what is review by research

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).

Libraries | Research Guides

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

What are Literature Reviews?

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

Goals of Literature Reviews

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

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

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

What kinds of sources require a Literature Review?

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

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

Types of Literature Reviews

What kinds of literature reviews are written?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Literature Reviews in the Health Sciences

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

• 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

Have a language expert improve your writing

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

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

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

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

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

There are five key steps to writing a literature review:

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

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

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

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

Table of contents

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

• Quick Run-through
• Step 1 & 2

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

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

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

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

The only proofreading tool specialized in correcting academic writing

The academic proofreading tool has been trained on 1000s of academic texts and by native English editors. Making it the most accurate and reliable proofreading tool for students.

Correct my document today

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

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

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

Download Word doc Download Google doc

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

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

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

Make a list of keywords

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

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

Search for relevant sources

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

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

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

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

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

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

For each publication, ask yourself:

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

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

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

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

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

Take notes and cite your sources

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

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

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

Prevent plagiarism, run a free check.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Chronological

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

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

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

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

Methodological

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

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

Theoretical

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

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

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

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

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

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

As you write, make sure to follow these tips:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Cite this Scribbr article

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

McCombes, S. (2022, June 07). What is a Literature Review? | Guide, Template, & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved 9 September 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/thesis-dissertation/literature-review/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

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

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

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

What is a literature review?

A literature review is a critical analysis of the literature related to your research topic. It evaluates and critiques the literature to establish a theoretical framework for your research topic and/or identify a gap in the existing research that your research will address.

A literature review is not a summary of the literature. You need to engage deeply and critically with the literature. Your literature review should show your understanding of the literature related to your research topic and lead to presenting a rationale for your research.

A literature review focuses on:

• the context of the topic
• key concepts, ideas, theories and methodologies
• key researchers, texts and seminal works
• major issues and debates
• identifying conflicting evidence
• the main questions that have been asked around the topic
• the organisation of knowledge on the topic
• definitions, particularly those that are contested
• showing how your research will advance scholarly knowledge (generally referred to as identifying the ‘gap’).

This module will guide you through the functions of a literature review; the typical process of conducting a literature review (including searching for literature and taking notes); structuring your literature review within your thesis and organising its internal ideas; and styling the language of your literature review.

The purposes of a literature review

A literature review serves two main purposes:

1) To show awareness of the present state of knowledge in a particular field, including:

• seminal authors
• the main empirical research
• theoretical positions
• controversies
• breakthroughs as well as links to other related areas of knowledge.

2) To provide a foundation for the author’s research. To do that, the literature review needs to:

• help the researcher define a hypothesis or a research question, and how answering the question will contribute to the body of knowledge;
• provide a rationale for investigating the problem and the selected methodology;
• provide a particular theoretical lens, support the argument, or identify gaps.

Before you engage further with this module, try the quiz below to see how much you already know about literature reviews.

Research and Writing Skills for Academic and Graduate Researchers Copyright © 2022 by RMIT University is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

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

What Is A Literature Review?

A plain-language explainer (with examples).

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

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

Literature Review 101

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

What is a literature review?

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

Reviewing the literature

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

The literature review chapter

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

What’s the purpose of a literature review?

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

Purpose #1 – Demonstrate your topic knowledge

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

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

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

Purpose #3 – Lay the foundation for your conceptual framework

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

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

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

Purpose #4 – To inform your methodology

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

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

How do I find articles for my literature review?

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

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

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

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

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

Need a helping hand?

How should I structure my literature review?

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

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

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

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

Example of a literature review

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

Wrapping Up

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

Psst… there’s more!

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

16 Comments

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

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

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

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

Timothy T. Chol [email protected]

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

This was so useful. Thank you so much.

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

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

Great Brief Explanation, thanks

So helpful to me as a student

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

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

Well-presented overview of the literature!

This was brilliant. So clear. Thank you

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

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

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

• Print Friendly

How to Write a Literature Review

What is a literature review.

• What Is the Literature
• Writing the Review

A literature review is much more than an annotated bibliography or a list of separate reviews of articles and books. It is a critical, analytical summary and synthesis of the current knowledge of a topic. Thus it should compare and relate different theories, findings, etc, rather than just summarize them individually. In addition, it should have a particular focus or theme to organize the review. It does not have to be an exhaustive account of everything published on the topic, but it should discuss all the significant academic literature and other relevant sources important for that focus.

This is meant to be a general guide to writing a literature review: ways to structure one, what to include, how it supplements other research. For more specific help on writing a review, and especially for help on finding the literature to review, sign up for a Personal Research Session .

The specific organization of a literature review depends on the type and purpose of the review, as well as on the specific field or topic being reviewed. But in general, it is a relatively brief but thorough exploration of past and current work on a topic. Rather than a chronological listing of previous work, though, literature reviews are usually organized thematically, such as different theoretical approaches, methodologies, or specific issues or concepts involved in the topic. A thematic organization makes it much easier to examine contrasting perspectives, theoretical approaches, methodologies, findings, etc, and to analyze the strengths and weaknesses of, and point out any gaps in, previous research. And this is the heart of what a literature review is about. A literature review may offer new interpretations, theoretical approaches, or other ideas; if it is part of a research proposal or report it should demonstrate the relationship of the proposed or reported research to others' work; but whatever else it does, it must provide a critical overview of the current state of research efforts. 

Literature reviews are common and very important in the sciences and social sciences. They are less common and have a less important role in the humanities, but they do have a place, especially stand-alone reviews.

Types of Literature Reviews

There are different types of literature reviews, and different purposes for writing a review, but the most common are:

• Stand-alone literature review articles . These provide an overview and analysis of the current state of research on a topic or question. The goal is to evaluate and compare previous research on a topic to provide an analysis of what is currently known, and also to reveal controversies, weaknesses, and gaps in current work, thus pointing to directions for future research. You can find examples published in any number of academic journals, but there is a series of Annual Reviews of *Subject* which are specifically devoted to literature review articles. Writing a stand-alone review is often an effective way to get a good handle on a topic and to develop ideas for your own research program. For example, contrasting theoretical approaches or conflicting interpretations of findings can be the basis of your research project: can you find evidence supporting one interpretation against another, or can you propose an alternative interpretation that overcomes their limitations?
• Part of a research proposal . This could be a proposal for a PhD dissertation, a senior thesis, or a class project. It could also be a submission for a grant. The literature review, by pointing out the current issues and questions concerning a topic, is a crucial part of demonstrating how your proposed research will contribute to the field, and thus of convincing your thesis committee to allow you to pursue the topic of your interest or a funding agency to pay for your research efforts.
• Part of a research report . When you finish your research and write your thesis or paper to present your findings, it should include a literature review to provide the context to which your work is a contribution. Your report, in addition to detailing the methods, results, etc. of your research, should show how your work relates to others' work.

A literature review for a research report is often a revision of the review for a research proposal, which can be a revision of a stand-alone review. Each revision should be a fairly extensive revision. With the increased knowledge of and experience in the topic as you proceed, your understanding of the topic will increase. Thus, you will be in a better position to analyze and critique the literature. In addition, your focus will change as you proceed in your research. Some areas of the literature you initially reviewed will be marginal or irrelevant for your eventual research, and you will need to explore other areas more thoroughly. 

Examples of Literature Reviews

See the series of Annual Reviews of *Subject* which are specifically devoted to literature review articles to find many examples of stand-alone literature reviews in the biomedical, physical, and social sciences. 

Research report articles vary in how they are organized, but a common general structure is to have sections such as:

• Abstract - Brief summary of the contents of the article
• Introduction - A explanation of the purpose of the study, a statement of the research question(s) the study intends to address
• Literature review - A critical assessment of the work done so far on this topic, to show how the current study relates to what has already been done
• Methods - How the study was carried out (e.g. instruments or equipment, procedures, methods to gather and analyze data)
• Results - What was found in the course of the study
• Discussion - What do the results mean
• Conclusion - State the conclusions and implications of the results, and discuss how it relates to the work reviewed in the literature review; also, point to directions for further work in the area

Here are some articles that illustrate variations on this theme. There is no need to read the entire articles (unless the contents interest you); just quickly browse through to see the sections, and see how each section is introduced and what is contained in them.

The Determinants of Undergraduate Grade Point Average: The Relative Importance of Family Background, High School Resources, and Peer Group Effects , in The Journal of Human Resources , v. 34 no. 2 (Spring 1999), p. 268-293.

This article has a standard breakdown of sections:

• Introduction
• Literature Review
• Some discussion sections

First Encounters of the Bureaucratic Kind: Early Freshman Experiences with a Campus Bureaucracy , in The Journal of Higher Education , v. 67 no. 6 (Nov-Dec 1996), p. 660-691.

This one does not have a section specifically labeled as a "literature review" or "review of the literature," but the first few sections cite a long list of other sources discussing previous research in the area before the authors present their own study they are reporting.

• Next: What Is the Literature >>
• Last Updated: Jan 11, 2024 9:48 AM
• URL: https://libguides.wesleyan.edu/litreview

• Library Homepage

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

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

What is a Literature Review?

So, what is a literature review .

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

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

What kinds of literature reviews are written?

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

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

What are the Goals of Creating a Literature Review?

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

When do you need to write a Literature Review?

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

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

Where I can find examples of Literature Reviews?

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

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

Where to Find Standalone Literature Reviews

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

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

Social Sciences

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

Hard science and health sciences:

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

• Insights blog

What is a review article?

Learn how to write a review article.

What is a review article? A review article can also be called a literature review, or a review of literature. It is a survey of previously published research on a topic. It should give an overview of current thinking on the topic. And, unlike an original research article, it will not present new experimental results.

Writing a review of literature is to provide a critical evaluation of the data available from existing studies. Review articles can identify potential research areas to explore next, and sometimes they will draw new conclusions from the existing data.

Why write a review article?

To provide a comprehensive foundation on a topic.

To explain the current state of knowledge.

To identify gaps in existing studies for potential future research.

To highlight the main methodologies and research techniques.

Did you know? 

There are some journals that only publish review articles, and others that do not accept them.

Make sure you check the  aims and scope  of the journal you’d like to publish in to find out if it’s the right place for your review article.

How to write a review article

Below are 8 key items to consider when you begin writing your review article.

Check the journal’s aims and scope

Make sure you have read the aims and scope for the journal you are submitting to and follow them closely. Different journals accept different types of articles and not all will accept review articles, so it’s important to check this before you start writing.

Define your scope

Define the scope of your review article and the research question you’ll be answering, making sure your article contributes something new to the field. 

As award-winning author Angus Crake told us, you’ll also need to “define the scope of your review so that it is manageable, not too large or small; it may be necessary to focus on recent advances if the field is well established.” 

Finding sources to evaluate

When finding sources to evaluate, Angus Crake says it’s critical that you “use multiple search engines/databases so you don’t miss any important ones.” 

For finding studies for a systematic review in medical sciences,  read advice from NCBI . 

Writing your title, abstract and keywords

Spend time writing an effective title, abstract and keywords. This will help maximize the visibility of your article online, making sure the right readers find your research. Your title and abstract should be clear, concise, accurate, and informative. 

For more information and guidance on getting these right, read our guide to writing a good abstract and title  and our  researcher’s guide to search engine optimization . 

Introduce the topic

Does a literature review need an introduction? Yes, always start with an overview of the topic and give some context, explaining why a review of the topic is necessary. Gather research to inform your introduction and make it broad enough to reach out to a large audience of non-specialists. This will help maximize its wider relevance and impact. 

Don’t make your introduction too long. Divide the review into sections of a suitable length to allow key points to be identified more easily.

Include critical discussion

Make sure you present a critical discussion, not just a descriptive summary of the topic. If there is contradictory research in your area of focus, make sure to include an element of debate and present both sides of the argument. You can also use your review paper to resolve conflict between contradictory studies.

What researchers say

Angus Crake, researcher

As part of your conclusion, include making suggestions for future research on the topic. Focus on the goal to communicate what you understood and what unknowns still remains.

Use a critical friend

Always perform a final spell and grammar check of your article before submission. 

You may want to ask a critical friend or colleague to give their feedback before you submit. If English is not your first language, think about using a language-polishing service.

Find out more about how  Taylor & Francis Editing Services can help improve your manuscript before you submit.

What is the difference between a research article and a review article?

[tableshd id=”17295″]

Before you submit your review article…

Complete this checklist before you submit your review article:

Have you checked the journal’s aims and scope?

Have you defined the scope of your article?

Did you use multiple search engines to find sources to evaluate?

Have you written a descriptive title and abstract using keywords?

Did you start with an overview of the topic?

Have you presented a critical discussion?

Have you included future suggestions for research in your conclusion?

Have you asked a friend to do a final spell and grammar check?

Expert help for your manuscript

Taylor & Francis Editing Services  offers a full range of pre-submission manuscript preparation services to help you improve the quality of your manuscript and submit with confidence.

Related resources

How to edit your paper

Writing a scientific literature review

• Privacy Policy

Home » Literature Review – Types Writing Guide and Examples

Literature Review – Types Writing Guide and Examples

Table of Contents

Literature Review

Definition:

A literature review is a comprehensive and critical analysis of the existing literature on a particular topic or research question. It involves identifying, evaluating, and synthesizing relevant literature, including scholarly articles, books, and other sources, to provide a summary and critical assessment of what is known about the topic.

Types of Literature Review

Types of Literature Review are as follows:

• Narrative literature review : This type of review involves a comprehensive summary and critical analysis of the available literature on a particular topic or research question. It is often used as an introductory section of a research paper.
• Systematic literature review: This is a rigorous and structured review that follows a pre-defined protocol to identify, evaluate, and synthesize all relevant studies on a specific research question. It is often used in evidence-based practice and systematic reviews.
• Meta-analysis: This is a quantitative review that uses statistical methods to combine data from multiple studies to derive a summary effect size. It provides a more precise estimate of the overall effect than any individual study.
• Scoping review: This is a preliminary review that aims to map the existing literature on a broad topic area to identify research gaps and areas for further investigation.
• Critical literature review : This type of review evaluates the strengths and weaknesses of the existing literature on a particular topic or research question. It aims to provide a critical analysis of the literature and identify areas where further research is needed.
• Conceptual literature review: This review synthesizes and integrates theories and concepts from multiple sources to provide a new perspective on a particular topic. It aims to provide a theoretical framework for understanding a particular research question.
• Rapid literature review: This is a quick review that provides a snapshot of the current state of knowledge on a specific research question or topic. It is often used when time and resources are limited.
• Thematic literature review : This review identifies and analyzes common themes and patterns across a body of literature on a particular topic. It aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the literature and identify key themes and concepts.
• Realist literature review: This review is often used in social science research and aims to identify how and why certain interventions work in certain contexts. It takes into account the context and complexities of real-world situations.
• State-of-the-art literature review : This type of review provides an overview of the current state of knowledge in a particular field, highlighting the most recent and relevant research. It is often used in fields where knowledge is rapidly evolving, such as technology or medicine.
• Integrative literature review: This type of review synthesizes and integrates findings from multiple studies on a particular topic to identify patterns, themes, and gaps in the literature. It aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of the current state of knowledge on a particular topic.
• Umbrella literature review : This review is used to provide a broad overview of a large and diverse body of literature on a particular topic. It aims to identify common themes and patterns across different areas of research.
• Historical literature review: This type of review examines the historical development of research on a particular topic or research question. It aims to provide a historical context for understanding the current state of knowledge on a particular topic.
• Problem-oriented literature review : This review focuses on a specific problem or issue and examines the literature to identify potential solutions or interventions. It aims to provide practical recommendations for addressing a particular problem or issue.
• Mixed-methods literature review : This type of review combines quantitative and qualitative methods to synthesize and analyze the available literature on a particular topic. It aims to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the research question by combining different types of evidence.

Parts of Literature Review

Parts of a literature review are as follows:

Introduction

The introduction of a literature review typically provides background information on the research topic and why it is important. It outlines the objectives of the review, the research question or hypothesis, and the scope of the review.

Literature Search

This section outlines the search strategy and databases used to identify relevant literature. The search terms used, inclusion and exclusion criteria, and any limitations of the search are described.

Literature Analysis

The literature analysis is the main body of the literature review. This section summarizes and synthesizes the literature that is relevant to the research question or hypothesis. The review should be organized thematically, chronologically, or by methodology, depending on the research objectives.

Critical Evaluation

Critical evaluation involves assessing the quality and validity of the literature. This includes evaluating the reliability and validity of the studies reviewed, the methodology used, and the strength of the evidence.

The conclusion of the literature review should summarize the main findings, identify any gaps in the literature, and suggest areas for future research. It should also reiterate the importance of the research question or hypothesis and the contribution of the literature review to the overall research project.

The references list includes all the sources cited in the literature review, and follows a specific referencing style (e.g., APA, MLA, Harvard).

How to write Literature Review

Here are some steps to follow when writing a literature review:

• Define your research question or topic : Before starting your literature review, it is essential to define your research question or topic. This will help you identify relevant literature and determine the scope of your review.
• Conduct a comprehensive search: Use databases and search engines to find relevant literature. Look for peer-reviewed articles, books, and other academic sources that are relevant to your research question or topic.
• Evaluate the sources: Once you have found potential sources, evaluate them critically to determine their relevance, credibility, and quality. Look for recent publications, reputable authors, and reliable sources of data and evidence.
• Organize your sources: Group the sources by theme, method, or research question. This will help you identify similarities and differences among the literature, and provide a structure for your literature review.
• Analyze and synthesize the literature : Analyze each source in depth, identifying the key findings, methodologies, and conclusions. Then, synthesize the information from the sources, identifying patterns and themes in the literature.
• Write the literature review : Start with an introduction that provides an overview of the topic and the purpose of the literature review. Then, organize the literature according to your chosen structure, and analyze and synthesize the sources. Finally, provide a conclusion that summarizes the key findings of the literature review, identifies gaps in knowledge, and suggests areas for future research.
• Edit and proofread: Once you have written your literature review, edit and proofread it carefully to ensure that it is well-organized, clear, and concise.

Examples of Literature Review

Here’s an example of how a literature review can be conducted for a thesis on the topic of “ The Impact of Social Media on Teenagers’ Mental Health”:

• Start by identifying the key terms related to your research topic. In this case, the key terms are “social media,” “teenagers,” and “mental health.”
• Use academic databases like Google Scholar, JSTOR, or PubMed to search for relevant articles, books, and other publications. Use these keywords in your search to narrow down your results.
• Evaluate the sources you find to determine if they are relevant to your research question. You may want to consider the publication date, author’s credentials, and the journal or book publisher.
• Begin reading and taking notes on each source, paying attention to key findings, methodologies used, and any gaps in the research.
• Organize your findings into themes or categories. For example, you might categorize your sources into those that examine the impact of social media on self-esteem, those that explore the effects of cyberbullying, and those that investigate the relationship between social media use and depression.
• Synthesize your findings by summarizing the key themes and highlighting any gaps or inconsistencies in the research. Identify areas where further research is needed.
• Use your literature review to inform your research questions and hypotheses for your thesis.

For example, after conducting a literature review on the impact of social media on teenagers’ mental health, a thesis might look like this:

“Using a mixed-methods approach, this study aims to investigate the relationship between social media use and mental health outcomes in teenagers. Specifically, the study will examine the effects of cyberbullying, social comparison, and excessive social media use on self-esteem, anxiety, and depression. Through an analysis of survey data and qualitative interviews with teenagers, the study will provide insight into the complex relationship between social media use and mental health outcomes, and identify strategies for promoting positive mental health outcomes in young people.”

Reference: Smith, J., Jones, M., & Lee, S. (2019). The effects of social media use on adolescent mental health: A systematic review. Journal of Adolescent Health, 65(2), 154-165. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2019.03.024

Reference Example: Author, A. A., Author, B. B., & Author, C. C. (Year). Title of article. Title of Journal, volume number(issue number), page range. doi:0000000/000000000000 or URL

Applications of Literature Review

some applications of literature review in different fields:

• Social Sciences: In social sciences, literature reviews are used to identify gaps in existing research, to develop research questions, and to provide a theoretical framework for research. Literature reviews are commonly used in fields such as sociology, psychology, anthropology, and political science.
• Natural Sciences: In natural sciences, literature reviews are used to summarize and evaluate the current state of knowledge in a particular field or subfield. Literature reviews can help researchers identify areas where more research is needed and provide insights into the latest developments in a particular field. Fields such as biology, chemistry, and physics commonly use literature reviews.
• Health Sciences: In health sciences, literature reviews are used to evaluate the effectiveness of treatments, identify best practices, and determine areas where more research is needed. Literature reviews are commonly used in fields such as medicine, nursing, and public health.
• Humanities: In humanities, literature reviews are used to identify gaps in existing knowledge, develop new interpretations of texts or cultural artifacts, and provide a theoretical framework for research. Literature reviews are commonly used in fields such as history, literary studies, and philosophy.

Role of Literature Review in Research

Here are some applications of literature review in research:

• Identifying Research Gaps : Literature review helps researchers identify gaps in existing research and literature related to their research question. This allows them to develop new research questions and hypotheses to fill those gaps.
• Developing Theoretical Framework: Literature review helps researchers develop a theoretical framework for their research. By analyzing and synthesizing existing literature, researchers can identify the key concepts, theories, and models that are relevant to their research.
• Selecting Research Methods : Literature review helps researchers select appropriate research methods and techniques based on previous research. It also helps researchers to identify potential biases or limitations of certain methods and techniques.
• Data Collection and Analysis: Literature review helps researchers in data collection and analysis by providing a foundation for the development of data collection instruments and methods. It also helps researchers to identify relevant data sources and identify potential data analysis techniques.
• Communicating Results: Literature review helps researchers to communicate their results effectively by providing a context for their research. It also helps to justify the significance of their findings in relation to existing research and literature.

Purpose of Literature Review

Some of the specific purposes of a literature review are as follows:

• To provide context: A literature review helps to provide context for your research by situating it within the broader body of literature on the topic.
• To identify gaps and inconsistencies: A literature review helps to identify areas where further research is needed or where there are inconsistencies in the existing literature.
• To synthesize information: A literature review helps to synthesize the information from multiple sources and present a coherent and comprehensive picture of the current state of knowledge on the topic.
• To identify key concepts and theories : A literature review helps to identify key concepts and theories that are relevant to your research question and provide a theoretical framework for your study.
• To inform research design: A literature review can inform the design of your research study by identifying appropriate research methods, data sources, and research questions.

Characteristics of Literature Review

Some Characteristics of Literature Review are as follows:

• Identifying gaps in knowledge: A literature review helps to identify gaps in the existing knowledge and research on a specific topic or research question. By analyzing and synthesizing the literature, you can identify areas where further research is needed and where new insights can be gained.
• Establishing the significance of your research: A literature review helps to establish the significance of your own research by placing it in the context of existing research. By demonstrating the relevance of your research to the existing literature, you can establish its importance and value.
• Informing research design and methodology : A literature review helps to inform research design and methodology by identifying the most appropriate research methods, techniques, and instruments. By reviewing the literature, you can identify the strengths and limitations of different research methods and techniques, and select the most appropriate ones for your own research.
• Supporting arguments and claims: A literature review provides evidence to support arguments and claims made in academic writing. By citing and analyzing the literature, you can provide a solid foundation for your own arguments and claims.
• I dentifying potential collaborators and mentors: A literature review can help identify potential collaborators and mentors by identifying researchers and practitioners who are working on related topics or using similar methods. By building relationships with these individuals, you can gain valuable insights and support for your own research and practice.
• Keeping up-to-date with the latest research : A literature review helps to keep you up-to-date with the latest research on a specific topic or research question. By regularly reviewing the literature, you can stay informed about the latest findings and developments in your field.

Advantages of Literature Review

There are several advantages to conducting a literature review as part of a research project, including:

• Establishing the significance of the research : A literature review helps to establish the significance of the research by demonstrating the gap or problem in the existing literature that the study aims to address.
• Identifying key concepts and theories: A literature review can help to identify key concepts and theories that are relevant to the research question, and provide a theoretical framework for the study.
• Supporting the research methodology : A literature review can inform the research methodology by identifying appropriate research methods, data sources, and research questions.
• Providing a comprehensive overview of the literature : A literature review provides a comprehensive overview of the current state of knowledge on a topic, allowing the researcher to identify key themes, debates, and areas of agreement or disagreement.
• Identifying potential research questions: A literature review can help to identify potential research questions and areas for further investigation.
• Avoiding duplication of research: A literature review can help to avoid duplication of research by identifying what has already been done on a topic, and what remains to be done.
• Enhancing the credibility of the research : A literature review helps to enhance the credibility of the research by demonstrating the researcher’s knowledge of the existing literature and their ability to situate their research within a broader context.

Limitations of Literature Review

Limitations of Literature Review are as follows:

• Limited scope : Literature reviews can only cover the existing literature on a particular topic, which may be limited in scope or depth.
• Publication bias : Literature reviews may be influenced by publication bias, which occurs when researchers are more likely to publish positive results than negative ones. This can lead to an incomplete or biased picture of the literature.
• Quality of sources : The quality of the literature reviewed can vary widely, and not all sources may be reliable or valid.
• Time-limited: Literature reviews can become quickly outdated as new research is published, making it difficult to keep up with the latest developments in a field.
• Subjective interpretation : Literature reviews can be subjective, and the interpretation of the findings can vary depending on the researcher’s perspective or bias.
• Lack of original data : Literature reviews do not generate new data, but rather rely on the analysis of existing studies.
• Risk of plagiarism: It is important to ensure that literature reviews do not inadvertently contain plagiarism, which can occur when researchers use the work of others without proper attribution.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

Future Research – Thesis Guide

Research Gap – Types, Examples and How to...

Informed Consent in Research – Types, Templates...

Data Interpretation – Process, Methods and...

Table of Contents – Types, Formats, Examples

Research Problem – Examples, Types and Guide

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
• My Bibliography
• Collections
• Citation manager

Save citation to file

Email citation, add to collections.

• Create a new collection
• Add to an existing collection

Add to My Bibliography

Your saved search, create a file for external citation management software, your rss feed.

• Search in PubMed
• Search in NLM Catalog
• Add to Search

How to Do a Systematic Review: A Best Practice Guide for Conducting and Reporting Narrative Reviews, Meta-Analyses, and Meta-Syntheses

Affiliations.

• 1 Behavioural Science Centre, Stirling Management School, University of Stirling, Stirling FK9 4LA, United Kingdom; email: [email protected].
• 2 Department of Psychological and Behavioural Science, London School of Economics and Political Science, London WC2A 2AE, United Kingdom.
• 3 Department of Statistics, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois 60208, USA; email: [email protected].
• PMID: 30089228
• DOI: 10.1146/annurev-psych-010418-102803

Systematic reviews are characterized by a methodical and replicable methodology and presentation. They involve a comprehensive search to locate all relevant published and unpublished work on a subject; a systematic integration of search results; and a critique of the extent, nature, and quality of evidence in relation to a particular research question. The best reviews synthesize studies to draw broad theoretical conclusions about what a literature means, linking theory to evidence and evidence to theory. This guide describes how to plan, conduct, organize, and present a systematic review of quantitative (meta-analysis) or qualitative (narrative review, meta-synthesis) information. We outline core standards and principles and describe commonly encountered problems. Although this guide targets psychological scientists, its high level of abstraction makes it potentially relevant to any subject area or discipline. We argue that systematic reviews are a key methodology for clarifying whether and how research findings replicate and for explaining possible inconsistencies, and we call for researchers to conduct systematic reviews to help elucidate whether there is a replication crisis.

Keywords: evidence; guide; meta-analysis; meta-synthesis; narrative; systematic review; theory.

PubMed Disclaimer

• Search in MeSH

LinkOut - more resources

Full text sources.

• Ingenta plc
• Ovid Technologies, Inc.

Other Literature Sources

• scite Smart Citations

Miscellaneous

• NCI CPTAC Assay Portal
• Citation Manager

NCBI Literature Resources

MeSH PMC Bookshelf Disclaimer

The PubMed wordmark and PubMed logo are registered trademarks of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Unauthorized use of these marks is strictly prohibited.

Literature Reviews

What is a Literature Review?

• Steps for Creating a Literature Review
• Providing Evidence / Critical Analysis
• Challenges when writing a Literature Review
• Systematic Literature Reviews

A literature review is an academic text that surveys, synthesizes, and critically evaluates the existing literature on a specific topic. It is typically required for theses, dissertations, or long reports and  serves several key purposes:

• Surveying the Literature : It involves a comprehensive search and examination of relevant academic books, journal articles, and other sources related to the chosen topic.
• Synthesizing Information : The literature review summarizes and organizes the information found in the literature, often identifying patterns, themes, and gaps in the current knowledge.
• Critical Analysis : It critically analyzes the collected information, highlighting limitations, gaps, and areas of controversy, and suggests directions for future research.
• Establishing Context : It places the current research within the broader context of the field, demonstrating how the new research builds on or diverges from previous studies.

Types of Literature Reviews

Literature reviews can take various forms, including:

• Narrative Reviews : These provide a qualitative summary of the literature and are often used to give a broad overview of a topic. They may be less structured and more subjective, focusing on synthesizing the literature to support a particular viewpoint.
• Systematic Reviews : These are more rigorous and structured, following a specific methodology to identify, evaluate, and synthesize all relevant studies on a particular question. They aim to minimize bias and provide a comprehensive summary of the existing evidence.
• Integrative Reviews : Similar to systematic reviews, but they aim to generate new knowledge by integrating findings from different studies to develop new theories or frameworks.

Importance of Literature Reviews

• Foundation for Research : They provide a solid background for new research projects, helping to justify the research question and methodology.

Identifying Gaps : Literature reviews highlight areas where knowledge is lacking, guiding future research efforts.

• Building Credibility : Demonstrating familiarity with existing research enhances the credibility of the researcher and their work.

In summary, a literature review is a critical component of academic research that helps to frame the current state of knowledge, identify gaps, and provide  a basis for new research.

The research, the body of current literature, and the particular objectives should all influence the structure of a literature review. It is also critical to remember that creating a literature review is an ongoing process - as one reads and analyzes the literature, one's understanding may change, which could require rearranging the literature review.

Paré, G. and Kitsiou, S. (2017) 'Methods for Literature Reviews' , in: Lau, F. and Kuziemsky, C. (eds.)  Handbook of eHealth evaluation: an evidence-based approach . Victoria (BC): University of Victoria.

Perplexity AI (2024) Perplexity AI response to Kathy Neville, 31 July.       

Royal Literary Fund (2024)  The structure of a literature review.  Available at: https://www.rlf.org.uk/resources/the-structure-of-a-literature-review/ (Accessed: 23 July 2024).

Library Services for Undergraduate Research (2024) Literature review: a definition . Available at: https://libguides.wustl.edu/our?p=302677 (Accessed: 31 July 2024).

Further Reading:

Methods for Literature Reviews

Literature Review (The University of Edinburgh)

Literature Reviews (University of Sheffield)

• How to Write a Literature Review Paper? Wee, Bert Van ; Banister, David ISBN: 0144-1647

• Next: Steps for Creating a Literature Review >>
• Last Updated: Sep 4, 2024 11:43 AM
• URL: https://library.lsbu.ac.uk/literaturereviews

• +44 (0) 207 391 9032

Recent Posts

What is a literature review definition, types, and examples.

• Why Is Your CV Getting Rejected and How to Avoid It
• Where to Find Images for Presentations
• What Is an Internship? Everything You Should Know
• How Long Should a Thesis Statement Be?
• How to Write a Character Analysis Essay
• Best Colours for Your PowerPoint Presentation: Top Colour Combinations
• How to Write a Nursing Essay – With Examples
• Top 5 Essential Skills You Should Build As An International Student
• How Professional Editing Services Can Take Your Writing to the Next Level
• Academic News
• Custom Essays
• Dissertation Writing
• Essay Marking
• Essay Writing
• Essay Writing Companies
• Model Essays
• Model Exam Answers
• Oxbridge Essays Updates
• PhD Writing
• Significant Academics
• Student News
• Study Skills
• University Applications
• University Essays
• University Life
• Writing Tips

Since 2006, Oxbridge Essays has been the UK’s leading paid essay-writing and dissertation service

We have helped 10,000s of undergraduate, Masters and PhD students to maximise their grades in essays, dissertations, model-exam answers, applications and other materials. If you would like a free chat about your project with one of our UK staff, then please just reach out on one of the methods below.

A literature review is an essential part of any academic research paper, thesis, or dissertation. It provides a thorough examination of existing research on a particular topic, allowing the researcher to identify gaps, areas of agreement or disagreement, and emerging trends in the field. In this post, we’ll delve into the definition of a literature review, explore the different types of literature reviews, and provide examples of literature review structures that can guide your own work. Additionally, we’ll offer tips on how to craft a compelling literature review that strengthens the foundation of your research.

Literature Review Meaning

The term "literature review" refers to a comprehensive survey of the scholarly works, books, journal articles, and other sources relevant to a particular research topic. Its primary purpose is to offer a critical evaluation of the existing body of knowledge. The literature review helps set the context for the research question, showing what has already been explored and where gaps in knowledge or methodological limitations may exist. By examining various sources, you can assess how your research fits into the broader conversation within your field. The literature review also provides the foundation for your argument, helping to justify the importance of your research and explain how it contributes to the ongoing academic discussion.

Why Is a Literature Review Important?

A literature review is not just a summary of previous research but a critical analysis of the work that has been done in a particular area of study. It helps demonstrate your understanding of the topic and situates your work within the existing academic landscape. By conducting a literature review, you ensure that your research is not redundant and identify the unique contributions your study can make. Furthermore, the literature review informs your methodology, highlighting which methods have been successful in previous studies and which have encountered limitations. By understanding what has worked before, you can avoid potential pitfalls and build upon the successes of earlier researchers.

Literature Review Structure

The structure of a literature review can vary depending on the nature of your research and the field of study. However, the most common literature review structure includes several key components:

• Introduction :This section outlines the scope of the literature review, defines the key terms, and states the overall purpose of the review. It provides the reader with an understanding of what the review will cover.
• Thematic Organisation : The literature is often organised thematically, grouping together works that address similar aspects of the research topic. Themes can relate to theoretical approaches, methodologies, or different interpretations of key issues.
• Critical Evaluation : The body of the literature review should not only summarise the existing research but also critically evaluate it. This might involve identifying strengths and weaknesses in methodologies, assessing the reliability of findings, and discussing how well the research supports the claims made.
• Conclusion : The conclusion should summarise the main findings of the review, restate the key themes, and highlight gaps in the research that your study will address. It should also reflect on how the literature review has shaped your own research design.

Types of Literature Reviews

There are several different forms of literature reviews, each with a distinct focus and structure. Understanding these types can help you choose the approach that best fits your research needs. Here are some of the most common types of literature reviews:

• Narrative Literature Review : This is the most traditional form of literature review. It provides a comprehensive summary and analysis of the literature on a particular topic. Narrative reviews are often broad in scope and provide an overview of key themes and trends.
• Systematic Literature Review : This type of review involves a rigorous, structured process that aims to identify all relevant studies on a specific research question. Systematic reviews follow a clearly defined methodology, including specific criteria for selecting and analysing studies. They are commonly used in fields such as healthcare, where a comprehensive synthesis of evidence is needed.
• Scoping Review : Clearly outline your main argument or position. This should guide the direction of your essay.
• Scoping Review : A scoping review is used to map the key concepts, sources, and evidence in a research area. It is often the first step before a systematic review and is useful for identifying gaps in the literature and guiding further research.
• Meta-Analysis : This is a form of literature review that uses statistical techniques to combine the results of multiple studies. Meta-analyses are typically used to provide an overall estimate of the effect size for a particular intervention or phenomenon.
• Integrative Review : An integrative review synthesises qualitative and quantitative data to provide a more holistic view of the research on a particular topic. It aims to generate new perspectives by integrating findings from different types of studies.
• Critical Review : This type of literature review goes beyond merely describing the literature. A critical review analyses and synthesises the research, evaluating its strengths and weaknesses and offering new insights and perspectives on the topic.

Short Example of a Literature Review

Below is an example of the literature review from a dissertation on climate change policies. The example demonstrates how to structure a literature review and critically engage with the literature:

Introduction of the Literature Review

Climate change has been a topic of growing concern over the past few decades, with numerous policies introduced globally to mitigate its effects. This review examines the existing literature on climate change policies, focusing on the effectiveness of carbon pricing, renewable energy subsidies, and regulatory approaches. The review aims to highlight the strengths and limitations of these policies and identify gaps in the research that future studies should address.

Thematic Organisation

The literature is organised into three main themes: carbon pricing mechanisms, renewable energy subsidies, and regulatory approaches to emissions reduction. Each theme is analysed in detail, examining the key findings of previous research and assessing the impact of these policies on greenhouse gas emissions.

Critical Evaluation

The review finds that while carbon pricing mechanisms have been effective in reducing emissions in some contexts, their success is heavily dependent on political and economic factors. Renewable energy subsidies have contributed to significant increases in renewable energy capacity, but their long-term sustainability remains in question. Regulatory approaches, while often politically contentious, have proven to be effective in certain jurisdictions.

The literature review concludes that although significant progress has been made in the development of climate change policies, further research is needed to evaluate the long-term impacts of these policies and to explore new approaches that may be more effective in reducing emissions.

Key Considerations

Writing a literature review can be a complex task, but it is a vital part of the research process. By understanding the meaning of a literature review, familiarising yourself with different forms of literature reviews, and following a clear structure, you can create a review that enhances your research project and demonstrates your knowledge of the field.

Top 10 tips for writing a dissertation methodology

Advice for successfully writing a dissertation, how to structure your dissertation in 2024, writing services.

• Essay Plans
• Critical Reviews
• Literature Reviews
• Presentations
• Dissertation Title Creation
• Dissertation Proposals
• Dissertation Chapters
• PhD Proposals
• Journal Publication
• CV Writing Service
• Business Proofreading Services

Editing Services

• Proofreading Service
• Editing Service
• Academic Editing Service

Additional Services

• Marking Services
• Consultation Calls
• Personal Statements
• Tutoring Services

Our Company

• Frequently Asked Questions
• Become a Writer

Terms & Policies

• Fair Use Policy
• Policy for Students in England
• Privacy Policy
• Terms & Conditions
• Editing Service Examples
• [email protected]
• Contact Form

Payment Methods

Cryptocurrency payments.

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
• Turk J Urol
• v.39(Suppl 1); 2013 Sep

How to write a review article?

In the medical sciences, the importance of review articles is rising. When clinicians want to update their knowledge and generate guidelines about a topic, they frequently use reviews as a starting point. The value of a review is associated with what has been done, what has been found and how these findings are presented. Before asking ‘how,’ the question of ‘why’ is more important when starting to write a review. The main and fundamental purpose of writing a review is to create a readable synthesis of the best resources available in the literature for an important research question or a current area of research. Although the idea of writing a review is attractive, it is important to spend time identifying the important questions. Good review methods are critical because they provide an unbiased point of view for the reader regarding the current literature. There is a consensus that a review should be written in a systematic fashion, a notion that is usually followed. In a systematic review with a focused question, the research methods must be clearly described. A ‘methodological filter’ is the best method for identifying the best working style for a research question, and this method reduces the workload when surveying the literature. An essential part of the review process is differentiating good research from bad and leaning on the results of the better studies. The ideal way to synthesize studies is to perform a meta-analysis. In conclusion, when writing a review, it is best to clearly focus on fixed ideas, to use a procedural and critical approach to the literature and to express your findings in an attractive way.

The importance of review articles in health sciences is increasing day by day. Clinicians frequently benefit from review articles to update their knowledge in their field of specialization, and use these articles as a starting point for formulating guidelines. [ 1 , 2 ] The institutions which provide financial support for further investigations resort to these reviews to reveal the need for these researches. [ 3 ] As is the case with all other researches, the value of a review article is related to what is achieved, what is found, and the way of communicating this information. A few studies have evaluated the quality of review articles. Murlow evaluated 50 review articles published in 1985, and 1986, and revealed that none of them had complied with clear-cut scientific criteria. [ 4 ] In 1996 an international group that analyzed articles, demonstrated the aspects of review articles, and meta-analyses that had not complied with scientific criteria, and elaborated QUOROM (QUality Of Reporting Of Meta-analyses) statement which focused on meta-analyses of randomized controlled studies. [ 5 ] Later on this guideline was updated, and named as PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses). [ 6 ]

Review articles are divided into 2 categories as narrative, and systematic reviews. Narrative reviews are written in an easily readable format, and allow consideration of the subject matter within a large spectrum. However in a systematic review, a very detailed, and comprehensive literature surveying is performed on the selected topic. [ 7 , 8 ] Since it is a result of a more detailed literature surveying with relatively lesser involvement of author’s bias, systematic reviews are considered as gold standard articles. Systematic reviews can be diivded into qualitative, and quantitative reviews. In both of them detailed literature surveying is performed. However in quantitative reviews, study data are collected, and statistically evaluated (ie. meta-analysis). [ 8 ]

Before inquring for the method of preparation of a review article, it is more logical to investigate the motivation behind writing the review article in question. The fundamental rationale of writing a review article is to make a readable synthesis of the best literature sources on an important research inquiry or a topic. This simple definition of a review article contains the following key elements:

• The question(s) to be dealt with
• Methods used to find out, and select the best quality researches so as to respond to these questions.
• To synthetize available, but quite different researches

For the specification of important questions to be answered, number of literature references to be consulted should be more or less determined. Discussions should be conducted with colleagues in the same area of interest, and time should be reserved for the solution of the problem(s). Though starting to write the review article promptly seems to be very alluring, the time you spend for the determination of important issues won’t be a waste of time. [ 9 ]

The PRISMA statement [ 6 ] elaborated to write a well-designed review articles contains a 27-item checklist ( Table 1 ). It will be reasonable to fulfill the requirements of these items during preparation of a review article or a meta-analysis. Thus preparation of a comprehensible article with a high-quality scientific content can be feasible.

PRISMA statement: A 27-item checklist

Contents and format

Important differences exist between systematic, and non-systematic reviews which especially arise from methodologies used in the description of the literature sources. A non-systematic review means use of articles collected for years with the recommendations of your colleagues, while systematic review is based on struggles to search for, and find the best possible researches which will respond to the questions predetermined at the start of the review.

Though a consensus has been reached about the systematic design of the review articles, studies revealed that most of them had not been written in a systematic format. McAlister et al. analyzed review articles in 6 medical journals, and disclosed that in less than one fourth of the review articles, methods of description, evaluation or synthesis of evidence had been provided, one third of them had focused on a clinical topic, and only half of them had provided quantitative data about the extend of the potential benefits. [ 10 ]

Use of proper methodologies in review articles is important in that readers assume an objective attitude towards updated information. We can confront two problems while we are using data from researches in order to answer certain questions. Firstly, we can be prejudiced during selection of research articles or these articles might be biased. To minimize this risk, methodologies used in our reviews should allow us to define, and use researches with minimal degree of bias. The second problem is that, most of the researches have been performed with small sample sizes. In statistical methods in meta-analyses, available researches are combined to increase the statistical power of the study. The problematic aspect of a non-systematic review is that our tendency to give biased responses to the questions, in other words we apt to select the studies with known or favourite results, rather than the best quality investigations among them.

As is the case with many research articles, general format of a systematic review on a single subject includes sections of Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion ( Table 2 ).

Structure of a systematic review

Preparation of the review article

Steps, and targets of constructing a good review article are listed in Table 3 . To write a good review article the items in Table 3 should be implemented step by step. [ 11 – 13 ]

Steps of a systematic review

The research question

It might be helpful to divide the research question into components. The most prevalently used format for questions related to the treatment is PICO (P - Patient, Problem or Population; I-Intervention; C-appropriate Comparisons, and O-Outcome measures) procedure. For example In female patients (P) with stress urinary incontinence, comparisons (C) between transobturator, and retropubic midurethral tension-free band surgery (I) as for patients’ satisfaction (O).

Finding Studies

In a systematic review on a focused question, methods of investigation used should be clearly specified.

Ideally, research methods, investigated databases, and key words should be described in the final report. Different databases are used dependent on the topic analyzed. In most of the clinical topics, Medline should be surveyed. However searching through Embase and CINAHL can be also appropriate.

While determining appropriate terms for surveying, PICO elements of the issue to be sought may guide the process. Since in general we are interested in more than one outcome, P, and I can be key elements. In this case we should think about synonyms of P, and I elements, and combine them with a conjunction AND.

One method which might alleviate the workload of surveying process is “methodological filter” which aims to find the best investigation method for each research question. A good example of this method can be found in PubMed interface of Medline. The Clinical Queries tool offers empirically developed filters for five different inquiries as guidelines for etiology, diagnosis, treatment, prognosis or clinical prediction.

Evaluation of the Quality of the Study

As an indispensable component of the review process is to discriminate good, and bad quality researches from each other, and the outcomes should be based on better qualified researches, as far as possible. To achieve this goal you should know the best possible evidence for each type of question The first component of the quality is its general planning/design of the study. General planning/design of a cohort study, a case series or normal study demonstrates variations.

A hierarchy of evidence for different research questions is presented in Table 4 . However this hierarchy is only a first step. After you find good quality research articles, you won’t need to read all the rest of other articles which saves you tons of time. [ 14 ]

Determination of levels of evidence based on the type of the research question

Formulating a Synthesis

Rarely all researches arrive at the same conclusion. In this case a solution should be found. However it is risky to make a decision based on the votes of absolute majority. Indeed, a well-performed large scale study, and a weakly designed one are weighed on the same scale. Therefore, ideally a meta-analysis should be performed to solve apparent differences. Ideally, first of all, one should be focused on the largest, and higher quality study, then other studies should be compared with this basic study.

Conclusions

In conclusion, during writing process of a review article, the procedures to be achieved can be indicated as follows: 1) Get rid of fixed ideas, and obsessions from your head, and view the subject from a large perspective. 2) Research articles in the literature should be approached with a methodological, and critical attitude and 3) finally data should be explained in an attractive way.

Systematic Reviews

• What is a Systematic Review?

A systematic review is an evidence synthesis that uses explicit, reproducible methods to perform a comprehensive literature search and critical appraisal of individual studies and that uses appropriate statistical techniques to combine these valid studies.

Key Characteristics of a Systematic Review:

Generally, systematic reviews must have:

• a clearly stated set of objectives with pre-defined eligibility criteria for studies
• an explicit, reproducible methodology
• a systematic search that attempts to identify all studies that would meet the eligibility criteria
• an assessment of the validity of the findings of the included studies, for example through the assessment of the risk of bias
• a systematic presentation, and synthesis, of the characteristics and findings of the included studies.

A meta-analysis is a systematic review that uses quantitative methods to synthesize and summarize the pooled data from included studies.

Additional Information

• How-to Books
• Beyond Health Sciences

• Cochrane Handbook For Systematic Reviews of Interventions Provides guidance to authors for the preparation of Cochrane Intervention reviews. Chapter 6 covers searching for reviews.
• Systematic Reviews: CRD’s Guidance for Undertaking Reviews in Health Care From The University of York Centre for Reviews and Dissemination: Provides practical guidance for undertaking evidence synthesis based on a thorough understanding of systematic review methodology. It presents the core principles of systematic reviewing, and in complementary chapters, highlights issues that are specific to reviews of clinical tests, public health interventions, adverse effects, and economic evaluations.
• Cornell, Sytematic Reviews and Evidence Synthesis Beyond the Health Sciences Video series geared for librarians but very informative about searching outside medicine.
• << Previous: Getting Started
• Next: Levels of Evidence >>
• Getting Started
• Levels of Evidence
• Locating Systematic Reviews
• Searching Systematically
• Developing Answerable Questions
• Identifying Synonyms & Related Terms
• Using Truncation and Wildcards
• Identifying Search Limits/Exclusion Criteria
• Keyword vs. Subject Searching
• Where to Search
• Search Filters
• Sensitivity vs. Precision
• Core Databases
• Other Databases
• Clinical Trial Registries
• Conference Presentations
• Databases Indexing Grey Literature
• Web Searching
• Handsearching
• Citation Indexes
• Documenting the Search Process
• Managing your Review

Research Support

• Last Updated: Aug 14, 2024 11:07 AM
• URL: https://guides.library.ucdavis.edu/systematic-reviews

Have a language expert improve your writing

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

• Knowledge Base

Methodology

• What Is Peer Review? | Types & Examples

What Is Peer Review? | Types & Examples

Published on December 17, 2021 by Tegan George . Revised on June 22, 2023.

Peer review, sometimes referred to as refereeing , is the process of evaluating submissions to an academic journal. Using strict criteria, a panel of reviewers in the same subject area decides whether to accept each submission for publication.

Peer-reviewed articles are considered a highly credible source due to the stringent process they go through before publication.

There are various types of peer review. The main difference between them is to what extent the authors, reviewers, and editors know each other’s identities. The most common types are:

• Single-blind review
• Double-blind review
• Triple-blind review

Collaborative review

Open review.

Relatedly, peer assessment is a process where your peers provide you with feedback on something you’ve written, based on a set of criteria or benchmarks from an instructor. They then give constructive feedback, compliments, or guidance to help you improve your draft.

Table of contents

What is the purpose of peer review, types of peer review, the peer review process, providing feedback to your peers, peer review example, advantages of peer review, criticisms of peer review, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about peer reviews.

Many academic fields use peer review, largely to determine whether a manuscript is suitable for publication. Peer review enhances the credibility of the manuscript. For this reason, academic journals are among the most credible sources you can refer to.

However, peer review is also common in non-academic settings. The United Nations, the European Union, and many individual nations use peer review to evaluate grant applications. It is also widely used in medical and health-related fields as a teaching or quality-of-care measure.

Peer assessment is often used in the classroom as a pedagogical tool. Both receiving feedback and providing it are thought to enhance the learning process, helping students think critically and collaboratively.

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

Depending on the journal, there are several types of peer review.

Single-blind peer review

The most common type of peer review is single-blind (or single anonymized) review . Here, the names of the reviewers are not known by the author.

While this gives the reviewers the ability to give feedback without the possibility of interference from the author, there has been substantial criticism of this method in the last few years. Many argue that single-blind reviewing can lead to poaching or intellectual theft or that anonymized comments cause reviewers to be too harsh.

Double-blind peer review

In double-blind (or double anonymized) review , both the author and the reviewers are anonymous.

Arguments for double-blind review highlight that this mitigates any risk of prejudice on the side of the reviewer, while protecting the nature of the process. In theory, it also leads to manuscripts being published on merit rather than on the reputation of the author.

Triple-blind peer review

While triple-blind (or triple anonymized) review —where the identities of the author, reviewers, and editors are all anonymized—does exist, it is difficult to carry out in practice.

Proponents of adopting triple-blind review for journal submissions argue that it minimizes potential conflicts of interest and biases. However, ensuring anonymity is logistically challenging, and current editing software is not always able to fully anonymize everyone involved in the process.

In collaborative review , authors and reviewers interact with each other directly throughout the process. However, the identity of the reviewer is not known to the author. This gives all parties the opportunity to resolve any inconsistencies or contradictions in real time, and provides them a rich forum for discussion. It can mitigate the need for multiple rounds of editing and minimize back-and-forth.

Collaborative review can be time- and resource-intensive for the journal, however. For these collaborations to occur, there has to be a set system in place, often a technological platform, with staff monitoring and fixing any bugs or glitches.

Lastly, in open review , all parties know each other’s identities throughout the process. Often, open review can also include feedback from a larger audience, such as an online forum, or reviewer feedback included as part of the final published product.

While many argue that greater transparency prevents plagiarism or unnecessary harshness, there is also concern about the quality of future scholarship if reviewers feel they have to censor their comments.

In general, the peer review process includes the following steps:

• First, the author submits the manuscript to the editor.
• Reject the manuscript and send it back to the author, or
• Send it onward to the selected peer reviewer(s)
• Next, the peer review process occurs. The reviewer provides feedback, addressing any major or minor issues with the manuscript, and gives their advice regarding what edits should be made.
• Lastly, the edited manuscript is sent back to the author. They input the edits and resubmit it to the editor for publication.

In an effort to be transparent, many journals are now disclosing who reviewed each article in the published product. There are also increasing opportunities for collaboration and feedback, with some journals allowing open communication between reviewers and authors.

It can seem daunting at first to conduct a peer review or peer assessment. If you’re not sure where to start, there are several best practices you can use.

Summarize the argument in your own words

Summarizing the main argument helps the author see how their argument is interpreted by readers, and gives you a jumping-off point for providing feedback. If you’re having trouble doing this, it’s a sign that the argument needs to be clearer, more concise, or worded differently.

If the author sees that you’ve interpreted their argument differently than they intended, they have an opportunity to address any misunderstandings when they get the manuscript back.

Separate your feedback into major and minor issues

It can be challenging to keep feedback organized. One strategy is to start out with any major issues and then flow into the more minor points. It’s often helpful to keep your feedback in a numbered list, so the author has concrete points to refer back to.

Major issues typically consist of any problems with the style, flow, or key points of the manuscript. Minor issues include spelling errors, citation errors, or other smaller, easy-to-apply feedback.

Tip: Try not to focus too much on the minor issues. If the manuscript has a lot of typos, consider making a note that the author should address spelling and grammar issues, rather than going through and fixing each one.

The best feedback you can provide is anything that helps them strengthen their argument or resolve major stylistic issues.

Give the type of feedback that you would like to receive

No one likes being criticized, and it can be difficult to give honest feedback without sounding overly harsh or critical. One strategy you can use here is the “compliment sandwich,” where you “sandwich” your constructive criticism between two compliments.

Be sure you are giving concrete, actionable feedback that will help the author submit a successful final draft. While you shouldn’t tell them exactly what they should do, your feedback should help them resolve any issues they may have overlooked.

As a rule of thumb, your feedback should be:

• Easy to understand
• Constructive

Below is a brief annotated research example. You can view examples of peer feedback by hovering over the highlighted sections.

Influence of phone use on sleep

Studies show that teens from the US are getting less sleep than they were a decade ago (Johnson, 2019) . On average, teens only slept for 6 hours a night in 2021, compared to 8 hours a night in 2011. Johnson mentions several potential causes, such as increased anxiety, changed diets, and increased phone use.

The current study focuses on the effect phone use before bedtime has on the number of hours of sleep teens are getting.

For this study, a sample of 300 teens was recruited using social media, such as Facebook, Instagram, and Snapchat. The first week, all teens were allowed to use their phone the way they normally would, in order to obtain a baseline.

The sample was then divided into 3 groups:

• Group 1 was not allowed to use their phone before bedtime.
• Group 2 used their phone for 1 hour before bedtime.
• Group 3 used their phone for 3 hours before bedtime.

All participants were asked to go to sleep around 10 p.m. to control for variation in bedtime . In the morning, their Fitbit showed the number of hours they’d slept. They kept track of these numbers themselves for 1 week.

Two independent t tests were used in order to compare Group 1 and Group 2, and Group 1 and Group 3. The first t test showed no significant difference ( p > .05) between the number of hours for Group 1 ( M = 7.8, SD = 0.6) and Group 2 ( M = 7.0, SD = 0.8). The second t test showed a significant difference ( p < .01) between the average difference for Group 1 ( M = 7.8, SD = 0.6) and Group 3 ( M = 6.1, SD = 1.5).

This shows that teens sleep fewer hours a night if they use their phone for over an hour before bedtime, compared to teens who use their phone for 0 to 1 hours.

Peer review is an established and hallowed process in academia, dating back hundreds of years. It provides various fields of study with metrics, expectations, and guidance to ensure published work is consistent with predetermined standards.

• Protects the quality of published research

Peer review can stop obviously problematic, falsified, or otherwise untrustworthy research from being published. Any content that raises red flags for reviewers can be closely examined in the review stage, preventing plagiarized or duplicated research from being published.

• Gives you access to feedback from experts in your field

Peer review represents an excellent opportunity to get feedback from renowned experts in your field and to improve your writing through their feedback and guidance. Experts with knowledge about your subject matter can give you feedback on both style and content, and they may also suggest avenues for further research that you hadn’t yet considered.

• Helps you identify any weaknesses in your argument

Peer review acts as a first defense, helping you ensure your argument is clear and that there are no gaps, vague terms, or unanswered questions for readers who weren’t involved in the research process. This way, you’ll end up with a more robust, more cohesive article.

While peer review is a widely accepted metric for credibility, it’s not without its drawbacks.

• Reviewer bias

The more transparent double-blind system is not yet very common, which can lead to bias in reviewing. A common criticism is that an excellent paper by a new researcher may be declined, while an objectively lower-quality submission by an established researcher would be accepted.

• Delays in publication

The thoroughness of the peer review process can lead to significant delays in publishing time. Research that was current at the time of submission may not be as current by the time it’s published. There is also high risk of publication bias , where journals are more likely to publish studies with positive findings than studies with negative findings.

• Risk of human error

By its very nature, peer review carries a risk of human error. In particular, falsification often cannot be detected, given that reviewers would have to replicate entire experiments to ensure the validity of results.

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

• Normal distribution
• Measures of central tendency
• Chi square tests
• Confidence interval
• Quartiles & Quantiles
• Cluster sampling
• Stratified sampling
• Thematic analysis
• Discourse analysis
• Cohort study
• Ethnography

Research bias

• Implicit bias
• Cognitive bias
• Conformity bias
• Hawthorne effect
• Availability heuristic
• Attrition bias
• Social desirability bias

Peer review is a process of evaluating submissions to an academic journal. Utilizing rigorous criteria, a panel of reviewers in the same subject area decide whether to accept each submission for publication. For this reason, academic journals are often considered among the most credible sources you can use in a research project– provided that the journal itself is trustworthy and well-regarded.

In general, the peer review process follows the following steps: 

• Reject the manuscript and send it back to author, or 
• Send it onward to the selected peer reviewer(s) 
• Next, the peer review process occurs. The reviewer provides feedback, addressing any major or minor issues with the manuscript, and gives their advice regarding what edits should be made. 
• Lastly, the edited manuscript is sent back to the author. They input the edits, and resubmit it to the editor for publication.

Peer review can stop obviously problematic, falsified, or otherwise untrustworthy research from being published. It also represents an excellent opportunity to get feedback from renowned experts in your field. It acts as a first defense, helping you ensure your argument is clear and that there are no gaps, vague terms, or unanswered questions for readers who weren’t involved in the research process.

Peer-reviewed articles are considered a highly credible source due to this stringent process they go through before publication.

Many academic fields use peer review , largely to determine whether a manuscript is suitable for publication. Peer review enhances the credibility of the published manuscript.

However, peer review is also common in non-academic settings. The United Nations, the European Union, and many individual nations use peer review to evaluate grant applications. It is also widely used in medical and health-related fields as a teaching or quality-of-care measure. 

A credible source should pass the CRAAP test  and follow these guidelines:

• The information should be up to date and current.
• The author and publication should be a trusted authority on the subject you are researching.
• The sources the author cited should be easy to find, clear, and unbiased.
• For a web source, the URL and layout should signify that it is trustworthy.

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.

George, T. (2023, June 22). What Is Peer Review? | Types & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved September 10, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/peer-review/

Is this article helpful?

Tegan George

Other students also liked, what are credible sources & how to spot them | examples, ethical considerations in research | types & examples, applying the craap test & evaluating sources, get unlimited documents corrected.

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

An official website of the United States government

Here's how you know

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS. A lock ( Lock Locked padlock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Archived funding opportunity

Nsf 23-605: graduate research fellowship program (grfp), program solicitation, document information, document history.

• Posted: July 18, 2023
• Replaces: NSF 22-614
• Replaced by: NSF 24-591

Program Solicitation NSF 23-605

Application Deadline(s) (received by 5 p.m. local time of applicant’s mailing address):

     October 16, 2023

Life Sciences

     October 17, 2023

Computer and Information Science and Engineering, Materials Research, Psychology, Social Sciences, STEM Education and Learning

     October 19, 2023

Engineering

     October 20, 2023

Chemistry, Geosciences, Mathematical Sciences, Physics and Astronomy

Important Information And Revision Notes

• This solicitation covers the Fiscal Year (FY) 2024 competition.
• Applicants must use the Research.gov/GRFP site ( https://www.research.gov/grfp/Login.do ) to register in Research.gov and submit their applications through the GRFP Application Module. Do not send application materials outside of the GRFP Application Module.
• Applications are due on the deadline date at 5:00 p.m. local time of the applicant’s mailing address.
• Currently enrolled second-year graduate students are strongly advised to provide official Registrar-issued transcripts as part of their application.
• NSF will continue to emphasize high priority research in alignment with the priorities laid out in pages 127-128 of the FY2024 budget https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/budget_fy2024.pdf
• Portions of the eligibility criteria have been rewritten for clarity.
• Reference letter writers must use the Research.gov/GRFP site ( https://www.research.gov/grfp/Login.do ) to register in Research.gov and submit reference letters through the Reference Letter System. Reference letters are due October 27 at 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time (ET).
• Applicants and reference letter writers requiring accessibility accommodation are asked to notify the GRF Operations Center at least four weeks before the deadline to coordinate assistance with NSF in submitting the application or reference letter.

Summary Of Program Requirements

General information.

Program Title:

NSF Graduate Research Fellowship Program (GRFP)

The purpose of the NSF Graduate Research Fellowship Program (GRFP) is to help ensure the quality, vitality, and diversity of the scientific and engineering workforce of the United States. The program recognizes and supports outstanding graduate students who are pursuing full-time research-based master's and doctoral degrees in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) or in STEM education. The GRFP provides three years of support over a five-year fellowship period for the graduate education of individuals who have demonstrated their potential for significant research achievements in STEM or STEM education. NSF actively encourages submission of applications from the full spectrum of diverse talent in STEM. NSF GRFP was established to recruit and support individuals who demonstrate the potential to make significant contributions in STEM. Thus, NSF especially encourages applications from undergraduate seniors and Bachelor's degree-holders interested in pursuing research-based graduate study in STEM. First- and second-year graduate students in eligible STEM fields and degree programs are also encouraged to apply.

Cognizant Program Officer(s):

Please note that the following information is current at the time of publishing. See program website for any updates to the points of contact.

Contact: GRF Operations Center, telephone: (866) 673-4737, email: [email protected]

• 47.041 --- Engineering
• 47.049 --- Mathematical and Physical Sciences
• 47.050 --- Geosciences
• 47.070 --- Computer and Information Science and Engineering
• 47.074 --- Biological Sciences
• 47.075 --- Social Behavioral and Economic Sciences
• 47.076 --- STEM Education
• 47.079 --- Office of International Science and Engineering
• 47.083 --- Office of Integrative Activities (OIA)
• 47.084 --- NSF Technology, Innovation and Partnerships

Award Information

Anticipated Type of Award:

Estimated Number of Awards: 2,500

NSF will support at least 2,500 new Graduate Research Fellowships per fiscal year under this program solicitation pending availability of funds.

Anticipated Funding Amount: $159,000

Per award (Fellowship), pending the availability of funds.

Each Fellowship provides three years of support over a five-year fellowship period. For each of the three years of support, NSF provides a $37,000 stipend and $16,000 cost of education allowance to the graduate degree-granting institution of higher education for each Fellow who uses the support in a fellowship year. The Fellowship is portable and can be transferred to a different institution of higher education if a Fellow chooses to transfer to another institution after completion of the first Fellowship year. While the Fellowship is offered to the individual, the Fellowship funds are awarded to the institution of higher education at which a Fellow is enrolled and the institution is responsible for disbursement of the stipend to the Fellow.

Eligibility Information

Organization Limit:

Fellowship applications must be submitted by the prospective Fellow. Applicants must use the GRFP application module in Research.gov ( https://www.research.gov/grfp/Login.do ) to submit the application. Confirmation of acceptance in a graduate degree program in STEM or STEM education is required at the time of Fellowship acceptance, no later than the deadline indicated in the fellowship offer letter, of the year the Fellowship is accepted. Prospective Fellows must enroll in a non-profit university, college, or institution of higher education accredited in, and having a campus located in, the United States, its territories or possessions, or the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico that offers advanced degrees in STEM and STEM education no later than fall of the year the Fellowship is accepted. All Fellows from the date of Fellowship Start through Completion or Termination of the Fellowship must be enrolled in a graduate degree-granting institution of higher education accredited in, and having a campus located in, the United States its territories or possessions, or the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.

See the Detailed Eligibility Requirements in Section IV for full information. Eligibility is based on the applicant's status at the application deadline. Applicants must self-certify that they are eligible to receive the Fellowship. To be eligible, an applicant must meet all of the following eligibility criteria at the application deadline: Be a U.S. citizen, national, or permanent resident Intend to enroll or be enrolled full-time in a research-based Master's or doctoral degree program in an eligible Field of Study in STEM or STEM education (See Appendix and Section IV.3 for eligible Fields of Study) Have completed no more than one academic year (according to institution's academic calendar) while enrolled in a graduate degree program Never previously accepted a Graduate Research Fellowship Declined any previously offered Graduate Research Fellowship by the acceptance deadline Never previously applied to GRFP while enrolled in a graduate degree program Never earned a doctoral or terminal degree in any field Individuals holding joint Bachelor's-Master's degrees who did not progress directly to a doctoral program the semester following award of the joint degree must apply as returning graduate students (see below) Individuals with prior graduate enrollment who have: (i) completed more than one academic year in any graduate degree-granting program, (ii) earned a previous master's degree of any kind (including Bachelor's-Master's degree), or (iii) earned a professional degree must meet the following requirements: not enrolled in a graduate degree program at application deadline two or more consecutive years past graduate degree enrollment or completion at the application deadline Not be a current NSF employee Number of Times An Individual May Apply Undergraduate seniors and Bachelor's degree holders who have never enrolled in a graduate degree program have no restrictions on the number of times they can apply before enrolling in a degree-granting graduate program. Currently enrolled graduate students who have completed no more than one academic year (according to institution's academic calendar) while enrolled in a graduate degree program can apply only once . Non-degree coursework does not count toward the one academic year limit. Individuals applying while enrolled in a joint Bachelor's-Master's degree program are considered graduate students who: i) must have completed three (3) years in the joint program, and; ii) are limited to one application to GRFP; they will not be eligible to apply again as doctoral students. For GRFP, joint Bachelor's-Master's degrees are defined as degrees concurrently pursued and awarded . Individuals holding joint Bachelor's-Master's degrees, currently enrolled as first-year doctoral students, who (i) have not previously applied as graduate students and (ii) enrolled in the doctoral program the semester following award of the joint degree, may only apply in the first year of the doctoral program. Applications withdrawn by November 15 of the application year do not count toward the one-time graduate application limit. Applications withdrawn after November 15 count toward this one-time limit. Applications not reviewed by NSF do not count toward the one-time graduate application limit.

An eligible applicant may submit only one application per annual competition.

Application Preparation and Submission Instructions

A. application preparation instructions.

Letters of Intent: Not applicable

Preliminary Proposal Submission: Not applicable

Application Instructions: This solicitation contains information that deviates from the standard NSF Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide (PAPPG) proposal preparation guidelines. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.

B. Budgetary Information

Cost Sharing Requirements:

Inclusion of voluntary committed cost sharing is prohibited.

Indirect Cost (F&A) Limitations:

No indirect costs are allowed.

Other Budgetary Limitations:

Other budgetary limitations apply. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.

C. Due Dates

Application review information criteria.

Merit Review Criteria:

National Science Board approved Merit Review Criteria (Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts) apply. Additional Solicitation-Specific Review Criteria also apply (see Section VI.A below).

Award Administration Information

Award Conditions:

NSF GRFP awards are made to the institution of higher education at which a Fellow is or will be enrolled. The awardee institution is responsible for financial management of the award and disbursement of Fellowship funds to the individual Fellow. The institution will administer the awards, including any amendments, in accordance with the terms of the Agreement and provisions (and any subsequent amendments) contained in the document NSF Graduate Research Fellowship Program Administrative Guide for Fellows and Coordinating Officials . All Fellowships are subject to the provisions (and any subsequent amendments) contained in the document NSF Graduate Research Fellowship Program Administrative Guide for Fellows and Coordinating Officials .

Reporting Requirements:

See reporting requirements in full text of solicitation and the NSF Graduate Research Fellowship Program Administrative Guide for Fellows and Coordinating Officials . Fellows are required to submit annual activity reports and to declare fellowship status by the deadline specified in the notification sent by email each year. Additional reporting requirements are presented in Section VII.C of this solicitation.

I. Introduction

The Graduate Research Fellowship Program (GRFP) is a National Science Foundation-wide program that provides Fellowships to individuals selected early in their graduate careers based on their demonstrated potential for significant research achievements in science, technology, engineering or mathematics (STEM) or in STEM education. Three years of support over a five-year period are provided for graduate study that leads to a research-based master's or doctoral degree in STEM or STEM education (see eligible Fields of Study in Appendix).

The program goals are: 1) to select, recognize, and financially support early-career individuals with the demonstrated potential to be high achieving scientists and engineers, and 2) to broaden participation of the full spectrum of diverse talents in STEM. NSF actively encourages submission of applications from the full spectrum of diverse talent in STEM.

GRFP is a critical program in NSF's overall strategy to develop the globally-engaged workforce necessary to ensure the Nation's leadership in advancing science and engineering research and innovation. The ranks of NSF Fellows include numerous individuals who have made transformative breakthrough discoveries in science and engineering, become leaders in their chosen careers, and been honored as Nobel laureates.

II. Program Description

The Graduate Research Fellowship Program (GRFP) awards Fellowships for graduate study leading to research-based master's and doctoral degrees in STEM or in STEM education. GRFP supports individuals proposing a comprehensive plan for graduate education that takes individual interests and competencies into consideration. The plan describes the academic achievements, attributes, and experiences that illustrate the applicant's demonstrated potential for significant research achievements. The applicant must provide a detailed profile of their relevant education, research experience, and plans for graduate education that demonstrates this potential.

Prospective applicants are advised that submission of an application implies their intent to pursue graduate study in a research-based program in STEM or STEM education at an accredited, non-profit institution of higher education having a campus located in the United States, its territories or possessions, or the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. All applicants are expected to either have adequate preparation to enroll in a research-based master's or doctoral program, or be enrolled in such a program by fall of the year the Fellowship is accepted. From the date of the Fellowship Start through Completion or Termination of the Fellowship, applicants accepting the award (Fellows) must be enrolled in an accredited graduate degree-granting institution of higher education having a campus located in the United States, its territories or possessions, or the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.

In FY2024, NSF will continue to fund outstanding Graduate Research Fellowships in all areas of science and engineering supported by NSF and continue to emphasize high priority research areas in alignment with NSF goals and priorities listed in pages 127-128 of the FY2024 budget ( https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/budget_fy2024.pdf ). Applications are encouraged in all disciplines supported by NSF.

III. Award Information

Fellowship funding will be for a maximum of three years of financial support (in 12-month allocations, starting in fall or summer) usable over a five-year fellowship period. The anticipated announcement date for the Fellowship awards is early April each year.

The Fellowship is portable and can be transferred to a different institution of higher education if a Fellow chooses to transfer to another institution after completion of the first Fellowship year. While the Fellowship is offered to the individual, the Fellowship funds are awarded to the institution at which a Fellow is enrolled and is considered the official NSF awardee institution. The awardee institution receives up to a $53,000 award per Fellow who uses the support in a fellowship year. The awardee institution is responsible for disbursement of fellowship funds to the Fellow. The Graduate Research Fellowship stipend is $37,000 for a 12-month tenure period, prorated in whole month increments of $3,083. The Cost of Education allowance provides payment in lieu of tuition and mandatory fees to the institution of $16,000 per year of fellowship support.

During receipt of the fellowship support, the institution is required to exempt Fellows from paying tuition and fees normally charged to students of similar academic standing, unless such charges are optional or are refundable (i.e., the institution is responsible for tuition and required fees in excess of the cost-of-education allowance). Acceptance of fellowship funds by the awardee institution indicates acceptance of and adherence to these and other terms and conditions of the NSF GRFP award. Refer to NSF Graduate Research Fellowship Program Administrative Guide for Fellows and Coordinating Officials for restrictions on the use of the cost-of-education allowance.

GRFP awards are eligible for supplemental funding as described in Chapter VI of the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) ( NSF 23-1 ).

Facilitation Awards for Scientists and Engineers with Disabilities (FASED) provide funding for special assistance or equipment to enable persons with disabilities to work on NSF-supported projects as described in Chapter II.F of the PAPPG . Fellows with disabilities may apply for assistance after consulting the instructions in the document NSF Graduate Research Fellowship Program Administrative Guide for Fellows and Coordinating Officials.

Career-Life Balance Supplemental Funding Requests (Dear Colleague Letter NSF 21-021 ) can be requested by the awardee institution to provide additional personnel (e.g., technician) to sustain the research of Fellows on approved medical leave due to family leave situations.

Fellows are eligible to apply for non-academic INTERN supplements following guidance specific to GRFP.

Honorable Mention

The NSF accords Honorable Mention to meritorious applicants who do not receive Fellowship offers. This is considered a significant national academic achievement.

IV. Eligibility Information

Applicant Eligibility:

Limit on Number of Applications per Applicant: 1

Additional Eligibility Info:

Eligibility is based on the applicant's status at the application deadline. Detailed Eligibility Requirements: Described in detail below are the eligibility requirements for the Graduate Research Fellowship Program: (1) citizenship, (2) degree requirements, and (3) field of study, degree programs, and proposed research. Applicants are strongly advised to read the entire program solicitation carefully to ensure that they understand all the eligibility requirements. Applicants must self-certify that they meet all eligibility criteria. 1. Citizenship Applicants must be United States citizens, nationals, or permanent residents of the United States by the application deadline. The term "national" designates a native resident of a commonwealth or territory of the United States. It does not refer to a citizen of another country who has applied for United States citizenship and who has not received U.S. citizenship by the application deadline, nor does it refer to an individual present in the U.S. on any type of visa. 2. Degree Requirements Applicants are eligible to apply: 1) as current undergraduates, or Bachelor's degree holders who have never enrolled in a degree-granting graduate program, and who will be prepared to attend graduate school in fall of the award year; 2) as current graduate students who have not completed more than one academic year (according to institution's academic calendar) of any degree-granting graduate program; or 3) as returning graduate students who are not currently enrolled and who have had an interruption of at least two consecutive years in graduate study since their most recent enrollment in any graduate degree-granting program, regardless of whether the degree was completed or awarded. Below are detailed guidelines to determine eligibility: a) Applicants not currently enrolled in a graduate degree program, with no prior enrollment in a graduate degree-granting program (including joint Bachelor's-Master's programs): With no prior graduate degree program enrollment Undergraduate students on track to receive a Bachelor's degree by the fall of the year following the application (e.g., senior or final year of Bachelor's degree) and Bachelor's degree holders never enrolled in a graduate degree program can apply an unlimited number of times prior to enrolling in a graduate degree program. They must be prepared to enroll in a full-time graduate degree program by fall of the year they are offered a Graduate Research Fellowship. With one year or less of prior graduate degree-granting program enrollment Applicants must not have completed more than one academic year (according to institution's academic calendar) of graduate study as indicated in the academic transcript issued by the Registrar of the universities attended as of the application deadline (see exception below). Applicants re-entering graduate study : applicants who have completed more than one academic year (according to institution's academic calendar) of graduate study or earned a previous Master's or professional degree are eligible only if they have had an interruption in graduate study of at least two consecutive years immediately prior to the application deadline, and are not enrolled in a graduate program at the deadline . Applicants must not have engaged in any graduate coursework during the interruption. Applicants should address the reasons for the interruption in graduate study in the Personal, Relevant Background and Future Goals Statement. b) Applicants pursuing a Master's degree concurrently with a Bachelor's degree (joint Bachelor's-Master's degree program in which both degrees are awarded at the same time as indicated on the transcript): Individuals applying while enrolled in a joint Bachelor's-Master's degree program are considered graduate students, who: 1) must have completed three years in the joint program, and; ii) are limited to one application to GRFP; they will not be eligible to apply again as doctoral students. Individuals holding joint Bachelor's-Master's degrees, currently enrolled as first-year doctoral students, who have not previously applied as graduate students and enrolled in the doctoral program the semester following award of the joint degree, may only apply in the first year of the doctoral program. Individuals holding joint Bachelor's-Master's degrees who did not progress directly to a doctoral program the semester following award of the joint degree must apply as returning graduate students (see above). c) Applicants currently enrolled in a graduate degree program: Applicants must not have completed more than one academic year of graduate study as indicated in the academic transcript issued by the Registrar of the universities attended, as of the application deadline. Participation in non-degree summer activities PRIOR TO graduate status as indicated in the academic transcript issued by the Registrar before the start of the fall graduate program is not included in this total. Graduate status is understood to begin on the date indicated on the Registrar-issued transcript and ALL activities after that date will be considered graduate activities. Second-year graduate students are strongly advised to include official Registrar-issued transcripts with their application. If the transcript does not clearly indicate the start date of graduate status, applicants are strongly advised to include documents from the Registrar confirming the start of their graduate status. Graduate coursework taken without being enrolled in a graduate degree-granting program is not counted in this limit. 3. Field of Study, Degree Programs, and Proposed Research Fellowships are awarded for graduate study leading to research-based Master's and doctoral degrees in science, technology, engineering or mathematics (STEM) or in STEM education, in eligible Fields of Study listed below: Chemistry Computer and Information Sciences and Engineering Engineering Geosciences Life Sciences Materials Research Mathematical Sciences Physics & Astronomy Psychology Social, Behavioral, and Economic Sciences STEM Education and Learning Research A complete list of eligible Major Fields of Study and their subfields are listed in the Appendix. If awarded, Fellows must enroll in a graduate degree program consistent with the Major Field of Study proposed in their application. A fellowship will not be awarded in a different Major Field of Study from that indicated in the application. Only research-based Master's and doctoral degrees in STEM or STEM education are eligible for GRFP support. Professional degree programs and graduate programs that are primarily course-based with no thesis are ineligible for GRFP support. Within eligible fields of study, there are ineligible areas of study and ineligible areas of proposed research. See below for ineligible areas of study and proposed research. Applications determined to be ineligible will not be reviewed. a) Ineligible degree programs Individuals are not eligible to apply if they will be enrolled in a practice-oriented professional degree program such as medical, dental, law, and public health degrees at any time during the fellowship. Ineligible degree programs include, but are not limited to, MBA, MPH, MSW, JD, MD, DVM and DDS. Joint or combined professional degree-science programs (e.g., MD/PhD or JD/PhD) and dual professional degree-science programs are also not eligible. Individuals enrolled in a graduate degree program while on a leave of absence from a professional degree program or professional degree-graduate degree joint program are not eligible. b) Ineligible areas of study Individuals are not eligible to apply if they will be enrolled in graduate study focused on clinical practice, counseling, social work, patient-oriented research, epidemiological and medical behavioral studies, outcomes research, and health services research. Ineligible study includes pharmacologic, non-pharmacologic, and behavioral interventions for disease or disorder prevention, prophylaxis, diagnosis, therapy, or treatment. Research to provide evidence leading to a scientific basis for consideration of a change in health policy or standard of care is not eligible. Graduate study focused on community, public, or global health, or other population-based research including medical intervention trials is also not eligible. c) Ineligible proposed research (i) Research for which the goals are directly human disease- or health-related, including the etiology, diagnosis, and/or treatment of disease or disorder is not eligible for support. Research activities using animal models of disease, for developing or testing of drugs or other procedures for treatment of disease or disorder are not eligible. (ii) Research focused on basic questions in plant pathology are eligible, however, applied studies focused on maximizing production in agricultural plants or impacts on food safety, are not eligible. (iii) Research with implications that inform policy is eligible. Research with the expressed intent to influence, advocate for, or effect specific policy outcomes is not eligible. d) Limited exceptions to ineligible proposed research (i) Certain areas of bioengineering research directed at medical use are eligible. These include research projects in bioengineering to aid persons with disabilities, or to diagnose or treat human disease or disorder, provided they apply engineering principles to problems in medicine while primarily advancing engineering knowledge. Applicants planning to study and conduct research in these areas of bioengineering should select biomedical engineering as the field of study. (ii) Certain areas of materials research directed at development of materials for use in biological or biomedical systems are eligible, provided they are focused on furthering fundamental materials research. (iii) Certain areas of research with etiology-, diagnosis-, or treatment-related goals that advance fundamental knowledge in engineering, mathematical, physical, computer or information sciences, are eligible for support. Applicants are advised to consult a faculty member, academic advisor, mentor, or other advisor for guidance on preparation of their research plans, and selection of Major Fields of Study and subfields.

V. Application Preparation And Submission Instructions

Fellowship applications must be submitted online using the NSF Graduate Research Fellowship Program Application Module at https://www.fastlane.nsf.gov/grfp/Login.do according to the deadline corresponding with the Field of Study selected in the application .

Applications must be received by 5:00 p.m. local time as determined by the applicant’s mailing address provided in the application. Applications received after the Field of Study deadline will not be reviewed . Applications submitted to a Field of Study deadline not in alignment with the proposed research plan will not be reviewed.

All reference letters must be submitted online by the reference writers through the GRFP Application Module ( https://www.fastlane.nsf.gov/grfp/Login.do ) and must be received by the reference letter deadline (see Application Preparation and Submission Instructions/C. Due Dates of this Solicitation), of 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time (ET). Reference letter writers cannot be family members of the applicant. Applicants are required to provide the name and contact information for three (3) reference writers from non-family members. Up to five (5) potential reference letter writers can be provided. Two reference letters from non-family members must be received by the reference letter deadline applications to be reviewed. If fewer than two reference letters (one or none) are received by the reference letter deadline, the application will not be reviewed.

Applicants must submit the following information through the GRFP Application Module: Personal Information; Education, Work and Other Experience; Transcript PDFs; Proposed Field(s) of Study; Proposed Graduate Study and Graduate School Information; the names and email addresses of at least three reference letter writers; Personal, Relevant Background and Future Goals Statement PDF; and Graduate Research Plan Statement PDF.

Only the information required in the GRFP Application Module will be reviewed. No additional items or information will be accepted or reviewed. Do not provide links to web pages within the application, except as part of citations in the References Cited section. Images must be included in the page limits. Review of the application and reference letters is based solely on materials received by the application and reference letter deadlines. Do not email application materials.

Applicants must follow the instructions in the GRFP Application Module for completing each section of the application. The statements must be written using the following guidelines:

• standard 8.5" x 11" page size
• 11 point or higher font, except text that is part of an image
• Times New Roman font for all text, Cambria Math font for equations, Symbol font for non-alphabetic characters (it is recommended that equations and symbols be inserted as an image)
• 1" margins on all sides, no text inside 1" margins (no header, footer, name, or page number)
• No less than single-spacing (approximately 6 lines per inch)
• Do not use line spacing options such as “exactly 11 point,” that are less than single spaced
• PDF file format only

Compliance with these guidelines will be automatically checked by the GRFP Application Module. Documents that are not compliant will not be accepted by the GRFP Application Module. Applicants are strongly advised to proofread and upload their documents early to ensure they are format-compliant and that non-compliant documents do not delay upload of the complete application for receipt by the deadline. Applications that are not compliant with these format requirements will not be reviewed.

The maximum length of the Personal, Relevant Background and Future Goals Statement is three (3) pages (PDF). The maximum length of the Graduate Research Plan Statement is two (2) pages (PDF). These page limits include all references, citations, charts, figures, images, and lists of publications and presentations. Applicants must certify that the two statements (Personal, Relevant Background and Future Goals Statement, and Graduate Research Plan Statement) in the application are their own original work. As explained in the NSF Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide (PAPPG): “NSF expects strict adherence to the rules of proper scholarship and attribution. The responsibility for proper scholarship and attribution rests with the authors of a proposal; all parts of the proposal should be prepared with equal care for this concern. Authors other than the PI (or any co-PI) should be named and acknowledged. Serious failure to adhere to such standards can result in findings of research misconduct. NSF policies and rules on research misconduct are discussed in the PAPPG, as well as 45 CFR Part 689."

Both statements must address NSF’s review criteria of Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts (described in detail in Section VI). " Intellectual Merit" and "Broader Impacts" sections must be present under separate headings in both Personal and Research Plan statements. Applications that do not have separate headings for Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts will not be reviewed.

In the application, applicants must list their undergraduate institution, and all graduate institutions attended with a start date prior to the fall term in which the application is submitted. Transcripts are required for all degree-granting programs listed. Transcripts may be included for all other institutions listed in the Education section. If the applicant started at the current institution in the fall of the application year and the institution does not provide unofficial or official transcripts prior to completion of the first term, the applicant may submit a class schedule/enrollment verification form in place of a transcript. At least one transcript must be included for the application to be accepted by the GRFP Application Module.

Transcripts must be uploaded through the GRFP Application Module by the Field of Study application deadline. Applicants should redact personally-identifiable information (date of birth, individual Social Security Numbers, personal financial information, home addresses, home telephone numbers and personal email addresses) from the transcripts before uploading. Transcripts must be uploaded as a PDF to be accepted by the GRFP Application Module. Transcripts must not be encrypted; the GRFP Application Module does not accept encrypted or password-protected transcripts.

Applicants who earned master’s degrees in joint Bachelor's-Master’s degree programs should submit transcripts that clearly document the joint program. If the transcript does not document the joint program and does not show that the Bachelor's and Master's degrees were conferred on the same date, applicants must upload a letter from the registrar of the institution certifying enrollment in a joint program, appended to the transcript for that institution. Failure to provide clear documentation of a joint program may result in an application being returned without review.

Failure to comply fully with the above requirements will result in the application not being reviewed.

Applications that are incomplete due to missing required transcripts and/or reference letters (fewer than two letters received), or that do not have "received" status in the Application Module on the application deadline for the selected Field of Study) will not be reviewed. Applicants are advised to submit applications early to avoid unanticipated delays on the deadline dates.

Reference Letters Reference writers cannot be family members of the applicant. Applicants are required to provide the name and contact information for three (3) reference writers from non-family members. Up to five (5) potential reference letter writers can be provided. Two reference letters from non-family members must be received by the reference letter deadline for an application to be reviewed. If fewer than two reference letters (one or none) are received by the reference letter deadline, the application will not be reviewed.

No changes to the list of reference writers are allowed after the application is submitted. Applicants are strongly advised to check the accuracy of email addresses provided for reference writers before submitting their application.

All reference letters must be received in the GRFP Application Module by 5:00 p.m. ET (Eastern Time) on the letter submission deadline date (see the deadline posted in GRFP Application Module and in Application Preparation and Submission Instructions/C. Due Dates of this Solicitation). No exceptions to the reference letter submission deadline will be granted. Each letter is limited to two (2) pages (PDF). The GRFP Application Module allows applicants to request up to five (5) reference letters and to rank those reference letters in order of preference for review. If more than three reference letters are received, the top three letters according to ranked preference will be considered for the application. Reference writers will be notified by an email of the request to submit a letter of reference on behalf of an applicant. Reference writers will not be notified of the ranked preference for review provided by the applicant.

To avoid disqualifying an application, reference writers should upload the letter well in advance of the 5:00 p.m. ET deadline . No letters will be accepted via email. Letter writers will receive a confirmation email after successful upload via the GRFP Application Module.

For technical assistance with letter upload: NSF Help Desk: [email protected] ; 1-800-381-1532

Applicants must enter an email address for each reference writer into the GRFP Application Module. An exact email address is crucial to matching the reference writer and the applicant in the GRFP Application Module. Applicants should ask reference writers well in advance of the reference writer deadline, and it is recommended they provide copies of their application materials to the writers.

Applicant-nominated reference writers must upload their letters through the GRFP Application Module. Reference letter requirements include:

• Institutional or professional letterhead, if available
• SIGNED by the reference writer, including the name, professional title, department, and institution
• Two (2) page limit (PDF file format)
• Standard 8.5" x 11" page size
• 11-point or higher Times New Roman font and 1" margins on all sides
• Single spaced using normal (100%) single-line spacing

The reference letter should address the NSF Merit Review Criteria of Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts (described in detail below). It should include details explaining the nature of the relationship to the applicant (including research advisor role), comments on the applicant's potential for contributing to a globally-engaged United States science and engineering workforce, statements about the applicant's academic potential and prior research experiences, statements about the applicant's proposed research, and any other information to aid review panels in evaluating the application according to the NSF Merit Review Criteria.

Application Completion Status

Applicants should use the "Application Completion Status" feature in the GRFP Application Module to ensure all application materials, including reference letters, have been received by NSF before the deadlines. For technical support, call the NSF Help Desk at 1-800-381-1532 or e-mail [email protected] .

Interdisciplinary Applications

NSF welcomes applications for interdisciplinary programs of study and research; however, data on interdisciplinary study is collected for informational purposes only. Interdisciplinary research is defined as "a mode of research by teams or individuals that integrates information, data, techniques, tools, perspectives, concepts, and/or theories from two or more disciplines or bodies of specialized knowledge to advance fundamental understanding or to solve problems whose solutions are beyond the scope of a single discipline or area of research practice" (Committee on Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research, Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy, 2004. Facilitating interdisciplinary research . National Academies. Washington: National Academy Press, p. 2). Applications must be received by the deadline for the first Major Field of Study designated in the application. Applications will be reviewed by experts in the first Major Field of Study listed. If awarded, Fellows will be required to enroll in a degree program consistent with the Major Field of Study in which the application was funded. Withdrawal of a GRFP application

To withdraw a submitted application, the applicant must withdraw their application using the Withdrawal option in the GRFP Application Module.

Applications withdrawn by November 15 of the application year do not count toward the one-time graduate application limit. Applications withdrawn after November 15 count toward this limit.

Cost Sharing:

Indirect Cost (F&A) Limitations:

NSF awards $53,000 each year to the GRFP institution to cover the Fellow stipend and Cost of Education allowance for each NSF Graduate Research Fellow "on tenure" at the institution.

The NSF Graduate Research Fellowship Program Fellowship stipend is $37,000 for a 12-month tenure period, prorated in monthly increments of $3,083. The institutional Cost of Education allowance is $16,000 per tenure year per Fellow.

D. Application Submission Requirements

Applicants are required to prepare and submit all applications for this program solicitation through the GRFP Application Module. Detailed instructions for application preparation and submission are available at: https://www.research.gov/grfp/Login.do . For user support, call the NSF Help Desk at 1-800-381-1532 or e-mail [email protected] . The NSF Help Desk answers general technical questions related to the use of the system. Specific questions related to this program solicitation should be referred to the NSF program staff contact(s) listed in Section VIII of this solicitation.

VI. Application Review Information

A. merit review principles and criteria.

Applications are reviewed by disciplinary and interdisciplinary scientists and engineers and other professional graduate education experts. Reviewers are selected by Program Officers charged with oversight of the review process. Care is taken to ensure that reviewers have no conflicts of interest with the applicants. Applications are reviewed in broad areas of related disciplines based on the selection of a Field of Study (see Fields of Study in Appendix). Selection of a Major Field of Study determines the application deadline, the broad disciplinary expertise of the reviewers, and the discipline of the graduate degree program if awarded a Fellowship. Applicants are advised to select the Major Field of Study in the GRFP Application Module (see Fields of Study in Appendix) that is most closely aligned with the proposed graduate program of study and research plan. Applicants who select “Other” must provide additional information describing their studies.

Each application will be reviewed independently in accordance with the NSF Merit Review Criteria using all available information in the completed application. In considering applications, reviewers are instructed to address the two Merit Review Criteria as approved by the National Science Board - Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts ( NSF Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide ). Applicants must include separate statements on Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts in their written statements in order to provide reviewers with the information necessary to evaluate the application with respect to both Criteria as detailed below . Applicants should include headings for Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts in their statements.

The following description of the Merit Review Criteria is provided in Chapter III of the NSF Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide (PAPPG) :

All NSF proposals are evaluated through use of the two National Science Board approved merit review criteria. In some instances, however, NSF will employ additional criteria as required to highlight the specific objectives of certain programs and activities.

The two merit review criteria are listed below. Both criteria are to be given full consideration during the review and decision-making processes; each criterion is necessary but neither, by itself, is sufficient. Therefore, proposers must fully address both criteria. (PAPPG Chapter II.C.2.d.i. contains additional information for use by proposers in development of the Project Description section of the proposal.) Reviewers are strongly encouraged to review the criteria, including PAPPG Chapter II.C.2.d.i., prior to the review of a proposal.

When evaluating NSF proposals, reviewers will be asked to consider what the proposers want to do, why they want to do it, how they plan to do it, how they will know if they succeed, and what benefits could accrue if the project is successful. These issues apply both to the technical aspects of the proposal and the way in which the project may make broader contributions. To that end, reviewers will be asked to evaluate all proposals against two criteria:

• Intellectual Merit : The Intellectual Merit criterion encompasses the potential to advance knowledge; and
• Broader Impacts : The Broader Impacts criterion encompasses the potential to benefit society and contribute to the achievement of specific, desired societal outcomes.

The following elements should be considered in the review for both criteria:

1. What is the potential for the proposed activity to:

a. Advance knowledge and understanding within its own field or across different fields (Intellectual Merit); and

b. Benefit society or advance desired societal outcomes (Broader Impacts)?

2. To what extent do the proposed activities suggest and explore creative, original, or potentially transformative concepts?

3. Is the plan for carrying out the proposed activities well-reasoned, well-organized, and based on a sound rationale? Does the plan incorporate a mechanism to assess success?

4. How well qualified is the individual, team, or organization to conduct the proposed activities?

5. Are there adequate resources available to the PI (either at the home organization or through collaborations) to carry out the proposed activities?

Additionally, Chapter II of the NSF Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide states:

Broader impacts may be accomplished through the research itself, through the activities that are directly related to specific research projects, or through activities that are supported by, but are complementary to, the project. NSF values the advancement of scientific knowledge and activities that contribute to achievement of societally relevant outcomes. Such outcomes include, but are not limited to: full participation of women, persons with disabilities, and underrepresented minorities in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM); improved STEM education and educator development at any level; increased public scientific literacy and public engagement with science and technology; improved well-being of individuals in society; development of a diverse, globally competitive STEM workforce; increased partnerships between academia, industry, and others; improved national security; increased economic competitiveness of the US; and enhanced infrastructure for research and education.

B. Application Review and Selection Process

Applications submitted in response to this program solicitation will be reviewed online by Panel Review.

The application evaluation involves the review and rating of applications by disciplinary and interdisciplinary scientists and engineers, and other professional graduate education experts.

Applicants are reviewed on their demonstrated potential to advance knowledge and to make significant research achievements and contributions to their fields throughout their careers. Reviewers are asked to assess applications using a holistic, comprehensive approach, giving balanced consideration to all components of the application, including the educational and research record, leadership, outreach, service activities, and future plans, as well as individual competencies, experiences, and other attributes. The aim is to recruit and retain a diverse cohort of early-career individuals with high potential for future achievements, contributions, and broader impacts in STEM and STEM education.

The primary responsibility of each reviewer is to evaluate eligible GRFP applications by applying the Merit Review Criteria described in Section VI.A, and to recommend applicants for NSF Graduate Research Fellowships. Reviewers are instructed to review the applications holistically, applying the Merit Review Criteria and noting GRFP’s emphasis on demonstrated potential for significant research achievements in STEM or in STEM education. From these recommendations, NSF selects applicants for Fellowships or Honorable Mention, in line with NSF’s mission and the goals of GRFP. After Fellowship offers are made, applicants are able to view verbatim reviewer comments, excluding the names of the reviewers, for a limited period of time through the NSF GRFP Module.

VII. Award Administration Information

A. notification of the award.

NSF Graduate Research Fellowship Program applicants will be notified of the outcomes of their applications by early April of the competition year. The NSF publishes lists of Fellowship and Honorable Mention recipients on the GRFP Module at https://www.research.gov/grfp/Login.do in early April.

B. Award Conditions

NSF GRFP awards are made to the institution of higher education at which a Fellow is or will be enrolled. The awardee institution is responsible for financial management of the award and disbursement of Fellowship funds to the Fellow. The NSF GRFP award consists of the award notification letter that includes the applicable terms and conditions and Fellowship management instructions. All Fellowships are made subject to the provisions (and any subsequent amendments) contained in the document NSF Graduate Research Fellowship Program Administrative Guide for Fellows and Coordinating Officials .

NSF GRFP awards provide funds for NSF Fellows who have "on tenure" status. The institution will administer the awards, including any amendments, in accordance with the terms of the Agreement and provisions (and any subsequent amendments) contained in the document NSF Graduate Research Fellowship Program Administrative Guide for Fellows and Coordinating Officials .

The applicant must accept or decline the Fellowship by the deadline indicated in the award notification letter by logging into the GRFP Module at https://www.research.gov/grfp/Login.do with the applicant User ID and password. Failure to comply with the deadline and acceptance of Fellowship Terms and Conditions by the deadline will result in revocation of the Fellowship offer and render applicants ineligible to re-apply.

Terms and Conditions

Awardees must formally accept and agree to the terms and conditions of the Fellowship award. Acceptance of the Fellowship constitutes a commitment to pursue a graduate degree in an eligible science or engineering field. Acceptance of a Fellowship award is an explicit acceptance of this commitment and assurance that the Fellow will be duly enrolled in a graduate degree program consistent with the field of study indicated in their application by the beginning of the following academic year. Major changes in scope later in the graduate career require NSF approval. NSF Graduate Research Fellowship Program Administrative Guide for Fellows and Coordinating Officials includes the terms and conditions that apply to the Fellowship and subsequent institutional award, in addition to the eligibility requirements (U.S. citizen, national, or permanent resident, degree requirements, and field of study) and Certifications in the application. Each institution, in accepting the funds, also certifies that the Fellows are eligible to receive the Fellowship under these terms and conditions. Fellows are expected to make satisfactory academic progress towards completion of their graduate degrees, as defined and certified by the Fellow's GRFP institution. In cases where Fellows have misrepresented their eligibility, or have failed to comply with the Fellowship Terms and Conditions, the Fellowship will be revoked, and the case may be referred to the Office of the Inspector General for investigation. This action may result in requiring the Fellow to repay Fellowship funds to the National Science Foundation.

An individual may not accept the Graduate Research Fellowship if the individual accepts or is supported by another federal graduate fellowship.

Responsible Conduct of Research

It is the responsibility of the Fellow, in conjunction with the GRFP institution, to ensure that all academic and research activities carried out in or outside the US comply with the laws or regulations of the US and/or of the foreign country in which the academic and/or research activities are conducted. These include appropriate human subject, animal welfare, copyright and intellectual property protection, and other regulations or laws, as appropriate. All academic and research activities should be coordinated with the appropriate US and foreign government authorities, and necessary licenses, permits, or approvals must be obtained prior to undertaking the proposed activities.

In response to the America COMPETES Act, all Fellows supported by NSF to conduct research are required to receive appropriate training and oversight in the Responsible and Ethical Conduct of Research.

Research Involving Human Subjects

Projects involving research with human subjects must ensure that subjects are protected from research risks in conformance with the relevant Federal policy known as the Common Rule ( Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects , 45 CFR 690 ). All projects involving human subjects must either (1) have approval from an Institutional Review Board (IRB) before issuance of an NSF award; or, (2) must affirm that the IRB has declared the research exempt from IRB review, in accordance with the applicable subsection, as established in 45 CFR § 690.104(d) of the Common Rule. Fellows are required to comply with this policy and adhere to the organization's protocol for managing research involving human subjects.

Research Involving Vertebrate Animals

Any project proposing use of vertebrate animals for research or education shall comply with the Animal Welfare Act [7 U.S.C. 2131 et seq.] and the regulations promulgated thereunder by the Secretary of Agriculture [9 CFR 1.1-4.11] pertaining to the humane care, handling, and treatment of vertebrate animals held or used for research, teaching or other activities supported by Federal awards. In accordance with these requirements, proposed projects involving use of any vertebrate animal for research or education must be approved by the submitting organization's Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) before an award can be made. For this approval to be accepted by NSF, the organization must have a current Public Health Service (PHS) Approved Assurance.

Projects involving the care or use of vertebrate animals at an international organization or international field site also require approval of research protocols by the US grantee’s IACUC. If the project is to be funded through an award to an international organization or through an individual fellowship award that will support activities at an international organization, NSF will require a statement from the international organization explicitly listing the proposer’s name and referencing the title of the award to confirm that the activities will be conducted in accordance with all applicable laws in the international country and that the International Guiding Principles for Biomedical Research Involving Animals (see: http://www.cioms.ch/ ) will be followed.

Legal Rights to Intellectual Property

The National Science Foundation claims no rights to any inventions or writings that might result from its fellowship or traineeship grants. However, fellows and trainees should be aware that the NSF, another Federal agency, or some private party may acquire such rights through other support for particular research. Also, fellows and trainees should note their obligation to include an Acknowledgment and Disclaimer in any publication.

C. Reporting Requirements

Acknowledgment of Support and Disclaimer

All publications, presentations, and creative works based on activities conducted during the Fellowship must acknowledge NSF GRFP Support and provide a disclaimer by including the following statement in the Acknowledgements or other appropriate section:

"This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship Program under Grant No. (NSF grant number). Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation."

Annual Activities Report and Annual Fellowship Status Declaration

Fellows are required to submit an Annual Activities Report and to complete Fellowship Status Declaration by the deadline date each year (deadline notification sent by email), using NSF's GRFP Module. The GRFP Module permits online submission and updating of activity reports, including information on research accomplishments and activities related to broader impacts, presentations, publications, teaching and research assistantships, awards and recognitions, and other scholarly and service accomplishments. These reports must be reviewed and satisfactory progress verified by the faculty advisor or designated graduate program administrator prior to submission to NSF.

Fellows must declare their intent to utilize the Fellowship for the following year using the NSF GRFP Module. Failure to declare Fellowship status by the established deadline violates the terms and conditions for NSF Fellowship awards, and results in termination of the Fellowship.

Program Evaluation

The Division of Graduate Education (DGE) conducts evaluations to provide evidence on the impact of the GRFP on individuals' educational decisions, career preparations, aspirations and progress, as well as professional productivity; and provide an understanding of the program policies in achieving the program goals. Additionally, it is highly desirable to have a structured means of tracking Fellows beyond graduation to gauge the extent to which they choose a career path consistent with the intent of the program and to assess the impact the NSF Graduate Research Fellowship has had on their graduate education experience. Accordingly, Fellows and Honorable Mention recipients may be contacted for updates on various aspects of their employment history, professional activities and accomplishments, participation in international research collaborations, and other information helpful in evaluating the impact of the program. Fellows and their institutions agree to cooperate in program-level evaluations conducted by the NSF and/or contracted evaluators. The 2014 GRFP evaluation is posted on the "Evaluation Reports" Web page for NSF's Directorate for STEM Education.

GRFP institutions are required to submit the GRFP Completion Report annually. The Completion Report allows GRFP institutions to certify the current status of all GRFP Fellows at the institution. The current status will identify a Fellow as: In Progress, Graduated, Transferred, or Withdrawn. For Fellows who have graduated, the graduation date is a required reporting element.

VIII. Agency Contacts

Please note that the program contact information is current at the time of publishing. See program website ( https://www.nsf.gov/funding/pgm_summ.jsp?pims_id=6201 ) for any updates to the points of contact.

General inquiries regarding this program should be made to:

For questions related to the use of GRFP Application Module, contact:

NSF Help Desk: telephone: 1-800-381-1532; e-mail: [email protected]

The Graduate Research Fellowship Operations Center is responsible for processing applications and responding to requests for information. General inquiries regarding the Graduate Research Fellowship Program should be made to:

Graduate Research Fellowship Operations Center, telephone: 866-NSF-GRFP, 866-673-4737 (toll-free from the US and Canada) or 202-331-3542 (international). email: [email protected]

IX. Other Information

The NSF website provides the most comprehensive source of information on NSF Directorates (including contact information), programs and funding opportunities. Use of this website by potential proposers is strongly encouraged. In addition, "NSF Update" is an information-delivery system designed to keep potential proposers and other interested parties apprised of new NSF funding opportunities and publications, important changes in proposal and award policies and procedures, and upcoming NSF Grants Conferences . Subscribers are informed through e-mail or the user's Web browser each time new publications are issued that match their identified interests. "NSF Update" also is available on NSF's website .

Grants.gov provides an additional electronic capability to search for Federal government-wide grant opportunities. NSF funding opportunities may be accessed via this mechanism. Further information on Grants.gov may be obtained at https://www.grants.gov .

Students are encouraged to gain professional experience in other countries through their university graduate programs, and to participate in international research opportunities offered by NSF at: Office of International Science and Engineering (OISE) | NSF - National Science Foundation . Other funding opportunities for students are available at http://www.nsfgrfp.org/ .

About The National Science Foundation

The National Science Foundation (NSF) is an independent Federal agency created by the National Science Foundation Act of 1950, as amended (42 USC 1861-75). The Act states the purpose of the NSF is "to promote the progress of science; [and] to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare by supporting research and education in all fields of science and engineering."

NSF funds research and education in most fields of science and engineering. It does this through grants and cooperative agreements to more than 2,000 colleges, universities, K-12 school systems, businesses, informal science organizations and other research organizations throughout the US. The Foundation accounts for about one-fourth of Federal support to academic institutions for basic research.

NSF receives approximately 55,000 proposals each year for research, education and training projects, of which approximately 11,000 are funded. In addition, the Foundation receives several thousand applications for graduate and postdoctoral fellowships. The agency operates no laboratories itself but does support National Research Centers, user facilities, certain oceanographic vessels and Arctic and Antarctic research stations. The Foundation also supports cooperative research between universities and industry, US participation in international scientific and engineering efforts, and educational activities at every academic level.

Facilitation Awards for Scientists and Engineers with Disabilities (FASED) provide funding for special assistance or equipment to enable persons with disabilities to work on NSF-supported projects. See the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide Chapter II.F.7 for instructions regarding preparation of these types of proposals.

The National Science Foundation has Telephonic Device for the Deaf (TDD) and Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) capabilities that enable individuals with hearing impairments to communicate with the Foundation about NSF programs, employment or general information. TDD may be accessed at (703) 292-5090 and (800) 281-8749, FIRS at (800) 877-8339.

The National Science Foundation Information Center may be reached at (703) 292-5111.

The National Science Foundation promotes and advances scientific progress in the United States by competitively awarding grants and cooperative agreements for research and education in the sciences, mathematics, and engineering. To get the latest information about program deadlines, to download copies of NSF publications, and to access abstracts of awards, visit the NSF Website at 2415 Eisenhower Avenue, Alexandria, VA 22314 (NSF Information Center) (703) 292-5111 (703) 292-5090 Send an e-mail to: or telephone: (703) 292-8134 (703) 292-5111 Privacy Act And Public Burden Statements The information requested on the application materials is solicited under the authority of the National Science Foundation Act of 1950, as amended. It will be used in connection with the selection of qualified applicants and may be disclosed to qualified reviewers as part of the review process; to the institution the nominee, applicant or fellow is attending or is planning to attend or is employed by for the purpose of facilitating review or award decisions, or administering fellowships or awards; to government contractors, experts, volunteers and other individuals who perform a service to or work under a contract, grant, cooperative agreement, advisory committee, committee of visitors, or other arrangement with the Federal government as necessary to complete assigned work; to other government agencies needing data regarding applicants or nominees as part of the review process, or in order to coordinate programs; and to another Federal agency, court or party in a court or Federal administrative proceeding if the government is a party. Information from this system may be merged with other computer files to carry out statistical studies the results of which do not identify individuals. Notice of the agency's decision may be given to nominators, and disclosure may be made of awardees' names, home institutions, and fields of study for public information purposes. For fellows or awardees receiving stipends directly from the government, information is transmitted to the Department of the Treasury to make payments. See System of Record Notices , NSF-12, "Fellowships and Other Awards," 63 Federal Register 265 (January 5, 1998). Submission of the information is voluntary; however, failure to provide full and complete information may reduce the possibility of your receiving an award. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, an information collection unless it displays a valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. The OMB control number for this collection is 3145-0023. Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 12 hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions. Send comments regarding this burden estimate and any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to: Suzanne H. Plimpton Reports Clearance Officer Policy Office, Division of Institution and Award Support Office of Budget, Finance, and Award Management National Science Foundation Alexandria, VA 22314 X. Appendix NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION GRADUATE RESEARCH FELLOWSHIPS Major Fields of Study Note: Applications are reviewed based on the selection of a Major Field of Study. As an example, CHEMISTRY is a Major Field of Study, and Chemical Catalysis is a subfield under CHEMISTRY. Selection of a Major Field of Study determines the application deadline, the broad disciplinary expertise of the reviewers who will review the application, and the discipline of the graduate program if the Fellowship is accepted. The subfield category designates specific expertise of the reviewers. Applicants can select “Other” if their specific subfield is not represented in the list of subfields under the Major Field of Study. The "Other" subfield category should be selected only if the proposed subfield is not covered by one of the listed subfields, and should not be used to designate a subfield that is more specific than the subfields listed. Artificial Intelligence Chemical Catalysis Chemical Measurement and Imaging Chemical Structure, Dynamics, and Mechanism Chemical Synthesis Chemical Theory, Models and Computational Methods Chemistry of Life Processes Computationally Intensive Research Environmental Chemical Systems Macromolecular, Supramolecular, and Nanochemistry Other (specify) Quantum Information Science Sustainable Chemistry COMPUTER AND INFORMATION SCIENCES & ENGINEERING Accessibility Algorithms and Theoretical Foundations Artificial Intelligence Augmented Reality/Virtual Reality, Graphics, and Visualization Bioinformatics and Bio-inspired Computing Communication and Information Theory Computationally Intensive Research Computer Architecture Computer Security and Privacy Computer Systems Computer Vision Cyber-Physical Systems and Embedded Systems Data Science, Data Mining, Information Retrieval and Databases Electronic Design Automation and Design of Micro and Nano Computing Systems Fairness, Explainability, Accountability and Transparency in Analytics Formal Methods, Verification, and Programming Languages Human Computer Interaction Information Sciences Machine Learning Natural Language Processing Other (specify) Parallel, Distributed, and Cloud Computing Quantum Information Science Robotics Scientific Computing Social Computing Software Engineering Wired and Wireless Networking ENGINEERING Aeronautical and Aerospace Engineering Artificial Intelligence Bioengineering Biomedical Engineering Chemical Engineering Civil Engineering Computationally Intensive Research Computer Engineering Electrical and Electronic Engineering Energy Engineering Environmental Engineering Industrial Engineering & Operations Research Manufacturing Engineering Materials Engineering Mechanical Engineering Nuclear Engineering Ocean Engineering Optical Engineering Other (specify) Quantum Engineering Quantum Information Science Systems Engineering Wireless Engineering GEOSCIENCES Aeronomy Artificial Intelligence Arctic-Antarctic Atmospheric Chemistry Biogeochemistry Biological Oceanography Chemical Oceanography Climate and Large-Scale Atmospheric Dynamics Computationally Intensive Research Geobiology Geochemistry Geodynamics Geomorphology Geophysics Glaciology Hydrology Magnetospheric Physics Marine Biology Marine Geology and Geophysics Other (specify) Paleoclimate Paleontology and Paleobiology Petrology Physical and Dynamic Meteorology Physical Oceanography Quantum Information Science Sedimentary Geology Solar Physics Tectonics LIFE SCIENCES Artificial Intelligence Biochemistry Bioinformatics and Computational Biology Biophysics Cell Biology Computationally Intensive Research Developmental Biology Ecology Environmental Biology Evolutionary Biology Genetics Genomics Microbial Biology Neurosciences Organismal Biology Other (specify) Physiology Proteomics Quantum Information Science Structural Biology Systematics and Biodiversity Systems and Molecular Biology MATERIALS RESEARCH Artificial Intelligence Biomaterials Ceramics Chemistry of Materials Computationally Intensive Research Electronic Materials Materials Theory Metallic Materials Other (specify) Photonic Materials Physics of Materials Polymers Quantum Information Science MATHEMATICAL SCIENCES Algebra, Number Theory, and Combinatorics Analysis Applied Mathematics Artificial Intelligence Biostatistics Computational and Data-enabled Science Computational Mathematics Computational Statistics Computationally Intensive Research Geometric Analysis Logic or Foundations of Mathematics Mathematical Biology Other (specify) Probability Quantum Information Science Statistics Topology PHYSICS & ASTRONOMY Artificial Intelligence Astronomy and Astrophysics Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics Computationally Intensive Research Condensed Matter Physics Nuclear Physics Other (specify) Particle Physics Physics of Living Systems Plasma Physics Quantum Information Science Solid State Physics Theoretical Physics Artificial Intelligence Cognitive Neuroscience Cognitive Psychology Comparative Psychology Computational Psychology Computationally Intensive Research Developmental Psychology Industrial/Organizational Psychology Neuropsychology Other (specify) Perception and Psychophysics Personality and Individual Differences Physiological Psychology Psycholinguistics Quantitative Psychology Quantum Information Science Social/Affective Neuroscience Social Psychology SOCIAL SCIENCES Anthropology, other (specify) Archaeology Artificial Intelligence Biological Anthropology Communications Computationally Intensive Research Cultural Anthropology Decision Making and Risk Analysis Economics Geography History and Philosophy of Science International Relations Law and Social Science Linguistic Anthropology Linguistics Medical Anthropology Other (specify) Political Science Public Policy Quantum Information Science Science Policy Sociology Urban and Regional Planning STEM EDUCATION AND LEARNING RESEARCH Artificial Intelligence Computationally Intensive Research Engineering Education Mathematics Education Other (specify) Quantum Information Science Science Education Technology Education SUGGESTED TOPICS The Magazine Newsletters Managing Yourself Managing Teams Work-life Balance The Big Idea Data & Visuals Reading Lists Case Selections HBR Learning Topic Feeds Account Settings Email Preferences Research: How to Delegate Decision-Making Strategically Hayley Blunden Mary Steffel A recent study examined the negative consequences of handing off responsibilities — and how to avoid them. Delegating work can help free up managers’ time and energy while empowering their employees to take on meaningful tasks. Yet, previous research has shown that delegating decision-making can cause employees to feel overly burdened. In a new paper, researchers examine the negative impact that handing over choice responsibility can have on delegator-delegate relationships. They offer research-backed solutions for delegating decisions more fairly in order to offset some of delegation’s negative interpersonal consequences. Effective delegation is critical to managerial success : delegating properly can help empower employees , and those who delegate can increase their earnings . Delegation can also be a way for managers to give employees experience and control, especially when they delegate decision-making responsibilities, which allow employees to exhibit agency over important stakes. Yet, some of our recent research has shown that employees can view delegated decision-making as a burden that they would prefer to avoid. Hayley Blunden is an assistant professor of management at the Kogod School of Business at American University. Her research focuses on how leaders can make workplace interaction more productive. MS Mary Steffel is an associate professor of marketing at D’Amore-McKim School of Business, Northeastern University. Her research focuses on examining when we call upon others to help us make decisions, how we navigate making decisions for others, and how we can support others in making better decisions. See her faculty page here . Partner Center Cookies on GOV.UK We use some essential cookies to make this website work. We’d like to set additional cookies to understand how you use GOV.UK, remember your settings and improve government services. We also use cookies set by other sites to help us deliver content from their services. You have accepted additional cookies. You can change your cookie settings at any time. You have rejected additional cookies. You can change your cookie settings at any time. Department of Health & Social Care Government response to the Independent Commission for Aid Impact recommendations on ‘The UK Department of Health and Social Care’s aid-funded global health research and innovation’, July 2024 Published 10 September 2024 © Crown copyright 2024 This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3 or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: [email protected] . Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. This publication is available at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/icai-review-of-dhscs-aid-funded-global-health-research-and-innovation-government-response/1d31ec1b-28d9-41a1-ae0c-8266334c7c1b Introduction The Department of Health and Social Care ( DHSC ) welcomes the Independent Commission for Aid Impact’s ( ICAI ) review of our aid-funded health research and innovation . As part of a cross-government approach to international development, DHSC has delivered a targeted portfolio of global health research since 2016. Across the global health research ( GHR ) and global health security ( GHS ) portfolios in the period reviewed (between the 2018 to 2019 financial year and the 2024 to 2025 financial year), DHSC has invested £974.5 million into the global life sciences sector. Our Official Development Assistance ( ODA ) funded health research and innovation portfolio prepares low and middle income countries ( LMICs ) to address health threats and the rising tide of non-communicable diseases. Health research contributes to better health directly, through improvements to the way disease, illness and injury are prevented and managed. It also strengthens economic performance through its contributions to a healthier and more productive workforce. This report illustrates how DHSC ’s activity delivers positive health and economic outcomes where they are needed most and is designed to complement wider UK aid investments by the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office ( FCDO ), UK Research and Innovation and other strategic funders. We welcome ICAI ’s findings and fully accept the report’s recommendations, noting that we are already making good progress in implementing many of these recommendations. We particularly welcome ICAI ’s recognition that DHSC ’s ODA funds relevant and effective global health research and innovation and is working to enhance LMIC leadership of research. We are also pleased ICAI cites many examples of effective research projects, such as: the Oxford COVID-19 vaccine research on traditionally underfunded areas, such as addressing severe stigmatising skin diseases in East African populations a cognitive therapy-based intervention for perinatal depression in Pakistan, cited in Nature Medicine as one of “11 clinical trials that will shape medicine in 2024” Since the end of the review period, we have already implemented actions supporting ICAI ’s recommendations, for example, launching: a streamlined structure for National Institute for Health and Care Research ( NIHR ) programmes, providing annual funding opportunities that give applicants predictability and enhance equitable partnerships new LMIC -only NIHR GHR Development Awards, with annual funding opportunities a new Global AMR Innovation Fund ( GAMRIF ) project with the Centre for Cellular and Molecular Platforms in India. This is GAMRIF ’s first LMIC -based primary delivery partner and will contribute to India’s life sciences sector Our responses to ICAI ’s recommendations are below. Recommendation 1 DHSC should focus on pathways to impact across its global health research portfolios, including by strengthening guidance for potential applicants and putting in place mechanisms for planning and measuring impact. Response: accept As DHSC ’s ODA funded global health research and innovation portfolio matures, we agree now is the appropriate time to strengthen our focus on pathways to impact and considerations of how best to achieve this. We recognise that strategies for research uptake and pathways to impact need to be considered and embedded in project design. We are already working with NIHR and delivery partners to enhance our approach to gathering and publishing impact case studies from across our portfolio. By spring 2025 we will: work with colleagues at FCDO and other funders to draw learnings on best practice on tracking impact in research recruit a new monitoring, evaluation and learning ( MEL ) lead who will work to refresh and strengthen our overarching MEL strategy and programme-level theories of change, with an emphasis on learning from other funders, including FCDO , to better track outcome and impact level changes work with stakeholders to review GHR ’s role in evidence synthesis to maximise research uptake and translation into use review, and refine where needed, guidance provided to NIHR funding applicants and awardees, and guidance to funding committee members. This will enable better planning, identification, tracking and scrutiny of their pathways to impact publish appropriate impact case stories on our website Recommendation 2 DHSC should ensure that its principle of equitable partnership is embedded and tracked across all areas of activity related to its global health research portfolios, including research funding, knowledge translation, learning, programme monitoring and evaluation. We understand empowering partners in LMICs increases development impact and strengthens research capacity and we are proud of recent efforts to progress in this area (see also recommendation 3). We continue to focus on ‘levelling the playing field’ for LMIC researchers to submit competitive applications. For example, since the ICAI review, we have launched NIHR GHR Development Awards, which provide finance to LMIC applicants to increase the competitiveness of their global health research proposals. In addition, GAMRIF and the UK Vaccine Network ( UKVN ) have set up opportunities for collaboration for delivery partners to improve LMIC applicants’ success rate to our programmes, through sharing best practice and feedback on writing applications. We plan to strengthen our approach to equitable partnerships yet further, with an emphasis on ensuring LMIC partner parity in access to funding. By spring 2025, we will: undertake a consultation with LMIC applicants to better understand the award holder experience and review our internal assurance processes. We recognise that administration and reporting processes are a barrier for some LMIC researchers and institutions. This consultation will be used to consider options for improvements in our commissioning and monitoring systems that strike an appropriate balance between assurance and burden on the award holder (see also recommendation 5) revisit and publish our approach to defining and approaching equitable partnerships across our whole portfolio review our results indicators with a focus on capacity strengthening review our approach to community engagement and involvement, strengthening engagement with LMIC communities and policy makers throughout the full research and innovation delivery cycle, where appropriate Recommendation 3 DHSC should progressively untie its aid for global health research, to ensure value for money and to allow LMIC researchers to identify the most appropriate partners for their projects. In line with the UK’s International Development Act 2002, DHSC remains wholly committed to the principle of untied aid and ensuring maximum benefit for ODA -eligible countries. We have been progressively untying our ODA -funded research and innovation programmes as the portfolio evolves from set-up to maturity and are delighted to announce that in May 2024 (following the completion of this review) we were able to remove the requirement for NIHR Global Health Research awards to be administered by a UK-based partner. As a result, all NIHR Global Health Research applications can now be led by LMIC institutions who can freely choose their collaborators based on expertise and best fit rather than geographical location, including partners from high-income countries. By spring 2025, we will continue to review and evolve our approach in line with our commitment to the principle of untied aid as we look ahead. We will do so with a constant eye to ensuring we commission the best science and value for money, making sure we deliver maximum impact for LMIC health systems and populations. Recommendation 4 DHSC should purposively collaborate with FCDO to strengthen UK health ODA coherence and alignment to partner country needs and priorities. DHSC and FCDO ’s health ODA research relationship is the strongest it’s ever been. We are committed to working more closely together in areas such as clinical trials. We recently worked with Bangladesh Science and Innovation Network ( SIN ) advisers in FCDO , where an NIHR cohort held their first annual symposium. These SIN advisers continue to champion locally relevant DHSC -funded health research opportunities to ministers and stakeholders, aiming to increase evidence uptake into policy. For the UKVN -funded UK-Southeast Asia Vaccine Manufacturing Research Hub, DHSC collaboration with FCDO was instrumental in understanding regional context and enabling engagement with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations secretariat. We intend to replicate these relationships across our portfolios where appropriate.  DHSC and FCDO will further deepen collaborative efforts, making full use of FCDO ’s overseas network to strengthen UK health ODA coherence and alignment to partner country needs and priorities. By 2025, we will: map and communicate UK government-funded global health research opportunities, outputs and outcomes, including through engagement with the FCDO ’s regional research hubs, the SIN , health advisers and other staff in LMICs . This includes protecting staff resources to ensure accurate information about DHSC ’s ODA -funded research projects through DevTracker and Mapping ODA research and innovation platform (MODARI) strengthen our understanding of LMIC research priorities in line with LMIC government ambitions and the sustainable development goals . This will be supported by improving our cross-government coherence and strengthening the impact of our health research ODA offer through regular meetings, joint reviews and communications and country-level consultations engage with relevant stakeholders to ensure that LMIC priorities inform our research calls to improve uptake and impact continue to ensure appropriate LMIC representation on our funding committees and advisory boards and strengthen guidance and monitoring of pathways to research uptake and impact (see recommendation 1) Recommendation 5 DHSC and NIHR should take a more strategic approach towards institutional and system-level capacity strengthening in LMICs , and develop metrics to track plausible contributions in these areas. DHSC recognises the importance of capacity strengthening across the whole LMIC health research system. We note the importance of a partnership approach to strengthening LMIC research capacity at the individual, institutional and system level. Mirroring NIHR ’s domestic expertise, we play a vital role in research system capacity building. We do this through: individual development awards collaborative research programme awards (for example, through the Research on Interventions for Global Health Transformation programme) investment into institutional capacity strengthening through dedicated schemes such as the  NIHR  Global Health Research Centres or the  NIHR  Financial Assurance Fund funding appropriate project management, finance, monitoring and learning staff to strengthen institutions (see recommendations 2 and 3) Our consortium approach brings together researchers from different disciplines and institutions, further supporting system capacity strengthening. Together, these build critical mass in LMICs and strengthen research culture and impact.  Since the conclusion of the review in May 2024, all NIHR global health research projects can be led by researchers in LMICs , contributing to research leadership capacity building. A successful system approach is best achieved through close collaboration with partners each contributing their key strengths. consider how we can more clearly articulate our offer on research capacity strengthening and how we work with others in this area explore opportunities with partners to complement wider capacity strengthening activities, maximising the value and impact of UK government ODA investments gather good practice examples and learning on effective strategic approaches to institutional and system-level research capacity strengthening in LMICs , replicating lessons learned from the UK Public Health Rapid Support Team across the portfolio where appropriate, and through engagement with other funders and beyond review our guidance and training to support research management capability, which underpins wider research system capacity review our strategic priorities for our ODA spend going forward Is this page useful? Yes this page is useful No this page is not useful Help us improve GOV.UK Don’t include personal or financial information like your National Insurance number or credit card details. To help us improve GOV.UK, we’d like to know more about your visit today. Please fill in this survey (opens in a new tab) . Alzheimer's disease & dementia Arthritis & Rheumatism Attention deficit disorders Autism spectrum disorders Biomedical technology Diseases, Conditions, Syndromes Endocrinology & Metabolism Gastroenterology Gerontology & Geriatrics Health informatics Inflammatory disorders Medical economics Medical research Medications Neuroscience Obstetrics & gynaecology Oncology & Cancer Ophthalmology Overweight & Obesity Parkinson's & Movement disorders Psychology & Psychiatry Radiology & Imaging Sleep disorders Sports medicine & Kinesiology Vaccination Breast cancer Cardiovascular disease Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease Colon cancer Coronary artery disease Heart attack Heart disease High blood pressure Kidney disease Lung cancer Multiple sclerosis Myocardial infarction Ovarian cancer Post traumatic stress disorder Rheumatoid arthritis Schizophrenia Skin cancer Type 2 diabetes Full List » share this! September 10, 2024 This article has been reviewed according to Science X's editorial process and policies . Editors have highlighted the following attributes while ensuring the content's credibility: fact-checked trusted source Clinical hypnosis vs. cognitive behavioral therapy: What's better for managing hot flashes? by The North American Menopause Society Nonhormone options for hot flashes and other menopause symptoms are growing in popularity, especially for women who cannot take hormones due to health complications. Cognitive behavioral therapy and clinical hypnosis are common nonhormone treatment options. According to a new scoping review, however, one is more effective than the other. Results of the scoping review are presented at the 2024 Annual Meeting of The Menopause Society , held in Chicago from September 10–14. Recognizing that a percentage of menopausal women cannot take hormone therapy either because of health restrictions, such as being a breast cancer survivor, or because of their concerns regarding the potential risks of hormones, in 2023 The Menopause Society published its Nonhormone Therapy Position Statement. Among other things, the Position Statement addressed both cognitive behavioral therapy and clinical hypnosis . A new scoping review which synthesized the findings from 23 studies spanning from 1996 until 2022, however, was designed to compare the effectiveness of these two treatment options. Of the total studies reviewed, eight had administered clinical hypnosis and 15 administered cognitive behavioral therapy for the treatment of hot flashes. The researchers found that clinical hypnosis interventions consistently demonstrated clinically significant efficacy in reducing hot flash frequency and severity, as well as improving quality of life, sleep quality, and mood. Specifically, clinical hypnosis showed a significant reduction of more than 60%. In contrast, cognitive behavioral therapy interventions showed mixed findings, with minimal impact on hot flash frequency reduction, although they did prove helpful in reducing the daily interference and stress associated with hot flashes. "Clinical hypnosis is the first behavioral intervention to achieve significant reductions of physiologically recorded hot flashes," says Vanessa Muniz, lead author from Baylor University. "This suggests that hypnosis may act through mechanisms beyond response expectancy or placebo effects, potentially altering activity in the medial preoptic area of the hypothalamus." Based on the results, the researchers suggest that future research should explore neurophysiological mechanisms of hypnosis and innovative delivery methods such as smartphone apps, and tailor interventions to individual characteristics for optimized outcomes in managing hot flashes. "Since hot flashes are one of the most common bothersome symptoms of menopause, evaluating the available treatment options , including the nonhormone options, are important so we can provide our patients with the option that will work best for them," says Dr. Stephanie Faubion, medical director for The Menopause Society. Explore further Feedback to editors New multimodal signature could predict immunotherapy success 2 minutes ago Novel screening tool could improve telehealth access and equity 10 minutes ago New law regulating out-of-pocket drug spending saves cancer patients more than $7,000 a year, study finds Scientists discover novel orthonairovirus in man bitten by tick in China 14 minutes ago AI algorithm can identify brain patterns related to specific behavior 16 minutes ago Researchers customize top-of-the-line microscopy method with AI to better understand glioblastoma tumors 18 minutes ago Large study shows the impact of India's rural mental health program 30 minutes ago Common diabetes drug slows growth of normal cells carrying cancer mutation, finds study 32 minutes ago Pathway tied to cancer-driving genome alterations identified 39 minutes ago Pressure sensing by muscles provides a promising new target for treatments 41 minutes ago Related Stories Hot flash drug shows significant benefits in clinical trials Aug 22, 2024 Recommendations updated for nonhormonal management of vasomotor symptoms Jun 12, 2023 Severe menopause symptoms may take toll on brain health Aug 14, 2024 What's new and what works in the treatment of hot flashes? Oct 12, 2022 New therapies offer hope for management of menopausal hot flashes Sep 22, 2021 Hormone therapy may aid in managing depressive symptoms during menopause, study suggests Feb 22, 2024 Recommended for you Long-term exercisers have 'healthier' belly fat, study reveals Endocannabinoids are associated with emotional numbing in PTSD: Study 52 minutes ago Psychologists argue conscientiousness outshines willpower in predicting success How we trust the reliability of others' memories: Research examines difference between human and machine capabilities 20 hours ago Let us know if there is a problem with our content Use this form if you have come across a typo, inaccuracy or would like to send an edit request for the content on this page. For general inquiries, please use our contact form . For general feedback, use the public comments section below (please adhere to guidelines ). Please select the most appropriate category to facilitate processing of your request Thank you for taking time to provide your feedback to the editors. Your feedback is important to us. However, we do not guarantee individual replies due to the high volume of messages. E-mail the story Your email address is used only to let the recipient know who sent the email. Neither your address nor the recipient's address will be used for any other purpose. The information you enter will appear in your e-mail message and is not retained by Medical Xpress in any form. Newsletter sign up Get weekly and/or daily updates delivered to your inbox. You can unsubscribe at any time and we'll never share your details to third parties. More information Privacy policy Donate and enjoy an ad-free experience We keep our content available to everyone. Consider supporting Science X's mission by getting a premium account. E-mail newsletter Cooking tools and utensils Love Natural Peanut Butter but Hate the Stirring? This Doodad Is a Game Changer. By Lesley Stockton Lesley Stockton is a writer focused on kitchen and entertaining. Her coverage includes grilling, kitchen knives, and cookware, just to name a few. As a career-long cook, I can say that there are a few kitchen tasks I’ll forever avoid if I can help it, and one of those is using a butter knife to stir up a brand-new jar of natural peanut butter. (Two others are turning artichokes and removing pin bones from fish fillets .) But the trouble is that I go through a lot of peanut butter, and fate inevitably draws me back to stirring broken peanut paste into a cohesive spread. Even as I write this, I shudder at the sensory nightmare of oil sloshing onto the countertop—and coating my hands—as I try to incorporate it into the peanut solids with a subpar instrument. If I had to endure this messy job only when opening a brand-new jar of natural peanut butter, I’d probably just suck it up and power through. But I went through 15 jars while testing for our guide to the best creamy peanut butter . And even your home PB jar needs re-stirring several times during its stint in your cupboard. I also frequently cook with tahini, which is arguably more of a pain to stir because the ground sesame seeds seem to create a denser, more concrete-like sediment than peanuts do. Looking at a new jar of peanut butter or tahini in my cabinet always elicited my saddest and heaviest of sighs—until I discovered the Grandpa Witmer’s Old Fashioned Peanut Butter Mixer . It makes clean and quick work of turning a jar of separated natural peanut butter (or tahini) into a delicious homogenous goo. Grandpa Witmer’s Old Fashioned Peanut Butter Mixer A quick and convenient peanut butter mixer. This handy tool stirs natural peanut butter without the usual mess and is available in a size for every style of peanut butter jar. Be sure to get the one that fits your preferred peanut butter. Buying Options Full disclosure: I scoffed at the Witmer mixer when I first saw it kicking around in a random utensil drawer in a Martha Stewart test kitchen I worked in many, many years ago. My skepticism was immediately met with a resounding “That thing is genius!” from my fellow food editors. So I gave it a whirl (puns!), and as I saw it seamlessly blend together the oil and peanuts, I instantly became a convert. Never have I ever warmed so quickly to a kitchen unitasker. The Witmer mixer design is simple: It’s just an S-hook with a crank threaded through a lid that screws onto the peanut butter jar. But that’s all that’s necessary to effectively mix up the peanut butter while keeping all the messy, sloshy oil contained. Getting your peanut butter mostly mixed together takes about two minutes of cranking. I say “mostly” because some jars have stubborn little crevices that the hook can’t reach. If you’re like me and can’t rest until the job is complete, you can work those errant peanut solids loose with an offset palette knife (you know, the one you might have buried in the back of your kitchen’s catch-all drawer). I’ve found that the best way to get the most thorough mix with the Witmer mixer is to use it with the jar upright for about 30 seconds and then turn the jar upside down and mix for another 30 seconds. Repeat that process once more, and you’re golden. And don’t worry about any oil leaking out through the hole in the lid—a rubber gasket keeps everything inside the jar. Remember the aforementioned tahini? The Witmer mixer makes quick work of that, too. Just make sure to buy tahini in a jar with a mouth that fits one of the Witmer lid sizes. Witmer makes three sizes: model 100 for 16-ounce wide-mouth jars, model 300 for 16-ounce small-mouth jars (including our pick, Teddie All-Natural , and Smuckers), and model 400 for 26-ounce jars, which the Teddie PB also comes in, as does Costco’s almond butter. If you’re unsure about which size to get, this handy PDF list from Witmer shows peanut butters by brand and the models that fit their respective jars. Another detail that I love about the Witmer mixer is the little rubber gasket in the lid, which scrapes the hook clean when you disassemble the device. When you’re done mixing your peanut butter, just pull the crank and stirrer up and out of the jar, and then remove the lid. Et voilà! Disassemble the components inside the lid—a plastic disc and rubber gasket—and wash everything in warm soapy water. I find that a dish brush works best to get peanut butter out of the threads and center hole. Even though I initially bristled at the idea of another one-trick-pony gadget taking up space in an already-packed kitchen drawer, I’m so glad that I gave this mixer a chance. And if you’re a fan of natural nut and seed butters, the Grandpa Witmer’s Old Fashioned Peanut Butter Mixer decidedly takes the frustration out of turning them into consistent spreads. This article was edited by Alexander Aciman and Catherine Kast. Meet your guide Lesley Stockton Lesley Stockton is a senior staff writer reporting on all things cooking and entertaining for Wirecutter. Her expertise builds on a lifelong career in the culinary world—from a restaurant cook and caterer to a food editor at Martha Stewart. She is perfectly happy to leave all that behind to be a full-time kitchen-gear nerd. 472 COMMENTS What is a Literature Review? How to Write It (with Examples) What is a Literature Review? How to Write It (with Examples) Research Guides: Literature Reviews: What is a Literature Review? A literature review is a review and synthesis of existing research on a topic or research question. A literature review is meant to analyze the scholarly literature, make connections across writings and identify strengths, weaknesses, trends, and missing conversations. A literature review should address different aspects of a topic as it ... How to Write a Literature Review How to Write a Literature Review | Guide, Examples, & ... Literature Review: The What, Why and How-to Guide 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. What is a literature review? What is a literature review? - Literature Reviews Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines Literature review as a research methodology: An overview ... What is a Literature Review? What is a Literature Review? | Guide, Template, & Examples Systematic Review Systematic Review | Definition, Example & Guide Writing a literature review Digital access to research papers, academic texts, review articles, reference databases and public data sets are all sources of information that are available to enrich your review. Introduction. A formal literature review is an evidence-based, in-depth analysis of a subject. There are many reasons for writing one and these will influence the ... Steps in Conducting 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. What is a literature review? A literature review serves two main purposes: 1) To show awareness of the present state of knowledge in a particular field, including: seminal authors. the main empirical research. theoretical positions. controversies. breakthroughs as well as links to other related areas of knowledge. 2) To provide a foundation for the author's research. Literature Review Research Literature Review - Research Guides - University of Delaware What Is A Literature Review (In A Dissertation Or Thesis ... What Is A Literature Review (In A Dissertation Or Thesis) How to Write a Literature Review How to Write a Literature Review - LibGuides Literature Reviews? Narrative Reviews: The purpose of this type of review is to describe the current state of the research on a specific research topic and to offer a critical analysis of the literature reviewed. Studies are grouped by research/theoretical categories, and themes and trends, strengths and weaknesses, and gaps are identified. What is a review article? A review article can also be called a literature review, or a review of literature. It is a survey of previously published research on a topic. It should give an overview of current thinking on the topic. And, unlike an original research article, it will not present new experimental results. Writing a review of literature is to provide a ... Writing, reading, and critiquing reviews Literature reviews are foundational to any study. They describe what is known about given topic and lead us to identify a knowledge gap to study. All reviews require authors to be able accurately summarize, synthesize, interpret and even critique the research literature. 1, 2 In fact, for this editorial we have had to review the literature on ... Literature Review Types of Literature Review are as follows: Narrative literature review: This type of review involves a comprehensive summary and critical analysis of the available literature on a particular topic or research question. It is often used as an introductory section of a research paper. Systematic literature review: This is a rigorous and ... How to Do a Systematic Review: A Best Practice Guide for ... Systematic reviews are characterized by a methodical and replicable methodology and presentation. They involve a comprehensive search to locate all relevant published and unpublished work on a subject; a systematic integration of search results; and a critique of the extent, nature, and quality of evidence in relation to a particular research question. LSBU Library: Literature Reviews: What is a Literature Review? The research, the body of current literature, and the particular objectives should all influence the structure of a literature review. It is also critical to remember that creating a literature review is an ongoing process - as one reads and analyzes the literature, one's understanding may change, which could require rearranging the literature ... What is a Literature Review? Definition, Types, and Examples A literature review is an essential part of any academic research paper, thesis, or dissertation. It provides a thorough examination of existing research on a particular topic, allowing the researcher to identify gaps, areas of agreement or disagreement, and emerging trends in the field. How to write a review article? How to write a review article? - PMC Research Guides: Systematic Reviews: What is a Systematic Review? an explicit, reproducible methodology. a systematic search that attempts to identify all studies that would meet the eligibility criteria. an assessment of the validity of the findings of the included studies, for example through the assessment of the risk of bias. a systematic presentation, and synthesis, of the characteristics and findings of ... What Is Peer Review? What Is Peer Review? | Types & Examples Narrative Reviews: Flexible, Rigorous, and Practical Narrative Reviews: Flexible, Rigorous, and Practical - PMC NSF 23-605: Graduate Research Fellowship Program (GRFP) Graduate Research Fellowship Program (GRFP) Research: How to Delegate Decision-Making Strategically Her research focuses on examining when we call upon others to help us make decisions, how we navigate making decisions for others, and how we can support others in making better decisions. See her ... Government response to the Independent Commission for Aid Impact Since the conclusion of the review in May 2024, all NIHR global health research projects can be led by researchers in LMICs, contributing to research leadership capacity building. A successful ... Clinical hypnosis vs. cognitive behavioral therapy: What's better for A new scoping review which synthesized the findings from 23 studies spanning from 1996 until 2022, however, was designed to compare the effectiveness of these two treatment options. Love Natural Peanut Butter but Hate the Stirring? This Doodad Is a Game We independently review everything we recommend. When you buy through our links, we may earn a commission. Learn more› By Lesley Stockton Lesley Stockton is a writer focused on kitchen and ... assignment essay homework paper phd report resume review thesis