meaning and significance of literature review

What is Literature Review? Importance, Functions, Process,

• Post last modified: 13 August 2023
• Reading time: 12 mins read
• Post category: Research Methodology

What is Literature Review?

A literature review is a critical and comprehensive analysis of existing research, studies, articles, books, and other relevant sources on a specific topic or subject. It serves as a foundational step in the research process, helping researchers understand the current state of knowledge, identify gaps in the literature, and establish a context for their own study.

Table of Content

• 1 What is Literature Review?
• 2 Importance of a Literature Review
• 3 Functions of a Literature Review
• 4.1 Search the Existing Literature in Your Field of Interest
• 4.2 Review the Literature Obtained
• 4.3 Develop a Theoretical Framework
• 4.4 Write the Literature Review
• 5 How to Write a Literature Review
• 6 Types of Sources for Review

In most research reports or research papers, you will see that literature review is an essential element and it forms the basis for advancing knowledge, facilitates theory development, discovers new research areas and closes old ones. When researchers want to understand the management dilemma, they study various books, articles and all other available sources.

In the research reports, the researchers present a summary of their search, study and evaluation of the literature that is already available related to the research topic. When the researcher presents a summary of their study of present literature in addition to their analysis of how this literature is related to or essential for the current research report; then, this process is known as literature review.

For example, in a research paper titled ‘Attrition Analysis in a Leading Sales Organisation in India’, authored by Mamta Mohapatra (International Management Institute, New Delhi, India), Amisha Gupta (Birlasoft, New Delhi, India) and Nikita Lamba (Genpact, New Delhi, India), literature review is presented as follows:

Organisations and researchers usually conduct literature review in order to establish how their own research fits within the context of existing literature.

Apart from these, some other objectives of carrying out literature review are:

• Develop an understanding of how each source of literature helps in understanding the research problem
• Examine the interrelationships among different variables
• Find out ways to interpret earlier similar researches on the topic under study
• Rectify the conflicts that exist among previously conducted studies
• Get an idea regarding the required sample size
• Get an estimate of how much variance is there in the variables of interest
• Understand the type of relationship that exists among variables
• Determine the research method that can be used in the research

Importance of a Literature Review

There are various reasons for carrying out literature review. Majorly, literature review helps in:

• Assessing the current state and level of research on a given topic
• Identifying experts related to particular research
• Identifying questions that need further research and exploration
• Identifying what methodologies have been used in the related past studies and what methodology should be used in current research
• Justifying a proposed research methodology
• Indicating the originality and relevance of the given research problem
• Demonstrating the preparedness of a researcher to complete the research

Functions of a Literature Review

Some of the major functions of literature review are:

• Establishing a context for the research
• Demonstrating that the researcher has actually read related literature extensively and is aware of most theory and methodology related to the given research topic
• Providing a shape for the research under consideration
• Establishing a connection between what the researcher is proposing and what he has already read
• Demonstrating how the findings of researcher can be integrated with the already existing research findings.
• Revealing the differences or areas of gap between present and earlier research findings
• Improving researcher’s research methodology
• Expanding researcher’s knowledge base
• Ensuring that the researcher is carrying out new research that has not been carried out earlier

Process of a Literature Review

The second step in the research process is to carry out the review of already existing literature. Before engaging in literature review, the researcher must be clear as to what is the area and topic of research. There are four steps involved in the literature review process as shown in Figure:

Search the Existing Literature in Your Field of Interest

In the literature review process, the first step is to find out what research has already been done in the area that the researcher has chosen. This step involves preparing a list or bibliography of existing sources of relevant literature such as books, journals, abstracts of articles on your research topic, citation indices and digital libraries.

Review the Literature Obtained

After the researcher has identified related literature including journals, books, research papers, etc.; the next step is to study, evaluate and analyse the literature critically. This study of literature helps a researcher identify themes and issues related to the research topic.

An evaluation of literature helps in:

• Identifying the different theories and their criticism
• Identifying different methodologies used in different studies including their sample size, data used, measurement methods
• Assessing if the researcher’s theory is confirmed beyond doubt
• Preparing a list of different opinions of different researchers and researcher should also add his/her opinion about the validity of these different opinions

Develop a Theoretical Framework

Since carrying out literature review is a time-consuming activity but the researcher has to do it within a limited time. In order to do so, the researcher usually establishes a boundary and parameters for the research work. Also, the researcher must sort information obtained from all the sources of literature. For a researcher, the theoretical framework acts as a base on which he can further or extend his research. At times, the researchers may modify their research framework after analysing the available literature.

Write the Literature Review

The last step in literature review is to make a summary of all the literature that the researcher has studied and reviewed. Usually, writing a literature review starts with a write-up on the main theme of research followed by the important ideas on which the research would focus. After this, the all the major themes and sub-themes to be discussed are organised and related. This will help the researcher in structuring the literature review. The researcher should also identify and describe the theories and studies that are relevant for the study under consideration. The researcher should then list and describe all the gaps that are present in the current body of knowledge. In addition, the researcher may also explain the recent advances and trends in the given research field. To conclude, the researcher should compare and evaluate his findings on the basis of research assumptions, related research theories, hypotheses, applied research designs, variables selected and potential future work speculated by the researchers. Finally, the researcher must acknowledge, cite and quote all the sources that he/she has used in his research. One specific characteristic of literature review is that the researcher must ensure that he gives due credit to all people who have contributed in the research work.

How to Write a Literature Review

While writing the literature review, the researcher must adopt or adhere to certain strategies as follows:

• Establish a focus around the central theme and ideas of the research
• Describe what a reader can expect from the given research study
• Organise the literature research to include basic elements such as introduction, body and conclusions

Types of Sources for Review

A researcher usually uses secondary data for literature review. Some of the major and widely used sources for literature reviews include articles in professional journals, statistical data from government websites and website material from professional organisations.

Apart from the previously mentioned sources, certain other sources of data can also be used by researchers that provide them first-hand information that is important for the study. These sources include reports, theses, emails, letters, conference proceedings, company reports, autobiographies, official reports, research articles, etc.

Apart from these, the researcher may also refer to other such as review articles, academic journals, books, newspapers, documentaries, encyclopaedias, dictionaries, bibliographies and citation indexes.

Business Ethics

( Click on Topic to Read )

• What is Ethics?
• What is Business Ethics?
• Values, Norms, Beliefs and Standards in Business Ethics
• Indian Ethos in Management
• Ethical Issues in Marketing
• Ethical Issues in HRM
• Ethical Issues in IT
• Ethical Issues in Production and Operations Management
• Ethical Issues in Finance and Accounting
• What is Corporate Governance?
• What is Ownership Concentration?
• What is Ownership Composition?
• Types of Companies in India
• Internal Corporate Governance
• External Corporate Governance
• Corporate Governance in India
• What is Enterprise Risk Management (ERM)?
• What is Assessment of Risk?
• What is Risk Register?
• Risk Management Committee

Corporate social responsibility (CSR)

• Theories of CSR
• Arguments Against CSR
• Business Case for CSR
• Importance of CSR in India
• Drivers of Corporate Social Responsibility
• Developing a CSR Strategy
• Implement CSR Commitments
• CSR Marketplace
• CSR at Workplace
• Environmental CSR
• CSR with Communities and in Supply Chain
• Community Interventions
• CSR Monitoring
• CSR Reporting
• Voluntary Codes in CSR
• What is Corporate Ethics?

Lean Six Sigma

• What is Six Sigma?
• What is Lean Six Sigma?
• Value and Waste in Lean Six Sigma
• Six Sigma Team
• MAIC Six Sigma
• Six Sigma in Supply Chains
• What is Binomial, Poisson, Normal Distribution?
• What is Sigma Level?
• What is DMAIC in Six Sigma?
• What is DMADV in Six Sigma?
• Six Sigma Project Charter
• Project Decomposition in Six Sigma
• Critical to Quality (CTQ) Six Sigma
• Process Mapping Six Sigma
• Flowchart and SIPOC
• Gage Repeatability and Reproducibility
• Statistical Diagram
• Lean Techniques for Optimisation Flow
• Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA)
• What is Process Audits?
• Six Sigma Implementation at Ford
• IBM Uses Six Sigma to Drive Behaviour Change
• Research Methodology
• What is Research?
• What is Hypothesis?

Sampling Method

• Research Methods
• Data Collection in Research
• Methods of Collecting Data
• Application of Business Research
• Levels of Measurement
• What is Sampling?
• Hypothesis Testing
• Research Report
• What is Management?
• Planning in Management
• Decision Making in Management
• What is Controlling?
• What is Coordination?
• What is Staffing?
• Organization Structure
• What is Departmentation?
• Span of Control
• What is Authority?
• Centralization vs Decentralization
• Organizing in Management
• Schools of Management Thought
• Classical Management Approach
• Is Management an Art or Science?
• Who is a Manager?

Operations Research

• What is Operations Research?
• Operation Research Models
• Linear Programming
• Linear Programming Graphic Solution
• Linear Programming Simplex Method
• Linear Programming Artificial Variable Technique
• Duality in Linear Programming
• Transportation Problem Initial Basic Feasible Solution
• Transportation Problem Finding Optimal Solution
• Project Network Analysis with Critical Path Method
• Project Network Analysis Methods
• Project Evaluation and Review Technique (PERT)
• Simulation in Operation Research
• Replacement Models in Operation Research

Operation Management

• What is Strategy?
• What is Operations Strategy?
• Operations Competitive Dimensions
• Operations Strategy Formulation Process
• What is Strategic Fit?
• Strategic Design Process
• Focused Operations Strategy
• Corporate Level Strategy
• Expansion Strategies
• Stability Strategies
• Retrenchment Strategies
• Competitive Advantage
• Strategic Choice and Strategic Alternatives
• What is Production Process?
• What is Process Technology?
• What is Process Improvement?
• Strategic Capacity Management
• Production and Logistics Strategy
• Taxonomy of Supply Chain Strategies
• Factors Considered in Supply Chain Planning
• Operational and Strategic Issues in Global Logistics
• Logistics Outsourcing Strategy
• What is Supply Chain Mapping?
• Supply Chain Process Restructuring
• Points of Differentiation
• Re-engineering Improvement in SCM
• What is Supply Chain Drivers?
• Supply Chain Operations Reference (SCOR) Model
• Customer Service and Cost Trade Off
• Internal and External Performance Measures
• Linking Supply Chain and Business Performance
• Netflix’s Niche Focused Strategy
• Disney and Pixar Merger
• Process Planning at Mcdonald’s

Service Operations Management

• What is Service?
• What is Service Operations Management?
• What is Service Design?
• Service Design Process
• Service Delivery
• What is Service Quality?
• Gap Model of Service Quality
• Juran Trilogy
• Service Performance Measurement
• Service Decoupling
• IT Service Operation
• Service Operations Management in Different Sector

Procurement Management

• What is Procurement Management?
• Procurement Negotiation
• Types of Requisition
• RFX in Procurement
• What is Purchasing Cycle?
• Vendor Managed Inventory
• Internal Conflict During Purchasing Operation
• Spend Analysis in Procurement
• Sourcing in Procurement
• Supplier Evaluation and Selection in Procurement
• Blacklisting of Suppliers in Procurement
• Total Cost of Ownership in Procurement
• Incoterms in Procurement
• Documents Used in International Procurement
• Transportation and Logistics Strategy
• What is Capital Equipment?
• Procurement Process of Capital Equipment
• Acquisition of Technology in Procurement
• What is E-Procurement?
• E-marketplace and Online Catalogues
• Fixed Price and Cost Reimbursement Contracts
• Contract Cancellation in Procurement
• Ethics in Procurement
• Legal Aspects of Procurement
• Global Sourcing in Procurement
• Intermediaries and Countertrade in Procurement

Strategic Management

• What is Strategic Management?
• What is Value Chain Analysis?
• Mission Statement
• Business Level Strategy
• What is SWOT Analysis?
• What is Competitive Advantage?
• What is Vision?
• What is Ansoff Matrix?
• Prahalad and Gary Hammel
• Strategic Management In Global Environment
• Competitor Analysis Framework
• Competitive Rivalry Analysis
• Competitive Dynamics
• What is Competitive Rivalry?
• Five Competitive Forces That Shape Strategy
• What is PESTLE Analysis?
• Fragmentation and Consolidation Of Industries
• What is Technology Life Cycle?
• What is Diversification Strategy?
• What is Corporate Restructuring Strategy?
• Resources and Capabilities of Organization
• Role of Leaders In Functional-Level Strategic Management
• Functional Structure In Functional Level Strategy Formulation
• Information And Control System
• What is Strategy Gap Analysis?
• Issues In Strategy Implementation
• Matrix Organizational Structure
• What is Strategic Management Process?

Supply Chain

• What is Supply Chain Management?
• Supply Chain Planning and Measuring Strategy Performance
• What is Warehousing?
• What is Packaging?
• What is Inventory Management?
• What is Material Handling?
• What is Order Picking?
• Receiving and Dispatch, Processes
• What is Warehouse Design?
• What is Warehousing Costs?

You Might Also Like

Primary data and secondary data, ethics in research, measures of relationship, types of hypotheses, what is measure of dispersion, what is sample size determination, formula, determining,, data processing in research, what is research types, purpose, characteristics, process, what is experiments variables, types, lab, field, research process | types, what is research design types, leave a reply cancel reply.

You must be logged in to post a comment.

World's Best Online Courses at One Place

We’ve spent the time in finding, so you can spend your time in learning

Digital Marketing

Personal Growth

Development

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base

Methodology

• How to Write a Literature Review | Guide, Examples, & Templates

How to Write a Literature Review | Guide, Examples, & Templates

Published on January 2, 2023 by Shona McCombes . Revised on September 11, 2023.

What is a literature review? A literature review is a survey of scholarly sources on a specific topic. It provides an overview of current knowledge, allowing you to identify relevant theories, methods, and gaps in the existing research that you can later apply to your paper, thesis, or dissertation topic .

There are five key steps to writing a literature review:

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

A good literature review doesn’t just summarize sources—it analyzes, synthesizes , and critically evaluates to give a clear picture of the state of knowledge on the subject.

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

Table of contents

What is the purpose of a literature review, examples of literature reviews, step 1 – search for relevant literature, step 2 – evaluate and select sources, step 3 – identify themes, debates, and gaps, step 4 – outline your literature review’s structure, step 5 – write your literature review, free lecture slides, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions, introduction.

• Quick Run-through
• Step 1 & 2

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

• Demonstrate your familiarity with the topic and its scholarly context
• Develop a theoretical framework and methodology for your research
• Position your work in relation to other researchers and theorists
• Show how your research addresses a gap or contributes to a debate
• Evaluate the current state of research and demonstrate your knowledge of the scholarly debates around your topic.

Writing literature reviews is a particularly important skill if you want to apply for graduate school or pursue a career in research. We’ve written a step-by-step guide that you can follow below.

Don't submit your assignments before you do this

The academic proofreading tool has been trained on 1000s of academic texts. Making it the most accurate and reliable proofreading tool for students. Free citation check included.

Try for free

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

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

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

Download Word doc Download Google doc

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

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

Make a list of keywords

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

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

Search for relevant sources

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

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

You can also use boolean operators to help narrow down your search.

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

You likely won’t be able to read absolutely everything that has been written on your topic, so it will be necessary to evaluate which sources are most relevant to your research question.

For each publication, ask yourself:

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

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

You can use our template to summarize and evaluate sources you’re thinking about using. Click on either button below to download.

Take notes and cite your sources

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

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

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

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

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

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

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

There are various approaches to organizing the body of a literature review. Depending on the length of your literature review, you can combine several of these strategies (for example, your overall structure might be thematic, but each theme is discussed chronologically).

Chronological

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

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

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

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

Methodological

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

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

Theoretical

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

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

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

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

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

As you write, you can follow these tips:

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

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

When you’ve finished writing and revising your literature review, don’t forget to proofread thoroughly before submitting. Not a language expert? Check out Scribbr’s professional proofreading services !

This article has been adapted into lecture slides that you can use to teach your students about writing a literature review.

Scribbr slides are free to use, customize, and distribute for educational purposes.

Open Google Slides Download PowerPoint

If you want to know more about the research process , methodology , research bias , or statistics , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.

• Sampling methods
• Simple random sampling
• Stratified sampling
• Cluster sampling
• Likert scales
• Reproducibility

 Statistics

• Null hypothesis
• Statistical power
• Probability distribution
• Effect size
• Poisson distribution

Research bias

• Optimism bias
• Cognitive bias
• Implicit bias
• Hawthorne effect
• Anchoring bias
• Explicit bias

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

It is often written as part of a thesis, dissertation , or research paper , in order to situate your work in relation to existing knowledge.

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

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

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

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

A literature review is a survey of credible sources on a topic, often used in dissertations , theses, and research papers . Literature reviews give an overview of knowledge on a subject, helping you identify relevant theories and methods, as well as gaps in existing research. Literature reviews are set up similarly to other  academic texts , with an introduction , a main body, and a conclusion .

An  annotated bibliography is a list of  source references that has a short description (called an annotation ) for each of the sources. It is often assigned as part of the research process for a  paper .  

Cite this Scribbr article

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

McCombes, S. (2023, September 11). How to Write a Literature Review | Guide, Examples, & Templates. Scribbr. Retrieved September 27, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/dissertation/literature-review/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, what is a theoretical framework | guide to organizing, what is a research methodology | steps & tips, how to write a research proposal | examples & templates, get unlimited documents corrected.

✔ Free APA citation check included ✔ Unlimited document corrections ✔ Specialized in correcting academic texts

Libraries | Research Guides

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

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

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

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

• Next: Planning the Review >>
• Last Updated: Jul 8, 2024 11:22 AM
• URL: https://libguides.northwestern.edu/literaturereviews

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

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

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

What are Literature Reviews?

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

Goals of Literature Reviews

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

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

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

What kinds of sources require a Literature Review?

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

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

Types of Literature Reviews

What kinds of literature reviews are written?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Literature Reviews in the Health Sciences

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

• Link to facebook
• Link to linkedin
• Link to twitter
• Link to youtube
• Writing Tips

What is the Purpose of a Literature Review?

4-minute read

• 23rd October 2023

If you’re writing a research paper or dissertation , then you’ll most likely need to include a comprehensive literature review . In this post, we’ll review the purpose of literature reviews, why they are so significant, and the specific elements to include in one. Literature reviews can:

1. Provide a foundation for current research.

2. Define key concepts and theories.

3. Demonstrate critical evaluation.

4. Show how research and methodologies have evolved.

5. Identify gaps in existing research.

6. Support your argument.

Keep reading to enter the exciting world of literature reviews!

What is a Literature Review?

A literature review is a critical summary and evaluation of the existing research (e.g., academic journal articles and books) on a specific topic. It is typically included as a separate section or chapter of a research paper or dissertation, serving as a contextual framework for a study. Literature reviews can vary in length depending on the subject and nature of the study, with most being about equal length to other sections or chapters included in the paper. Essentially, the literature review highlights previous studies in the context of your research and summarizes your insights in a structured, organized format. Next, let’s look at the overall purpose of a literature review.

Find this useful?

Subscribe to our newsletter and get writing tips from our editors straight to your inbox.

Literature reviews are considered an integral part of research across most academic subjects and fields. The primary purpose of a literature review in your study is to:

Provide a Foundation for Current Research

Since the literature review provides a comprehensive evaluation of the existing research, it serves as a solid foundation for your current study. It’s a way to contextualize your work and show how your research fits into the broader landscape of your specific area of study.  

Define Key Concepts and Theories

The literature review highlights the central theories and concepts that have arisen from previous research on your chosen topic. It gives your readers a more thorough understanding of the background of your study and why your research is particularly significant .

Demonstrate Critical Evaluation 

A comprehensive literature review shows your ability to critically analyze and evaluate a broad range of source material. And since you’re considering and acknowledging the contribution of key scholars alongside your own, it establishes your own credibility and knowledge.

Show How Research and Methodologies Have Evolved

Another purpose of literature reviews is to provide a historical perspective and demonstrate how research and methodologies have changed over time, especially as data collection methods and technology have advanced. And studying past methodologies allows you, as the researcher, to understand what did and did not work and apply that knowledge to your own research.  

Identify Gaps in Existing Research

Besides discussing current research and methodologies, the literature review should also address areas that are lacking in the existing literature. This helps further demonstrate the relevance of your own research by explaining why your study is necessary to fill the gaps.

Support Your Argument

A good literature review should provide evidence that supports your research questions and hypothesis. For example, your study may show that your research supports existing theories or builds on them in some way. Referencing previous related studies shows your work is grounded in established research and will ultimately be a contribution to the field.  

Literature Review Editing Services 

Ensure your literature review is polished and ready for submission by having it professionally proofread and edited by our expert team. Our literature review editing services will help your research stand out and make an impact. Not convinced yet? Send in your free sample today and see for yourself! 

Share this article:

Post A New Comment

Got content that needs a quick turnaround? Let us polish your work. Explore our editorial business services.

5-minute read

Free Email Newsletter Template

Promoting a brand means sharing valuable insights to connect more deeply with your audience, and...

6-minute read

How to Write a Nonprofit Grant Proposal

If you’re seeking funding to support your charitable endeavors as a nonprofit organization, you’ll need...

9-minute read

How to Use Infographics to Boost Your Presentation

Is your content getting noticed? Capturing and maintaining an audience’s attention is a challenge when...

8-minute read

Why Interactive PDFs Are Better for Engagement

Are you looking to enhance engagement and captivate your audience through your professional documents? Interactive...

7-minute read

Seven Key Strategies for Voice Search Optimization

Voice search optimization is rapidly shaping the digital landscape, requiring content professionals to adapt their...

Five Creative Ways to Showcase Your Digital Portfolio

Are you a creative freelancer looking to make a lasting impression on potential clients or...

Make sure your writing is the best it can be with our expert English proofreading and editing.

• University of Texas Libraries

Literature Reviews

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

What is a Literature Review?

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

A literature review should: 

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

From  S age Research Methods

Purpose of a Literature Review

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

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

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

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

Limitations of a Literature Review

Some of the limitations of a literature review are:

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

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

Librarian Assistance

For help, please contact the librarian for your subject area.  We have a guide to library specialists by subject .

• Last Updated: Aug 26, 2024 5:59 AM
• URL: https://guides.lib.utexas.edu/literaturereviews

Literature Review - what is a Literature Review, why it is important and how it is done

What are literature reviews, goals of literature reviews, types of literature reviews, about this guide/licence.

• Strategies to Find Sources
• Evaluating Literature Reviews and Sources
• Tips for Writing Literature Reviews
• Writing Literature Review: Useful Sites
• Citation Resources
• Other Academic Writings
• Useful Resources

Help is Just a Click Away

Search our FAQ Knowledge base, ask a question, chat, send comments...

Go to LibAnswers

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

Source NC State University Libraries. This video is published under a Creative Commons 3.0 BY-NC-SA US license.

What are the goals of creating a Literature Review?

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

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

When do you need to write a Literature Review?

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

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

Literature reviews are also written as standalone articles as a way to survey a particular research topic in-depth. This type of literature reviews look at a topic from a historical perspective to see how the understanding of the topic have change through time.

What kinds of literature reviews are written?

• Narrative Review: The purpose of this type of review is to describe the current state of the research on a specific topic/research and to offer a critical analysis of the literature reviewed. Studies are grouped by research/theoretical categories, and themes and trends, strengths and weakness, and gaps are identified. The review ends with a conclusion section which summarizes the findings regarding the state of the research of the specific study, the gaps identify and if applicable, explains how the author's research will address gaps identify in the review and expand the knowledge on the topic reviewed.
• Book review essays/ Historiographical review essays : This is a type of review that focus on a small set of research books on a particular topic " to locate these books within current scholarship, critical methodologies, and approaches" in the field. - LARR
• Systematic review : "The authors of a systematic review use a specific procedure to search the research literature, select the studies to include in their review, and critically evaluate the studies they find." (p. 139). Nelson, L.K. (2013). Research in Communication Sciences and Disorders . San Diego, CA: Plural Publishing.
• Meta-analysis : "Meta-analysis is a method of reviewing research findings in a quantitative fashion by transforming the data from individual studies into what is called an effect size and then pooling and analyzing this information. The basic goal in meta-analysis is to explain why different outcomes have occurred in different studies." (p. 197). Roberts, M.C. & Ilardi, S.S. (2003). Handbook of Research Methods in Clinical Psychology . Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub.
• Meta-synthesis : "Qualitative meta-synthesis is a type of qualitative study that uses as data the findings from other qualitative studies linked by the same or related topic." (p.312). Zimmer, L. (2006). "Qualitative meta-synthesis: A question of dialoguing with texts," Journal of Advanced Nursing , 53(3), 311-318.

Guide adapted from "Literature Review" , a guide developed by Marisol Ramos used under CC BY 4.0 /modified from original.

• Next: Strategies to Find Sources >>
• Last Updated: Jul 3, 2024 10:56 AM
• URL: https://lit.libguides.com/Literature-Review

The Library, Technological University of the Shannon: Midwest

Reference management. Clean and simple.

What is a literature review? [with examples]

What is a literature review?

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

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

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

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

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

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

The four main objectives of a literature review are:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

• Maps & Floorplans
• Libraries A-Z

• Ellis Library (main)
• Engineering Library
• Geological Sciences
• Journalism Library
• Law Library
• Mathematical Sciences
• MU Digital Collections
• Veterinary Medical
• More Libraries...
• Instructional Services
• Course Reserves
• Course Guides
• Schedule a Library Class
• Class Assessment Forms
• Recordings & Tutorials
• Research & Writing Help
• More class resources
• Places to Study
• Borrow, Request & Renew
• Call Numbers
• Computers, Printers, Scanners & Software
• Digital Media Lab
• Equipment Lending: Laptops, cameras, etc.
• Subject Librarians
• Writing Tutors
• More In the Library...
• Undergraduate Students
• Graduate Students
• Faculty & Staff
• Researcher Support
• Distance Learners
• International Students
• More Services for...
• View my MU Libraries Account (login & click on My Library Account)
• View my MOBIUS Checkouts
• Renew my Books (login & click on My Loans)
• Place a Hold on a Book
• Request Books from Depository
• View my ILL@MU Account
• Set Up Alerts in Databases
• More Account Information...

Introduction to Literature Reviews

Introduction.

• Step One: Define
• Step Two: Research
• Step Three: Write
• Suggested Readings

A literature review is a written work that :

• Compiles significant research published on a topic by accredited scholars and researchers;
• Surveys scholarly articles, books, dissertations, conference proceedings, and other sources;
• Examines contrasting perspectives, theoretical approaches, methodologies, findings, results, conclusions.
• Reviews critically, analyzes, and synthesizes existing research on a topic; and,
• Performs a thorough “re” view, “overview”, or “look again” of past and current works on a subject, issue, or theory.

From these analyses, the writer then offers an overview of the current status of a particular area of knowledge from both a practical and theoretical perspective.

Literature reviews are important because they are usually a  required  step in a thesis proposal (Master's or PhD). The proposal will not be well-supported without a literature review. Also, literature reviews are important because they help you learn important authors and ideas in your field. This is useful for your coursework and your writing. Knowing key authors also helps you become acquainted with other researchers in your field.

Look at this diagram and imagine that your research is the "something new." This shows how your research should relate to major works and other sources.

Olivia Whitfield | Graduate Reference Assistant | 2012-2015

• Next: Step One: Define >>
• Last Updated: Aug 29, 2024 1:55 PM
• URL: https://libraryguides.missouri.edu/literaturereview

A Guide to Literature Reviews

Importance of a good literature review.

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

A literature review is not only a summary of key sources, but  has an organizational pattern which combines both summary and synthesis, often within specific conceptual categories . A summary is a recap of the important information of the source, but a synthesis is a re-organization, or a reshuffling, of that information in a way that informs how you are planning to investigate a research problem. The analytical features of a literature review might:

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

The purpose of a literature review is to:

• Place each work in the context of its contribution to understanding the research problem being studied.
• Describe the relationship of each work to the others under consideration.
• Identify new ways to interpret prior research.
• Reveal any gaps that exist in the literature.
• Resolve conflicts amongst seemingly contradictory previous studies.
• Identify areas of prior scholarship to prevent duplication of effort.
• Point the way in fulfilling a need for additional research.
• Locate your own research within the context of existing literature [very important].
• << Previous: Definition
• Next: Conducting the Literature Review >>
• Last Updated: Jul 3, 2024 3:13 PM
• URL: https://libguides.mcmaster.ca/litreview

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

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

Table of Contents

What is the purpose of literature review , a. habitat loss and species extinction: , b. range shifts and phenological changes: , c. ocean acidification and coral reefs: , d. adaptive strategies and conservation efforts: .

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

Frequently asked questions 

What is a literature review .

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Literature review example 

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

Literature Review on Climate Change Impacts on Biodiversity:  

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

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

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

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

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

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

How to write a good literature review 

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

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

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

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

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

Write and Cite as yo u go with Paperpal Research. Start now for free!

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

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

Conducting a literature review 

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

Choose a Topic and Define the Research Question:  

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

Decide on the Scope of Your Review:  

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

Select Databases for Searches:  

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

Conduct Searches and Keep Track:  

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

Review the Literature:  

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

Organize and Write Your Literature Review:  

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

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

How to write a literature review faster with Paperpal?  

Paperpal, an AI writing assistant, integrates powerful academic search capabilities within its writing platform. With the Research | Cite feature, you get 100% factual insights, with citations backed by 250M+ verified research articles, directly within your writing interface. It also allows you auto-cite references in 10,000+ styles and save relevant references in your Citation Library. By eliminating the need to switch tabs to find answers to all your research questions, Paperpal saves time and helps you stay focused on your writing.   

Here’s how to use the Research feature:  

• Ask a question: Get started with a new document on paperpal.com. Click on the “Research | Cite” feature and type your question in plain English. Paperpal will scour over 250 million research articles, including conference papers and preprints, to provide you with accurate insights and citations. 

• Review and Save: Paperpal summarizes the information, while citing sources and listing relevant reads. You can quickly scan the results to identify relevant references and save these directly to your built-in citations library for later access. 
• Cite with Confidence: Paperpal makes it easy to incorporate relevant citations and references in 10,000+ styles into your writing, ensuring your arguments are well-supported by credible sources. This translates to a polished, well-researched literature review. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

References 

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

Paperpal is a comprehensive AI writing toolkit that helps students and researchers achieve 2x the writing in half the time. It leverages 22+ years of STM experience and insights from millions of research articles to provide in-depth academic writing, language editing, and submission readiness support to help you write better, faster.  

Get accurate academic translations, rewriting support, grammar checks, vocabulary suggestions, and generative AI assistance that delivers human precision at machine speed. Try for free or upgrade to Paperpal Prime starting at US$19 a month to access premium features, including consistency, plagiarism, and 30+ submission readiness checks to help you succeed.  

Experience the future of academic writing – Sign up to Paperpal and start writing for free!  

Related Reads:

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

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

Self-plagiarism in research: what it is and how to avoid it, you may also like, machine translation vs human translation: which is reliable..., what is academic integrity, and why is it..., how to make a graphical abstract, academic integrity vs academic dishonesty: types & examples, dissertation printing and binding | types & comparison , what is a dissertation preface definition and examples , the ai revolution: authors’ role in upholding academic..., the future of academia: how ai tools are..., how to write a research proposal: (with examples..., how to write your research paper in apa....

• USC Libraries
• Research Guides

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper

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

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

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

Importance of a Good Literature Review

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

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

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

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

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

Types of Literature Reviews

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Structure and Writing Style

I.  Thinking About Your Literature Review

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

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

The critical evaluation of each work should consider :

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

II.  Development of the Literature Review

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

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

III.  Ways to Organize Your Literature Review

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

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

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

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

IV.  Writing Your Literature Review

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

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

V.  Common Mistakes to Avoid

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

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

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

Writing Tip

Break Out of Your Disciplinary Box!

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

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

Another Writing Tip

Don't Just Review for Content!

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

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

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

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

Yet Another Writing Tip

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

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

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

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

• << Previous: Theoretical Framework
• Next: Citation Tracking >>
• Last Updated: Sep 27, 2024 1:09 PM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

The PMC website is updating on October 15, 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Clinics (Sao Paulo)

Approaching literature review for academic purposes: The Literature Review Checklist

Debora f.b. leite.

I Departamento de Ginecologia e Obstetricia, Faculdade de Ciencias Medicas, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Campinas, SP, BR

II Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Pernambuco, PE, BR

III Hospital das Clinicas, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Pernambuco, PE, BR

Maria Auxiliadora Soares Padilha

Jose g. cecatti.

A sophisticated literature review (LR) can result in a robust dissertation/thesis by scrutinizing the main problem examined by the academic study; anticipating research hypotheses, methods and results; and maintaining the interest of the audience in how the dissertation/thesis will provide solutions for the current gaps in a particular field. Unfortunately, little guidance is available on elaborating LRs, and writing an LR chapter is not a linear process. An LR translates students’ abilities in information literacy, the language domain, and critical writing. Students in postgraduate programs should be systematically trained in these skills. Therefore, this paper discusses the purposes of LRs in dissertations and theses. Second, the paper considers five steps for developing a review: defining the main topic, searching the literature, analyzing the results, writing the review and reflecting on the writing. Ultimately, this study proposes a twelve-item LR checklist. By clearly stating the desired achievements, this checklist allows Masters and Ph.D. students to continuously assess their own progress in elaborating an LR. Institutions aiming to strengthen students’ necessary skills in critical academic writing should also use this tool.

INTRODUCTION

Writing the literature review (LR) is often viewed as a difficult task that can be a point of writer’s block and procrastination ( 1 ) in postgraduate life. Disagreements on the definitions or classifications of LRs ( 2 ) may confuse students about their purpose and scope, as well as how to perform an LR. Interestingly, at many universities, the LR is still an important element in any academic work, despite the more recent trend of producing scientific articles rather than classical theses.

The LR is not an isolated section of the thesis/dissertation or a copy of the background section of a research proposal. It identifies the state-of-the-art knowledge in a particular field, clarifies information that is already known, elucidates implications of the problem being analyzed, links theory and practice ( 3 - 5 ), highlights gaps in the current literature, and places the dissertation/thesis within the research agenda of that field. Additionally, by writing the LR, postgraduate students will comprehend the structure of the subject and elaborate on their cognitive connections ( 3 ) while analyzing and synthesizing data with increasing maturity.

At the same time, the LR transforms the student and hints at the contents of other chapters for the reader. First, the LR explains the research question; second, it supports the hypothesis, objectives, and methods of the research project; and finally, it facilitates a description of the student’s interpretation of the results and his/her conclusions. For scholars, the LR is an introductory chapter ( 6 ). If it is well written, it demonstrates the student’s understanding of and maturity in a particular topic. A sound and sophisticated LR can indicate a robust dissertation/thesis.

A consensus on the best method to elaborate a dissertation/thesis has not been achieved. The LR can be a distinct chapter or included in different sections; it can be part of the introduction chapter, part of each research topic, or part of each published paper ( 7 ). However, scholars view the LR as an integral part of the main body of an academic work because it is intrinsically connected to other sections ( Figure 1 ) and is frequently present. The structure of the LR depends on the conventions of a particular discipline, the rules of the department, and the student’s and supervisor’s areas of expertise, needs and interests.

Interestingly, many postgraduate students choose to submit their LR to peer-reviewed journals. As LRs are critical evaluations of current knowledge, they are indeed publishable material, even in the form of narrative or systematic reviews. However, systematic reviews have specific patterns 1 ( 8 ) that may not entirely fit with the questions posed in the dissertation/thesis. Additionally, the scope of a systematic review may be too narrow, and the strict criteria for study inclusion may omit important information from the dissertation/thesis. Therefore, this essay discusses the definition of an LR is and methods to develop an LR in the context of an academic dissertation/thesis. Finally, we suggest a checklist to evaluate an LR.

WHAT IS A LITERATURE REVIEW IN A THESIS?

Conducting research and writing a dissertation/thesis translates rational thinking and enthusiasm ( 9 ). While a strong body of literature that instructs students on research methodology, data analysis and writing scientific papers exists, little guidance on performing LRs is available. The LR is a unique opportunity to assess and contrast various arguments and theories, not just summarize them. The research results should not be discussed within the LR, but the postgraduate student tends to write a comprehensive LR while reflecting on his or her own findings ( 10 ).

Many people believe that writing an LR is a lonely and linear process. Supervisors or the institutions assume that the Ph.D. student has mastered the relevant techniques and vocabulary associated with his/her subject and conducts a self-reflection about previously published findings. Indeed, while elaborating the LR, the student should aggregate diverse skills, which mainly rely on his/her own commitment to mastering them. Thus, less supervision should be required ( 11 ). However, the parameters described above might not currently be the case for many students ( 11 , 12 ), and the lack of formal and systematic training on writing LRs is an important concern ( 11 ).

An institutional environment devoted to active learning will provide students the opportunity to continuously reflect on LRs, which will form a dialogue between the postgraduate student and the current literature in a particular field ( 13 ). Postgraduate students will be interpreting studies by other researchers, and, according to Hart (1998) ( 3 ), the outcomes of the LR in a dissertation/thesis include the following:

• To identify what research has been performed and what topics require further investigation in a particular field of knowledge;
• To determine the context of the problem;
• To recognize the main methodologies and techniques that have been used in the past;
• To place the current research project within the historical, methodological and theoretical context of a particular field;
• To identify significant aspects of the topic;
• To elucidate the implications of the topic;
• To offer an alternative perspective;
• To discern how the studied subject is structured;
• To improve the student’s subject vocabulary in a particular field; and
• To characterize the links between theory and practice.

A sound LR translates the postgraduate student’s expertise in academic and scientific writing: it expresses his/her level of comfort with synthesizing ideas ( 11 ). The LR reveals how well the postgraduate student has proceeded in three domains: an effective literature search, the language domain, and critical writing.

Effective literature search

All students should be trained in gathering appropriate data for specific purposes, and information literacy skills are a cornerstone. These skills are defined as “an individual’s ability to know when they need information, to identify information that can help them address the issue or problem at hand, and to locate, evaluate, and use that information effectively” ( 14 ). Librarian support is of vital importance in coaching the appropriate use of Boolean logic (AND, OR, NOT) and other tools for highly efficient literature searches (e.g., quotation marks and truncation), as is the appropriate management of electronic databases.

Language domain

Academic writing must be concise and precise: unnecessary words distract the reader from the essential content ( 15 ). In this context, reading about issues distant from the research topic ( 16 ) may increase students’ general vocabulary and familiarity with grammar. Ultimately, reading diverse materials facilitates and encourages the writing process itself.

Critical writing

Critical judgment includes critical reading, thinking and writing. It supposes a student’s analytical reflection about what he/she has read. The student should delineate the basic elements of the topic, characterize the most relevant claims, identify relationships, and finally contrast those relationships ( 17 ). Each scientific document highlights the perspective of the author, and students will become more confident in judging the supporting evidence and underlying premises of a study and constructing their own counterargument as they read more articles. A paucity of integration or contradictory perspectives indicates lower levels of cognitive complexity ( 12 ).

Thus, while elaborating an LR, the postgraduate student should achieve the highest category of Bloom’s cognitive skills: evaluation ( 12 ). The writer should not only summarize data and understand each topic but also be able to make judgments based on objective criteria, compare resources and findings, identify discrepancies due to methodology, and construct his/her own argument ( 12 ). As a result, the student will be sufficiently confident to show his/her own voice .

Writing a consistent LR is an intense and complex activity that reveals the training and long-lasting academic skills of a writer. It is not a lonely or linear process. However, students are unlikely to be prepared to write an LR if they have not mastered the aforementioned domains ( 10 ). An institutional environment that supports student learning is crucial.

Different institutions employ distinct methods to promote students’ learning processes. First, many universities propose modules to develop behind the scenes activities that enhance self-reflection about general skills (e.g., the skills we have mastered and the skills we need to develop further), behaviors that should be incorporated (e.g., self-criticism about one’s own thoughts), and each student’s role in the advancement of his/her field. Lectures or workshops about LRs themselves are useful because they describe the purposes of the LR and how it fits into the whole picture of a student’s work. These activities may explain what type of discussion an LR must involve, the importance of defining the correct scope, the reasons to include a particular resource, and the main role of critical reading.

Some pedagogic services that promote a continuous improvement in study and academic skills are equally important. Examples include workshops about time management, the accomplishment of personal objectives, active learning, and foreign languages for nonnative speakers. Additionally, opportunities to converse with other students promotes an awareness of others’ experiences and difficulties. Ultimately, the supervisor’s role in providing feedback and setting deadlines is crucial in developing students’ abilities and in strengthening students’ writing quality ( 12 ).

HOW SHOULD A LITERATURE REVIEW BE DEVELOPED?

A consensus on the appropriate method for elaborating an LR is not available, but four main steps are generally accepted: defining the main topic, searching the literature, analyzing the results, and writing ( 6 ). We suggest a fifth step: reflecting on the information that has been written in previous publications ( Figure 2 ).

First step: Defining the main topic

Planning an LR is directly linked to the research main question of the thesis and occurs in parallel to students’ training in the three domains discussed above. The planning stage helps organize ideas, delimit the scope of the LR ( 11 ), and avoid the wasting of time in the process. Planning includes the following steps:

• Reflecting on the scope of the LR: postgraduate students will have assumptions about what material must be addressed and what information is not essential to an LR ( 13 , 18 ). Cooper’s Taxonomy of Literature Reviews 2 systematizes the writing process through six characteristics and nonmutually exclusive categories. The focus refers to the reviewer’s most important points of interest, while the goals concern what students want to achieve with the LR. The perspective assumes answers to the student’s own view of the LR and how he/she presents a particular issue. The coverage defines how comprehensive the student is in presenting the literature, and the organization determines the sequence of arguments. The audience is defined as the group for whom the LR is written.
• Designating sections and subsections: Headings and subheadings should be specific, explanatory and have a coherent sequence throughout the text ( 4 ). They simulate an inverted pyramid, with an increasing level of reflection and depth of argument.
• Identifying keywords: The relevant keywords for each LR section should be listed to guide the literature search. This list should mirror what Hart (1998) ( 3 ) advocates as subject vocabulary . The keywords will also be useful when the student is writing the LR since they guide the reader through the text.
• Delineating the time interval and language of documents to be retrieved in the second step. The most recently published documents should be considered, but relevant texts published before a predefined cutoff year can be included if they are classic documents in that field. Extra care should be employed when translating documents.

Second step: Searching the literature

The ability to gather adequate information from the literature must be addressed in postgraduate programs. Librarian support is important, particularly for accessing difficult texts. This step comprises the following components:

• Searching the literature itself: This process consists of defining which databases (electronic or dissertation/thesis repositories), official documents, and books will be searched and then actively conducting the search. Information literacy skills have a central role in this stage. While searching electronic databases, controlled vocabulary (e.g., Medical Subject Headings, or MeSH, for the PubMed database) or specific standardized syntax rules may need to be applied.

In addition, two other approaches are suggested. First, a review of the reference list of each document might be useful for identifying relevant publications to be included and important opinions to be assessed. This step is also relevant for referencing the original studies and leading authors in that field. Moreover, students can directly contact the experts on a particular topic to consult with them regarding their experience or use them as a source of additional unpublished documents.

Before submitting a dissertation/thesis, the electronic search strategy should be repeated. This process will ensure that the most recently published papers will be considered in the LR.

• Selecting documents for inclusion: Generally, the most recent literature will be included in the form of published peer-reviewed papers. Assess books and unpublished material, such as conference abstracts, academic texts and government reports, are also important to assess since the gray literature also offers valuable information. However, since these materials are not peer-reviewed, we recommend that they are carefully added to the LR.

This task is an important exercise in time management. First, students should read the title and abstract to understand whether that document suits their purposes, addresses the research question, and helps develop the topic of interest. Then, they should scan the full text, determine how it is structured, group it with similar documents, and verify whether other arguments might be considered ( 5 ).

Third step: Analyzing the results

Critical reading and thinking skills are important in this step. This step consists of the following components:

• Reading documents: The student may read various texts in depth according to LR sections and subsections ( defining the main topic ), which is not a passive activity ( 1 ). Some questions should be asked to practice critical analysis skills, as listed below. Is the research question evident and articulated with previous knowledge? What are the authors’ research goals and theoretical orientations, and how do they interact? Are the authors’ claims related to other scholars’ research? Do the authors consider different perspectives? Was the research project designed and conducted properly? Are the results and discussion plausible, and are they consistent with the research objectives and methodology? What are the strengths and limitations of this work? How do the authors support their findings? How does this work contribute to the current research topic? ( 1 , 19 )
• Taking notes: Students who systematically take notes on each document are more readily able to establish similarities or differences with other documents and to highlight personal observations. This approach reinforces the student’s ideas about the next step and helps develop his/her own academic voice ( 1 , 13 ). Voice recognition software ( 16 ), mind maps ( 5 ), flowcharts, tables, spreadsheets, personal comments on the referenced texts, and note-taking apps are all available tools for managing these observations, and the student him/herself should use the tool that best improves his/her learning. Additionally, when a student is considering submitting an LR to a peer-reviewed journal, notes should be taken on the activities performed in all five steps to ensure that they are able to be replicated.

Fourth step: Writing

The recognition of when a student is able and ready to write after a sufficient period of reading and thinking is likely a difficult task. Some students can produce a review in a single long work session. However, as discussed above, writing is not a linear process, and students do not need to write LRs according to a specific sequence of sections. Writing an LR is a time-consuming task, and some scholars believe that a period of at least six months is sufficient ( 6 ). An LR, and academic writing in general, expresses the writer’s proper thoughts, conclusions about others’ work ( 6 , 10 , 13 , 16 ), and decisions about methods to progress in the chosen field of knowledge. Thus, each student is expected to present a different learning and writing trajectory.

In this step, writing methods should be considered; then, editing, citing and correct referencing should complete this stage, at least temporarily. Freewriting techniques may be a good starting point for brainstorming ideas and improving the understanding of the information that has been read ( 1 ). Students should consider the following parameters when creating an agenda for writing the LR: two-hour writing blocks (at minimum), with prespecified tasks that are possible to complete in one section; short (minutes) and long breaks (days or weeks) to allow sufficient time for mental rest and reflection; and short- and long-term goals to motivate the writing itself ( 20 ). With increasing experience, this scheme can vary widely, and it is not a straightforward rule. Importantly, each discipline has a different way of writing ( 1 ), and each department has its own preferred styles for citations and references.

Fifth step: Reflecting on the writing

In this step, the postgraduate student should ask him/herself the same questions as in the analyzing the results step, which can take more time than anticipated. Ambiguities, repeated ideas, and a lack of coherence may not be noted when the student is immersed in the writing task for long periods. The whole effort will likely be a work in progress, and continuous refinements in the written material will occur once the writing process has begun.

LITERATURE REVIEW CHECKLIST

In contrast to review papers, the LR of a dissertation/thesis should not be a standalone piece or work. Instead, it should present the student as a scholar and should maintain the interest of the audience in how that dissertation/thesis will provide solutions for the current gaps in a particular field.

A checklist for evaluating an LR is convenient for students’ continuous academic development and research transparency: it clearly states the desired achievements for the LR of a dissertation/thesis. Here, we present an LR checklist developed from an LR scoring rubric ( 11 ). For a critical analysis of an LR, we maintain the five categories but offer twelve criteria that are not scaled ( Figure 3 ). The criteria all have the same importance and are not mutually exclusive.

First category: Coverage

1. justified criteria exist for the inclusion and exclusion of literature in the review.

This criterion builds on the main topic and areas covered by the LR ( 18 ). While experts may be confident in retrieving and selecting literature, postgraduate students must convince their audience about the adequacy of their search strategy and their reasons for intentionally selecting what material to cover ( 11 ). References from different fields of knowledge provide distinct perspective, but narrowing the scope of coverage may be important in areas with a large body of existing knowledge.

Second category: Synthesis

2. a critical examination of the state of the field exists.

A critical examination is an assessment of distinct aspects in the field ( 1 ) along with a constructive argument. It is not a negative critique but an expression of the student’s understanding of how other scholars have added to the topic ( 1 ), and the student should analyze and contextualize contradictory statements. A writer’s personal bias (beliefs or political involvement) have been shown to influence the structure and writing of a document; therefore, the cultural and paradigmatic background guide how the theories are revised and presented ( 13 ). However, an honest judgment is important when considering different perspectives.

3. The topic or problem is clearly placed in the context of the broader scholarly literature

The broader scholarly literature should be related to the chosen main topic for the LR ( how to develop the literature review section). The LR can cover the literature from one or more disciplines, depending on its scope, but it should always offer a new perspective. In addition, students should be careful in citing and referencing previous publications. As a rule, original studies and primary references should generally be included. Systematic and narrative reviews present summarized data, and it may be important to cite them, particularly for issues that should be understood but do not require a detailed description. Similarly, quotations highlight the exact statement from another publication. However, excessive referencing may disclose lower levels of analysis and synthesis by the student.

4. The LR is critically placed in the historical context of the field

Situating the LR in its historical context shows the level of comfort of the student in addressing a particular topic. Instead of only presenting statements and theories in a temporal approach, which occasionally follows a linear timeline, the LR should authentically characterize the student’s academic work in the state-of-art techniques in their particular field of knowledge. Thus, the LR should reinforce why the dissertation/thesis represents original work in the chosen research field.

5. Ambiguities in definitions are considered and resolved

Distinct theories on the same topic may exist in different disciplines, and one discipline may consider multiple concepts to explain one topic. These misunderstandings should be addressed and contemplated. The LR should not synthesize all theories or concepts at the same time. Although this approach might demonstrate in-depth reading on a particular topic, it can reveal a student’s inability to comprehend and synthesize his/her research problem.

6. Important variables and phenomena relevant to the topic are articulated

The LR is a unique opportunity to articulate ideas and arguments and to purpose new relationships between them ( 10 , 11 ). More importantly, a sound LR will outline to the audience how these important variables and phenomena will be addressed in the current academic work. Indeed, the LR should build a bidirectional link with the remaining sections and ground the connections between all of the sections ( Figure 1 ).

7. A synthesized new perspective on the literature has been established

The LR is a ‘creative inquiry’ ( 13 ) in which the student elaborates his/her own discourse, builds on previous knowledge in the field, and describes his/her own perspective while interpreting others’ work ( 13 , 17 ). Thus, students should articulate the current knowledge, not accept the results at face value ( 11 , 13 , 17 ), and improve their own cognitive abilities ( 12 ).

Third category: Methodology

8. the main methodologies and research techniques that have been used in the field are identified and their advantages and disadvantages are discussed.

The LR is expected to distinguish the research that has been completed from investigations that remain to be performed, address the benefits and limitations of the main methods applied to date, and consider the strategies for addressing the expected limitations described above. While placing his/her research within the methodological context of a particular topic, the LR will justify the methodology of the study and substantiate the student’s interpretations.

9. Ideas and theories in the field are related to research methodologies

The audience expects the writer to analyze and synthesize methodological approaches in the field. The findings should be explained according to the strengths and limitations of previous research methods, and students must avoid interpretations that are not supported by the analyzed literature. This criterion translates to the student’s comprehension of the applicability and types of answers provided by different research methodologies, even those using a quantitative or qualitative research approach.

Fourth category: Significance

10. the scholarly significance of the research problem is rationalized.

The LR is an introductory section of a dissertation/thesis and will present the postgraduate student as a scholar in a particular field ( 11 ). Therefore, the LR should discuss how the research problem is currently addressed in the discipline being investigated or in different disciplines, depending on the scope of the LR. The LR explains the academic paradigms in the topic of interest ( 13 ) and methods to advance the field from these starting points. However, an excess number of personal citations—whether referencing the student’s research or studies by his/her research team—may reflect a narrow literature search and a lack of comprehensive synthesis of ideas and arguments.

11. The practical significance of the research problem is rationalized

The practical significance indicates a student’s comprehensive understanding of research terminology (e.g., risk versus associated factor), methodology (e.g., efficacy versus effectiveness) and plausible interpretations in the context of the field. Notably, the academic argument about a topic may not always reflect the debate in real life terms. For example, using a quantitative approach in epidemiology, statistically significant differences between groups do not explain all of the factors involved in a particular problem ( 21 ). Therefore, excessive faith in p -values may reflect lower levels of critical evaluation of the context and implications of a research problem by the student.

Fifth category: Rhetoric

12. the lr was written with a coherent, clear structure that supported the review.

This category strictly relates to the language domain: the text should be coherent and presented in a logical sequence, regardless of which organizational ( 18 ) approach is chosen. The beginning of each section/subsection should state what themes will be addressed, paragraphs should be carefully linked to each other ( 10 ), and the first sentence of each paragraph should generally summarize the content. Additionally, the student’s statements are clear, sound, and linked to other scholars’ works, and precise and concise language that follows standardized writing conventions (e.g., in terms of active/passive voice and verb tenses) is used. Attention to grammar, such as orthography and punctuation, indicates prudence and supports a robust dissertation/thesis. Ultimately, all of these strategies provide fluency and consistency for the text.

Although the scoring rubric was initially proposed for postgraduate programs in education research, we are convinced that this checklist is a valuable tool for all academic areas. It enables the monitoring of students’ learning curves and a concentrated effort on any criteria that are not yet achieved. For institutions, the checklist is a guide to support supervisors’ feedback, improve students’ writing skills, and highlight the learning goals of each program. These criteria do not form a linear sequence, but ideally, all twelve achievements should be perceived in the LR.

CONCLUSIONS

A single correct method to classify, evaluate and guide the elaboration of an LR has not been established. In this essay, we have suggested directions for planning, structuring and critically evaluating an LR. The planning of the scope of an LR and approaches to complete it is a valuable effort, and the five steps represent a rational starting point. An institutional environment devoted to active learning will support students in continuously reflecting on LRs, which will form a dialogue between the writer and the current literature in a particular field ( 13 ).

The completion of an LR is a challenging and necessary process for understanding one’s own field of expertise. Knowledge is always transitory, but our responsibility as scholars is to provide a critical contribution to our field, allowing others to think through our work. Good researchers are grounded in sophisticated LRs, which reveal a writer’s training and long-lasting academic skills. We recommend using the LR checklist as a tool for strengthening the skills necessary for critical academic writing.

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS

Leite DFB has initially conceived the idea and has written the first draft of this review. Padilha MAS and Cecatti JG have supervised data interpretation and critically reviewed the manuscript. All authors have read the draft and agreed with this submission. Authors are responsible for all aspects of this academic piece.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We are grateful to all of the professors of the ‘Getting Started with Graduate Research and Generic Skills’ module at University College Cork, Cork, Ireland, for suggesting and supporting this article. Funding: DFBL has granted scholarship from Brazilian Federal Agency for Support and Evaluation of Graduate Education (CAPES) to take part of her Ph.D. studies in Ireland (process number 88881.134512/2016-01). There is no participation from sponsors on authors’ decision to write or to submit this manuscript.

No potential conflict of interest was reported.

1 The questions posed in systematic reviews usually follow the ‘PICOS’ acronym: Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes, Study design.

2 In 1988, Cooper proposed a taxonomy that aims to facilitate students’ and institutions’ understanding of literature reviews. Six characteristics with specific categories are briefly described: Focus: research outcomes, research methodologies, theories, or practices and applications; Goals: integration (generalization, conflict resolution, and linguistic bridge-building), criticism, or identification of central issues; Perspective: neutral representation or espousal of a position; Coverage: exhaustive, exhaustive with selective citations, representative, central or pivotal; Organization: historical, conceptual, or methodological; and Audience: specialized scholars, general scholars, practitioners or policymakers, or the general public.

• +91 9884350006
• +1-972-502-9262
• [email protected]

Why is it important to do a literature review in research?

The importance of scientific communication in the healthcare industry

The Importance and Role of Biostatistics in Clinical Research

 “A substantive, thorough, sophisticated literature review is a precondition for doing substantive, thorough, sophisticated research”. Boote and Baile 2005

Authors of manuscripts treat writing a literature review as a routine work or a mere formality. But a seasoned one knows the purpose and importance of a well-written literature review.  Since it is one of the basic needs for researches at any level, they have to be done vigilantly. Only then the reader will know that the basics of research have not been neglected.

The aim of any literature review is to summarize and synthesize the arguments and ideas of existing knowledge in a particular field without adding any new contributions.   Being built on existing knowledge they help the researcher to even turn the wheels of the topic of research.  It is possible only with profound knowledge of what is wrong in the existing findings in detail to overpower them.  For other researches, the literature review gives the direction to be headed for its success. 

The common perception of literature review and reality:

As per the common belief, literature reviews are only a summary of the sources related to the research. And many authors of scientific manuscripts believe that they are only surveys of what are the researches are done on the chosen topic.  But on the contrary, it uses published information from pertinent and relevant sources like

• Scholarly books
• Scientific papers
• Latest studies in the field
• Established school of thoughts
• Relevant articles from renowned scientific journals

and many more for a field of study or theory or a particular problem to do the following:

• Summarize into a brief account of all information
• Synthesize the information by restructuring and reorganizing
• Critical evaluation of a concept or a school of thought or ideas
• Familiarize the authors to the extent of knowledge in the particular field
• Encapsulate
• Compare & contrast

By doing the above on the relevant information, it provides the reader of the scientific manuscript with the following for a better understanding of it:

• It establishes the authors’  in-depth understanding and knowledge of their field subject
• It gives the background of the research
• Portrays the scientific manuscript plan of examining the research result
• Illuminates on how the knowledge has changed within the field
• Highlights what has already been done in a particular field
• Information of the generally accepted facts, emerging and current state of the topic of research
• Identifies the research gap that is still unexplored or under-researched fields
• Demonstrates how the research fits within a larger field of study
• Provides an overview of the sources explored during the research of a particular topic

Importance of literature review in research:

The importance of literature review in scientific manuscripts can be condensed into an analytical feature to enable the multifold reach of its significance.  It adds value to the legitimacy of the research in many ways:

• Provides the interpretation of existing literature in light of updated developments in the field to help in establishing the consistency in knowledge and relevancy of existing materials
• It helps in calculating the impact of the latest information in the field by mapping their progress of knowledge.
• It brings out the dialects of contradictions between various thoughts within the field to establish facts
• The research gaps scrutinized initially are further explored to establish the latest facts of theories to add value to the field
• Indicates the current research place in the schema of a particular field
• Provides information for relevancy and coherency to check the research
• Apart from elucidating the continuance of knowledge, it also points out areas that require further investigation and thus aid as a starting point of any future research
• Justifies the research and sets up the research question
• Sets up a theoretical framework comprising the concepts and theories of the research upon which its success can be judged
• Helps to adopt a more appropriate methodology for the research by examining the strengths and weaknesses of existing research in the same field
• Increases the significance of the results by comparing it with the existing literature
• Provides a point of reference by writing the findings in the scientific manuscript
• Helps to get the due credit from the audience for having done the fact-finding and fact-checking mission in the scientific manuscripts
• The more the reference of relevant sources of it could increase more of its trustworthiness with the readers
• Helps to prevent plagiarism by tailoring and uniquely tweaking the scientific manuscript not to repeat other’s original idea
• By preventing plagiarism , it saves the scientific manuscript from rejection and thus also saves a lot of time and money
• Helps to evaluate, condense and synthesize gist in the author’s own words to sharpen the research focus
• Helps to compare and contrast to  show the originality and uniqueness of the research than that of the existing other researches
• Rationalizes the need for conducting the particular research in a specified field
• Helps to collect data accurately for allowing any new methodology of research than the existing ones
• Enables the readers of the manuscript to answer the following questions of its readers for its better chances for publication
• What do the researchers know?
• What do they not know?
• Is the scientific manuscript reliable and trustworthy?
• What are the knowledge gaps of the researcher?

22. It helps the readers to identify the following for further reading of the scientific manuscript:

• What has been already established, discredited and accepted in the particular field of research
• Areas of controversy and conflicts among different schools of thought
• Unsolved problems and issues in the connected field of research
• The emerging trends and approaches
• How the research extends, builds upon and leaves behind from the previous research

A profound literature review with many relevant sources of reference will enhance the chances of the scientific manuscript publication in renowned and reputed scientific journals .

References:

http://www.math.montana.edu/jobo/phdprep/phd6.pdf

journal Publishing services  |  Scientific Editing Services  |  Medical Writing Services  |  scientific research writing service  |  Scientific communication services

Related Topics:

Meta Analysis

Scientific Research Paper Writing

Medical Research Paper Writing

Scientific Communication in healthcare

pubrica academy

Related posts.

Importance Of Proofreading For Scientific Writing Methods and Significance

Statistical analyses of case-control studies

Selecting material (e.g. excipient, active pharmaceutical ingredient, packaging material) for drug development

Comments are closed.

Open Access is an initiative that aims to make scientific research freely available to all. To date our community has made over 100 million downloads. It’s based on principles of collaboration, unobstructed discovery, and, most importantly, scientific progression. As PhD students, we found it difficult to access the research we needed, so we decided to create a new Open Access publisher that levels the playing field for scientists across the world. How? By making research easy to access, and puts the academic needs of the researchers before the business interests of publishers.

We are a community of more than 103,000 authors and editors from 3,291 institutions spanning 160 countries, including Nobel Prize winners and some of the world’s most-cited researchers. Publishing on IntechOpen allows authors to earn citations and find new collaborators, meaning more people see your work not only from your own field of study, but from other related fields too.

Brief introduction to this section that descibes Open Access especially from an IntechOpen perspective

Want to get in touch? Contact our London head office or media team here

Our team is growing all the time, so we’re always on the lookout for smart people who want to help us reshape the world of scientific publishing.

Home > Books > National Security in the Digital and Information Age

The Front End of Innovation in Defense: A Comprehensive Literature Review

Submitted: 18 January 2024 Reviewed: 02 March 2024 Published: 30 April 2024

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.1005191

Cite this chapter

There are two ways to cite this chapter:

From the Edited Volume

National Security in the Digital and Information Age

To purchase hard copies of this book, please contact the representative in India: CBS Publishers & Distributors Pvt. Ltd. www.cbspd.com | [email protected]

Chapter metrics overview

38 Chapter Downloads

Impact of this chapter

Total Chapter Downloads on intechopen.com

Total Chapter Views on intechopen.com

Innovation management, a multifaceted organizational process encompassing opportunities and ideas from inception to implementation, demands a systematic approach, particularly in the critical initial phase known as the Front End of Innovation (FEI). This pivotal phase significantly influences the entire innovation management chain. Despite its recognized importance, FEI in the defense sector has yet to be systematically addressed in the academic literature. Recognizing the vital role of FEI in the defense sector, this study addresses this deficiency through a systematic review, scrutinizing 24 documents from the scientific literature (Scopus and Web of Science databases) and gray literature (government defense documents). This research systematically maps key activities identified in seminal FEI models. These activities include the identification and analysis of opportunities; generation, enrichment, and screening of ideas; product concept definition; and consideration of influencing factors. Concurrently, this work aligns defense practices with established innovation models and provides valuable insights for optimizing the management dynamics of the military innovation process. Through this systematic inquiry, this study contributes to a nuanced understanding of the FEI in the defense sector, offering practical implications for enhancing defense innovation development.

• front end of innovation
• literature review

Author Information

Romullo girardi *.

• Military Institute of Engineering, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
• INESC TEC and Faculty of Engineering, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal

Juraci Ferreira Galdino

Paulo césar pellanda.

*Address all correspondence to: [email protected]

1. Introduction

Innovation management, a complex and broad organizational process covering the entire spectrum, from identifying new opportunities and ideas to their practical implementation, poses significant challenges for managers across all organizational levels [ 1 ].

Notably, innovation seldom fails due to a lack of creativity; instead, it is the absence of discipline that plays a pivotal role in innovation failures [ 2 ]. From this perspective, Boeddrich [ 3 ] contends that systematic and structured procedures in the early phase, known as the Front End of Innovation (FEI), are imperative to avert adverse effects throughout the innovation management chain.

Multiple researchers emphasize that enhancing FEI activities contributes positively to organizational outcomes, bolstering the likelihood of successful innovation development [ 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 ]. Yet, the successful adoption of a FEI model requires considering some factors like organizational size and culture, as well as decision-making styles [ 10 , 11 ].

Despite the increasing attention to FEI as a complex and multidisciplinary field [ 12 ], the defense context of FEI has not been sufficiently addressed in the academic literature, a gap this study endeavors to address. Therefore, this research aims to unravel the dynamics of FEI in the military sector through a systematic literature review, focusing on the research question: How can the current literature on the early phase of the innovation process in defense be mapped within seminal FEI models?

This question is pertinent given the Armed Forces’ distinct organizational culture, demanding innovation to sustain high-tech operational capabilities and mainly requiring innovations capable of inducing technological surprise in the theater of operations. Aligning defense practices with established models in innovation literature can furnish invaluable insights for improving the management dynamics of the military’s initial innovation phase. Moreover, by reviewing approaches used by different countries, the study recognizes that the suitability and significance of FEI management practices can differ across national defense contexts. It emphasizes how cultural and procedural nuances impact the development and adoption of new technologies in military settings.

Structured around the research question, this paper is organized as follows: Section 2 provides a theoretical foundation on FEI, seminal FEI models, and defense peculiarities. Section 3 outlines the research methodology. Section 4 delineates the mapping of the FEI in the defense sector within seminal FEI models. Section 5 discusses salient aspects identified throughout the study. Finally, Section 6 highlights the concluding remarks, outlining directions for future research.

2. Theoretical foundation

Before exploring the current literature on the early stage of the innovation process in defense, it is essential to understand the foundational topics involved: the FEI concept, the seminal FEI models, and the unique aspects of the military sector.

2.1 Front end of innovation (FEI)

The Fuzzy Front End (FFE) refers to the earliest stage in the New Product Development (NPD) process. This term was popularized by Smith and Reinertsen [ 13 ], as pointed out by Khurana and Rosenthal [ 10 ].

In 2002, Koen et al. [ 14 ] proposed the term Front End of Innovation (FEI), considering that the adjective “fuzzy” is “mysterious, lacks accountability, and cannot be critically evaluated” ([ 14 ], p. 30). The new term dissociated the idea that the initial phase of the innovation process was nebulous and uncontrollable. In this approach, the FEI is described as “those activities that come before the formal and well-structured NPD process” ([ 14 ], p. 30).

Figure 1 illustrates the breakdown of the product innovation management process into three phases: FEI, NPD, and implementation (the commercialization of the product in the market). The circular shape of the FEI suggests that ideas should flow and iterate until the formal definition of products is developed. In contrast, the NPD phase is depicted as a series of sequential, well-structured, and chronologically ordered steps [ 14 , 15 ].

Breakdown of the product innovation management process. Source: Adapted from Koen et al. [ 14 , 15 ].

The FEI emerges as a crucial driver of positive outcomes for new products and, consequently, the overall success of the business [ 16 ]. Markham [ 6 ] underscores the profound impact of early-phase activities on product performance, emphasizing that the success of the front end stands as the strongest independent predictor of all NPD performance variables.

Selecting an appropriate FEI model requires careful consideration of various factors, including organizational size and culture, as well as decision-making style [ 10 , 11 ]. As a response to these diverse organizational needs, numerous FEI models have been developed over time, offering distinct approaches to navigate their complexities, as detailed in the next section.

2.2 Seminal FEI models

In an integrative literature review, Pereira et al. [ 12 ] found that 26% of articles related to FEI contributed in terms of frameworks, models, processes, tools, and methodologies, exemplifying endeavors to structure the early phase of the innovation process in specific contexts.

While recent contributions are significant, seminal works have produced models that served as reference points for structuring the FEI. Table 1 provides an overview of the four seminal models identified by Pereira et al. [ 12 , 20 ].

Seminal FEI models.

Source: Adapted from Pereira et al. [ 12 , 20 ].

Stage 0 (Discovery) : In this inaugural stage, the organization actively generates ideas for new products.

Gate 1 (Idea screen) : Ideas undergo a concise evaluation based on strategic, feasibility, and market criteria. Financial considerations are deferred at this point. Accepted ideas proceed to the next phase.

Stage 1 (Scoping) : The accepted idea transitions into a project, initiating a dual evaluation process:

Market evaluation : Involves research, user contact, and conceptual testing to determine market size and acceptance.

Technical evaluation : Encompasses feasibility, costs, and development timelines.

Gate 2 (Second screen) : Comprehensive information from market and technical evaluations prompts a reassessment of the project’s viability. If approved, the project advances to the next stage.

Stage 2 (Build business case) : Positioned just before product development, this stage involves:

Assessing the project’s attractiveness.

Defining clear objectives.

Conducting market, technical, operational, and financial evaluations.

Gate 3 (Development) : A pivotal decision point where the organization determines resource allocation for project development [ 17 , 18 ].

The FEI within the stage-gate model. Source: Adapted from Cooper [ 17 ].

Pre-Phase Zero : This initial phase concentrates on the continuous identification of opportunities within the organization. It involves generating ideas and conducting technological and market analyzes. When a promising opportunity is identified, it triggers the transition to Phase Zero. The authors emphasize that this phase should occur continuously within the organization.

Phase Zero : This phase is initiated when Pre-Phase Zero identifies a promising opportunity. Its primary objective is to define the concept of a new product.

Phase One : Following the conceptualization of the new product, Phase One focuses on analyzing feasibility and planning the project to initiate the NPD process formally. It is crucial to maintain a constant interface with the organization’s product and portfolio strategy throughout the entire process.

Three Phase Front End model. Source: Khurana and Rosenthal [ 11 ].

The New Concept Development (NCD) model, proposed by Koen et al. [ 14 , 15 ], is a theoretical construction composed of the three fundamental concepts: controllable activities, “engine” and influencing factors. Controllable activities represent the elements that the organization can control. The “engine” encompasses the controllable aspects of the organization that are responsible for driving the activities of the FEI. Finally, the influencing factors are variables that have an impact on the FEI and are relatively outside of the organization’s control [ 14 , 15 ]. Table 2 details the structure of the NCD model. In the structure of the NCD model, organizational capabilities are classified as an influencing factor because they usually change very slowly and are therefore uncontrollable. Alternatively, organizational capabilities can be incorporated into the “engine” to the extent that the organization can modify and control them [ 14 ].

Structure of the NCD model.

Source: Koen et al. [ 14 ].

The model proposed by Reid and De Brentani [ 19 ] provides a unique focus on disruptive innovations, highlighting their distinct entry into the organization compared to incremental innovations. According to this model, disruptive innovations typically originate from the external environment. Figure 4 illustrates how the front end of the innovation process initiates its flow based on information from the external environment, involving the identification of unstructured problems and the recognition of opportunities. This model emphasizes that disruptive innovations follow a distinctive path, with the FEI process being strongly influenced by external inputs. The opportunities identified undergo thorough analyzes and decisions at various organizational levels before being formally integrated into an NPD project [ 19 ].

The Fuzzy Front End of new product development for discontinuous innovations. Source: Reid and De Brentani [ 19 ].

The seminal models presented – Cooper’s Stage-Gate Model, Khurana, and Rosenthal’s Three Phase Front End Model, Koen et al.’s New Concept Development (NCD) Model, and Reid and De Brentani’s Model for Discontinuous Innovations – vary in focus, approach, depth, and structuring of activities. Despite these differences, a common thread emerges as they collectively address the FEI through key activities: identification and analysis of opportunities, generation, enrichment, and screening of ideas, product concept definition, and consideration of influencing factors (encompassing the outside world, market and technology information, scenario planning, competitive analysis, and organizational issues such as culture, leadership, strategy, portfolio, and capabilities).

The ultimate objective of these FEI activities is to formulate a well-defined product concept before entering the formal NPD stage. Table 3 establishes the correspondence between FEI activities and the structures of the seminal models.

FEI activities and their relationship with the seminal models.

To mitigate potential ambiguities in the interpretation of certain terms related to the FEI, Table 4 provides standardized reference definitions. This table serves as a reference guide, providing clear and standardized definitions for key terms associated with the FEI, enhancing clarity and consistency in their interpretation.

Definitions for terms related to the FEI.

2.3 Defense sector

High technological level : The defense industry requires substantial investments in research, development, and innovation to create sophisticated products such as aircraft, ships, weapons, and systems. These must operate safely and reliably under severe conditions [ 25 ], often characterized as Complex Products and Systems (CoPS). CoPS involve customization, production in small quantities by a few companies, integration of diverse knowledge areas, and a lifecycle spanning decades [ 26 ].

Technological duality : Innovations developed for military purposes may have civilian applications (spin-off) and vice versa (spin-in) [ 27 , 28 ]. Dual-use technologies, like GPS and the Internet, initially developed for defense, now find widespread civilian applications.

Governmental dependence : The defense market is highly regulated and relies on government contracts, resulting in a strong dependence on public resources. From a demand perspective, the defense market operates as a monopsony, with the State being the primary purchaser of goods and services [ 29 , 30 , 31 ].

High market concentration : Global defense market dominance by a few companies leads to limited competition and protectionist practices. Oligopolies in the defense market can collude, manipulate prices, limit competition, or engage in practices like dumping [ 32 ] to control strategic interests [ 31 , 33 ].

Vulnerability to geopolitical issues : The demand for defense equipment is influenced by geopolitical conflicts and international relations, resulting in a volatile market subject to sudden changes. Companies may exploit geopolitical issues for financial or strategic reasons, impacting commitments during times of national crisis [ 31 , 34 ].

In summary, the defense sector is characterized by its strategic importance, technological advancement, dual-use nature, governmental dependence, market concentration, and vulnerability to geopolitical issues. This situation is a combination of a monopoly/oligopoly, where a few major global players dominate the supply, and a monopsony, where the State centralizes the demand. Recognizing these peculiarities highlights the need for a comprehensive exploration of FEI dynamics within the defense sector.

3. Methodology

Databases : Scopus and Web of Science (WoS), aligning with the methodology outlined by Ferreira et al. [ 36 ].

Search string : The search string was crafted by combining key terms related to the FEI and the defense sector. The FEI-related terms were derived from a frequency analysis of authors’ keywords, following the methodology of Ferreira et al. [ 36 ]. To capture the comprehensive scope of the defense sector, terms related to aerospace were also incorporated, acknowledging that certain countries treat both topics as a unified strategic theme. For instance, the United States has the U.S. Space Force under its Department of Defense [ 37 ]. The search was conducted on September 21, 2023, focusing on terms found in the title, abstract, and keywords:

Scopus database: TITLE-ABS-KEY((“front end of innovation” OR “front-end of innovation” OR “front end innovation” OR “front-end innovation” OR “fuzzy front end” OR “fuzzy front-end”) AND (“military” OR “defense” OR “defense” OR “navy” OR “army” OR “air force” OR “aerospace” OR “aeronautic*” OR “astronautic*” OR “avionics”)).

WoS database: TS = ((“front end of innovation” OR “front-end of innovation” OR “front end innovation” OR “front-end innovation” OR “fuzzy front end” OR “fuzzy front-end”) AND (“military” OR “defense” OR “defense” OR “navy” OR “army” OR “air force” OR “aerospace” OR “aeronautic*” OR “astronautic*” OR “avionics”)).

Inclusion criteria : publications in English, Portuguese, or Spanish were considered, and the accessibility of the entire document was taken into account. Additionally, the publication had to address explicitly the FEI in the defense context.

The academic literature search yielded five documents from the Scopus database and two from WoS. Upon analysis, one redundancy was identified, resulting in six unique documents. Subsequently, it was observed that two articles did not meet the inclusion criteria, leaving four documents within the review scope. Following this initial search, the snowball technique was applied to identify relevant documents citing or cited by the selected publications. Additional efforts were made to explore works authored by the selected publications’ authors, uncovering three more documents.

In parallel with the academic literature search, the exploration of government defense management agencies’ websites led to the identification of 17 more documents. Therefore, while the academic literature contributed documents presenting general aspects of FEI in the defense sector, the gray literature addressed defense management in specific nations, ensuring representation across continents and encompassing both developed and developing countries. The nations (or alliances) covered included Australia, Brazil, China, India, NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization), the United Kingdom, the United States, and South Africa.

Thus, a total of 24 documents were selected for review. It is noteworthy that, during the research, no review works similar to this article were found. The steps of the review are represented in summary in Figure 5 , using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) diagram, a tool for presenting the flow of information through the different phases of a systematic literature review [ 38 ].

Stages of the systematic literature review. Source: Adapted from Page et al. [ 38 ].

4. Front end of innovation in the defense sector

The investigation of FEI in the defense sector is structured based on content mapping of the selected review documents, focusing on key FEI activities outlined in Section 2.2. These activities include the identification and analysis of opportunities; generation, enrichment, and screening of ideas; product concept definition; and consideration of influencing factors.

4.1 Identification and analysis of opportunities

The identification and analysis of opportunities serve as the primary catalyst for the FEI process. It occurs when an organization recognizes a gap, whether related to business or technology issues. This gap represents the difference between the current state and a desired future state, presenting an opportunity that can be exploited to gain a competitive advantage, address a threat, solve a problem, or enhance a situation [ 14 ]. As stressed by Khurana and Rosenthal [ 11 ], the phase of identifying and analyzing opportunities should be an ongoing and continuous process within an organization.

In the defense sector, the identification and analysis of opportunities are intricately tied to Capability-Based Planning (CBP), a central process in strategic defense management [ 39 , 40 ]. This strategic planning paradigm, initially utilized in the United States Nuclear Program during the 1960s, saw broader adoption by the U.S. Department of Defense in 2001, becoming a reference for armed forces worldwide [ 41 ]. From this standpoint, Table 5 provides a mapping of the phase of identification and analysis of opportunities within the documents reviewed.

Approaches to identification and analysis of opportunities within the review documents.

4.2 Generation, enrichment, and screening of ideas

According to Koen et al. [ 14 ], the generation and enrichment of ideas follow the identification and analysis of opportunities. An idea, as conceptualized by the authors, represents the most preliminary form of a new product or service, typically outlining a high-level vision for the planned solution related to the identified opportunity [ 14 ]. Cooper [ 17 ], in the stage-gate model, underscores that ideas for new products must undergo initial screening, known as gate 1, before being integrated into an organization’s project [ 17 ]. Reid and De Brentani [ 19 ] also stress the importance of a formal analysis of opportunities/ideas at the corporate level before progressing to the project level [ 19 ].

In the defense sector, as outlined in Table 6 , the identification of the need for a new product occurs when a capability gap analysis indicates the necessity for a new materiel solution. This triggers the formal process of acquiring a defense product. Table 6 provides a mapping of the phase of generation, enrichment, and screening of ideas within the reviewed documents.

Approaches to idea generation, enrichment, and screening within the review documents.

4.3 Product concept definition

According to Koen et al. [ 14 ], a well-defined product concept should entail a comprehensive configuration, offering both written and visual descriptions that encapsulate the primary features, customer benefits, and a broad understanding of the required technologies. This stage in product development represents the final step preceding the formal NPD process [ 14 ]. The models proposed by Khurana and Rosenthal [ 11 ], Reid and De Brentani [ 19 ], and Cooper [ 17 ] also emphasize the significance of product concept development, feasibility analysis, project planning, and decision-making as crucial prerequisites before formally entering the NPD phase.

In the defense sector, the Armed Forces commonly adopt the systems engineering lifecycle concept to structure their acquisition processes [ 56 ]. Within this framework, the product concept undergoes development through a top-down approach, comprising two distinct phases: logical description (problem domain) and physical description (solution domain). The logical or functional description essentially outlines the intended functionalities of the new product from the user’s perspective, providing an operational view. Building upon the logical description, the physical description then defines the high-level architecture of the product elements, encompassing systems, subsystems, assemblies, and/or components, from a technical perspective [ 57 , 58 , 59 ]. Table 7 provides a mapping of the product concept definition phase within the reviewed documents.

Approaches to product concept definition within the review documents.

4.4 Consideration of influencing factors

According to Koen et al. [ 14 ], influencing factors are variables that impact FEI and are relatively outside the organization’s control. Table 8 maps the influencing factors considered in the review documents.

Influencing factors within the review documents.

5. Discussion

After presenting the review results, it is essential to delve deeper into key findings and considerations identified throughout the study.

5.1 Synthetic diagnosis of the results

Table 9 provides a condensed overview, offering a synthetic diagnosis of the results derived from the review. It succinctly outlines FEI activities in the defense sector and establishes connections with the influencing factors under consideration.

FEI activities in the defense sector.

5.2 Peculiarities of FEI in the defense sector

After systematically mapping the FEI in defense sector against established FEI models, several distinct aspects specific to the military context have emerged, as shown in Table 10 .

Peculiarities of FEI in the defense sector.

5.3 Contributions to the FEI literature

Use of systems engineering approach : The defense sector prominently employs systems engineering activities during the early phase of military innovation. This approach encompasses requirements engineering and systems lifecycle management, aspects not explicitly emphasized in traditional FEI models.

Relevance of technological duality, criticality, and maturity : Concepts such as technological duality, criticality, and maturity play a crucial role in military FEI. These factors, while not extensively covered in established FEI models, are instrumental in decision-making processes, risk mitigation, and the strategic development of defense capabilities.

Organizational capabilities as the “engine” of FEI : In contrast to seminal NPD models that classify organizational capabilities as influencing factors, the defense sector integrates organizational capabilities as a fundamental component of the FEI “engine.” Capability-based planning is a central element in identifying and analyzing opportunities, as well as in generating, enriching, and screening ideas.

“Implementation” of military innovation : The implementation of military innovation necessitates a broader interpretation compared to traditional FEI models. In defense, implementation occurs when a new or improved product is seamlessly integrated into the capability’s portfolio of an Armed Force. This integration involves adjustments in various non-technological aspects, emphasizing the symbiosis between technological and doctrinal advancement.

Continuity in project leadership : Recognizing the high turnover of military leaders and the extended durations of defense projects, the continuity of leadership emerges as a critical consideration. Seminal FEI models do not explicitly address managing leadership continuity in NPD project planning.

Moreover, it is noteworthy that recent contributions in the FEI literature have started to delve deeper into the alignment between organizational strategy and FEI activities. Unlike seminal models that treat this issue generically, recent works, such as the integrative ontologies developed by Pereira et al. [ 20 ] and Castro and Ferreira [ 72 , 73 ], provide management artifacts designed to align organizational strategic vision with FEI activities. Employing the design science paradigm, these artifacts integrate constructs, models, methods, and instantiations, thereby enriching the strategic dimension of FEI literature.

5.4 Contributions to the defense literature

The defense sector, encompassing products ranging from CoPS to mass-produced items, presents a unique challenge due to its diverse complexity and production volume [ 74 ]. While the CoPS research area has an established connection with systems engineering literature, the realm of mass-produced products aligns more closely with the theoretical foundations of the FEI literature. Notably, defense documents predominantly draw from the CoPS approach, sparingly incorporating principles from mass production. However, recognizing that the military context spans both worlds, the integration of these approaches becomes crucial, and mapping established FEI models within the dynamics of the initial phase of the military innovation process serves as a valuable step in achieving this harmonization.

Moreover, the FEI literature, characterized by well-defined seminal models and recent integrative ontologies (as discussed in the previous section), contrasts with the more heterogeneous nature of the systems engineering literature. The latter encompasses diverse authors, countries, organizations, and standardization bodies, each adhering to distinct management models with unique nomenclatures and structures [ 43 , 44 , 45 , 47 , 48 , 54 , 55 , 57 , 58 , 59 ]. In this context, the FEI literature emerges as a unifying force, facilitating the creation of a common representation of knowledge related to the early stage of the military innovation process. This not only streamlines communication among specialists, decision-makers, managers, researchers, entrepreneurs, and other stakeholders in the defense field but also promotes greater efficiency in navigating the diverse landscape of defense innovation.

5.5 Limitations

Selection of seminal FEI models : The identification of seminal FEI models relied on findings from Pereira et al. [ 12 , 20 ] and co-citation analysis of FEI-related works available in the Scopus and WoS databases. Alternative criteria for model selection might yield a different set of seminal documents, potentially influencing the analysis.

Data collection in gray literature : The exploration of gray literature related to FEI in the military sector was constrained by the availability of documents on government websites of defense management agencies. This limitation could result in an incomplete representation of the landscape.

Scope of mapping : The review presented an initial mapping of FEI in the defense sector within seminal models. A more comprehensive and structured mapping could be achieved through the adoption of more robust methodological approaches, such as the design science paradigm [ 75 , 76 ]. This suggests that there is potential for a more in-depth and detailed examination of FEI activities in the defense sector.

Acknowledging these limitations is essential for a nuanced understanding of the scope and implications of the study, guiding future research endeavors in this domain.

6. Conclusion

This study aimed to comprehensively explore the dynamics of FEI in the defense sector through a systematic review encompassing 24 documents from both academic and gray literature. By analyzing seminal FEI models, the research mapped key activities within the defense context, including the identification and analysis of opportunities, generation, enrichment, and screening of ideas, product concept definition, and consideration of influencing factors.

The study’s contributions extend to both FEI and defense literature, introducing original perspectives. Notably, it emphasized the systems engineering approach, national strategic focus, technological duality, technological criticality, technological maturity, organizational capabilities as the “engine”, the unique concept of “implementation” in military innovation, and the importance of continuity in project leadership.

Acknowledging limitations, such as the criteria for selecting seminal FEI models, constraints in accessing gray literature, and the preliminary nature of the mapping, the study calls for future research to employ more robust methodologies, like the design science paradigm [ 75 , 76 ], for an in-depth understanding of the initial phase of the military innovation process.

In conclusion, this research lays a foundation for further exploration and synthesis of knowledge, contributing to the advancement of both FEI theory and its application in the defense sector.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the Brazilian Army (Atv PCENA V23-011).

We thank Dr. João José Pinto Ferreira (INESC TEC and Faculty of Engineering, University of Porto) for his expertise and help in writing the manuscript.

• 1. Tidd J, Bessant J. Managing Innovation: Integrating Technological, Market and Organizational Change. 7th ed. Hoboken, USA: Wiley; 2020
• 2. Keeley L, Walters H, Pikkel R, et al. Ten Types of Innovation: The Discipline of Building Breakthroughs. 1st ed. Hoboken, USA: Wiley; 2013
• 3. Boeddrich H-J. Ideas in the workplace: A new approach towards organizing the fuzzy front end of the innovation process. Creativity and Innovation Management. 2004; 13 :274-285
• 4. Koen P, Bertels H, Kleinschmidt E. Managing the front end of innovation - Part I: Results from a three-year study. Research-Technology Management. 2014; 57 :34-43
• 5. Koen P, Bertels H, Kleinschmidt E. Managing the front end of innovation - Part II: Results from a three-year study. Research-Technology Management. 2014; 57 :25-35
• 6. Markham SK. The impact of front-end innovation activities on product performance. Journal of Product Innovation Management. 2013; 30 :77-92
• 7. Stevens GA, Burley J. Piloting the rocket of radical innovation. IEEE Engineering Management Review. 2004; 32 :16-25. DOI: 10.1109/EMR.2004.25114 [Epub ahead of print]
• 8. Verworn B, Herstatt C, Nagahira A. The fuzzy front end of Japanese new product development projects: Impact on success and differences between incremental and radical projects. R&D Management. 2008; 38 :1-19
• 9. Williams MA, Kochhar AK, Tennant C. An object-oriented reference model of the fuzzy front end of the new product introduction process. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology. 2007; 34 :826-841
• 10. Khurana A, Rosenthal SR. Integrating the Fuzzy Front End of New Product Development. Cambridge, USA: MIT Sloan Management Review; 1997
• 11. Khurana A, Rosenthal SR. Towards holistic ‘front ends’ in new product development. Journal of Product Innovation Management. 1998; 15 :57-74
• 12. Pereira AR, Ferreira JJP, Lopes A. Front end of innovation: An integrative literature review. Journal of Innovation Management. 2017; 5 :22-39
• 13. Smith PG, Reinertsen DG. Developing Products in Half The Time. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold; 1991
• 14. Koen P, Ajamian G, Boyce S, et al. Fuzzy front end: Effective methods, tools, and techniques. Industrial Research. 2002. pp. 5-35
• 15. Koen P, Ajamian G, Burkart R, et al. Providing clarity and a common language to the ‘fuzzy front end’. Research Management. 2001; 44 :46-55
• 16. Kock A, Heising W, Gemünden HG. How ideation portfolio management influences front-end success. Journal of Product Innovation Management. 2015; 32 :539-555
• 17. Cooper RG. Perspective: The stage-gates idea-to-launch process-update, what’s new, and NexGen systems. Journal of Product Innovation Management. 2008; 25 :213-232
• 18. Cooper RG. Stage-gate systems: A new tool for managing new products. Business Horizons. 1990; 33 :44-54
• 19. Reid SE, De Brentani U. The fuzzy front end of new product development for discontinuous innovations: A theoretical model. Journal of Product Innovation Management. 2004; 21 :170-184
• 20. Pereira AR, Ferreira JJP, Lopes A. A knowledge representation of the beginning of the innovation process: The front end of innovation integrative ontology (FEI2O). Data & Knowledge Engineering. 2020; 125 :1-20
• 21. Schein EH. Organizational Culture and Leadership. 3rd ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass; 2004
• 22. PMI. The Standard for Portfolio Management. 2017. Available from: https://www.pmi.org/pmbok-guide-standards/foundational/standard-for-portfolio-management [Accessed: March 5, 2024]
• 23. Teece DJ, Pisano G, Shuen A. Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal. 1997; 18 :509-533. DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199708)18:7<509::AID-SMJ882>3.0.CO;2-Z [Epub ahead of print]
• 24. Brasil. Política Nacional de Defesa e Estratégia Nacional de Defesa. 2016
• 25. Bitzinger RA. The Modern Defense Industry: Political, Economic, and Technological Issues. Westport, USA: Praeger Publishers; 2009
• 26. Hobday M. Product complexity, innovation and industrial organisation. Research Policy. 1998; 26 :689-710
• 27. Amarante JCA d. Processos de obtenção de tecnologia militar. In: Texto para discussão. Rio de Janeiro, Brasil: Instituto de Pesquisa Econômica Aplicada (Ipea); 2013. p. 1877
• 28. Brustolin VM. Inovação e Desenvolvimento via Defesa Nacional nos EUA e no Brasil. Rio de Janeiro, Brasil: Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro e Universidade de Harvard; 2014
• 29. Urbano EP. A contribuição dos offsets em defesa para a inovação e transferência de tecnologia para a base industrial de defesa. Brasília, Brasil: Universidade de Brasília; 2019
• 30. Araujo BC, De Negri F, De Negri JA, et al. Base industrial de defesa. In: de Negri JA, Lemos MB, editors. O Núcleo Tecnológico da Indústria Brasileira. Brasília, DF: Ipea, FINEP e ABDI; 2011. pp. 595-653.
• 31. Galdino JF, Schons DL. Maquiavel e a importância do poder militar nacional. Coleção Meira Mattos: revista das ciências militares. 2022; 16 :369-384
• 32. Ethier WJ. Dumping. Journal of Political Economy. 1982; 90 :487-506
• 33. Anderton CH. Economics of arms trade. In: Handbook of Defense Economics. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier; 1995. pp. 523-561
• 34. da Silva CD. Planejamento Baseado em Capacidades e suas perspectivas para o Exército Brasileiro. Centro de Estudos Estratégicos do Exército - Artigos Estratégicos. 2019; 7 :21-29
• 35. Thomé AMT, Scavarda LF, Scavarda AJ. Conducting systematic literature review in operations management. Production Planning and Control. 2016; 27 :408-420
• 36. Ferreira JJP, Mention AL, Torkkeli M. Phrasing the giant: On the importance of rigour in literature search process. Journal of Innovation Management. 2020; 8 :1-10. DOI: 10.24840/2183-0606_008.002_0001 [Epub ahead of print]
• 37. United States. Defense Space Strategy Summary. 2020.
• 38. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. The BMJ. 2021; 372 :1-9. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.n71 [Epub ahead of print]
• 39. Najgebauer A, Antkiewicz R, Chmielewski M, et al. The qualitative and quantitative support method for capability based planning. In: Intelligent Information and Database Systems. Bali, Indonesia: Springer; 2015. pp. 212-223
• 40. Tagarev T. Capabilities-based planning for security sector transformation. Information & Security An International Journal. 2009; 24 :27-35
• 41. United States. Analytic Architecture for Capabilities-Based Planning, Mission-System Analysis, and Transformation. 2002
• 42. United States. 5123.01H-Charter of the Joint Requirements Oversight Council (JROC) and Implementation of the Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System (JCIDS). 2018
• 43. NATO. Joint Analysis Handbook. Lisbon, Portugal: NATO; 2016
• 44. United Kingdom. Knowledge in Defence (KiD). 2019
• 45. Australia. Defence Capability Manual. 2022
• 46. Barton J. China’s PLA Modernization through the DOTMLPF-P Lens. TRADOC Mad Scientist Laboratory; 2021. Available from: https://madsciblog.tradoc.army.mil/330-chinas-pla-modernization-through-the-dotmlpf-p-lens/
• 47. India. Defence Acquisition Procedure 2020. 2020
• 48. South Africa. South African Defence Review. 2015
• 49. Brasil. EB20-MF-10.102 - Manual de Fundamentos da Doutrina Militar Terrestre. 2019
• 50. Brasil. EB20-C-07.001 - Catálogo de Capacidades do Exército. 2014
• 51. Helfat CE, Peteraf MA. The dynamic resource-based view: Capability lifecycles. Strategic Management Journal. 2003; 24 :997-1010
• 52. Salvato C, Rerup C. Beyond collective entities: Multilevel research on organizational routines and capabilities. Journal of Management. 2010; 37 :468-490
• 53. Wallin J, Parida V, Isaksson O. Understanding product-service system innovation capabilities development for manufacturing companies. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management. 2015; 26 :763-787. DOI: 10.1108/JMTM-05-2013-0055 [Epub ahead of print]
• 54. United States. 5000.85 - Major Capability Acquisition. 2020
• 55. Brasil. EB10-IG-01.018 - Instruções Gerais para a Gestão do Ciclo de Vida dos Sistemas e Materiais de Emprego Militar. 2022
• 56. Faulconbridge R, Ryan M. Introduction to Systems Engineering. Canberra: Argos Press; 2015
• 57. Blanchard B, Fabrycky W. Systems Engineering and Analysis. 5th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall; 2011
• 58. International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE). INCOSE Systems Engineering Handbook. San Diego, USA: INCOSE; 2023
• 59. International Organization for Standardization (ISO). ISO/IEC/IEEE 15288 - Systems and Software Engineering - System Life Cycle Processes. Geneva, Switzerland: ISO; 2023
• 60. Innovations. Competing for defence ideas: Looking wider for innovation. Strategic Direction. 2008; 24 :35-37. DOI: 10.1108/02580540810839359 [Epub ahead of print]
• 61. Clegg B, Alexander I, Wingrove S, et al. Tool support for integrating extended enterprises. IEE Proceedings - Software. 2000; 147 :101-108. DOI: 10.1049/ip-sen:20000907 [Epub ahead of print]
• 62. Larsson A, Larsson T, Bylund N, et al. Rethinking virtual teams for streamlined development. In: Torres-Coronas T, Macgregor SP, editors. Higher Creativity for Virtual Teams - Developing Platforms for Co-Creation. Hershey, USA: Information Science Reference; 2007. DOI: 10.4018/978-1-59904-129-2.ch007 [Epub ahead of print]
• 63. Johansson C, Hicks B, Larsson AC, et al. Knowledge maturity as a means to support decision making during product-service systems development projects in the aerospace sector. Project Management Journal. 2011; 42 :32-50
• 64. United States. Critical and Emerging Technologies List Update. 2022
• 65. United States. Technology Readiness Assessment (TRA) Deskbook. 2009
• 66. United Kingdom. The Defence Capability Framework. 2022
• 67. Australia. Blueprint for Critical Technologies. 2021
• 68. Australia. The Action Plan for Critical Technologies. 2021
• 69. IEDI. O 14 o Plano Quinquenal Chinês: Transformando a China em potência industrial e tecnológica. Carta do Instituto de Estudos para o Desenvolvimento Industrial-Edição 1094; 2021. Available from: https://iedi.org.br/cartas/carta_iedi_n_1094.html [Accessed: July 2, 2023]
• 70. Brasil. Plano Estratégico do Exército 2020-2023. 2020
• 71. Organização para a Cooperação e o Desenvolvimento Econômico (OCDE). Manual de Oslo: Diretrizes para a Coleta e Interpretação de dados sobre Inovação Tecnológica. Paris: OCDE; 2005
• 72. Castro RN, Ferreira JJP. Project portfolio management in the front-end of innovation of research centers: A literature review. Technology Innovation Management Review. 2020; 10 :46-59
• 73. Castro RN, Ferreira JJP. The front-end of R&D at non-profit research centers: How does research produce impact? International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management. 2023; 20 :1-22
• 74. Girardi R, França Junior JA, Galdino JF. A customização de processos de avaliação de prontidão tecnológica baseados na escala TRL: Desenvolvimento de uma metodologia para o Exército Brasileiro. Coleção Meira Mattos: Revista das ciências militares. 2022; 16 :491-527. DOI: 10.52781/cmm.a084
• 75. Hevner AR, March ST, Park J, et al. Design science in information systems research. MIS Quarterly: Management Information Systems. 2004; 28 :75-105
• 76. Vaishnavi V, Kuechler B, Stacey P. Design Science Research in Information Systems. desrist.org - Design science research in information systems and technology; 2021. Available from: http://www.desrist.org/design-research-in-information-systems [Accessed: September 28, 2023]

© The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Continue reading from the same book

Edited by Sally Burt

Published: 25 September 2024

By Yuval Karniel and Amit Lavie-Dinur

88 downloads

By Haki Demolli

26 downloads

By Ulpia-Elena Botezatu and Adrian-Victor Vevera

40 downloads

IntechOpen Author/Editor? To get your discount, log in .

Discounts available on purchase of multiple copies. View rates

Local taxes (VAT) are calculated in later steps, if applicable.

Support: [email protected]

Advertisement

Non-invasive approaches to hydration assessment: a literature review

• Published: 26 September 2024
• Volume 52 , article number  132 , ( 2024 )

Cite this article

• Achraf Tahar 1 ,
• Hadil Zrour 1 ,
• Stéphane Dupont 2 &
• Agnieszka Pozdzik 3 , 4  

Explore all metrics

Traditional hydration assessment methods, while accurate, are often invasive and impractical for routine monitoring. In response, innovative non-invasive techniques such as bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA), electrodermal activity (EDA), electrocardiogram (ECG) monitoring, and urine color charts have emerged, offering greater comfort and accessibility for patients. These methods use various types of sensors to capture a range of bio-signals, followed by machine learning-based classification or regression methods, providing real-time feedback on hydration status, which is crucial for effective management and prevention of urinary stones. This review explores the principles, applications, and efficacy of these non-invasive techniques, highlighting their potential to transform hydration monitoring in clinical and everyday settings. By facilitating improved patient compliance and enabling proactive hydration management, these approaches align with contemporary trends in personalized healthcare. This article presents a literature review on non-invasive approaches to hydration assessment, focusing on their significance in preventing kidney stone disease and enhancing kidney health.

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

Access this article

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Protocol of a pilot-scale, single-arm, observational study to assess the utility and acceptability of a wearable hydration monitor in haemodialysis patients

Personalized prediction of optimal water intake in adult population by blended use of machine learning and clinical data

A Survey on Various Total Body Water Detection Techniques to Develop a Wearable Device

Explore related subjects.

• Artificial Intelligence

Data availability

No datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.

Abbreviations

Bioelectrical impedance analysis

Electrodermal activity

Electrocardiogram

Kidney stone disease

Extracellular water

Intracellular water

Galvanic skin response

Bidirectional long short-term memory

K-nearest neighbors

Monitoring my dehydration

Heart rate variability

Before exercise

Post-exercise

After hydration

Standard deviation of RR intervals

Root mean square of successive RR interval differences

Support vector machine

Electric potential sensing

Body mass index

Hydration monitor

Photoplethysmography

Dehydration body monitor

Lotan Y, Daudon M, Bruyère F, Talaska G, Strippoli G, Johnson RJ, Tack I (2013) Impact of fluid intake in the prevention of urinary system diseases: a brief review. Curr Opin Nephrol Hypertens 22:S1

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Williams JC, Gambaro G, Rodgers A et al (2021) Urine and stone analysis for the investigation of the renal stone former: a consensus conference. Urolithiasis 49:1–16

Pozdzik A, Grillo V, Sakhaee K (2024) Gaps in kidney stone disease management: from clinical theory to patient reality. Urolithiasis 52:61

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Dawson CH, Tomson CR (2012) Kidney stone disease: pathophysiology, investigation and medical treatment. Clin Med 12:467–471

Article   Google Scholar  

Wang J-S, Chiang H-Y, Chen H-L, Flores M, Navas-Acien A, Kuo C-C (2022) Association of water intake and hydration status with risk of kidney stone formation based on NHANES 2009–2012 cycles. Public Health Nutr 25:2403–2414

Dello Russo M, Formisano A, Lauria F et al (2023) Dietary Diversity and its association with diet quality and health status of European children, adolescents, and adults: results from the I.Family study. Foods 12:4458

Courbebaisse M, Travers S, Bouderlique E, Michon-Colin A, Daudon M, De Mul A, Poli L, Baron S, Prot-Bertoye C (2023) Hydration for adult patients with nephrolithiasis: specificities and current recommendations. Nutrients 15:4885

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Gamage KN, Jamnadass E, Sulaiman SK, Pietropaolo A, Aboumarzouk O, Somani BK (2020) The role of fluid intake in the prevention of kidney stone disease: a systematic review over the last two decades. Turk J Urol 46:S92–S103

Mohammedin AS, AlSaid AH, Almalki AM, Alsaiari AR, Alghamdi FN, Jalalah AA, Alghamdi AF, Jatoi N-A (2022) Assessment of hydration status and blood pressure in a tertiary care hospital at Al-Khobar. Cureus 14:e27706

PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Sawka MN, Latzka WA, Matott RP, Montain SJ (1998) Hydration effects on temperature regulation. Int J Sports Med 19(Suppl 2):S108-110

Thornton SN (2016) Increased hydration can be associated with weight loss. Front Nutr. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnut.2016.00018

Tamborino F, Cicchetti R, Mascitti M et al (2024) Pathophysiology and main molecular mechanisms of urinary stone formation and recurrence. Int J Mol Sci 25:3075

Barley OR, Chapman DW, Abbiss CR (2020) Reviewing the current methods of assessing hydration in athletes. J Int Soc Sports Nutr 17:52

Alaslani R, Perzhilla L, Rahman MMU, Laleg-Kirati T-M, Al-Naffouri TY (2024) You can monitor your hydration level using your smartphone camera. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2402.07467

Noor Azhar M, Bustam A, Naseem FS, Shuin SS, Md Yusuf MH, Hishamudin NU, Poh K (2023) Improving the reliability of smartphone-based urine colorimetry using a colour card calibration method. Digit Health 9:20552076231154684

AlDisi R, Bader Q, Bermak A (2022) Hydration assessment using the bio-impedance analysis method. Sensors 22:6350

O’Brien C, Young AJ, Sawka MN (2002) Bioelectrical impedance to estimate changes in hydration status. Int J Sports Med 23:361–366

Liaqat S, Dashtipour K, Rizwan A, Usman M, Shah SA, Arshad K, Assaleh K, Ramzan N (2022) Personalized wearable electrodermal sensing-based human skin hydration level detection for sports, health and wellbeing. Sci Rep 12:3715

Kulkarni N, Compton C, Luna J, Alam MAU (2020) Monitoring my dehydration: a non-invasive dehydration alert system using electrodermal activity. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2009.13626

Rizwan A, Abu Ali N, Zoha A, Ozturk M, Alomaniy A, Imran M, Abbasi Q (2020) Non-invasive hydration level estimation in human body using galvanic skin response. IEEE Sens J. https://doi.org/10.1109/JSEN.2020.2965892

Alvarez A, Severeyn E, Velásquez J, Wong S, Perpiñan G, Huerta M (2019) Machine learning methods in the classification of the athletes dehydration. In: 2019 IEEE Fourth Ecuad. Tech. Chapters Meet. ETCM. pp 1–5

Rendon-Morales E, Roggen D, Prance H, Prance RJ (2015) Towards the correlation between human hydration and the electrical activity of the heart using Electric Potential Sensors. In: 2015 IEEE Sens. Appl. Symp. SAS. pp 1–5

Kaveh A, Chung W (2013) Classification of hydration status using electrocardiogram and machine learning. In: AIP Conference Proceedings (Vol. 1559, No. 1, pp. 240-249). American Institute of Physics

Google Scholar  

Mengistu Y, Pham M, Manh Do H, Sheng W (2016) AutoHydrate: a wearable hydration monitoring system. In: 2016 IEEERSJ Int. Conf. Intell. Robots Syst. IROS. pp 1857–1862

Rodin D, Shapiro Y, Pinhasov A, Kreinin A, Kirby M (2022) An accurate wearable hydration sensor: real-world evaluation of practical use. PLoS ONE 17:e0272646

Reljin N, Malyuta Y, Zimmer G, Mendelson Y, Blehar DJ, Darling CE, Chon KH (2018) Automatic Detection of dehydration using support vector machines. In: 2018 14th Symp. Neural Netw. Appl. NEUREL. pp 1–6

Chew N, Noor Azhar AM, Bustam A, Azanan MS, Wang C, Lum LCS (2020) Assessing dehydration status in dengue patients using urine colourimetry and mobile phone technology. PLoS Negl Trop Dis 14:e0008562

Mentes JC, Wakefield B, Culp K (2006) Use of a urine color chart to monitor hydration status in nursing home residents. Biol Res Nurs 7:197–203

Conroy DE, West AB, Brunke-Reese D, Thomaz E, Streeper NM (2020) Just-in-time adaptive intervention to promote fluid consumption in patients with kidney stones. Health Psychol Off J Div Health Psychol Am Psychol Assoc 39:1062–1069

Streeper NM, Fairbourn JD, Marks J, Thomaz E, Ram N, Conroy DE (2023) Feasibility of mini sipIT behavioral intervention to increase urine volume in patients with kidney stones. Urology 179:39–43

Conroy DE, Marks J, Cutshaw A, Ram N, Thomaz E, Streeper NM (2024) Promoting fluid intake to increase urine volume for kidney stone prevention: protocol for a randomized controlled efficacy trial of the sipIT intervention. Contemp Clin Trials 138:107454

Gray M, Birkenfeld JS, Butterworth I (2023) Noninvasive monitoring to detect dehydration: are we there yet? Annu Rev Biomed Eng 25:23–49

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Johnson KB, Wei W, Weeraratne D, Frisse ME, Misulis K, Rhee K, Zhao J, Snowdon JL (2021) Precision medicine, AI, and the future of personalized health care. Clin Transl Sci 14:86–93

Scales CD, Desai AC, Harper JD et al (2021) Prevention of urinary stones with hydration (PUSH): design and rationale of a clinical trial. Am J Kidney Dis Off J Natl Kidney Found 77:898-906.e1

Aksenov LI, Streeper NM, Scales CD (2024) Leveraging behavioral modification technology for the prevention of kidney stones. Curr Opin Urol 34:14–19

Greenhalgh T, Thorne S, Malterud K (2018) Time to challenge the spurious hierarchy of systematic over narrative reviews? Eur J Clin Invest 48:e12931

Kamran F, Le VC, Frischknecht A, Wiens J, Sienko KH (2021) Noninvasive estimation of hydration status in athletes using wearable sensors and a data-driven approach based on orthostatic changes. Sensors 21:4469

Samoni S, Bonilla-Reséndiz LI (2019) Noninvasive methods of fluid status assessment in critically ill patients. Clinical Publishing, pp. 821–825.e2

Jaffrin MY, Morel H (2008) Body fluid volumes measurements by impedance: a review of bioimpedance spectroscopy (BIS) and bioimpedance analysis (BIA) methods. Med Eng Phys 30:1257–1269

Bari DS, Rammoo MNS, Aldosky HYY, Jaqsi MK, Martinsen ØG (2023) The five basic human senses evoke electrodermal activity. Sensors 23:8181

“Tobii Customer Portal.” [Online]. Available: https://connect.tobii.com . Accessed 06 Aug 2024

“GSR Devices, GSR Signals, Metrics and Applications | MM.” [Online]. Available: https://www.ashokcharan.com/Marketing-Analytics/bm-galvanic-skin-response.php#gsc.tab=0 . Accessed 06 Aug 2024

“Electrocardiogram (EKG/ECG),” Cleveland Clinic. [Online]. Available: https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diagnostics/16953-electrocardiogram-ekg . Accessed 07 Aug 2024

Sarvazyan AP, Tsyuryupa SN, Calhoun M, Utter A (2016) Acoustical method of whole-body hydration status monitoring. Acoust Phys 62:514–522

Mengistu Y, Pham M, Do HM, Sheng W (2016) AutoHydrate: a wearable hydration monitoring system. In: 2016 IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems (IROS), pp 1857–1862. https://doi.org/10.1109/IROS.2016.7759295

Quarti-Trevano F, Seravalle G, Dell’Oro R, Mancia G, Grassi G (2021) Autonomic cardiovascular alterations in chronic kidney disease: effects of dialysis, kidney transplantation, and renal denervation. Curr Hypertens Rep 23:10

de Moraes J et al (2018) Advances in photopletysmography signal analysis for biomedical applications. Sensors. https://doi.org/10.3390/s18061894

Feng Y, Fang G, Qu C, Cui S, Geng X, Gao D, Qin F, Zhao J (2022) Validation of urine colour L*a*b* for assessing hydration amongst athletes. Front Nutr. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnut.2022.997189

Belasco R, Edwards T, Munoz AJ, Rayo V, Buono MJ (2020) The effect of hydration on urine color objectively evaluated in CIE L*a*b* color space. Front Nutr 7:576974

“The science of nutrition and healthy eating: Week 3: 2 | OpenLearn - Open University.” Accessed: Aug. 27, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.open.edu/openlearn/mod/oucontent/view.php?id=72178&section=2 . Accessed 25 Aug 2024

Calhoun MC, Utter A, McAnulty SR, McBride JM, Zwetsloot J, Austin M, Mehlhorn JD, Sommerfield L, Tsyuryupa S, Sarvazyan A (2015) Validity of an acoustic method to assess whole-body hydration status. Proc Meet Acoust 23:020001

Kreinin A (2017) Study details | analysis of sweat secretion and body dehydration monitoring | ClinicalTrials.gov. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT03229109?cond=NCT03229109&rank=1 . Accessed 7 Sep 2024

Marks J, E. Conroy D, M. Streeper N (2023) CLINICAL TRIALS SipIT behavioral intervention clinical trial to increase fluid intake for kidney stone prevention - American Urological Association. https://auanews.net/issues/articles/2023/october-extra-2023/clinical-trials-sipit-behavioral-intervention-clinical-trial-to-increase-fluid-intake-for-kidney-stone-prevention . Accessed 7 Sep 2024

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Research, Development and Innovation, Renal Care and Research Srl, Rue Saint Martin 35, 1457, Walhain, Nil Saint Vicent, Belgium

Achraf Tahar & Hadil Zrour

Artificial Intelligence Research Unit (MAIA), Department of Computer Science, University of Mons, Avenue Maistriau15, 7000, Mons, Belgium

Stéphane Dupont

Kidney Stone Clinic, University Hospital Brugmann, Place A. Van Gehuchtenplein 4, 1020, Brussels, Belgium

Agnieszka Pozdzik

Faculty of Medicine, Université Libre de Bruxelles (ULB), Route de Lennik 808, 1070, Brussels, Belgium

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

A.T. and A.P. wrote the main manuscript text. A.T. prepared figures. All authors reviewed the manuscript.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Achraf Tahar or Agnieszka Pozdzik .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

H.Z. is currently employed at Renal Care & Research. A.P. serves on the board of Renal Care & Research.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

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

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Tahar, A., Zrour, H., Dupont, S. et al. Non-invasive approaches to hydration assessment: a literature review. Urolithiasis 52 , 132 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-024-01630-y

Download citation

Received : 03 September 2024

Accepted : 09 September 2024

Published : 26 September 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-024-01630-y

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

• Kidney stones
• Water intake
• Mobile application
• Smart bottle
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research