How To Set Up A Literature Review Apa

What this handout is about

This handout will explain what literature reviews are and offer insights into the course and structure of literature reviews in the humanities, social sciences, and sciences.

Introduction

OK. You've got to write a literature review. You dust off a novel and a book of poetry, settle downward in your chair, and go set up to consequence a "thumbs upwards" or "thumbs down" as you leaf through the pages. "Literature review" done. Right?

Incorrect! The "literature" of a literature review refers to any drove of materials on a topic, non necessarily the great literary texts of the world. "Literature" could be anything from a ready of government pamphlets on British colonial methods in Africa to scholarly articles on the treatment of a torn ACL. And a review does non necessarily mean that your reader wants yous to give your personal opinion on whether or not you liked these sources.

What is a literature review, and then?

A literature review discusses published data in a detail discipline, and sometimes information in a particular bailiwick expanse within a sure time period.

A literature review tin be just a simple summary of the sources, just it usually has an organizational design and combines both summary and synthesis. A summary is a recap of the important information of the source, but a synthesis is a re-organisation, or a reshuffling, of that information. It might give a new interpretation of old textile or combine new with quondam interpretations. Or information technology might trace the intellectual progression of the field, including major debates. And depending on the situation, the literature review may evaluate the sources and suggest the reader on the nigh pertinent or relevant.

But how is a literature review unlike from an academic research paper?

The main focus of an bookish enquiry paper is to develop a new argument, and a research paper is probable to contain a literature review every bit 1 of its parts. In a research paper, y'all utilise the literature every bit a foundation and every bit back up for a new insight that you contribute. The focus of a literature review, however, is to summarize and synthesize the arguments and ideas of others without adding new contributions.

Why practice we write literature reviews?

Literature reviews provide you with a handy guide to a particular topic. If yous have limited fourth dimension to conduct research, literature reviews tin can requite you an overview or human activity as a stepping stone. For professionals, they are useful reports that keep them upwards to engagement with what is current in the field. For scholars, the depth and breadth of the literature review emphasizes the credibility of the writer in his or her field. Literature reviews as well provide a solid groundwork for a research paper'southward investigation. Comprehensive knowledge of the literature of the field is essential to about research papers.

Who writes these things, anyway?

Literature reviews are written occasionally in the humanities, but mostly in the sciences and social sciences; in experiment and lab reports, they constitute a section of the paper. Sometimes a literature review is written every bit a newspaper in itself.

Let'southward become to it! What should I do before writing the literature review?

Analyze

If your consignment is not very specific, seek clarification from your teacher:

Roughly how many sources should y'all include?
What types of sources (books, periodical articles, websites)?
Should you summarize, synthesize, or critique your sources by discussing a common theme or effect?
Should you evaluate your sources?
Should yous provide subheadings and other groundwork information, such equally definitions and/or a history?

Notice models

Look for other literature reviews in your area of interest or in the discipline and read them to get a sense of the types of themes you might want to wait for in your own research or ways to organize your final review. You tin simply put the discussion "review" in your search engine along with your other topic terms to find articles of this type on the Internet or in an electronic database. The bibliography or reference section of sources you've already read are as well excellent entry points into your own inquiry.

Narrow your topic

At that place are hundreds or even thousands of articles and books on nigh areas of study. The narrower your topic, the easier information technology will exist to limit the number of sources y'all need to read in club to get a good survey of the material. Your teacher will probably non expect you to read everything that's out there on the topic, but you'll brand your chore easier if you showtime limit your telescopic.

Go on in listen that UNC Libraries have enquiry guides and to databases relevant to many fields of study. You can attain out to the subject area librarian for a consultation: https://library.unc.edu/support/consultations/.

And don't forget to tap into your professor's (or other professors') cognition in the field. Inquire your professor questions such as: "If you had to read only one book from the 90's on topic Ten, what would it be?" Questions such equally this aid you to detect and determine quickly the most seminal pieces in the field.

Consider whether your sources are current

Some disciplines crave that y'all utilize data that is every bit electric current equally possible. In the sciences, for instance, treatments for medical problems are constantly changing according to the latest studies. Information even ii years old could be obsolete. All the same, if you are writing a review in the humanities, history, or social sciences, a survey of the history of the literature may exist what is needed, because what is important is how perspectives have inverse through the years or within a certain time period. Try sorting through some other current bibliographies or literature reviews in the field to go a sense of what your field of study expects. Y'all can also use this method to consider what is currently of interest to scholars in this field and what is non.

Strategies for writing the literature review

Find a focus

A literature review, like a term paper, is ordinarily organized around ideas, non the sources themselves as an annotated bibliography would exist organized. This means that you lot will not just merely list your sources and go into detail nearly each one of them, one at a time. No. Equally y'all read widely but selectively in your topic surface area, consider instead what themes or bug connect your sources together. Do they present one or different solutions? Is there an aspect of the field that is missing? How well practice they present the material and exercise they portray it according to an advisable theory? Practise they reveal a trend in the field? A raging debate? Pick one of these themes to focus the organization of your review.

Convey information technology to your reader

A literature review may non have a traditional thesis statement (one that makes an argument), but you practice need to tell readers what to expect. Try writing a simple statement that lets the reader know what is your principal organizing principle. Here are a couple of examples:

The current trend in handling for congestive centre failure combines surgery and medicine.
More than and more cultural studies scholars are accepting popular media as a field of study worthy of academic consideration.

Consider organization

You've got a focus, and you lot've stated it clearly and directly. Now what is the most effective way of presenting the information? What are the virtually important topics, subtopics, etc., that your review needs to include? And in what society should yous present them? Develop an organization for your review at both a global and local level:

Starting time, encompass the basic categories

Just like most bookish papers, literature reviews as well must incorporate at least three basic elements: an introduction or background information department; the body of the review containing the discussion of sources; and, finally, a conclusion and/or recommendations department to stop the paper. The following provides a brief description of the content of each:

Introduction: Gives a quick idea of the topic of the literature review, such as the primal theme or organizational pattern.
Torso: Contains your discussion of sources and is organized either chronologically, thematically, or methodologically (run across beneath for more information on each).
Conclusions/Recommendations: Discuss what you have drawn from reviewing literature so far. Where might the discussion proceed?

Organizing the torso

Once y'all take the basic categories in place, then you must consider how you will present the sources themselves inside the body of your paper. Create an organizational method to focus this section even farther.

To help you come up with an overall organizational framework for your review, consider the following scenario:

You've decided to focus your literature review on materials dealing with sperm whales. This is because you've just finished reading Moby Dick, and you wonder if that whale's portrayal is actually real. Yous start with some articles about the physiology of sperm whales in biology journals written in the 1980's. But these manufactures refer to some British biological studies performed on whales in the early 18th century. So yous check those out. And then you lot wait up a book written in 1968 with information on how sperm whales have been portrayed in other forms of art, such every bit in Alaskan poetry, in French painting, or on whale bone, every bit the whale hunters in the belatedly 19th century used to do. This makes you wonder about American whaling methods during the time portrayed in Moby Dick, so you find some academic articles published in the last five years on how accurately Herman Melville portrayed the whaling scene in his novel.

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

Chronological: If your review follows the chronological method, you could write about the materials above according to when they were published. For instance, first you would talk most the British biological studies of the 18th century, then well-nigh Moby Dick, published in 1851, so the book on sperm whales in other art (1968), and finally the biology articles (1980s) and the recent articles on American whaling of the 19th century. But there is relatively no continuity amid subjects hither. And discover that even though the sources on sperm whales in other fine art and on American whaling are written recently, they are about other subjects/objects that were created much earlier. Thus, the review loses its chronological focus.

By publication: Lodge your sources by publication chronology, and then, just if the social club demonstrates a more of import trend. For example, you could lodge a review of literature on biological studies of sperm whales if the progression revealed a change in autopsy practices of the researchers who wrote and/or conducted the studies.

By trend: A amend way to organize the above sources chronologically is to examine the sources under some other trend, such as the history of whaling. Then your review would have subsections co-ordinate to eras inside this period. For instance, the review might examine whaling from pre-1600-1699, 1700-1799, and 1800-1899. Under this method, you would combine the contempo studies on American whaling in the 19th century with Moby Dick itself in the 1800-1899 category, even though the authors wrote a century apart.

Thematic: Thematic reviews of literature are organized effectually a topic or issue, rather than the progression of time. However, progression of time may still be an important cistron in a thematic review. For instance, the sperm whale review could focus on the evolution of the harpoon for whale hunting. While the study focuses on i topic, harpoon technology, it volition still be organized chronologically. The simply difference here between a "chronological" and a "thematic" approach is what is emphasized the nearly: the development of the harpoon or the harpoon technology.But more accurate thematic reviews tend to pause away from chronological society. For case, a thematic review of material on sperm whales might examine how they are portrayed as "evil" in cultural documents. The subsections might include how they are personified, how their proportions are exaggerated, and their behaviors misunderstood. A review organized in this way would shift between fourth dimension periods inside each section according to the betoken made.

Methodological: A methodological arroyo differs from the 2 above in that the focusing cistron ordinarily does not have to do with the content of the fabric. Instead, it focuses on the "methods" of the researcher or writer. For the sperm whale project, one methodological arroyo would exist to look at cultural differences between the portrayal of whales in American, British, and French art work. Or the review might focus on the economic bear on of whaling on a customs. A methodological scope will influence either the types of documents in the review or the way in which these documents are discussed.
Once you've decided on the organizational method for the trunk of the review, the sections you need to include in the paper should be easy to figure out. They should arise out of your organizational strategy. In other words, a chronological review would have subsections for each vital fourth dimension period. A thematic review would have subtopics based upon factors that relate to the theme or issue.

Sometimes, though, you might demand to add together boosted sections that are necessary for your study, but do not fit in the organizational strategy of the body. What other sections yous include in the trunk is up to you lot. Put in merely what is necessary. Hither are a few other sections you might want to consider:

Current State of affairs: Data necessary to empathize the topic or focus of the literature review.
History: The chronological progression of the field, the literature, or an thought that is necessary to sympathise the literature review, if the body of the literature review is not already a chronology.
Methods and/or Standards: The criteria you used to select the sources in your literature review or the way in which you nowadays your information. For case, y'all might explain that your review includes just peer-reviewed articles and journals.

Questions for Farther Research: What questions about the field has the review sparked? How volition you further your research as a result of the review?

Begin composing

One time you've settled on a full general blueprint of organization, y'all're ready to write each department. There are a few guidelines you lot should follow during the writing stage too. Here is a sample paragraph from a literature review about sexism and language to illuminate the post-obit word:

However, other studies have shown that even gender-neutral antecedents are more than likely to produce masculine images than feminine ones (Gastil, 1990). Hamilton (1988) asked students to consummate sentences that required them to fill in pronouns that agreed with gender-neutral antecedents such as "author," "pedestrian," and "persons." The students were asked to depict any image they had when writing the judgement. Hamilton establish that people imagined three.3 men to each adult female in the masculine "generic" condition and 1.5 men per adult female in the unbiased condition. Thus, while ambient sexism deemed for some of the masculine bias, sexist language amplified the effect. (Source: Erika Falk and Jordan Mills, "Why Sexist Linguistic communication Affects Persuasion: The Role of Homophily, Intended Audience, and Criminal offense," Women and Language19:ii).

Utilise testify

In the example above, the writers refer to several other sources when making their point. A literature review in this sense is just similar any other academic enquiry paper. Your interpretation of the available sources must be backed up with testify to show that what you are saying is valid.

Exist selective

Select only the near important points in each source to highlight in the review. The blazon of information you choose to mention should chronicle directly to the review'southward focus, whether information technology is thematic, methodological, or chronological.

Use quotes sparingly

Falk and Mills do not apply whatever straight quotes. That is because the survey nature of the literature review does non allow for in-depth discussion or detailed quotes from the text. Some brusque quotes here and at that place are okay, though, if y'all want to emphasize a point, or if what the author said just cannot be rewritten in your ain words. Notice that Falk and Mills do quote certain terms that were coined by the writer, not common knowledge, or taken directly from the study. But if you find yourself wanting to put in more quotes, check with your teacher.

Summarize and synthesize

Remember to summarize and synthesize your sources within each paragraph also as throughout the review. The authors here recapitulate important features of Hamilton's study, merely then synthesize it by rephrasing the study's significance and relating it to their own piece of work.

Keep your own vocalisation

While the literature review presents others' ideas, your voice (the author's) should remain front and centre. Find that Falk and Mills weave references to other sources into their ain text, but they still maintain their ain voice by starting and ending the paragraph with their own ideas and their own words. The sources support what Falk and Mills are saying.

Utilize caution when paraphrasing

When paraphrasing a source that is not your own, be sure to represent the author'south information or opinions accurately and in your own words. In the preceding example, Falk and Mills either directly refer in the text to the writer of their source, such equally Hamilton, or they provide ample notation in the text when the ideas they are mentioning are not their own, for instance, Gastil'southward. For more information, please see our handout on plagiarism.

Revise, revise, revise

Draft in hand? Now y'all're ready to revise. Spending a lot of time revising is a wise thought, because your main objective is to present the material, not the argument. So check over your review again to make sure it follows the assignment and/or your outline. And then, merely equally you would for most other bookish forms of writing, rewrite or rework the language of your review and then that you've presented your data in the about concise manner possible. Be sure to use terminology familiar to your audience; get rid of unnecessary jargon or slang. Finally, double check that y'all've documented your sources and formatted the review appropriately for your discipline. For tips on the revising and editing process, see our handout on revising drafts.

Works consulted

We consulted these works while writing this handout. This is not a comprehensive list of resource on the handout'south topic, and we encourage you lot to do your own research to find additional publications. Delight practise not use this list as a model for the format of your ain reference list, as it may not match the citation fashion you are using. For guidance on formatting citations, please meet the UNC Libraries commendation tutorial. We revise these tips periodically and welcome feedback.

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

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

Lamb, Sandra Due east. 1998. How to Write It: A Complete Guide to Everything You'll Ever Write. Berkeley: 10 Speed Press.

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

Troyka, Lynn Quittman, and Doug Hesse. 2022. Simon and Schuster Handbook for Writers, 11th ed. London: Pearson.

Creative Commons License This piece of work is licensed nether a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs four.0 License.
You may reproduce it for non-commercial use if you lot use the unabridged handout and attribute the source: The Writing Heart, University of Due north Carolina at Chapel Hill

Make a Souvenir