How to Write a Literature Review Paper? Bert Van Wee & David Banister

Literature review papers (LRPs) are well-structured and up-to-date overviews of literature in a specific area, that brings data together in a clearly structured manner. Their values lies in that research gaps are made explicit or they outline and discuss the advantages and disadvantage of a the methods used and implications of the findings.

A LRP makes use of some conceptual and methodological guidance more than literature reviews as part of primary research because they are less straightforward and there are decisions with respect to the structure that need to be made.

The Rationale for Writing a LRP and Added Value

A key differentiator of LRP is their scope and added value. The scope of a LRP seeks a “balance between specificity and generality” because being too specific limits the range that the LRP can cover and being too general makes it difficult to produce a high-quality review as there is ample material available. Overcoming this requires a clear focus to the review because it is easier to “grow” a review by extending its scope, as opposed to restricting a review that already has a large scope.

Writing a LRP results (because of the wide range of reading) in the research acquiring a substantial amount of knowledge in that research topic, which in its own right might create enthusiasm to write a LRP. Subsequently, this will result in a paper that is heavily cited and will build the reputation of the authors, which will enhance their standing as learned scholars in that field. This allows researchers to position their work in the overall academic literature of their field. A LRP also demonstrates that the researcher can organize and “harvest” all their reading in an explicit manner while receiving credit for it. A LRP can also be conducted independently, without the need for data collection and the resources that come with that. LRPs are used for teaching and research purposes. It can also be the starting point for new research (by identifying an under-researched area that is embedded in a well-covered research area).

A reason why a LRP might not be written is to avoid redundancy if another LRP has already been published and it has the same scope. However, in some cases, an additional review might be useful if different types of literature will be used, if an existing review needs to be updated, or even if the same literature will be used, a different lens of analysis will be used to come to a substantially different conclusion.

The pivotal difference between a more general overview paper (literature review as part of primary research) and a more critical review paper rests on the need to have added value. A LRP needs to bring more value than an overview. The added value a LRP could bring is analysing a range of paper types (conceptual, theoretical, methodological) as well as case study and practice-based reviews. They can be synthetic, critical, innovative (proposing new conceptual frameworks) or bring together different approaches.

A key rationale for writing a LRP is the added value of a distinct message and interpretation of the material used.

A classic LRP would first outline the purpose and structure of the review, present the literature in a logical way, commenting on the differences in the literature cited, followed by discussions and conclusions. This last part relates to the added value of the LRP.

Methodology: Selection of Papers

LRPs do not have a specific methodology, which is often cited as a weakness. The authors recommend that we should be explicit about the methodologies that are used in the selection of material. The most obvious sources of literature are the numerous databases available (e.g. Web of Science, SCOPUS, Scholar Google, and TRID). It needs to be made explicit how these databases have been systematically searched. For example, comment on the keywords used for the search and if the selection has been heavily influenced by the Boolean operators (AND, OR, and NOT).

In an LRP by Scheepers et al. (2014), they make explicit the databases, languages included, keywords, search strategy, time frame (including a rationale for this choice), and specific contexts (region or countries). For example, you may choice post 1998 literature either because literature up to that year already exists or the methods being reviewed were first introduced in that year. An example relative to region or countries: The health systems, legislation, socio-economic make-up and other aspects are substantially different to other countries.

Snowballing is often used and should be made explicit. Forward snowballing implies finding citations to a paper, whereas backward snowballing implies finding citations in a paper (Jalali & Wohlin, 2012). Even when selecting papers to be included is based on more subjective criteria, such as personal knowledge, extensive research in an area, brainstorming with experts, and other open-ended approaches need to be made explicit in a methodological section explaining the process of which papers have been included and excluded.

In the case where a search results in too many papers for inclusion in the review, even after narrowing down the scope, the solution may be to impose a (stratified) selection. This process should be made explicit and justified. For example, reasons could relate to impact of papers (determined through number of citations -total or per year), geographical area, quality, year, whether it is seminal or not, and many more criteria.

Structure of a LRP

The introduction would be similar to a conventional research paper:

• Discuss background of topic.

• What is already known in terms of the main lines of enquiry.

• The gap(s) in the literature.

• Motivation and aims of the paper in relation to the gaps.

• The research question.

• Intended audience.

• If there is already a literature review in the same area.

• Position of the current LRP compared to previously published LRPs in the same area.

Next would be an overview of the literature reviewed, often in the form of a table or a series of tables. Several templates for such a presentation can be found. If the table is long it can be included as an appendix. The purpose of tables, graphics and other illustrative material is to synthesise large amounts of data clearly and concisely making it easier to understand and make broad comparisons between the literature being reviewed. It also makes the narrative easier to follow.

LRPs can also be structured according to the sources such as results, themes, or content-related clustering as a guiding principle.