![example of a literature review matrix example of a literature review matrix](https://libapps.s3.amazonaws.com/customers/1460/images/walden-logo-universal-navigation.png)
- Walden University
- Faculty Portal
![](http://academicwritinghelp.pw/777/templates/cheerup1/res/banner1.gif)
Common Assignments: Literature Review Matrix
Literature review matrix.
As you read and evaluate your literature there are several different ways to organize your research. Courtesy of Dr. Gary Burkholder in the School of Psychology, these sample matrices are one option to help organize your articles. These documents allow you to compile details about your sources, such as the foundational theories, methodologies, and conclusions; begin to note similarities among the authors; and retrieve citation information for easy insertion within a document.
You can review the sample matrixes to see a completed form or download the blank matrix for your own use.
- Literature Review Matrix 1 This PDF file provides a sample literature review matrix.
- Literature Review Matrix 2 This PDF file provides a sample literature review matrix.
- Literature Review Matrix Template (Word)
- Literature Review Matrix Template (Excel)
Related Resources
![example of a literature review matrix podcast](https://libapps.s3.amazonaws.com/customers/1460/images/headphones_icon_website.png)
Didn't find what you need? Email us at [email protected] .
- Previous Page: Commentary Versus Opinion
- Next Page: Professional Development Plans (PDPs)
- Office of Student Disability Services
Walden Resources
Departments.
- Academic Residencies
- Academic Skills
- Career Planning and Development
- Customer Care Team
- Field Experience
- Military Services
- Student Success Advising
- Writing Skills
Centers and Offices
- Center for Social Change
- Office of Academic Support and Instructional Services
- Office of Degree Acceleration
- Office of Research and Doctoral Services
- Office of Student Affairs
Student Resources
- Doctoral Writing Assessment
- Form & Style Review
- Quick Answers
- ScholarWorks
- SKIL Courses and Workshops
- Walden Bookstore
- Walden Catalog & Student Handbook
- Student Safety/Title IX
- Legal & Consumer Information
- Website Terms and Conditions
- Cookie Policy
- Accessibility
- Accreditation
- State Authorization
- Net Price Calculator
- Contact Walden
Walden University is a member of Adtalem Global Education, Inc. www.adtalem.com Walden University is certified to operate by SCHEV © 2024 Walden University LLC. All rights reserved.
- Generating Ideas
- Drafting and Revision
- Sources and Evidence
- Style and Grammar
- Specific to Creative Arts
- Specific to Humanities
- Specific to Sciences
- Specific to Social Sciences
- CVs, Résumés and Cover Letters
- Graduate School Applications
- Other Resources
- Hiatt Career Center
- University Writing Center
- Classroom Materials
- Course and Assignment Design
- UWP Instructor Resources
- Writing Intensive Requirement
- Criteria and Learning Goals
- Course Application for Instructors
- What to Know about UWS
- Teaching Resources for WI
- FAQ for Instructors
- FAQ for Students
- Journals on Writing Research and Pedagogy
- University Writing Program
- Degree Programs
- Majors and Minors
- Graduate Programs
- The Brandeis Core
- School of Arts and Sciences
- Brandeis Online
- Brandeis International Business School
- Graduate School of Arts and Sciences
- Heller School for Social Policy and Management
- Rabb School of Continuing Studies
- Precollege Programs
- Faculty and Researcher Directory
- Brandeis Library
- Academic Calendar
- Undergraduate Admissions
- Summer School
- Financial Aid
- Research that Matters
- Resources for Researchers
- Brandeis Researchers in the News
- Provost Research Grants
- Recent Awards
- Faculty Research
- Student Research
- Centers and Institutes
- Office of the Vice Provost for Research
- Office of the Provost
- Housing/Community Living
- Campus Calendar
- Student Engagement
- Clubs and Organizations
- Community Service
- Dean of Students Office
- Orientation
- Spiritual Life
- Graduate Student Affairs
- Directory of Campus Contacts
- Division of Creative Arts
- Brandeis Arts Engagement
- Rose Art Museum
- Bernstein Festival of the Creative Arts
- Theater Arts Productions
- Brandeis Concert Series
- Public Sculpture at Brandeis
- Women's Studies Research Center
- Creative Arts Award
- Our Jewish Roots
- The Framework for the Future
- Mission and Diversity Statements
- Distinguished Faculty
- Nobel Prize 2017
- Notable Alumni
- Administration
- Working at Brandeis
- Commencement
- Offices Directory
- Faculty & Staff
- Alumni & Friends
- Parents & Families
- 75th Anniversary
- Directories
- New Students
- Shuttle Schedules
- Support at Brandeis
Writing Resources
The matrix method for literature reviews.
This handout is available for download in DOCX format and PDF format .
What is the Matrix Method, and why should I use it?
Using a review matrix enables you to quickly compare and contrast articles in order to determine the scope of research across time. A review matrix can help you more easily spot differences and similarities between journal articles about a research topic. While they may be helpful in any discipline, review matrices are especially helpful for health sciences literature reviews covering the complete scope of a research topic over time. This guide focuses on the review matrix step in the literature review process and offers tips on how to use it effectively.
Organize your sources
Once you complete your research, organize your source by date in order to make it easier to see changes in research over time.
Begin by creating the blank matrix. The matrices can be easily constructed using table-making software such as Microsoft Excel, Word or OneNote, Google Sheets, or Numbers. Every review matrix should have the same first three column headings: (1) authors, title, and journal, (2) publication year, and (3) purpose.
![example of a literature review matrix Table headings and one sample entry showing "authors, title, and journal" in column A, "publication year" in column B, and "purpose" in column C.](https://www.brandeis.edu/matrix.jpg)
Be aware that it may be difficult to determine purpose from just a cursory review of the article. In some cases, it may be necessary to first read the paper fully to identify its purpose.
Choose your remaining column topics
Next, carefully read all your articles. Note any important issues you identify. The following broad categories provide some suggestions for determining your own subject headings:
Methodological
Methodology is often an important question. For example, if you are looking at tests of an Ebola vaccine beyond human subjects, it will be important to note what type of animal the test was carried out on, i.e. macaques or mice.
Content-specific
Consider noting what was actually studied. For example, when looking at the effectiveness of traditional Chinese medicine in the treatment of illnesses, it would be important to note what illness was being studied.
Geographical
It may be important to note where the research was completed. For example, if you want to compare the effects of the AIDS epidemic in different countries, you would use country as a column heading.
There are many ways to choose your column headings, and these are just a few suggestions. As you create your own matrix, choose column headings that support your research question and goals.
- Do not include column headings that are explicit in your research question. For example, if you are looking at drug use in adolescents, do not include a column heading for age of study participants. If the answer will be the same for every study, it's generally a bad choice for a column heading.
- Do not try to fully complete a review matrix before reading the articles. Reading the articles is an important way to discern the nuances between studies.
Credit: Adapted from David Nolfi, “Matrix Method for Literature Review: The Review Matrix,” Duquesne University, https://guides.library.duq.edu/matrix , 2020.
- Resources for Students
- Writing Intensive Instructor Resources
- Research and Pedagogy
![example of a literature review matrix example of a literature review matrix](https://www.liberty.edu/staging/library/wp-content/uploads/sites/193/2021/03/magnifying-glass-icon-white.png)
- Books, Articles, & More
- Curriculum Library
- Archives & Special Collections
- Scholars Crossing
- Research Guides
- Student Support
- Faculty Support
- Interlibrary Loan
AMA Writing Guide: Literature Matrix
- AMA Style Formatting
- In-text Citations
- Journal Articles
- Books and Ebooks
- WHO Reports
- Misc. Citations
- Structured Abstract- IMRAD
- Primary & Secondary Sources
- Literature Matrix
What is a literature matrix?
As defined by Judith Garrard in her handbook entitled Health Sciences Literature Reviews Made Easy: The Matrix Method , a “Review of the literature consists of reading, analyzing, and writing a synthesis of scholarly materials about a specific topic. When reviewing scientific literature, the focus is on the hypotheses, the scientific methods, the strengths and weaknesses of the study, the results, and the authors’ interpretations and conclusions.” When reading materials for a literature review, you should critically evaluate the study’s major aims and results.
The purpose of completing a literature matrix is to help you identify important aspects of the study. Literature matrixes contain a variety of headings, but frequent headings include: author surname and date, theoretical/ conceptual framework, research question(s)/ hypothesis, methodology, analysis & results, conclusions, implications for future research, and implications for practice. You can add additional columns as needed, and you might consider adding a “notes column” to proactively have important quotations and your thoughts already collected. As you read journal articles, have your literature matrix ready. It is best to fill in the matrix directly after reading a work, rather than returning to the matrix later.
Literature Matrix Files
You should use a literature matrix that best helps you to organize your reading and research. Excel workbooks can help to organize your research. Sample basic and complex literature matrixes are provided below:
- Literature Matrix Basic BLANK
- Literature Matrix Basic SAMPLE
- Literature Matrix Complex BLANK
Synthesize vs. Summarize
When writing your literature review, you will not simply summarize the materials that you found related to your topic. A summary is a recap of the information provided in research articles. Summaries provide basic information about the study, but the details provided in a summary are not enumerative or systematic.
Synthesizing goes beyond summarizing to explore specific aspects of the research study. When synthesizing the literature, rely on your completed literature matrix to inform your writing. Do you see any tends across publications? Was one type of methodology used repeatedly, why or why not? Did separate teams of researchers come to the same conclusion, differing conclusions, or is the literature inconclusive? Synthesizing requires that you look at the current state of the research overall.
When preparing to write a synthesis, you will read the literature available, tease apart individual findings and supporting evidence across different articles, and then reorganize this information in a way that presents your understanding of the current state of research in this field.
- << Previous: Primary & Secondary Sources
- Last Updated: Apr 3, 2024 9:18 AM
- URL: https://libguides.liberty.edu/ama
![example of a literature review matrix](https://libapps.s3.amazonaws.com/accounts/252255/images/icon_banner.png)
- University of Oregon Libraries
- Research Guides
How to Write a Literature Review
- 6. Synthesize
- Literature Reviews: A Recap
- Reading Journal Articles
- Does it Describe a Literature Review?
- 1. Identify the Question
- 2. Review Discipline Styles
- Searching Article Databases
- Finding Full-Text of an Article
- Citation Chaining
- When to Stop Searching
- 4. Manage Your References
- 5. Critically Analyze and Evaluate
Synthesis Visualization
Synthesis matrix example.
- 7. Write a Literature Review
![example of a literature review matrix Chat](https://s3.amazonaws.com/libapps/customers/2807/images/icon-chat45.png)
- Synthesis Worksheet
About Synthesis
Approaches to synthesis.
You can sort the literature in various ways, for example:
How to Begin?
Read your sources carefully and find the main idea(s) of each source
Look for similarities in your sources – which sources are talking about the same main ideas? (for example, sources that discuss the historical background on your topic)
Use the worksheet (above) or synthesis matrix (below) to get organized
This work can be messy. Don't worry if you have to go through a few iterations of the worksheet or matrix as you work on your lit review!
Four Examples of Student Writing
In the four examples below, only ONE shows a good example of synthesis: the fourth column, or Student D . For a web accessible version, click the link below the image.
![example of a literature review matrix Four Examples of Student Writing; Follow the "long description" infographic link for a web accessible description.](https://libapps.s3.amazonaws.com/accounts/207197/images/Vizualizing_Synthesis.png)
Long description of "Four Examples of Student Writing" for web accessibility
- Download a copy of the "Four Examples of Student Writing" chart
![example of a literature review matrix Red X mark](https://libapps.s3.amazonaws.com/accounts/207197/images/noun_X_2289986-2.png)
Click on the example to view the pdf.
![example of a literature review matrix Personal Learning Environment chart](https://s3.amazonaws.com/libapps/accounts/49167/images/lrmatrix.jpg)
From Jennifer Lim
- << Previous: 5. Critically Analyze and Evaluate
- Next: 7. Write a Literature Review >>
- Last Updated: May 3, 2024 5:17 PM
- URL: https://researchguides.uoregon.edu/litreview
Contact Us Library Accessibility UO Libraries Privacy Notices and Procedures
![example of a literature review matrix Make a Gift](https://library.uoregon.edu/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/2022-10/givenow-sm.png?itok=yQQLJk-m)
1501 Kincaid Street Eugene, OR 97403 P: 541-346-3053 F: 541-346-3485
- Visit us on Facebook
- Visit us on Twitter
- Visit us on Youtube
- Visit us on Instagram
- Report a Concern
- Nondiscrimination and Title IX
- Accessibility
- Privacy Policy
- Find People
The Sheridan Libraries
- Write a Literature Review
- Sheridan Libraries
- Find This link opens in a new window
- Evaluate This link opens in a new window
What Will You Do Differently?
Please help your librarians by filling out this two-minute survey of today's class session..
Professor, this one's for you .
Introduction
Literature reviews take time. here is some general information to know before you start. .
- VIDEO -- This video is a great overview of the entire process. (2020; North Carolina State University Libraries) --The transcript is included --This is for everyone; ignore the mention of "graduate students" --9.5 minutes, and every second is important
- OVERVIEW -- Read this page from Purdue's OWL. It's not long, and gives some tips to fill in what you just learned from the video.
- NOT A RESEARCH ARTICLE -- A literature review follows a different style, format, and structure from a research article.
Steps to Completing a Literature Review
![example of a literature review matrix](https://libapps.s3.amazonaws.com/accounts/24280/images/003-search.png)
- Next: Find >>
- Last Updated: Sep 26, 2023 10:25 AM
- URL: https://guides.library.jhu.edu/lit-review
![example of a literature review matrix Williams logo](https://librarytools.williams.edu/assets/images/WILLIAMS_COLLEGE_LOGO_HALF_WHITE.png)
- Research Guides
Literature Review: A Self-Guided Tutorial
Using a synthesis matrix.
- Literature Reviews: A Recap
- Peer Review
- Reading the Literature
- Using Concept Maps
- Developing Research Questions
- Considering Strong Opinions
- 2. Review discipline styles
- Super Searching
- Finding the Full Text
- Citation Searching This link opens in a new window
- When to stop searching
- Citation Management
- Annotating Articles Tip
- 5. Critically analyze and evaluate
- How to Review the Literature
- 7. Write literature review
A synthesis matrix visually represents your research by organizing your sources by themes:
- Sample Synthesis Matrix Example provided by Ashford University Writing Center .
- << Previous: How to Review the Literature
- Next: 7. Write literature review >>
- Last Updated: Feb 22, 2024 10:53 AM
- URL: https://libguides.williams.edu/literature-review
![example of a literature review matrix Carl S. Swisher Library at Jacksonville University](https://libapps.s3.amazonaws.com/accounts/88728/images/newbanner.jpg)
- Jacksonville University
- Swisher Library
- Brooks Rehabilitation College of Healthcare Sciences
Matrix Method for Literature Review
Introduction.
Using a review matrix enables you to quickly compare and contrast articles in order to determine the scope of research across time. A review matrix can help you more easily spot differences and similarities between journal articles about a given research topic. Review matrices are especially helpful for health sciences literature reviews covering the complete scope of a research topic over time.
Organizing your Sources
Once you complete your research, organize your source by date in order to make it easier to see changes in research over time.
Every review matrix should have the same first three column headings: (1) authors, title, and journal; (2) publication year; (3) purpose.
![example of a literature review matrix Example of matrix method table](https://libapps.s3.amazonaws.com/customers/1745/images/first_three_columns.png)
It may be difficult to determine purpose from just a cursory review of the article. In some cases, it may be necessary to first read the paper fully to identify its purpose.
Choose your Remaining Column Topics
Next, carefully read all your articles. Note any important issues you identify. The following broad categories provide some suggestions for determining your own subject headings:
- Methodological - Methodology is often an important question. For example, if you are looking at tests of an Ebola vaccine beyond human subjects, it will be important to note what type of animal the test was carried out on, i.e. macaques or mice.
- Content-specific - Consider noting what was actually studied. For example, when looking at the effectiveness of traditional Chinese medicine in the treatment of illnesses, it would be important to note what illness was being studied.
- Geographical - It may be important to note where the research was completed. For example, if you want to compare the effects of the AIDS epidemic in different countries, you would use country as a column heading.
There are many ways to choose your column headings, and these are just a few suggestions. As you create your own matrix, choose column headings that support your research question and goals.
- Do not include column headings that are explicit in your research question. For example, if you are looking at drug use in adolescents, do not include a column heading for age of study participants. If the answer will be the same for every study, it's generally a bad choice for a column heading.
- Do not try to fully complete a review matrix before reading the articles. Reading the articles is an important way to discern the nuances between studies.
Sample Review Matrix and Templates
- Review Matrix Example: Ebola Vaccine Clinical Studies This document includes a review matrix of two Ebola vaccine clinical reviews done on humans published by the National Institute of Health.
- Review Matrix Word Template A review matrix template in Microsoft Word.
- Review Matrix Excel Template A review matrix template for Microsoft Excel
More Information
Information found in this guide was adapted from the following book.
Guide Credit
Information on this guide has been borrowed with permission from David Nolfi at Duquesne University .
- Reserve a study room
- Library Account
- Undergraduate Students
- Graduate Students
- Faculty & Staff
How to Conduct a Literature Review (Health Sciences and Beyond)
- What is a Literature Review?
- Developing a Research Question
- Selection Criteria
- Database Search
- Documenting Your Search
Review Matrix
- Reference Management
Using a spreadsheet or table to organize the key elements (e.g. subjects, methodologies, results) of articles/books you plan to use in your literature review can be helpful. This is called a review matrix.
When you create a review matrix, the first few columns should include (1) the authors, title, journal, (2) publication year, and (3) purpose of the paper. The remaining columns should identify important aspects of each study such as methodology and findings.
Click on the image below to view a sample review matrix.
You can also download this template as a Microsoft Excel file .
The information on this page is from the book below. The 5th edition is available online through VCU Libraries.
- << Previous: Documenting Your Search
- Next: Reference Management >>
- Last Updated: Mar 15, 2024 12:22 PM
- URL: https://guides.library.vcu.edu/health-sciences-lit-review
![example of a literature review matrix East Carolina University Libraries](https://lib.ecu.edu/ecu-libraries-white-gold-purple-wordmark.png)
- Joyner Library
- Laupus Health Sciences Library
- Music Library
- Digital Collections
- Special Collections
- North Carolina Collection
- Teaching Resources
- The ScholarShip Institutional Repository
- Country Doctor Museum
East Carolina University: RN to BSN Library Research Guide: Literature Review Matrix
- Research Questions & PICO
- Search-Strategy Lab Notebook
- Identifying Research Articles
- Literature Review Matrix
- Research Databases to Use
- Laupus Library Hours & ILL
- Citing & Writing Resources at ECU
Nursing Literature Reviews
What is a Literature (Lit) Review?
A Literature Review is Not:
- a quick summary of sources
- a grouping of broad, unrelated sources
- a compilation of everything that has ever been written on a topic
- a literature criticism or book review
So, what is it then?
A literature review is an integrated analysis-- not just a summary-- of scholarly writings that are related directly to your research question. That is, it represents the literature that provides background information on your topic and shows a correspondence between those writings 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.
Adapted from: https://libguides.uwf.edu/c.php?g=215270&p=4439026 by Hillary Fox, University of West Florida, hfox @uwf.edu.
Creating a Literature Review using the Matrix Method:
A matrix review allows you to quickly compare and contrast articles in an easy to read format. It can help you to easily spot differences and similarities between journal articles and your nursing research topic. Review matrices are especially helpful for health sciences literature reviews that cover the scope of research over a given amount of time.
Most literature reviews are set up in this format:
Chart adapted from the book below:
- Check out the e-book above for more help in creating a literature review matrix.
Steps for Conducting a Literature Review
1. Choose Your Topic
- Review your PICO question and think about your central research question. To review the PICO process, please see Kerry Sewell's LibGuide on this subject.
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?
3. Select the databases you want to use to conduct your searches (See the Databases Tab Above!)
4. Conduct your searches and find the literature. (Keep track of your searches, try using the Search Strategy Lab Notebook!)
- Review the abstracts and conclusions carefully. This will help you decide which articles actually fit the criteria you are looking for.
- Write down the keywords you used and where you found them.
- You can also use RefWorks to keep track of your citations.
5. Review the Literature (This will probably be the most time consuming part)
- What was the research question of the study you are reviewing? What were the authors trying to discover?
- Was the research funded by a company or source that could influence the findings? (Such as Colgate® sponsoring a toothpaste study?)
- What were the research methodologies? Analyze the paper's literature review, the samples and variables used, the results and conclusions. Does the research seem to be complete? Could it have been conducted more soundly? What questions does it raise?
- If there are conflicting studies, why do you think that is?
- How are the authors of the paper viewed in the field? Has this study been cited by other publications?
Literature Review Examples
Remember, a lit review provides an intelligent overview of the topic. There may or may not be a method for how studies are collected or interpreted. Lit reviews aren't always labeled specifically as "literature reviews," they may often be embedded with other sections such as an introduction or background.
- Mentes, J.C., Salem, N., & Phillips, L.R. (2017). Ethnocultural gerontological nursing. An integrative literature review. Journal of Transcultural Nursing, 28(1), 79-97. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1043659615601483
- Rosa, D.F., Carvalho, M.V., & Pereira, N.R, et al. (2019). Nursing care for the transgender population: genders from the perspective of professional practice. Revista Brasilerira de Enfermagem, 72 (Suppl 1), 299-306. http://www.scielo.br/pdf/reben/v72s1/0034-7167-reben-72-s1-0299.pdf
- Dahlke, S.A., Hunter, K.F., Negrin, K. (2019). Nursing practice with hospitalized older people: Safety and harm. International Journal of Older People Nursing, 14 (1), Article e1220. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/opn.12220
Adapted from: https://libguides.uwf.edu/c.php?g=215270&p=4439026 by Hillary Fox, University of West Florida, [email protected].
Carrie Forbes, MLS
![example of a literature review matrix Profile Photo](https://d2jv02qf7xgjwx.cloudfront.net/accounts/20290/profiles/16652/Cprofile2019.jpg)
- << Previous: Identifying Research Articles
- Next: Research Databases to Use >>
- Last Updated: Jul 26, 2022 6:15 PM
- URL: https://libguides.ecu.edu/RN2BSNResearch
- Archives & Special Collections home
- Art Library home
- Ekstrom Library home
- Kornhauser Health Sciences Library home
- Law Library home
- Music Library home
- University of Louisville Hospital home
- Interlibrary Loan
- Off-Campus Login
- Renew Books
- Cardinal Card
- My Print Center
- Business Ops
- Cards Career Connection
Search Site
Search catalog, soc 303: introduction to research methods(orend): literature matrix.
- Literature Searching
- Research Question
- Annotated Bibliography
- Writing a Literature Review
- Literature Matrix
- Evaluating Sources
- Citing Souces
Literature Review Matrix: Section One
This section helps you analyze each individual article for its research question(s), method(s), results, and conclusions. It also enables you to evaluate it for its strengths and limitations and identify its themes before you attempt to connect it to other research.
Literature Matrix 2
This part helps you visually connect the themes and identify disparate themes so that you can begin to synthesize established knowledge on your topic and identify alternative points of view on the topic and speak to why those might exist.
Organize Your Articles
A literature review matrix serves to help you visually organize your thoughts on an article.
This is only one option of many that can help you organize your thoughts; you can easily change the first section to reflect your discipline
- << Previous: Writing a Literature Review
- Next: Evaluating Sources >>
- Last Updated: Mar 7, 2024 12:35 PM
- Librarian Login
![example of a literature review matrix site header image](https://libapps.s3.amazonaws.com/customers/1670/images/UW-Whitewater_Libraries_Web-Banner_Left-Aligned_opt.png)
Communication Sciences & Disorders: Researching the Literature
- 1. Terms to Know: The Basics
- Practice: Identifying Information Sources (Opens Word Doc) This link opens in a new window
- 3: Browsing Key Journals
- 4: Author Searching
- 5: Reference Mining & Citation Searching
- 6. PICO: To Refine the Research Question
- 7: Database Searching
- 8. Finding Full Text Articles
- Sample Annotation
- Sample Annotation 2
Literature Review Matrices and Organizers
- 11. APA Style Citation
A literature review matrix is a tool used by researchers to analyze and synthesize information from various sources relevant to their research topic. It typically takes the form of a table or chart, where rows represent different studies or articles, and columns display key information such as research methodologies, findings, and key themes.
The primary purpose of a literature review matrix is to help you analyze and compare existing literature, to identify patterns, gaps, and contradictions in the body of knowledge related to your research question.
- Literature Rewiew Matrix Template (example) You will be prompted to make a copy in your Google Drive. You are the sole owner, viewer and editor of the template until you choose to share it.
- << Previous: Sample Annotation 2
- Next: 11. APA Style Citation >>
- Last Updated: May 20, 2024 12:49 PM
- URL: https://libguides.uww.edu/comdis-lit-review
![example of a literature review matrix Logo for Toronto Metropolitan University Pressbooks](https://pressbooks.library.torontomu.ca/graduatereivews2/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/TMUPressbooks.png)
Module 4: Strategic Reading
Organize your Readings with a Literature Review Matrix
The next step after reading and evaluating your sources is to organize them in a way that will help you start the writing process.
Review Matrix
One way to organize your literature is with a review matrix. The review matrix is a chart that sorts and categorizes the different arguments presented per topic or issue. Using a matrix enables you to quickly compare and contrast your sources in order to determine the scope of research across time. This will allow you to spot similarities and differences between sources. It is particularly useful in the synthesis and analysis stages of a review (See Module 1 Conducting a Literature Review with the SALSA Framework ).
Example of a Review Matrix
My research question:
How can we use machine learning to analyze social media data related to HIV?
Writing a Literature Review Modified from The WI+RE Team, UCLA. Creative Commons CC-BY-NA-SA
Create a Review Matrix
Start with a charting tool you are most familiar with (for example MS Word, MS Excel, Google Sheets, Numbers etc).
- Organize your sources from oldest to most recent. This way you can see how the research on your topic has changed over time.
- First Column: citation (i.e., author, title, source, publication year)
- Second Column: purpose or summary (1-2 sentences)
- methodology
- intervention
Key Takeaways
Here are some examples of different review matrices and templates:
- Evidence Synthesis Matrix Template, Jane Schmidt, Toronto Metropolitan University (Google Sheets)
- The Matrix Method for Literature Reviews, Brandeis University, Writing Resources.
- Literature Review Synthesis Matrix , Concordia University (MS Word)
- Write a Literature Review: Synthesize . Johns Hopkins University, Sheridan Libraries
Advanced Research Skills: Conducting Literature and Systematic Reviews (2nd Edition) Copyright © 2021 by Kelly Dermody; Cecile Farnum; Daniel Jakubek; Jo-Anne Petropoulos; Jane Schmidt; and Reece Steinberg is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.
Share This Book
![example of a literature review matrix The Writing Center • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill](https://writingcenter.unc.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/346/2018/08/writingcenterlogo-oneline.png)
How I Made My Life Easier By Using A Synthesis Matrix
![example of a literature review matrix How I Write and Learn](https://writingcenter.unc.edu/files/2020/01/WriteandLearnBlogBanner-cropped.jpg)
By Abbie, a Writing Center Coach
I’ve always enjoyed writing and thought myself quite good at it before getting to college. Of course, a lot of the writing you do then is for English class, reading one book and writing about it; you still have to work at figuring out your focus and how to support it, but the “research” aspect is limited. Stepping outside of a traditional English paper is another step, one that I was hit with when I first started college and had to write for other subjects.
To me, a research paper is one of the most daunting assignments I’ve ever received. Suddenly, I needed to look at more than just a single work of fiction. There are often semester-long steps to picking a question, finding sources, evaluating them, and synthesizing them. It’s easy for me to want to push those tasks until later or cherrypick evidence to support an easier answer. But that doesn’t result in the best research paper possible, and I might not even learn much along the way.
One of my favorite strategies for writing research papers is creating a synthesis matrix, which is essentially creating a research worksheet to fill out. They can look different depending on what I’m working on, but their main purpose is for taking research notes and seeing relationships across large numbers of sources and information categories. I’ve used both Microsoft Excel and Google Sheets to create synthesis matrices in the past.
The first time I ever created a synthesis matrix was for ENGL 402 , which I took to apply to work at the Writing Center. The assignment was a literature review where I had to pick any topic related to writing and explore what the literature said about it. I had no idea where to start, but this method helped me land on and deeply explore my topic.
While working on my literature review, I divided my synthesis matrix process into five steps: topic selection, source selection, matrix setup, reading and categorization, and usage of the matrix itself.
Step 1: Topic Selection
First, I decided to freewrite some topic ideas, a strategy I got from the Writing Center’s Brainstorming handout . I set a timer for 5 minutes and listed out every topic related to writing that came to mind. I came up with multiple ideas, but the one I chose was about writing motivation. As someone who has always loved writing, I wanted to explore people writing solely for a grade rather than because of genuine passion and interest in the topic. This helped me come up with keywords (writing, grades, motivation, rubrics) that I could then use in my initial research step when searching for sources.
Step 2: Source Selection
![example of a literature review matrix Home page of the UNC Libraries website. The “E-Research by Discipline” and “Articles+” tools are highlighted](https://writingcenter.unc.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/346/2022/03/Screen-Shot-2022-03-02-at-6.30.27-PM-1-300x116.png)
Once I had my keywords, I turned to the UNC Libraries website. I always begin with the “E-Research by Discipline” tool, which allows me to select databases of academic articles that are more likely to be related to my topic. For my initial ideas about writing motivation, I went to a database under the “English” discipline. The “Articles+” on the library site has more search filters under “Advanced Search” that I used to get more specific search results.
![example of a literature review matrix Image of the search feature in the library](https://writingcenter.unc.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/346/2022/03/Picture1-300x173.png)
Through this research process, I landed on a topic: utility-value in writing . Using this topic to form my new keywords, I found multiple sources related to writing, learning, real world applications of course material, and connections between class content. One issue I ran into was that a lot of sources were about multilingual learners, while I just wanted to focus on general college writing (rather than language learning). Thankfully, I was able to use Boolean search logic to filter out language learning sources.
Step 3: Setting up the Matrices
Before looking through the sources I had gathered, I set up a Microsoft Excel sheet for note taking. This would become my synthesis matrix — all of my sources, along with the author, date, and citation, were listed in the left columns. The rest of the columns were broken into categories of information I thought I might use. The first few columns make it easy for me to find important information needed for parenthetical citations and references, as well as to remember the specific focus of a source. I was mostly using empirical studies, though other source types could have different categories, like a synopsis of a book from which a chapter had been pulled. I ended up with two separate sections of my sheet: one for sources related to utility value writing and another for sources related to Writing-To-Learn ( a learning pedagogy with some similarities).
With my matrix set up, I felt much better about my ability to take good notes on my sources rather than trying to tackle them with a blank document.
![example of a literature review matrix Column list of different search information color coded](https://writingcenter.unc.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/346/2022/03/Picture1-1-300x128.png)
Step 4: Reading & Note-taking
Once I started reading, using the matrix felt like I had given myself a checklist of sources to get through along with boxes to fill in for each one. Because of this, I was able to get through my sources much more quickly, feeling a sense of accomplishment as I could see how much I had done. I also was already beginning to organize my notes because of the matrix setup. It initially seemed like a much more time-consuming method, but the organizational element was a huge time-saver when it came to actually putting my paper together. I was much more familiar with my evidence by the time it came to outline, so I didn’t have to dig through my notes as much to figure out what to say or where to say it.
As I read through my sources, I took notes in the matrix by copy and pasting quotes from my sources as well as paraphrasing information. I always made sure to add page numbers so I could easily go back and find where I got my information. Along the way, my categories molded to what I was reading. It was important for me to not only search for what I was originally looking for but reflect what was actually being discussed in my sources.
Step 5: Using the Matrix
Once I had filled in the entire Excel sheet, I could see which sources overlapped where, compare and contrast what they said, and see areas of agreement and disagreement. My next step was to use this information to organize my paper. I decided to color-code the boxes based on where I thought they might fit; while this ended up largely following the column categories, there were a few that fit somewhere else, and the visual strategy helped remind me to include everything where I wanted it.
![example of a literature review matrix List of research color coded](https://writingcenter.unc.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/346/2022/03/Picture1-2-300x264.png)
The last step was writing the actual paper. I found it to be a much easier and faster process with my synthesis matrix having already organized everything, and was able to sit down and write an entire 10 pages over just a couple days. I ended up satisfied with what I had written, and I know it would have been much harder without the synthesis matrix.
Reflections
If I were to go back and work on this matrix again, I might work on paraphrasing more than just pasting direct quotes in. While it was easier to just paste the original wording, I ended up having to work a lot on paraphrasing and evaluating my sources’ information when I was actually writing the paper. I think using more paraphrasing relative to quoting when I was filling in the matrix would have gotten me to try to better understand what I was reading when I was reading it, and probably would have saved some space since I ended up with a lot of blocks of long quotes. I also had a column for figures and diagrams that I didn’t fill in much and didn’t end up using what I had filled in at all, so I might reevaluate what forms of information I’m predominantly paying attention to in sources and whether other forms might add something of value to my paper, perhaps by listing out information I get without even looking at the main text.
I highly recommend trying this strategy out on your next research paper or literature review! I learned it from Dr. Gigi Taylor in ENGL 402, a class where you can try using this strategy and learn more about yourself and your writing style. I am very grateful to have found a method that works so well with my approach to writing, and I hope that it helps you as well.
This blog showcases the perspectives of UNC Chapel Hill community members learning and writing online. If you want to talk to a Writing and Learning Center coach about implementing strategies described in the blog, make an appointment with a writing coach , a peer tutor , or an academic coach today. Have an idea for a blog post about how you are learning and writing remotely? Contact us here .
![example of a literature review matrix example of a literature review matrix](https://libapps.s3.amazonaws.com/accounts/2740/images/logo_school.png)
Matrix Method for Literature Review
- The Review Matrix
Organize Your Sources
- Choose Your Remaining Column Topics
- More Information
- Sample Matrix and Templates
- Related Library Guides
- Getting Help
Once you complete your research, organize your source by date in order to make it easier to see changes in research over time.
Every review matrix should have the same first three column headings: (1) authors, title, and journal, (2) publication year, and (3) purpose.
It may be difficult to determine purpose from just a cursory review of the article. In some cases, it may be necessary to first read the paper fully to identify its purpose.
- << Previous: The Review Matrix
- Next: Choose Your Remaining Column Topics >>
- Last Updated: Feb 20, 2024 10:26 AM
- URL: https://guides.library.duq.edu/matrix
Chaos to Clarity: Structuring Your Literature Review Format
Master literature review format! Learn key sections, effective citation & analysis tips to write a strong academic review.
Ever wondered how to dive into a mountain of books and articles and come up with something that not just makes sense but shines new light on a topic? What if there was a way to neatly tie together all that information, spot what’s missing, and maybe even pave the way for discoveries?
That’s what you are going to learn in this article, literature reviews—a place where chaos meets order, and where your insights could set the stage for the next big thing. Let’s break down the literature review format , your essential guide to properly writing a literature review.
Dissecting Literature Review Format
There are 6 main sections to make a note of while writing a literature review. Those are:
The Introduction Section
Topic background, conceptual framework.
- Synthesis and Evaluation in Literature Reviews
- Conclusion for Your Literature Review
- Reference List in Your Literature Review
Also Read: Essential Components of a Literature Review
The introduction of your literature review is where you set the stage for the entire document. It’s your first opportunity to engage your readers and provide a clear blueprint of what your review will cover and why it matters. This section does more than merely introduce the topic; it establishes the context, defines the scope, and outlines the purpose and objectives of your literature review.
Things to keep in mind while writing an introduction:
- Craft a compelling opening
- Establish the Context and Justification
- Define the Scope and Objectives
- Lay out the Structure
- Give an overview of the Structure
The “Topic Background” section of a literature review serves as the cornerstone for understanding the evolution and current state of the subject matter. It is divided into two crucial sub-sections: Historical Context and Current State of the Topic .
Delving into these areas provides you with a comprehensive backdrop against which the literature review is framed, enriching the reader’s understanding of why the topic is of interest and what has influenced its development to the current state.
Historical Context
![example of a literature review matrix](https://mindthegraph.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/neom-hgf0fJGJPQs-unsplash-1024x683.jpg)
The Historical Context is fundamental in setting the stage for the entire literature review. This section is not just a chronology of events or developments; it’s a curated narrative that highlights the key milestones and turning points that have significantly impacted the topic.
By examining the historical evolution, the review establishes a timeline of how understanding and perspectives have shifted over the years.
Summary Of Key Historical Developments
This involves identifying and summarizing the major breakthroughs, shifts in thinking, or seminal works that have shaped the topic. It’s important to focus on developments that have a direct relevance to the current understanding and state of the subject. For example, if the topic is about the evolution of renewable energy technologies, this part would outline the initial discovery and use of renewable sources, significant technological innovations, and pivotal policy decisions that have influenced the field.
Relevance Of Historical Context To The Topic
After outlining the key historical developments, it’s crucial to connect these events to the present topic. This means discussing how past events have laid the groundwork for current theories, practices, or debates within the field. It involves analyzing the impact of historical milestones on the subject matter, and explaining how they have contributed to current knowledge, challenges, and research questions. This section makes it clear why understanding history is essential for anyone researching or studying the topic today.
Current State Of The Topic
Moving from the historical context, the review transitions to the present with the Current State of the Topic. This part assesses the latest research, trends, debates, and technological advancements that define the subject area at the moment.
Current Trends Or Updates
Here, the focus shifts to what is happening in the field right now. This could include recent research findings, emerging theories, new methodologies, or the latest technological innovations. The aim is to provide a snapshot of the current research landscape, identifying what themes, questions, or problems are being actively explored. For instance, in the context of digital marketing, this might involve discussing the rise of artificial intelligence in customer relationship management or the impact of social media trends on marketing strategies.
Impact Of These Trends On The Subject Matter
The final step is to assess the implications of these current trends for the topic. This includes considering how recent developments have advanced the field, the challenges they present, and the opportunities they open up for future research. It’s about connecting the dots between what’s happening now and what it means for the subject area moving forward. This not only helps to frame the research questions that the literature review will address but also sets the stage for identifying gaps in the current knowledge, thereby guiding the direction of future studies.
Also Read: What is a literature review? Get the concept and start using it
When doing a literature review, it’s essential to lay a solid foundation for your exploration through a well-defined conceptual framework. This framework acts as a compass, guiding your review’s direction by establishing the key concepts, theories, and perspectives that underpin your topic.
Definitions And Descriptions
Before diving into the depths of your literature review, it’s crucial to start with the basics. This means clearly identifying and defining the key concepts related to your topic. Think of this as setting the stage for your readers, ensuring they have a clear understanding of the fundamental terms and ideas you will be exploring.
Key Concepts Related To The Topic
Begin by listing the essential concepts central to your review. These are the building blocks of your topic, the terms that will repeatedly appear throughout your exploration.
Detailed Definitions And Their Relevance
Once you’ve identified these concepts, provide precise and comprehensive definitions for each. Don’t hesitate to explore different dimensions or interpretations of these terms, as this can enrich your readers’ understanding. More importantly, discuss why these concepts are crucial to your review. How do they shape the scope of your exploration? How do they relate to each other and to the broader topic? This step ensures that your readers are not just familiar with the terms but also understand their significance within your review’s context.
Theoretical Perspectives
With the key concepts clearly defined, it’s time to frame your literature review within relevant theoretical perspectives. This is where you align your exploration with existing theories, models, or frameworks that provide insights into your topic.
Important Theories Related To The Topic
Identify the theories that are foundational to your topic. These could range from well-established theories that have long guided research in your field to more contemporary models that offer new insights. For example, a review of organizational behavior might draw on theories of motivation, leadership styles, and organizational culture.
Evaluation Of These Theories And Their Influence On The Topic
After pinpointing the relevant theories, critically assess their contributions to the topic. Consider questions like: How have these theories shaped understanding of the topic? What insights do they offer, and where do they fall short? Are there controversies or debates surrounding these theories? This evaluation not only deepens your review’s analytical depth but also positions your work within the larger academic conversation.
Synthesis And Evaluation In Literature Reviews
![example of a literature review matrix](https://mindthegraph.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/daniel-thomas-6-NXEMZbUq0-unsplash-1024x683.jpg)
The “Synthesis and Evaluation” section is where your literature review truly comes to life. Here, you’re not just summarizing what others have said; you’re weaving together diverse strands of research to present a cohesive picture of the topic at hand.
Comparison And Contrast Of Sources
Synthesizing the literature involves more than listing findings from various studies; it’s about drawing connections between them, highlighting areas of agreement and dispute, and weaving these into a narrative that adds depth and breadth to your understanding of the topic.
Comparative Analysis
Start by grouping your sources based on similarities in their findings, methodologies, or theoretical approaches. This clustering will help you identify trends and common themes across the literature. For example, if several studies have found similar outcomes under comparable conditions, these findings can be grouped to strengthen a particular argument or observation about the topic.
Contrasts Or Conflicts Among Sources
Equally important is the identification of discrepancies in the literature. Do some studies present findings that directly contradict others? Are there differences in how researchers have interpreted similar data? Highlighting these conflicts is crucial, as it can indicate areas where the topic is still evolving or where further research is needed. It also shows your ability to critically engage with the material, a hallmark of scholarly rigor.
Analysis Of Gaps In Literature
One of your primary tasks in the synthesis and evaluation section is to identify what’s missing in the current body of research. This requires a critical eye and a deep understanding of both your topic and the broader field in which it resides.
Identification Of Research Gaps
As you comb through the literature, ask yourself: What questions remain unanswered? Are there underexplored areas or populations? Perhaps certain methodologies have been overlooked, or theoretical perspectives have not been considered. Pinpointing these gaps is not a mere exercise in academic critique; it’s a vital step in advancing knowledge within the field.
Implications Of These Gaps For Future Research
Highlighting gaps in the literature sets the stage for future studies. It’s where you, as the reviewer, can suggest new research directions that could fill these voids or further explore the topic. Discussing the implications of these gaps not only enriches your review but also contributes to the ongoing scholarly conversation.
Conclusion For Your Literature Review
The conclusion of your literature review is where you bring together all the strands of your argument, synthesizing the insights gained and highlighting the significance of your findings. It’s not just a summary of what has been discussed; it’s an opportunity to underscore the relevance of the review, reflect on the broader implications of your synthesis and evaluation, and suggest directions for future research.
Summary Of Key Points
Start your conclusion by succinctly summarizing the main points and findings of your review. This isn’t about rehashing every detail but rather about distilling the essence of your exploration. Highlight the critical trends, themes, and conflicts you’ve uncovered, and remind your readers of the significance of these discoveries.
Relevance And Implications Of The Literature For The Topic
Next, focus on the relevance and implications of your findings. This involves stepping back to consider the bigger picture—how does your literature review contribute to the understanding of your topic? Discuss the impact of the trends and gaps you’ve identified on the field, and elaborate on how your synthesis of the literature advances or enriches existing knowledge.
Reflection On The Research Process
Reflecting on the research process itself can provide valuable insights. Consider discussing the challenges you encountered in navigating the literature, such as dealing with conflicting findings or the scarcity of research on certain aspects of your topic.
Directions For Future Research
One of the most critical aspects of your conclusion is to suggest directions for future research. Be as precise as possible, whether suggesting new methodologies, theoretical frameworks, or specific topics that warrant deeper investigation.
Final Thoughts
End your conclusion with a strong closing statement that reiterates the value of your literature review. Emphasize the importance of continued research on your topic and the potential it holds for advanced understanding within your field. A compelling conclusion reaffirms the significance of your work, leaving your readers with a clear sense of its contribution and the urgent need for further exploration.
Reference List In Your Literature Review
The Reference List is the backbone of your literature review, providing a comprehensive compilation of all the sources you’ve cited throughout your exploration. It’s not merely a formality but a crucial component that lends credibility and rigor to your work.
Importance Of Accuracy And Consistency
The cornerstone of a reliable Reference List is accuracy and consistency in citation style. Whether you’re adhering to APA , MLA , Chicago , or another academic citation format, it’s vital to apply the rules with precision. This includes correctly formatting author names, publication dates, titles, and publication details.
Organizing Your References
While different citation styles have their own rules for listing references, organizing them in a way that enhances readability and accessibility is universally beneficial. Alphabetical order by the author’s last name is the most common method, as it allows readers to easily locate sources.
Comprehensive Coverage
Your Reference List should be exhaustive, including every work you’ve cited in your review. This extends beyond journal articles and books to encompass reports, conference papers, online resources, and any other materials that have informed your analysis.
![](http://academicwritinghelp.pw/777/templates/cheerup1/res/banner1.gif)
The Value Of Annotations
While not always required, providing brief annotations for key sources can add tremendous value to your Reference List. An annotated bibliography offers a succinct summary of each source’s main arguments, methodologies, and findings, as well as its relevance to your literature review.
Digital Accessibility
In today’s digital age, considering the accessibility of your referenced works can greatly enhance the utility of your Reference List. Whenever possible, include Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs) or stable URLs for online sources, ensuring readers can directly access the materials.
Also read: What Is A DOI? Exploring The Purpose And Importance
Reflecting On Ethical Scholarship
Finally, your Reference List is a reflection of ethical scholarship. By accurately citing all the sources that have informed your work, you’re honoring the intellectual property of other researchers and upholding the academic community’s standards of integrity and respect.
Crafting a meticulous Reference List is an essential aspect of your literature review that underscores the credibility, depth, and ethical foundation of your research. By adhering to the principles of accuracy, comprehensiveness, and accessibility, you not only facilitate further inquiry but also pay homage to the collective endeavor of knowledge advancement in your field.
Related Article: Navigating the AMA Citation Format: Best Tips for Referencing
In conclusion, writing a literature review involves meticulous structuring, beginning with an engaging introduction that sets the stage, followed by a detailed exploration of the topic’s background, including its historical context and current state.
A robust conceptual framework lays the groundwork for analysis, leading to a critical synthesis and evaluation of relevant literature.
The conclusion ties together the review’s key findings and implications, while the reference list meticulously catalogs all cited works. Mastering each section ensures a comprehensive and insightful review, essential for advancing academic understanding and contributing to scholarly discussions.
Related Article: Preliminary Literature Review: A Guide for Effective Research
Science Figures, Graphical Abstracts, And Infographics For Your Research
Revolutionize your research with infographics from Mind the Graph . From science figures, graphical abstracts to infographics, you can unleash the power of creative visuals with this user-friendly platform and make your research captivating.
![example of a literature review matrix illustrations-banner](https://mindthegraph.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/illustrations-banner.webp)
Subscribe to our newsletter
Exclusive high quality content about effective visual communication in science.
Unlock Your Creativity
Create infographics, presentations and other scientifically-accurate designs without hassle — absolutely free for 7 days!
About Sowjanya Pedada
Sowjanya is a passionate writer and an avid reader. She holds MBA in Agribusiness Management and now is working as a content writer. She loves to play with words and hopes to make a difference in the world through her writings. Apart from writing, she is interested in reading fiction novels and doing craftwork. She also loves to travel and explore different cuisines and spend time with her family and friends.
Content tags
![English en_US](https://mindthegraph.com/blog/wp-content/plugins/translatepress-multilingual/assets/images/flags/en_US.png)
A systematic exploration of scoping and mapping literature reviews
- Brief Report
- Open access
- Published: 23 May 2024
Cite this article
You have full access to this open access article
- Eirini Christou ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-6928-1013 1 ,
- Antigoni Parmaxi ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-0687-0176 1 &
- Panayiotis Zaphiris ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-8112-5099 1
235 Accesses
Explore all metrics
Systematic literature mapping can help researchers identify gaps in the research and provide a comprehensive overview of the available evidence. Despite the importance and benefits of conducting systematic scoping and mapping reviews, many researchers may not be familiar with the methods and best practices for conducting these types of reviews. This paper aims to address this gap by providing a step-by-step guide to conducting a systematic scoping or mapping review, drawing on examples from different fields. This study adopts a systematic literature review approach aiming to identify and present the steps of conducting scoping and mapping literature reviews and serves as a guide on conducting scoping or mapping systematic literature reviews. A number of 90 studies were included in this study. The findings describe the steps to follow when conducting scoping and mapping reviews and suggest the integration of the card sorting method as part of the process. The proposed steps for undertaking scoping and mapping reviews presented in this manuscript, highlight the importance of following a rigorous approach for conducting scoping or mapping reviews.
Similar content being viewed by others
A scoping review on the conduct and reporting of scoping reviews.
![example of a literature review matrix example of a literature review matrix](https://media.springernature.com/w215h120/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1186%2Fs12874-020-01061-4/MediaObjects/12874_2020_1061_Fig1_HTML.png)
How methodological frameworks are being developed: evidence from a scoping review
Literature Reviews: An Overview of Systematic, Integrated, and Scoping Reviews
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
1 Introduction
An essential component of academic research is literature review. A systematic literature review, also known as a systematic review, is a method for locating, assessing, and interpreting all research related to a specific research question, topic, or phenomenon of interest [ 1 ].
Scoping and mapping reviews are variations of systematic literature mapping [ 2 ]. Both mapping and scoping reviews can help researchers to understand the scope and breadth of the literature in a given field, identify gaps in the research, and provide a comprehensive overview of the available evidence. Systematic literature mapping purposely focuses on a narrower but more general academic or policy issue and does not try to synthesize the results of research to address a particular subject. The scoping review is exploratory in nature, whereas the mapping review can be conclusive in describing the available evidence and identifying gaps. Mapping review includes a thorough, systematic search of a wide field. It identifies the body of literature that is currently available on a subject and points out any glaring gaps in the evidence [ 3 ].
1.1 Rationale
Despite the importance and benefits of conducting systematic scoping and mapping reviews, many researchers may not be familiar with the methods and best practices for conducting these types of reviews. This paper aims to address this gap by providing a step-by-step guide to conducting a systematic scoping or mapping review, drawing on examples from different fields.
This study adopts a systematic literature review approach aiming to identify and present the differences and the steps of conducting scoping and mapping literature review. The paper provides practical guidance on how to address common challenges in conducting systematic scoping or mapping reviews, such as dealing with the volume of studies identified, managing the data extraction and synthesis process, and ensuring rigor and reproducibility in the review methodology. The main research questions that guide this study are:
RQ1: What is a systematic scoping review and how is it conducted?
RQ2: What is a systematic mapping review and how is it conducted?
RQ3: What are the main differences between systematic scoping and systematic mapping reviews?
Overall, this paper will be a valuable resource for researchers who are interested in conducting a systematic scoping or mapping review. By providing clear guidance and practical examples, the paper aims to promote best practices in systematic scoping and mapping review methodology. The study is organized as follows: The following section presents the methodology of the study, followed by the results showing the process of the scoping and mapping literature review and presenting some examples. Finally, suggestions on how to plan and perform a quality scoping and mapping review are presented.
2 Methodology
The methodology of this paper was adopted by Xiao and Watson [ 4 ].
2.1 Literature search
The search was conducted in two well-known online databases, Web of Science and EBSCOHost, across various disciplines. The searched terms combined keywords related to the performance of scoping and mapping literature review, such as “systematic literature review”, “methodology”, “map”, “mapping” and “scoping”. The title of each manuscript was used to determine its initial relevance. If the content of the title suggested that it would explain the method of the literature review process, we obtained the full reference, which included the author, year, title, and abstract, for additional analysis.
2.2 Initial search results
The query string used for the database search is the following: systematic literature review AND methodology AND (“map” OR “mapping” OR “scoping”). Abstract search was conducted in both databases for the last 10 years (2013–2022). A search on EBSCOHost revealed 643 results of which 291 were duplicated and automatically removed. After applying the database filters to limit the articles to peer-reviewed academic journal articles written in English, a number of 102 papers were excluded. Additional 109 papers were duplicated and removed manually. After an initial screening of the titles, a total of 13 studies were identified as relevant to the methodology of the scoping and mapping literature review. A search on Web of Science, revealed 888 results of which 9 were duplicate and removed, and 157 were found to be related to the methodology of scoping or mapping literature reviews after the first title screening. Last search was conducted on the 2nd of November 2022. Both sources revealed 161 related studies, excluding 9 duplicates that were removed.
2.3 Inclusion and exclusion criteria
Only studies that provide instructions on how to perform a scoping or mapping review were included in this paper. Reviews of the literature on certain subjects and in languages other than English were excluded. The study is limited to papers published within the last 10 years, aiming to collect recent information for performing scoping or mapping reviews. Inclusion and exclusion criteria can be found in Table 1 .
2.4 Screening
To further assess the 161 studies’ applicability to the study topic, their abstracts were reviewed. The manuscripts were evaluated independently and in parallel by two researchers. The researchers’ differing opinions were discussed and settled. Then the full-text of a total of 20 studies was acquired for quality evaluation.
2.5 Eligibility and quality evaluation
To further assess the quality and relevance of the studies, the full-text papers were reviewed. Journal articles and books published by prominent publishers were included in the review as they contained high-quality research. Because there is no peer review procedure, the majority of technical reports and online presentations were excluded.
Two researchers worked independently and simultaneously on evaluating eligibility and quality. Any disagreements between them were discussed and resolved. A total of ten (10) studies were excluded after careful review: one study was excluded because it lacked instructions on how the scoping or mapping review methodology was conducted, three studies were excluded because the methodology was not related to scoping or mapping review, while five studies were disregarded because they focused on a particular subject. One of the studies’ full text couldn’t be accessed. This resulted in ten (10) eligible for full-text analysis.
2.6 Iterations
Through backward and forward searching, additional 18 studies were discovered, from which only 10 met the inclusion criteria. The forward and backward search was also used to find manuscripts that applied scoping or mapping literature review methodology. After finding the article that established the scoping or mapping review methodology, articles that had cited the methodology paper to find instances of best practices in different fields were searched. Following consideration of examples’ adherence to the methodology, preference was given to planning-related articles. In total, 90 studies were analyzed in this study, i.e. 10 methodological papers that describe the application of scoping or mapping review, as well as 80 papers that demonstrate the application of the scoping and mapping methodology in different fields, that are used as examples. The PRISMA flow diagram (see Fig. 1 ) depicts the process of the search strategy [ 5 ].
![example of a literature review matrix figure 1](https://media.springernature.com/lw685/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1007%2Fs10209-024-01120-3/MediaObjects/10209_2024_1120_Fig1_HTML.png)
PRISMA flow diagram
2.7 Extraction and analysis of data
Data were extracted in the process of scoping literature reviews, including information with regards to formulating the problem, establishing and validating the review procedure, searching the literature, screening for inclusion, evaluating quality, extracting data, analyzing and synthesizing data, and reporting the findings (Xiao & Watson, 2019). NVivo software was used for all data extraction and coding procedures. Initially, two researchers each took information from articles for cross-checking. The two researchers reached an agreement on what to extract from the publications after reviewing a few articles together. Then the first author classified the data based on the research questions.
In this section we present the findings of our review.
3.1 Defining “Scoping” and “mapping” review
According to [ 2 ], scoping and mapping reviews are variations of systematic literature mapping that focus on narrower but more general academic or policy issues. A scoping review is exploratory in nature, seeking to identify the nature and extent of research on a particular topic, and can be used to identify gaps in the literature. An example of a research question suitable for a scoping review is “What engagement strategies do educators use in classroom settings to facilitate teaching and learning of diverse students in undergraduate nursing programs?“ [ 6 ]. A mapping review, on the other hand, is a thorough and systematic search of a wide field of literature that aims to identify the body of literature currently available on a subject and point out any glaring gaps in the evidence. An example of a research question suitable for a mapping review is “What are the currently available animal models for cystic fibrosis” [ 3 ]. Overall, each type of review has its own specific aims and can be useful for different types of research questions.
3.1.1 Defining scoping review
There is no single definition for scoping reviews in the literature. According to [ 7 ], scoping review is a type of knowledge synthesis that uses a systematic process to map the evidence on a subject and identify key ideas, theories, sources, and knowledge gaps. The goal of a scoping review is to include all relevant information that is available, including ‘grey’ literature, which includes unpublished research findings, therefore including all available literature and evidence, but the reviewers can decide what type of publications they would like to include [ 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 ].
Scoping review process is sometimes used as a preliminary step before a systematic literature review, in cases where the topic or research area in focus has not yet been extensively reviewed or is complicated or heterogeneous in nature and the types of evidence available remain unclear [ 3 ]. For example, while a scoping review might serve as the foundation for a full systematic review, it does not aim to evaluate the quality of the evidence like systematic reviews do [ 8 ]. Moreover, scoping review is also referred to as a “pilot study” [ 12 ], that can be used as a “trial run” of the entire systematic map; it helps to mold the intended approach for the review and inform the protocol development.
Rapid and scoping meta-reviews were also referred as types of scoping reviews. A “rapid review” is a particular kind of scoping review, which aims to provide an answer to a particular query and can shorten the process compared to a full systematic review [ 3 ]. The “scoping meta-review” (SMR) is a scoping evaluation of systematic reviews that offers researchers a flexible framework for field mapping and a way to condense pertinent research activities and findings, similar to a scoping review [ 13 ].
Almost all of the scoping studies identified in the corpus, draw from previews scoping review frameworks, such as the one proposed by [ 14 , 15 ] and the authors’ manual provided by the Joanna Briggs Institute [ 11 , 16 , 17 , 18 ].
3.1.2 Defining mapping review
A mapping review, also referred to as a “systematic map”, is “a high-level review with a broad research question” [ 3 ](p.133). The mapping review includes a thorough, systematic search of a wide field. It identifies the body of literature that is currently available on a subject and points out any gaps in the evidence. The mapping review can be conclusive in describing the available evidence and identifying gaps, whereas the scoping review is exploratory in nature [ 3 ].
The term “mapping” is used to describe the process of synthesizing and representing the literature numerically and thematically in tables, figures, or graphical representations, which can be thought of as the review output. Mapping enables researchers to pinpoint potential areas for further study as well as gaps in the literature [ 19 ].
Systematic mapping uses the same strict procedures as systematic reviews do. However, systematic mapping can be used to address open or closed-framed questions on broad or specific topics, because it is not constrained by the requirement to include fully specified and defined key elements [ 12 ]. Systematic mapping is especially useful for broad, multifaceted questions about an interesting topic that might not be appropriate for systematic review because they involve a variety of interventions, populations, or outcomes, or because they draw on evidence that is not just from primary research [ 12 ].
3.2 Process of conducting mapping and scoping reviews
As noted in the previous sections, mapping reviews and scoping reviews both aim to provide a broad overview of the literature, but the former focuses on the scope of the literature while the latter focuses on the nature and extent of available evidence on a specific research question or topic. In understanding the process for conducting mapping and scoping reviews, we adopted the eight steps proposed by Xiao and Watson [ 4 ] that are common for all types of reviews: (1) Formulate the problem; (2) Establishing and validating the review procedure; (3) Searching the literature; (4) Screening for inclusion; (5) Evaluating quality; (6) Extracting data; (7) Analyzing and synthesizing data; (8) Reporting the findings. The steps are explained in detail below and describe the methodology for both scoping and mapping reviews, distinguishing their differences where applicable. A summary of the review types along with their characteristics and steps as identified from the literature are presented in Table 2 .
3.2.1 Step 1 formulate the problem
The first step for undertaking a mapping or a scoping review is to formulate the problem by setting the research question that should be investigated, taking into account the topic’s scope [ 12 ]. It is important to clearly state the review objectives and specific review questions for the scoping review. The objectives should indicate what the scoping review is trying to achieve [ 10 , 20 ].
In mapping reviews, it can be helpful to create a conceptual framework or model (visual or textual) to describe what will be explored by the map when determining the mapping review’s scope. It should also be determined whether the topic’s scope is broad, specific, or likely to be supported by a substantial body of evidence [ 12 ].
3.2.1.1 Defining the research question(s)
Prior to beginning their search and paper selection process, the authors should typically define their research question(s) [ 3 ]. There are specific formats that are recommended for structuring the research question(s), as well as the exclusion and inclusion criteria of mapping and scoping reviews [ 21 ] (see Table 3 ).
PCC (Population, Concept, and Context) and PICO format (Population, Intervention, Comparator and Outcome) are often used in scoping and mapping reviews. It is recommended that research questions for scoping reviews follow the PCC format and include all of its components [ 17 , 18 , 21 ]. Information about the participants (e.g. age), the principal idea or “concept,” and the setting of the review, should all be included in the research question. The context should be made explicit and may take into account geographical or locational considerations, cultural considerations, and particular racial or gender-based concerns [ 10 ].
Researchers use the PCC format in order to determine the eligibility of their research questions, as well as to define their inclusion criteria (e.g [ 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 ]). Most scoping reviews have a single main question, but some of them are better served by one or more sub-questions that focus on specific PCC characteristics [ 8 , 18 ].
3.2.2 Step 2. Establishing and validating the review procedure
A protocol is crucial for scoping and mapping reviews because it pre-defines the scoping review’s goals and procedures [ 11 , 17 , 18 , 20 ], it clearly states all methodological decisions since the very beginning [ 2 ], and it also specifies the strategy to be used at each stage of the review process [ 12 ]. Similar to all systematic reviews, scoping reviews start with the creation of an a-priori protocol that includes inclusion and exclusion criteria that are directly related to the review’s objectives and questions [ 7 , 11 , 17 , 18 , 20 ]. In order to decrease study duplication and improve data reporting transparency, the use of formalized, registered protocols is suggested [ 18 , 19 ]. The international prospective register of systematic reviews, known as PROSPERO, states that scoping reviews (and literature reviews) are currently ineligible for registration in the database. While this could change in the future, scoping reviews can currently be registered with the Open Science Framework ( https://osf.io/ ) or Figshare ( https://figshare.com/ ), and their protocols can be published in select publications, including the JBI Evidence Synthesis [ 18 ].
Scoping and mapping reviews should require at least two reviewers in order to minimize reporting bias, as well as to ensure consistency and clarity [ 3 , 16 , 17 , 18 ]. The reviewers should include a plan for the results presentation during the protocol development, such as a draft chart or table that could be improved at the end when the reviewers become more familiar with the information they have included in the review [ 17 , 18 ].
3.2.3 Step 3. Searching the literature
Searching the literature requires to prepare a search strategy, decide on search terms, search databases or journals, and perform a manual search [ 27 ]. For example, deciding on search terms, can follow an iterative process that is further explained in the sub-section below. Thinking about searching in terms of broader to narrower strategies is helpful. Fewer databases and/or journals will be checked out in narrower searches (search only in the title, keywords, and abstract fields), which are frequently used in scoping reviews, while multiple databases can be checked for mapping reviews [ 2 ].
Search strategy
Mapping and scoping review search should aim to be as thorough as possible [ 12 ] to find both published and unpublished evidence. An inclusive approach is frequently preferred for scoping reviews to prevent potential omission of crucial information [ 10 , 17 , 18 ].
According to JBI, there should be a three-step search process for scoping reviews [ 10 , 17 , 18 ]. The first step is a quick search of at least two databases followed by a text word check of the article’s title, abstract, and body of text that are then analyzed. All determined index terms and keywords are used in the second stage across all included databases. In the third stage, additional studies should be looked up in the identified reports and articles’ reference lists [ 10 , 11 , 18 ]. The reviewers may look solely at the reference lists of the studies that were chosen from the full-text and/or included in the review, or they may look at the reference lists of all identified studies. In any case, it needs to be made very clear which group of studies will be looked at [ 8 , 11 , 18 ]. As reviewers gain more familiarity with the body of available evidence, new keywords, sources, and possibly helpful search terms may be found and incorporated into the search strategy, hence the search for a scoping review may be quite iterative. If so, it is crucial that the entire search process and the outcomes are open to scrutiny and audit [ 11 , 18 ].
In the same line, it is recommended for mapping reviews to search multiple databases [ 2 ] in all pertinent searchable fields (e.g., title, abstract, keywords, etc.) [ 3 ]. Thematic keywords, along with all of their synonyms and regional/temporal variations, are joined together to form Boolean strings using Boolean signs. Building looser, multiple Boolean strings instead of well-targeted ones (for example, using OR instead of AND, NOT, and exact phrases, respectively) is preferable. The latter runs the risk of omitting crucial references, whereas the former may return a sizable sample of sparsely relevant references [ 2 ]. Focusing the search on a specific component and then filtering all the results can be more effective for mapping reviews [ 3 ].
3.2.4 Step 4. Screening for inclusion
Screening and choosing the studies to be included in a review are the main objectives of this phase. According to [ 27 ], there are two levels of screening. Titles and abstracts are scanned in the first level to limit the range of the studies to be included, while full texts are scanned in the second level to re-examine the relevance of the studies and to settle disagreements between reviewers regarding the study selection. Discussions, meetings, consulting a third reviewer, and determining inter-rater reliability/agreement (using Cohen’s kappa coefficient or intraclass correlation coefficient) are the most typical ways to resolve disagreements. Soaita et al. (2020) [ 2 ] also support that the sample of retrieved references should be ‘cleaned-up’ once it has been finalized and duplicates have been automatically removed.
Different methodological approaches, including primary research articles, summary articles, opinion pieces, and grey literature, can all be included in the literature that scoping reviews identify and analyze [ 7 , 18 , 19 ], but they may also serve as an exclusion criterion [ 2 ]. Peters, Godfrey, et al. (2020) [ 18 ] advice against limiting source inclusion based on language unless there are compelling justifications for doing so (such as practical considerations).
According to the PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR), a description of the study selection process must be provided in both a narrative and flow diagram format. Including the date of the most recent literature search, enables the reader to assess how current the scoping review is [ 7 ].
3.2.4.1 Inclusion and exclusion criteria
Inclusion criteria offer a framework on which the reviewers can decide which sources to include in the scoping review. To ensure transparency and replicability, the exclusion and inclusion criteria need to be documented [ 7 , 8 , 10 , 11 , 17 ]. Authors should specify any limitations by year, language, publication status, or other factors, and explain why each one was put in place [ 7 ].
When it comes to mapping reviews, criteria should be created whenever possible with participation from stakeholders. Depending on the type of research questions, stakeholders may include practitioners, designers, policy makers, scientists and research funding bodies, but attention should be paid to avoid bias [ 12 ].
3.2.5 Step 5. Evaluating quality
Scoping and mapping reviews are not concerned with quality assessment as a criterion for inclusion [ 2 ]. Assessments of reporting quality and bias risk are typically outside the scope. Although it is possible to extract study characteristics that reflect study and reporting quality, bias cannot be assessed against a specific hypothesis if a mapping review is exploratory [ 3 ].
3.2.6 Step 6. Extracting data
The process of data extraction for a scoping review is also known as “charting the results”. A draft charting table or form needs to be created to capture the key details about the relevance of the included studies to the review question, as well as the characteristics of the included studies. The data extraction process can be iterative, with the charting table being constantly updated.
The reviewers should become familiar with the source results and test the extraction form on two or three studies to ensure that all relevant results are extracted [ 7 , 8 , 10 , 11 , 17 , 18 , 28 ]. In order to increase reporting transparency, authors should explain the main revisions with a justification if the charting process was iterative (i.e., the form was continuously updated). If appropriate, details about the procedures used to collect and verify information from the researchers of the included sources of evidence should be provided [ 7 ]. Author(s), year of publication, source origin, country of origin, objectives, purpose, study population, sample size, methodology, intervention type and comparator, concept, duration of the intervention, how outcomes are measured, and key findings that are related to the review question are all types of information that may be extracted [ 7 , 8 , 10 , 11 , 17 ].
When it comes to data extraction for mapping reviews, it is restricted to important study characteristics and outcomes due to the size of a mapping review [ 3 ]. The process of mapping is intended to produce a practical and organized resource that provides enough detail about studies to be helpful in further work [ 12 ].
To move beyond a straightforward list of citations, it is crucial to maintain a high level of clarity throughout any databases that are created. Studies that are discussed in several papers or that seem to be connected should be marked in the database. In the future, this helps prevent the double counting of research findings in syntheses that might overlook connections between study lines in the databases [ 12 ].
Aiming to capture the key characteristics of the included studies in the scoping and mapping reviews, we suggest the use of a guiding table for extracting data (see Supplementary_Material_1_Guiding_Table).
3.2.7 Step 7. Analyzing and synthesizing data
Authors may extract results and map descriptively. Simple frequency counts of concepts, populations, characteristics, or other fields of data will suffice for many scoping reviews [ 17 , 18 ]. In-depth analysis of quantitative data is not typically required in scoping reviews, although in some cases the authors may take into consideration a more advanced analysis depending on the nature and purpose of their review. A meta-analysis or interpretive qualitative analysis is probably not necessary in scoping reviews [ 17 , 18 ].
When it comes to mapping reviews, no results synthesis is carried out [ 12 ]. Different analytical approaches can be used to map chronological, geographical, conceptual, and thematic trends, which include some form of coding, once the sample has been limited to the pertinent references [ 2 ]. It is possible to identify correlations, trends, gaps, and clusters using simple numerical accounts of frequencies in each category (for example, the number of studies looking at a specific species) and more complex cross-tabulations (for instance, the number of studies looking at the effectiveness of a specific intervention, in a particular farming system, for a named species). Users have access to the map and can query it to find information pertaining to any chosen combinations of the subsets of the meta-data [ 12 ].
3.2.8 Step 8. Reporting the findings
Authors should specify exactly how the evidence will be presented, whether it be in a narrative format, table, or visual representation, such as a map or diagram [ 7 ].
In scoping reviews, a summary of all the relevant information gathered can be presented [ 8 ] using a logical and descriptive summary of the findings based on the research questions [ 10 , 11 , 17 ]. The distribution of studies by year or period of publication, countries of origin, field of intervention, and research methodologies, may be displayed in the tables and charts accompanied with a narrative summary that explains how the results relate to the review’s objectives [ 7 , 11 , 17 , 18 ].
The conclusions should be consistent with the review objective or question based on the findings of the scoping review [ 10 ]. Following the conclusions, specific recommendations for future research based on gaps in knowledge identified by the review results can be presented. Because of the lack of a methodological quality appraisal, recommendations for practice may be unable to be developed; however, suggestions based on the conclusions may be made [ 10 ].
A scoping review’s results section should include a PRISMA flow diagram and details the outcomes of the search strategy and selection procedure [ 7 , 17 ] outlining the grounds for exclusion at the full-text level of screening [ 7 ]. For example, a study [ 29 ] used the PRISMA-ScR extension for scoping reviews to ensure all important sections have been covered in their review.
Mapping reviews may place more emphasis on describing the evidence. The use of pivot tables and pivot charts is helpful for quickly visualizing the amount (and quality, if it is measured) of evidence across a variety of meta-data variables [ 12 ]. Such visualizations can display the quantity of research, the conclusions of a critical appraisal, the sample size across nations, outcomes, populations, or variables. These visualizations can contain categorical variables as additional dimensions. The geographic distribution of study effort and type may be particularly important in mapping reviews with a global or large-scale reach [ 12 ].
4 Discussion
This systematic literature review aimed to describe the process of conducting mapping and scoping literature reviews. In summary, the main difference between the two types of reviews is in their focus and scope. Mapping reviews provide a comprehensive overview of the literature while scoping reviews identify gaps and inconsistencies in the literature and outline potential areas for future research.
A lot of the methodological papers included in this systematic literature review (e.g [ 10 , 19 , 28 ]), referred to the “consultation process” as an additional, optional step that has been suggested by [ 14 ]. In this stage, subject experts or potential review users like practitioners, consumers, and policymakers may be consulted [ 8 ]. Researchers argue that this step should be mandatory [ 15 , 28 ]. In agreement with Levac et al.’s [ 15 ] choice, Daudt et al. [ 28 ] encourage the use of the consultation stage whenever it is practical because it adds richness to the entire research process and, consequently, the findings. Despite the fact that stakeholder consultations can make scoping review planning and execution more difficult, they guarantee that the findings are pertinent to educational practice and/or policies [ 19 ].
Scoping and mapping reviews should require more than one author to eliminate bias and ensure their quality. The card-sorting technique is suggested to be employed within the review process as a means for resolving discrepancies between the stakeholders and come to an agreement on the categorization and evaluation of the data to be included. Other studies (e.g [ 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 ]), propose the card-sorting technique as a method for resolving disagreements between people’s disparities, as well as to evaluate and verify extracted themes from datasets. Card sorting is a quick and reliable sorting method that finds patterns in how users would expect to find content or functionality. Due to the patterns and insights it exposes about how people organize and categorize content, card sorting is a successful approach for resolving categorization disagreements [ 34 ]. According to Wood and Wood [ 35 ], the majority of card sorting projects involve an open sort, where participants receive a list of items and are asked to organize them in the most appropriate way. However, in some cases, a pre-existing set of categories is given to the participants, the so-called closed card sorting project. This assumes that the existing categories are already well-organized, and the goal is to make minor adjustments. Wood and Wood [ 35 ], suggest that it’s best to start with an open sort and analyze the data before conducting a closed sort for validation. If a closed sort is necessary, it should be kept simple, and the results may not be optimal. For example, in a study [ 30 ] that aimed to review the use of makerspaces for educational purposes, the card sorting technique was used for the development of the coding scheme. A three-member academic committee, consisting of three professors took part in the card sorting exercise where they went through the abstracts of the relevant papers and were asked to categorize each manuscript after discussion. They then categorized the manuscripts in the three major themes and 11 subcategories that emerged during the card sorting exercise [ 30 ]. Similarly, the authors of [ 31 ] employed the card sorting technique in their research in order to agree on the main categorization and sub-categorization of the articles identified for inclusion in their review. Card sorting can be integrated as an additional step when conducting scoping and mapping reviews, as it provides useful insights from the experts’ perspective and makes the mapping process more inclusive (see Fig. 2 ).
![example of a literature review matrix figure 2](https://media.springernature.com/lw685/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1007%2Fs10209-024-01120-3/MediaObjects/10209_2024_1120_Fig2_HTML.png)
Proposed steps for conducting scoping and mapping reviews
5 Conclusion
Scoping and mapping reviews need a methodological framework that is rigorous, consistent, and transparent, so that the results can be trusted and the review replicated. This provides enough information for the readers to evaluate the review’s accuracy, relevance, and thoroughness [ 8 ]. Scoping reviews should be carried out in accordance with established methodological guidance and reported using reporting standards (like PRISMA-ScR) guidelines [ 36 ]. The proposed steps for undertaking scoping and mapping reviews presented in this manuscript, highlight the importance of following a rigorous approach for conducting scoping or mapping reviews. Overall, this paper is a valuable resource for researchers who are interested in conducting a systematic scoping or mapping review in different fields and are looking to apply these review methods to their own research questions.
5.1 Limitations and future work
This study does not lack limitations. As specific keywords and specific databases were searched, not all relevant work is included. The study was also limited to the past 10 years, letting out methodologies and frameworks for scoping and mapping literature reviews that were not published within the specific timeframe. The fact that the number of methodological papers identified for inclusion are limited to ten, makes it difficult to clarify the differences between mapping and scoping reviews. Therefore, further research is encouraged in order to clarify and verify the differences and similarities between the two. The application of the proposed process for conducting systematic scoping and mapping reviews on specific topics will verify the process.
Data availability
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, [EC], upon reasonable request.
Kitchenham, B., Charters, S.: Guidelines for performing Systematic Literature Reviews in Software Engineering, (2007). https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2016.2603219
Soaita, A.M., Serin, B., Preece, J.: A methodological quest for systematic literature mapping. Int. J. Hous. Policy. 20 , 320–343 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1080/19491247.2019.1649040
Article Google Scholar
Leenaars, C., Tsaioun, K., Stafleu, F., Rooney, K., Meijboom, F., Ritskes-Hoitinga, M., Bleich, A.: Reviewing the animal literature: How to describe and choose between different types of literature reviews. Lab. Anim. 55 , 129–141 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1177/0023677220968599
Xiao, Y., Watson, M.: Guidance on conducting a systematic literature review. J. Plan. Educ. Res. 39 , 93–112 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X17723971
Haddaway, N.R., Page, M.J., Pritchard, C.C., McGuinness, L.A.: PRISMA: An R package and Shiny app for producing PRISMA 2020-compliant flow diagrams, with interactivity for optimised digital transparency and Open Synthesis, Campbell Syst. Rev. 18 (2022). (2020). https://doi.org/10.1002/CL2.1230
Iduye, D., Vukic, A., Waldron, I., Price, S., Sheffer, C., McKibbon, S., Dorey, R., Yu, Z.: Educators’ strategies for engaging diverse students in undergraduate nursing education programs: A scoping review protocol. JBI Evid. Synth. 19 , 1178–1185 (2021). https://doi.org/10.11124/JBIES-20-00039
Tricco, A.C., Lillie, E., Zarin, W., O’Brien, K.K., Colquhoun, H., Levac, D., Moher, D., Peters, M.D.J., Horsley, T., Weeks, L., Hempel, S., Akl, E.A., Chang, C., McGowan, J., Stewart, L., Hartling, L., Aldcroft, A., Wilson, M.G., Garritty, C., Lewin, S., Godfrey, C.M., MacDonald, M.T., Langlois, E.V., Soares-Weiser, K., Moriarty, J., Clifford, T., Tunçalp, Ö., Straus, S.E.: PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and explanation. Ann. Intern. Med. 169 , 467–473 (2018). https://doi.org/10.7326/M18-0850/SUPPL_FILE/M18-0850_SUPPLEMENT.PDF
McKinstry, C., Brown, T., Gustafsson, L.: Scoping reviews in occupational therapy: The what, why, and how to. Aust Occup. Ther. J. 61 , 58–66 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1111/1440-1630.12080 WE - Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED)
Peterson, J., Pearce, P.F., Ferguson, L.A., Langford, C.A.: Understanding scoping reviews: Definition, purpose, and process. J. Am. Assoc. Nurse Pract. 29 , 12–16 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1002/2327-6924.12380
Khalil, H., Peters, M., Godfrey, C.M., McInerney, P., Soares, C.B., Parker, D.: An evidence-based Approach to Scoping Reviews. Worldviews Evidence-Based Nurs. 13 , 118–123 (2016)
Peters, M.D.J., Godfrey, C., McInerney, P., Munn, Z., Trico, A., Khalil, H.: Chap. 11: Scoping reviews, in: JBI Man. Evid. Synth. JBI. (2017). https://doi.org/10.46658/JBIMES-20-12
James, K.L., Randall, N.P., Haddaway, N.R.: A methodology for systematic mapping in environmental sciences. Environ. Evid. 5 , 1–13 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13750-016-0059-6
Sarrami-Foroushani, P., Travaglia, J., Debono, D., Clay-Williams, R., Braithwaite, J.: Scoping Meta-review: Introducing a New Methodology. Clin. Transl Sci. 8 , 77–81 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1111/CTS.12188
Arksey, H., O’malley, L.: Scoping studies: Towards a methodological framework. Int. J. Soc. Res. Methodol. 8 , 19–32 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1080/1364557032000119616
Levac, D., Colquhoun, H., O’Brien, K.K.: Scoping studies: Advancing the methodology. Implement. Sci. 5 , 1–9 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511814563.003
Peters, M., Godfrey, C., McInerney, P., Soares, C., Parker, K.H.D.: Chap. 11: Scoping reviews. In: Aromataris, E., Munn, Z. (eds.) JBI Rev. Man. JBI, Adelaide (2015)
Google Scholar
Peters, M.D.J., Marnie, C., Tricco, A.C., Pollock, D., Munn, Z., Alexander, L., McInerney, P., Godfrey, C.M., Khalil, H.: Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews. JBI Evid. Synth. 18 , 2119–2126 (2020). https://doi.org/10.11124/JBIES-20-00167 WE - Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI)
Peters, M.D.J., Godfrey, C., McInerney, P., Munn, Z., Trico, A., Khalil, H.: Chap. 11: Scoping Reviews, JBI Man. Evid. Synth. (2020). https://doi.org/10.46658/JBIMES-20-12
Thomas, A., Lubarsky, S., Durning, S.J., Young, M.E.: Knowledge syntheses in medical education: Demystifying scoping reviews. Acad. Med. 92 , 161–166 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000001452
Peters, M.D.J., Godfrey, C.M., Khalil, H., McInerney, P., Parker, D., Soares, C.B.: Guidance for conducting systematic scoping reviews. Int. J. Evid. Based Healthc. 13 , 141–146 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1097/XEB.0000000000000050
Sager, M., Pistone, I.: Mismatches in the production of a scoping review: Highlighting the interplay of (in)formalities. J. Eval Clin. Pract. 25 , 930–937 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1111/jep.13251
Balsiger, F., Wagner, B., Jende, J.M.E., Marty, B., Bendszus, M., Scheidegger, O., Kurz, F.T.: Methodologies and MR parameters in quantitative magnetic resonance neurography: A scoping review protocol. METHODS Protoc. 5 (2022). https://doi.org/10.3390/mps5030039 WE - Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI)
Kesztyus, D., Brucher, S., Kesztyus, T.: Use of infrared thermography in medical diagnostics: A scoping review protocol. BMJ Open. 12 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-059833 WE - Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED)
Olaniyi, A.A., Ncama, B.P., Amod, H.: Mapping evidence of neonatal resuscitation training on the practices of Unskilled Birth attendants in Low-Resource Countries: Protocol for a scoping review. JMIR Res. Protoc. 10 (2021). https://doi.org/10.2196/18935 WE - Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI)
Rosca, E.C., Tudor, R., Cornea, A., Simu, M.: Parkinson’s Disease in Romania: A scoping review protocol. BRAIN Sci. 11 (2021). https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci11020251 WE - Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED)
Walker, K., Asoodar, M., Rudolph, J., Meguerdichian, M., Yusaf, T., Campbell-Taylor, K., van Merrienboer, J.: Optimising expert dyad performance in acute care settings: A scoping review protocol. BMJ Open. 11 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-047260 WE - Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED)
Chong, S.W., Lin, T.J., Chen, Y.: A methodological review of systematic literature reviews in higher education: Heterogeneity and homogeneity. Educ. Res. Rev. 35 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2021.100426
Daudt, H.M.L., Van Mossel, C., Scott, S.J.: Enhancing the scoping study methodology: A large, inter-professional team’s experience with Arksey and O’Malley’s framework. BMC Med. Res. Methodol. 13 , 1–9 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-13-48
Qiu, Y.J., Osadnik, C.R., Team, V., Weller, C.D.: Physical activity as an Adjunct to Compression Therapy on Healing outcomes and recurrence in patients with venous Leg ulcers: A scoping review protocol. Front. Med. 8 (2021). https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2021.614059 WE - Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED)
Konstantinou, D., Parmaxi, A., Zaphiris, P.: Mapping research directions on makerspaces in education, EMI. Educ. Media Int. 58 , 223–247 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1080/09523987.2021.1976826
Pallaris, G., Zaphiris, P., Parmaxi, A.: Mapping the landscape of Makerspaces in higher education: An inventory of research findings. Interact. Technol. Smart Educ. (2022). https://doi.org/10.1108/ITSE-01-2022-0013
Parmaxi, A., Zaphiris, P., Papadima-Sophocleous, S., Ioannou, A.: Mapping the landscape of computer-assisted language learning: An inventory of research. Interact. Technol. Smart Educ. 10 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1108/ITSE-02-2013-0004
Parmaxi, A., Zaphiris, P.: Computer-mediated communication in computer-assisted language learning: Implications for culture-centered design. Univers. Access. Inf. Soc. 15 , 169–177 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/S10209-015-0405-4/TABLES/3
Morville, P., Rosenfeld, L.: Information architecture for the World Wide Web: Designing large-scale web sites, (2006). https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=2d2Ry2hZc2MC&oi=fnd&pg=PR5&dq=Morville+%26+Rosenfeld,+2007&ots=opbfyu0ODb&sig=cAyUSw0mmdVRYf5ARSNp6DaYYLA (accessed January 17, 2024)
Wood, J.R., Wood, L.E.: Card sorting: Current practices and beyond. J. Usability Stud. 4 , 1–6 (2008). http://usabilityprofessionals.org/upa_publications/jus/2008november/JUS_Wood_Nov2008.pdf
Munn, Z., Pollock, D., Khalil, H., Alexander, L., Mclnerney, P., Godfrey, C.M., Peters, M., Tricco, A.C.: What are scoping reviews? Providing a formal definition of scoping reviews as a type of evidence synthesis. JBI Evid. Synth. 20 , 950–952 (2022). https://doi.org/10.11124/JBIES-21-00483 WE - Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI)
Download references
Acknowledgements
This work has been supported through funding from the Cyprus University of Technology.
Open access funding provided by the Cyprus Libraries Consortium (CLC).
Author information
Authors and affiliations.
Cyprus University of Technology, Limassol, Cyprus
Eirini Christou, Antigoni Parmaxi & Panayiotis Zaphiris
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Contributions
E.C. and A.P. wrote the main manuscript text. All authors contributed and agreed on the methodology to be followed. A.P. and E.C. screened and decided on the papers to be included in the study. All authors reviewed the manuscript.
Corresponding author
Correspondence to Eirini Christou .
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.
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Supplementary Material 1
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
Christou, E., Parmaxi, A. & Zaphiris, P. A systematic exploration of scoping and mapping literature reviews. Univ Access Inf Soc (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-024-01120-3
Download citation
Accepted : 15 May 2024
Published : 23 May 2024
DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-024-01120-3
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
- Scoping review
- Mapping review
- Review methodology
- Systematic literature mapping
- Card sorting
- Find a journal
- Publish with us
- Track your research
![example of a literature review matrix Examples](https://images.examples.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/examples-com-logo-3.webp)
Review of Related Literature (RRL)
Ai generator.
![example of a literature review matrix example of a literature review matrix](https://images.examples.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/Review-of-Related-Literature-RRL.png)
The Review of Related Literature (RRL) is a crucial section in research that examines existing studies and publications related to a specific topic. It summarizes and synthesizes previous findings, identifies gaps, and provides context for the current research. RRL ensures the research is grounded in established knowledge, guiding the direction and focus of new studies.
What Is Review of Related Literature (RRL)?
The Review of Related Literature (RRL) is a detailed analysis of existing research relevant to a specific topic. It evaluates, synthesizes, and summarizes previous studies to identify trends, gaps, and conflicts in the literature. RRL provides a foundation for new research, ensuring it builds on established knowledge and addresses existing gaps.
Format of Review of Related Literature (RRL)
The Review of Related Literature (RRL) is a critical part of any research paper or thesis . It provides an overview of existing research on your topic and helps to establish the context for your study. Here is a typical format for an RRL:
1. Introduction
- Purpose : Explain the purpose of the review and its importance to your research.
- Scope : Define the scope of the literature reviewed, including the time frame, types of sources, and key themes.
2. Theoretical Framework
- Concepts and Theories : Present the main theories and concepts that underpin your research.
- Relevance : Explain how these theories relate to your study.
3. Review of Empirical Studies
- Sub-theme 1 : Summarize key studies, including methodologies, findings, and conclusions.
- Sub-theme 2 : Continue summarizing studies, focusing on different aspects or variables.
- Sub-theme 3 : Include any additional relevant studies.
4. Methodological Review
- Approaches : Discuss the various methodologies used in the reviewed studies.
- Strengths and Weaknesses : Highlight the strengths and weaknesses of these methodologies.
- Gaps : Identify gaps in the existing research that your study aims to address.
5. Synthesis and Critique
- Integration : Integrate findings from the reviewed studies to show the current state of knowledge.
- Critique : Critically evaluate the literature, discussing inconsistencies, limitations, and areas for further research.
6. Conclusion
- Summary : Summarize the main findings from the literature review.
- Research Gap : Clearly state the research gap your study will address.
- Contribution : Explain how your study will contribute to the existing body of knowledge.
7. References
- Citation Style : List all the sources cited in your literature review in the appropriate citation style (e.g., APA, MLA, Chicago).
Review of Related Literature (RRL) 1. Introduction This review examines research on social media’s impact on mental health, focusing on anxiety and depression across various demographics over the past ten years. 2. Theoretical Framework Anchored in Social Comparison Theory and Uses and Gratifications Theory, this review explores how individuals’ social media interactions affect their mental health. 3. Review of Empirical Studies Adolescents’ Mental Health Instagram & Body Image : Smith & Johnson (2017) found Instagram use linked to body image issues and lower self-esteem among 500 high school students. Facebook & Anxiety : Brown & Green (2016) showed Facebook use correlated with higher anxiety and depressive symptoms in a longitudinal study of 300 students. Young Adults’ Mental Health Twitter & Stress : Davis & Lee (2018) reported higher stress levels among heavy Twitter users in a survey of 400 university students. LinkedIn & Self-Esteem : Miller & White (2019) found LinkedIn use positively influenced professional self-esteem in 200 young professionals. Adult Mental Health General Social Media Use : Thompson & Evans (2020) found moderate social media use associated with better mental health outcomes, while excessive use correlated with higher anxiety and depression in 1,000 adults. 4. Methodological Review Studies used cross-sectional surveys, longitudinal designs, and mixed methods. Cross-sectional surveys provided large data sets but couldn’t infer causation. Longitudinal studies offered insights into long-term effects but were resource-intensive. Mixed methods enriched data through qualitative insights but required careful integration. 5. Synthesis and Critique The literature shows a complex relationship between social media and mental health, with platform-specific and demographic-specific effects. However, reliance on self-reported data introduces bias, and many cross-sectional studies limit causal inference. More longitudinal and experimental research is needed. 6. Conclusion Current research offers insights into social media’s mental health impact but leaves gaps, particularly regarding long-term effects and causation. This study aims to address these gaps through comprehensive longitudinal analysis. 7. References Brown, A., & Green, K. (2016). Facebook Use and Anxiety Among High School Students . Psychology in the Schools, 53(3), 257-264. Davis, R., & Lee, S. (2018). Twitter and Psychological Stress: A Study of University Students . Journal of College Student Development, 59(2), 120-135. Miller, P., & White, H. (2019). LinkedIn and Its Effect on Professional Self-Esteem . Journal of Applied Psychology, 104(1), 78-90. Smith, J., & Johnson, L. (2017). The Impact of Instagram on Teen Body Image . Journal of Adolescent Health, 60(5), 555-560. Thompson, M., & Evans, D. (2020). The Relationship Between Social Media Use and Mental Health in Adults . Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 23(4), 201-208.
Review of Related Literature (RRL) Examples
Review of related literature in research, review of related literature in research paper, review of related literature qualitative research.
![example of a literature review matrix Review-of-Related-Literature-RRL-in-Research-Edit-Download-Pdf](https://images.examples.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/Review-of-Related-Literature-RRL-in-Research-Edit-Download-Pdf.png)
Review of Related Literature Quantitative Research
![example of a literature review matrix Review-of-Related-Literature-RRL-in-Quantitative-Research-Edit-Download-Pdf](https://images.examples.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/Review-of-Related-Literature-RRL-in-Quantitative-Research-Edit-Download-Pdf.png)
More Review of Related Literature (RRL) Examples
- Impact of E-learning on Student Performance
- Effectiveness of Mindfulness in Workplace
- Green Building and Energy Efficiency
- Impact of Technology on Healthcare Delivery
- Effects of Nutrition on Cognitive Development in Children
- Impact of Employee Training Programs on Productivity
- Effects of Climate Change on Biodiversity
- Impact of Parental Involvement on Student Achievement
- Effects of Mobile Learning on Student Engagement
- Effects of Urban Green Spaces on Mental Health
Purpose of the Review of Related Literature (RRL)
The Review of Related Literature (RRL) serves several critical purposes in research:
- Establishing Context : It situates your research within the broader field, showing how your study relates to existing work.
- Identifying Gaps : It highlights gaps, inconsistencies, and areas needing further exploration in current knowledge, providing a clear rationale for your study.
- Avoiding Duplication : By reviewing what has already been done, it helps ensure your research is original and not a repetition of existing studies.
- Building on Existing Knowledge : It allows you to build on the findings of previous research, using established theories and methodologies to inform your work.
- Theoretical Foundation : It provides a theoretical basis for your research, grounding it in existing concepts and theories.
- Methodological Insights : It offers insights into the methods and approaches used in similar studies, helping you choose the most appropriate methods for your research.
- Establishing Credibility : It demonstrates your familiarity with the field, showing that you are well-informed and have a solid foundation for your research.
- Supporting Arguments : It provides evidence and support for your research questions, hypotheses, and objectives, strengthening the overall argument of your study.
How to Write Review of Related Literature (RRL)
Writing a Review of Related Literature (RRL) involves several key steps. Here’s a step-by-step guide:
1. Define the Scope and Objectives
- Determine the Scope : Decide on the breadth of the literature you will review, including specific themes, time frame, and types of sources.
- Set Objectives : Clearly define the purpose of the review. What do you aim to achieve? Identify gaps, establish context, or build on existing knowledge.
2. Search for Relevant Literature
- Identify Keywords : Use keywords and phrases related to your research topic.
- Use Databases : Search academic databases like Google Scholar, PubMed, JSTOR, etc., for relevant articles, books, and papers.
- Select Sources : Choose sources that are credible, recent, and relevant to your research.
3. Evaluate and Select the Literature
- Read Abstracts and Summaries : Quickly determine the relevance of each source.
- Assess Quality : Consider the methodology, credibility of the authors, and publication source.
- Select Key Studies : Choose studies that are most relevant to your research questions and objectives.
4. Organize the Literature
- Thematic Organization : Group studies by themes or topics.
- Chronological Organization : Arrange studies in the order they were published to show the development of ideas over time.
- Methodological Organization : Categorize studies by the methods they used.
5. Write the Review
- State the purpose and scope of the review.
- Explain the importance of the topic.
- Theoretical Framework : Present and discuss the main theories and concepts.
- Summarize key studies, including their methodologies, findings, and conclusions.
- Organize by themes or other chosen organizational methods.
- Methodological Review : Discuss the various methodologies used, highlighting their strengths and weaknesses.
- Synthesis and Critique : Integrate findings, critically evaluate the literature, and identify gaps or inconsistencies.
- Summarize the main findings from the literature review.
- Highlight the research gaps your study will address.
- State how your research will contribute to the existing knowledge.
6. Cite the Sources
- Use Appropriate Citation Style : Follow the required citation style (e.g., APA, MLA, Chicago).
- List References : Provide a complete list of all sources cited in your review.
What is an RRL?
An RRL summarizes and synthesizes existing research on a specific topic to identify gaps and guide future studies.
Why is RRL important?
It provides context, highlights gaps, and ensures new research builds on existing knowledge.
How do you write an RRL?
Organize by themes, summarize studies, evaluate methodologies, identify gaps, and conclude with relevance to current research.
What sources are used in RRL?
Peer-reviewed journals, books, conference papers, and credible online resources.
How long should an RRL be?
Length varies; typically 10-20% of the total research paper.
What are common RRL mistakes?
Lack of organization, insufficient synthesis, over-reliance on outdated sources, and failure to identify gaps.
Can an RRL include non-scholarly sources?
Primarily scholarly, but reputable non-scholarly sources can be included for context.
What is the difference between RRL and bibliography?
RRL synthesizes and analyzes the literature, while a bibliography lists sources.
How often should an RRL be updated?
Regularly, especially when new relevant research is published.
Can an RRL influence research direction?
Yes, it identifies gaps and trends that shape the focus and methodology of new research.
![example of a literature review matrix Twitter](https://images.examples.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/icon_5.png)
Text prompt
- Instructive
- Professional
10 Examples of Public speaking
20 Examples of Gas lighting
![](http://academicwritinghelp.pw/777/templates/cheerup1/res/banner1.gif)
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
Literature Review Matrix. As you read and evaluate your literature there are several different ways to organize your research. Courtesy of Dr. Gary Burkholder in the School of Psychology, these sample matrices are one option to help organize your articles. These documents allow you to compile details about your sources, such as the foundational ...
A review matrix can help you more easily spot differences and similarities between journal articles about a research topic. While they may be helpful in any discipline, review matrices are especially helpful for health sciences literature reviews covering the complete scope of a research topic over time.
A synthesis matrix helps you record the main points of each source and document how sources relate to each other. After summarizing and evaluating your sources, arrange them in a matrix or use a citation manager to help you see how they relate to each other and apply to each of your themes or variables. By arranging your sources by theme or ...
One way that seems particularly helpful in organizing literature reviews is the synthesis matrix. The synthesis matrix is a chart that allows a researcher to sort and categorize the different arguments presented on an issue. Across the top of the chart are the spaces to record sources, and along the side of the chart are the spaces to record ...
As defined by Judith Garrard in her handbook entitled Health Sciences Literature Reviews Made Easy: The Matrix Method , a "Review of the literature consists of reading, analyzing, and writing a synthesis of scholarly materials about a specific topic. When reviewing scientific literature, the focus is on the hypotheses, the scientific methods ...
Synthesizing Sources | Examples & Synthesis Matrix. Published on July 4, 2022 by Eoghan Ryan. Revised on May 31, 2023. ... Examples, & Templates A literature review is a survey of scholarly knowledge on a topic. Our guide with examples, video, and templates can help you write yours. 9988.
(for example, sources that discuss the historical background on your topic) Use the worksheet (above) or synthesis matrix (below) to get organized. This work can be messy. Don't worry if you have to go through a few iterations of the worksheet or matrix as you work on your lit review!
A review matrix can help you more easily spot differences and similarities between journal articles about a given research topic. Review matrices are especially helpful for health sciences literature reviews covering the complete scope of a research topic over time. This guide focuses on the review matrix step in the literature review process.
THE BASICS OF A LITERATURE REVIEW A literature review is a presentation of existing scholarship on an issue. ... Create a research matrix like the one below to discern what each of your sources ... Great background and examples of … p. 17, 24, 30-31 Challenges the notion based on … p. 30-32 Source B Disagrees because of … p. 227, 245 ...
Steps to Completing a Literature Review. Find. Conduct searches for relevant information. Evaluate. Critically review your sources. Summarize. Determine the most important and relevant information from each source, theories, findings, etc. Synthesize. Create a synthesis matrix to find connections between resources, and ensure your sources ...
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.
Using a Synthesis Matrix ; 7. Write literature review; Using a Synthesis Matrix. A synthesis matrix visually represents your research by organizing your sources by themes: ... Source #2 : Source #3 : Sample Synthesis Matrix. Example provided by Ashford University Writing Center. << Previous: How to Review the Literature; Next: 7. Write ...
Abstract. This literature review matrix was downloaded from https://waldenu.edu/. I have read and implemented the various categories of the literature into the matrix to assist with research on ...
Once you complete your research, organize your source by date in order to make it easier to see changes in research over time. Every review matrix should have the same first three column headings: (1) authors, title, and journal; (2) publication year; (3) purpose. It may be difficult to determine purpose from just a cursory review of the article.
Review the information in the Resources box to learn about using a synthesis matrix. Create your own literature review synthesis matrix using the Word or Excel files available in the Activity box. Organize and synthesize literature related to your topic using your synthesis matrix;
This is called a review matrix. When you create a review matrix, the first few columns should include (1) the authors, title, journal, (2) publication year, and (3) purpose of the paper. The remaining columns should identify important aspects of each study such as methodology and findings. Click on the image below to view a sample review matrix.
An example of a nursing literature review matrix; Source(citation) Research Question (Purpose) Methods Major findings Notes: Martin, JE et al. (2006) A DNA vaccine for ebola virus is safe and immunogenic in phase I clinical trial. ... Literature Review Examples. Remember, a lit review provides an intelligent overview of the topic. ...
A literature review matrix serves to help you visually organize your thoughts on an article. This is only one option of many that can help you organize your thoughts; you can easily change the first section to reflect your discipline << Previous: Writing a Literature Review;
A literature review matrix is a tool used by researchers to analyze and synthesize information from various sources relevant to their research topic. It typically takes the form of a table or chart, where rows represent different studies or articles, and columns display key information such as research methodologies, findings, and key themes.
Using a matrix enables you to quickly compare and contrast your sources in order to determine the scope of research across time. This will allow you to spot similarities and differences between sources. It is particularly useful in the synthesis and analysis stages of a review (See Module 1 Conducting a Literature Review with the SALSA Framework).
Sample Matrix and Templates. Review Matrix Example-Ebola Vaccine Clinical Studies. This document includes a review matrix of two Ebola vaccine clinical reviews done on humans published by the National Institute of Health. Review Matrix Word Template. A review matrix template in Microsoft Word. Review Matrix Excel Template.
While working on my literature review, I divided my synthesis matrix process into five steps: topic selection, source selection, matrix setup, reading and categorization, and usage of the matrix itself. Step 1: Topic Selection. First, I decided to freewrite some topic ideas, a strategy I got from the Writing Center's Brainstorming handout.
Once you complete your research, organize your source by date in order to make it easier to see changes in research over time. Every review matrix should have the same first three column headings: (1) authors, title, and journal, (2) publication year, and (3) purpose. It may be difficult to determine purpose from just a cursory review of the ...
Looking for a systematic literature review example? This guide covers the format, writing method, and what you need to know to conduct a review. May 7, 2024. A Beginner's Guide To Review Of Related Literature. Understand the importance of a review of related literature. Learn how to conduct thorough research and analysis in your academic writing.
Let's break down the literature review format, your essential guide to properly writing a literature review. Dissecting Literature Review Format . There are 6 main sections to make a note of while writing a literature review. Those are: The Introduction Section; Topic Background; Conceptual Framework; Synthesis and Evaluation in Literature ...
In this section we present the findings of our review. 3.1 Defining "Scoping" and "mapping" review. According to [], scoping and mapping reviews are variations of systematic literature mapping that focus on narrower but more general academic or policy issues.A scoping review is exploratory in nature, seeking to identify the nature and extent of research on a particular topic, and can ...
The Review of Related Literature (RRL) is a crucial section in research that examines existing studies and publications related to a specific topic. It summarizes and synthesizes previous findings, identifies gaps, and provides context for the current research. RRL ensures the research is grounded in established knowledge, guiding the direction and focus of new studies.
An extensive literature review of related studies was conducted to determine the contractor selection criteria to select contractors for building projects. The key contractor selection criteria are then organized. Then, a Delphi method is employed to finalize and categorize contractor selection criteria to select contractors for building projects.
Life in Kowloon Walled City has often inspired the dystopian identity in modern media works.. A dystopia (from Ancient Greek δυσ (dus) 'bad', and τόπος (tópos) 'place'), also called a cacotopia or anti-utopia, is a community or society that is extremely bad or frightening. It is often treated as an antonym of utopia, a term that was coined by Sir Thomas More and figures as the title ...