content of review of literature

Purdue Online Writing Lab Purdue OWL® College of Liberal Arts

Writing a Literature Review

Welcome to the Purdue OWL

This page is brought to you by the OWL at Purdue University. When printing this page, you must include the entire legal notice.

Copyright ©1995-2018 by The Writing Lab & The OWL at Purdue and Purdue University. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, reproduced, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our terms and conditions of fair use.

A literature review is a document or section of a document that collects key sources on a topic and discusses those sources in conversation with each other (also called synthesis ). The lit review is an important genre in many disciplines, not just literature (i.e., the study of works of literature such as novels and plays). When we say “literature review” or refer to “the literature,” we are talking about the research ( scholarship ) in a given field. You will often see the terms “the research,” “the scholarship,” and “the literature” used mostly interchangeably.

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

There are a number of different situations where you might write a literature review, each with slightly different expectations; different disciplines, too, have field-specific expectations for what a literature review is and does. For instance, in the humanities, authors might include more overt argumentation and interpretation of source material in their literature reviews, whereas in the sciences, authors are more likely to report study designs and results in their literature reviews; these differences reflect these disciplines’ purposes and conventions in scholarship. You should always look at examples from your own discipline and talk to professors or mentors in your field to be sure you understand your discipline’s conventions, for literature reviews as well as for any other genre.

A literature review can be a part of a research paper or scholarly article, usually falling after the introduction and before the research methods sections. In these cases, the lit review just needs to cover scholarship that is important to the issue you are writing about; sometimes it will also cover key sources that informed your research methodology.

Lit reviews can also be standalone pieces, either as assignments in a class or as publications. In a class, a lit review may be assigned to help students familiarize themselves with a topic and with scholarship in their field, get an idea of the other researchers working on the topic they’re interested in, find gaps in existing research in order to propose new projects, and/or develop a theoretical framework and methodology for later research. As a publication, a lit review usually is meant to help make other scholars’ lives easier by collecting and summarizing, synthesizing, and analyzing existing research on a topic. This can be especially helpful for students or scholars getting into a new research area, or for directing an entire community of scholars toward questions that have not yet been answered.

What are the parts of a lit review?

Most lit reviews use a basic introduction-body-conclusion structure; if your lit review is part of a larger paper, the introduction and conclusion pieces may be just a few sentences while you focus most of your attention on the body. If your lit review is a standalone piece, the introduction and conclusion take up more space and give you a place to discuss your goals, research methods, and conclusions separately from where you discuss the literature itself.

Introduction:

• An introductory paragraph that explains what your working topic and thesis is
• A forecast of key topics or texts that will appear in the review
• Potentially, a description of how you found sources and how you analyzed them for inclusion and discussion in the review (more often found in published, standalone literature reviews than in lit review sections in an article or research paper)
• Summarize and synthesize: Give an overview of the main points of each source and combine them into a coherent whole
• Analyze and interpret: Don’t just paraphrase other researchers – add your own interpretations where possible, discussing the significance of findings in relation to the literature as a whole
• Critically Evaluate: Mention the strengths and weaknesses of your sources
• Write in well-structured paragraphs: Use transition words and topic sentence to draw connections, comparisons, and contrasts.

Conclusion:

• Summarize the key findings you have taken from the literature and emphasize their significance
• Connect it back to your primary research question

How should I organize my lit review?

Lit reviews can take many different organizational patterns depending on what you are trying to accomplish with the review. Here are some examples:

• Chronological : The simplest approach is to trace the development of the topic over time, which helps familiarize the audience with the topic (for instance if you are introducing something that is not commonly known in your field). If you choose this strategy, be careful to avoid simply listing and summarizing sources in order. Try to analyze the patterns, turning points, and key debates that have shaped the direction of the field. Give your interpretation of how and why certain developments occurred (as mentioned previously, this may not be appropriate in your discipline — check with a teacher or mentor if you’re unsure).
• Thematic : If you have found some recurring central themes that you will continue working with throughout your piece, you can organize your literature review into subsections that address different aspects of the topic. For example, if you are reviewing literature about women and religion, key themes can include the role of women in churches and the religious attitude towards women.
• Qualitative versus quantitative research
• Empirical versus theoretical scholarship
• Divide the research by sociological, historical, or cultural sources
• Theoretical : In many humanities articles, the literature review is the foundation for the theoretical framework. You can use it to discuss various theories, models, and definitions of key concepts. You can argue for the relevance of a specific theoretical approach or combine various theorical concepts to create a framework for your research.

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

Any lit review is only as good as the research it discusses; make sure your sources are well-chosen and your research is thorough. Don’t be afraid to do more research if you discover a new thread as you’re writing. More info on the research process is available in our "Conducting Research" resources .

As you’re doing your research, create an annotated bibliography ( see our page on the this type of document ). Much of the information used in an annotated bibliography can be used also in a literature review, so you’ll be not only partially drafting your lit review as you research, but also developing your sense of the larger conversation going on among scholars, professionals, and any other stakeholders in your topic.

Usually you will need to synthesize research rather than just summarizing it. This means drawing connections between sources to create a picture of the scholarly conversation on a topic over time. Many student writers struggle to synthesize because they feel they don’t have anything to add to the scholars they are citing; here are some strategies to help you:

• It often helps to remember that the point of these kinds of syntheses is to show your readers how you understand your research, to help them read the rest of your paper.
• Writing teachers often say synthesis is like hosting a dinner party: imagine all your sources are together in a room, discussing your topic. What are they saying to each other?
• Look at the in-text citations in each paragraph. Are you citing just one source for each paragraph? This usually indicates summary only. When you have multiple sources cited in a paragraph, you are more likely to be synthesizing them (not always, but often
• Read more about synthesis here.

The most interesting literature reviews are often written as arguments (again, as mentioned at the beginning of the page, this is discipline-specific and doesn’t work for all situations). Often, the literature review is where you can establish your research as filling a particular gap or as relevant in a particular way. You have some chance to do this in your introduction in an article, but the literature review section gives a more extended opportunity to establish the conversation in the way you would like your readers to see it. You can choose the intellectual lineage you would like to be part of and whose definitions matter most to your thinking (mostly humanities-specific, but this goes for sciences as well). In addressing these points, you argue for your place in the conversation, which tends to make the lit review more compelling than a simple reporting of other sources.

Get science-backed answers as you write with Paperpal's Research feature

What is a Literature Review? How to Write It (with Examples)

A literature review is a critical analysis and synthesis of existing research on a particular topic. It provides an overview of the current state of knowledge, identifies gaps, and highlights key findings in the literature. 1 The purpose of a literature review is to situate your own research within the context of existing scholarship, demonstrating your understanding of the topic and showing how your work contributes to the ongoing conversation in the field. Learning how to write a literature review is a critical tool for successful research. Your ability to summarize and synthesize prior research pertaining to a certain topic demonstrates your grasp on the topic of study, and assists in the learning process. 

Table of Contents

• What is the purpose of literature review? 
• a. Habitat Loss and Species Extinction: 
• b. Range Shifts and Phenological Changes: 
• c. Ocean Acidification and Coral Reefs: 
• d. Adaptive Strategies and Conservation Efforts: 

How to write a good literature review 

• Choose a Topic and Define the Research Question: 
• Decide on the Scope of Your Review: 
• Select Databases for Searches: 
• Conduct Searches and Keep Track: 
• Review the Literature: 
• Organize and Write Your Literature Review: 
• How to write a literature review faster with Paperpal? 
• Frequently asked questions 

What is a literature review?

A well-conducted literature review demonstrates the researcher’s familiarity with the existing literature, establishes the context for their own research, and contributes to scholarly conversations on the topic. One of the purposes of a literature review is also to help researchers avoid duplicating previous work and ensure that their research is informed by and builds upon the existing body of knowledge.

What is the purpose of literature review?

A literature review serves several important purposes within academic and research contexts. Here are some key objectives and functions of a literature review: 2  

1. Contextualizing the Research Problem: The literature review provides a background and context for the research problem under investigation. It helps to situate the study within the existing body of knowledge. 

2. Identifying Gaps in Knowledge: By identifying gaps, contradictions, or areas requiring further research, the researcher can shape the research question and justify the significance of the study. This is crucial for ensuring that the new research contributes something novel to the field. 

Find academic papers related to your research topic faster. Try Research on Paperpal  

3. Understanding Theoretical and Conceptual Frameworks: Literature reviews help researchers gain an understanding of the theoretical and conceptual frameworks used in previous studies. This aids in the development of a theoretical framework for the current research. 

4. Providing Methodological Insights: Another purpose of literature reviews is that it allows researchers to learn about the methodologies employed in previous studies. This can help in choosing appropriate research methods for the current study and avoiding pitfalls that others may have encountered. 

5. Establishing Credibility: A well-conducted literature review demonstrates the researcher’s familiarity with existing scholarship, establishing their credibility and expertise in the field. It also helps in building a solid foundation for the new research. 

6. Informing Hypotheses or Research Questions: The literature review guides the formulation of hypotheses or research questions by highlighting relevant findings and areas of uncertainty in existing literature. 

Literature review example

Let’s delve deeper with a literature review example: Let’s say your literature review is about the impact of climate change on biodiversity. You might format your literature review into sections such as the effects of climate change on habitat loss and species extinction, phenological changes, and marine biodiversity. Each section would then summarize and analyze relevant studies in those areas, highlighting key findings and identifying gaps in the research. The review would conclude by emphasizing the need for further research on specific aspects of the relationship between climate change and biodiversity. The following literature review template provides a glimpse into the recommended literature review structure and content, demonstrating how research findings are organized around specific themes within a broader topic. 

Literature Review on Climate Change Impacts on Biodiversity:

Climate change is a global phenomenon with far-reaching consequences, including significant impacts on biodiversity. This literature review synthesizes key findings from various studies: 

a. Habitat Loss and Species Extinction:

Climate change-induced alterations in temperature and precipitation patterns contribute to habitat loss, affecting numerous species (Thomas et al., 2004). The review discusses how these changes increase the risk of extinction, particularly for species with specific habitat requirements. 

b. Range Shifts and Phenological Changes:

Observations of range shifts and changes in the timing of biological events (phenology) are documented in response to changing climatic conditions (Parmesan & Yohe, 2003). These shifts affect ecosystems and may lead to mismatches between species and their resources. 

c. Ocean Acidification and Coral Reefs:

The review explores the impact of climate change on marine biodiversity, emphasizing ocean acidification’s threat to coral reefs (Hoegh-Guldberg et al., 2007). Changes in pH levels negatively affect coral calcification, disrupting the delicate balance of marine ecosystems. 

d. Adaptive Strategies and Conservation Efforts:

Recognizing the urgency of the situation, the literature review discusses various adaptive strategies adopted by species and conservation efforts aimed at mitigating the impacts of climate change on biodiversity (Hannah et al., 2007). It emphasizes the importance of interdisciplinary approaches for effective conservation planning. 

Strengthen your literature review with factual insights. Try Research on Paperpal for free!    

Writing a literature review involves summarizing and synthesizing existing research on a particular topic. A good literature review format should include the following elements. 

Introduction: The introduction sets the stage for your literature review, providing context and introducing the main focus of your review. 

• Opening Statement: Begin with a general statement about the broader topic and its significance in the field. 
• Scope and Purpose: Clearly define the scope of your literature review. Explain the specific research question or objective you aim to address. 
• Organizational Framework: Briefly outline the structure of your literature review, indicating how you will categorize and discuss the existing research. 
• Significance of the Study: Highlight why your literature review is important and how it contributes to the understanding of the chosen topic. 
• Thesis Statement: Conclude the introduction with a concise thesis statement that outlines the main argument or perspective you will develop in the body of the literature review. 

Body: The body of the literature review is where you provide a comprehensive analysis of existing literature, grouping studies based on themes, methodologies, or other relevant criteria. 

• Organize by Theme or Concept: Group studies that share common themes, concepts, or methodologies. Discuss each theme or concept in detail, summarizing key findings and identifying gaps or areas of disagreement. 
• Critical Analysis: Evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of each study. Discuss the methodologies used, the quality of evidence, and the overall contribution of each work to the understanding of the topic. 
• Synthesis of Findings: Synthesize the information from different studies to highlight trends, patterns, or areas of consensus in the literature. 
• Identification of Gaps: Discuss any gaps or limitations in the existing research and explain how your review contributes to filling these gaps. 
• Transition between Sections: Provide smooth transitions between different themes or concepts to maintain the flow of your literature review. 

Write and Cite as you go with Paperpal Research. Start now for free.   

Conclusion: The conclusion of your literature review should summarize the main findings, highlight the contributions of the review, and suggest avenues for future research. 

• Summary of Key Findings: Recap the main findings from the literature and restate how they contribute to your research question or objective. 
• Contributions to the Field: Discuss the overall contribution of your literature review to the existing knowledge in the field. 
• Implications and Applications: Explore the practical implications of the findings and suggest how they might impact future research or practice. 
• Recommendations for Future Research: Identify areas that require further investigation and propose potential directions for future research in the field. 
• Final Thoughts: Conclude with a final reflection on the importance of your literature review and its relevance to the broader academic community. 

Conducting a literature review

Conducting a literature review is an essential step in research that involves reviewing and analyzing existing literature on a specific topic. It’s important to know how to do a literature review effectively, so here are the steps to follow: 1  

Choose a Topic and Define the Research Question:

• Select a topic that is relevant to your field of study. 
• Clearly define your research question or objective. Determine what specific aspect of the topic do you want to explore? 

Decide on the Scope of Your Review:

• Determine the timeframe for your literature review. Are you focusing on recent developments, or do you want a historical overview? 
• Consider the geographical scope. Is your review global, or are you focusing on a specific region? 
• Define the inclusion and exclusion criteria. What types of sources will you include? Are there specific types of studies or publications you will exclude? 

Select Databases for Searches:

• Identify relevant databases for your field. Examples include PubMed, IEEE Xplore, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. 
• Consider searching in library catalogs, institutional repositories, and specialized databases related to your topic. 

Conduct Searches and Keep Track:

• Develop a systematic search strategy using keywords, Boolean operators (AND, OR, NOT), and other search techniques. 
• Record and document your search strategy for transparency and replicability. 
• Keep track of the articles, including publication details, abstracts, and links. Use citation management tools like EndNote, Zotero, or Mendeley to organize your references. 

Review the Literature:

• Evaluate the relevance and quality of each source. Consider the methodology, sample size, and results of studies. 
• Organize the literature by themes or key concepts. Identify patterns, trends, and gaps in the existing research. 
• Summarize key findings and arguments from each source. Compare and contrast different perspectives. 
• Identify areas where there is a consensus in the literature and where there are conflicting opinions. 
• Provide critical analysis and synthesis of the literature. What are the strengths and weaknesses of existing research? 

Organize and Write Your Literature Review:

• Literature review outline should be based on themes, chronological order, or methodological approaches. 
• Write a clear and coherent narrative that synthesizes the information gathered. 
• Use proper citations for each source and ensure consistency in your citation style (APA, MLA, Chicago, etc.). 
• Conclude your literature review by summarizing key findings, identifying gaps, and suggesting areas for future research. 

Whether you’re exploring a new research field or finding new angles to develop an existing topic, sifting through hundreds of papers can take more time than you have to spare. But what if you could find science-backed insights with verified citations in seconds? That’s the power of Paperpal’s new Research feature!  

How to write a literature review faster with Paperpal?

Paperpal, an AI writing assistant, integrates powerful academic search capabilities within its writing platform. With the Research feature, you get 100% factual insights, with citations backed by 250M+ verified research articles, directly within your writing interface with the option to save relevant references in your Citation Library. By eliminating the need to switch tabs to find answers to all your research questions, Paperpal saves time and helps you stay focused on your writing.   

Here’s how to use the Research feature:  

• Ask a question: Get started with a new document on paperpal.com. Click on the “Research” feature and type your question in plain English. Paperpal will scour over 250 million research articles, including conference papers and preprints, to provide you with accurate insights and citations. 
• Review and Save: Paperpal summarizes the information, while citing sources and listing relevant reads. You can quickly scan the results to identify relevant references and save these directly to your built-in citations library for later access. 
• Cite with Confidence: Paperpal makes it easy to incorporate relevant citations and references into your writing, ensuring your arguments are well-supported by credible sources. This translates to a polished, well-researched literature review. 

The literature review sample and detailed advice on writing and conducting a review will help you produce a well-structured report. But remember that a good literature review is an ongoing process, and it may be necessary to revisit and update it as your research progresses. By combining effortless research with an easy citation process, Paperpal Research streamlines the literature review process and empowers you to write faster and with more confidence. Try Paperpal Research now and see for yourself.  

Frequently asked questions

A literature review is a critical and comprehensive analysis of existing literature (published and unpublished works) on a specific topic or research question and provides a synthesis of the current state of knowledge in a particular field. A well-conducted literature review is crucial for researchers to build upon existing knowledge, avoid duplication of efforts, and contribute to the advancement of their field. It also helps researchers situate their work within a broader context and facilitates the development of a sound theoretical and conceptual framework for their studies.

Literature review is a crucial component of research writing, providing a solid background for a research paper’s investigation. The aim is to keep professionals up to date by providing an understanding of ongoing developments within a specific field, including research methods, and experimental techniques used in that field, and present that knowledge in the form of a written report. Also, the depth and breadth of the literature review emphasizes the credibility of the scholar in his or her field.  

Before writing a literature review, it’s essential to undertake several preparatory steps to ensure that your review is well-researched, organized, and focused. This includes choosing a topic of general interest to you and doing exploratory research on that topic, writing an annotated bibliography, and noting major points, especially those that relate to the position you have taken on the topic. 

Literature reviews and academic research papers are essential components of scholarly work but serve different purposes within the academic realm. 3 A literature review aims to provide a foundation for understanding the current state of research on a particular topic, identify gaps or controversies, and lay the groundwork for future research. Therefore, it draws heavily from existing academic sources, including books, journal articles, and other scholarly publications. In contrast, an academic research paper aims to present new knowledge, contribute to the academic discourse, and advance the understanding of a specific research question. Therefore, it involves a mix of existing literature (in the introduction and literature review sections) and original data or findings obtained through research methods. 

Literature reviews are essential components of academic and research papers, and various strategies can be employed to conduct them effectively. If you want to know how to write a literature review for a research paper, here are four common approaches that are often used by researchers.  Chronological Review: This strategy involves organizing the literature based on the chronological order of publication. It helps to trace the development of a topic over time, showing how ideas, theories, and research have evolved.  Thematic Review: Thematic reviews focus on identifying and analyzing themes or topics that cut across different studies. Instead of organizing the literature chronologically, it is grouped by key themes or concepts, allowing for a comprehensive exploration of various aspects of the topic.  Methodological Review: This strategy involves organizing the literature based on the research methods employed in different studies. It helps to highlight the strengths and weaknesses of various methodologies and allows the reader to evaluate the reliability and validity of the research findings.  Theoretical Review: A theoretical review examines the literature based on the theoretical frameworks used in different studies. This approach helps to identify the key theories that have been applied to the topic and assess their contributions to the understanding of the subject.  It’s important to note that these strategies are not mutually exclusive, and a literature review may combine elements of more than one approach. The choice of strategy depends on the research question, the nature of the literature available, and the goals of the review. Additionally, other strategies, such as integrative reviews or systematic reviews, may be employed depending on the specific requirements of the research.

The literature review format can vary depending on the specific publication guidelines. However, there are some common elements and structures that are often followed. Here is a general guideline for the format of a literature review:  Introduction:   Provide an overview of the topic.  Define the scope and purpose of the literature review.  State the research question or objective.  Body:   Organize the literature by themes, concepts, or chronology.  Critically analyze and evaluate each source.  Discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the studies.  Highlight any methodological limitations or biases.  Identify patterns, connections, or contradictions in the existing research.  Conclusion:   Summarize the key points discussed in the literature review.  Highlight the research gap.  Address the research question or objective stated in the introduction.  Highlight the contributions of the review and suggest directions for future research.

Both annotated bibliographies and literature reviews involve the examination of scholarly sources. While annotated bibliographies focus on individual sources with brief annotations, literature reviews provide a more in-depth, integrated, and comprehensive analysis of existing literature on a specific topic. The key differences are as follows: 

References 

• Denney, A. S., & Tewksbury, R. (2013). How to write a literature review.  Journal of criminal justice education ,  24 (2), 218-234. 
• Pan, M. L. (2016).  Preparing literature reviews: Qualitative and quantitative approaches . Taylor & Francis. 
• Cantero, C. (2019). How to write a literature review.  San José State University Writing Center . 

Paperpal is an AI writing assistant that help academics write better, faster with real-time suggestions for in-depth language and grammar correction. Trained on millions of research manuscripts enhanced by professional academic editors, Paperpal delivers human precision at machine speed.  

Try it for free or upgrade to  Paperpal Prime , which unlocks unlimited access to premium features like academic translation, paraphrasing, contextual synonyms, consistency checks and more. It’s like always having a professional academic editor by your side! Go beyond limitations and experience the future of academic writing.  Get Paperpal Prime now at just US$19 a month!

Related Reads:

• Empirical Research: A Comprehensive Guide for Academics 
• How to Write a Scientific Paper in 10 Steps 
• How Long Should a Chapter Be?
• How to Use Paperpal to Generate Emails & Cover Letters?

6 Tips for Post-Doc Researchers to Take Their Career to the Next Level

Self-plagiarism in research: what it is and how to avoid it, you may also like, how to write the first draft of a..., mla works cited page: format, template & examples, how to ace grant writing for research funding..., powerful academic phrases to improve your essay writing , how to write a high-quality conference paper, how paperpal’s research feature helps you develop and..., how paperpal is enhancing academic productivity and accelerating..., how to write a successful book chapter for..., academic editing: how to self-edit academic text with..., 4 ways paperpal encourages responsible writing with ai.

Learn how to write a review of literature

What is a review of literature.

The format of a review of literature may vary from discipline to discipline and from assignment to assignment.

A review may be a self-contained unit — an end in itself — or a preface to and rationale for engaging in primary research. A review is a required part of grant and research proposals and often a chapter in theses and dissertations.

Generally, the purpose of a review is to analyze critically a segment of a published body of knowledge through summary, classification, and comparison of prior research studies, reviews of literature, and theoretical articles.

Writing the introduction

In the introduction, you should:

Define or identify the general topic, issue, or area of concern, thus providing an appropriate context for reviewing the literature.

Point out overall trends in what has been published about the topic; or conflicts in theory, methodology, evidence, and conclusions; or gaps in research and scholarship; or a single problem or new perspective of immediate interest.

Establish the writer’s reason (point of view) for reviewing the literature; explain the criteria to be used in analyzing and comparing literature and the organization of the review (sequence); and, when necessary, state why certain literature is or is not included (scope).

Writing the body

In the body, you should:

Group research studies and other types of literature (reviews, theoretical articles, case studies, etc.) according to common denominators such as qualitative versus quantitative approaches, conclusions of authors, specific purpose or objective, chronology, etc.

Summarize individual studies or articles with as much or as little detail as each merits according to its comparative importance in the literature, remembering that space (length) denotes significance.

Provide the reader with strong “umbrella” sentences at beginnings of paragraphs, “signposts” throughout, and brief “so what” summary sentences at intermediate points in the review to aid in understanding comparisons and analyses.

Writing the conclusion

In the conclusion, you should:

Summarize major contributions of significant studies and articles to the body of knowledge under review, maintaining the focus established in the introduction.

Evaluate the current “state of the art” for the body of knowledge reviewed, pointing out major methodological flaws or gaps in research, inconsistencies in theory and findings, and areas or issues pertinent to future study.

Conclude by providing some insight into the relationship between the central topic of the literature review and a larger area of study such as a discipline, a scientific endeavor, or a profession.

For further information see our handouts on Writing a Critical Review of a Nonfiction Book or Article or Reading a Book to Review It .

To learn more about literature reviews, take a look at our workshop on Writing Literature Reviews of Published Research.

Sample Literature Reviews

An important strategy for learning how to compose literature reviews in your field or within a specific genre is to locate and analyze representative examples. The following collection of annotated sample literature reviews written and co-written by colleagues associated with UW-Madison showcases how these reviews can do different kind of work for different purposes. Use these successful examples as a starting point for understanding how other writers have approached the challenging and important task of situating their idea in the context of established research.

• Sample 1 (PDF) A brief literature review within a political scientists’  National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship  grant
• Sample 2 (PDF) A several-page literature review at the beginning of a published, academic article about philosophy
• Sample 3 (PDF) A brief literature review at the beginning of a published, academic article about photochemistry

Academic and Professional Writing

This is an accordion element with a series of buttons that open and close related content panels.

Analysis Papers

Reading Poetry

A Short Guide to Close Reading for Literary Analysis

Using Literary Quotations

Play Reviews

Writing a Rhetorical Précis to Analyze Nonfiction Texts

Incorporating Interview Data

Grant Proposals

Planning and Writing a Grant Proposal: The Basics

Additional Resources for Grants and Proposal Writing

Job Materials and Application Essays

Writing Personal Statements for Ph.D. Programs

• Before you begin: useful tips for writing your essay
• Guided brainstorming exercises
• Get more help with your essay
• Frequently Asked Questions

Resume Writing Tips

CV Writing Tips

Cover Letters

Business Letters

Proposals and Dissertations

Resources for Proposal Writers

Resources for Dissertators

Research Papers

Planning and Writing Research Papers

Quoting and Paraphrasing

Writing Annotated Bibliographies

Creating Poster Presentations

Writing an Abstract for Your Research Paper

Thank-You Notes

Advice for Students Writing Thank-You Notes to Donors

Reading for a Review

Critical Reviews

Writing a Review of Literature

Scientific Reports

Scientific Report Format

Sample Lab Assignment

Writing for the Web

Writing an Effective Blog Post

Writing for Social Media: A Guide for Academics

• UConn Library
• Literature Review: The What, Why and How-to Guide
• Introduction

Literature Review: The What, Why and How-to Guide — Introduction

• Getting Started
• How to Pick a Topic
• Strategies to Find Sources
• Evaluating Sources & Lit. Reviews
• Tips for Writing Literature Reviews
• Writing Literature Review: Useful Sites
• Citation Resources
• Other Academic Writings

What are Literature Reviews?

So, what is a literature review? "A literature review is an account of what has been published on a topic by accredited scholars and researchers. In writing the literature review, your purpose is to convey to your reader what knowledge and ideas have been established on a topic, and what their strengths and weaknesses are. As a piece of writing, the literature review must be defined by a guiding concept (e.g., your research objective, the problem or issue you are discussing, or your argumentative thesis). It is not just a descriptive list of the material available, or a set of summaries." Taylor, D.  The literature review: A few tips on conducting it . University of Toronto Health Sciences Writing Centre.

Goals of Literature Reviews

What are the goals of creating a Literature Review?  A literature could be written to accomplish different aims:

• To develop a theory or evaluate an existing theory
• To summarize the historical or existing state of a research topic
• Identify a problem in a field of research 

Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1997). Writing narrative literature reviews .  Review of General Psychology , 1 (3), 311-320.

What kinds of sources require a Literature Review?

• A research paper assigned in a course
• A thesis or dissertation
• A grant proposal
• An article intended for publication in a journal

All these instances require you to collect what has been written about your research topic so that you can demonstrate how your own research sheds new light on the topic.

Types of Literature Reviews

What kinds of literature reviews are written?

Narrative review: The purpose of this type of review is to describe the current state of the research on a specific topic/research and to offer a critical analysis of the literature reviewed. Studies are grouped by research/theoretical categories, and themes and trends, strengths and weakness, and gaps are identified. The review ends with a conclusion section which summarizes the findings regarding the state of the research of the specific study, the gaps identify and if applicable, explains how the author's research will address gaps identify in the review and expand the knowledge on the topic reviewed.

• Example : Predictors and Outcomes of U.S. Quality Maternity Leave: A Review and Conceptual Framework:  10.1177/08948453211037398  

Systematic review : "The authors of a systematic review use a specific procedure to search the research literature, select the studies to include in their review, and critically evaluate the studies they find." (p. 139). Nelson, L. K. (2013). Research in Communication Sciences and Disorders . Plural Publishing.

• Example : The effect of leave policies on increasing fertility: a systematic review:  10.1057/s41599-022-01270-w

Meta-analysis : "Meta-analysis is a method of reviewing research findings in a quantitative fashion by transforming the data from individual studies into what is called an effect size and then pooling and analyzing this information. The basic goal in meta-analysis is to explain why different outcomes have occurred in different studies." (p. 197). Roberts, M. C., & Ilardi, S. S. (2003). Handbook of Research Methods in Clinical Psychology . Blackwell Publishing.

• Example : Employment Instability and Fertility in Europe: A Meta-Analysis:  10.1215/00703370-9164737

Meta-synthesis : "Qualitative meta-synthesis is a type of qualitative study that uses as data the findings from other qualitative studies linked by the same or related topic." (p.312). Zimmer, L. (2006). Qualitative meta-synthesis: A question of dialoguing with texts .  Journal of Advanced Nursing , 53 (3), 311-318.

• Example : Women’s perspectives on career successes and barriers: A qualitative meta-synthesis:  10.1177/05390184221113735

Literature Reviews in the Health Sciences

• UConn Health subject guide on systematic reviews Explanation of the different review types used in health sciences literature as well as tools to help you find the right review type
• << Previous: Getting Started
• Next: How to Pick a Topic >>
• Last Updated: Sep 21, 2022 2:16 PM
• URL: https://guides.lib.uconn.edu/literaturereview

Literature Reviews

What this handout is about.

This handout will explain what literature reviews are and offer insights into the form and construction of literature reviews 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 is likely to 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?

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.

Keep in mind that UNC Libraries have research guides and to databases relevant to many fields of study. You can reach out to the subject librarian for a consultation: https://library.unc.edu/support/consultations/ .

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 90’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.

Convey it to your reader

A literature review may not have a traditional thesis statement (one that makes an argument), but you do need to tell readers what to expect. Try writing a simple statement that lets the reader know what is your main organizing principle. Here are a couple of examples:

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 stated it clearly and directly. 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. The following provides a brief description of the content of each:

• 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:

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.

Now consider some typical ways of organizing the sources into a review:

• 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 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 additional publications. 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 . We revise these tips periodically and welcome feedback.

Anson, Chris M., and Robert A. Schwegler. 2010. The Longman Handbook for Writers and Readers , 6th ed. New York: Longman.

Jones, Robert, Patrick Bizzaro, and Cynthia Selfe. 1997. The Harcourt Brace Guide to Writing in the Disciplines . New York: Harcourt Brace.

Lamb, Sandra E. 1998. How to Write It: A Complete Guide to Everything You’ll Ever Write . Berkeley: Ten Speed Press.

Rosen, Leonard J., and Laurence Behrens. 2003. The Allyn & Bacon Handbook , 5th ed. New York: Longman.

Troyka, Lynn Quittman, and Doug Hesse. 2016. Simon and Schuster Handbook for Writers , 11th ed. London: Pearson.

You may reproduce it for non-commercial use if you use the entire handout and attribute the source: The Writing Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Make a Gift

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, automatically generate references for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Dissertation
• What is a Literature Review? | Guide, Template, & Examples

What is a Literature Review? | Guide, Template, & Examples

Published on 22 February 2022 by Shona McCombes . Revised on 7 June 2022.

What is a literature review? A literature review is a survey of scholarly sources on a specific topic. It provides an overview of current knowledge, allowing you to identify relevant theories, methods, and gaps in the existing research.

There are five key steps to writing a literature review:

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

A good literature review doesn’t just summarise sources – it analyses, synthesises, and critically evaluates to give a clear picture of the state of knowledge on the subject.

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Be assured that you'll submit flawless writing. Upload your document to correct all your mistakes.

Table of contents

Why write a literature review, examples of literature reviews, step 1: search for relevant literature, step 2: evaluate and select sources, step 3: identify themes, debates and gaps, step 4: outline your literature review’s structure, step 5: write your literature review, frequently asked questions about literature reviews, introduction.

• Quick Run-through
• Step 1 & 2

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

• Demonstrate your familiarity with the topic and scholarly context
• Develop a theoretical framework and methodology for your research
• Position yourself in relation to other researchers and theorists
• Show how your dissertation addresses a gap or contributes to a debate

You might also have to write a literature review as a stand-alone assignment. In this case, the purpose is to evaluate the current state of research and demonstrate your knowledge of scholarly debates around a topic.

The content will look slightly different in each case, but the process of conducting a literature review follows the same steps. We’ve written a step-by-step guide that you can follow below.

Prevent plagiarism, run a free check.

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

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

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

Download Word doc Download Google doc

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

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

If you are writing a literature review as a stand-alone assignment, you will have to choose a focus and develop a central question to direct your search. Unlike a dissertation research question, this question has to be answerable without collecting original data. You should be able to answer it based only on a review of existing publications.

Make a list of keywords

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

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

Search for relevant sources

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

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

You can use boolean operators to help narrow down your search:

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

To identify the most important publications on your topic, take note of recurring citations. If the same authors, books or articles keep appearing in your reading, make sure to seek them out.

You probably won’t be able to read absolutely everything that has been written on the topic – you’ll have to evaluate which sources are most relevant to your questions.

For each publication, ask yourself:

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

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

You can find out how many times an article has been cited on Google Scholar – a high citation count means the article has been influential in the field, and should certainly be included in your literature review.

The scope of your review will depend on your topic and discipline: in the sciences you usually only review recent literature, but in the humanities you might take a long historical perspective (for example, to trace how a concept has changed in meaning over time).

Remember that you can use our template to summarise and evaluate sources you’re thinking about using!

Take notes and cite your sources

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

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

You can use our free APA Reference Generator for quick, correct, consistent citations.

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

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

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

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

There are various approaches to organising the body of a literature review. You should have a rough idea of your strategy before you start writing.

Depending on the length of your literature review, you can combine several of these strategies (for example, your overall structure might be thematic, but each theme is discussed chronologically).

Chronological

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

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

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

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

Methodological

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

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

Theoretical

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

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

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

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

If you are writing the literature review as part of your dissertation or thesis, reiterate your central problem or research question and give a brief summary of the scholarly context. You can emphasise the timeliness of the topic (“many recent studies have focused on the problem of x”) or highlight a gap in the literature (“while there has been much research on x, few researchers have taken y into consideration”).

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

As you write, make sure to follow these tips:

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

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

If the literature review is part of your dissertation or thesis, reiterate how your research addresses gaps and contributes new knowledge, or discuss how you have drawn on existing theories and methods to build a framework for your research. This can lead directly into your methodology section.

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

It is often written as part of a dissertation , thesis, research paper , or proposal .

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

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

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

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

Cite this Scribbr article

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

McCombes, S. (2022, June 07). What is a Literature Review? | Guide, Template, & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved 3 June 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/thesis-dissertation/literature-review/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, how to write a dissertation proposal | a step-by-step guide, what is a theoretical framework | a step-by-step guide, what is a research methodology | steps & tips.

Reference management. Clean and simple.

What is a literature review? [with examples]

What is a literature review?

The purpose of a literature review, how to write a literature review, the format of a literature review, general formatting rules, the length of a literature review, literature review examples, frequently asked questions about literature reviews, related articles.

A literature review is an assessment of the sources in a chosen topic of research.

In a literature review, you’re expected to report on the existing scholarly conversation, without adding new contributions.

If you are currently writing one, you've come to the right place. In the following paragraphs, we will explain:

• the objective of a literature review
• how to write a literature review
• the basic format of a literature review

Tip: It’s not always mandatory to add a literature review in a paper. Theses and dissertations often include them, whereas research papers may not. Make sure to consult with your instructor for exact requirements.

The four main objectives of a literature review are:

• Studying the references of your research area
• Summarizing the main arguments
• Identifying current gaps, stances, and issues
• Presenting all of the above in a text

Ultimately, the main goal of a literature review is to provide the researcher with sufficient knowledge about the topic in question so that they can eventually make an intervention.

The format of a literature review is fairly standard. It includes an:

• introduction that briefly introduces the main topic
• body that includes the main discussion of the key arguments
• conclusion that highlights the gaps and issues of the literature

➡️ Take a look at our guide on how to write a literature review to learn more about how to structure a literature review.

First of all, a literature review should have its own labeled section. You should indicate clearly in the table of contents where the literature can be found, and you should label this section as “Literature Review.”

➡️ For more information on writing a thesis, visit our guide on how to structure a thesis .

There is no set amount of words for a literature review, so the length depends on the research. If you are working with a large amount of sources, it will be long. If your paper does not depend entirely on references, it will be short.

Take a look at these three theses featuring great literature reviews:

• School-Based Speech-Language Pathologist's Perceptions of Sensory Food Aversions in Children [ PDF , see page 20]
• Who's Writing What We Read: Authorship in Criminological Research [ PDF , see page 4]
• A Phenomenological Study of the Lived Experience of Online Instructors of Theological Reflection at Christian Institutions Accredited by the Association of Theological Schools [ PDF , see page 56]

Literature reviews are most commonly found in theses and dissertations. However, you find them in research papers as well.

There is no set amount of words for a literature review, so the length depends on the research. If you are working with a large amount of sources, then it will be long. If your paper does not depend entirely on references, then it will be short.

No. A literature review should have its own independent section. You should indicate clearly in the table of contents where the literature review can be found, and label this section as “Literature Review.”

The main goal of a literature review is to provide the researcher with sufficient knowledge about the topic in question so that they can eventually make an intervention.

• USC Libraries
• Research Guides

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper

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

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

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

Importance of a Good Literature Review

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

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

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

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

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

Types of Literature Reviews

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Structure and Writing Style

I.  Thinking About Your Literature Review

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

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

The critical evaluation of each work should consider :

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

II.  Development of the Literature Review

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

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

III.  Ways to Organize Your Literature Review

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

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

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

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

IV.  Writing Your Literature Review

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

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

V.  Common Mistakes to Avoid

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

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

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

Writing Tip

Break Out of Your Disciplinary Box!

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

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

Another Writing Tip

Don't Just Review for Content!

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

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

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

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

Yet Another Writing Tip

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

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

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

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

• << Previous: Theoretical Framework
• Next: Citation Tracking >>
• Last Updated: May 30, 2024 9:38 AM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide

Harvey Cushing/John Hay Whitney Medical Library

• Collections
• Research Help

YSN Doctoral Programs: Steps in Conducting a Literature Review

• Biomedical Databases
• Global (Public Health) Databases
• Soc. Sci., History, and Law Databases
• Grey Literature
• Trials Registers
• Data and Statistics
• Public Policy
• Google Tips
• Recommended Books
• Steps in Conducting a Literature Review

What is a literature review?

A literature review is an integrated analysis -- not just a summary-- of scholarly writings and other relevant evidence related directly to your research question.  That is, it represents a synthesis of the evidence that provides background information on your topic and shows a association between the evidence and your research question.

A literature review may be a stand alone work or the introduction to a larger research paper, depending on the assignment.  Rely heavily on the guidelines your instructor has given you.

Why is it important?

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.
• Discovers relationships between research studies/ideas.
• Identifies major themes, concepts, and researchers on a topic.
• Identifies critical gaps and points of disagreement.
• Discusses further research questions that logically come out of the previous studies.

APA7 Style resources

APA Style Blog - for those harder to find answers

1. Choose a topic. Define your research question.

Your literature review should be guided by your central research question.  The literature represents background and research developments related to a specific research question, interpreted and analyzed by you in a synthesized way.

• Make sure your research question is not too broad or too narrow.  Is it manageable?
• Begin writing down terms that are related to your question. These will be useful for searches later.
• If you have the opportunity, discuss your topic with your professor and your class mates.

2. Decide on the scope of your review

How many studies do you need to look at? How comprehensive should it be? How many years should it cover? 

• This may depend on your assignment.  How many sources does the assignment require?

3. Select the databases you will use to conduct your searches.

Make a list of the databases you will search. 

Where to find databases:

• use the tabs on this guide
• Find other databases in the Nursing Information Resources web page
• More on the Medical Library web page
• ... and more on the Yale University Library web page

4. Conduct your searches to find the evidence. Keep track of your searches.

• Use the key words in your question, as well as synonyms for those words, as terms in your search. Use the database tutorials for help.
• Save the searches in the databases. This saves time when you want to redo, or modify, the searches. It is also helpful to use as a guide is the searches are not finding any useful results.
• Review the abstracts of research studies carefully. This will save you time.
• Use the bibliographies and references of research studies you find to locate others.
• Check with your professor, or a subject expert in the field, if you are missing any key works in the field.
• Ask your librarian for help at any time.
• Use a citation manager, such as EndNote as the repository for your citations. See the EndNote tutorials for help.

Review the literature

Some questions to help you analyze the research:

• What was the research question of the study you are reviewing? What were the authors trying to discover?
• Was the research funded by a source that could influence the findings?
• What were the research methodologies? Analyze its literature review, the samples and variables used, the results, and the conclusions.
• Does the research seem to be complete? Could it have been conducted more soundly? What further questions does it raise?
• If there are conflicting studies, why do you think that is?
• How are the authors viewed in the field? Has this study been cited? If so, how has it been analyzed?

Tips: 

• Review the abstracts carefully.  
• Keep careful notes so that you may track your thought processes during the research process.
• Create a matrix of the studies for easy analysis, and synthesis, across all of the studies.
• << Previous: Recommended Books
• Last Updated: Jan 4, 2024 10:52 AM
• URL: https://guides.library.yale.edu/YSNDoctoral

• University of Texas Libraries

Literature Reviews

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

What is a Literature Review?

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

A literature review should: 

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

From  S age Research Methods

Purpose of a Literature Review

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

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

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

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

Limitations of a Literature Review

Some of the limitations of a literature review are:

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

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

Meryl Brodsky : Communication and Information Studies

Hannah Chapman Tripp : Biology, Neuroscience

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

Larayne Dallas : Engineering

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

Susan Macicak : Linguistics

Imelda Vetter : Dell Medical School

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

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

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

Libraries | Research Guides

Literature reviews, what is a literature review, learning more about how to do a literature review.

• Planning the Review
• The Research Question
• Choosing Where to Search
• Organizing the Review
• Writing the Review

A literature review is a review and synthesis of existing research on a topic or research question. A literature review is meant to analyze the scholarly literature, make connections across writings and identify strengths, weaknesses, trends, and missing conversations. A literature review should address different aspects of a topic as it relates to your research question. A literature review goes beyond a description or summary of the literature you have read. 

• Sage Research Methods Core Collection This link opens in a new window SAGE Research Methods supports research at all levels by providing material to guide users through every step of the research process. SAGE Research Methods is the ultimate methods library with more than 1000 books, reference works, journal articles, and instructional videos by world-leading academics from across the social sciences, including the largest collection of qualitative methods books available online from any scholarly publisher. – Publisher

• Next: Planning the Review >>
• Last Updated: May 2, 2024 10:39 AM
• URL: https://libguides.northwestern.edu/literaturereviews

• Library Homepage

Literature Review: The What, Why and How-to Guide: Literature Reviews?

• Literature Reviews?
• Strategies to Finding Sources
• Keeping up with Research!
• Evaluating Sources & Literature Reviews
• Organizing for Writing
• Writing Literature Review
• Other Academic Writings

What is a Literature Review?

So, what is a literature review .

"A literature review is an account of what has been published on a topic by accredited scholars and researchers. In writing the literature review, your purpose is to convey to your reader what knowledge and ideas have been established on a topic, and what their strengths and weaknesses are. As a piece of writing, the literature review must be defined by a guiding concept (e.g., your research objective, the problem or issue you are discussing, or your argumentative thesis). It is not just a descriptive list of the material available or a set of summaries." - Quote from Taylor, D. (n.d)."The Literature Review: A Few Tips on Conducting it".

• Citation: "The Literature Review: A Few Tips on Conducting it"

What kinds of literature reviews are written?

Each field has a particular way to do reviews for academic research literature. In the social sciences and humanities the most common are:

• Narrative Reviews: The purpose of this type of review is to describe the current state of the research on a specific research topic and to offer a critical analysis of the literature reviewed. Studies are grouped by research/theoretical categories, and themes and trends, strengths and weaknesses, and gaps are identified. The review ends with a conclusion section that summarizes the findings regarding the state of the research of the specific study, the gaps identify and if applicable, explains how the author's research will address gaps identify in the review and expand the knowledge on the topic reviewed.
• Book review essays/ Historiographical review essays : A type of literature review typical in History and related fields, e.g., Latin American studies. For example, the Latin American Research Review explains that the purpose of this type of review is to “(1) to familiarize readers with the subject, approach, arguments, and conclusions found in a group of books whose common focus is a historical period; a country or region within Latin America; or a practice, development, or issue of interest to specialists and others; (2) to locate these books within current scholarship, critical methodologies, and approaches; and (3) to probe the relation of these new books to previous work on the subject, especially canonical texts. Unlike individual book reviews, the cluster reviews found in LARR seek to address the state of the field or discipline and not solely the works at issue.” - LARR

What are the Goals of Creating a Literature Review?

• To develop a theory or evaluate an existing theory
• To summarize the historical or existing state of a research topic
• Identify a problem in a field of research 
• Baumeister, R.F. & Leary, M.R. (1997). "Writing narrative literature reviews," Review of General Psychology , 1(3), 311-320.

When do you need to write a Literature Review?

• When writing a prospectus or a thesis/dissertation
• When writing a research paper
• When writing a grant proposal

In all these cases you need to dedicate a chapter in these works to showcase what has been written about your research topic and to point out how your own research will shed new light into a body of scholarship.

Where I can find examples of Literature Reviews?

Note:  In the humanities, even if they don't use the term "literature review", they may have a dedicated  chapter that reviewed the "critical bibliography" or they incorporated that review in the introduction or first chapter of the dissertation, book, or article.

• UCSB electronic theses and dissertations In partnership with the Graduate Division, the UC Santa Barbara Library is making available theses and dissertations produced by UCSB students. Currently included in ADRL are theses and dissertations that were originally filed electronically, starting in 2011. In future phases of ADRL, all theses and dissertations created by UCSB students may be digitized and made available.

Where to Find Standalone Literature Reviews

Literature reviews are also written as standalone articles as a way to survey a particular research topic in-depth. This type of literature review looks at a topic from a historical perspective to see how the understanding of the topic has changed over time. 

• Find e-Journals for Standalone Literature Reviews The best way to get familiar with and to learn how to write literature reviews is by reading them. You can use our Journal Search option to find journals that specialize in publishing literature reviews from major disciplines like anthropology, sociology, etc. Usually these titles are called, "Annual Review of [discipline name] OR [Discipline name] Review. This option works best if you know the title of the publication you are looking for. Below are some examples of these journals! more... less... Journal Search can be found by hovering over the link for Research on the library website.

Social Sciences

• Annual Review of Anthropology
• Annual Review of Political Science
• Annual Review of Sociology
• Ethnic Studies Review

Hard science and health sciences:

• Annual Review of Biomedical Data Science
• Annual Review of Materials Science
• Systematic Review From journal site: "The journal Systematic Reviews encompasses all aspects of the design, conduct, and reporting of systematic reviews" in the health sciences.
• << Previous: Overview
• Next: Strategies to Finding Sources >>
• Last Updated: Mar 5, 2024 11:44 AM
• URL: https://guides.library.ucsb.edu/litreview

What Is A Literature Review?

A plain-language explainer (with examples).

By:  Derek Jansen (MBA) & Kerryn Warren (PhD) | June 2020 (Updated May 2023)

If you’re faced with writing a dissertation or thesis, chances are you’ve encountered the term “literature review” . If you’re on this page, you’re probably not 100% what the literature review is all about. The good news is that you’ve come to the right place.

Literature Review 101

• What (exactly) is a literature review
• What’s the purpose of the literature review chapter
• How to find high-quality resources
• How to structure your literature review chapter
• Example of an actual literature review

What is a literature review?

The word “literature review” can refer to two related things that are part of the broader literature review process. The first is the task of  reviewing the literature  – i.e. sourcing and reading through the existing research relating to your research topic. The second is the  actual chapter  that you write up in your dissertation, thesis or research project. Let’s look at each of them:

Reviewing the literature

The first step of any literature review is to hunt down and  read through the existing research  that’s relevant to your research topic. To do this, you’ll use a combination of tools (we’ll discuss some of these later) to find journal articles, books, ebooks, research reports, dissertations, theses and any other credible sources of information that relate to your topic. You’ll then  summarise and catalogue these  for easy reference when you write up your literature review chapter. 

The literature review chapter

The second step of the literature review is to write the actual literature review chapter (this is usually the second chapter in a typical dissertation or thesis structure ). At the simplest level, the literature review chapter is an  overview of the key literature  that’s relevant to your research topic. This chapter should provide a smooth-flowing discussion of what research has already been done, what is known, what is unknown and what is contested in relation to your research topic. So, you can think of it as an  integrated review of the state of knowledge  around your research topic. 

What’s the purpose of a literature review?

The literature review chapter has a few important functions within your dissertation, thesis or research project. Let’s take a look at these:

Purpose #1 – Demonstrate your topic knowledge

The first function of the literature review chapter is, quite simply, to show the reader (or marker) that you  know what you’re talking about . In other words, a good literature review chapter demonstrates that you’ve read the relevant existing research and understand what’s going on – who’s said what, what’s agreed upon, disagreed upon and so on. This needs to be  more than just a summary  of who said what – it needs to integrate the existing research to  show how it all fits together  and what’s missing (which leads us to purpose #2, next). 

Purpose #2 – Reveal the research gap that you’ll fill

The second function of the literature review chapter is to  show what’s currently missing  from the existing research, to lay the foundation for your own research topic. In other words, your literature review chapter needs to show that there are currently “missing pieces” in terms of the bigger puzzle, and that  your study will fill one of those research gaps . By doing this, you are showing that your research topic is original and will help contribute to the body of knowledge. In other words, the literature review helps justify your research topic.  

Purpose #3 – Lay the foundation for your conceptual framework

The third function of the literature review is to form the  basis for a conceptual framework . Not every research topic will necessarily have a conceptual framework, but if your topic does require one, it needs to be rooted in your literature review. 

For example, let’s say your research aims to identify the drivers of a certain outcome – the factors which contribute to burnout in office workers. In this case, you’d likely develop a conceptual framework which details the potential factors (e.g. long hours, excessive stress, etc), as well as the outcome (burnout). Those factors would need to emerge from the literature review chapter – they can’t just come from your gut! 

So, in this case, the literature review chapter would uncover each of the potential factors (based on previous studies about burnout), which would then be modelled into a framework. 

Purpose #4 – To inform your methodology

The fourth function of the literature review is to  inform the choice of methodology  for your own research. As we’ve  discussed on the Grad Coach blog , your choice of methodology will be heavily influenced by your research aims, objectives and questions . Given that you’ll be reviewing studies covering a topic close to yours, it makes sense that you could learn a lot from their (well-considered) methodologies.

So, when you’re reviewing the literature, you’ll need to  pay close attention to the research design , methodology and methods used in similar studies, and use these to inform your methodology. Quite often, you’ll be able to  “borrow” from previous studies . This is especially true for quantitative studies , as you can use previously tried and tested measures and scales. 

How do I find articles for my literature review?

Finding quality journal articles is essential to crafting a rock-solid literature review. As you probably already know, not all research is created equally, and so you need to make sure that your literature review is  built on credible research . 

We could write an entire post on how to find quality literature (actually, we have ), but a good starting point is Google Scholar . Google Scholar is essentially the academic equivalent of Google, using Google’s powerful search capabilities to find relevant journal articles and reports. It certainly doesn’t cover every possible resource, but it’s a very useful way to get started on your literature review journey, as it will very quickly give you a good indication of what the  most popular pieces of research  are in your field.

One downside of Google Scholar is that it’s merely a search engine – that is, it lists the articles, but oftentimes  it doesn’t host the articles . So you’ll often hit a paywall when clicking through to journal websites. 

Thankfully, your university should provide you with access to their library, so you can find the article titles using Google Scholar and then search for them by name in your university’s online library. Your university may also provide you with access to  ResearchGate , which is another great source for existing research. 

Remember, the correct search keywords will be super important to get the right information from the start. So, pay close attention to the keywords used in the journal articles you read and use those keywords to search for more articles. If you can’t find a spoon in the kitchen, you haven’t looked in the right drawer. 

Need a helping hand?

How should I structure my literature review?

Unfortunately, there’s no generic universal answer for this one. The structure of your literature review will depend largely on your topic area and your research aims and objectives.

You could potentially structure your literature review chapter according to theme, group, variables , chronologically or per concepts in your field of research. We explain the main approaches to structuring your literature review here . You can also download a copy of our free literature review template to help you establish an initial structure.

In general, it’s also a good idea to start wide (i.e. the big-picture-level) and then narrow down, ending your literature review close to your research questions . However, there’s no universal one “right way” to structure your literature review. The most important thing is not to discuss your sources one after the other like a list – as we touched on earlier, your literature review needs to synthesise the research , not summarise it .

Ultimately, you need to craft your literature review so that it conveys the most important information effectively – it needs to tell a logical story in a digestible way. It’s no use starting off with highly technical terms and then only explaining what these terms mean later. Always assume your reader is not a subject matter expert and hold their hand through a journe y of the literature while keeping the functions of the literature review chapter (which we discussed earlier) front of mind.

Example of a literature review

In the video below, we walk you through a high-quality literature review from a dissertation that earned full distinction. This will give you a clearer view of what a strong literature review looks like in practice and hopefully provide some inspiration for your own. 

Wrapping Up

In this post, we’ve (hopefully) answered the question, “ what is a literature review? “. We’ve also considered the purpose and functions of the literature review, as well as how to find literature and how to structure the literature review chapter. If you’re keen to learn more, check out the literature review section of the Grad Coach blog , as well as our detailed video post covering how to write a literature review . 

Psst… there’s more!

This post is an extract from our bestselling short course, Literature Review Bootcamp . If you want to work smart, you don't want to miss this .

You Might Also Like:

16 Comments

Thanks for this review. It narrates what’s not been taught as tutors are always in a early to finish their classes.

Thanks for the kind words, Becky. Good luck with your literature review 🙂

This website is amazing, it really helps break everything down. Thank you, I would have been lost without it.

This is review is amazing. I benefited from it a lot and hope others visiting this website will benefit too.

Timothy T. Chol [email protected]

Thank you very much for the guiding in literature review I learn and benefited a lot this make my journey smooth I’ll recommend this site to my friends

This was so useful. Thank you so much.

Hi, Concept was explained nicely by both of you. Thanks a lot for sharing it. It will surely help research scholars to start their Research Journey.

The review is really helpful to me especially during this period of covid-19 pandemic when most universities in my country only offer online classes. Great stuff

Great Brief Explanation, thanks

So helpful to me as a student

GradCoach is a fantastic site with brilliant and modern minds behind it.. I spent weeks decoding the substantial academic Jargon and grounding my initial steps on the research process, which could be shortened to a couple of days through the Gradcoach. Thanks again!

This is an amazing talk. I paved way for myself as a researcher. Thank you GradCoach!

Well-presented overview of the literature!

This was brilliant. So clear. Thank you

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• Print Friendly

How to write a literature review introduction (+ examples)

The introduction to a literature review serves as your reader’s guide through your academic work and thought process. Explore the significance of literature review introductions in review papers, academic papers, essays, theses, and dissertations. We delve into the purpose and necessity of these introductions, explore the essential components of literature review introductions, and provide step-by-step guidance on how to craft your own, along with examples.

Why you need an introduction for a literature review

When you need an introduction for a literature review, what to include in a literature review introduction, examples of literature review introductions, steps to write your own literature review introduction.

A literature review is a comprehensive examination of the international academic literature concerning a particular topic. It involves summarizing published works, theories, and concepts while also highlighting gaps and offering critical reflections.

In academic writing , the introduction for a literature review is an indispensable component. Effective academic writing requires proper paragraph structuring to guide your reader through your argumentation. This includes providing an introduction to your literature review.

It is imperative to remember that you should never start sharing your findings abruptly. Even if there isn’t a dedicated introduction section .

Instead, you should always offer some form of introduction to orient the reader and clarify what they can expect.

There are three main scenarios in which you need an introduction for a literature review:

• Academic literature review papers: When your literature review constitutes the entirety of an academic review paper, a more substantial introduction is necessary. This introduction should resemble the standard introduction found in regular academic papers.
• Literature review section in an academic paper or essay: While this section tends to be brief, it’s important to precede the detailed literature review with a few introductory sentences. This helps orient the reader before delving into the literature itself.
• Literature review chapter or section in your thesis/dissertation: Every thesis and dissertation includes a literature review component, which also requires a concise introduction to set the stage for the subsequent review.

You may also like: How to write a fantastic thesis introduction (+15 examples)

It is crucial to customize the content and depth of your literature review introduction according to the specific format of your academic work.

In practical terms, this implies, for instance, that the introduction in an academic literature review paper, especially one derived from a systematic literature review , is quite comprehensive. Particularly compared to the rather brief one or two introductory sentences that are often found at the beginning of a literature review section in a standard academic paper. The introduction to the literature review chapter in a thesis or dissertation again adheres to different standards.

Here’s a structured breakdown based on length and the necessary information:

Academic literature review paper

The introduction of an academic literature review paper, which does not rely on empirical data, often necessitates a more extensive introduction than the brief literature review introductions typically found in empirical papers. It should encompass:

• The research problem: Clearly articulate the problem or question that your literature review aims to address.
• The research gap: Highlight the existing gaps, limitations, or unresolved aspects within the current body of literature related to the research problem.
• The research relevance: Explain why the chosen research problem and its subsequent investigation through a literature review are significant and relevant in your academic field.
• The literature review method: If applicable, describe the methodology employed in your literature review, especially if it is a systematic review or follows a specific research framework.
• The main findings or insights of the literature review: Summarize the key discoveries, insights, or trends that have emerged from your comprehensive review of the literature.
• The main argument of the literature review: Conclude the introduction by outlining the primary argument or statement that your literature review will substantiate, linking it to the research problem and relevance you’ve established.
• Preview of the literature review’s structure: Offer a glimpse into the organization of the literature review paper, acting as a guide for the reader. This overview outlines the subsequent sections of the paper and provides an understanding of what to anticipate.

By addressing these elements, your introduction will provide a clear and structured overview of what readers can expect in your literature review paper.

Regular literature review section in an academic article or essay

Most academic articles or essays incorporate regular literature review sections, often placed after the introduction. These sections serve to establish a scholarly basis for the research or discussion within the paper.

In a standard 8000-word journal article, the literature review section typically spans between 750 and 1250 words. The first few sentences or the first paragraph within this section often serve as an introduction. It should encompass:

• An introduction to the topic: When delving into the academic literature on a specific topic, it’s important to provide a smooth transition that aids the reader in comprehending why certain aspects will be discussed within your literature review.
• The core argument: While literature review sections primarily synthesize the work of other scholars, they should consistently connect to your central argument. This central argument serves as the crux of your message or the key takeaway you want your readers to retain. By positioning it at the outset of the literature review section and systematically substantiating it with evidence, you not only enhance reader comprehension but also elevate overall readability. This primary argument can typically be distilled into 1-2 succinct sentences.

In some cases, you might include:

• Methodology: Details about the methodology used, but only if your literature review employed a specialized method. If your approach involved a broader overview without a systematic methodology, you can omit this section, thereby conserving word count.

By addressing these elements, your introduction will effectively integrate your literature review into the broader context of your academic paper or essay. This will, in turn, assist your reader in seamlessly following your overarching line of argumentation.

Introduction to a literature review chapter in thesis or dissertation

The literature review typically constitutes a distinct chapter within a thesis or dissertation. Often, it is Chapter 2 of a thesis or dissertation.

Some students choose to incorporate a brief introductory section at the beginning of each chapter, including the literature review chapter. Alternatively, others opt to seamlessly integrate the introduction into the initial sentences of the literature review itself. Both approaches are acceptable, provided that you incorporate the following elements:

• Purpose of the literature review and its relevance to the thesis/dissertation research: Explain the broader objectives of the literature review within the context of your research and how it contributes to your thesis or dissertation. Essentially, you’re telling the reader why this literature review is important and how it fits into the larger scope of your academic work.
• Primary argument: Succinctly communicate what you aim to prove, explain, or explore through the review of existing literature. This statement helps guide the reader’s understanding of the review’s purpose and what to expect from it.
• Preview of the literature review’s content: Provide a brief overview of the topics or themes that your literature review will cover. It’s like a roadmap for the reader, outlining the main areas of focus within the review. This preview can help the reader anticipate the structure and organization of your literature review.
• Methodology: If your literature review involved a specific research method, such as a systematic review or meta-analysis, you should briefly describe that methodology. However, this is not always necessary, especially if your literature review is more of a narrative synthesis without a distinct research method.

By addressing these elements, your introduction will empower your literature review to play a pivotal role in your thesis or dissertation research. It will accomplish this by integrating your research into the broader academic literature and providing a solid theoretical foundation for your work.

Comprehending the art of crafting your own literature review introduction becomes significantly more accessible when you have concrete examples to examine. Here, you will find several examples that meet, or in most cases, adhere to the criteria described earlier.

Example 1: An effective introduction for an academic literature review paper

To begin, let’s delve into the introduction of an academic literature review paper. We will examine the paper “How does culture influence innovation? A systematic literature review”, which was published in 2018 in the journal Management Decision.

The entire introduction spans 611 words and is divided into five paragraphs. In this introduction, the authors accomplish the following:

• In the first paragraph, the authors introduce the broader topic of the literature review, which focuses on innovation and its significance in the context of economic competition. They underscore the importance of this topic, highlighting its relevance for both researchers and policymakers.
• In the second paragraph, the authors narrow down their focus to emphasize the specific role of culture in relation to innovation.
• In the third paragraph, the authors identify research gaps, noting that existing studies are often fragmented and disconnected. They then emphasize the value of conducting a systematic literature review to enhance our understanding of the topic.
• In the fourth paragraph, the authors introduce their specific objectives and explain how their insights can benefit other researchers and business practitioners.
• In the fifth and final paragraph, the authors provide an overview of the paper’s organization and structure.

In summary, this introduction stands as a solid example. While the authors deviate from previewing their key findings (which is a common practice at least in the social sciences), they do effectively cover all the other previously mentioned points.

Example 2: An effective introduction to a literature review section in an academic paper

The second example represents a typical academic paper, encompassing not only a literature review section but also empirical data, a case study, and other elements. We will closely examine the introduction to the literature review section in the paper “The environmentalism of the subalterns: a case study of environmental activism in Eastern Kurdistan/Rojhelat”, which was published in 2021 in the journal Local Environment.

The paper begins with a general introduction and then proceeds to the literature review, designated by the authors as their conceptual framework. Of particular interest is the first paragraph of this conceptual framework, comprising 142 words across five sentences:

“ A peripheral and marginalised nationality within a multinational though-Persian dominated Iranian society, the Kurdish people of Iranian Kurdistan (a region referred by the Kurds as Rojhelat/Eastern Kurdi-stan) have since the early twentieth century been subject to multifaceted and systematic discriminatory and exclusionary state policy in Iran. This condition has left a population of 12–15 million Kurds in Iran suffering from structural inequalities, disenfranchisement and deprivation. Mismanagement of Kurdistan’s natural resources and the degradation of its natural environmental are among examples of this disenfranchisement. As asserted by Julian Agyeman (2005), structural inequalities that sustain the domination of political and economic elites often simultaneously result in environmental degradation, injustice and discrimination against subaltern communities. This study argues that the environmental struggle in Eastern Kurdistan can be asserted as a (sub)element of the Kurdish liberation movement in Iran. Conceptually this research is inspired by and has been conducted through the lens of ‘subalternity’ ” ( Hassaniyan, 2021, p. 931 ).

In this first paragraph, the author is doing the following:

• The author contextualises the research
• The author links the research focus to the international literature on structural inequalities
• The author clearly presents the argument of the research
• The author clarifies how the research is inspired by and uses the concept of ‘subalternity’.

Thus, the author successfully introduces the literature review, from which point onward it dives into the main concept (‘subalternity’) of the research, and reviews the literature on socio-economic justice and environmental degradation.

While introductions to a literature review section aren’t always required to offer the same level of study context detail as demonstrated here, this introduction serves as a commendable model for orienting the reader within the literature review. It effectively underscores the literature review’s significance within the context of the study being conducted.

Examples 3-5: Effective introductions to literature review chapters

The introduction to a literature review chapter can vary in length, depending largely on the overall length of the literature review chapter itself. For example, a master’s thesis typically features a more concise literature review, thus necessitating a shorter introduction. In contrast, a Ph.D. thesis, with its more extensive literature review, often includes a more detailed introduction.

Numerous universities offer online repositories where you can access theses and dissertations from previous years, serving as valuable sources of reference. Many of these repositories, however, may require you to log in through your university account. Nevertheless, a few open-access repositories are accessible to anyone, such as the one by the University of Manchester . It’s important to note though that copyright restrictions apply to these resources, just as they would with published papers.

Master’s thesis literature review introduction

The first example is “Benchmarking Asymmetrical Heating Models of Spider Pulsar Companions” by P. Sun, a master’s thesis completed at the University of Manchester on January 9, 2024. The author, P. Sun, introduces the literature review chapter very briefly but effectively:

PhD thesis literature review chapter introduction

The second example is Deep Learning on Semi-Structured Data and its Applications to Video-Game AI, Woof, W. (Author). 31 Dec 2020, a PhD thesis completed at the University of Manchester . In Chapter 2, the author offers a comprehensive introduction to the topic in four paragraphs, with the final paragraph serving as an overview of the chapter’s structure:

PhD thesis literature review introduction

The last example is the doctoral thesis Metacognitive strategies and beliefs: Child correlates and early experiences Chan, K. Y. M. (Author). 31 Dec 2020 . The author clearly conducted a systematic literature review, commencing the review section with a discussion of the methodology and approach employed in locating and analyzing the selected records.

Having absorbed all of this information, let’s recap the essential steps and offer a succinct guide on how to proceed with creating your literature review introduction:

• Contextualize your review : Begin by clearly identifying the academic context in which your literature review resides and determining the necessary information to include.
• Outline your structure : Develop a structured outline for your literature review, highlighting the essential information you plan to incorporate in your introduction.
• Literature review process : Conduct a rigorous literature review, reviewing and analyzing relevant sources.
• Summarize and abstract : After completing the review, synthesize the findings and abstract key insights, trends, and knowledge gaps from the literature.
• Craft the introduction : Write your literature review introduction with meticulous attention to the seamless integration of your review into the larger context of your work. Ensure that your introduction effectively elucidates your rationale for the chosen review topics and the underlying reasons guiding your selection.

Master Academia

Get new content delivered directly to your inbox.

Subscribe and receive Master Academia's quarterly newsletter.

The best answers to "What are your plans for the future?"

10 tips for engaging your audience in academic writing, related articles.

Introduce yourself in a PhD interview (4 simple steps + examples)

37 creative ways to get motivation to study

Types of editorial decisions after peer review (+ how to react)

Minor revisions: Sample peer review comments and examples

A Guide to Literature Reviews

Importance of a good literature review.

• Conducting the Literature Review
• Structure and Writing Style
• Types of Literature Reviews
• Citation Management Software This link opens in a new window
• Acknowledgements

A literature review is not only a summary of key sources, but  has an organizational pattern which 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].
• << Previous: Definition
• Next: Conducting the Literature Review >>
• Last Updated: May 10, 2024 11:34 AM
• URL: https://libguides.mcmaster.ca/litreview

Help | Advanced Search

Computer Science > Machine Learning

Title: a structured review of literature on uncertainty in machine learning & deep learning.

Abstract: The adaptation and use of Machine Learning (ML) in our daily lives has led to concerns in lack of transparency, privacy, reliability, among others. As a result, we are seeing research in niche areas such as interpretability, causality, bias and fairness, and reliability. In this survey paper, we focus on a critical concern for adaptation of ML in risk-sensitive applications, namely understanding and quantifying uncertainty. Our paper approaches this topic in a structured way, providing a review of the literature in the various facets that uncertainty is enveloped in the ML process. We begin by defining uncertainty and its categories (e.g., aleatoric and epistemic), understanding sources of uncertainty (e.g., data and model), and how uncertainty can be assessed in terms of uncertainty quantification techniques (Ensembles, Bayesian Neural Networks, etc.). As part of our assessment and understanding of uncertainty in the ML realm, we cover metrics for uncertainty quantification for a single sample, dataset, and metrics for accuracy of the uncertainty estimation itself. This is followed by discussions on calibration (model and uncertainty), and decision making under uncertainty. Thus, we provide a more complete treatment of uncertainty: from the sources of uncertainty to the decision-making process. We have focused the review of uncertainty quantification methods on Deep Learning (DL), while providing the necessary background for uncertainty discussion within ML in general. Key contributions in this review are broadening the scope of uncertainty discussion, as well as an updated review of uncertainty quantification methods in DL.

Submission history

Access paper:.

• Other Formats

References & Citations

• Google Scholar
• Semantic Scholar

BibTeX formatted citation

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Code, data and media associated with this article, recommenders and search tools.

• Institution

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs .

Exploring strategic corporate sustainability management in family businesses: A systematic literature review

• Original Paper
• Open access
• Published: 06 June 2024

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Simone Häußler   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-1118-4733 1 &
• Patrick Ulrich 1  

The escalating demands from legislative authorities and stakeholders for companies to adopt corporate sustainability measures underscore the growing importance of strategic sustainability management. Despite the efforts made by companies in this domain, the strategic management of sustainability in family businesses remains an under-researched area. To address this gap, we conducted a systematic literature review covering the period from 2006 to 2022, on the topic of strategic sustainability management in family businesses. Our investigation encompasses a content analysis of 98 relevant studies. Our research question is: “What aspects are taken into account by family businesses in their corporate sustainability strategies?” We tackle this issue through a methodological triangulation of qualitative and quantitative methods. Our results yield three clusters of strategies for corporate sustainability in family businesses: (1) Family values and succession planning; Stakeholder relations and communication; (2) Risk taking, Inventions, and Technologies; and (3) Entrepreneurship and Intrapreneurship. In addition, we systematically present a range of descriptive indicators, including the research methodologies applied and the geographic focus of the published literature. This research contributes significant insights for scholars and practitioners alike, providing valuable guidance in this field. Moreover, our study paves the way for further investigations into the strategies that influence sustainability within the context of family businesses. By shedding light on this critical area, we aim to foster a more sustainable and informed approach to corporate practices among family-owned enterprises.

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

1 Introduction

The pressure on companies to implement corporate sustainability is increasing from both the legislature and stakeholders (Tjahjadi et al. 2021 ). Sustainability management is no longer just an individual corporate decision but is increasingly becoming a competitive factor. Given new and stricter requirements (e.g. on the part of the European Commission to achieve the 2- or preferably 1.5-degree target), companies will be more strongly obliged in the future to disclose their business activities regarding sustainability (European Parliament Council 2021 ).

Sustainability can improve consumers’ perceptions of product value (Bruttel 2014 ; Gómez-Ortega et al. 2023 ). A literature review by Schäufele and Hamm ( 2017 ) indicates that manufacturing and marketing with sustainability attributes is a promising strategy for quality differentiation. They report that consumers understand sustainability as a quality indicator and are therefore willing to pay more for sustainable products. Thus, through sustainability, preferences are created and purchasing behavior is influenced, which offers companies a competitive advantage. Sustainability can also help companies improve their image and generate more sales and customer loyalty as society takes on more and more social responsibility (Samudro et al. 2018 ). Sustainable marketing encompasses both sustainable products and social and economic practices. Addressing each of these elements can have a positive impact on competition. In a review paper, Batista and Francisco (2018) identified sustainable strategies of companies and analyzed the competitive advantages resulting from each of the three categories: environmental, economic, and social strategies. Actions falling under the environmental category are fundamental to maintaining competitiveness as they result from competitive behaviors and practices aimed at meeting specific requirements (e. g., the European requirements for sustainability reporting under the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive) and achieving the necessary level in developed countries. Conversely, the neglect of environmental strategies can drastically limit the ability of companies to act and grow and may result in lost opportunities for long-term investment. In the category of economic strategies, the indirect economic impacts are the development of new markets, opportunities for generating new jobs, increased effort toward accessibility, and adaptation to new economic contexts. The results regarding the social category show that companies strive to add value to their businesses by valuing and retaining their talent.

A paradigm shift toward sustainability is evident not only from a practical standpoint but also from a scientific standpoint. Academic interest in corporate sustainability issues has intensified in recent years (Pranugrahaning et al. 2021 ), but not every form of enterprise has come with a fair balance of scientific results. Although family businesses make up the most common type of companies listed in Africa, Asia, Europe, and Latin America (Broccardo et al. 2019 ; Curado and Mota 2021 ), and they are estimated to account for over 70 percent of worldwide gross domestic product (De Massis et al. 2018 ; King et al. 2022 ), there is little evidence about sustainability management for this type of enterprise. Moreover, a clear distinction is lacking between family business and other types of companies. The main problem is defining what a family business is in the first place, as different definitions of family businesses can be found in the literature. While family businesses and non-family businesses can be small, medium, or large, they can also differ concerning their values and practices compared to non-family businesses (Behringer et al. 2019 ). Until now, certain core elements such as financial performance statements, familiarity, and corporate governance in family companies could be identified and considered in definitions (Astrachan and Zellweger 2008 ; Frank et al. 2010 ; Siebels and zu Knyphausen-Aufsess 2012 ; Harms 2014 ; Fries et al. 2019 ; Baltazar et al. 2023 ). However, a recent and comprehensive meta-analysis by Miroshnychenko et al. ( 2022 ) notes a possible negative environmental performance in companies that define themselves as having family ownership and management. The inclusion of sustainability in the term “family business,” in addition to the common characteristics of a family business such as family goals or vision and a long-term orientation, is essential to a contemporary definition (Miroshnychenko et al. 2022 ). Given the hitherto less pronounced but growing interest in the area of sustainability in family businesses (Le Breton-Miller and Miller 2016 ; Kammerlander 2022 ), definitions with a corresponding focus are once again being addressed. Chua et al. ( 1999 ) in their definitions of the term family business already included the pursuit of a corporate vision in a sustainable manner and thus serve as a starting point for further research (see for example Behringer et al. 2019 ). Concerning the above-mentioned aspects, the present study adds to the definition of Chua et al. ( 1999 ), which still appears to be up to date:

The family business is a business governed and/or managed intending to shape and pursue the vision of the business held by a dominant coalition controlled by members of the same family or a small number of families in a manner that is potentially sustainable [(importance of social and ecological aspects)] across generations of the family or families. (Chua et al. 1999 )

Most firms are family firms, but little is known about their approaches to sustainability (Clauß et al. 2022 ). It seems that despite increasing research in the area of sustainability, the knowledge of how to manage sustainability is limited in family businesses (Traxler and Greiling 2023 ). As López-Pérez et al. ( 2018 ) state, family businesses face complex issues affecting their governance and management that differ from those of non-family businesses. The results of their study suggest that the company profile (a family business vs. a non-family business) moderates the relationship between sustainability and company performance. Mariani et al. ( 2021 ) conducted a systematic review highlighting that family businesses and non-family businesses exhibit different behaviors in implementing Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), with some studies indicating higher CSR performance among family businesses. As the influencing factors with which a company acts and the resulting adaptation of sustainability or the related performance are reported to differ between family businesses and other types of businesses, it would be of scientific value to analyze which strategies family businesses adapt to achieve corporate sustainability. Thus, this article focuses on strategies for corporate sustainability in family businesses and aims to analyze the latest literature. The research question is: What aspects are taken into account by family businesses in their corporate sustainability strategies? We expect the results to provide more clarity on why and how family businesses address the issue of sustainability and yield further insights into the corresponding content of the strategies. In addition, we provide detailed insights into the studies considered by breaking down the results according to geographical focus and the methods applied.

The literature review is considered a necessary tool for systematically evaluating and managing a given body of literature for a specific academic inquiry (Tranfield et al. 2003 ; Becker et al. 2018 ). Review articles can challenge established assumptions, identify critical problems and errors, and spark scientific dialogue on a topic (Kraus et al. 2022 ). However, we emphasize the systematic literature analysis, as it guarantees a high level of impact (Kraus et al. 2024 ) and transparency due to the structured implementation and clear presentation of content required. Thus, a systematic literature analysis exceeds the possibilities of narrative literature analysis (Hiebl 2023 ). Moreover, a systematic literature analysis requires a high commitment from researchers (Sauer and Seuring 2023 ) and enables them to design flexible databases of articles that can be easily updated and interrogated (Pickering and Byrne 2014 ). With the aim of presenting a clear picture of the strategies relating to sustainability in family firms in the recent literature, we conducted a systematic literature review based on the guidelines proposed by Briner and Denyer ( 2012 : 115). We used a systematic approach to identify relevant studies by combining two of the most comprehensive databases of scientific papers, Scopus ( 2023 ) and Web of Science ( 2023 ). In a preliminary search process, we searched all literature reviews that dealt with sustainability and family businesses. After reading the papers in full, we brainstormed relevant keywords and an established a set of exclusion criteria in order to define clear boundaries.

To this end, the following three limitations were set:

We considered only peer-reviewed scientific journals in English that had a management focus to ensure the identification of high-quality research and to narrow the scope of our review,

To capture the current scientific discourse and derive trends for the future, we focused mainly on the years 2006–2022.

Publications focusing on technical, political, or natural science focus were excluded.

A custom search string was developed and applied. The multi-part search string contained two keywords that logically limited the subject area. We searched the following term in either the abstract or the title: sustaina* (to ensure that the different variations such as “sustainability,” “sustainable development,” “business sustainability,” or “business sustainability” were captured). The first keyword was connected to a second phrase (specifically, “family business*” or “family firms” or “family enterprise” or “family-controlled firms”). In the first round, a total of 269 hits were achieved. To narrow down the hits in relation to the research question, we selected all journals related to management. This left 128 hits. After we removed the duplicates, 98 hits remained, which were read completely and subjected to content analysis. Compared to systematic literature analyses with a relatively similar context, the number of papers found appeared to be appropriate (for example, compare Morioka and de Carvalho 2016 ; Aarseth et al. 2017 ; Lim et al. 2019 ; Velte 2022 ). The authors individually read all of the abstracts and, if needed, the entire article to screen them for relevance. The selected sources were then evaluated and analyzed in terms of content. For the literature analysis and synthesis, a concept matrix based on Webster and Watson ( 2002 ) was used to structure the content of the results. This step is crucial to synthesizing and organizing a large volume of data and helps to provide an initial impression of the results. Consecutive steps can then be taken to further evaluate the data. Building on that initial analysis, we examined the results of the concept matrix using methodical triangulation (Fig. 1 ). We then conducted a qualitative content analysis (Mayring 2010 : 84) based on the research question “What aspects are taken into account by family businesses in their corporate sustainability strategies?” This was followed by a quantitative content analysis to break down the results according to geographical focus, year of publication, and applied methods (Benninghaus 2005 ).

Methodical Triangulation

The process model of inductive category formation according to Mayring ( 2010 : 84) was used to analyze the results, as this method is highly appropriate for the inductive and qualitative investigation of large amounts of data. In addition, further descriptive analyses were conducted, which provided information on the year of publication, the methodology used, and the location of the study. According to the process model of inductive category formation (Mayring 2010 : 84), firstly, the subject of the analysis was defined. The body of literature consisted of 98 peer- reviewed papers. After that, the level of abstraction was set and the material revision and formulation of keywords were carried out. This was followed by a revision of the keywords and a final review of the material. The last step entailed the interpretation and analysis of content.

For the quantitative analysis, descriptive clusters (Benninghaus 2005 ) were used to classify the body of literature. Descriptive clusters are groupings or categories of similar data points or objects that are identified based on common characteristics or attributes. These clusters are often used in statistical data analysis to improve the structure and organization of large datasets. The content of the literature was assessed using two questions:

What research methodologies are applied?

Which location is the main focus of the publications?

This section presents the results of the literature research. Firstly, the qualitative results, based on the application of the process model of inductive category formation, are presented and the research question is answered. Following this, the results of the quantitative analysis, using descriptive clusters, are revealed. The quantitative analysis provides information about the indicators (applied methods and geographical focus of the publication) of the literature.

3.1 Strategies for corporate sustainability management in family businesses

After various stages of processing the material, and running the process model of inductive category formation, three clusters of strategies were identified, which are presented in the following:

Family values and succession planning

Stakeholder relations and communication The predominant focus of the analyzed publications revolved around themes concerning the internal and external relationships within family businesses. This aspect emerges as a pivotal and determining factor concerning sustainability in the context of family enterprises. Understanding and effectively managing the intricate dynamics between family members, as well as fostering productive collaborations with external stakeholders, appears to play a central role in shaping the sustainability strategies of family businesses. Family values, succession planning, and stakeholder engagement emerge as factors that influence the extent to which sustainable practices are integrated into the core operations of these firms. Furthermore, this emphasis on relationships underscores the significance of transparent communication and effective governance structures within family businesses. Establishing clear lines of communication and governance mechanisms can facilitate a shared vision for sustainability and foster collective commitment to long-term sustainability goals. For example, when a non- family business is accused of unethical behavior, it reflects badly on the company, whereas in a family business, it is the reputation of the family itself that is at stake (Curado and Mota 2021 ). García‐Sánchez et al. ( 2020 ) examined this circumstance with an international sample of 956 listed firms and found that family firms perform a higher level of CSR compared to non-family firms. A positive relationship between family firms and sustainability is likely to emerge due to internally driven motivations, such as personal or organizational values and ideas, that align with ESG (Environment, Social, Governance) criteria (Sun et al. 2024 ). Particularly in the case of an impending generational change, the family’s values are crucial, especially regarding sustainability issues (Astrachan et al. 2020 ; Anggadwita et al. 2020 ). Succession planning (Bozer et al. 2017 ; Wang et al. 2019 ; Porfírio et al. 2020 ; Rodriguez Serna et al. 2022a , b ; Rodriguez Serna et al. 2022a ) and the associated reorientation about sustainability issues, as well as Stakeholder relations (Alwadani and Ndubisi 2020 ; Nguyen et al. 2020 ), are the most significant strategies for family businesses.

Risk taking, Inventions, and Technologies

In non-family firms, risk taking refers to the propensity of the organization to engage in ventures, investments, or strategic decisions that involve uncertain outcomes and potential exposure to financial, operational, or reputational hazards. The extent of risk- taking behavior in these firms is often influenced by factors such as organizational culture, management’s risk appetite, market conditions, and regulatory environments. Successful risk taking in non-family firms requires a balance between calculated risk assessment and the pursuit of opportunities that align with the organization’s strategic objectives and risk management framework. The way that risk is managed differs between family and non-family firms, as the perception of operational risk positively affects the perception of financial risk only in family firms (Santos et al. 2022 ). This circumstance influences the risk behavior of family firms, especially in times of crisis. As an example, the conduct of family firms during the COVID-19 pandemic has been studied by several authors. Anggadwita et al. ( 2022 ) identified instances in which family firms during the COVID-19 pandemic developed and implemented resilience. Chaudhuri et al. ( 2022 ) highlight the important moderating influence of strategic intent for sustaining family firms in uncertain times. However, apart from times of crisis, disruptive and new technologies also play a major role, with Kazancoglu et al. ( 2021 ) identifying Industry 4.0 as a driver for family business resources to improve sustainability.

Entrepreneurship and intrapreneurship

An entrepreneur is an individual who identifies and exploits business opportunities, creates innovative ventures, and assumes significant risk in the pursuit of profit and market success. Entrepreneurs play a crucial role in economies by enhancing and advancing businesses (Gallardo-Vázquez et al. 2023 ). In contrast, an intrapreneur operates within an established organization, exhibiting entrepreneurial characteristics to drive innovation, develop new projects, and advance the organization’s objectives while often benefiting from the organization’s resources and support. Whereas entrepreneurs act independently and are active within their companies, intrapreneurs are only partially independent because they work within the company as employees (Cadar and Badulescu 2015 ). Both entrepreneurs and intrapreneurs are crucial when it comes to sustainability in family businesses. Woodfield et al. ( 2017 ) explore the linkage between sustainable entrepreneurship and family firms and argue that family firms go beyond seeking financial gain and provide non-economic benefits (such as security and employment) to people and society. Rachmawati et al. ( 2022 ) assess family business performance and offer an overview of strategies. They point out that entrepreneurial orientation and family involvement are important factors in performance appraisal in family firms. Jamil et al. ( 2022 ) explore entrepreneurial qualities that lead to family business sustainability and indicate four supporting factors (cognitive characteristics, leadership role, motivation, and personality traits). Yet there are also limitations in this regard. Martínez Bobillo et al. ( 2021 ) show that efficiency factors in the design and potentiation of the entrepreneurial orientation and innovation capacity by family firms are hindered by the institutional (regulatory, legal, labor, and educational) environment, while more traditional factors such as ownership concentration and firm size are dominant.

3.2 Quantitative analysis of indicators

After the previous qualitative evaluation of results, the quantitative evaluation and graphical illustration of indicators are presented below.

Based in the recommendations Curado and Mota ( 2021 ) and Herrera and de las Heras-Rosas ( 2020 ), the geographical backgrounds of the publications studied were systematically collected. It should be mentioned that the naming of a geographical focus is always closely related to the selection of the research method. A geographical context is crucial for a case study but not for meta-level investigations, such as a literature review. For this reason, the number of publications that cannot be assigned a geographical focus is relatively high (n=33), which left a set of 65 publications. Among the assignable results, Asia (n=27) and Europe (n=23) are the regions with the highest number of publications. The emphasis on these regions reflects the growing interest and prevalence of family businesses in these areas and their significance in contributing to sustainable development. Only a few publications indicated Africa, America, Australia, or South America as the geographic context (Fig. 2 ). The predominance of Asia and Europe as the geographic focus in most publications on sustainability in family firms could be attributed to several factors. Firstly, these regions are home to a significant number of family- owned enterprises, making them important contributors to the global economy and sustainability discourse. Secondly, Asia and Europe have witnessed a growing awareness and emphasis on sustainability issues, leading to an increased interest in studying sustainable practices within family businesses in these regions. Lastly, the availability of research funding, academic resources, and established networks of scholars and institutions in these areas may have facilitated the production and dissemination of research on this topic.

Geographical context of the publications

According to the literature review by Seuring and Müller ( 2008 ), five different research methods were distinguished and each paper (n=98) was assigned to only one method (Fig. 3 ). Surveys (n=34) were the most frequently chosen method to tackle sustainability in family firms, followed by case studies (n=22) and models (n=19).

Research methodologies applied

The prevalence of surveys as the most commonly used method in papers on sustainability in family firms could be attributed to several factors. First of all, surveys are well-suited for collecting quantitative data from a large sample of family businesses, allowing researchers to obtain comprehensive insights into the prevalence and nature of sustainability practices across a diverse range of companies. Furthermore, surveys provide a structured and standardized approach, enabling researchers to ask consistent questions and compare responses systematically. This enhances the reliability and validity of the findings, making surveys an attractive method for studying sustainability-related phenomena in family firms. Surveys offer a cost-effective and efficient means of data collection, particularly when compared to qualitative methods, which often require extensive time and resources for in-depth interviews or case studies. As sustainability in family firms remains a burgeoning research area, surveys allow researchers to cover a wide range of topics and gather data from a larger pool of respondents. Lastly, the anonymous nature of surveys can encourage respondents to provide more honest responses on sensitive topics, such as internal family dynamics or business strategies. This can lead to a more accurate representation of the actual practices and challenges faced by family firms concerning sustainability.

4 Discussion

Corporate strategy refers to the strategy used to achieve a company’s goals, i.e. to implement the company’s policy (Davies 2000 ). According to Porter ( 1996 ), the […] “essence of strategy is choosing to perform activities differently than rivals do.” A strategy can be considered as a means of deciding what actions to pursue (Evered 1983 ). In terms of corporate strategy, there are specifics in the case of family businesses. Corporate sustainability strategies encompass deliberate plans and initiatives aimed at fostering the enduring economic, social, and environmental sustainability of a company’s operations. These strategies entail a comprehensive evaluation of the ecological, societal, and economic consequences of business activities, coupled with the implementation of measures to mitigate adverse impacts and enhance positive contributions to society and the environment (Eweje 2011 ).

Various types of sustainability strategies can be identified, each serving distinct purposes (Baumgartner and Ebner 2010 ). Introverted strategies focus on risk mitigation, adhering to external standards and regulations to safeguard the company from potential liabilities. Extroverted strategies, on the other hand, emphasize the building of positive external relationships and securing the social license to operate effectively. Conservative strategies prioritize eco-efficiency and cleaner production as a means of enhancing resource efficiency. Lastly, visionary strategies adopt a holistic approach, incorporating sustainability considerations across all business activities. Based on the papers found in our review, we agree with these statements and emphasize that the inclusion of internal (issues such as family succession) and external relationships in sustainability strategies should be considered as a matter of urgency.

Chirapanda ( 2020 ) aimed to elucidate the main strategies for family firms to ensure the successful continuation of their enterprises. The author points out that of the family firms surveyed, 60 percent agree that corporate and management strategies must be established along with a properly thought-out succession plan (ibid). In addition to succession planning, conflict strategies are also an important topic in strategic considerations in family businesses, in contrast to non-family businesses. Wu et al. ( 2018 ) show that managing the level of conflict between family business board members at an appropriate level by studying the main cause of conflict and identifying its nature led to better performance and sustainable development of family businesses.

As other authors have also recently noted (Henschel et al. 2021 ), sustainability issues are a continuously growing trend for family businesses, which can be deduced from the increasing number of corresponding publications, especially since 2010. Although sustainability in family businesses is an under-researched field, there have been several recent literature reviews that deal with partial aspects. These include Henschel et al. ( 2021 ), who conducted a systematic literature review on the topic of family businesses and CSR. However, the evaluation method (bibliographic coupling analysis) led to a higher degree of abstraction of the results, with a focus on thematic connections and the contexts offered by the bibliographic coupling network visualization. In contrast, the present work goes significantly deeper to qualitatively explore the topics through inductive category formation.

Regarding the limitations of this work, we note that we have not considered peer-reviewed literature or literature not published in languages outside of English in the results of the literature analysis. We acknowledge that there may have been relevant literature in these sources that could have contributed to the summarized results. In addition, we limited our search to two digital databases, Scopus and WoS. Although these databases are extensive, some studies may have been overlooked.

5 Conclusion

Our study offers advice for colleagues and practitioners by highlighting key aspects of sustainability in family businesses. Future research can be developed on these topics and solutions can be offered to these companies. The study also gave family businesses an insight into potential areas for development and provided an overview of three clusters of strategies that have been captured in the recent literature on sustainable family businesses: (1) Family values and succession planning; Stakeholder relations and communication (2) Risk taking, Inventions, and Technologies (3) Entrepreneurship and Intrapreneurship. In addition, we offered insights into the studies considered by breaking down the results by geographical focus, methods applied, and year of publication. We recommend that future research be conducted on the following topics.

Regarding sustainability, strategies for family businesses’ internal as well as external relationships should be included. Core elements of the studies found relate internally to the topics of family values and succession planning and externally to the topics of stakeholder relationships, including maintaining the good reputation of the family name. We recommend a longitudinal study to follow up on the core elements identified, focusing on the long-term impact of sustainability strategies on the performance and resilience of family businesses and to identify best practices.

A future research direction could be to analyze the possibilities of implementing sustainability strategies based on company size regarding the resources required and in particular concerning technologies in the company, associated costs, and risks for family businesses. This could reveal whether larger family businesses with more capital, for example, are better able to drive forward technologies in terms of sustainability development.

Regarding the topic of family businesses and sustainability, it is important to strike a balance between efficiency/entrepreneurship, family factors, and the quality characteristics of sustainability. In this context, it would be interesting to examine the influence of family management structures and dynamics on the adoption and implementation of sustainability strategies and to analyze how family traditions, values, and decision-making processes influence the integration of sustainability into the core business strategy.

6 Data availability statement

Not applicable.

Aarseth W, Ahola T, Aaltonen K, Økland A, Andersen B (2017) Project sustainability strategies: A systematic literature review. Int J Project Manage 35(6):1071–1083. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2016.11.006

Article   Google Scholar  

Alwadani R, Ndubisi NO (2020) Sustainable family business: The role of stakeholder involvement, mindful organizing, and contingent human factors. Int J Manpow 41(7):945–965. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJM-08-2019-0359

Anggadwita G, Profityo WB, Alamanda DT, Permatasari A (2020) Cultural values and their implications to family business succession: A case study of small Chinese-owned family businesses in Bandung. Indones J Family Bus Manag 10(4):281–292. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFBM-03-2019-0017

Anggadwita G, Permatasari A, Alamanda DT, Profityo WB (2022) Exploring women’s initiatives for family business resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic. J Family Bus Manag 13(3):714–736. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFBM-02-2022-0014

Astrachan JH, Zellweger T (2008) Performance of family firms: A literature review and guidance for future research. Zeitschrift Für KMU Und Entrep 56(1–2):1–22. https://doi.org/10.3790/zfke.56.1_2.83

Astrachan JH, Astrachan CB, Campopiano G, Baù M (2020) Values, Spirituality, and Religion: Family Business and the Roots of Sustainable Ethical Behavior. J Bus Ethics 163(4):637–645. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-019-04392-5

Baltazar JR, Fernandes CI, Ramadani V, Hughes M (2023) Family business succession and innovation: a systematic literature review. RMS 17(8):2897–2920. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-022-00607-8

Baumgartner RJ, Ebner D (2010) Corporate sustainability strategies: sustainability profiles and maturity levels. Sustain Dev 18(2):76–89. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.447

Becker W, Ulrich P, Stradtmann M (2018) Geschäftsmodellinnovationen als Wettbewerbsvorteil mittelständischer Unternehmen. Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden

Book   Google Scholar  

Behringer S, Ulrich P, Unruh A (2019) Compliance management in family firms: A systematic literature analysis. Corp Ownersh Control 17(1):140–157. https://doi.org/10.22495/cocv17i1art13

Benninghaus H (2005) Einführung in die sozialwissenschaftliche Datenanalyse: Buch mit CD- ROM. Oldenbourg, München

Bozer G, Levin L, Santora JC (2017) Succession in family business: multi-source perspectives. J Small Bus Enterp Dev 24(4):753–774. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSBED-10-2016-0163

Briner RB, Denyer D (2012) Systematic review and evidence synthesis as a practice and scholarship tool. In: Rousseau DM (ed) The Oxford Handbook of evidence-based management. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 112–129

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Broccardo L, Truant E, Zicari A (2019) Internal corporate sustainability drivers: What evidence from family firms? A literature review and research agenda. Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag 26(1):1–18. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1672

Bruttel O (2014) Nachhaltigkeit als Kriterium für Konsumentscheidungen. Ökologisches Wirtschaften Fachzeitschrift 29(1):41–45. https://doi.org/10.14512/OEW290141

Cadar O, Badulescu (2015) Entrepreneur, Entrepreneurship and Intrapreneurship. A Literature Review. The Annals of the University of Oradea: Economic Sciences 2(XXIV): 658–664. https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/78871/1/MPRA_paper_78871.pdf . Accessed 15 Aug 2023

Chaudhuri R, Chatterjee S, Kraus S, Vrontis D (2022) Assessing the AI-CRM technology capability for sustaining family businesses in times of crisis: the moderating role of strategic intent. J Family Bus Manag 13(1):46–67. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFBM-12-2021-0153

Chirapanda S (2020) Identification of success factors for sustainability in family businesses: Case study method and exploratory research in Japan. J Family Bus Manag 10(1):58–75. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFBM-05-2019-0030

Chua JH, Chrisman JJ, Sharma P (1999) Defining the family business by behavior. Entrep Theory Pract 23(4):19–39. https://doi.org/10.1177/104225879902300402

Clauß T, Kraus S, Jones P (2022) Sustainability in family business: Mechanisms, technologies and business models for achieving economic prosperity, environmental quality and social equity. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 176(1):121450. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121450

Curado C, Mota A (2021) A systematic literature review on sustainability in family firms. Sustainability 13(7):3824. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13073824

Davies W (2000) Understanding strategy. Strategy & Leadership 28(5):25–30. https://doi.org/10.1108/10878570010379428

De Massis A, Frattini F, Majocchi A, Piscitello L (2018) Family firms in the global economy: Toward a deeper understanding of internationalization determinants, processes and outcomes. Glob Strateg J 8(1):3–21. https://doi.org/10.1002/gsj.1199

European Parliament Council (2021) Regulation (EU) 2021/1119 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 June 2021 establishing the framework for achieving climate neutrality and amending Regulations (EC) No 401/2009 and (EU) 2018/1999 (‘European Climate Law’). Official Journal of the European Union, L 243/1. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32021R1119 . Accessed 15 Aug 2023

Evered R (1983) So what is strategy? Long Range Plan 16(3):57–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-6301(83)90032-8

Eweje G (2011) A shift in corporate practice? Facilitating sustainability strategy in companies. Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag 18(3):125–136. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.268

Frank H, Lueger M, Nosé L, Suchy D (2010) The concept of “Familiness”: Literature review and systems theory-based reflections. J Fam Bus Strat 1(3):119–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfbs.2010.08.001

Fries A, Kammerlander N, Leitterstorf M (2019) Leadership Styles and Leadership Behaviors in Family Firms: A Systematic Literature Review. J Fam Bus Strat 12(1):1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfbs.2020.100374

Gallardo-Vázquez D, Herrador-Alcaide TC, de la Cruz S-D (2023) Developing a measurement scale of corporate socially responsible entrepreneurship in sustainable management. RMS 18:1377–1426. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-023-00658-5

García-Sánchez IM, Martín-Moreno J, Khan SA, Hussain N (2020) Socio-emotional wealth and corporate responses to environmental hostility: Are family firms more stakeholder oriented? Bus Strateg Environ 30(2):1003–1018. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2666

Gómez-Ortega A, Flores-Ureba S, Gelashvili V, Jalón MLD (2023) Users’ perception for innovation and sustainability management: evidence from public transport. RMS 18:859–882. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-023-00625-0

Harms H (2014) Review of Family Business Definitions: Cluster Approach and Implications of Heterogeneous Application for Family Business Research. Int J Financ Stud 2(3):280–314. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijfs2030280

Henschel T, Florio C, Jharni S, Stellmacher M (2021) The impact of corporate social responsibility on advancing the enterprise risk management performance relationship in small and medium-sized enterprises. J Int Council Small Bus 3(4):321–328. https://doi.org/10.1080/00472778.2021.1955122

Herrera J, de las Heras-Rosas C (2020) Economic, non-economic and critical factors for the sustainability of family firms. J Open Innov: Technol, Market, Complex 6(4):119. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc6040119

Hiebl MRW (2023) Sample Selection in Systematic Literature Reviews of Management Research. Organ Res Methods 26(2):229–261. https://doi.org/10.1177/10944281209868

Jamil M, Fadzil AFM, Waqar A, Yaacob MR (2022) Exploring entrepreneurial qualities for the sustainability of family businesses in Pakistan. J Family Bus Manag 13(4):856–872. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFBM-05-2022-0073

Kammerlander N (2022) Family business and business family questions in the 21st century: Who develops SEW, how do family members create value, and who belongs to the family? J Fam Bus Strat 13(2):1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfbs.2021.100470

Kazancoglu Y, Sezer MD, Ozkan-Ozen YD, Mangla SK, Kumar A (2021) Industry 4.0 impacts on responsible environmental and societal management in the family business. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 173:121108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121108

King DR, Meglio O, Gomez-Mejia L, Bauer F, De Massis A (2022) Family business restructuring: A review and research agenda. J Manage Stud 59(1):197–235. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12717

Kraus S, Breier M, Lim WM, Dabić M, Kumar S, Kanbach D et al (2022) Literature reviews as independent studies: guidelines for academic practice. RMS 16(8):2577–2595. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-022-00588-8

Kraus S, Bouncken RB, YelaAránega A (2024) The burgeoning role of literature review articles in management research: an introduction and outlook. RMS 18:299–314. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-024-00729-1

Le Breton-Miller I, Miller D (2016) Family firms and practices of sustainability: A contingency view. J Fam Bus Strat 7(1):26–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfbs.2015.09.001

Lim S, Pettit S, Abouarghoub W, Beresford A (2019) Port sustainability and performance: A systematic literature review. Transp Res Part d: Transp Environ 72:47–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2019.04.009

López-Pérez ME, Melero-Polo I, Vázquez-Carrasco R, Cambra-Fierro J (2018) Sustainability and business outcomes in the context of SMEs: Comparing family firms vs. non-family firms. Sustainability 10(11):1–16. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10114080

Mariani MM, Al-Sultan K, De Massis A (2021) Corporate social responsibility in family firms: A systematic literature review. J Small Bus Manage 61(3):1192–1246. https://doi.org/10.1080/00472778.2021.1955122

Martínez Bobillo A, Rodríguez Sanz JA, Tejerina Gaite F (2021) Explanatory and predictive drivers of entrepreneurial orientation and innovation capacity: Evidence from family enterprises. Cuadernos de Gestión 21(2):63–76. https://hdl.handle.net/10810/52003 . Accessed 15 Aug 2023

Mayring P (2010) Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse – Grundlagen und Techniken. 11., aktualisierte und überarbeitete Auflage. Beltz Verlag, Weinheim Basel

Miroshnychenko I, De Massis A, Barontini R, Testa F (2022) Family firms and environmental performance: A meta-analytic review. Fam Bus Rev 35(1):68–90. https://doi.org/10.1177/08944865211064409

Morioka SN, de Carvalho MM (2016) A systematic literature review towards a conceptual framework for integrating sustainability performance into business. J Clean Prod 136:134–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.01.104

Nguyen HTT, Costanzo LA, Karatas-Özkan M (2020) Stakeholders’ perceptions of sustainable entrepreneurship within the context of a developing economy. J Small Bus Manage 61(2):441–480. https://doi.org/10.1080/00472778.2020.1796465

Pickering C, Byrne J (2014) The benefits of publishing systematic quantitative literature reviews for PhD candidates and other early-career researchers. High Educ Res Dev 33(3):534–548. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2013.841651

Porfírio JA, Felício JA, Carrilho T (2020) Family business succession: Analysis of the drivers of success based on entrepreneurship theory. J Bus Res 115:250–257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.11.054

Porter ME (1996) What is strategy? Harvard business review Nov–Dec 74(6):61–78. https://hbr.org/1996/11/what-is-strategy . Accessed 15 Aug 2023

Pranugrahaning A, Donovan JD, Topple C, Masli EK (2021) Corporate sustainability assessments: A systematic literature review and conceptual framework. J Clean Prod 295:126385. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126385

Rachmawati E, Suliyanto S, Suroso A (2022) Direct and indirect effect of entrepreneurial orientation, family involvement and gender on family business performance. J Family Bus Manag 12(2):214–236. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFBM-07-2020-0064

Rodriguez Serna L, Bowyer DM, Gregory SK (2022) Management control systems. A non- family stakeholder perspective on the critical success factors influencing continuous stakeholder support during businesses succession. J Small Bus Enterp Dev 30(2):290–310. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSBED-09-2021-0364

Rodriguez Serna L, Nakandala D, Bowyer D (2022b) Why do eligible successors withdraw from the succession process in family businesses? A social exchange perspective". J Family Bus Manag 12(4):999–1019. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFBM-04-2021-0036

Samudro A, Sumarwan U, Yusuf EZ, Simanjuntak M (2018) Perceived value, social bond, and switching cost as antecedents and predictors of customer loyalty in the B2B chemical industry context: A literature review. Int J Market Stud 10(4):124–138. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijms.v10n4p124

Santos E, Tavares V, Tavares FO, Ratten V (2022) How is risk different in family and non- family businesses? A comparative statistical analysis during the COVID-19 pandemic. J Family Bus Manag 12(4):1113–1130. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFBM-10-2021-0123

Sauer PC, Seuring S (2023) How to conduct systematic literature reviews in management research: a guide in 6 steps and 14 decisions. RMS 17:1899–1933. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-023-00668-3

Schäufele I, Hamm U (2017) Consumers’ perceptions, preferences and willingness-to-pay for wine with sustainability characteristics: A review. J Clean Prod 147:379–394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.01.118

Scopus (2023) https://www.scopus.com/search/form.uri?display=authorLookup#author . Accessed 15 Aug 2023

Seuring S, Müller M (2008) From a literature review to a conceptual framework for the sustainable supply chain management. J Clean Prod 16(15):1699–1710. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2008.04.020

Siebels JF, zuKnyphausen-Aufsess D (2012) A review of theory in family business research: The implications for corporate governance. Int J Manag Rev 14(3):280–304. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2011.00317.x

Sun J, Pellegrini MM, Dabić M, Wang K, Wang C (2024) Family ownership and control as drivers for environmental, social, and governance in family firms. RMS 18(4):1015–1046. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-023-00631-2

Tjahjadi B, Soewarno N, Mustikaningtiyas F (2021) Good corporate governance and corporate sustainability performance in Indonesia: A triple bottom line approach. Heliyon 7(3):1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e06453

Tranfield D, Denyer D, Smart P (2003) Towards a methodology for developing evidence- informed management knowledge by means of systematic review. Br J Manag 14(3):207–222. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.00375

Traxler AA, Greiling D (2023) Nachhaltigkeitsberichterstattung und -controlling in Familienunternehmen. In: Duller C, Hiebl MRW, Kuttner M, Mayr S, Mitter C (eds) Herausforderungen im Management von Familienunternehmen. Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden, pp 263–277

Velte P (2022) Which institutional investors drive corporate sustainability? A systematic literature review. Bus Strateg Environ 32(1):42–71. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3117

Wang YZ, Lo FY, Weng SM (2019) Family businesses successors knowledge and willingness on sustainable innovation: The moderating role of leader’s approval. J Innov Knowl 4(3):188–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2019.05.001

Web of Science (2023) https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/basic-search . Accessed 15 Aug 2023

Webster J, Watson R (2002) Analyzing the Past to Prepare for the Future: Writing a Literature Review. MIS Quarterly 26(2):xiii–xxiii. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4132319

Woodfield P, Woods C, Shepherd D (2017) Sustainable entrepreneurship: another avenue for family business scholarship? J Family Bus Manag 7(1):122–132. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFBM-12-2015-0040

Wu M, Zhang L, Imran M, Lu J, Hu X (2018) Conflict coping strategy evolution of top management team members in China’s family enterprises. Chin Manag Stud 12(2):246–267. https://doi.org/10.1108/CMS-08-2017-0227

Download references

Open Access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL. The project underlying this report was funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research under the grant number 03FHP139C. The responsibility for the content of this publication lies with the author.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Aalen Institute of Management (AAUF), Aalen University, Aalen, Germany

Simone Häußler & Patrick Ulrich

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Simone Häußler .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there are no conflicts of interest, nor any financial or non-financial interests to disclose.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

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

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Häußler, S., Ulrich, P. Exploring strategic corporate sustainability management in family businesses: A systematic literature review. Rev Manag Sci (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-024-00776-8

Download citation

Received : 18 August 2023

Accepted : 17 May 2024

Published : 06 June 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-024-00776-8

Share this article

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

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

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Family Firms
• Strategic Management
• Sustainability Management
• Literature Review

JEL Classification

• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• My Account Login
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Review Article
• Open access
• Published: 03 June 2024

The effectiveness of digital twins in promoting precision health across the entire population: a systematic review

• Mei-di Shen 1 ,
• Si-bing Chen 2 &
• Xiang-dong Ding   ORCID: orcid.org/0009-0001-1925-0654 2  

npj Digital Medicine volume  7 , Article number:  145 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

38 Accesses

2 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Public health
• Risk factors
• Signs and symptoms

Digital twins represent a promising technology within the domain of precision healthcare, offering significant prospects for individualized medical interventions. Existing systematic reviews, however, mainly focus on the technological dimensions of digital twins, with a limited exploration of their impact on health-related outcomes. Therefore, this systematic review aims to explore the efficacy of digital twins in improving precision healthcare at the population level. The literature search for this study encompassed PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, SinoMed, CNKI, and Wanfang Database to retrieve potentially relevant records. Patient health-related outcomes were synthesized employing quantitative content analysis, whereas the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) scales were used to evaluate the quality and potential bias inherent in each selected study. Following established inclusion and exclusion criteria, 12 studies were screened from an initial 1321 records for further analysis. These studies included patients with various conditions, including cancers, type 2 diabetes, multiple sclerosis, heart failure, qi deficiency, post-hepatectomy liver failure, and dental issues. The review coded three types of interventions: personalized health management, precision individual therapy effects, and predicting individual risk, leading to a total of 45 outcomes being measured. The collective effectiveness of these outcomes at the population level was calculated at 80% (36 out of 45). No studies exhibited unacceptable differences in quality. Overall, employing digital twins in precision health demonstrates practical advantages, warranting its expanded use to facilitate the transition from the development phase to broad application.

PROSPERO registry: CRD42024507256.

Similar content being viewed by others

Digital twins for health: a scoping review

Digital twins in medicine

The health digital twin to tackle cardiovascular disease—a review of an emerging interdisciplinary field

Introduction.

Precision health represents a paradigm shift from the conventional “one size fits all” medical approach, focusing on specific diagnosis, treatment, and health management by incorporating individualized factors such as omics data, clinical information, and health outcomes 1 , 2 . This approach significantly impacts various diseases, potentially improving overall health while reducing healthcare costs 3 , 4 . Within this context, digital twins emerged as a promising technology 5 , creating digital replicas of the human body through two key steps: building mappings and enabling dynamic evolution 6 . Unlike traditional data mining methods, digital twins consider individual variability, providing continuous, dynamic recommendations for clinical practice 7 . This approach has gained significant attention among researchers, highlighting its potential applications in advancing precision health.

Several systematic reviews have explored the advancement of digital twins within the healthcare sector. One rapid review 8 identified four core functionalities of digital twins in healthcare management: safety management, information management, health management/well-being promotion, and operational control. Another systematic review 9 , through an analysis of 22 selected publications, summarized the diverse application scenarios of digital twins in healthcare, confirming their potential in continuous monitoring, personalized therapy, and hospital management. Furthermore, a quantitative review 10 assessed 94 high-quality articles published from 2018 to 2022, revealing a primary focus on technological advancements (such as artificial intelligence and the Internet of Things) and application scenarios (including personalized, precise, and real-time healthcare solutions), thus highlighting the pivotal role of digital twins technology in the field of precision health. Another systematic review 11 , incorporating 18 framework papers or reviews, underscored the need for ongoing research into digital twins’ healthcare applications, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic. Moreover, a systematic review 12 on the application of digital twins in cardiovascular diseases presented proof-of-concept and data-driven approaches, offering valuable insights for implementing digital twins in this specific medical area.

While the existing literature offers valuable insights into the technological aspects of digital twins in healthcare, these systematic reviews failed to thoroughly examine the actual impacts on population health. Despite the increasing interest and expanding body of research on digital twins in healthcare, the direct effects on patient health-related outcomes remain unclear. This knowledge gap highlights the need to investigate how digital twins promote and restore patient health, which is vital for advancing precision health technologies. Therefore, the objective of our systematic review is to assess the effectiveness of digital twins in improving health-related outcomes at the population level, providing a clearer understanding of their practical benefits in the context of precision health.

Search results

The selection process for the systematic review is outlined in the PRISMA flow chart (Fig. 1 ). Initially, 1321 records were identified. Of these, 446 duplicates (446/1321, 33.76%) were removed, leaving 875 records (875/1321, 66.24%) for title and abstract screening. Applying the pre-defined inclusion and exclusion criteria led to the exclusion of 858 records (858/875, 98.06%), leaving 17 records (17/875, 1.94%) for full-text review. Further scrutiny resulted in the exclusion of one study (1/17, 5.88%) lacking health-related outcomes and four studies (4/17, 23.53%) with overlapping data. Ultimately, 12 (12/17, 70.59%) original studies 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 were included in the systematic review. Supplementary Table 1 provides a summary of the reasons for exclusion at the full-text reading phase.

Flow chart of included studies in the systematic review.

Study characteristics

The studies included in this systematic review were published between 2021 (2/12, 16.67%) 23 , 24 and 2023 (8/12, 66.67%) 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 . Originating from diverse regions, 4/12 studies (33.33%) were from Asia 13 , 14 , 21 , 24 , 5/12 (41.67%) from America 15 , 17 , 19 , 20 , 22 , and 3/12 (25.00%) from Europe 16 , 18 , 23 . The review encompassed various study designs, including randomized controlled trials (1/12, 8.33%) 14 , quasi-experiments (6/12, 50.00%) 13 , 15 , 16 , 18 , 19 , 21 , and cohort studies (5/12, 41.67%) 17 , 20 , 22 , 23 , 24 . The sample sizes ranged from 15 13 to 3500 patients 19 . Five studies assessed the impact of digital twins on virtual patients 15 , 16 , 18 , 19 , 20 , while seven examined their effect on real-world patients 13 , 14 , 17 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 . These patients included had various diseases, including cancer (4/12, 33.33%) 15 , 16 , 19 , 22 , type 2 diabetes (2/12, 16.66%) 13 , 14 , multiple sclerosis (2/12, 16.66%) 17 , 18 , qi deficiency (1/12, 8.33%) 21 , heart failure (1/12, 8.33%) 20 , post-hepatectomy liver failure (1/12, 8.33%) 23 , and dental issues (1/12, 8.33%) 24 . This review coded interventions into three types: personalized health management (3/12, 25.00%) 13 , 14 , 21 , precision individual therapy effects (3/12, 25.00%) 15 , 16 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 22 , and predicting individual risk (3/12, 25.00%) 17 , 23 , 24 , with a total of 45 measured outcomes. Characteristics of the included studies are detailed in Table 1 .

Risk of bias assessment

The risk of bias for the studies included in this review is summarized in Fig. 2 . In the single RCT 14 assessed, 10 out of 13 items received positive responses. Limitations were observed due to incomplete reporting of baseline characteristics and issues with blinding. Among the six quasi-experimental studies evaluated, five (83.33%) 13 , 15 , 16 , 18 , 21 achieved at least six positive responses, indicating an acceptable quality, while one study (16.67%) 19 fell slightly below this threshold with five positive responses. The primary challenges in these quasi-experimental studies were due to the lack of control groups, inadequate baseline comparisons, and limited follow-up reporting. Four out of five (80.00%) 17 , 20 , 22 , 23 of the cohort studies met or exceeded the criterion with at least eight positive responses, demonstrating their acceptable quality. However, one study (20.00%) 24 had a lower score due to incomplete data regarding loss to follow-up and the specifics of the interventions applied. Table 1 elaborates on the specific reasons for these assessments. Despite these concerns, the overall quality of the included studies is considered a generally acceptable risk of bias.

The summary of bias risk via the Joanna Briggs Institute assessment tools.

The impact of digital twins on health-related outcomes among patients

This review includes 12 studies that collectively assessed 45 outcomes, achieving an overall effectiveness rate of 80% (36 out of 45 outcomes), as depicted in Fig. 3a . The digital twins analyzed were coded into three functional categories: personalized health management, precision individual therapy effects, and predicting individual risks. A comprehensive analysis of the effectiveness of digital twins across these categories is provided, detailing the impact and outcomes associated with each function.

a The overall effectiveness of digital twins; b The effectiveness of personalized health management driven by digital twins; c The effectiveness of precision individualized therapy effects driven by digital twins; d The effectiveness of prediction of individual risk driven by digital twins.

The effectiveness of digital twins in personalized health management

In this review, three studies 13 , 14 , 21 employing digital twins for personalized health management reported an effectiveness of 80% (24 out of 30 outcomes), as shown in Fig. 3b . A self-control study 13 involving 15 elderly patients with diabetes, used virtual patient representations based on health information to guide individualized insulin infusion. Over 14 days, this approach improved the time in range (TIR) from 3–75% to 86–97%, decreased hypoglycemia duration from 0–22% to 0–9%, and reduced hyperglycemia time from 0–98% to 0–12%. A 1-year randomized controlled trial 14 with 319 type 2 diabetes patients, implemented personalized digital twins interventions based on nutrition, activity, and sleep. This trial demonstrated significant improvements in Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1C), Homeostatic Model Assessment 2 of Insulin Resistance (HOMA2-IR), Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease Liver Fat Score (NAFLD-LFS), and Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease Fibrosis Score (NAFLD-NFS), and other primary outcomes (all, P  < 0.001; Table 2 ). However, no significant changes were observed in weight, Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT), Fibrosis-4 Score (FIB4), and AST to Platelet Ratio Index (APRI) (all, P  > 0.05). A non-randomized controlled trial 21 introduced a digital twin-based Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) health management platform for patients with qi deficiency. It was found to significantly improve blood pressure, main and secondary TCM symptoms, total TCM symptom scores, and quality of life (all, P  < 0.05). Nonetheless, no significant improvements were observed in heart rate and BMI (all, P  > 0.05; Table 2 ).

The effectiveness of digital twins in precision individual therapy effects

Six studies 15 , 16 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 22 focused on the precision of individual therapy effects using digital twins, demonstrating a 70% effectiveness rate (7 out of 10 outcomes), as detailed in Fig. 3c . In a self-control study 15 , a data-driven approach was employed to create digital twins, generating 100 virtual patients to predict the potential tumor biology outcomes of radiotherapy regimens with varying contents and doses. This study showed that personalized radiotherapy plans derived from digital twins could extend the median tumor progression time by approximately six days and reduce radiation doses by 16.7%. Bahrami et al. 16 created 3000 virtual patients experiencing cancer pain to administer precision dosing of fentanyl transdermal patch therapy. The intervention led to a 16% decrease in average pain intensity and an additional median pain-free duration of 23 hours, extending from 72 hours in cancer patients. Another quasi-experimental study 18 created 3000 virtual patients with multiple sclerosis to assess the impact of Ocrelizumab. Findings indicated Ocrelizumab can resulted in a reduction in relapses (0.191 [0.143, 0.239]) and lymphopenic adverse events (83.73% vs . 19.9%) compared to a placebo. American researchers 19 developed a quantitative systems pharmacology model using digital twins to identify the optimal dosing for aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma patients. This approach resulted in at least a 50% tumor size reduction by day 42 among 3500 virtual patients. A cohort study 20 assessed the 5-year composite cardiovascular outcomes in 2173 virtual patients who were treated with spironolactone or left untreated and indicated no statistically significant inter-group differences (0.85, [0.69–1.04]). Tardini et al. 22 employed digital twins to optimize multi-step treatment for oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma in 134 patients. The optimized treatment selection through digital twins predicted increased survival rates by 3.73 (−0.75, 8.96) and dysphagia rates by 0.75 (−4.48, 6.72) compared to clinician decisions, with no statistical significance.

The effectiveness of digital twins in predicting individual risk

Three studies 17 , 23 , 24 employing digital twins to predict individual patient risks demonstrated a 100% effectiveness rate (5 out of 5 outcomes), as shown in Fig. 3d . A cohort study 17 used digital twins to forecast the onset age for disease-specific brain atrophy in patients with multiple sclerosis. Findings indicated that the onset of progressive brain tissue loss, on average, preceded clinical symptoms by 5-6 years among the 519 patients ( P  < 0.01). Another study 23 focused on predicting postoperative liver failure in 47 patients undergoing major hepatectomy through mathematical models of blood circulation. The study highlighted that elevated Postoperative Portal Vein pressure (PPV) and Portocaval Gradient (PCG) values above 17.5 mmHg and 13.5 mmHg, respectively, correlated with the measured values (all, P  < 0.0001; Table 2 ). These indicators were effective in predicting post-hepatectomy liver failure, accurately identifying three out of four patients who experienced this complication. Cho et al. 24 created digital twins for 50 adult female patients using facial scans and cone-beam computed tomography images to evaluate the anteroposterior position of the maxillary central incisors and forehead inclination. The analysis demonstrated significant differences in the position of the maxillary central incisors ( P  = 0.04) and forehead inclination ( P  = 0.02) between the two groups.

This systematic review outlines the effectiveness of digital twins in improving health-related outcomes across various diseases, including cancers, type 2 diabetes, multiple sclerosis, qi deficiency, heart failure, post-hepatectomy liver failure, and dental issues, at the population level. Distinct from prior reviews that focused on the technological dimensions of digital twins, our analysis shows the practical applications of digital twins in healthcare. The applications have been categorized into three main areas: personalized health management, precision individual therapy effects, and predicting individual risks, encompassing a total of 45 outcomes. An overall effectiveness of 80% was observed across these outcomes. This review offers valuable insights into the application of digital twins in precision health and supports the transition of digital twins from construction to population-wide implementation.

Digital twins play a crucial role in achieving precision health 25 . They serve as virtual models of human organs, tissues, cells, or microenvironments, dynamically updating based on real-time data to offer feedback for interventions on their real counterparts 26 , 27 . Digital twins can solve complex problems in personalized health management 28 , 29 and enable comprehensive, proactive, and precise healthcare 30 . In the studies reviewed, researchers implemented digital twins by creating virtual patients based on personal health data and using simulations to generate personalized recommendations and predictions. It is worth noting that while certain indicators have not experienced significant improvement in personalized health management for patients with type 2 diabetes and Qi deficiency, it does not undermine the effectiveness of digital twins. Firstly, these studies have demonstrated significant improvements in primary outcome measures. Secondly, improving health-related outcomes in chronic diseases is an ongoing, complex process heavily influenced by changes in health behaviors 31 , 32 . While digital twins can provide personalized health guidance based on individual health data, their impact on actual behaviors warrants further investigation.

The dual nature of medications, providing benefits yet potentially leading to severe clinical outcomes like morbidity or mortality, must be carefully considered. The impact of therapy is subject to various factors, including the drug attributes and the specific disease characteristics 33 . Achieving accurate medication administration remains a significant challenge for healthcare providers 34 , underscoring the need for innovative methodologies like computational precise drug delivery 35 , 36 , a example highlighted in our review of digital twins. Regarding the prediction of individual therapy effects for conditions such as cancer, multiple sclerosis, and heart failure, six studies within this review have reported partly significant improvements in patient health-related outcomes. These advancements facilitate the tailored selection and dosing of therapy, underscoring the ability of digital twins to optimize patient-specific treatment plans effectively.

Furthermore, digital twins can enhance clinical understanding and personalize disease risk prediction 37 . It enables a quantitative understanding and prediction of individuals by continuously predicting and evaluating patient data in a virtual environment 38 . In patients with multiple sclerosis, digital twins have facilitated predictions regarding the onset of disease-specific brain atrophy, allowing for early intervention strategies. Similarly, digital twins assessed the risk of liver failure after liver resection, aiding healthcare professionals in making timely decisions. Moreover, the application of digital twins in the three-dimensional analysis of patients with dental problems has demonstrated highly effective clinical significance, underscoring its potential across various medical specialties. In summary, the adoption of digital twins has significantly contributed to advancing precision health and restoring patient well-being by creating virtual patients based on personal health data and using simulations to generate personalized recommendations and predictions.

Recent studies have introduced various digital twin systems, covering areas such as hospital management 8 , remote monitoring 9 , and diagnosing and treating various conditions 39 , 40 . Nevertheless, these systems were not included in this review due to the lack of detailed descriptions at the population health level, which constrains the broader application of this emerging technology. Our analysis underscores the reported effectiveness of digital twins, providing unique opportunities for dynamic prevention and precise intervention across different diseases. Multiple research methodologies and outcome measures poses a challenge for quantitative publication detection. This systematic review employed a comprehensive retrieval strategy across various databases for screening articles on the effectiveness of digital twins, to reduce the omission of negative results. And four repeated publications were excluded based on authors, affiliation, population, and other criteria to mitigate the bias of overestimating the digital twins effect due to repeated publication.

However, there are still limitations. Firstly, the limited published research on digital twins’ application at the population level hinders the ability to perform a quantitative meta-analysis, possibly limiting our findings’ interpretability. We encourage reporting additional high-quality randomized controlled trials on the applicability of digital twins to facilitate quantitative analysis of their effectiveness in precision health at the population level. Secondly, this review assessed the effectiveness of digital twins primarily through statistical significance ( P -value or 95% confidence interval). However, there are four quasi-experimental studies did not report statistical significance. One of the limitations of this study is the use of significant changes in author self-reports as a criterion in these four quasi-experimental studies for identifying effectiveness. In clinical practice, the author’s self-reported clinical significance can also provide the effectiveness of digital twins. Thirdly, by focusing solely on studies published in Chinese and English, this review may have omitted relevant research available in other languages, potentially limiting the scope of the analyzed literature. Lastly, our review primarily emphasized reporting statistical differences between groups. Future work should incorporate more application feedback from real patients to expose digital twins to the nuances of actual patient populations.

The application of digital twins is currently limited and primarily focused on precision health for individual patients. Expanding digital twins’ application from individual to group precision health is recommended to signify a more extensive integration in healthcare settings. This expansion involves sharing real-time data and integrating medical information across diverse medical institutions within a region, signifying the development of group precision health. Investigating both personalized medical care and collective health management has significant implications for improving medical diagnosis and treatment approaches, predicting disease risks, optimizing health management strategies, and reducing societal healthcare costs 41 .

Digital twins intervention encompasses various aspects such as health management, decision-making, and prediction, among others 9 . It represents a technological and conceptual innovation in traditional population health intervention. However, the current content design of the digital twins intervention is insufficient and suggests that it should be improved by incorporating more effective content strategies tailored to the characteristics of the target population. Findings from this study indicate that interventions did not differ significantly in our study is from digital twins driven by personalized health management, which means that compared with the other two function-driven digital twins, personalized health management needs to receive more attention to enhance its effect in population-level. For example, within the sphere of chronic disease management, integrating effective behavioral change strategies into digital twins is advisable to positively influence health-related indicators, such as weight and BMI. The effectiveness of such digital behavior change strategies has been reported in previous studies 42 , 43 . The consensus among researchers on the importance of combining effective content strategies with digital intervention technologies underscores the potential for this approach to improve patient health-related outcomes significantly.

The applications of digital twins in precision health are mainly focused on model establishment and prediction description, with limited implementation in multi-center settings. A more robust and detailed data foundation is recommended to improve clinical decision-making and reduce the likelihood of imprecise treatments. This requires continuous updating and capturing of dynamic information by digital twins in the future, as well as the improvement of the data platform that facilitates mapping, interaction, and iterative optimization. Integrating digital twins effectively into clinical workflows can support clinical interventions, assist physicians in making informed decisions, and increase the standard of patient care 6 .

The accessibility of health data is a significant challenge for the clinical implementation of digital twins. Although the internet and information technology have significantly enhanced health data availability, health data, including information systems and electronic health records, remain heterogeneous and are difficult to share 44 . Health data often contains confidential patient information, as well as unreliable information, posing challenges for implementing digital twins in healthcare settings. The primary technology utilized in digital twins, artificial intelligence algorithms, demands high-performance hardware devices and software platforms for data analysis 45 , necessitating healthcare organizations to allocate increased investment and budget for computing infrastructure supporting digital twins’ application. Therefore, future research should be focused on the technical aspects of digital twins to resolve these challenges. The automated processing of health data using a large language model and the rapid conversion of complex natural language texts into comprehensive knowledge texts are encouraged. The development of high-performance computing technology is essential for cost-effective computing requirements, which can facilitate the application of digital twins in clinical practice 46 .

Overall, this systematic review offers a comprehensive overview of digital twins in precision health, examining their impact at the population level. The findings indicate a significant overall effectiveness rate of 80% for the measured outcomes, highlighting digital twins’ pivotal role in advancing precision health. Future research should broaden the application of digital twins across various populations, integrate proven content strategies, and implement these approaches in various healthcare settings. Such efforts will maximize the benefits of digital technologies in healthcare, promoting more precise and efficacious strategies, thereby elevating patient outcomes and improving overall healthcare experiences. While digital twins offer great promise for precision health, their broad adoption and practical implementation are still in the early stages. Development, and application are essential to unlock the full potential of digital twins in revolutionizing healthcare delivery.

This systematic review was performed following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines 47 . The protocol for this systematic review was prospectively registered on PROSPERO, which can be accessed via the following link: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42024507256 . The registered protocol underwent an update, which included polishing the title of the article, modifying the limitation of the control group and language in the inclusion/exclusion criteria, and refining the process of data synthesis and analysis to enhance that clarity and readability of this systematic review. These modifications were updated in the revision notes section of the PROSPERO.

Literature search strategy

Literature searches were conducted in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, SinoMed, CNKI, and Wanfang Database, covering publications up to December 24, 2023. A comprehensive search strategy was developed using a combination of Medical Subject Headings terms and free-text terms, as detailed in Supplementary Table 2 . Furthermore, reference lists of articles and reviews meeting the inclusion criteria were reviewed for additional relevant studies.

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

The inclusion criteria for this systematic review included: 1) Population: Patients diagnosed with any diseases or symptoms; 2) Intervention: Any interventions involving digital twins; 3) Controls: Non-digital twin groups, such as standard care or conventional therapy, as well as no control group; 4) Outcomes: Health-related outcomes as the primary outcomes of interest; 5) Study design: All study designs that measured patient health-related outcomes after digital twins were included, including intervention studies and predictive cohort studies.

Initially, duplicates were removed. Exclusion criteria included: 1) Papers lacking original data, such as reviews, protocols, and conference abstracts; 2) Studies not in English or Chinese; 3) Surveys focusing on implementation and qualitative studies related to requirements. In cases of data duplication, the most comprehensive data report was included.

Study selection and Data extraction

Following the automatic removal of duplicates, two independent reviewers (MD.SHEN and SB.CHEN) conducted initial screenings of titles and abstracts against the predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria to identify potentially relevant studies. Afterward, the same reviewers examined the full texts of these shortlisted articles to confirm their suitability for inclusion. This process also involved checking the reference lists of these articles for any additional studies that might meet the criteria. Data from the included studies were systematically extracted using a pre-designed extraction form. Recorded information included the first author’s name, publication year, country of origin, type of study, sample size, study population, intervention, controls, measurements, and an appraisal of each study. Disagreements between the reviewers were resolved by consultation with a third senior reviewer (XD.DING), ensuring consensus.

Quality appraisal

The Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) scales 48 were used to assess the quality and potential bias of each study included in the review, employing specific tools tailored to the type of study under evaluation. These tools feature response options of “yes,” “no,” “unclear,” or “not applicable” for each assessment item. For randomized controlled trials (RCTs), the JBI scale includes 13 items, with answering “yes” to at least six items indicating a high-quality study. Quasi-experimental studies were evaluated using a nine-item checklist, where five or more positive responses qualify the research as high quality. Cohort studies underwent evaluation through an 11-item checklist, with six or more affirmative responses indicating high quality. The assessment was independently carried out by two reviewers (MD.SHEN and SB.CHEN), and any disagreements were resolved through consultation with a third senior reviewer (XD.DING), ensuring the integrity and accuracy of the quality assessment.

Data synthesis and analysis

Given the heterogeneity in type of study and outcome measures, a meta-analysis was deemed unfeasible. Instead, a quantitative content analysis was employed to analyze all the selected studies 49 , 50 . Key information was extracted using a pre-designed standardized form, including the first author’s name, patient characteristics, intervention functional characteristics, measurements, results, effectiveness, and adverse events. Two reviewers (MD.SHEN and SB.CHEN) independently coded digital twin technology into three categories for descriptive analysis: personalized health management, precision individual therapy effects, and predicting individual risk, based on its functional characteristics. The Kappa statistic was applied to evaluate the inter-rater reliability during the coding process, yielding a value of 0.871, which signifies good agreement between the researchers 51 , 52 . The assessment of digital twins effectiveness was based on statistical significance ( P -value or 95% confidence interval). Outcomes with statistical significance were labeled as “resultful,” whereas those lacking statistical significance were deemed “resultless.” For quasi-experimental studies, significant changes in the authors’ self-reports were used to determine the effectiveness in the absence of reporting of statistical significance. The proportion of effectiveness was calculated as the number of “resultful” indicators divided by the total number of outcomes within each category.

Data availability

Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analyzed during the current study.

Code availability

Code sharing is not applicable to this article as no codes were generated or analyzed during the current study.

Fu, M. R. et al. Precision health: A nursing perspective. Int. J. Nurs. Sci. 7 , 5–12 (2020).

PubMed   Google Scholar  

Naithani, N., Sinha, S., Misra, P., Vasudevan, B. & Sahu, R. Precision medicine: Concept and tools. Med. J., Armed Forces India 77 , 249–257 (2021).

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Payne, K. & Gavan, S. P. Economics and precision medicine. Handb. Exp. Pharmacol. 280 , 263–281 (2023).

Ielapi, N. et al. Precision medicine and precision nursing: the era of biomarkers and precision health. Int. J. Gen. Med. 13 , 1705–1711 (2020).

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Corral-Acero, J. et al. The ‘Digital Twin’ to enable the vision of precision cardiology. Eur. Heart J. 41 , 4556–4564 (2020).

Ferdousi, R., Laamarti, F., Hossain, M. A., Yang, C. S. & Saddik, A. E. Digital twins for well-being: an overview. Digital Twin 1 , 2022 (2022).

Article   Google Scholar  

Vallée, A. Digital twin for healthcare systems. Front. Digital health 5 , 1253050 (2023).

Elkefi, S. & Asan, O. Digital twins for managing health care systems: rapid literature review. J. Med. Internet Res. 24 , e37641 (2022).

Sun, T., He, X. & Li, Z. Digital twin in healthcare: Recent updates and challenges. Digital Health 9 , 20552076221149651 (2023).

Sheng, B. et al. Detecting latent topics and trends of digital twins in healthcare: A structural topic model-based systematic review. Digital Health 9 , 20552076231203672 (2023).

Khan, A. et al. A scoping review of digital twins in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic. Biomed. Eng. Comput. Biol. 13 , 11795972221102115 (2022).

Coorey, G. et al. The health digital twin to tackle cardiovascular disease-a review of an emerging interdisciplinary field. NPJ Digital Med. 5 , 126 (2022).

Thamotharan, P. et al. Human Digital Twin for Personalized Elderly Type 2 Diabetes Management. J. Clin. Med. 12 , https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm12062094 (2023).

Joshi, S. et al. Digital twin-enabled personalized nutrition improves metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease in type 2 diabetes: results of a 1-year randomized controlled study. Endocr. Pract. : Off. J. Am. Coll. Endocrinol. Am. Assoc. Clin. Endocrinologists 29 , 960–970 (2023).

Chaudhuri, A. et al. Predictive digital twin for optimizing patient-specific radiotherapy regimens under uncertainty in high-grade gliomas. Front. Artif. Intell. 6 , 1222612–1222612 (2023).

Bahrami, F., Rossi, R. M., De Nys, K. & Defraeye, T. An individualized digital twin of a patient for transdermal fentanyl therapy for chronic pain management. Drug Deliv. Transl. Res. 13 , 2272–2285 (2023).

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Cen, S., Gebregziabher, M., Moazami, S., Azevedo, C. J. & Pelletier, D. Toward precision medicine using a “digital twin” approach: modeling the onset of disease-specific brain atrophy in individuals with multiple sclerosis. Sci. Rep. 13 , 16279 (2023).

Maleki, A. et al. Moving forward through the in silico modeling of multiple sclerosis: Treatment layer implementation and validation. Comput. Struct. Biotechnol. J. 21 , 3081–3090 (2023).

Susilo, M. E. et al. Systems-based digital twins to help characterize clinical dose–response and propose predictive biomarkers in a Phase I study of bispecific antibody, mosunetuzumab, in NHL. Clin. Transl. Sci. 16 , 1134–1148 (2023).

Thangaraj, P. M., Vasisht Shankar, S., Oikonomou, E. K. & Khera, R. RCT-Twin-GAN Generates Digital Twins of Randomized Control Trials Adapted to Real-world Patients to Enhance their Inference and Application. medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences , https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.12.06.23299464 (2023).

Jiang, J., Li, Q. & Yang, F. TCM Physical Health Management Training and Nursing Effect Evaluation Based on Digital Twin. Sci. Progr. 2022 , https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/3907481 (2022).

Tardini, E. et al. Optimal treatment selection in sequential systemic and locoregional therapy of oropharyngeal squamous carcinomas: deep Q-learning with a patient-physician digital twin dyad. J. Med. Int. Res. 24 , e29455 (2022).

Google Scholar  

Golse, N. et al. Predicting the risk of post-hepatectomy portal hypertension using a digital twin: A clinical proof of concept. J. Hepatol. 74 , 661–669 (2021).

Cho, S.-W. et al. Sagittal relationship between the maxillary central incisors and the forehead in digital twins of korean adult females. J. Personal. Med. 11 , https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm11030203 (2021).

Imoto, S., Hasegawa, T. & Yamaguchi, R. Data science and precision health care. Nutr. Rev. 78 , 53–57 (2020).

Drummond, D. & Coulet, A. Technical, ethical, legal, and societal challenges with digital twin systems for the management of chronic diseases in children and young people. J. Med. Internet Res. 24 , e39698 (2022).

Bertezene, S. The digital twin in health: Organizational contributions and epistemological limits in a context of health crisis. Med. Sci. M/S 38 , 663–668 (2022).

Johnson, K. B. et al. Precision Medicine, AI, and the Future of Personalized Health Care. Clin. Transl. Sci. 14 , 86–93 (2021).

Powell, J. & Li, X. Integrated, data-driven health management: A step closer to personalized and predictive healthcare. Cell Syst. 13 , 201–203 (2022).

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Delpierre, C. & Lefèvre, T. Precision and personalized medicine: What their current definition says and silences about the model of health they promote. Implication for the development of personalized health. Front. Sociol. 8 , 1112159 (2023).

Raiff, B. R., Burrows, C. & Dwyer, M. Behavior-analytic approaches to the management of diabetes mellitus: current status and future directions. Behav. Anal. Pract. 14 , 240–252 (2021).

Ahern, D. K. et al. Behavior-based diabetes management: impact on care, hospitalizations, and costs. Am. J. Managed care 27 , 96–102 (2021).

Tyson, R. J. et al. Precision dosing priority criteria: drug, disease, and patient population variables. Front. Pharmacol. 11 , 420 (2020).

Walton, R., Dovey, S., Harvey, E. & Freemantle, N. Computer support for determining drug dose: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ (Clin. Res.) 318 , 984–990 (1999).

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Friedrichs, M. & Shoshi, A. History and future of KALIS: Towards computer-assisted decision making in prescriptive medicine. J. Integr. Bioinform. 16 , https://doi.org/10.1515/jib-2019-0011 (2019).

Zhao, H. et al. Identifying the serious clinical outcomes of adverse reactions to drugs by a multi-task deep learning framework. Commun. Biol. 6 , 870 (2023).

Thiong’o, G. M. & Rutka, J. T. Digital twin technology: the future of predicting neurological complications of pediatric cancers and their treatment. Front. Oncol. 11 , 781499 (2021).

Sun, T., He, X., Song, X., Shu, L. & Li, Z. The digital twin in medicine: a key to the future of healthcare? Front. Med. 9 , 907066 (2022).

Sarp, S., Kuzlu, M., Zhao, Y. & Gueler, O. Digital twin in healthcare: a study for chronic wound management. IEEE J. Biomed. health Inform. 27 , 5634–5643 (2023).

Chu, Y., Li, S., Tang, J. & Wu, H. The potential of the Medical Digital Twin in diabetes management: a review. Front. Med. 10 , 1178912 (2023).

Barricelli, B. R., Casiraghi, E. & Fogli, D. A survey on digital twin: definitions, characteristics, applications, and design implications. IEEE Access 7 , 167653–167671 (2019).

Keller, R. et al. Digital behavior change interventions for the prevention and management of type 2 diabetes: systematic market analysis. J. Med. Internet Res. 24 , e33348 (2022).

Priesterroth, L., Grammes, J., Holtz, K., Reinwarth, A. & Kubiak, T. Gamification and behavior change techniques in diabetes self-management apps. J. diabetes Sci. Technol. 13 , 954–958 (2019).

Venkatesh, K. P., Raza, M. M. & Kvedar, J. C. Health digital twins as tools for precision medicine: Considerations for computation, implementation, and regulation. NPJ digital Med. 5 , 150 (2022).

Venkatesh, K. P., Brito, G. & Kamel Boulos, M. N. Health digital twins in life science and health care innovation. Annu. Rev. Pharmacol. Toxicol. 64 , 159–170 (2024).

Katsoulakis, E. et al. Digital twins for health: a scoping review. NPJ Digital Med. 7 , 77 (2024).

Page, M. J. et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ (Clin. Res. ed.) 372 , n71 (2021).

Barker, T. H. et al. Revising the JBI quantitative critical appraisal tools to improve their applicability: an overview of methods and the development process. JBI Evid. Synth. 21 , 478–493 (2023).

Manganello, J. & Blake, N. A study of quantitative content analysis of health messages in U.S. media from 1985 to 2005. Health Commun. 25 , 387–396 (2010).

Giannantonio, C. M. Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology, 2nd edition. Organ. Res. Methods 13 , 392–394 (2010).

Rigby, A. S. Statistical methods in epidemiology. v. Towards an understanding of the kappa coefficient. Disabil. Rehabilitation 22 , 339–344 (2000).

Lantz, C. A. & Nebenzahl, E. Behavior and interpretation of the kappa statistic: resolution of the two paradoxes. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 49 , 431–434 (1996).

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Nursing, Peking University, Beijing, China

Mei-di Shen

Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Microsurgery, China-Japan Union Hospital, Jilin University, Changchun, Jilin, China

Si-bing Chen & Xiang-dong Ding

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

MD.SHEN contributed to the data collection, analysis and the manuscript writing. SB.CHEN contributed to the data collection and analysis. XD.DING contributed to the critical revision of the manuscript as well as the initial study conception. All authors read and approved the final manuscript, and jointly take responsibility for the decision to submit this work for publication.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Xiang-dong Ding .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

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

Supplementary information

Supplementary file, rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Shen, Md., Chen, Sb. & Ding, Xd. The effectiveness of digital twins in promoting precision health across the entire population: a systematic review. npj Digit. Med. 7 , 145 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-024-01146-0

Download citation

Received : 29 January 2024

Accepted : 22 May 2024

Published : 03 June 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-024-01146-0

Share this article

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

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

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

NTRS - NASA Technical Reports Server

Available downloads, related records.

• Election 2024
• Entertainment
• Newsletters
• Photography
• Personal Finance
• AP Investigations
• AP Buyline Personal Finance
• AP Buyline Shopping
• Press Releases
• Israel-Hamas War
• Russia-Ukraine War
• Global elections
• Asia Pacific
• Latin America
• Middle East
• Election Results
• Delegate Tracker
• AP & Elections
• Auto Racing
• 2024 Paris Olympic Games
• Movie reviews
• Book reviews
• Personal finance
• Financial Markets
• Business Highlights
• Financial wellness
• Artificial Intelligence
• Social Media

A new ‘Hunger Games’ book — and movie — is coming

FILE - Suzanne Collins arrives at the Los Angeles premiere of “The Hunger Games: Mockingjay - Part 1" at the Nokia Theatre L.A. Live on Nov. 17, 2014. Collins is returning to the ravaged, post-apocalyptic land of Panem for a new “The Hunger Games” novel. Scholastic announced Thursday that “Sunrise on the Reaping” will be published March 18, 2025. (Photo by Jordan Strauss/Invision/AP, File)

• Copy Link copied

NEW YORK (AP) — Inspired by an 18th century Scottish philosopher and the modern scourge of misinformation, Suzanne Collins is returning to the ravaged, post-apocalyptic land of Panem for a new “The Hunger Games” novel.

Scholastic announced Thursday that “Sunrise on the Reaping,” the fifth volume of Collins’ blockbuster dystopian series, will be published March 18, 2025. The new book begins with the reaping of the Fiftieth Hunger Games, set 24 years before the original “Hunger Games” novel, which came out in 2008, and 40 years after Collins’ most recent book, “The Ballad of Songbirds and Snakes.”

Lionsgate, which has released film adaptations of all four previous “Hunger Games” books, announced later on Thursday that “Sunrise on the Reaping” will open in theaters on Nov. 20, 2026. Francis Lawrence, who has worked on all but the first “Hunger Games” movie, will return as director.

The first four “Hunger Games” books have sold more than 100 million copies and been translated into dozens of languages. Collins had seemingly ended the series after the 2010 publication of “Mockingjay,” writing in 2015 that it was “time to move on to other lands.” But four years later, she stunned readers and the publishing world when she revealed she was working on what became “The Ballad of Songbirds and Snakes,” released in 2020 and set 64 years before the first book.

Collins has drawn upon Greek mythology and the Roman gladiator games for her earlier “Hunger Games” books. But for the upcoming novel, she cites the Scottish Enlightenment philosopher David Hume.

“With ‘Sunrise on the Reaping,’ I was inspired by David Hume’s idea of implicit submission and, in his words, ‘the easiness with which the many are governed by the few,’” Collins said in a statement. “The story also lent itself to a deeper dive into the use of propaganda and the power of those who control the narrative. The question ‘Real or not real?’ seems more pressing to me every day.”

The “Hunger Games” movies are a multibillion dollar franchise for Lionsgate. Jennifer Lawrence portrayed heroine Katniss Everdeen in the film versions of “The Hunger Games,” “Catching Fire” and “Mockingjay,” the last of which came out in two installments. Other featured actors have included Philip Seymour Hoffman, Josh Hutcherson, Stanley Tucci and Donald Sutherland.

“Suzanne Collins is a master storyteller and our creative north star,” Lionsgate chair Adam Fogelson said in a statement. “We couldn’t be more fortunate than to be guided and trusted by a collaborator whose talent and imagination are so consistently brilliant.”

The film version of “Songbirds and Snakes,” starring Tom Blyth and Rachel Zegler, came out last year. This fall, a “Hunger Games” stage production is scheduled to debut in London.