previous studies in literature review

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, 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..., how to choose a dissertation topic, how to write a phd research proposal, how to write an academic paragraph (step-by-step guide).

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.

Receive feedback on language, structure, and formatting

Professional editors proofread and edit your paper by focusing on:

• Academic style
• Vague sentences
• Style consistency

See an example

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.

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

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 3, 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, "i thought ai proofreading was useless but..".

I've been using Scribbr for years now and I know it's a service that won't disappoint. It does a good job spotting mistakes”

Building On The Past: How To Write Previous Studies In Research

Crafting an effective previous study is a foundation for your research. Learn how to write previous studies in research through this guide.

Have you ever wondered how research builds upon itself, creating a foundation for discoveries and insights? Is it wrong if you indulge in working on previous studies in research and get a new idea out of it?

The significance of previous studies in research cannot be underestimated. Every piece of scholarly work, from groundbreaking research to humble literature reviews , contributes to the ever-expanding area of knowledge. 

In this article, we explore the importance of delving into the archives of research, identifying opportunities for further investigation, and ultimately advancing our understanding of the world around us. Let’s get started and understand how to write previous studies in research . 

Purpose And Scope Of Previous Study In Research

The purpose of previous studies in research is to provide a foundation for new investigations. It helps researchers understand what has already been studied, what knowledge gaps exist, and what questions need further exploration. By looking at what others have done, researchers can build on existing knowledge, avoid repeating the same work, and ensure their study contributes something valuable to the field. It also helps validate their research design and methods, making their findings more credible.

The scope of previous studies in research refers to the range of literature and sources that researchers consider relevant to their own study. It involves selecting and reviewing studies that directly relate to their research topic and objectives. Researchers should focus on recent and up-to-date works, including both influential studies and the latest advancements in the field. By being selective and inclusive, they can gain a well-rounded understanding of what has been done before, guiding them to ask meaningful research questions and making their study more impactful.

How To Write Previous Studies In Research

To write the previous studies, you first need to understand the steps in crafting a literature review and the limitations involved. So firstly, let’s understand what is a literature review:

What Is Literature Review?

A literature review is a critical and comprehensive evaluation of existing published research, scholarly articles, books, and other sources relevant to a particular topic or research question. It serves as a crucial component of academic research and helps to establish the context, identify gaps in knowledge, and provide the theoretical framework for the new study. A well-conducted literature review demonstrates the researcher’s familiarity with the existing literature and provides the basis for formulating research objectives and hypotheses.

Also read: What Is A Literature Review? Get The Concept And Start Using It

Literature Review Process

The literature review process typically involves the following steps:

Defining The Research Question

The process starts by clearly defining the research question or topic that the literature review aims to address. A well-defined question helps in narrowing down the search for relevant literature.

Conducting A Comprehensive Search

Researchers then conduct a systematic search for existing literature using academic databases, libraries, online journals, and other reputable sources. Keywords and search terms related to the research question are used to identify relevant studies.

Evaluating The Quality Of Sources

The selected sources are critically evaluated for their quality, credibility, and relevance to the research topic. Researchers consider factors such as the reputation of the authors, the rigor of the research methodology, and the publication venue.

Summarizing And Synthesizing

Researchers summarize the key findings and main points from each selected source. They also identify common themes, trends, and conflicting viewpoints across the literature.

Organizing The Literature

The information gathered from the literature review is organized in a structured manner. Researchers may use themes, categories, or chronological order to present the findings effectively.

Writing The Literature Review

The literature review is then written, incorporating the synthesized information into a coherent narrative. The review should highlight the significance of previous studies, their limitations, and their implications for the new research.

Citing And Referencing

Proper citations and references are provided for all the sources included in the literature review. This ensures academic integrity and acknowledges the work of other researchers.

Also read: Literature Mapping in Scientific Research: A Comprehensive Review

How To Organize And Evaluate Your Literature Review?

Organizing and evaluating sources for your literature review is a crucial process that involves systematically gathering relevant academic materials and assessing their credibility and relevance to your research topic. 

Begin by clearly defining your research question or focus, which will guide your search for appropriate sources. Utilize academic databases, journals, books, and reputable online platforms to gather a diverse range of scholarly materials. 

As you collect sources, categorize them based on their themes, methodologies, or key arguments to facilitate a coherent and logical structure for your literature review. Additionally, critically evaluate each source’s authority, currency, objectivity, and reliability to ensure you include high-quality and trustworthy information in your review. 

By employing a rigorous approach to organizing and evaluating your sources, you will enhance the academic rigor and impact of your literature review.

Limitations Of Previous Studies In Research

The limitations of previous studies are common aspects that researchers should consider while conducting a literature review or developing their own research. These limitations may include:

Sample Size And Representativeness

Some studies may have small sample sizes, which can limit the generalizability of their findings to larger populations or diverse groups. Non-representative samples may also introduce bias into the results .

Research Design And Methodology

Previous studies may have used different research designs or methodologies that could impact the reliability and validity of their results. Flaws in the study design or data collection methods may affect the accuracy of the findings.

Data Quality And Availability

Studies may rely on secondary data sources or data with inherent limitations, potentially affecting the accuracy and completeness of the information used for analysis.

Scope And Generalizability

The scope of a study might be narrow, focusing on a specific population, region, or time period, making it challenging to apply the findings to broader contexts.

Publication Bias

Studies that show statistically significant or positive results may be more likely to get published, while studies with null or non-significant results might go unpublished, leading to a biased representation of the literature.

Ethical Considerations

Ethical issues in data collection or research conduct, such as inadequate informed consent or potential harm to participants, could limit the usefulness or ethical soundness of previous studies.

Related article: What Are The Limitations In Research And How To Write Them?

Identifying Opportunities For Future Research Based On Previous Studies

Identifying opportunities for future research based on previous studies is an essential aspect of conducting a literature review and advancing knowledge in a particular field. Here are some strategies to identify such opportunities:

Unanswered Questions

Look for gaps in the existing literature where important questions remain unanswered or areas where conflicting or inconclusive results have been reported. These gaps represent opportunities for future research to delve deeper into the topic and provide more comprehensive insights.

Emerging Trends

Identify emerging trends or new developments within the field. These can indicate areas that are gaining significance but may not yet have been extensively studied. Exploring these emerging trends can contribute to the cutting edge of research.

Limitations Of Previous Studies

As mentioned earlier, assess the limitations of previous studies. These limitations can point to areas that need further investigation, using improved methodologies or data sources to overcome the shortcomings of earlier research.

Replication Studies

Consider replicating studies that have produced significant findings but have not been replicated by other researchers. Replication studies help validate and strengthen the robustness of existing findings.

Cross-Disciplinary Research

Look for opportunities to integrate knowledge and methodologies from different disciplines. Combining insights from diverse fields can lead to innovative research and fresh perspectives on existing problems.

The Bottom Line

The role of previous studies in research and literature review is crucial in shaping knowledge within any field. Through a comprehensive and critical examination of existing literature, researchers can identify gaps, trends, limitations, and unanswered questions that provide valuable opportunities for future investigation. 

Previous studies serve as a foundation upon which new research can build, validate, and extend existing findings, or challenge established paradigms. By acknowledging and understanding the contributions and limitations of past research, scholars can design more robust studies, explore emerging trends, and engage in cross-disciplinary collaborations to further enrich our understanding of complex phenomena.

Your Creations, Ready Within Minutes!

Are you in a hurry to publish your papers and have no time to create graphs and infographics? Well, we understand that, as a scientist, you have many tasks on your plate but visuals are equally important. Worry not as we are here with a tool that can make your creations ready in minutes – Mind The Graph . Sign Up now to learn more. 

Subscribe to our newsletter

Exclusive high quality content about effective visual communication in science.

Sign Up for Free

Try the best infographic maker and promote your research with scientifically-accurate beautiful figures

no credit card required

About Sowjanya Pedada

Sowjanya is a passionate writer and an avid reader. She holds MBA in Agribusiness Management and now is working as a content writer. She loves to play with words and hopes to make a difference in the world through her writings. Apart from writing, she is interested in reading fiction novels and doing craftwork. She also loves to travel and explore different cuisines and spend time with her family and friends.

Content tags

• Affiliate Program

• UNITED STATES
• 台灣 (TAIWAN)
• TÜRKIYE (TURKEY)
• Academic Editing Services
• - Research Paper
• - Journal Manuscript
• - Dissertation
• - College & University Assignments
• Admissions Editing Services
• - Application Essay
• - Personal Statement
• - Recommendation Letter
• - Cover Letter
• - CV/Resume
• Business Editing Services
• - Business Documents
• - Report & Brochure
• - Website & Blog
• Writer Editing Services
• - Script & Screenplay
• Our Editors
• Client Reviews
• Editing & Proofreading Prices
• Wordvice Points
• Partner Discount
• Plagiarism Checker
• APA Citation Generator
• MLA Citation Generator
• Chicago Citation Generator
• Vancouver Citation Generator
• - APA Style
• - MLA Style
• - Chicago Style
• - Vancouver Style
• Writing & Editing Guide
• Academic Resources
• Admissions Resources

How to Make a Literature Review in Research (RRL Example)

What is an RRL in a research paper?

A relevant review of the literature (RRL) is an objective, concise, critical summary of published research literature relevant to a topic being researched in an article. In an RRL, you discuss knowledge and findings from existing literature relevant to your study topic. If there are conflicts or gaps in existing literature, you can also discuss these in your review, as well as how you will confront these missing elements or resolve these issues in your study.

To complete an RRL, you first need to collect relevant literature; this can include online and offline sources. Save all of your applicable resources as you will need to include them in your paper. When looking through these sources, take notes and identify concepts of each source to describe in the review of the literature.

A good RRL does NOT:

A literature review does not simply reference and list all of the material you have cited in your paper.

• Presenting material that is not directly relevant to your study will distract and frustrate the reader and make them lose sight of the purpose of your study.
• Starting a literature review with “A number of scholars have studied the relationship between X and Y” and simply listing who has studied the topic and what each scholar concluded is not going to strengthen your paper.

A good RRL DOES:

• Present a brief typology that orders articles and books into groups to help readers focus on unresolved debates, inconsistencies, tensions, and new questions about a research topic.
• Summarize the most relevant and important aspects of the scientific literature related to your area of research
• Synthesize what has been done in this area of research and by whom, highlight what previous research indicates about a topic, and identify potential gaps and areas of disagreement in the field
• Give the reader an understanding of the background of the field and show which studies are important—and highlight errors in previous studies

How long is a review of the literature for a research paper?

The length of a review of the literature depends on its purpose and target readership and can vary significantly in scope and depth. In a dissertation, thesis, or standalone review of literature, it is usually a full chapter of the text (at least 20 pages). Whereas, a standard research article or school assignment literature review section could only be a few paragraphs in the Introduction section .

Building Your Literature Review Bookshelf

One way to conceive of a literature review is to think about writing it as you would build a bookshelf. You don’t need to cut each piece by yourself from scratch. Rather, you can take the pieces that other researchers have cut out and put them together to build a framework on which to hang your own “books”—that is, your own study methods, results, and conclusions.

What Makes a Good Literature Review?

The contents of a literature review (RRL) are determined by many factors, including its precise purpose in the article, the degree of consensus with a given theory or tension between competing theories, the length of the article, the number of previous studies existing in the given field, etc. The following are some of the most important elements that a literature review provides.

Historical background for your research

Analyze what has been written about your field of research to highlight what is new and significant in your study—or how the analysis itself contributes to the understanding of this field, even in a small way. Providing a historical background also demonstrates to other researchers and journal editors your competency in discussing theoretical concepts. You should also make sure to understand how to paraphrase scientific literature to avoid plagiarism in your work.

The current context of your research

Discuss central (or peripheral) questions, issues, and debates in the field. Because a field is constantly being updated by new work, you can show where your research fits into this context and explain developments and trends in research.

A discussion of relevant theories and concepts

Theories and concepts should provide the foundation for your research. For example, if you are researching the relationship between ecological environments and human populations, provide models and theories that focus on specific aspects of this connection to contextualize your study. If your study asks a question concerning sustainability, mention a theory or model that underpins this concept. If it concerns invasive species, choose material that is focused in this direction.

Definitions of relevant terminology

In the natural sciences, the meaning of terms is relatively straightforward and consistent. But if you present a term that is obscure or context-specific, you should define the meaning of the term in the Introduction section (if you are introducing a study) or in the summary of the literature being reviewed.

Description of related relevant research

Include a description of related research that shows how your work expands or challenges earlier studies or fills in gaps in previous work. You can use your literature review as evidence of what works, what doesn’t, and what is missing in the field.

Supporting evidence for a practical problem or issue your research is addressing that demonstrates its importance: Referencing related research establishes your area of research as reputable and shows you are building upon previous work that other researchers have deemed significant.

Types of Literature Reviews

Literature reviews can differ in structure, length, amount, and breadth of content included. They can range from selective (a very narrow area of research or only a single work) to comprehensive (a larger amount or range of works). They can also be part of a larger work or stand on their own.

• A course assignment is an example of a selective, stand-alone work. It focuses on a small segment of the literature on a topic and makes up an entire work on its own.
• The literature review in a dissertation or thesis is both comprehensive and helps make up a larger work.
• A majority of journal articles start with a selective literature review to provide context for the research reported in the study; such a literature review is usually included in the Introduction section (but it can also follow the presentation of the results in the Discussion section ).
• Some literature reviews are both comprehensive and stand as a separate work—in this case, the entire article analyzes the literature on a given topic.

Literature Reviews Found in Academic Journals

The two types of literature reviews commonly found in journals are those introducing research articles (studies and surveys) and stand-alone literature analyses. They can differ in their scope, length, and specific purpose.

Literature reviews introducing research articles

The literature review found at the beginning of a journal article is used to introduce research related to the specific study and is found in the Introduction section, usually near the end. It is shorter than a stand-alone review because it must be limited to very specific studies and theories that are directly relevant to the current study. Its purpose is to set research precedence and provide support for the study’s theory, methods, results, and/or conclusions. Not all research articles contain an explicit review of the literature, but most do, whether it is a discrete section or indistinguishable from the rest of the Introduction.

How to structure a literature review for an article

When writing a literature review as part of an introduction to a study, simply follow the structure of the Introduction and move from the general to the specific—presenting the broadest background information about a topic first and then moving to specific studies that support your rationale , finally leading to your hypothesis statement. Such a literature review is often indistinguishable from the Introduction itself—the literature is INTRODUCING the background and defining the gaps your study aims to fill.

The stand-alone literature review

The literature review published as a stand-alone article presents and analyzes as many of the important publications in an area of study as possible to provide background information and context for a current area of research or a study. Stand-alone reviews are an excellent resource for researchers when they are first searching for the most relevant information on an area of study.

Such literature reviews are generally a bit broader in scope and can extend further back in time. This means that sometimes a scientific literature review can be highly theoretical, in addition to focusing on specific methods and outcomes of previous studies. In addition, all sections of such a “review article” refer to existing literature rather than describing the results of the authors’ own study.

In addition, this type of literature review is usually much longer than the literature review introducing a study. At the end of the review follows a conclusion that once again explicitly ties all of the cited works together to show how this analysis is itself a contribution to the literature. While not absolutely necessary, such articles often include the terms “Literature Review” or “Review of the Literature” in the title. Whether or not that is necessary or appropriate can also depend on the specific author instructions of the target journal. Have a look at this article for more input on how to compile a stand-alone review article that is insightful and helpful for other researchers in your field.

How to Write a Literature Review in 6 Steps

So how do authors turn a network of articles into a coherent review of relevant literature?

Writing a literature review is not usually a linear process—authors often go back and check the literature while reformulating their ideas or making adjustments to their study. Sometimes new findings are published before a study is completed and need to be incorporated into the current work. This also means you will not be writing the literature review at any one time, but constantly working on it before, during, and after your study is complete.

Here are some steps that will help you begin and follow through on your literature review.

Step 1: Choose a topic to write about—focus on and explore this topic.

Choose a topic that you are familiar with and highly interested in analyzing; a topic your intended readers and researchers will find interesting and useful; and a topic that is current, well-established in the field, and about which there has been sufficient research conducted for a review. This will help you find the “sweet spot” for what to focus on.

Step 2: Research and collect all the scholarly information on the topic that might be pertinent to your study.

This includes scholarly articles, books, conventions, conferences, dissertations, and theses—these and any other academic work related to your area of study is called “the literature.”

Step 3: Analyze the network of information that extends or responds to the major works in your area; select the material that is most useful.

Use thought maps and charts to identify intersections in the research and to outline important categories; select the material that will be most useful to your review.

Step 4: Describe and summarize each article—provide the essential information of the article that pertains to your study.

Determine 2-3 important concepts (depending on the length of your article) that are discussed in the literature; take notes about all of the important aspects of this study relevant to the topic being reviewed.

For example, in a given study, perhaps some of the main concepts are X, Y, and Z. Note these concepts and then write a brief summary about how the article incorporates them. In reviews that introduce a study, these can be relatively short. In stand-alone reviews, there may be significantly more texts and more concepts.

Step 5: Demonstrate how these concepts in the literature relate to what you discovered in your study or how the literature connects the concepts or topics being discussed.

In a literature review intro for an article, this information might include a summary of the results or methods of previous studies that correspond to and/or confirm those sections in your own study. For a stand-alone literature review, this may mean highlighting the concepts in each article and showing how they strengthen a hypothesis or show a pattern.

Discuss unaddressed issues in previous studies. These studies that are missing something you address are important to include in your literature review. In addition, those works whose theories and conclusions directly support your findings will be valuable to review here.

Step 6: Identify relationships in the literature and develop and connect your own ideas to them.

This is essentially the same as step 5 but focused on the connections between the literature and the current study or guiding concepts or arguments of the paper, not only on the connections between the works themselves.

Your hypothesis, argument, or guiding concept is the “golden thread” that will ultimately tie the works together and provide readers with specific insights they didn’t have before reading your literature review. Make sure you know where to put the research question , hypothesis, or statement of the problem in your research paper so that you guide your readers logically and naturally from your introduction of earlier work and evidence to the conclusions you want them to draw from the bigger picture.

Your literature review will not only cover publications on your topics but will include your own ideas and contributions. By following these steps you will be telling the specific story that sets the background and shows the significance of your research and you can turn a network of related works into a focused review of the literature.

Literature Review (RRL) Examples

Because creating sample literature reviews would take too long and not properly capture the nuances and detailed information needed for a good review, we have included some links to different types of literature reviews below. You can find links to more literature reviews in these categories by visiting the TUS Library’s website . Sample literature reviews as part of an article, dissertation, or thesis:

• Critical Thinking and Transferability: A Review of the Literature (Gwendolyn Reece)
• Building Customer Loyalty: A Customer Experience Based Approach in a Tourism Context (Martina Donnelly)

Sample stand-alone literature reviews

• Literature Review on Attitudes towards Disability (National Disability Authority)
• The Effects of Communication Styles on Marital Satisfaction (Hannah Yager)

Additional Literature Review Format Guidelines

In addition to the content guidelines above, authors also need to check which style guidelines to use ( APA , Chicago, MLA, etc.) and what specific rules the target journal might have for how to structure such articles or how many studies to include—such information can usually be found on the journals’ “Guide for Authors” pages. Additionally, use one of the four Wordvice citation generators below, choosing the citation style needed for your paper:

Wordvice Writing and Academic Editing Resources

Finally, after you have finished drafting your literature review, be sure to receive professional proofreading services , including paper editing for your academic work. A competent proofreader who understands academic writing conventions and the specific style guides used by academic journals will ensure that your paper is ready for publication in your target journal.

See our academic resources for further advice on references in your paper , how to write an abstract , how to write a research paper title, how to impress the editor of your target journal with a perfect cover letter , and dozens of other research writing and publication topics.

Harvey Cushing/John Hay Whitney Medical Library

• Collections
• Research Help

YSN Doctoral Programs: Steps in Conducting a Literature Review

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

What is a literature review?

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

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

Why is it important?

A literature review is important because it:

• Explains the background of research on a topic.
• Demonstrates why a topic is significant to a subject area.
• Discovers relationships between research studies/ideas.
• Identifies major themes, concepts, and researchers on a topic.
• Identifies critical gaps and points of disagreement.
• Discusses further research questions that logically come out of the previous studies.

APA7 Style resources

APA Style Blog - for those harder to find answers

1. Choose a topic. Define your research question.

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

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

2. Decide on the scope of your review

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

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

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

Make a list of the databases you will search. 

Where to find databases:

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

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

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

Review the literature

Some questions to help you analyze the research:

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

Tips: 

• Review the abstracts carefully.  
• Keep careful notes so that you may track your thought processes during the research process.
• Create a matrix of the studies for easy analysis, and synthesis, across all of the studies.
• << Previous: Recommended Books
• Last Updated: Jun 20, 2024 9:08 AM
• URL: https://guides.library.yale.edu/YSNDoctoral

• 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 4, 2024 9:40 AM
• 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

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 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.

Research Methods

• Getting Started
• Literature Review Research
• Research Design
• Research Design By Discipline
• SAGE Research Methods
• Teaching with SAGE Research Methods

Literature Review

• What is a Literature Review?
• What is NOT a Literature Review?
• Purposes of a Literature Review
• Types of Literature Reviews
• Literature Reviews vs. Systematic Reviews
• Systematic vs. Meta-Analysis

Literature Review  is a comprehensive survey of the works published in a particular field of study or line of research, usually over a specific period of time, in the form of an in-depth, critical bibliographic essay or annotated list in which attention is drawn to the most significant works.

Also, we can define a literature review as the collected body of scholarly works related to a topic:

• Summarizes and analyzes previous research relevant to a topic
• Includes scholarly books and articles published in academic journals
• Can be an specific scholarly paper or a section in a research paper

The objective of a Literature Review is to find previous published scholarly works relevant to an specific topic

• Help gather ideas or information
• Keep up to date in current trends and findings
• Help develop new questions

A literature review is important because it:

• Explains the background of research on a topic.
• Demonstrates why a topic is significant to a subject area.
• Helps focus your own research questions or problems
• Discovers relationships between research studies/ideas.
• Suggests unexplored ideas or populations
• Identifies major themes, concepts, and researchers on a topic.
• Tests assumptions; may help counter preconceived ideas and remove unconscious bias.
• Identifies critical gaps, points of disagreement, or potentially flawed methodology or theoretical approaches.
• Indicates potential directions for future research.

All content in this section is from Literature Review Research from Old Dominion University 

Keep in mind the following, a literature review is NOT:

Not an essay 

Not an annotated bibliography  in which you summarize each article that you have reviewed.  A literature review goes beyond basic summarizing to focus on the critical analysis of the reviewed works and their relationship to your research question.

Not a research paper   where you select resources to support one side of an issue versus another.  A lit review should explain and consider all sides of an argument in order to avoid bias, and areas of agreement and disagreement should be highlighted.

A literature review serves several purposes. For example, it

• provides thorough knowledge of previous studies; introduces seminal works.
• helps focus one’s own research topic.
• identifies a conceptual framework for one’s own research questions or problems; indicates potential directions for future research.
• suggests previously unused or underused methodologies, designs, quantitative and qualitative strategies.
• identifies gaps in previous studies; identifies flawed methodologies and/or theoretical approaches; avoids replication of mistakes.
• helps the researcher avoid repetition of earlier research.
• suggests unexplored populations.
• determines whether past studies agree or disagree; identifies controversy in the literature.
• tests assumptions; may help counter preconceived ideas and remove unconscious bias.

As Kennedy (2007) notes*, it is important to think of knowledge in a given field as consisting of three layers. First, there are the primary studies that researchers conduct and publish. Second are the reviews of those studies that summarize and offer new interpretations built from and often extending beyond the original studies. Third, there are the perceptions, conclusions, opinion, and interpretations that are shared informally that become part of the lore of field. In composing a literature review, it is important to note that it is often this third layer of knowledge that is cited as "true" even though it often has only a loose relationship to the primary studies and secondary literature reviews.

Given this, while literature reviews are designed to provide an overview and synthesis of pertinent sources you have explored, there are several approaches to how they can be done, depending upon the type of analysis underpinning your study. Listed below are definitions of types of literature reviews:

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

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

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

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

Systematic Review      This form consists of an overview of existing evidence pertinent to a clearly formulated research question, which uses pre-specified and standardized methods to identify and critically appraise relevant research, and to collect, report, and analyse data from the studies that are included in the review. Typically it focuses on a very specific empirical question, often posed in a cause-and-effect form, such as "To what extent does A contribute to B?"

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

* Kennedy, Mary M. "Defining a Literature."  Educational Researcher  36 (April 2007): 139-147.

All content in this section is from The Literature Review created by Dr. Robert Larabee USC

Robinson, P. and Lowe, J. (2015),  Literature reviews vs systematic reviews.  Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 39: 103-103. doi: 10.1111/1753-6405.12393

What's in the name? The difference between a Systematic Review and a Literature Review, and why it matters . By Lynn Kysh from University of Southern California

Systematic review or meta-analysis?

A  systematic review  answers a defined research question by collecting and summarizing all empirical evidence that fits pre-specified eligibility criteria.

A  meta-analysis  is the use of statistical methods to summarize the results of these studies.

Systematic reviews, just like other research articles, can be of varying quality. They are a significant piece of work (the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination at York estimates that a team will take 9-24 months), and to be useful to other researchers and practitioners they should have:

• clearly stated objectives with pre-defined eligibility criteria for studies
• explicit, reproducible methodology
• a systematic search that attempts to identify all studies
• assessment of the validity of the findings of the included studies (e.g. risk of bias)
• systematic presentation, and synthesis, of the characteristics and findings of the included studies

Not all systematic reviews contain meta-analysis. 

Meta-analysis is the use of statistical methods to summarize the results of independent studies. By combining information from all relevant studies, meta-analysis can provide more precise estimates of the effects of health care than those derived from the individual studies included within a review.  More information on meta-analyses can be found in  Cochrane Handbook, Chapter 9 .

A meta-analysis goes beyond critique and integration and conducts secondary statistical analysis on the outcomes of similar studies.  It is a systematic review that uses quantitative methods to synthesize and summarize the results.

An advantage of a meta-analysis is the ability to be completely objective in evaluating research findings.  Not all topics, however, have sufficient research evidence to allow a meta-analysis to be conducted.  In that case, an integrative review is an appropriate strategy. 

Some of the content in this section is from Systematic reviews and meta-analyses: step by step guide created by Kate McAllister.

• << Previous: Getting Started
• Next: Research Design >>
• Last Updated: Jul 15, 2024 10:34 AM
• URL: https://guides.lib.udel.edu/researchmethods

• 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

• 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

Information

• Author Services

Initiatives

You are accessing a machine-readable page. In order to be human-readable, please install an RSS reader.

All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess .

Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications.

Feature papers are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the scientific editors and must receive positive feedback from the reviewers.

Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.

Original Submission Date Received: .

• Active Journals
• Find a Journal
• Proceedings Series
• For Authors
• For Reviewers
• For Editors
• For Librarians
• For Publishers
• For Societies
• For Conference Organizers
• Open Access Policy
• Institutional Open Access Program
• Special Issues Guidelines
• Editorial Process
• Research and Publication Ethics
• Article Processing Charges
• Testimonials
• Preprints.org
• SciProfiles
• Encyclopedia

Article Menu

• Subscribe SciFeed
• Recommended Articles
• Google Scholar
• on Google Scholar
• Table of Contents

Find support for a specific problem in the support section of our website.

Please let us know what you think of our products and services.

Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.

JSmol Viewer

Literature review on collaborative project delivery for sustainable construction: bibliometric analysis.

1. Introduction

2. literature review, 2.1. collaborative project delivery, 2.2. design build (db), 2.3. construction manager at risk (cmar), 2.4. integrated project delivery method (ipd), 2.5. sustainability, 2.6. sustainable construction, 2.7. benefits of eci comparing case studies, 2.8. collaborative delivery models, 3. methodology, 3.1. research methods, 3.2. database research, 4.1. ipd, design-build, and cmar overview, 4.1.1. yearly publication distribution of db cmar and ipd, 4.1.2. major country analysis, 4.1.3. most relevant and influential journals, 4.1.4. corresponding author countries, 4.2. keyword analysis, 4.2.1. high-frequency keyword analysis, 4.2.2. co-occurrence network analysis, 4.2.3. analysis of keywords’ frequency over time, 5. discussion, 5.1. findings of advantages and disadvantages of ipd, db, and cmar for sustainable construction, 5.1.1. advantages of ipd, 5.1.2. advantages of design-build, 5.1.3. advantages of construction manager at risk, 5.1.4. disadvantages of ipd, 5.1.5. disadvantages of design-build, 5.1.6. disadvantages of construction manager at risk, 5.2. most suitable cpd technique for sustainable construction based on literature review, 5.2.1. limitations, 5.2.2. recommendations for future research, 6. future trend, 6.1. enhancing innovation through collaborative project delivery, 6.2. open communication and block chain technology, 6.3. multi-party agreement, 6.4. utilizing artificial intelligence in decision support systems, 7. conclusions, author contributions, institutional review board statement, informed consent statement, data availability statement, conflicts of interest.

• Giachino, J.; Cecil, M.; Husselbee, B.; Matthews, C. Alternative Project Delivery: Construction Management at Risk, Design-Build and Public-Private Partnerships. In Proceedings of the Utility Management Conference 2016, San Diego, CA, USA, 24–26 February 2016. [ Google Scholar ]
• Shrestha, P.P.; Maharjan, R.; Batista, J.R. Performance of Design-Build and Construction Manager-at-Risk Methods in Water and Wastewater Projects. Pract. Period. Struct. Des. Constr. 2019 , 24 , 04018029. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Shrestha, P.P.; Batista, J. Lessons Learned in Design-Build and Construction-Manager-at-Risk Water and Wastewater Project. J. Leg. Aff. Dispute Resolut. Eng. Constr. 2020 , 12 , 04520002. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Xia, B.; Chan, A.P.C. Identification of Selection Criteria for Operational Variations of The Design-Build System: A Delphi Study in China. J. Civ. Eng. Manag. 2012 , 18 , 173–183. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Shane, J.S.; Bogus, S.M.; Molenaar, K.R. Municipal Water/Wastewater Project Delivery Performance Comparison. J. Manag. Eng. 2013 , 29 , 251–258. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sullivan, J.; El Asmar, M.; Chalhoub, J.; Obeid, H. Two Decades of Performance Comparisons for Design-Build, Construction Manager at Risk, and Design-Bid-Build: Quantitative Analysis of the State of Knowledge on Project Cost, Schedule, and Quality. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2017 , 143 , 04017009. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Raouf, A.M.; Al-Ghamdi, S. Effectiveness of Project Delivery Systems in Executing Green Buildings. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2019 , 145 , 03119005. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Francom, T.; El Asmar, M.; Ariaratnam, S.T. Performance Analysis of Construction Manager at Risk on Pipeline Engineering and Construction Projects. J. Manag. Eng. 2016 , 32 , 04016016. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Gransberg, D.D.; Shane, J.S.; Transportation Research Board. Construction Manager-at-Risk Project Delivery for Highway Programs ; The National Academies Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2010. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rahman, M.M.; Kumaraswamy, M.M. Potential for Implementing Relational Contracting and Joint Risk Management. J. Manag. Eng. 2004 , 20 , 178–189. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Feghaly, J.; El Asmar, M.; Ariaratnam, S.; Bearup, W. Selecting project delivery methods for water treatment plants. Eng. Constr. Archit. Manag. 2019 , 27 , 936–951. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Park, H.-S.; Lee, D.; Kim, S.; Kim, J.-L. Comparing Project Performance of Design-Build and Design-Bid-Build Methods for Large-sized Public Apartment Housing Projects in Korea. J. Asian Archit. Build. Eng. 2015 , 14 , 323–330. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Shrestha, P.P.; Batista, J.; Maharajan, R. Risks involved in using alternative project delivery (APD) methods in water and wastewater projects. Procedia Eng. 2016 , 145 , 219–223. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hettiaarachchige, N.; Rathnasinghe, A.; Ranadewa, K.; Thurairajah, N. Thurairajah, Lean Integrated Project Delivery for Construction Procurement: The Case of Sri Lanka. Buildings 2022 , 12 , 524. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kent, D.C.; Becerik-Gerber, B. Understanding Construction Industry Experience and Attitudes toward Integrated Project Delivery. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2010 , 136 , 815–825. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Franz, B.; Leicht, R.; Molenaar, K.; Messner, J. Impact of Team Integration and Group Cohesion on Project Delivery Performance. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2017 , 143 , 04016088. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Engebø, A.; Klakegg, O.J.; Lohne, J.; Lædre, O. A collaborative project delivery method for design of a high-performance building. Int. J. Manag. Proj. Bus. 2020 , 13 , 1141–1165. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ahmed, S.; El-Sayegh, S. Critical Review of the Evolution of Project Delivery Methods in the Construction Industry. Buildings 2020 , 11 , 11. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bond-Barnard, T.J.; Fletcher, L.; Steyn, H. Linking trust and collaboration in project teams to project management success. Int. J. Manag. Proj. Bus. 2018 , 11 , 432–457. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Rodrigues, M.R.; Lindhard, S.M. Lindhard, Benefits and challenges to applying IPD: Experiences from a Norwegian mega-project. Constr. Innov. 2021 , 23 , 287–305. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kaminsky, J. The fourth pillar of infrastructure sustainability: Tailoring civil infrastructure to social context. Constr. Manag. Econ. 2015 , 33 , 299–309. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Al Khalil, M.I. Selecting the appropriate project delivery method using AHP. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 2002 , 20 , 469–474. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ibbs, C.W.; Kwak, Y.H.; Ng, T.; Odabasi, A.M. Project Delivery Systems and Project Change: Quantitative Analysis. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2003 , 129 , 382–387. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Jansen, J.; Beck, A. Overcoming the Challenges of Large Diameter Water Project in North Texas via CMAR Delivery Method. In Proceedings of the Pipelines 2020, San Antonio, TX, USA, 9–12 August 2020; Conference Held Virtually. pp. 264–271. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bingham, E.; Gibson, G.E.; Asmar, M.E. Measuring User Perceptions of Popular Transportation Project Delivery Methods Using Least Significant Difference Intervals and Multiple Range Tests. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2018 , 144 , 04018033. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Cho, Y.J. A review of construction delivery systems: Focus on the construction management at risk system in the Korean public construction market. KSCE J. Civ. Eng. 2016 , 20 , 530–537. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Rosayuru, H.D.R.R.; Waidyasekara, K.G.A.S.; Wijewickrama, M.K.C.S. Sustainable BIM based integrated project delivery system for construction industry in Sri Lanka. Int. J. Constr. Manag. 2022 , 22 , 769–783. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Pishdad-Bozorgi, P.; Beliveau, Y.J. Symbiotic Relationships between Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) and Trust. Int. J. Constr. Educ. Res. 2016 , 12 , 179–192. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sherif, M.; Abotaleb, I.; Alqahtani, F.K. Alqahtani, Application of Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) in the Middle East: Implementation and Challenges. Buildings 2022 , 12 , 467. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Manata, B.; Garcia, A.J.; Mollaoglu, S.; Miller, V.D. The effect of commitment differentiation on integrated project delivery team dynamics: The critical roles of goal alignment, communication behaviors, and decision quality. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 2021 , 39 , 259–269. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kraatz, J.A.; Sanchez, A.X.; Hampson, K.D. Hampson, Digital Modeling, Integrated Project Delivery and Industry Transformation: An Australian Case Study. Buildings 2014 , 4 , 453–466. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zhang, L.; He, J.; Zhou, S. Sharing Tacit Knowledge for Integrated Project Team Flexibility: Case Study of Integrated Project Delivery. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2013 , 139 , 795–804. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• El Asmar, M.; Hanna, A.S.; Loh, W.-Y. Quantifying Performance for the Integrated Project Delivery System as Compared to Established Delivery Systems. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2013 , 139 , 04013012. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ghassemi, R.; Becerik-Gerber, B. Transitioning to integrated project delivery: Potential barriers and lessons learned. Lean Constr. J. 2011 , 32–52. Available online: https://leanconstruction.org/resources/lean-construction-journal/lcj-back-issues/2011-issue/ (accessed on 11 August 2024).
• Mei, T.; Guo, Z.; Li, P.; Fang, K.; Zhong, S. Influence of Integrated Project Delivery Principles on Project Performance in China: An SEM-Based Approach. Sustainability 2022 , 14 , 4381. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ilozor, B.D.; Kelly, D.J. Building information modeling and integrated project delivery in the commercial construction industry: A conceptual study. J. Eng. Proj. Prod. Manag. 2012 , 2 , 23–36. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zabihi, H.; Habib, F.; Mirsaeedie, L. Sustainability in Building and Construction: Revising Definitions and Concepts. Int. J. Emerg. Sci. 2012 , 2 , 570–578. [ Google Scholar ]
• Young, J.W.S. A Framework for the Ultimate Environmental Index—Putting Atmospheric Change Into Context With Sustainability. Environ. Monit. Assess. 1997 , 46 , 135–149. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ding, G.K.C. Sustainable construction—The role of environmental assessment tools. J. Environ. Manag. 2008 , 86 , 451–464. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Conte, E. The Era of Sustainability: Promises, Pitfalls and Prospects for Sustainable Buildings and the Built Environment. Sustainability 2018 , 10 , 2092. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Standardized Method of Life Cycle Costing for Construction Procurement. A Supplement to BS ISO 15686-5. Buildings and Constructed Assets. Service Life Planning. Life Cycle Costing ; BSI British Standards: London, UK, 2008. [ CrossRef ]
• Sustainability|Free Full-Text|A Hybrid Multi-Criteria Decision Support System for Selecting the Most Sustainable Structural Material for a Multistory Building Construction. Available online: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/4/3128 (accessed on 2 April 2024).
• Korkmaz, S.; Riley, D.; Horman, M. Piloting Evaluation Metrics for Sustainable High-Performance Building Project Delivery. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2010 , 136 , 877–885. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ng, M.S.; Graser, K.; Hall, D.M. Digital fabrication, BIM and early contractor involvement in design in construction projects: A comparative case study. Archit. Eng. Des. Manag. 2021 , 19 , 39–55. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Moradi, S.; Kähkönen, K.; Sormunen, P. Analytical and Conceptual Perspectives toward Behavioral Elements of Collaborative Delivery Models in Construction Projects. Buildings 2022 , 12 , 316. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zupic, I.; Čater, T. Bibliometric Methods in Management and Organization. 2015. Available online: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1094428114562629 (accessed on 3 April 2024).
• Rozas, L.W.; Klein, W.C. The Value and Purpose of the Traditional Qualitative Literature Review. J. Evid.-Based Soc. Work 2010 , 7 , 387–399. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Cobo, M.J.; López-Herrera, A.G.; Herrera-Viedma, E.; Herrera, F. Science mapping software tools: Review, analysis, and cooperative study among tools. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 2011 , 62 , 1382–1402. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Cancino, C.A.; Merigó, J.M.; Coronado, F.C. A bibliometric analysis of leading universities in innovation research. J. Innov. Knowl. 2017 , 2 , 106–124. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Pedro, L.F.M.G.; Barbosa, C.M.M.d.O.; Santos, C.M.d.N. A critical review of mobile learning integration in formal educational contexts. Int. J. Educ. Technol. High. Educ. 2018 , 15 , 10. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wen, S.; Tang, H.; Ying, F.; Wu, G. Exploring the Global Research Trends of Supply Chain Management of Construction Projects Based on a Bibliometric Analysis: Current Status and Future Prospects. Buildings 2023 , 13 , 373. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hosseini, M.R.; Martek, I.; Zavadskas, E.K.; Aibinu, A.A.; Arashpour, M.; Chileshe, N. Critical evaluation of off-site construction research: A Scientometric analysis. Autom. Constr. 2018 , 87 , 235–247. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Toyin, J.O.; Mewomo, M.C. Mewomo, Overview of BIM contributions in the construction phase: Review and bibliometric analysis. J. Inf. Technol. Constr. 2023 , 28 , 500–514. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kahvandi, Z.; Saghatforoush, E.; Alinezhad, M.; Noghli, F. Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) Research Trends. J. Eng. 2017 , 7 , 99–114. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hale, D.R.; Shrestha, P.P.; Gibson, G.E.; Migliaccio, G.C. Empirical Comparison of Design/Build and Design/Bid/Build Project Delivery Methods. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2009 , 135 , 579–587. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mollaoglu-Korkmaz, S.; Swarup, L.; Riley, D. Delivering Sustainable, High-Performance Buildings: Influence of Project Delivery Methods on Integration and Project Outcomes. J. Manag. Eng. 2013 , 29 , 71–78. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ugwu, O.O.; Haupt, T.C. Key performance indicators and assessment methods for infrastructure sustainability—a South African construction industry perspective. Build. Environ. 2007 , 42 , 665–680. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kines, P.; Andersen, L.P.S.; Spangenberg, S.; Mikkelsen, K.L.; Dyreborg, J.; Zohar, D. Improving construction site safety through leader-based verbal safety communication. J. Safety Res. 2010 , 41 , 399–406. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Ballard, G. The Lean Project Delivery System: An Update. 2008. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bynum, P.; Issa, R.R.A.; Olbina, S. Building information modeling in support of sustainable design and construction. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2013 , 139 , 24–34. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Choudhry, R.M.; Fang, D.; Lingard, H. Measuring Safety Climate of a Construction Company. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2009 , 135 , 890–899. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wardani, M.A.E.; Messner, J.I.; Horman, M.J. Comparing procurement methods for Design-Build projects. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2006 , 132 , 230–238. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Liu, J.; Zhao, X.; Yan, P. Risk Paths in International Construction Projects: Case Study from Chinese Contractors. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2016 , 142 . [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• El-Sayegh, S. Evaluating the effectiveness of project delivery methods. J. Constr. Manag. Econ. 2008 , 23 , 457–465. [ Google Scholar ]
• Fang, C.; Marle, F.; Zio, E.; Bocquet, J.-C. Network theory-based analysis of risk interactions in large engineering projects. Reliability Eng. Syst. Safety 2012 , 106 , 1–10. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Franz, B.; Leicht, R.M. Initiating IPD Concepts on Campus Facilities with a ‘Collaboration Addendum’. In Proceedings of the Construction Research Congress 2012, West Lafayette, IN, USA, 21–23 May 2012; pp. 61–70. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kim, H.; Kim, K.; Kim, H. Vision-Based Object-Centric Safety Assessment Using Fuzzy Inference: Monitoring Struck-By Accidents with Moving Objects. J. Comput. Civil Eng. 2016 , 30 . [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zhou, Y.; Ding, L.Y.; Chen, L.J. Application of 4D visualization technology for safety management in metro construction. Automation Constr. 2013 , 34 , 25–36. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wanberg, J.; Harper, C.; Hallowell, M.R.; Rajendran, S. Relationship between Construction Safety and Quality Performance. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2013 , 139 . [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Shrestha, P.P.; O’Connor, J.T.; Gibson, G.E. Performance comparison of large Design-Build and Design-Bid-Build highway projects. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2012 , 138 , 1–13. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Torabi, S.A.; Hassini, E. Multi-site production planning integrating procurement and distribution plans in multi-echelon supply chains: An interactive fuzzy goal programming approach. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2009 , 47 , 5475–5499. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Baradan, S.; Usmen, M. Comparative Injury and Fatality Risk Analysis of Building Trades. J. Constr. Eng. Manag.-ASCE 2006 , 132 . [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Levitt, R.E. CEM Research for the Next 50 Years: Maximizing Economic, Environmental, and Societal Value of the Built Environment1. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2007 , 133 , 619–628. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Araya, F. Modeling the spread of COVID-19 on construction workers: An agent-based approach. Saf. Sci. 2021 , 133 , 105022. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zheng, X.; Le, Y.; Chan, A.P.; Hu, Y.; Li, Y. Review of the application of social network analysis (SNA) in construction project management research. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 2016 , 34 , 1214–1225. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Elghaish, F.; Abrishami, S. A centralised cost management system: Exploiting EVM and ABC within IPD. Eng. Constr. Archit. Manag. 2021 , 28 , 549–569. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Smith, R.E.; Mossman, A.; Emmitt, S. Lean and integrated project delivery. Lean Constr. J. 2011 , 1–16. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bröchner, J.; Badenfelt, U. Changes and change management in construction and IT projects. Autom. Constr. 2011 , 20 , 767–775. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Monteiro, A.; Mêda, P.; Martins, J.P. Framework for the coordinated application of two different integrated project delivery platforms. Autom. Constr. 2014 , 38 , 87–99. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Azhar, N.; Kang, Y.; Ahmad, I.U. Factors influencing integrated project delivery in publicly owned construction projects: An information modelling perspective. Procedia Eng. 2014 , 77 , 213–221. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mihic, M.; Sertic, J.; Zavrski, I. Integrated Project Delivery as Integration between Solution Development and Solution Implementation. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2014 , 119 , 557–565. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Nawi, M.N.M.; Haron, A.T.; Hamid, Z.A.; Kamar, K.A.M.; Baharuddin, Y. Improving integrated practice through building information modeling-integrated project delivery (BIM-IPD) for Malaysian industrialised building system (IBS) Construction Projects. Malays. Constr. Res. J. 2014 , 15 , 29–38. Available online: https://dsgate.uum.edu.my/jspui/handle/123456789/1651 (accessed on 24 April 2024).
• Ma, Z.; Zhang, D.; Li, J. A dedicated collaboration platform for Integrated Project Delivery. Autom. Constr. 2018 , 86 , 199–209. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Yadav, S.; Kanade, G. Application of Revit as Building Information Modeling (BIM) for Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) to Building Construction Project—A Review. Int. Res. J. Eng. Technol. 2018 , 5 , 11–14. [ Google Scholar ]
• Salim, M.S.; Mahjoob, A.M.R. Integrated project delivery (IPD) method with BIM to improve the project performance: A case study in the Republic of Iraq. Asian J. Civ. Eng. 2020 , 21 , 947–957. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ling, Y.Y.; Lau, B.S.Y. A case study on the management of the development of a large-scale power plant project in East Asia based on design-build arrangement. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 2002 , 20 , 413–423. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Dalui, P.; Elghaish, F.; Brooks, T.; McIlwaine, S. Integrated Project Delivery with BIM: A Methodical Approach Within the UK Consulting Sector. J. Inf. Technol. Constr. 2021 , 26 , 922–935. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Pishdad-Bozorgi, P. Case Studies on the Role of Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) Approach on the Establishment and Promotion of Trust. Int. J. Constr. Educ. Res. 2017 , 13 , 102–124. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Singleton, M.S.; Hamzeh, F.R. Implementing integrated project delivery on department of the navy construction projects: Lean Construction Journal. Lean Constr. J. 2011 , 17–31. [ Google Scholar ]
• Tran, D.Q.; Nguyen, L.D.; Faught, A. Examination of communication processes in design-build project delivery in building construction. Eng. Constr. Archit. Manag. 2017 , 24 , 1319–1336. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Park, J.; Kwak, Y.H. Design-Bid-Build (DBB) vs. Design-Build (DB) in the U.S. public transportation projects: The choice and consequences. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 2017 , 35 , 280–295. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wiss, R.A.; Roberts, R.T.; Phraner, S.D. Beyond Design-Build-Operate-Maintain: New Partnership Approach Toward Fixed Guideway Transit Projects. Transp. Res. Rec. J. Transp. Res. Board 2000 , 1704 , 13–18. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Xia, B.; Chan, A.P. Key competences of design-build clients in China. J. Facil. Manag. 2010 , 8 , 114–129. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• DeBernard, D.M. Beyond Collaboration—The Benefits of Integrated Project Delivery ; AIA Soloso Website: Washington, DC, USA, 2008. [ Google Scholar ]
• Chen, Q.; Jin, Z.; Xia, B.; Wu, P.; Skitmore, M. Time and Cost Performance of Design–Build Projects. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2016 , 142 , 04015074. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Xia, B.; Chan, P. Review of the design-build market in the People’s Republic of China. J. Constr. Procure. 2008 , 14 , 108–117. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mcwhirt, D.; Ahn, J.; Shane, J.S.; Strong, K.C. Military construction projects: Comparison of project delivery methods. J. Facil. Manag. 2011 , 9 , 157–169. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Minchin, R.E.; Li, X.; Issa, R.R.; Vargas, G.G. Comparison of Cost and Time Performance of Design-Build and Design-Bid-Build Delivery Systems in Florida. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2013 , 139 , 04013007. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Adamtey, S.; Onsarigo, L. Effective tools for projects delivered by progressive design-build method. In Proceedings of the CSCE Annual Conference 2019, Laval, QC, Canada, 12–15 June 2019; pp. 1–10. [ Google Scholar ]
• Adamtey, S.A. A Case Study Performance Analysis of Design-Build and Integrated Project Delivery Methods. Int. J. Constr. Educ. Res. 2021 , 17 , 68–84. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Gad, G.M.; Adamtey, S.A.; Gransberg, D.D. Gransberg, Trends in Quality Management Approaches to Design–Build Transportation Projects. Transp. Res. Rec. J. Transp. Res. Board. 2015 , 2504 , 87–92. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sari, E.M.; Irawan, A.P.; Wibowo, M.A.; Siregar, J.P.; Praja, A.K.A. Project delivery systems: The partnering concept in integrated and non-integrated construction projects. Sustainability 2022 , 15 , 86. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chakra, H.A.; Ashi, A. Comparative analysis of design/build and design/bid/build project delivery systems in Lebanon. J. Ind. Eng. Int. 2019 , 15 , 147–152. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Perkins, R.A. Sources of Changes in Design–Build Contracts for a Governmental Owner. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2009 , 135 , 588–593. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Palaneeswaran, E.; Kumaraswamy, M.M. Contractor Selection for Design/Build Projects. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2000 , 126 , 331–339. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chan, A.P.C. Evaluation of enhanced design and build system a case study of a hospital project. Constr. Manag. Econ. 2000 , 18 , 863–871. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Shrestha, P.P.; Davis, B.; Gad, G.M. Investigation of Legal Issues in Construction-Manager-at-Risk Projects: Case Study of Airport Projects. J. Leg. Aff. Dispute Resolut. Eng. Constr. 2020 , 12 , 04520022. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Marston, S. CMAR Project Delivery Method Generates Team Orientated Project Management with Win/Win Mentality. In Proceedings of the Pipelines 2020, San Antonio, TX, USA, 9–12 August 2020; pp. 167–170. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Francom, T.; El Asmar, M.; Ariaratnam, S.T. Ariaratnam, Longitudinal Study of Construction Manager at Risk for Pipeline Rehabilitation. J. Pipeline Syst. Eng. Pract. 2017 , 8 , 04017001. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Peña-Mora, F.; Tamaki, T. Effect of Delivery Systems on Collaborative Negotiations for Large-Scale Infrastructure Projects. J. Manag. Eng. 2001 , 17 , 105–121. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mahdi, I.M.; Alreshaid, K. Decision support system for selecting the proper project delivery method using analytical hierarchy process (AHP). Int. J. Proj. Manag. 2005 , 23 , 564–572. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Randall, T.; Pool, S.; Limke, J.; Bradney, A. CMaR Delivery of Critical Water and Wastewater Pipelines. In Proceedings of the Pipelines 2020, San Antonio, TX, USA, 9–12 August 2020; Conference Held Virtually. pp. 280–289. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Perrenoud, A.; Reyes, M.; Ghosh, S.; Coetzee, M. Collaborative Risk Management of the Approval Process of Building Envelope Materials. In Proceedings of the AEI 2017, Oklahoma City, OK, USA, 11–13 April 2017; pp. 806–816. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Parrott, B.C.; Bomba, M.B. Integrated Project Delivery and Building Information Modeling: A New Breed of Contract. 2010. Available online: https://content.aia.org/sites/default/files/2017-03/Integrated%20project%20delivery%20and%20BIM-%20A%20new%20breed%20of%20contract.pdf (accessed on 18 November 2023).
• Cheng, R. IPD Case Studies. Report. March 2012. Available online: http://conservancy.umn.edu/handle/11299/201408 (accessed on 1 May 2024).
• Lee, H.W.; Anderson, S.M.; Kim, Y.-W.; Ballard, G. Ballard, Advancing Impact of Education, Training, and Professional Experience on Integrated Project Delivery. Pract. Period. Struct. Des. Constr. 2014 , 19 , 8–14. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hoseingholi, M.; Jalal, M.P. Jalal, Identification and Analysis of Owner-Induced Problems in Design–Build Project Lifecycle. J. Leg. Aff. Dispute Resolut. Eng. Constr. 2017 , 9 , 04516013. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Öztaş, A.; Ökmen, Ö. Risk analysis in fixed-price design–build construction projects. Build. Environ. 2004 , 39 , 229–237. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lee, D.-E.; Arditi, D. Total Quality Performance of Design/Build Firms Using Quality Function Deployment. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2006 , 132 , 49–57. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Garner, B.; Richardson, K.; Castro-Lacouture, D. Design-Build Project Delivery in Military Construction: Approach to Best Value Procurement. J. Adv. Perform. Inf. Value 2008 , 1 , 35–50. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Graham, P. Evaluation of Design-Build Practice in Colorado Project IR IM(CX) 025-3(113) ; Colorado Department of Transportation: Denver, CO, USA, 2001. [ Google Scholar ]
• Parami Dewi, A.; Too, E.; Trigunarsyah, B. Implementing design build project delivery system in Indonesian road infrastructure projects. In Innovation and Sustainable Construction in Developing Countries (CIB W107 Conference 2011) ; Uwakweh, B.O., Ed.; Construction Publishing House/International Council for Research and Innovation in Building and C: Hanoi, Vietnam, 2011; pp. 108–117. [ Google Scholar ]
• Arditi, D.; Lee, D.-E. Assessing the corporate service quality performance of design-build contractors using quality function deployment. Constr. Manag. Econ. 2003 , 21 , 175–185. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Rao, T. . Is Design-Build Right for Your Next WWW Project? presented at the WEFTEC 2009, Water Environment Federation. January 2009, pp. 6444–6458. Available online: https://www.accesswater.org/publications/proceedings/-297075/is-design-build-right-for-your-next-www-project- (accessed on 3 April 2024).
• Touran, A.; Molenaar, K.R.; Gransberg, D.D.; Ghavamifar, K. Decision Support System for Selection of Project Delivery Method in Transit. Transp. Res. Rec. 2009 , 2111 , 148–157. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Culp, G. Alternative Project Delivery Methods for Water and Wastewater Projects: Do They Save Time and Money? Leadersh. Manag. Eng. 2011 , 11 , 231–240. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ling, F.Y.Y.; Poh, B.H.M. Problems encountered by owners of design–build projects in Singapore. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 2008 , 26 , 164–173. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Pishdad-Bozorgi, P.; de la Garza, J.M. Comparative Analysis of Design-Bid-Build and Design-Build from the Standpoint of Claims. In Proceedings of the Construction Research Congress 2012, West Lafayette, IN, USA, 21–23 May 2012. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Walewski, J.; Gibson, G.E., Jr.; Jasper, J. Project Delivery Methods and Contracting Approaches Available for Implementation by the Texas Department of Transportation. University of Texas at Austin. Center for Transportation Research. 2001. Available online: https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/14863 (accessed on 3 April 2024).
• Alleman, D.; Antoine, A.; Gransberg, D.D.; Molenaar, K.R. Comparison of Qualifications-Based Selection and Best-Value Procurement for Construction Manager–General Contractor Highway Construction. 2017. Available online: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.3141/2630-08 (accessed on 2 April 2024).
• Gransberg, N.J.; Gransberg, D.D. Public Project Construction Manager-at-Risk Contracts: Lessons Learned from a Comparison of Commercial and Infrastructure Projects. J. Leg. Aff. Dispute Resolut. Eng. Constr. 2020 , 12 , 04519039. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Anderson, S.D.; Damnjanovic, I. Selection and Evaluation of Alternative Contracting Methods to Accelerate Project Completion ; The National Academies Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2008; Available online: http://elibrary.pcu.edu.ph:9000/digi/NA02/2008/23075.pdf (accessed on 26 April 2024).
• Shrestha, P.P.; Batista, J.; Maharjan, R. Impediments in Using Design-Build or Construction Management-at-Risk Delivery Methods for Water and Wastewater Projects. In Proceedings of the Construction Research Congress 2016, San Juan, PR, USA, 31 May–2 June 2016; pp. 380–387. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chateau, L. Environmental acceptability of beneficial use of waste as construction material—State of knowledge, current practices and future developments in Europe and in France. J. Hazard. Mater. 2007 , 139 , 556–562. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lam, T.I.; Chan, H.W.E.; Chau, C.K.; Poon, C.S. An Overview of the Development of Green Specifications in the Construction Industry. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Urban Sustainability [ICONUS], 1 January 2008; pp. 295–301. Available online: https://research.polyu.edu.hk/en/publications/an-overview-of-the-development-of-green-specifications-in-the-con (accessed on 2 May 2024).
• Tabish, S.Z.S.; Jha, K.N. Success Traits for a Construction Project. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2012 , 138 , 1131–1138. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Niroumand, H.; Zain, M.; Jamil, M. A guideline for assessing of critical parameters on Earth architecture and Earth buildings as a sustainable architecture in various countries. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2013 , 28 , 130–165. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Rogulj, K.; Jajac, N. Achieving a Construction Barrier–Free Environment: Decision Support to Policy Selection. J. Manag. Eng. 2018 , 34 , 04018020. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sackey, S.; Kim, B.-S. Environmental and Economic Performance of Asphalt Shingle and Clay Tile Roofing Sheets Using Life Cycle Assessment Approach and TOPSIS. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2018 , 144 , 04018104. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Carretero-Ayuso, M.J.; García-Sanz-Calcedo, J.; Rodríguez-Jiménez, C.E. Rodríguez-Jiménez, Characterization and Appraisal of Technical Specifications in Brick Façade Projects in Spain. J. Perform. Constr. Facil. 2018 , 32 , 04018012. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Golabchi, A.; Guo, X.; Liu, M.; Han, S.; Lee, S.; AbouRizk, S. An integrated ergonomics framework for evaluation and design of construction operations. Autom. Constr. 2018 , 95 , 72–85. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Jha, K.; Iyer, K. Commitment, coordination, competence and the iron triangle. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 2007 , 25 , 527–540. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Tabassi, A.A.; Ramli, M.; Roufechaei, K.M.; Tabasi, A.A. Team development and performance in construction design teams: An assessment of a hierarchical model with mediating effect of compensation. Constr. Manag. Econ. 2014 , 32 , 932–949. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chen, Y.; Okudan, G.E.; Riley, D.R. Sustainable performance criteria for construction method selection in concrete buildings. Autom. Constr. 2010 , 19 , 235–244. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Doloi, H.; Sawhney, A.; Iyer, K.; Rentala, S. Analysing factors affecting delays in Indian construction projects. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 2012 , 30 , 479–489. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kog, Y.C.; Loh, P.K. Critical Success Factors for Different Components of Construction Projects. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2012 , 138 , 520–528. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Gunduz, M.; Almuajebh, M. Critical success factors for sustainable construction project management. Sustainability 2020 , 12 , 1990. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Cao, D.; Li, H.; Wang, G.; Luo, X.; Tan, D. Relationship Network Structure and Organizational Competitiveness: Evidence from BIM Implementation Practices in the Construction Industry. J. Manag. Eng. 2018 , 34 , 04018005. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Clevenger, C.M. Development of a Project Management Certification Plan for a DOT. J. Manag. Eng. 2018 , 34 , 06018002. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bygballe, L.E.; Swärd, A. Collaborative Project Delivery Models and the Role of Routines in Institutionalizing Partnering. Proj. Manag. J. 2019 , 50 , 161–176. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Collins, W.; Parrish, K. The Need for Integrated Project Delivery in the Public Sector. In Proceedings of the Construction Research Congress 2014, Atlanta, GA, USA, 19–21 May 2014; pp. 719–728. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Turk, Ž.; Klinc, R. Potentials of Blockchain Technology for Construction Management. Procedia Eng. 2017 , 196 , 638–645. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Elghaish, F.; Abrishami, S.; Hosseini, M.R. Integrated project delivery with blockchain: An automated financial system. Autom. Constr. 2020 , 114 , 103182. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Fish, A. Integrated Project Delivery: The Obstacles of Implementation. May 2011. Available online: http://hdl.handle.net/2097/8554 (accessed on 3 April 2024).
• Pan, Y.; Zhang, L. Roles of artificial intelligence in construction engineering and management: A critical review and future trends. Autom. Constr. 2020 , 122 , 103517. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mellit, A.; Kalogirou, S.A. Artificial intelligence techniques for photovoltaic applications: A review. Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 2008 , 34 , 574–632. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Smith, C.J.; Wong, A.T.C. Advancements in Artificial Intelligence-Based Decision Support Systems for Improving Construction Project Sustainability: A Systematic Literature Review. Informatics 2022 , 9 , 43. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Villa, F. Semantically driven meta-modelling: Automating model construction in an environmental decision support system for the assessment of ecosystem services flows. In Information Technologies in Environmental Engineering ; Athanasiadis, I.N., Rizzoli, A.E., Mitkas, P.A., Gómez, J.M., Eds.; Springer: Berlin, Heidelberg, 2009; pp. 23–36. [ Google Scholar ]
• Minhas, M.R.; Potdar, V. Decision Support Systems in Construction: A Bibliometric Analysis. Buildings 2020 , 10 , 108. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]

Click here to enlarge figure

Share and Cite

Babalola, O.G.; Alam Bhuiyan, M.M.; Hammad, A. Literature Review on Collaborative Project Delivery for Sustainable Construction: Bibliometric Analysis. Sustainability 2024 , 16 , 7707. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16177707

Babalola OG, Alam Bhuiyan MM, Hammad A. Literature Review on Collaborative Project Delivery for Sustainable Construction: Bibliometric Analysis. Sustainability . 2024; 16(17):7707. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16177707

Babalola, Olabode Gafar, Mohammad Masfiqul Alam Bhuiyan, and Ahmed Hammad. 2024. "Literature Review on Collaborative Project Delivery for Sustainable Construction: Bibliometric Analysis" Sustainability 16, no. 17: 7707. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16177707

Article Metrics

Article access statistics, further information, mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.

Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals