAL OF LITERATURE, PHILOSOPHY AND CULTURE

Urvashi Kaushal

Zeeshan Ali

Anthony J CASCARDI

RELATED PAPERS

andres ramirez

irene irma athabu

Journal of athletic training

Wendy Hurley

JULIAN SURYA MAHENDRA

Jessica Aprillia

Kushagra Agrawal

Photochemistry and Photobiology

Beatriz de Mishima

Applied Sciences

Carmen Palermo

veronica schmidt

Semina Scientiarum

Konrad Dydak Rycyk

Medicina fluminensis

Tomislav Baudoin

Chemistry - A European Journal

Yuji Miyahara

davide caliaro

Brazilian Journal of Development

Letícia Grasso

Egyptian Journal of Veterinary Sciences

Sustainability

Roberta Pinna

Journal of Chemical Education

Bradford Pendley

European Journal of Political Research

Wolfgang C Müller

escalante tile ESCALANTE

Frontiers in Human Neuroscience

christophe-loic Gerard

• Cognitive Science

Jesús Calvillo Tinoco

Psychiatriki

Ioannis Tollos

Psychoanalytic Psychology

Mario Rossi monti

Journal of Ethnopharmacology

Verica Aleksic Sabo

TENCON 2008 - 2008 IEEE Region 10 Conference

hima bindu m

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024