literature review of programmes

Have a language expert improve your writing

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

• Knowledge Base

Methodology

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

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

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

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

There are five key steps to writing a literature review:

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

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

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

Table of contents

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

• Quick Run-through
• Step 1 & 2

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

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

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

Don't submit your assignments before you do this

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

Try for free

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

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

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

Download Word doc Download Google doc

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

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

Make a list of keywords

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

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

Search for relevant sources

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

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

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

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

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

For each publication, ask yourself:

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

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

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

Take notes and cite your sources

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Chronological

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

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

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

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

Methodological

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

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

Theoretical

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

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

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

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

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

As you write, you can follow these tips:

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

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

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

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

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

Open Google Slides Download PowerPoint

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

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

 Statistics

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

Research bias

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Cite this Scribbr article

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

McCombes, S. (2023, September 11). How to Write a Literature Review | Guide, Examples, & Templates. Scribbr. Retrieved September 9, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/dissertation/literature-review/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, what is a theoretical framework | guide to organizing, what is a research methodology | steps & tips, how to write a research proposal | examples & templates, "i thought ai proofreading was useless but..".

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

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).

Purdue Online Writing Lab Purdue OWL® College of Liberal Arts

Writing a Literature Review

Welcome to the Purdue OWL

This page is brought to you by the OWL at Purdue University. When printing this page, you must include the entire legal notice.

Copyright ©1995-2018 by The Writing Lab & The OWL at Purdue and Purdue University. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, reproduced, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our terms and conditions of fair use.

A literature review is a document or section of a document that collects key sources on a topic and discusses those sources in conversation with each other (also called synthesis ). The lit review is an important genre in many disciplines, not just literature (i.e., the study of works of literature such as novels and plays). When we say “literature review” or refer to “the literature,” we are talking about the research ( scholarship ) in a given field. You will often see the terms “the research,” “the scholarship,” and “the literature” used mostly interchangeably.

Where, when, and why would I write a lit review?

There are a number of different situations where you might write a literature review, each with slightly different expectations; different disciplines, too, have field-specific expectations for what a literature review is and does. For instance, in the humanities, authors might include more overt argumentation and interpretation of source material in their literature reviews, whereas in the sciences, authors are more likely to report study designs and results in their literature reviews; these differences reflect these disciplines’ purposes and conventions in scholarship. You should always look at examples from your own discipline and talk to professors or mentors in your field to be sure you understand your discipline’s conventions, for literature reviews as well as for any other genre.

A literature review can be a part of a research paper or scholarly article, usually falling after the introduction and before the research methods sections. In these cases, the lit review just needs to cover scholarship that is important to the issue you are writing about; sometimes it will also cover key sources that informed your research methodology.

Lit reviews can also be standalone pieces, either as assignments in a class or as publications. In a class, a lit review may be assigned to help students familiarize themselves with a topic and with scholarship in their field, get an idea of the other researchers working on the topic they’re interested in, find gaps in existing research in order to propose new projects, and/or develop a theoretical framework and methodology for later research. As a publication, a lit review usually is meant to help make other scholars’ lives easier by collecting and summarizing, synthesizing, and analyzing existing research on a topic. This can be especially helpful for students or scholars getting into a new research area, or for directing an entire community of scholars toward questions that have not yet been answered.

What are the parts of a lit review?

Most lit reviews use a basic introduction-body-conclusion structure; if your lit review is part of a larger paper, the introduction and conclusion pieces may be just a few sentences while you focus most of your attention on the body. If your lit review is a standalone piece, the introduction and conclusion take up more space and give you a place to discuss your goals, research methods, and conclusions separately from where you discuss the literature itself.

Introduction:

• An introductory paragraph that explains what your working topic and thesis is
• A forecast of key topics or texts that will appear in the review
• Potentially, a description of how you found sources and how you analyzed them for inclusion and discussion in the review (more often found in published, standalone literature reviews than in lit review sections in an article or research paper)
• Summarize and synthesize: Give an overview of the main points of each source and combine them into a coherent whole
• Analyze and interpret: Don’t just paraphrase other researchers – add your own interpretations where possible, discussing the significance of findings in relation to the literature as a whole
• Critically Evaluate: Mention the strengths and weaknesses of your sources
• Write in well-structured paragraphs: Use transition words and topic sentence to draw connections, comparisons, and contrasts.

Conclusion:

• Summarize the key findings you have taken from the literature and emphasize their significance
• Connect it back to your primary research question

How should I organize my lit review?

Lit reviews can take many different organizational patterns depending on what you are trying to accomplish with the review. Here are some examples:

• Chronological : The simplest approach is to trace the development of the topic over time, which helps familiarize the audience with the topic (for instance if you are introducing something that is not commonly known in your field). If you choose this strategy, be careful to avoid simply listing and summarizing sources in order. Try to analyze the patterns, turning points, and key debates that have shaped the direction of the field. Give your interpretation of how and why certain developments occurred (as mentioned previously, this may not be appropriate in your discipline — check with a teacher or mentor if you’re unsure).
• Thematic : If you have found some recurring central themes that you will continue working with throughout your piece, you can organize your literature review into subsections that address different aspects of the topic. For example, if you are reviewing literature about women and religion, key themes can include the role of women in churches and the religious attitude towards women.
• Qualitative versus quantitative research
• Empirical versus theoretical scholarship
• Divide the research by sociological, historical, or cultural sources
• Theoretical : In many humanities articles, the literature review is the foundation for the theoretical framework. You can use it to discuss various theories, models, and definitions of key concepts. You can argue for the relevance of a specific theoretical approach or combine various theorical concepts to create a framework for your research.

What are some strategies or tips I can use while writing my lit review?

Any lit review is only as good as the research it discusses; make sure your sources are well-chosen and your research is thorough. Don’t be afraid to do more research if you discover a new thread as you’re writing. More info on the research process is available in our "Conducting Research" resources .

As you’re doing your research, create an annotated bibliography ( see our page on the this type of document ). Much of the information used in an annotated bibliography can be used also in a literature review, so you’ll be not only partially drafting your lit review as you research, but also developing your sense of the larger conversation going on among scholars, professionals, and any other stakeholders in your topic.

Usually you will need to synthesize research rather than just summarizing it. This means drawing connections between sources to create a picture of the scholarly conversation on a topic over time. Many student writers struggle to synthesize because they feel they don’t have anything to add to the scholars they are citing; here are some strategies to help you:

• It often helps to remember that the point of these kinds of syntheses is to show your readers how you understand your research, to help them read the rest of your paper.
• Writing teachers often say synthesis is like hosting a dinner party: imagine all your sources are together in a room, discussing your topic. What are they saying to each other?
• Look at the in-text citations in each paragraph. Are you citing just one source for each paragraph? This usually indicates summary only. When you have multiple sources cited in a paragraph, you are more likely to be synthesizing them (not always, but often
• Read more about synthesis here.

The most interesting literature reviews are often written as arguments (again, as mentioned at the beginning of the page, this is discipline-specific and doesn’t work for all situations). Often, the literature review is where you can establish your research as filling a particular gap or as relevant in a particular way. You have some chance to do this in your introduction in an article, but the literature review section gives a more extended opportunity to establish the conversation in the way you would like your readers to see it. You can choose the intellectual lineage you would like to be part of and whose definitions matter most to your thinking (mostly humanities-specific, but this goes for sciences as well). In addressing these points, you argue for your place in the conversation, which tends to make the lit review more compelling than a simple reporting of other sources.

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

How To Structure Your Literature Review

3 options to help structure your chapter.

By: Amy Rommelspacher (PhD) | Reviewer: Dr Eunice Rautenbach | November 2020 (Updated May 2023)

Writing the literature review chapter can seem pretty daunting when you’re piecing together your dissertation or thesis. As  we’ve discussed before , a good literature review needs to achieve a few very important objectives – it should:

• Demonstrate your knowledge of the research topic
• Identify the gaps in the literature and show how your research links to these
• Provide the foundation for your conceptual framework (if you have one)
• Inform your own  methodology and research design

To achieve this, your literature review needs a well-thought-out structure . Get the structure of your literature review chapter wrong and you’ll struggle to achieve these objectives. Don’t worry though – in this post, we’ll look at how to structure your literature review for maximum impact (and marks!).

But wait – is this the right time?

Deciding on the structure of your literature review should come towards the end of the literature review process – after you have collected and digested the literature, but before you start writing the chapter. 

In other words, you need to first develop a rich understanding of the literature before you even attempt to map out a structure. There’s no use trying to develop a structure before you’ve fully wrapped your head around the existing research.

Equally importantly, you need to have a structure in place before you start writing , or your literature review will most likely end up a rambling, disjointed mess. 

Importantly, don’t feel that once you’ve defined a structure you can’t iterate on it. It’s perfectly natural to adjust as you engage in the writing process. As we’ve discussed before , writing is a way of developing your thinking, so it’s quite common for your thinking to change – and therefore, for your chapter structure to change – as you write. 

Need a helping hand?

Like any other chapter in your thesis or dissertation, your literature review needs to have a clear, logical structure. At a minimum, it should have three essential components – an  introduction , a  body   and a  conclusion . 

Let’s take a closer look at each of these.

1: The Introduction Section

Just like any good introduction, the introduction section of your literature review should introduce the purpose and layout (organisation) of the chapter. In other words, your introduction needs to give the reader a taste of what’s to come, and how you’re going to lay that out. Essentially, you should provide the reader with a high-level roadmap of your chapter to give them a taste of the journey that lies ahead.

Here’s an example of the layout visualised in a literature review introduction:

Your introduction should also outline your topic (including any tricky terminology or jargon) and provide an explanation of the scope of your literature review – in other words, what you  will   and  won’t   be covering (the delimitations ). This helps ringfence your review and achieve a clear focus . The clearer and narrower your focus, the deeper you can dive into the topic (which is typically where the magic lies). 

Depending on the nature of your project, you could also present your stance or point of view at this stage. In other words, after grappling with the literature you’ll have an opinion about what the trends and concerns are in the field as well as what’s lacking. The introduction section can then present these ideas so that it is clear to examiners that you’re aware of how your research connects with existing knowledge .

2: The Body Section

The body of your literature review is the centre of your work. This is where you’ll present, analyse, evaluate and synthesise the existing research. In other words, this is where you’re going to earn (or lose) the most marks. Therefore, it’s important to carefully think about how you will organise your discussion to present it in a clear way. 

The body of your literature review should do just as the description of this chapter suggests. It should “review” the literature – in other words, identify, analyse, and synthesise it. So, when thinking about structuring your literature review, you need to think about which structural approach will provide the best “review” for your specific type of research and objectives (we’ll get to this shortly).

There are (broadly speaking)  three options  for organising your literature review.

Option 1: Chronological (according to date)

Organising the literature chronologically is one of the simplest ways to structure your literature review. You start with what was published first and work your way through the literature until you reach the work published most recently. Pretty straightforward.

The benefit of this option is that it makes it easy to discuss the developments and debates in the field as they emerged over time. Organising your literature chronologically also allows you to highlight how specific articles or pieces of work might have changed the course of the field – in other words, which research has had the most impact . Therefore, this approach is very useful when your research is aimed at understanding how the topic has unfolded over time and is often used by scholars in the field of history. That said, this approach can be utilised by anyone that wants to explore change over time .

For example , if a student of politics is investigating how the understanding of democracy has evolved over time, they could use the chronological approach to provide a narrative that demonstrates how this understanding has changed through the ages.

Here are some questions you can ask yourself to help you structure your literature review chronologically.

• What is the earliest literature published relating to this topic?
• How has the field changed over time? Why?
• What are the most recent discoveries/theories?

In some ways, chronology plays a part whichever way you decide to structure your literature review, because you will always, to a certain extent, be analysing how the literature has developed. However, with the chronological approach, the emphasis is very firmly on how the discussion has evolved over time , as opposed to how all the literature links together (which we’ll discuss next ).

Option 2: Thematic (grouped by theme)

The thematic approach to structuring a literature review means organising your literature by theme or category – for example, by independent variables (i.e. factors that have an impact on a specific outcome).

As you’ve been collecting and synthesising literature , you’ll likely have started seeing some themes or patterns emerging. You can then use these themes or patterns as a structure for your body discussion. The thematic approach is the most common approach and is useful for structuring literature reviews in most fields.

For example, if you were researching which factors contributed towards people trusting an organisation, you might find themes such as consumers’ perceptions of an organisation’s competence, benevolence and integrity. Structuring your literature review thematically would mean structuring your literature review’s body section to discuss each of these themes, one section at a time.

Here are some questions to ask yourself when structuring your literature review by themes:

• Are there any patterns that have come to light in the literature?
• What are the central themes and categories used by the researchers?
• Do I have enough evidence of these themes?

PS – you can see an example of a thematically structured literature review in our literature review sample walkthrough video here.

Option 3: Methodological

The methodological option is a way of structuring your literature review by the research methodologies used . In other words, organising your discussion based on the angle from which each piece of research was approached – for example, qualitative , quantitative or mixed  methodologies.

Structuring your literature review by methodology can be useful if you are drawing research from a variety of disciplines and are critiquing different methodologies. The point of this approach is to question  how  existing research has been conducted, as opposed to  what  the conclusions and/or findings the research were.

For example, a sociologist might centre their research around critiquing specific fieldwork practices. Their literature review will then be a summary of the fieldwork methodologies used by different studies.

Here are some questions you can ask yourself when structuring your literature review according to methodology:

• Which methodologies have been utilised in this field?
• Which methodology is the most popular (and why)?
• What are the strengths and weaknesses of the various methodologies?
• How can the existing methodologies inform my own methodology?

3: The Conclusion Section

Once you’ve completed the body section of your literature review using one of the structural approaches we discussed above, you’ll need to “wrap up” your literature review and pull all the pieces together to set the direction for the rest of your dissertation or thesis.

The conclusion is where you’ll present the key findings of your literature review. In this section, you should emphasise the research that is especially important to your research questions and highlight the gaps that exist in the literature. Based on this, you need to make it clear what you will add to the literature – in other words, justify your own research by showing how it will help fill one or more of the gaps you just identified.

Last but not least, if it’s your intention to develop a conceptual framework for your dissertation or thesis, the conclusion section is a good place to present this.

Example: Thematically Structured Review

In the video below, we unpack a literature review chapter so that you can see an example of a thematically structure review in practice.

Let’s Recap

In this article, we’ve  discussed how to structure your literature review for maximum impact. Here’s a quick recap of what  you need to keep in mind when deciding on your literature review structure:

• Just like other chapters, your literature review needs a clear introduction , body and conclusion .
• The introduction section should provide an overview of what you will discuss in your literature review.
• The body section of your literature review can be organised by chronology , theme or methodology . The right structural approach depends on what you’re trying to achieve with your research.
• The conclusion section should draw together the key findings of your literature review and link them to your research questions.

If you’re ready to get started, be sure to download our free literature review template to fast-track your chapter outline.

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 .

29 Comments

Great work. This is exactly what I was looking for and helps a lot together with your previous post on literature review. One last thing is missing: a link to a great literature chapter of an journal article (maybe with comments of the different sections in this review chapter). Do you know any great literature review chapters?

I agree with you Marin… A great piece

I agree with Marin. This would be quite helpful if you annotate a nicely structured literature from previously published research articles.

Awesome article for my research.

I thank you immensely for this wonderful guide

It is indeed thought and supportive work for the futurist researcher and students

Very educative and good time to get guide. Thank you

Great work, very insightful. Thank you.

Thanks for this wonderful presentation. My question is that do I put all the variables into a single conceptual framework or each hypothesis will have it own conceptual framework?

Thank you very much, very helpful

This is very educative and precise . Thank you very much for dropping this kind of write up .

Pheeww, so damn helpful, thank you for this informative piece.

I’m doing a research project topic ; stool analysis for parasitic worm (enteric) worm, how do I structure it, thanks.

comprehensive explanation. Help us by pasting the URL of some good “literature review” for better understanding.

great piece. thanks for the awesome explanation. it is really worth sharing. I have a little question, if anyone can help me out, which of the options in the body of literature can be best fit if you are writing an architectural thesis that deals with design?

I am doing a research on nanofluids how can l structure it?

Beautifully clear.nThank you!

Lucid! Thankyou!

Brilliant work, well understood, many thanks

I like how this was so clear with simple language 😊😊 thank you so much 😊 for these information 😊

Insightful. I was struggling to come up with a sensible literature review but this has been really helpful. Thank you!

You have given thought-provoking information about the review of the literature.

Thank you. It has made my own research better and to impart your work to students I teach

I learnt a lot from this teaching. It’s a great piece.

I am doing research on EFL teacher motivation for his/her job. How Can I structure it? Is there any detailed template, additional to this?

You are so cool! I do not think I’ve read through something like this before. So nice to find somebody with some genuine thoughts on this issue. Seriously.. thank you for starting this up. This site is one thing that is required on the internet, someone with a little originality!

I’m asked to do conceptual, theoretical and empirical literature, and i just don’t know how to structure it

Asking questions are actually fastidious thing if you are not understanding anything fully, but this article presents good understanding yet.

thank you SOOO much it is really helpful ..

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

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.

• USC Libraries
• Research Guides

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper

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

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

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

Importance of a Good Literature Review

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

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

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

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

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

Types of Literature Reviews

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Structure and Writing Style

I.  Thinking About Your Literature Review

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

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

The critical evaluation of each work should consider :

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

II.  Development of the Literature Review

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

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

III.  Ways to Organize Your Literature Review

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

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

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

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

IV.  Writing Your Literature Review

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

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

V.  Common Mistakes to Avoid

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

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

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

Writing Tip

Break Out of Your Disciplinary Box!

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

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

Another Writing Tip

Don't Just Review for Content!

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

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

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

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

Yet Another Writing Tip

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

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

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

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

• << Previous: Theoretical Framework
• Next: Citation Tracking >>
• Last Updated: Sep 4, 2024 9:40 AM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide

Literature Review Guide

The literature review, database search tips.

• Back to Research Help
• What is a Literature Review?
• Plan Your Literature Review
• Identify a Research Gap
• Define Your Research Question
• Search the Literature
• Analyze Your Research Results
• Manage Research Results
• Write the Literature Review

What is a Literature Review?  What is its purpose?

The purpose of a literature review is to offer a  comprehensive review of scholarly literature on a specific topic along with an  evaluation of the strengths and weaknesses of authors' arguments . In other words, you are summarizing research available on a certain topic and then drawing conclusions about researchers' findings. To make gathering research easier, be sure to start with a narrow/specific topic and then widen your topic if necessary.

A thorough literature review provides an accurate description of current knowledge on a topic and identifies areas for future research.  Are there gaps or areas that require further study and exploration? What opportunities are there for further research? What is missing from my collection of resources? Are more resources needed?

It is important to note that conclusions described in the literature you gather may contradict each other completely or in part.  Recognize that knowledge creation is collective and cumulative.  Current research is built upon past research findings and discoveries.  Research may bring previously accepted conclusions into question.  A literature review presents current knowledge on a topic and may point out various academic arguments within the discipline.

What a Literature Review is not

• A literature review is not an annotated bibliography .  An annotated bibliography provides a brief summary, analysis, and reflection of resources included in the bibliography.  Often it is not a systematic review of existing research on a specific subject.  That said, creating an annotated bibliography throughout your research process may be helpful in managing the resources discovered through your research.
• A literature review is not a research paper .  A research paper explores a topic and uses resources discovered through the research process to support a position on the topic.  In other words, research papers present one side of an issue.  A literature review explores all sides of the research topic and evaluates all positions and conclusions achieved through the scientific research process even though some conclusions may conflict partially or completely.

From the Online Library

SAGE Research Methods is a web-based research methods tool that covers quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods. Researchers can explore methods and concepts to help design research projects, understand a particular method or identify a new method, and write up research. Sage Research Methods focuses on methodology rather than disciplines, and is of potential use to researchers from the social sciences, health sciences and other research areas.

• Sage Research Methods Project Planner - Reviewing the Literature View the resources and videos for a step-by-step guide to performing a literature review.

The Literature Review: Step by Step

Follow this step-by-step process by using the related tabs in this Guide.

• Define your Research question
• Analyze the material you’ve found
• Manage the results of your research
• Write your Review

Getting Started

Consider the following questions as you develop your research topic, conduct your research, and begin evaluating the resources discovered in the research process:

• What is known about the subject?
• Are there any gaps in the knowledge of the subject?
• Have areas of further study been identified by other researchers that you may want to consider?
• Who are the significant research personalities in this area?
• Is there consensus about the topic?
• What aspects have generated significant debate on the topic?
• What methods or problems were identified by others studying in the field and how might they impact your research?
• What is the most productive methodology for your research based on the literature you have reviewed?
• What is the current status of research in this area?
• What sources of information or data were identified that might be useful to you?
• How detailed? Will it be a review of ALL relevant material or will the scope be limited to more recent material, e.g., the last five years.
• Are you focusing on methodological approaches; on theoretical issues; on qualitative or quantitative research?

What is Academic Literature?

What is the difference between popular and scholarly literature?

To better understand the differences between popular and scholarly articles, comparing characteristics and purpose of the publications where these articles appear is helpful.

Popular Article (Magazine)

• Articles are shorter and are written for the general public
• General interest topics or current events are covered
• Language is simple and easy to understand
• Source material is not cited
• Articles often include glossy photographs, graphics, or visuals
• Articles are written by the publication's staff of journalists
• Articles are edited and information is fact checked

Examples of magazines that contain popular articles:

Scholarly Article (Academic Journal)

• Articles are written by scholars and researchers for academics, professionals, and experts in the field
• Articles are longer and report original research findings
• Topics are narrower in focus and provide in-depth analysis
• Technical or scholarly language is used
• Source material is cited
• Charts and graphs illustrating research findings are included
• Many are  "peer reviewed"  meaning that panels of experts review articles submitted for publication to ensure that proper research methods were used and research findings are contributing something new to the field before selecting for publication.

Examples of academic journals that contain scholarly articles:

Define your research question

Selecting a research topic can be overwhelming.  Consider following these steps:

1.  Brainstorm  research topic ideas

      - Free write: Set a timer for five minutes and write down as many ideas as you can in the allotted time

      -  Mind-Map  to explore how ideas are related

2.  Prioritize  topics based on personal interest and curiosity

3.  Pre-research

      - Explore encyclopedias and reference books for background information on the topic

      - Perform a quick database or Google search on the topic to explore current issues. 

4.  Focus the topic  by evaluating how much information is available on the topic

         - Too much information?  Consider narrowing the topic by focusing on a specific issue 

         - Too little information?  Consider broadening the topic 

5.  Determine your purpose  by considering whether your research is attempting to:

         - further the research on this topic

         - fill a gap in the research

         - support existing knowledge with new evidence

         - take a new approach or direction

         - question or challenge existing knowledge

6.  Finalize your research question

NOTE:  Be aware that your initial research question may change as you conduct research on your topic.

Searching the Literature

Research on your topic should be conducted in the academic literature.  The  Rasmussen University Online Library contains subject-focused databases that contain the leading academic journals in your programmatic area.

Consult the  Using the Online Library video tutorials  for information about how to effectively search library databases.

Watch the video below for tips on how to create a search statement that will provide relevant results

Need help starting your research?  Make a  research appointment with a Rasmussen Librarian .

TIP:  Document as you research.  Begin building your references list using the citation managers in one of these resources:

• APA Academic Writer
• NoodleTools

Recommended programmatic databases include:

Data Science

Coverage includes computer engineering, computer theory & systems, research and development, and the social and professional implications of new technologies. Articles come from more than 1,900 academic journals, trade magazines, and professional publications.

Provides access to full-text peer-reviewed journals, transactions, magazines, conference proceedings, and published standards in the areas of electrical engineering, computer science, and electronics. It also provides access to the IEEE Standards Dictionary Online. Full-text available.

Computing, telecommunications, art, science and design databases from ProQuest.

Healthcare Management

Articles from scholarly business journals back as far as 1886 with content from all disciplines of business, including marketing, management, accounting, management information systems, production and operations management, finance, and economics. Contains 55 videos from the Harvard Faculty Seminar Series, on topics such as leadership, sustaining competitive advantage, and globalization. To access the videos, click "More" in the blue bar at the top. Select "Images/ Business Videos." Uncheck "Image Quick View Collection" to indicate you only wish to search for videos. Enter search terms.

Provides a truly comprehensive business research collection. The collection consists of the following databases and more: ABI/INFORM Complete, ProQuest Entrepreneurship, ProQuest Accounting & Tax, International Bibliography of Social Sciences (IBSS), ProQuest Asian Business and Reference, and Banking Information Source.

The definitive research tool for all areas of nursing and allied health literature. Geared towards the needs of nurses and medical professionals. Covers more than 750 journals from 1937 to present.

HPRC provides information on the creation, implementation and study of health care policy and the health care system. Topics covered include health care administration, economics, planning, law, quality control, ethics, and more.

PolicyMap is an online mapping site that provides data on demographics, real estate, health, jobs, and other areas across the U.S. Access and visualize data from Census and third-party records.

Human Resources

Articles from all subject areas gathered from more than 11,000 magazines, journals, books and reports. Subjects include astronomy, multicultural studies, humanities, geography, history, law, pharmaceutical sciences, women's studies, and more. Coverage from 1887 to present. Start your research here.

Cochrane gathers and summarizes the best evidence from research to help you make informed choices about treatments. Whether a doctor or nurse, patient, researcher or student, Cochrane evidence provides a tool to enhance your healthcare knowledge and decision making on topics ranging from allergies, blood disorders, and cancer, to mental health, pregnancy, urology, and wounds.

Health sciences, biology, science, and pharmaceutical information from ProQuest. Includes articles from scholarly, peer-reviewed journals, practical and professional development content from professional journals, and general interest articles from magazines and newspapers.

Joanna Briggs Institute Academic Collection contains evidence-based information from across the globe, including evidence summaries, systematic reviews, best practice guidelines, and more. Subjects include medical, nursing, and healthcare specialties.

Comprehensive source of full-text articles from more than 1,450 scholarly medical journals.

Articles from more than 35 nursing journals in full text, searchable as far back as 1995.

Analyzing Your Research Results

You have completed your research and discovered many, many academic articles on your topic.  The next step involves evaluating and organizing the literature found in the research process.

As you review, keep in mind that there are three types of research studies:

• Quantitative
• Qualitative 
• Mixed Methods

Consider these questions as you review the articles you have gathered through the research process:

1. Does the study relate to your topic?

2. Were sound research methods used in conducting the study?

3. Does the research design fit the research question? What variables were chosen? Was the sample size adequate?

4. What conclusions were drawn?  Do the authors point out areas for further research?

Reading Academic Literature

Academic journals publish the results of research studies performed by experts in an academic discipline.  Articles selected for publication go through a rigorous peer-review process.  This process includes a thorough evaluation of the research submitted for publication by journal editors and other experts or peers in the field.  Editors select articles based on specific criteria including the research methods used, whether the research contributes new findings to the field of study, and how the research fits within the scope of the academic journal.  Articles selected often go through a revision process prior to publication.

Most academic journal articles include the following sections:

• Abstract    (An executive summary of the study)
• Introduction  (Definition of the research question to be studied)
• Literature Review  (A summary of past research noting where gaps exist)
• Methods  (The research design including variables, sample size, measurements)
• Data   (Information gathered through the study often displayed in tables and charts)
• Results   (Conclusions reached at the end of the study)
• Conclusion   (Discussion of whether the study proved the thesis; may suggest opportunities for further research)
• Bibliography  (A list of works cited in the journal article)

TIP:  To begin selecting articles for your research, read the   highlighted sections   to determine whether the academic journal article includes information relevant to your research topic.

Step 1: Skim the article

When sorting through multiple articles discovered in the research process, skimming through these sections of the article will help you determine whether the article will be useful in your research.

1.  Article title   and subject headings assigned to the article

2.   Abstract

3.   Introduction

4.  Conclusion

If the article fits your information need, go back and  read the article thoroughly.

TIP:  Create a folder on your computer to save copies of articles you plan to use in your thesis or research project.  Use  NoodleTools  or  APA Academic Writer  to save APA references.

Step 2: Determine Your Purpose

Think about how you will evaluate the academic articles you find and how you will determine whether to include them in your research project.  Ask yourself the following questions to focus your search in the academic literature:

• ​Are you looking for an overview of a topic? an explanation of a specific concept, idea, or position?
• Are you exploring gaps in the research to identify a new area for academic study?
• Are you looking for research that supports or disagrees with your thesis or research question?
• Are you looking for examples of a research design and/or research methods you are considering for your own research project?

Step 3: Read Critically

Before reading the article, ask yourself the following:

• What is my research question?  What position am I trying to support?
• What do I already know about this topic?  What do I need to learn?
• How will I evaluate the article?  Author's reputation? Research design? Treatment of topic? 
• What are my biases about the topic?

As you read the article make note of the following:

• Who is the intended audience for this article?
• What is the author's purpose in writing this article?
• What is the main point?
• How was the main point proven or supported?  
• Were scientific methods used in conducting the research?
• Do you agree or disagree with the author? Why?
• How does this article compare or connect with other articles on the topic?
• Does the author recommend areas for further study?
• How does this article help to answer your research question?

Managing your Research

Tip:  Create APA references for resources as you discover them in the research process

Use APA Academic Writer or NoodleTools to generate citations and manage your resources.  Find information on how to use these resources in the Citation Tools Guide .

Writing the Literature Review

Once research has been completed, it is time to structure the literature review and begin summarizing and synthesizing information.  The following steps may help with this process:

• Chronological
• By research method used
• Explore contradictory or conflicting conclusions
• Read each study critically
• Critique methodology, processes, and conclusions
• Consider how the study relates to your topic

• Description of public health nursing nutrition assessment and interventions for home‐visited women. This article provides a nice review of the literature in the article introduction. You can see how the authors have used the existing literature to make a case for their research questions. more... less... Horning, M. L., Olsen, J. M., Lell, S., Thorson, D. R., & Monsen, K. A. (2018). Description of public health nursing nutrition assessment and interventions for home‐visited women. Public Health Nursing, 35(4), 317–326. https://doi.org/10.1111/phn.12410
• Improving Diabetes Self-Efficacy in the Hispanic Population Through Self-Management Education Doctoral papers are a good place to see how literature reviews can be done. You can learn where they searched, what search terms they used, and how they decided which articles were included. Notice how the literature review is organized around the three main themes that came out of the literature search. more... less... Robles, A. N. (2023). Improving diabetes self-efficacy in the hispanic population through self-management education (Order No. 30635901). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global: The Sciences and Engineering Collection. https://www.proquest.com/dissertations-theses/improving-diabetes-self-efficacy-hispanic/docview/2853708553/se-2
• Exploring mediating effects between nursing leadership and patient safety from a person-centred perspective: A literature review Reading articles that publish the results of a systematic literature review is a great way to see in detail how a literature review is conducted. These articles provide an article matrix, which provides you an example of how you can document information about the articles you find in your own search. To see more examples, include "literature review" or "systematic review" as a search term. more... less... Wang, M., & Dewing, J. (2021). Exploring mediating effects between nursing leadership and patient safety from a person‐centred perspective: A literature review. Journal of Nursing Management, 29(5), 878–889. https://doi.org/10.1111/jonm.13226
• Boolean Operators
• Keywords vs. Subjects
• Creating a Search String
• Library databases are collections of resources that are searchable, including full-text articles, books, and encyclopedias.
• Searching library databases is different than searching Google. Best results are achieved when using Keywords linked with Boolean Operators . 
• Applying Limiters such as full-text, publication date, resource type, language, geographic location, and subject help to refine search results.
• Utilizing Phrases or Fields , in addition to an awareness of Stop Words , can focus your search and retrieve more useful results.
• Have questions? Ask a Librarian

Boolean Operators connect keywords or concepts logically to retrieve relevant articles, books, and other resources.  There are three Boolean Operators:

Using AND 

• Narrows search results
• Connects two or more keywords/concepts
• All keywords/concepts connected with "and" must be in an article or resource to appear in the search results list

Venn diagram of the AND connector

Example: The result list will include resources that include both keywords -- "distracted driving" and "texting" -- in the same article or resource, represented in the shaded area where the circles intersect (area shaded in purple).

• Broadens search results ("OR means more!")
• Connects two or more synonyms or related keywords/concepts
• Resources appearing in the results list will include any of the terms connected with the OR connector

Venn diagram of the OR connector

Example:  The result list will include resources that include the keyword "texting" OR the keyword "cell phone" (entire area shaded in blue); either is acceptable.

• Excludes keywords or concepts from the search
• Narrows results by removing resources that contain the keyword or term connected with the NOT connector
• Use sparingly

Venn diagram of the NOT connector

Example: The result list will include all resources that include the term "car" (green area) but will exclude any resource that includes the term "motorcycle" (purple area) even though the term car may be present in the resource.

A library database searches for keywords throughout the entire resource record including the full-text of the resource, subject headings, tags, bibliographic information, etc.

• Natural language words or short phrases that describe a concept or idea
• Can retrieve too few or irrelevant results due to full-text searching (What words would an author use to write about this topic?)
• Provide flexibility in a search
• Must consider synonyms or related terms to improve search results
• TIP: Build a Keyword List

Example:  The keyword list above was developed to find resources that discuss how texting while driving results in accidents.  Notice that there are synonyms (texting and "text messaging"), related terms ("cell phones" and texting), and spelling variations ("cell phone" and cellphone).  Using keywords when searching full text requires consideration of various words that express an idea or concept.

• Subject Headings
• Predetermined "controlled vocabulary" database editors apply to resources to describe topical coverage of content
• Can retrieve more precise search results because every article assigned that subject heading will be retrieved.
• Provide less flexibility in a search
• Can be combined with a keyword search to focus search results.
• TIP: Consult database subject heading list or subject headings assigned to relevant resources

Example 1: In EBSCO's Academic Search Complete, clicking on the "Subject Terms" tab provides access to the entire subject heading list used in the database.  It also allows a search for specific subject terms.

Example 2:  A subject term can be incorporated into a keyword search by clicking on the down arrow next to "Select a Field" and selecting "Subject Terms" from the dropdown list.  Also, notice how subject headings are listed below the resource title, providing another strategy for discovering subject headings used in the database.

When a search term is more than one word, enclose the phrase in quotation marks to retrieve more precise and accurate results.  Using quotation marks around a term will search it as a "chunk," searching for those particular words together in that order within the text of a resource. 

"cell phone"

"distracted driving"

"car accident"

TIP: In some databases, neglecting to enclose phrases in quotation marks will insert the AND Boolean connector between each word resulting in unintended search results.

Truncation provides an option to search for a root of a keyword in order to retrieve resources that include variations of that word.  This feature can be used to broaden search results, although some results may not be relevant.  To truncate a keyword, type an asterisk (*) following the root of the word.

For example:

Library databases provide a variety of tools to limit and refine search results.  Limiters provide the ability to limit search results to resources having specified characteristics including:

• Resource type
• Publication date
• Geographic location

In both the EBSCO and ProQuest databases, the limiting tools are located in the left panel of the results page.

                                                 EBSCO                                                     ProQuest

The short video below provides a demonstration of how to use limiters to refine a list of search results.

Each resource in a library database is stored in a record.  In addition to the full-text of the resources, searchable Fields are attached that typically include:

• Journal title
• Date of Publication

Incorporating Fields into your search can assist in focusing and refining search results by limiting the results to those resources that include specific information in a particular field.

In both EBSCO and ProQuest databases, selecting the Advanced Search option will allow Fields to be included in a search.

For example, in the Advanced Search option in EBSCO's Academic Search Complete database, clicking on the down arrow next to "Select a Field" provides a list of fields that can be searched within that database.  Select the field and enter the information in the text box to the left to use this feature.

Stop words are short, commonly used words--articles, prepositions, and pronouns-- that are automatically dropped from a search.  Typical stop words include:

In library databases, a stop word will not be searched even if it is included in a phrase enclosed in quotation marks.  In some instances, a word will be substituted for the stop word to allow for the other words in the phrase to be searched in proximity to one another within the text of the resource.

For example, if you searched company of America, your result list will include these variatons:

• company in America
• company of America
• company for America

Creating an Search String

This short video demonstrates how to create a search string -- keywords connected with Boolean operators -- to use in a library database search to retrieve relevant resources for any research assignment.

• Database Search Menu Template Use this search menu template to plan a database search.
• Next: Back to Research Help >>
• Last Updated: Jun 14, 2024 10:44 AM
• URL: https://guides.rasmussen.edu/LitReview

7 open source tools to make literature reviews easy

Opensource.com

A good literature review is critical for academic research in any field, whether it is for a research article, a critical review for coursework, or a dissertation. In a recent article, I presented detailed steps for doing  a literature review using open source software .

The following is a brief summary of seven free and open source software tools described in that article that will make your next literature review much easier.

1. GNU Linux

Most literature reviews are accomplished by graduate students working in research labs in universities. For absurd reasons, graduate students often have the worst computers on campus. They are often old, slow, and clunky Windows machines that have been discarded and recycled from the undergraduate computer labs. Installing a flavor of GNU Linux will breathe new life into these outdated PCs. There are more than 100 distributions , all of which can be downloaded and installed for free on computers. Most popular Linux distributions come with a "try-before-you-buy" feature. For example, with Ubuntu you can make a bootable USB stick that allows you to test-run the Ubuntu desktop experience without interfering in any way with your PC configuration. If you like the experience, you can use the stick to install Ubuntu on your machine permanently.

Linux distributions generally come with a free web browser, and the most popular is Firefox . Two Firefox plugins that are particularly useful for literature reviews are Unpaywall and Zotero. Keep reading to learn why.

3. Unpaywall

Often one of the hardest parts of a literature review is gaining access to the papers you want to read for your review. The unintended consequence of copyright restrictions and paywalls is it has narrowed access to the peer-reviewed literature to the point that even Harvard University is challenged to pay for it. Fortunately, there are a lot of open access articles—about a third of the literature is free (and the percentage is growing). Unpaywall is a Firefox plugin that enables researchers to click a green tab on the side of the browser and skip the paywall on millions of peer-reviewed journal articles. This makes finding accessible copies of articles much faster that searching each database individually. Unpaywall is fast, free, and legal, as it accesses many of the open access sites that I covered in my paper on using open source in lit reviews .

Formatting references is the most tedious of academic tasks. Zotero can save you from ever doing it again. It operates as an Android app, desktop program, and a Firefox plugin (which I recommend). It is a free, easy-to-use tool to help you collect, organize, cite, and share research. It replaces the functionality of proprietary packages such as RefWorks, Endnote, and Papers for zero cost. Zotero can auto-add bibliographic information directly from websites. In addition, it can scrape bibliographic data from PDF files. Notes can be easily added on each reference. Finally, and most importantly, it can import and export the bibliography databases in all publishers' various formats. With this feature, you can export bibliographic information to paste into a document editor for a paper or thesis—or even to a wiki for dynamic collaborative literature reviews (see tool #7 for more on the value of wikis in lit reviews).

5. LibreOffice

Your thesis or academic article can be written conventionally with the free office suite LibreOffice , which operates similarly to Microsoft's Office products but respects your freedom. Zotero has a word processor plugin to integrate directly with LibreOffice. LibreOffice is more than adequate for the vast majority of academic paper writing.

If LibreOffice is not enough for your layout needs, you can take your paper writing one step further with LaTeX , a high-quality typesetting system specifically designed for producing technical and scientific documentation. LaTeX is particularly useful if your writing has a lot of equations in it. Also, Zotero libraries can be directly exported to BibTeX files for use with LaTeX.

7. MediaWiki

If you want to leverage the open source way to get help with your literature review, you can facilitate a dynamic collaborative literature review . A wiki is a website that allows anyone to add, delete, or revise content directly using a web browser. MediaWiki is free software that enables you to set up your own wikis.

Researchers can (in decreasing order of complexity): 1) set up their own research group wiki with MediaWiki, 2) utilize wikis already established at their universities (e.g., Aalto University ), or 3) use wikis dedicated to areas that they research. For example, several university research groups that focus on sustainability (including mine ) use Appropedia , which is set up for collaborative solutions on sustainability, appropriate technology, poverty reduction, and permaculture.

Using a wiki makes it easy for anyone in the group to keep track of the status of and update literature reviews (both current and older or from other researchers). It also enables multiple members of the group to easily collaborate on a literature review asynchronously. Most importantly, it enables people outside the research group to help make a literature review more complete, accurate, and up-to-date.

Wrapping up

Free and open source software can cover the entire lit review toolchain, meaning there's no need for anyone to use proprietary solutions. Do you use other libre tools for making literature reviews or other academic work easier? Please let us know your favorites in the comments.

Related Content

Libraries & Cultural Resources

Research guides, research in education.

• Where to Start

Education Literature Review Guide

General literature review guides.

• Citation Resources
• Contact Us!

• << Previous: Where to Start
• Next: Citation Resources >>
• Last Updated: Sep 3, 2024 5:13 PM
• URL: https://libguides.ucalgary.ca/edresearch

Libraries & Cultural Resources

• 403.220.8895

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

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 A locked padlock ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Model Programs Guide

Literature Reviews

Implementation Guides

Model Programs Guide Literature Reviews provide practitioners and policymakers with relevant research and evaluations for several youth-related topics and programs.  

• Afterschool Programs  (2010)
• Alternatives to Detention and Confinement  (2024)
• Age Boundaries of the Juvenile Justice System (2024)
• Arts-Based Programs and Arts Therapies for At-Risk, Justice-Involved, and Traumatized Youths  (2021)
• Bullying and Cyberbullying  (2023)
• Child Labor Trafficking  (2016)
• Children Exposed to Violence  (2022)
• Cognitive Behavioral Treatment  (2010)
• Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children and Sex Trafficking  (2014)
• Community- and Problem-Oriented Policing  (2023)
• Community Awareness/Mobilization  (2009)
• Conflict Resolution/Interpersonal Skills  (2011)
• Day Treatment  (2011)
• Diversion from Formal Juvenile Court Processing  (2017)
• Drug Court  (2010)
• Education for Youth Under Formal Supervision of the Juvenile Justice System  (2019) 
• Family Drug Courts  (2016)
• Family Engagement in Juvenile Justice  (2018)
• Family Therapy  (2014)
• Formal, Post-Adjudication Juvenile Probation Services  (2017)
• Gang Prevention  (2014)
• Girls in the Juvenile Justice System (2023)
• Group Homes  (2008)
• Gun Court  (2010)
• Gun Violence and Youth/Young Adults (2024)
• Hate Crimes and Youth  (2022) 
• Home Confinement and Electronic Monitoring  (2014)
• Implementation Science  (2015)
• Indigent Defense for Juveniles  (2018)
• Interactions between Youth and Law Enforcement  (2018) 
• Intersection between Mental Health and the Juvenile Justice System  (2017)
• Intersection of Juvenile Justice and Child Welfare Systems  (2021)
• Juvenile Reentry  (2017)
• LGBTQ Youths in the Juvenile Justice System  (2014)
• Mental Health Court  (2010)
• Parent Training  (2010)
• Positive Youth Development  (2014)
• Protective Factors Against Delinquency  (2015)
• Racial and Ethnic Disparity in Juvenile Justice Processing  (2022)
• Reentry Court  (2010)
• Residential Programs  (2019)
• Restorative Justice for Juveniles  (2021)
• Risk Factors for Delinquency  (2015)
• Risk/Needs Assessments for Youths  (2015)
• School/Classroom Environment  (2000)
• Status Offenders  (2016)
• Substance Use Prevention Programs  (2022)
• Substance Use Treatment Programs  (2023)
• Teen Dating Violence  (2022)
• Teen/Youth Court  (2010)
• Tribal Youth in the Juvenile Justice System  (2016)
• Truancy Prevention  (2010)
• Vocational/Job Training  (2010)
• Wraparound Process  (2014)
• Youth in the Adult Criminal Justice System (2024)
• Youth Mentoring and Delinquency Prevention  (2019)
• Youths with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities in the Juvenile Justice System  (2017)

Information

• Author Services

Initiatives

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

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

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

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

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

Original Submission Date Received: .

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

Article Menu

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

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

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

Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.

JSmol Viewer

Advancing university education: exploring the benefits of education for sustainable development.

Share and Cite

Bonilla-Jurado, D.; Zumba, E.; Lucio-Quintana, A.; Yerbabuena-Torres, C.; Ramírez-Casco, A.; Guevara, C. Advancing University Education: Exploring the Benefits of Education for Sustainable Development. Sustainability 2024 , 16 , 7847. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16177847

Bonilla-Jurado D, Zumba E, Lucio-Quintana A, Yerbabuena-Torres C, Ramírez-Casco A, Guevara C. Advancing University Education: Exploring the Benefits of Education for Sustainable Development. Sustainability . 2024; 16(17):7847. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16177847

Bonilla-Jurado, Diego, Ember Zumba, Araceli Lucio-Quintana, Carlos Yerbabuena-Torres, Andrea Ramírez-Casco, and Cesar Guevara. 2024. "Advancing University Education: Exploring the Benefits of Education for Sustainable Development" Sustainability 16, no. 17: 7847. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16177847

Article Metrics

Article access statistics, supplementary material.

ZIP-Document (ZIP, 104 KiB)

Further Information

Mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.

Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals

Warning: The NCBI web site requires JavaScript to function. more...

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
• Browse Titles

NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

Lau F, Kuziemsky C, editors. Handbook of eHealth Evaluation: An Evidence-based Approach [Internet]. Victoria (BC): University of Victoria; 2017 Feb 27.

Handbook of eHealth Evaluation: An Evidence-based Approach [Internet].

Chapter 9 methods for literature reviews.

Guy Paré and Spyros Kitsiou .

9.1. Introduction

Literature reviews play a critical role in scholarship because science remains, first and foremost, a cumulative endeavour ( vom Brocke et al., 2009 ). As in any academic discipline, rigorous knowledge syntheses are becoming indispensable in keeping up with an exponentially growing eHealth literature, assisting practitioners, academics, and graduate students in finding, evaluating, and synthesizing the contents of many empirical and conceptual papers. Among other methods, literature reviews are essential for: (a) identifying what has been written on a subject or topic; (b) determining the extent to which a specific research area reveals any interpretable trends or patterns; (c) aggregating empirical findings related to a narrow research question to support evidence-based practice; (d) generating new frameworks and theories; and (e) identifying topics or questions requiring more investigation ( Paré, Trudel, Jaana, & Kitsiou, 2015 ).

Literature reviews can take two major forms. The most prevalent one is the “literature review” or “background” section within a journal paper or a chapter in a graduate thesis. This section synthesizes the extant literature and usually identifies the gaps in knowledge that the empirical study addresses ( Sylvester, Tate, & Johnstone, 2013 ). It may also provide a theoretical foundation for the proposed study, substantiate the presence of the research problem, justify the research as one that contributes something new to the cumulated knowledge, or validate the methods and approaches for the proposed study ( Hart, 1998 ; Levy & Ellis, 2006 ).

The second form of literature review, which is the focus of this chapter, constitutes an original and valuable work of research in and of itself ( Paré et al., 2015 ). Rather than providing a base for a researcher’s own work, it creates a solid starting point for all members of the community interested in a particular area or topic ( Mulrow, 1987 ). The so-called “review article” is a journal-length paper which has an overarching purpose to synthesize the literature in a field, without collecting or analyzing any primary data ( Green, Johnson, & Adams, 2006 ).

When appropriately conducted, review articles represent powerful information sources for practitioners looking for state-of-the art evidence to guide their decision-making and work practices ( Paré et al., 2015 ). Further, high-quality reviews become frequently cited pieces of work which researchers seek out as a first clear outline of the literature when undertaking empirical studies ( Cooper, 1988 ; Rowe, 2014 ). Scholars who track and gauge the impact of articles have found that review papers are cited and downloaded more often than any other type of published article ( Cronin, Ryan, & Coughlan, 2008 ; Montori, Wilczynski, Morgan, Haynes, & Hedges, 2003 ; Patsopoulos, Analatos, & Ioannidis, 2005 ). The reason for their popularity may be the fact that reading the review enables one to have an overview, if not a detailed knowledge of the area in question, as well as references to the most useful primary sources ( Cronin et al., 2008 ). Although they are not easy to conduct, the commitment to complete a review article provides a tremendous service to one’s academic community ( Paré et al., 2015 ; Petticrew & Roberts, 2006 ). Most, if not all, peer-reviewed journals in the fields of medical informatics publish review articles of some type.

The main objectives of this chapter are fourfold: (a) to provide an overview of the major steps and activities involved in conducting a stand-alone literature review; (b) to describe and contrast the different types of review articles that can contribute to the eHealth knowledge base; (c) to illustrate each review type with one or two examples from the eHealth literature; and (d) to provide a series of recommendations for prospective authors of review articles in this domain.

9.2. Overview of the Literature Review Process and Steps

As explained in Templier and Paré (2015) , there are six generic steps involved in conducting a review article:

• formulating the research question(s) and objective(s),
• searching the extant literature,
• screening for inclusion,
• assessing the quality of primary studies,
• extracting data, and
• analyzing data.

Although these steps are presented here in sequential order, one must keep in mind that the review process can be iterative and that many activities can be initiated during the planning stage and later refined during subsequent phases ( Finfgeld-Connett & Johnson, 2013 ; Kitchenham & Charters, 2007 ).

Formulating the research question(s) and objective(s): As a first step, members of the review team must appropriately justify the need for the review itself ( Petticrew & Roberts, 2006 ), identify the review’s main objective(s) ( Okoli & Schabram, 2010 ), and define the concepts or variables at the heart of their synthesis ( Cooper & Hedges, 2009 ; Webster & Watson, 2002 ). Importantly, they also need to articulate the research question(s) they propose to investigate ( Kitchenham & Charters, 2007 ). In this regard, we concur with Jesson, Matheson, and Lacey (2011) that clearly articulated research questions are key ingredients that guide the entire review methodology; they underscore the type of information that is needed, inform the search for and selection of relevant literature, and guide or orient the subsequent analysis. Searching the extant literature: The next step consists of searching the literature and making decisions about the suitability of material to be considered in the review ( Cooper, 1988 ). There exist three main coverage strategies. First, exhaustive coverage means an effort is made to be as comprehensive as possible in order to ensure that all relevant studies, published and unpublished, are included in the review and, thus, conclusions are based on this all-inclusive knowledge base. The second type of coverage consists of presenting materials that are representative of most other works in a given field or area. Often authors who adopt this strategy will search for relevant articles in a small number of top-tier journals in a field ( Paré et al., 2015 ). In the third strategy, the review team concentrates on prior works that have been central or pivotal to a particular topic. This may include empirical studies or conceptual papers that initiated a line of investigation, changed how problems or questions were framed, introduced new methods or concepts, or engendered important debate ( Cooper, 1988 ). Screening for inclusion: The following step consists of evaluating the applicability of the material identified in the preceding step ( Levy & Ellis, 2006 ; vom Brocke et al., 2009 ). Once a group of potential studies has been identified, members of the review team must screen them to determine their relevance ( Petticrew & Roberts, 2006 ). A set of predetermined rules provides a basis for including or excluding certain studies. This exercise requires a significant investment on the part of researchers, who must ensure enhanced objectivity and avoid biases or mistakes. As discussed later in this chapter, for certain types of reviews there must be at least two independent reviewers involved in the screening process and a procedure to resolve disagreements must also be in place ( Liberati et al., 2009 ; Shea et al., 2009 ). Assessing the quality of primary studies: In addition to screening material for inclusion, members of the review team may need to assess the scientific quality of the selected studies, that is, appraise the rigour of the research design and methods. Such formal assessment, which is usually conducted independently by at least two coders, helps members of the review team refine which studies to include in the final sample, determine whether or not the differences in quality may affect their conclusions, or guide how they analyze the data and interpret the findings ( Petticrew & Roberts, 2006 ). Ascribing quality scores to each primary study or considering through domain-based evaluations which study components have or have not been designed and executed appropriately makes it possible to reflect on the extent to which the selected study addresses possible biases and maximizes validity ( Shea et al., 2009 ). Extracting data: The following step involves gathering or extracting applicable information from each primary study included in the sample and deciding what is relevant to the problem of interest ( Cooper & Hedges, 2009 ). Indeed, the type of data that should be recorded mainly depends on the initial research questions ( Okoli & Schabram, 2010 ). However, important information may also be gathered about how, when, where and by whom the primary study was conducted, the research design and methods, or qualitative/quantitative results ( Cooper & Hedges, 2009 ). Analyzing and synthesizing data : As a final step, members of the review team must collate, summarize, aggregate, organize, and compare the evidence extracted from the included studies. The extracted data must be presented in a meaningful way that suggests a new contribution to the extant literature ( Jesson et al., 2011 ). Webster and Watson (2002) warn researchers that literature reviews should be much more than lists of papers and should provide a coherent lens to make sense of extant knowledge on a given topic. There exist several methods and techniques for synthesizing quantitative (e.g., frequency analysis, meta-analysis) and qualitative (e.g., grounded theory, narrative analysis, meta-ethnography) evidence ( Dixon-Woods, Agarwal, Jones, Young, & Sutton, 2005 ; Thomas & Harden, 2008 ).

9.3. Types of Review Articles and Brief Illustrations

EHealth researchers have at their disposal a number of approaches and methods for making sense out of existing literature, all with the purpose of casting current research findings into historical contexts or explaining contradictions that might exist among a set of primary research studies conducted on a particular topic. Our classification scheme is largely inspired from Paré and colleagues’ (2015) typology. Below we present and illustrate those review types that we feel are central to the growth and development of the eHealth domain.

9.3.1. Narrative Reviews

The narrative review is the “traditional” way of reviewing the extant literature and is skewed towards a qualitative interpretation of prior knowledge ( Sylvester et al., 2013 ). Put simply, a narrative review attempts to summarize or synthesize what has been written on a particular topic but does not seek generalization or cumulative knowledge from what is reviewed ( Davies, 2000 ; Green et al., 2006 ). Instead, the review team often undertakes the task of accumulating and synthesizing the literature to demonstrate the value of a particular point of view ( Baumeister & Leary, 1997 ). As such, reviewers may selectively ignore or limit the attention paid to certain studies in order to make a point. In this rather unsystematic approach, the selection of information from primary articles is subjective, lacks explicit criteria for inclusion and can lead to biased interpretations or inferences ( Green et al., 2006 ). There are several narrative reviews in the particular eHealth domain, as in all fields, which follow such an unstructured approach ( Silva et al., 2015 ; Paul et al., 2015 ).

Despite these criticisms, this type of review can be very useful in gathering together a volume of literature in a specific subject area and synthesizing it. As mentioned above, its primary purpose is to provide the reader with a comprehensive background for understanding current knowledge and highlighting the significance of new research ( Cronin et al., 2008 ). Faculty like to use narrative reviews in the classroom because they are often more up to date than textbooks, provide a single source for students to reference, and expose students to peer-reviewed literature ( Green et al., 2006 ). For researchers, narrative reviews can inspire research ideas by identifying gaps or inconsistencies in a body of knowledge, thus helping researchers to determine research questions or formulate hypotheses. Importantly, narrative reviews can also be used as educational articles to bring practitioners up to date with certain topics of issues ( Green et al., 2006 ).

Recently, there have been several efforts to introduce more rigour in narrative reviews that will elucidate common pitfalls and bring changes into their publication standards. Information systems researchers, among others, have contributed to advancing knowledge on how to structure a “traditional” review. For instance, Levy and Ellis (2006) proposed a generic framework for conducting such reviews. Their model follows the systematic data processing approach comprised of three steps, namely: (a) literature search and screening; (b) data extraction and analysis; and (c) writing the literature review. They provide detailed and very helpful instructions on how to conduct each step of the review process. As another methodological contribution, vom Brocke et al. (2009) offered a series of guidelines for conducting literature reviews, with a particular focus on how to search and extract the relevant body of knowledge. Last, Bandara, Miskon, and Fielt (2011) proposed a structured, predefined and tool-supported method to identify primary studies within a feasible scope, extract relevant content from identified articles, synthesize and analyze the findings, and effectively write and present the results of the literature review. We highly recommend that prospective authors of narrative reviews consult these useful sources before embarking on their work.

Darlow and Wen (2015) provide a good example of a highly structured narrative review in the eHealth field. These authors synthesized published articles that describe the development process of mobile health (m-health) interventions for patients’ cancer care self-management. As in most narrative reviews, the scope of the research questions being investigated is broad: (a) how development of these systems are carried out; (b) which methods are used to investigate these systems; and (c) what conclusions can be drawn as a result of the development of these systems. To provide clear answers to these questions, a literature search was conducted on six electronic databases and Google Scholar . The search was performed using several terms and free text words, combining them in an appropriate manner. Four inclusion and three exclusion criteria were utilized during the screening process. Both authors independently reviewed each of the identified articles to determine eligibility and extract study information. A flow diagram shows the number of studies identified, screened, and included or excluded at each stage of study selection. In terms of contributions, this review provides a series of practical recommendations for m-health intervention development.

9.3.2. Descriptive or Mapping Reviews

The primary goal of a descriptive review is to determine the extent to which a body of knowledge in a particular research topic reveals any interpretable pattern or trend with respect to pre-existing propositions, theories, methodologies or findings ( King & He, 2005 ; Paré et al., 2015 ). In contrast with narrative reviews, descriptive reviews follow a systematic and transparent procedure, including searching, screening and classifying studies ( Petersen, Vakkalanka, & Kuzniarz, 2015 ). Indeed, structured search methods are used to form a representative sample of a larger group of published works ( Paré et al., 2015 ). Further, authors of descriptive reviews extract from each study certain characteristics of interest, such as publication year, research methods, data collection techniques, and direction or strength of research outcomes (e.g., positive, negative, or non-significant) in the form of frequency analysis to produce quantitative results ( Sylvester et al., 2013 ). In essence, each study included in a descriptive review is treated as the unit of analysis and the published literature as a whole provides a database from which the authors attempt to identify any interpretable trends or draw overall conclusions about the merits of existing conceptualizations, propositions, methods or findings ( Paré et al., 2015 ). In doing so, a descriptive review may claim that its findings represent the state of the art in a particular domain ( King & He, 2005 ).

In the fields of health sciences and medical informatics, reviews that focus on examining the range, nature and evolution of a topic area are described by Anderson, Allen, Peckham, and Goodwin (2008) as mapping reviews . Like descriptive reviews, the research questions are generic and usually relate to publication patterns and trends. There is no preconceived plan to systematically review all of the literature although this can be done. Instead, researchers often present studies that are representative of most works published in a particular area and they consider a specific time frame to be mapped.

An example of this approach in the eHealth domain is offered by DeShazo, Lavallie, and Wolf (2009). The purpose of this descriptive or mapping review was to characterize publication trends in the medical informatics literature over a 20-year period (1987 to 2006). To achieve this ambitious objective, the authors performed a bibliometric analysis of medical informatics citations indexed in medline using publication trends, journal frequencies, impact factors, Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) term frequencies, and characteristics of citations. Findings revealed that there were over 77,000 medical informatics articles published during the covered period in numerous journals and that the average annual growth rate was 12%. The MeSH term analysis also suggested a strong interdisciplinary trend. Finally, average impact scores increased over time with two notable growth periods. Overall, patterns in research outputs that seem to characterize the historic trends and current components of the field of medical informatics suggest it may be a maturing discipline (DeShazo et al., 2009).

9.3.3. Scoping Reviews

Scoping reviews attempt to provide an initial indication of the potential size and nature of the extant literature on an emergent topic (Arksey & O’Malley, 2005; Daudt, van Mossel, & Scott, 2013 ; Levac, Colquhoun, & O’Brien, 2010). A scoping review may be conducted to examine the extent, range and nature of research activities in a particular area, determine the value of undertaking a full systematic review (discussed next), or identify research gaps in the extant literature ( Paré et al., 2015 ). In line with their main objective, scoping reviews usually conclude with the presentation of a detailed research agenda for future works along with potential implications for both practice and research.

Unlike narrative and descriptive reviews, the whole point of scoping the field is to be as comprehensive as possible, including grey literature (Arksey & O’Malley, 2005). Inclusion and exclusion criteria must be established to help researchers eliminate studies that are not aligned with the research questions. It is also recommended that at least two independent coders review abstracts yielded from the search strategy and then the full articles for study selection ( Daudt et al., 2013 ). The synthesized evidence from content or thematic analysis is relatively easy to present in tabular form (Arksey & O’Malley, 2005; Thomas & Harden, 2008 ).

One of the most highly cited scoping reviews in the eHealth domain was published by Archer, Fevrier-Thomas, Lokker, McKibbon, and Straus (2011) . These authors reviewed the existing literature on personal health record ( phr ) systems including design, functionality, implementation, applications, outcomes, and benefits. Seven databases were searched from 1985 to March 2010. Several search terms relating to phr s were used during this process. Two authors independently screened titles and abstracts to determine inclusion status. A second screen of full-text articles, again by two independent members of the research team, ensured that the studies described phr s. All in all, 130 articles met the criteria and their data were extracted manually into a database. The authors concluded that although there is a large amount of survey, observational, cohort/panel, and anecdotal evidence of phr benefits and satisfaction for patients, more research is needed to evaluate the results of phr implementations. Their in-depth analysis of the literature signalled that there is little solid evidence from randomized controlled trials or other studies through the use of phr s. Hence, they suggested that more research is needed that addresses the current lack of understanding of optimal functionality and usability of these systems, and how they can play a beneficial role in supporting patient self-management ( Archer et al., 2011 ).

9.3.4. Forms of Aggregative Reviews

Healthcare providers, practitioners, and policy-makers are nowadays overwhelmed with large volumes of information, including research-based evidence from numerous clinical trials and evaluation studies, assessing the effectiveness of health information technologies and interventions ( Ammenwerth & de Keizer, 2004 ; Deshazo et al., 2009 ). It is unrealistic to expect that all these disparate actors will have the time, skills, and necessary resources to identify the available evidence in the area of their expertise and consider it when making decisions. Systematic reviews that involve the rigorous application of scientific strategies aimed at limiting subjectivity and bias (i.e., systematic and random errors) can respond to this challenge.

Systematic reviews attempt to aggregate, appraise, and synthesize in a single source all empirical evidence that meet a set of previously specified eligibility criteria in order to answer a clearly formulated and often narrow research question on a particular topic of interest to support evidence-based practice ( Liberati et al., 2009 ). They adhere closely to explicit scientific principles ( Liberati et al., 2009 ) and rigorous methodological guidelines (Higgins & Green, 2008) aimed at reducing random and systematic errors that can lead to deviations from the truth in results or inferences. The use of explicit methods allows systematic reviews to aggregate a large body of research evidence, assess whether effects or relationships are in the same direction and of the same general magnitude, explain possible inconsistencies between study results, and determine the strength of the overall evidence for every outcome of interest based on the quality of included studies and the general consistency among them ( Cook, Mulrow, & Haynes, 1997 ). The main procedures of a systematic review involve:

• Formulating a review question and developing a search strategy based on explicit inclusion criteria for the identification of eligible studies (usually described in the context of a detailed review protocol).
• Searching for eligible studies using multiple databases and information sources, including grey literature sources, without any language restrictions.
• Selecting studies, extracting data, and assessing risk of bias in a duplicate manner using two independent reviewers to avoid random or systematic errors in the process.
• Analyzing data using quantitative or qualitative methods.
• Presenting results in summary of findings tables.
• Interpreting results and drawing conclusions.

Many systematic reviews, but not all, use statistical methods to combine the results of independent studies into a single quantitative estimate or summary effect size. Known as meta-analyses , these reviews use specific data extraction and statistical techniques (e.g., network, frequentist, or Bayesian meta-analyses) to calculate from each study by outcome of interest an effect size along with a confidence interval that reflects the degree of uncertainty behind the point estimate of effect ( Borenstein, Hedges, Higgins, & Rothstein, 2009 ; Deeks, Higgins, & Altman, 2008 ). Subsequently, they use fixed or random-effects analysis models to combine the results of the included studies, assess statistical heterogeneity, and calculate a weighted average of the effect estimates from the different studies, taking into account their sample sizes. The summary effect size is a value that reflects the average magnitude of the intervention effect for a particular outcome of interest or, more generally, the strength of a relationship between two variables across all studies included in the systematic review. By statistically combining data from multiple studies, meta-analyses can create more precise and reliable estimates of intervention effects than those derived from individual studies alone, when these are examined independently as discrete sources of information.

The review by Gurol-Urganci, de Jongh, Vodopivec-Jamsek, Atun, and Car (2013) on the effects of mobile phone messaging reminders for attendance at healthcare appointments is an illustrative example of a high-quality systematic review with meta-analysis. Missed appointments are a major cause of inefficiency in healthcare delivery with substantial monetary costs to health systems. These authors sought to assess whether mobile phone-based appointment reminders delivered through Short Message Service ( sms ) or Multimedia Messaging Service ( mms ) are effective in improving rates of patient attendance and reducing overall costs. To this end, they conducted a comprehensive search on multiple databases using highly sensitive search strategies without language or publication-type restrictions to identify all rct s that are eligible for inclusion. In order to minimize the risk of omitting eligible studies not captured by the original search, they supplemented all electronic searches with manual screening of trial registers and references contained in the included studies. Study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessments were performed inde­­pen­dently by two coders using standardized methods to ensure consistency and to eliminate potential errors. Findings from eight rct s involving 6,615 participants were pooled into meta-analyses to calculate the magnitude of effects that mobile text message reminders have on the rate of attendance at healthcare appointments compared to no reminders and phone call reminders.

Meta-analyses are regarded as powerful tools for deriving meaningful conclusions. However, there are situations in which it is neither reasonable nor appropriate to pool studies together using meta-analytic methods simply because there is extensive clinical heterogeneity between the included studies or variation in measurement tools, comparisons, or outcomes of interest. In these cases, systematic reviews can use qualitative synthesis methods such as vote counting, content analysis, classification schemes and tabulations, as an alternative approach to narratively synthesize the results of the independent studies included in the review. This form of review is known as qualitative systematic review.

A rigorous example of one such review in the eHealth domain is presented by Mickan, Atherton, Roberts, Heneghan, and Tilson (2014) on the use of handheld computers by healthcare professionals and their impact on access to information and clinical decision-making. In line with the methodological guide­lines for systematic reviews, these authors: (a) developed and registered with prospero ( www.crd.york.ac.uk/ prospero / ) an a priori review protocol; (b) conducted comprehensive searches for eligible studies using multiple databases and other supplementary strategies (e.g., forward searches); and (c) subsequently carried out study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessments in a duplicate manner to eliminate potential errors in the review process. Heterogeneity between the included studies in terms of reported outcomes and measures precluded the use of meta-analytic methods. To this end, the authors resorted to using narrative analysis and synthesis to describe the effectiveness of handheld computers on accessing information for clinical knowledge, adherence to safety and clinical quality guidelines, and diagnostic decision-making.

In recent years, the number of systematic reviews in the field of health informatics has increased considerably. Systematic reviews with discordant findings can cause great confusion and make it difficult for decision-makers to interpret the review-level evidence ( Moher, 2013 ). Therefore, there is a growing need for appraisal and synthesis of prior systematic reviews to ensure that decision-making is constantly informed by the best available accumulated evidence. Umbrella reviews , also known as overviews of systematic reviews, are tertiary types of evidence synthesis that aim to accomplish this; that is, they aim to compare and contrast findings from multiple systematic reviews and meta-analyses ( Becker & Oxman, 2008 ). Umbrella reviews generally adhere to the same principles and rigorous methodological guidelines used in systematic reviews. However, the unit of analysis in umbrella reviews is the systematic review rather than the primary study ( Becker & Oxman, 2008 ). Unlike systematic reviews that have a narrow focus of inquiry, umbrella reviews focus on broader research topics for which there are several potential interventions ( Smith, Devane, Begley, & Clarke, 2011 ). A recent umbrella review on the effects of home telemonitoring interventions for patients with heart failure critically appraised, compared, and synthesized evidence from 15 systematic reviews to investigate which types of home telemonitoring technologies and forms of interventions are more effective in reducing mortality and hospital admissions ( Kitsiou, Paré, & Jaana, 2015 ).

9.3.5. Realist Reviews

Realist reviews are theory-driven interpretative reviews developed to inform, enhance, or supplement conventional systematic reviews by making sense of heterogeneous evidence about complex interventions applied in diverse contexts in a way that informs policy decision-making ( Greenhalgh, Wong, Westhorp, & Pawson, 2011 ). They originated from criticisms of positivist systematic reviews which centre on their “simplistic” underlying assumptions ( Oates, 2011 ). As explained above, systematic reviews seek to identify causation. Such logic is appropriate for fields like medicine and education where findings of randomized controlled trials can be aggregated to see whether a new treatment or intervention does improve outcomes. However, many argue that it is not possible to establish such direct causal links between interventions and outcomes in fields such as social policy, management, and information systems where for any intervention there is unlikely to be a regular or consistent outcome ( Oates, 2011 ; Pawson, 2006 ; Rousseau, Manning, & Denyer, 2008 ).

To circumvent these limitations, Pawson, Greenhalgh, Harvey, and Walshe (2005) have proposed a new approach for synthesizing knowledge that seeks to unpack the mechanism of how “complex interventions” work in particular contexts. The basic research question — what works? — which is usually associated with systematic reviews changes to: what is it about this intervention that works, for whom, in what circumstances, in what respects and why? Realist reviews have no particular preference for either quantitative or qualitative evidence. As a theory-building approach, a realist review usually starts by articulating likely underlying mechanisms and then scrutinizes available evidence to find out whether and where these mechanisms are applicable ( Shepperd et al., 2009 ). Primary studies found in the extant literature are viewed as case studies which can test and modify the initial theories ( Rousseau et al., 2008 ).

The main objective pursued in the realist review conducted by Otte-Trojel, de Bont, Rundall, and van de Klundert (2014) was to examine how patient portals contribute to health service delivery and patient outcomes. The specific goals were to investigate how outcomes are produced and, most importantly, how variations in outcomes can be explained. The research team started with an exploratory review of background documents and research studies to identify ways in which patient portals may contribute to health service delivery and patient outcomes. The authors identified six main ways which represent “educated guesses” to be tested against the data in the evaluation studies. These studies were identified through a formal and systematic search in four databases between 2003 and 2013. Two members of the research team selected the articles using a pre-established list of inclusion and exclusion criteria and following a two-step procedure. The authors then extracted data from the selected articles and created several tables, one for each outcome category. They organized information to bring forward those mechanisms where patient portals contribute to outcomes and the variation in outcomes across different contexts.

9.3.6. Critical Reviews

Lastly, critical reviews aim to provide a critical evaluation and interpretive analysis of existing literature on a particular topic of interest to reveal strengths, weaknesses, contradictions, controversies, inconsistencies, and/or other important issues with respect to theories, hypotheses, research methods or results ( Baumeister & Leary, 1997 ; Kirkevold, 1997 ). Unlike other review types, critical reviews attempt to take a reflective account of the research that has been done in a particular area of interest, and assess its credibility by using appraisal instruments or critical interpretive methods. In this way, critical reviews attempt to constructively inform other scholars about the weaknesses of prior research and strengthen knowledge development by giving focus and direction to studies for further improvement ( Kirkevold, 1997 ).

Kitsiou, Paré, and Jaana (2013) provide an example of a critical review that assessed the methodological quality of prior systematic reviews of home telemonitoring studies for chronic patients. The authors conducted a comprehensive search on multiple databases to identify eligible reviews and subsequently used a validated instrument to conduct an in-depth quality appraisal. Results indicate that the majority of systematic reviews in this particular area suffer from important methodological flaws and biases that impair their internal validity and limit their usefulness for clinical and decision-making purposes. To this end, they provide a number of recommendations to strengthen knowledge development towards improving the design and execution of future reviews on home telemonitoring.

9.4. Summary

Table 9.1 outlines the main types of literature reviews that were described in the previous sub-sections and summarizes the main characteristics that distinguish one review type from another. It also includes key references to methodological guidelines and useful sources that can be used by eHealth scholars and researchers for planning and developing reviews.

Typology of Literature Reviews (adapted from Paré et al., 2015).

As shown in Table 9.1 , each review type addresses different kinds of research questions or objectives, which subsequently define and dictate the methods and approaches that need to be used to achieve the overarching goal(s) of the review. For example, in the case of narrative reviews, there is greater flexibility in searching and synthesizing articles ( Green et al., 2006 ). Researchers are often relatively free to use a diversity of approaches to search, identify, and select relevant scientific articles, describe their operational characteristics, present how the individual studies fit together, and formulate conclusions. On the other hand, systematic reviews are characterized by their high level of systematicity, rigour, and use of explicit methods, based on an “a priori” review plan that aims to minimize bias in the analysis and synthesis process (Higgins & Green, 2008). Some reviews are exploratory in nature (e.g., scoping/mapping reviews), whereas others may be conducted to discover patterns (e.g., descriptive reviews) or involve a synthesis approach that may include the critical analysis of prior research ( Paré et al., 2015 ). Hence, in order to select the most appropriate type of review, it is critical to know before embarking on a review project, why the research synthesis is conducted and what type of methods are best aligned with the pursued goals.

9.5. Concluding Remarks

In light of the increased use of evidence-based practice and research generating stronger evidence ( Grady et al., 2011 ; Lyden et al., 2013 ), review articles have become essential tools for summarizing, synthesizing, integrating or critically appraising prior knowledge in the eHealth field. As mentioned earlier, when rigorously conducted review articles represent powerful information sources for eHealth scholars and practitioners looking for state-of-the-art evidence. The typology of literature reviews we used herein will allow eHealth researchers, graduate students and practitioners to gain a better understanding of the similarities and differences between review types.

We must stress that this classification scheme does not privilege any specific type of review as being of higher quality than another ( Paré et al., 2015 ). As explained above, each type of review has its own strengths and limitations. Having said that, we realize that the methodological rigour of any review — be it qualitative, quantitative or mixed — is a critical aspect that should be considered seriously by prospective authors. In the present context, the notion of rigour refers to the reliability and validity of the review process described in section 9.2. For one thing, reliability is related to the reproducibility of the review process and steps, which is facilitated by a comprehensive documentation of the literature search process, extraction, coding and analysis performed in the review. Whether the search is comprehensive or not, whether it involves a methodical approach for data extraction and synthesis or not, it is important that the review documents in an explicit and transparent manner the steps and approach that were used in the process of its development. Next, validity characterizes the degree to which the review process was conducted appropriately. It goes beyond documentation and reflects decisions related to the selection of the sources, the search terms used, the period of time covered, the articles selected in the search, and the application of backward and forward searches ( vom Brocke et al., 2009 ). In short, the rigour of any review article is reflected by the explicitness of its methods (i.e., transparency) and the soundness of the approach used. We refer those interested in the concepts of rigour and quality to the work of Templier and Paré (2015) which offers a detailed set of methodological guidelines for conducting and evaluating various types of review articles.

To conclude, our main objective in this chapter was to demystify the various types of literature reviews that are central to the continuous development of the eHealth field. It is our hope that our descriptive account will serve as a valuable source for those conducting, evaluating or using reviews in this important and growing domain.

• Ammenwerth E., de Keizer N. An inventory of evaluation studies of information technology in health care. Trends in evaluation research, 1982-2002. International Journal of Medical Informatics. 2004; 44 (1):44–56. [ PubMed : 15778794 ]
• Anderson S., Allen P., Peckham S., Goodwin N. Asking the right questions: scoping studies in the commissioning of research on the organisation and delivery of health services. Health Research Policy and Systems. 2008; 6 (7):1–12. [ PMC free article : PMC2500008 ] [ PubMed : 18613961 ] [ CrossRef ]
• Archer N., Fevrier-Thomas U., Lokker C., McKibbon K. A., Straus S.E. Personal health records: a scoping review. Journal of American Medical Informatics Association. 2011; 18 (4):515–522. [ PMC free article : PMC3128401 ] [ PubMed : 21672914 ]
• Arksey H., O’Malley L. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology. 2005; 8 (1):19–32.
• A systematic, tool-supported method for conducting literature reviews in information systems. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 19th European Conference on Information Systems ( ecis 2011); June 9 to 11; Helsinki, Finland. 2011.
• Baumeister R. F., Leary M.R. Writing narrative literature reviews. Review of General Psychology. 1997; 1 (3):311–320.
• Becker L. A., Oxman A.D. In: Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Higgins J. P. T., Green S., editors. Hoboken, nj : John Wiley & Sons, Ltd; 2008. Overviews of reviews; pp. 607–631.
• Borenstein M., Hedges L., Higgins J., Rothstein H. Introduction to meta-analysis. Hoboken, nj : John Wiley & Sons Inc; 2009.
• Cook D. J., Mulrow C. D., Haynes B. Systematic reviews: Synthesis of best evidence for clinical decisions. Annals of Internal Medicine. 1997; 126 (5):376–380. [ PubMed : 9054282 ]
• Cooper H., Hedges L.V. In: The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis. 2nd ed. Cooper H., Hedges L. V., Valentine J. C., editors. New York: Russell Sage Foundation; 2009. Research synthesis as a scientific process; pp. 3–17.
• Cooper H. M. Organizing knowledge syntheses: A taxonomy of literature reviews. Knowledge in Society. 1988; 1 (1):104–126.
• Cronin P., Ryan F., Coughlan M. Undertaking a literature review: a step-by-step approach. British Journal of Nursing. 2008; 17 (1):38–43. [ PubMed : 18399395 ]
• Darlow S., Wen K.Y. Development testing of mobile health interventions for cancer patient self-management: A review. Health Informatics Journal. 2015 (online before print). [ PubMed : 25916831 ] [ CrossRef ]
• Daudt H. M., van Mossel C., Scott S.J. Enhancing the scoping study methodology: a large, inter-professional team’s experience with Arksey and O’Malley’s framework. bmc Medical Research Methodology. 2013; 13 :48. [ PMC free article : PMC3614526 ] [ PubMed : 23522333 ] [ CrossRef ]
• Davies P. The relevance of systematic reviews to educational policy and practice. Oxford Review of Education. 2000; 26 (3-4):365–378.
• Deeks J. J., Higgins J. P. T., Altman D.G. In: Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Higgins J. P. T., Green S., editors. Hoboken, nj : John Wiley & Sons, Ltd; 2008. Analysing data and undertaking meta-analyses; pp. 243–296.
• Deshazo J. P., Lavallie D. L., Wolf F.M. Publication trends in the medical informatics literature: 20 years of “Medical Informatics” in mesh . bmc Medical Informatics and Decision Making. 2009; 9 :7. [ PMC free article : PMC2652453 ] [ PubMed : 19159472 ] [ CrossRef ]
• Dixon-Woods M., Agarwal S., Jones D., Young B., Sutton A. Synthesising qualitative and quantitative evidence: a review of possible methods. Journal of Health Services Research and Policy. 2005; 10 (1):45–53. [ PubMed : 15667704 ]
• Finfgeld-Connett D., Johnson E.D. Literature search strategies for conducting knowledge-building and theory-generating qualitative systematic reviews. Journal of Advanced Nursing. 2013; 69 (1):194–204. [ PMC free article : PMC3424349 ] [ PubMed : 22591030 ]
• Grady B., Myers K. M., Nelson E. L., Belz N., Bennett L., Carnahan L. … Guidelines Working Group. Evidence-based practice for telemental health. Telemedicine Journal and E Health. 2011; 17 (2):131–148. [ PubMed : 21385026 ]
• Green B. N., Johnson C. D., Adams A. Writing narrative literature reviews for peer-reviewed journals: secrets of the trade. Journal of Chiropractic Medicine. 2006; 5 (3):101–117. [ PMC free article : PMC2647067 ] [ PubMed : 19674681 ]
• Greenhalgh T., Wong G., Westhorp G., Pawson R. Protocol–realist and meta-narrative evidence synthesis: evolving standards ( rameses ). bmc Medical Research Methodology. 2011; 11 :115. [ PMC free article : PMC3173389 ] [ PubMed : 21843376 ]
• Gurol-Urganci I., de Jongh T., Vodopivec-Jamsek V., Atun R., Car J. Mobile phone messaging reminders for attendance at healthcare appointments. Cochrane Database System Review. 2013; 12 cd 007458. [ PMC free article : PMC6485985 ] [ PubMed : 24310741 ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hart C. Doing a literature review: Releasing the social science research imagination. London: SAGE Publications; 1998.
• Higgins J. P. T., Green S., editors. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions: Cochrane book series. Hoboken, nj : Wiley-Blackwell; 2008.
• Jesson J., Matheson L., Lacey F.M. Doing your literature review: traditional and systematic techniques. Los Angeles & London: SAGE Publications; 2011.
• King W. R., He J. Understanding the role and methods of meta-analysis in IS research. Communications of the Association for Information Systems. 2005; 16 :1.
• Kirkevold M. Integrative nursing research — an important strategy to further the development of nursing science and nursing practice. Journal of Advanced Nursing. 1997; 25 (5):977–984. [ PubMed : 9147203 ]
• Kitchenham B., Charters S. ebse Technical Report Version 2.3. Keele & Durham. uk : Keele University & University of Durham; 2007. Guidelines for performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering.
• Kitsiou S., Paré G., Jaana M. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of home telemonitoring interventions for patients with chronic diseases: a critical assessment of their methodological quality. Journal of Medical Internet Research. 2013; 15 (7):e150. [ PMC free article : PMC3785977 ] [ PubMed : 23880072 ]
• Kitsiou S., Paré G., Jaana M. Effects of home telemonitoring interventions on patients with chronic heart failure: an overview of systematic reviews. Journal of Medical Internet Research. 2015; 17 (3):e63. [ PMC free article : PMC4376138 ] [ PubMed : 25768664 ]
• Levac D., Colquhoun H., O’Brien K. K. Scoping studies: advancing the methodology. Implementation Science. 2010; 5 (1):69. [ PMC free article : PMC2954944 ] [ PubMed : 20854677 ]
• Levy Y., Ellis T.J. A systems approach to conduct an effective literature review in support of information systems research. Informing Science. 2006; 9 :181–211.
• Liberati A., Altman D. G., Tetzlaff J., Mulrow C., Gøtzsche P. C., Ioannidis J. P. A. et al. Moher D. The prisma statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: Explanation and elaboration. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2009; 151 (4):W-65. [ PubMed : 19622512 ]
• Lyden J. R., Zickmund S. L., Bhargava T. D., Bryce C. L., Conroy M. B., Fischer G. S. et al. McTigue K. M. Implementing health information technology in a patient-centered manner: Patient experiences with an online evidence-based lifestyle intervention. Journal for Healthcare Quality. 2013; 35 (5):47–57. [ PubMed : 24004039 ]
• Mickan S., Atherton H., Roberts N. W., Heneghan C., Tilson J.K. Use of handheld computers in clinical practice: a systematic review. bmc Medical Informatics and Decision Making. 2014; 14 :56. [ PMC free article : PMC4099138 ] [ PubMed : 24998515 ]
• Moher D. The problem of duplicate systematic reviews. British Medical Journal. 2013; 347 (5040) [ PubMed : 23945367 ] [ CrossRef ]
• Montori V. M., Wilczynski N. L., Morgan D., Haynes R. B., Hedges T. Systematic reviews: a cross-sectional study of location and citation counts. bmc Medicine. 2003; 1 :2. [ PMC free article : PMC281591 ] [ PubMed : 14633274 ]
• Mulrow C. D. The medical review article: state of the science. Annals of Internal Medicine. 1987; 106 (3):485–488. [ PubMed : 3813259 ] [ CrossRef ]
• Evidence-based information systems: A decade later. Proceedings of the European Conference on Information Systems ; 2011. Retrieved from http://aisel ​.aisnet.org/cgi/viewcontent ​.cgi?article ​=1221&context ​=ecis2011 .
• Okoli C., Schabram K. A guide to conducting a systematic literature review of information systems research. ssrn Electronic Journal. 2010
• Otte-Trojel T., de Bont A., Rundall T. G., van de Klundert J. How outcomes are achieved through patient portals: a realist review. Journal of American Medical Informatics Association. 2014; 21 (4):751–757. [ PMC free article : PMC4078283 ] [ PubMed : 24503882 ]
• Paré G., Trudel M.-C., Jaana M., Kitsiou S. Synthesizing information systems knowledge: A typology of literature reviews. Information & Management. 2015; 52 (2):183–199.
• Patsopoulos N. A., Analatos A. A., Ioannidis J.P. A. Relative citation impact of various study designs in the health sciences. Journal of the American Medical Association. 2005; 293 (19):2362–2366. [ PubMed : 15900006 ]
• Paul M. M., Greene C. M., Newton-Dame R., Thorpe L. E., Perlman S. E., McVeigh K. H., Gourevitch M.N. The state of population health surveillance using electronic health records: A narrative review. Population Health Management. 2015; 18 (3):209–216. [ PubMed : 25608033 ]
• Pawson R. Evidence-based policy: a realist perspective. London: SAGE Publications; 2006.
• Pawson R., Greenhalgh T., Harvey G., Walshe K. Realist review—a new method of systematic review designed for complex policy interventions. Journal of Health Services Research & Policy. 2005; 10 (Suppl 1):21–34. [ PubMed : 16053581 ]
• Petersen K., Vakkalanka S., Kuzniarz L. Guidelines for conducting systematic mapping studies in software engineering: An update. Information and Software Technology. 2015; 64 :1–18.
• Petticrew M., Roberts H. Systematic reviews in the social sciences: A practical guide. Malden, ma : Blackwell Publishing Co; 2006.
• Rousseau D. M., Manning J., Denyer D. Evidence in management and organizational science: Assembling the field’s full weight of scientific knowledge through syntheses. The Academy of Management Annals. 2008; 2 (1):475–515.
• Rowe F. What literature review is not: diversity, boundaries and recommendations. European Journal of Information Systems. 2014; 23 (3):241–255.
• Shea B. J., Hamel C., Wells G. A., Bouter L. M., Kristjansson E., Grimshaw J. et al. Boers M. amstar is a reliable and valid measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 2009; 62 (10):1013–1020. [ PubMed : 19230606 ]
• Shepperd S., Lewin S., Straus S., Clarke M., Eccles M. P., Fitzpatrick R. et al. Sheikh A. Can we systematically review studies that evaluate complex interventions? PLoS Medicine. 2009; 6 (8):e1000086. [ PMC free article : PMC2717209 ] [ PubMed : 19668360 ]
• Silva B. M., Rodrigues J. J., de la Torre Díez I., López-Coronado M., Saleem K. Mobile-health: A review of current state in 2015. Journal of Biomedical Informatics. 2015; 56 :265–272. [ PubMed : 26071682 ]
• Smith V., Devane D., Begley C., Clarke M. Methodology in conducting a systematic review of systematic reviews of healthcare interventions. bmc Medical Research Methodology. 2011; 11 (1):15. [ PMC free article : PMC3039637 ] [ PubMed : 21291558 ]
• Sylvester A., Tate M., Johnstone D. Beyond synthesis: re-presenting heterogeneous research literature. Behaviour & Information Technology. 2013; 32 (12):1199–1215.
• Templier M., Paré G. A framework for guiding and evaluating literature reviews. Communications of the Association for Information Systems. 2015; 37 (6):112–137.
• Thomas J., Harden A. Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews. bmc Medical Research Methodology. 2008; 8 (1):45. [ PMC free article : PMC2478656 ] [ PubMed : 18616818 ]
• Reconstructing the giant: on the importance of rigour in documenting the literature search process. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 17th European Conference on Information Systems ( ecis 2009); Verona, Italy. 2009.
• Webster J., Watson R.T. Analyzing the past to prepare for the future: Writing a literature review. Management Information Systems Quarterly. 2002; 26 (2):11.
• Whitlock E. P., Lin J. S., Chou R., Shekelle P., Robinson K.A. Using existing systematic reviews in complex systematic reviews. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2008; 148 (10):776–782. [ PubMed : 18490690 ]

This publication is licensed under a Creative Commons License, Attribution-Noncommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0): see https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

• Cite this Page Paré G, Kitsiou S. Chapter 9 Methods for Literature Reviews. In: Lau F, Kuziemsky C, editors. Handbook of eHealth Evaluation: An Evidence-based Approach [Internet]. Victoria (BC): University of Victoria; 2017 Feb 27.
• PDF version of this title (4.5M)

In this Page

• Introduction
• Overview of the Literature Review Process and Steps
• Types of Review Articles and Brief Illustrations
• Concluding Remarks

Related information

• PMC PubMed Central citations
• PubMed Links to PubMed

Recent Activity

• Chapter 9 Methods for Literature Reviews - Handbook of eHealth Evaluation: An Ev... Chapter 9 Methods for Literature Reviews - Handbook of eHealth Evaluation: An Evidence-based Approach

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

Connect with NLM

National Library of Medicine 8600 Rockville Pike Bethesda, MD 20894

Web Policies FOIA HHS Vulnerability Disclosure

Help Accessibility Careers

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 07 September 2024

Student involvement and innovative teaching methods in a biophilic design education pilot elective course in interior architecture

• Fulya Özbey   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-5902-2165 1 , 2 &
• Simge Bardak Denerel 1  

Humanities and Social Sciences Communications volume  11 , Article number:  1155 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

13 Accesses

Metrics details

• Environmental studies

Biophilic design has gained popularity in interior design areas owing to its numerous advantages. Nevertheless, globally, Interior Architecture/Interior Architecture and Environmental Design departments lack adequate biophilic design courses in their curricula. This research investigates the impact of involving students in syllabus design and applying innovative teaching methods in a pilot elective course focused on biophilic design in interior spaces on student engagement and course sustainability. A new pilot elective course was introduced in the 2022–2023 Spring Semester at the Interior Architecture Department, Faculty of Architecture, Near East University, aiming to establish an enduring and captivating learning environment for students. Initially, a focus group study was conducted to measure students’ awareness of biophilic design and integrate their ideas regarding innovative learning methods into the syllabus for an engaging elective course. Strategies like interactive learning tools, group tasks, and peer assessments were incorporated throughout the course to enhance engagement. Analysis of end-of-course surveys and student observations revealed an augmented awareness of biophilic design among students and a positive influence of innovative learning methods on course sustainability. Thus, the study suggests that an elective course offers the potential to mitigate the deficiency of biophilic design integration in undergraduate programs, augmenting students’ awareness in this field. Moreover, new elective courses could deliver more sustainable and engaging learning experiences for enrolled students when structured through student involvement and innovative learning methods.

Similar content being viewed by others

Development and validation of a higher-order thinking skills (HOTS) scale for major students in the interior design discipline for blended learning

An importance-performance analysis of teachers’ perception of STEM engineering design education

Community-oriented engineering co-design: case studies from the Peruvian Highlands

Introduction.

The historical human-nature relationship has been disrupted by industrialization, leading to a growing recognition of the need for a mindful approach in the 21st century. Biophilia, our innate connection with nature, has evolved into Biophilic Design, enriching constructed spaces with natural elements. This design approach has proven advantages, enhancing workplace productivity, stress reduction, education outcomes, and healthcare recovery while aligning with sustainability efforts (Browning et al. 2014 ). Therefore, the incorporation of biophilic design in educational curricula has accumulated significant attention due to its confirmed benefits and to prepare students to meet industry demands because when considering the practice of interior architecture in the 21st century, it is observed that the understanding of biophilic design has been embraced by designers more than ever before in interior spatial design (Demirbaş & Demirbaş, 2019 ). Despite its acknowledged benefits, undergraduate education in biophilic design remains scarce, notably in Interior Architecture (IA) and Environmental Design (IAED). Few universities globally, in Türkiye and the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC), offer specific courses in this field. According to the QS World University Rankings by Subject 2022: Art & Design indicates that out of the top 10 universities with IAED or IA departments, five universities do not offer any courses related to biophilic design. While one university includes a course on biomimicry, three lack accessible detailed course content. Only Aalto University offers an explicit course on biophilia, which is called “Biofilia ABC,” and a biophilia lab that emphasizes the integration of biophilic design into research and learning environments through interdisciplinary collaboration. The gap in biophilic design education is no different in Türkiye and the TRNC, where there are 84 universities with IAED or IA departments (41 having IAED departments 41 having IA departments, and 2 universities offering both), biophilic design education is significantly lacking. Out of these institutions, only 1 offers a dedicated “biophilic design” course at the undergraduate level (starting from 2023 to 2024 Fall Semester in İstanbul Galata University), and only 4 universities include the term “biophilia” in any course syllabus. Most universities have courses that focus on sub-topics of biophilic design, such as indoor landscaping, biomimicry, or the nature-human relationship and its representation. Surprisingly, 40 universities do not include any terms or subjects related to “biophilia” in their course names within the curriculum, further highlighting the scarcity of biophilic design education in the region. However, there’s a high demand for this knowledge among interior architects, indicating an educational gap that requires attention also supported by the survey conducted by Doğan ( 2021 ) targeting interior architects and space users, with a sample size of 285 respondents (139 interior architects and 146 general space users). The results indicated that 107 of the participating interior architects had not received formal education in biophilic design, underscoring the absence of biophilic design within many Turkish universities. However, 111 of the participants possessed knowledge of biophilic design, suggesting that they had sought information from external sources. To bridge the gap and promote biophilic design education at the undergraduate level, a dedicated elective course covering theoretical foundations and practical applications of biophilic design principles is crucial. By establishing a comprehensive biophilic design course, universities can equip students with the knowledge and skills needed to create sustainable, nature-inspired interior spaces and foster a deeper connection with the natural world. However, understanding students’ course selection motives, such as interest and perceived benefits, is crucial. Involving students in syllabus design enhances communication and caters to diverse learning styles, making courses more effective. This research investigates the impact of student involvement in creating a pilot elective on biophilic design for interior spaces. It explores how innovative teaching methods and course preparation influence student engagement and course longevity. Also, this research uses qualitative and quantitative methods, while delving into three key questions:

What is the awareness/knowledge level of undergraduate IA and IAED students in Türkiye and the TRNC regarding Biophilic Design?

Does a student-involved course syllabus preparation process enhance the sustainability and student commitment in biophilic design courses?

What challenges do instructors face in elective courses for Generation Z (Gen Z) students in IA and IAED programs? How can these be addressed to establish participatory course structures and enhance learning outcomes?

Literature review

Biophilic design is currently a popular topic, but its full integration into IA and/or IAED curricula is still lacking. In addition, the content and method of teaching the designed course are important for the biophilic design to take its place in education because elective courses in the curriculum offer students the opportunity to explore their interests and develop their individuality. Since this study delves into the effects of students taking part in developing a trial elective focusing on biophilic design for interior spaces, it aims to examine the influence of creative teaching approaches and course planning on student participation and the sustainability of the course this literature review includes two sections. The first one is biophilic design and its applications in interior architecture, and the second one is the role of elective courses in architectural education.

Biophilic design and its applications in interior architecture

Throughout history, humans have coexisted with and drawn valuable insights from the natural world (Turner et al. 2004 ; Wilson, 1996 ). However, the industrial revolution and global urbanization have severed this connection, resulting in significant environmental damage (Çorakçı, 2016 ). The civilizations that once dominated nature in the 18th and 19th centuries faced dire consequences for their environmental exploitation in the 20th century, leading to a growing realization in the 21st century of the need for a more conscientious approach to nature (Çorakçı, 2016 ). Erich Fromm introduced the concept of “biophilia,” signifying a deep love for all living beings (Heerwagen et al. 2012 ). Edward O. Wilson and Stephen R. Kellert expanded on this concept, proposing in “The Biophilia Hypothesis” (1993) that humans possess an innate inclination to connect with nature and other life forms (Kellert and Wilson, 1993 ). Biophilia is not an instinct-like breathing but emerges from biological tendencies shaped by learning and experiences, including emotions such as love, hate, and fear. Sociocultural factors influence its expression, evident in the symbolic use of nature in myths, religious beliefs, and meditations (Kellert and Wilson, 1993 ). Stephen Kellert’s research on biophilia led to its integration into architectural design, exemplified in “Building for Life” (2005). This laid the foundation for “Biophilic Design,” solidified in the initial edition of “Biophilic Design” (2008) with contributions from various researchers, defining it as “an innovative approach emphasizing the essential preservation, enrichment, and restoration of the positive human-nature connection within built environments” (Kellert et al. 2011 ).

Based on various research and perspectives, the principles and applications of biophilic design have been subject to numerous categorizations (Kellert et al. 2011 ; Browning et al. 2014 ). Nonetheless, at the core of all predominant categorizations lies the central theme of seamlessly incorporating elements of nature and natural phenomena into the constructed environment. In their seminal work, “Biophilic Design: The Theory, Science and Practice of Bringing Buildings to Life,” Kellert et al. ( 2011 ) delineated six fundamental principles of biophilic design, which encompass “Environmental Features, Natural Shapes and Forms, Natural Patterns and Processes, Light and Space, Place-Based Relationships, and Evolved Human-Nature Relationships.” These principles collectively offer a comprehensive framework for the establishment of harmonious human-built environments.

The application of biophilic design principles within interior spaces involves the deliberate integration of nature-inspired elements to foster a more harmonious and productive milieu. Common manifestations of biophilic applications include the utilization of natural lighting, incorporation of indoor flora, utilization of natural materials, the inclusion of water features, and the provision of vistas that connect with natural settings. The empirical evidence underscores the multifaceted advantages of biophilic design on human well-being and productivity. For instance, a study conducted by Sanchez et al. ( 2018 ) substantiates the notion that biophilic design features enhance workplace performance. In a subsequent study by Aristizabal et al. ( 2021 ), it was established that a multisensory biophilic environment not only improved cognitive performance but also mitigated stress levels while enhancing overall satisfaction with the workplace environment. Furthermore, research conducted by Sayed et al. ( 2021 ) has demonstrated that the incorporation of biophilic principles into educational spaces engenders improved concentration levels, higher attendance rates, and enhanced academic performance among students. Beyond the realms of work and education, the beneficial impact of biophilic design extends to healthcare settings, as underscored by studies conducted by Samir ( 2021 ) and Totaforti ( 2018 ). These studies reveal that biophilic design elements contribute to alleviating patient fatigue and expediting the healing process. Lastly, Newman et al. ( 2012 ) underscore the potential economic advantages associated with the integration of biophilia into design practices. This includes reduced energy consumption, enhanced biodiversity, and, in addition, improvements in well-being and productivity, ultimately aligning with sustainability and ecological preservation efforts.

The role of elective courses in architectural education

Universities offer students various opportunities to pursue their academic goals. Elective courses, in particular, allow students to pursue their aspirations, develop virtual goals, and broaden their educational content (Movchan and Zarishniak, 2017 ). Also, elective courses enable students to study subjects that satisfy their interests, abilities, and career determination while seeking to develop the individuality of each student (Ghonim and Eweda, 2018 ). Architectural education is a multidisciplinary field that imparts both technical knowledge and social responsibility to students. Integrating elective courses into the curriculum can ensure a well-rounded education and exposure to a diverse range of subjects. This is essential for developing a holistic understanding of the role of architecture in society and the importance of ethical principles and values for architects (Ghonim and Eweda, 2018 ). Thus, there arises a compelling need to establish a novel pedagogical framework emphasizing self-directed learning among graduating architects guided by their mentors. Consequently, educational models must emphasize the cultivation of imaginative thinking, keen observation, and active engagement, especially when incorporating innovative instructional resources aligned with these objectives (Fernandez-Antolin et al. 2021 ). The flexible nature of the elective factor allows for dynamic updates to reflect contemporary issues and developments in the field, marketplace, and society. When offering new elective courses, considerations should include program orientation, student interests and needs, and faculty specialization (Ghonim and Eweda, 2018 ).

Additionally, to provide an effective elective course in architectural education, it is crucial to not only consider the students’ interests and needs but also their reasons for selecting an elective course. In the study conducted by Ting and Lee ( 2012 ), an investigation was undertaken to explore the various factors that exert an influence on students’ selection of elective courses. The researchers identified a multitude of determinants, which include the perceived level of interest in the subject matter, the perceived difficulty of the course content, the perceived leniency of the instructor, the potential acquisition of future career skills, the impact of external influences, the instructor’s popularity or personality, the timing of the class in terms of the day of the week and meeting hour, the reputation of the university, the suitability of the subject matter, and the class size. Another aspect of an effective elective course is the level of student involvement in the course. This process is not only limited by the course duration but might start from the syllabus design process. Research conducted by Cook-Sather ( 2014 ) has underscored the significance of involving students in the design of syllabi, highlighting its positive impact on teacher-student communication and collaboration. This proactive approach has enabled educators to gain a deeper understanding of students’ motivations and learning styles, facilitating the tailoring of instructional methods to better suit individual needs. Furthermore, a study conducted by Bovill et al. ( 2011 ) has demonstrated that the inclusion of students in syllabus design has resulted in heightened levels of self-regulation and metacognitive awareness. Students have become more attuned to their learning strategies, fostering an increased propensity for engaging in self-directed learning practices. Practitioner-researchers Zereyalp and Buğra ( 2019 ) have ascertained that the incorporation of students’ voices in syllabus development substantially contributes to the efficacy of the syllabus. This contribution manifests in the form of fostering open and constructive communication with students, thereby better aligning the syllabus with their needs and expectations.

Methodology

This study adopted a mixed-method research approach, which integrated focus group studies, interviews, case studies, and participant observation methods. Since this research involves gathering both qualitative and quantitative data together into a single platform to obtain a comprehensive understanding of the topic from various perspectives, including those of students and instructors, a mixed research approach is considered well-suited for this study (Mulisa, 2022 ). The research methodology consisted of three distinct sequential steps.

In the initial step, the emphasis was on preparing the syllabus of the pilot elective course (case study) and addressing the first two research questions. Data collection was primarily facilitated through focus group studies and interviews, with subsequent qualitative analysis applied.

The second step involved data collection during the course period, treated as a case study for addressing both the second and third research questions. During this phase, participants (comprising students enrolled in the pilot elective course) were subject to observation, alongside the administration of concise questionnaires. Subsequently, the results obtained from these questionnaires, encompassing both qualitative and quantitative data, underwent rigorous analysis.

The third and final step entailed comprehensively analyzing the amassed data to substantiate the study’s hypotheses.

A succinct summary of the research methods and evaluation techniques utilized throughout the study is presented in Fig. 1 , the research methodology flowchart.

Methodology flowchart.

Data collection

In the initial phase of data collection for this study, a pilot focus group investigation was undertaken with five sophomore students from Yaşar University’s (YU) Department IAED. These students were selected for their qualifications aligning with the primary focus group participants. The purpose of this pilot study was to assess the reliability of the research questions, as outlined by Nagle and Williams ( 2013 ), which had been prepared for the forthcoming focus group studies. The designated questions were sequentially presented to the students, and their responses were meticulously evaluated. The outcomes of this pilot focus group analysis indicated that the formulated questions were sufficiently effective in eliciting the necessary data for the subsequent primary focus group study. The selection of participants for the focus group sessions was carried out through the convenience sampling method to have individuals with characteristics of the overall population (students who enrolled in the elective course), proposed by Nagle and Williams ( 2013 ). The focus group inquiries were methodically administered to the students, and the ensuing responses were subjected to qualitative analysis. These focus group sessions were conducted on November 22nd and 23rd, 2022, involving ten students from Near East University (NEU), and subsequently on December 1st and 2nd, 2022, with the participation of eight students from YU.

The interview phase of the research was executed on November 22nd and December 2nd, 2022, involving three instructors from the Faculty of Architecture, each responsible for teaching various elective courses at YU and NEU. During these interviews, the instructors were probed about their approaches to curriculum development, the selection of assessment methods, strategies employed to foster student engagement, utilization of innovative pedagogical techniques, and their course adaptation procedures based on end-of-semester feedback.

The insights garnered from both the instructor interviews and the focus group sessions constitute the primary data sources for the case study under investigation. The subsequent step in the data collection process for this study was designed to coincide with the case study. During this stage, the students enrolled in the pilot elective course served as subjects of observation, while periodic administration of concise online but with clear, targeted questions that aligned with the learning objectives and teaching effectiveness of the course questionnaires allowed for ongoing data acquisition. The reason for choosing the online survey method for the end-semester feedback is that online surveys are straightforward, anonymous, and time-efficient (Moss & Hendry, 2002 ). Also, emphasizing the anonymity and confidentiality of responses can encourage students to provide honest feedback to have more reliable results even with a small group of sample. Last but not least, the necessary permissions were obtained from the NEU Scientific Research Ethics Committee for all stages requiring data collection.

Data analysis plan

In the initial phase of data collection, a comprehensive data analysis plan was formulated, which encompassed the incorporation of data derived from primary and secondary sources. The data amassed during this first step underwent a rigorous evaluation employing qualitative methodologies. Subsequently, an insightful case study was methodically created, drawing from the analytical findings obtained from the gathered data.

In the subsequent phase, which unfolded within the context of the aforementioned case study, the participants were subjected to systematic observations, and periodic surveys were administered to solicit their responses. Data collection culminated upon the conclusion of the case study. To facilitate a comprehensive analysis of these diverse data sources, a well-structured approach was devised, combining qualitative techniques for the assessment of participant observations and a blend of both qualitative and quantitative methods to scrutinize the results derived from the periodic surveys. In addition, the reliability of the course evaluation results was validated by triangulating the survey findings with other assessment measures, such as students’ academic performance or assignment quality.

Ultimately, the data at hand was subjected to a robust interpretative process, and it was the intent to engage in a thoughtful deliberation of the hypotheses in accordance with the insights gleaned from the case study.

Focus group study and interviews

For this study, pilot elective courses titled “TMF 444 İç Mimarlıkta Biyofilik Tasarım “ and “FAE424 Biophilic Design in Interior Architecture” were offered in both Turkish and English language departments during the 2022–2023 Spring Semester at the Faculty of Architecture, Department of Interior Architecture, Near East University. However, before opening the courses in line with the stated objectives and methodologies of the research, students were actively involved in the curriculum development processes of these courses, with the aim of creating a more efficient and dynamic elective course. Additionally, the opinions of various faculty members were sought.

Initially, a focus group study with open-ended questions was conducted with a total of 18 students, 10 from NEU’s and 8 from YU’s Faculty of Architecture. The responses from this study were evaluated using the MAXQDA 2022 (VERBI Software, 2021 ) program and subjected to the keyword analysis method. The study sought to ascertain the student’s familiarity with the concept of biophilic design, their expectations for an upcoming elective course on this subject, their preferences for course activities and assessment methods, their views on effective teaching techniques, and their integration into academic courses, as well as the motivating factors driving their active engagement in these courses. The analysis highlights from the focus group study are summarized in Table 1 .

The highlights from the interviews with the instructors indicated that it is important to approach students in a friendlier manner and use innovative teaching techniques to create a more engaging class environment while considering students’ voices to develop the course in general.

Course period

After evaluating the data in Table 1 and the interview outputs, course contents for TMF 444 and FAE 424 were developed following the NEU course content development rules. An overview of the course syllabus is presented in Table 2 .

The 14-week course commenced with an introductory week, determining the student demographic, midterm and final assessments, and administering a survey on students’ perceptions of biophilic design, innovative learning methods, and in-class motivations. Weeks 2–8 predominantly focused on various topics such as the concept of biophilia, patterns and health impact of biophilic design, differences and similarities between biophilic design and sustainable design, the concept of biophilic cities, and some practical ways of incorporating biophilic design principals to the interior spaces as well as the examination of example case studies. Week 9 centered around the midterm presentation, involving the analysis of a chosen structure based on biophilic design criteria. Weeks 10–14 were allocated for the creation of an interior design project emphasizing biophilic design, followed by desk critiques. Ultimately, developed projects were submitted as the final assessment.

In the proposed pilot elective course, 26 students enrolled in the Turkish section, while 11 students registered for the English section. Among these, 20 students attended the Turkish course, and 7 students attended the English course for the whole semester. The overall distribution of students by department and class includes 16 Interior Architecture students (14 undergraduate 3rd year, 2 undergraduate 4th year) and 9 Architecture students (1 undergraduate 1st year, pursuing a double major, 1 undergraduate 2nd year, 4 undergraduate 3rd year, and 3 undergraduate 4th year). Given that a substantial proportion of students enrolled in both FAE 424 and TMF 444 courses are representative of Generation Z, this study also investigates the challenges encountered by instructors in this demographic context. As the course unfolds, the difficulties of being an instructor in a class dominated by Gen Z learners are explored. The paramount question becomes: how can these challenges be effectively addressed, and what methods can be employed to construct a participatory course structure that enhances learning outcomes? Drawing inspiration from contemporary educational research, including works by Orr et al. ( 2021 ), Saxena and Mishra ( 2021 ), Szabó et al. ( 2021 ), Chan and Lee ( 2023 ), Mohr and Mohr ( 2017 ), Marie and Kaur ( 2020 ), and Jaleniauskiene and Juceviciene ( 2015 ) this study consolidates diverse strategies to enhance the student engagement and participation for teaching Gen Z in higher education. As, Orr advocates for an academic coaching model, emphasizing transformational learning. Saxena proposes gamification as a motivational tool, and Szabó underscores the significance of incorporating various information technologies, such as e-learning and gamification, to boost student motivation and skill development Chan’s study delves into Gen Z students’ perceptions of generative AI in higher education, noting their optimism for its benefits—enhanced productivity and personalized learning. However, it emphasizes the concerns raised by Gen X and Gen Y teachers regarding overreliance and ethical implications, highlighting the importance of integrating technology with traditional teaching methods for a more effective learning environment. Mohr’s study emphasizes the significance of understanding generational profiles to improve course assignments and communication approaches. The findings emphasize the need for instructors to adapt teaching methods to align with Gen Z’s preferences for technology-driven and visually engaging educational experiences, and Marie’s research highlights Gen Z’s inclination towards a digitized learning environment, emphasizing the importance of adapting academic opportunities to meet their diverse needs and foster critical 21st-century skills like critical thinking and creativity. Finally, Jaleniauskienė's study focuses on reshaping educational environments to cater to Gen Z’s learning preferences. The recommendations span from redesigning physical and non-classroom spaces to accommodate diverse learning styles, integrating active learning methodologies, fostering collaborative environments (both physical and virtual), and leveraging technology as mindtools to enhance cognitive functions and engage visually oriented learners. In summary, advocation for a multifaceted approach that integrates technology, personalized coaching, gamification, and varied pedagogical strategies to create engaging, transformative, and inclusive learning environments for Gen Z learners.

Therefore, interactive presentations were prepared during the course, leveraging Genially (Genially Web, S.L., 2021 ) and Gamma (Gamma Tech, Inc., 2022 ), as they facilitated engagement, aligning with the 5 students who identified the fluidity of course delivery as a significant motivator for participation. To maintain interactivity and motivation, quizzes at the end of the course were conducted through Quizizz (Gupta and Cheenath, 2015 ), with a 10-point bonus awarded to the student with the highest quiz average throughout the semester. Moreover, practical exercises were conducted utilizing Miro (Khusid and Shardin, 2011 ) to incorporate active learning strategies, thereby cultivating collaborative learning settings. A specific instance of the Miro exercise is illustrated in Fig. 2 .

In-class exercise by Miro.

While implementing the assignments, based on the findings from the focus group study, even if the majority of students expressed a preference for being able to choose assignment types, it was acknowledged in interviews that this approach might lead to potential issues, such as providing enough sources for each type of assignment or concerns related to students blaming each other for grades, finding others’ assignments easier, etc. Consequently, for this pilot course, it was decided that the assignment types would be determined by the course instructor, and for midterm and final assessments, students would be consulted at the beginning of the course to reach a decision by majority agreement. Additionally, as 8 of the students expressed the utility of peer evaluations, and recognized their potential to enhance motivation and interest in the course, a 10-point peer evaluation criterion was incorporated into one of the assignments and midterm presentations. The assignment incorporating peer assessment was a brief research task, designed to encourage students to share their findings during class and contribute to each other’s ideas. The assignment brief and grading criteria are outlined in Fig. 3 .

Assignment 1 brief and grading criteria.

For the midterm assessment, students were expected to select a structure and analyze it based on the principles of biophilic design, presenting their analysis during class. Peer assessment was incorporated during the midterm too, where students evaluated each other’s presentations. Last but not least, in the final assessment, influenced by both the preference for project submissions by 2 of the students and the suggestion of integration with project or studio courses 2 students were required to choose an area from project courses. They were expected to develop their designs for three weeks based on the desk critics, express them through technical drawings, and provide a written explanation of how they integrated biophilic design principles. The midterm and final briefs, along with grading criteria, are illustrated in Fig. 4 .

Midterm and final briefs.

Additionally, although field trips were identified as a factor that could enhance student motivation and contribute to achieving the learning outcomes of the course, they could not be added to the course content due to financial constraints. Nonetheless, an exploration of a diminutive village distinguished by a plethora of biophilic attributes in the TRNC was undertaken in collaboration with two students from the course. The ensuing research findings were subsequently disseminated and made publicly accessible via the webpage hosted by the biophilic cities network (Özbey et al. 2023 ).

This section includes the results of qualitative and quantitative assessment surveys conducted at the beginning and end of the course. The findings in this section are broadly analyzed in the discussion section.

Pre-course expectations and motivations

A brief survey was administered to 27 enrolled students within the initial week of the course to measure their awareness and expectations concerning biophilic design, the course syllabus, and innovative learning methodologies. Furthermore, the delineation of a course syllabus was elucidated to students, and the impact of a student-contributed syllabus on enrolled students was examined. Out of the enrolled students, 25 participated in the survey, and the outcomes, encompassing their knowledge levels and application of biophilic design principles, have been consolidated in Fig. 5 .

Summary of pre-course survey (Biophilic design knowledge).

According to the table, participants’ familiarity with biophilic design varied across the terms “biophilia” and “biophilic design,” with a higher level of recognition for the former term than the latter. However, awareness of the “Six Principles of Biophilic Design” was notably lower, indicating a more diverse range of responses across the spectrum from familiarity to unfamiliarity with these principles. There’s a strong consensus among respondents that biophilic design should be integrated into interior design, particularly in emphasizing the importance of designs that amalgamate nature, humanity, and architecture. Participants largely acknowledge that the weakening of connections between nature and humanity can adversely affect human life. There’s substantial agreement on the positive impact of natural light and ventilation on health, success, and work productivity in spaces. The use of “plants” as a design element in interiors garners notable agreement, while the inclusion of a “water element” seems to have a mixed response.

When examining students’ expectations regarding course syllabus and innovative learning methods, a majority of respondents concur that the provided learning outcomes and resources exhibit direct relevance to the course. Furthermore, there is a prevailing consensus indicating that the assessment methods delineated in the syllabus maintain a sense of equilibrium. A significant majority of students express confidence in their ability to extrapolate and apply the course content to other academic subjects. The recognition of abundant opportunities for peer interaction, notably through group discussions and activities, is acknowledged by a substantial number of participants. Regarding familiarity with interactive learning tools such as Sli.do, Padlet, Kahoot, and similar platforms, respondents exhibit varying degrees of awareness and experience with these tools. A comprehensive summary of the distribution of students’ survey responses is outlined in Fig. 6 .

Summary of pre-course survey (evaluation, of course, syllabi, and innovative learning methods).

Post-course reflections and feedback

Feedback on the co-design process, learning environment, and their influence on student engagement.

Out of the 27 students attending the course, 23 voluntarily responded to the survey conducted at the end of the semester. When considering the effects of the student-contributed course syllabus and the interactive course format on student obligations, it becomes evident that students derive pleasure from the interactive format and perceive the course as a conducive space for engaging with their peers. Moreover, students found the short quizzes administered at the end of the course both enjoyable and beneficial. The evaluation methods, such as assignments, midterms, and finals determined based on the preferences of students enrolled in the class and who attended focus group sessions, have been deemed sufficient by a significant majority of students for assessing and presenting their knowledge. Additionally, students expressed enjoyment and perceived usefulness from the group activities and peer assessments conducted during the course. The responses of students regarding the co-design process and its impact on their engagement have been summarized in Fig. 7 .

The responses of students regarding the co-design process and its impact on their engagement.

Feedback on the biophilic design knowledge, learning outcomes, and course instructor

In the end-of-term evaluation survey responded to by 23 students, in addition to gathering insights on students’ perspectives concerning the course period and assessment methods, inquiries were also posed regarding their understanding of biophilic design concepts, perceptions of the course’s learning outcomes, and the instructor’s behavior during the class.

In the students’ end-of-term survey regarding biophilic design, a notable pattern emerges: the respondents consistently exhibit a significant degree of familiarity and comprehension spanning a wide range of biophilic design concepts. This pattern underscores a robust knowledge improvement within the surveyed group, showcasing a comprehensive understanding of various aspects of the biophilic design domain. According to the survey results, there is a high level of agreement regarding the awareness of specific terminologies associated with biophilic design. However, there are slight differences in the degree of familiarity with specific aspects of biophilic design. Additionally, a substantial majority expressed confidence in their capability to extrapolate and apply the course content to other academic disciplines. Furthermore, students conveyed a sense of acquiring substantial knowledge and awareness about biophilic design during the course, enabling them to engage in comprehensive discussions on the subject and confidently evaluate the built environment using biophilic design principles by the course’s conclusion. The participants’ responses regarding their knowledge of biophilic design have been summarized in Fig. 8 .

The responses of students regarding the biophilic design knowledge.

About the evaluation of learning outcomes and instructor’s performance, there was a notable consensus among respondents. Nineteen students strongly agreed, and four students agreed that the learning outcomes were intricately linked to the course content. Moreover, a significant majority of students strongly agreed or agreed that the course provided pertinent resources aligning with the subject matter. Notably, students exhibited high positivity towards the course instructor, indicating satisfaction and understanding in various aspects. They strongly agreed or agreed that the instructor’s explanations regarding assessment methods were lucid, demonstrating a clear grasp of evaluation criteria. Moreover, students found the instructor’s approach in the course to be fitting and the responses indicate a high level of endorsement for the course. Twenty respondents strongly agreed, while three respondents agreed that they would recommend the course to others. The responses related to students’ perceptions of learning outcomes, the instructor, and the overall quality of the course are presented in Fig. 9 for reference.

Evaluation of learning outcomes, instructor’s behavior, and course quality.

Findings from the student co-design process

In the context of IA/IAED teaching, the integration of student co-design processes into elective courses is not a deeply studied area. As mentioned in the introduction part, while there are several courses addressing biophilic design principles, there’s a noticeable gap in the literature regarding specific content and teaching methodologies employed in these courses. Therefore, this study not only delves into students’ perceptions and preferences but also aims to bridge this gap by showcasing how student input can enrich course content and delivery. The findings from the student co-design process provided valuable insights into various aspects of the course, including the students’ familiarity with biophilic design, their expectations for the elective course, their preferences for course activities and assessment methods, their views on effective teaching techniques, and the motivating factors driving their active engagement in the course. The majority preferred a practice-based course, indicating a desire for hands-on learning experiences. Additionally, suggestions for field trips, theory-based learning, online delivery, workshop sessions, multimedia, and flexible design options were also mentioned. These preferences highlight the importance of incorporating a variety of teaching methods and activities to cater to different learning styles and interests. The students’ preferences for course activities and assessment methods were also explored. Field trips, model-making assignments, discussion and debate sessions, and group work were suggested by the students. The majority of students found group work highly beneficial, while some expressed uncertainty. Peer evaluations were perceived as essential by a significant portion of students, although reservations were also expressed. End-of-course quizzes were valued by half of the students, but reservations were also present. These findings indicate the importance of incorporating a mix of individual and collaborative activities, as well as diverse assessment methods, to cater to the preferences and needs of the students. In terms of assessment type and selection preferences, project-based assignments and presentations were favored by the majority of students. Written assignments were also preferred by a significant portion of students, while research assignments were less favored. The students’ preferences for assignment types and their involvement in the selection process were also explored. The majority of students preferred to select their own assignment types, while some preferred a collective decision through group discussion. Only a small percentage believed that course instructors should determine the assignment types. These findings suggest that involving students in the assignment selection process can enhance their engagement and motivation. The students’ preferences for assessment methods were similar to their preferences for assignment types. Project-based assignments, presentations, and written assignments were the most preferred methods. Some students expressed a desire for a diverse array of assignments to be valued equally, while others had no specific preference. These findings highlight the importance of incorporating a variety of assessment methods to cater to the diverse preferences and strengths of the students. Based on the findings from the focus group study, interactive presentations, online quizzes, practical exercises, and peer evaluations were incorporated into the course. These strategies aimed to enhance student engagement, motivation, and collaborative learning. The findings from the student co-design process provided valuable insights into the students’ preferences, needs, and motivations, which were incorporated into the course structure. The incorporation of interactive and innovative teaching methods, diverse assessment methods, and opportunities for peer interaction aimed to enhance overall student engagement, motivation, and learning outcomes. Those preferences of the students including emphasis on interactive and innovative teaching methods, as well as opportunities for peer interaction and feedback, not only enhance student engagement and motivation but also reflect the changing educational environment in IA/IAED. By focusing on collaborative learning, student-centered methods, and incorporating real-world experiences into the curriculum by embracing the student co-design process, educators can create more dynamic and responsive learning environments that prepare students for the complexities and challenges of contemporary design practice.

Findings from student evaluations

Overall student satisfaction and engagement.

The findings from this study highlight the importance of incorporating diverse pedagogical strategies and technology tools to create engaging and inclusive learning environments for Gen Z learners. The recommendations provided for the course implementation, such as redesigning physical and non-classroom spaces, integrating active learning methodologies, fostering collaborative environments, and leveraging technology as mindtools, align with the preferences and motivations expressed by the students in this study. One of the key findings is the positive impact of interactive presentations prepared using Genially and Gamma. These tools facilitated engagement and were particularly appealing to the 5 of the students who identified the fluidity of course delivery as a significant motivator for participation. This suggests that incorporating interactive elements in presentations can enhance student engagement and motivation. To maintain interactivity and motivation throughout the course, quizzes were conducted using Quizizz. The inclusion of a 10-point bonus for the student with the highest quiz average throughout the semester further incentivized participation. The positive response from students indicates that gamification elements can enhance motivation and make the learning experience more enjoyable. Practical exercises conducted using Miro incorporated active learning strategies and fostered collaborative learning settings. This aligns with the recommendations for fostering collaborative environments, as students expressed a preference for group discussions and activities. The use of Miro allowed students to actively participate and contribute to each other’s ideas, further enhancing the collaborative learning experience. The findings also highlight the importance of considering potential issues when implementing certain assignment types. While the majority of students expressed a preference for being able to choose assignment types, concerns were raised about providing enough sources for each type of assignment and potential issues related to grades and comparisons among students. To address these concerns, the assignment types were determined by the course instructor, with student consultation for midterm and final assessments. This approach allowed for a balance between student preferences and practical considerations. The inclusion of peer evaluations in one of the assignments and the midterm presentation was well-received by students. Peer evaluations were identified as a utility by 8 of the students and were seen as a way to enhance motivation and interest in the course. The assignment incorporating peer assessment encouraged students to share their findings and contribute to each other’s ideas, fostering a collaborative learning environment. The positive response from students suggests that peer evaluations can be an effective tool for enhancing motivation and engagement. In the final assessment, students were given the opportunity to choose an area from project courses and develop their designs based on the principles of biophilic design. This aligns with the preferences expressed by 2 of the students for project submissions and integration with project or studio courses. By allowing students to apply their knowledge and skills to a real-world design project, the final assessment provided a meaningful and relevant learning experience. Although field trips were identified as a factor that could enhance student motivation and contribute to achieving the learning outcomes of the course, financial constraints prevented their inclusion in the course content. However, an exploration of a diminutive village with biophilic attributes was undertaken in collaboration with two students from the course. These research findings were disseminated and made publicly accessible, providing an alternative way for students to engage with real-world examples of biophilic design.

The survey results regarding students’ understanding of biophilic design concepts indicate a high level of familiarity and comprehension. The respondents consistently exhibited a significant degree of knowledge improvement, showcasing a comprehensive understanding of various aspects of biophilic design. This suggests that the course content and interactive learning methods were effective in enhancing students’ knowledge and awareness of biophilic design. The evaluation of learning outcomes and the instructor’s performance received a notable consensus among respondents. Students strongly agreed that the learning outcomes were intricately linked to the course content and that the course provided pertinent resources aligning with the subject matter. The high positivity towards the course instructor indicates satisfaction and understanding in various aspects, including the clarity of assessment methods and the instructor’s approach to the course. Overall, the findings from this study support the recommendations for a multifaceted approach that integrates technology, personalized coaching, gamification, and varied pedagogical strategies to create engaging, transformative, and inclusive learning environments for Gen Z learners. The incorporation of interactive presentations, quizzes, practical exercises, peer evaluations, and real-world design projects was well-received by students and contributed to their engagement, motivation, and knowledge improvement.

Impact of the course on biophilic design knowledge and skills

The analysis of students’ familiarity with the terms “biophilia” and “biophilic design” at the beginning and end of the term indicates a notable shift in their comprehension. At the start of the term, a majority of respondents were not acquainted with these terms, with a significant number either undecided or expressing disagreement with their familiarity. However, by the term’s conclusion, there was a remarkable increase in familiarity with both concepts. For “biophilia,” the number of respondents familiar with the term rose considerably, from 9 at the beginning to 23 by the term’s end, with no disagreement or uncertainty recorded at the conclusion. Similarly, for “biophilic design,” familiarity surged notably, with 22 respondents indicating acquaintance at the term’s end, compared to 10 at the outset. These shifts underscore a significant improvement in students’ understanding and awareness of these fundamental concepts related to biophilic design throughout the course duration. This finding is supported by the strong consensus among the respondents, with 21 students strongly agreeing and 2 agreeing that they feel confident in their understanding of biophilic design. This indicates that the course has effectively imparted the necessary information and concepts related to biophilic design, enabling students to engage in discussions about it with others. This is an important outcome, as it demonstrates that the students have not only acquired knowledge but also the ability to communicate and share their understanding of biophilic design with their peers and beyond. Furthermore, the majority of respondents also expressed confidence in their ability to assess the built environment using the principles of biophilic design. This finding is significant as it suggests that the course has not only provided theoretical knowledge but has also equipped students with practical skills to apply these principles in real-world scenarios. The high number of students who feel confident in their ability to evaluate environments based on biophilic principles indicates that they have developed a strong understanding of how to analyze and assess the built environment through the lens of biophilic design.

Implications for IA and IAED education

The insights derived from the student co-design process within the interior architecture course present a rich tapestry of students’ perspectives, expectations, and preferences, offering profound implications for the realm of interior design education. Student’s alignment of assessment method preferences with specific assignment types, notably favoring project-based tasks, presentations, and written assignments, underscores the need for a diverse array of evaluation techniques catering to varying student preferences and strengths. These findings emphasize the importance of incorporating multifaceted assessment approaches to accommodate diverse student needs effectively. Leveraging the insights gleaned from focus group studies, the course structure was revamped to integrate interactive presentations, online quizzes, practical exercises, and peer evaluations, aiming to augment student engagement, motivation, and collaborative learning experiences. These adjustments reflect an alignment with students’ identified preferences and requirements, enhancing the overall pedagogical environment. In the realm of interior design education, these findings bear pivotal implications. The involvement of students in shaping course elements not only empowered their engagement but also streamlined the course content to meet their needs and motivations. The integration of interactive teaching methodologies, diverse assessment strategies, and avenues for peer interaction aimed to foster heightened student engagement, motivation, and ultimately, enriched learning outcomes within the IA and IAED curriculum. Moreover, the study’s broader implications resonate beyond the educational sphere. The students’ strong confidence in discussing biophilic design and applying it to varied contexts underscores the significance of interdisciplinary approaches in design education. Equipping students with transferable skills cultivates a comprehensive understanding of design principles, essential in the multifaceted domain of IA and IAED, where considerations encompass human well-being, spatial functionality, and environmental sustainability. The findings also suggest a potential cadre of competent professionals poised to advocate for and implement biophilic design principles within the industry. In conclusion, this study delineates the success of the course in imparting knowledge, nurturing critical thinking abilities, and enabling practical application of learning. Moving forward, it underscores the importance of continuous exploration and development of innovative teaching methodologies, advocating for immersive and experiential learning activities to enhance students’ grasp and application of biophilic design principles within the sphere of IA and education.

The purpose of this research was to investigate the impact of an elective course, designed collaboratively with student contributions and integrated with innovative learning methodologies, focused on biophilic design for interior spaces. Addressing specific research questions, this study examined the preparation process of the course, the influence of innovative learning methods on student participation, and the enduring impact of the course.

First, the study assessed the curricula of IA/IAED programs in Turkey and TRNC and found a significant educational gap, which was also supported by literature (Doğan, 2021 ). Only one university offered a dedicated course (Galata University, starting from 2023 to 2024 Fall Semester) and a few as part of sustainability-related courses. Therefore, to improve the improved student awareness and confidence in understanding biophilic design, indicating effective education advancement and real-world application readiness a newly introduced elective course was offered.

Additionally, the study aimed to evaluate how effective a course structure designed by students was in enhancing the long-term retention of biophilic design knowledge in interior spaces. It drew from research advocating for student-driven content to increase engagement and commitment, focusing on creating a more interactive learning environment. The study emphasized collaborative learning methods, group work, presentations, project-based assignments, and peer interactions by involving students in designing the course syllabus and analyzing their expectations through group sessions. The student-influenced course structure received positive feedback from end-of-term surveys, with students expressing satisfaction and active engagement, particularly appreciating group activities, peer assessments, and interactive formats such as quizzes.

Lastly, the research investigated the specific hurdles encountered by instructors teaching elective courses primarily attended by students from Gen Z enrolled in IA or IAED programs. These challenges encompassed addressing short attention spans, tendencies towards multitasking, and the need for technical proficiency. To mitigate these challenges, the study proposed potential solutions, including incorporating frequent breaks, employing interactive teaching methodologies, and providing targeted, concise assignments tailored to accommodate the unique traits of Gen Z learners. The study underscores the importance of utilizing an interactive course format, highlighting the significance of diverse teaching methods and technology in effectively engaging Gen Z students. The recommendations put forward, such as promoting active learning, creating collaborative spaces, and integrating technological tools like Genially and Gamma, are aligned with the preferences of these students. The integration of interactive presentations and quizzes on platforms like Quizizz served to motivate active participation, while the use of Miro for exercises fostered collaborative learning, resonating with students’ preference for group engagement and discussions. These strategic approaches significantly elevated student engagement and contributed to cultivating an inclusive and enriching learning environment.

Lastly and significantly, summarizing the instructor’s observations and dialogs with students during the pilot course, the use of interactive materials and methods significantly contributed to students’ engagement levels. Student feedback reflects a positive reception towards the interactive quiz format, contrary to their anticipation of traditional or system-based exams, finding the interactive format enjoyable and engaging. Personal observations indicate that students, being accustomed to short quizzes at the end of classes, consciously ensure their phones are charged before class and quickly review their notes or discuss potential questions during breaks. Furthermore, the activities conducted on Miro transformed into templates and content used by students in midterms and finals. Students have taken peer evaluations seriously, demonstrating fairness in the assessment process. Notably, there is alignment observed between the instructor’s grading and the grades derived from peer evaluations, even among students who have reported personal issues. Some students have gone above expectations, opening additional subsections for thorough grading in peer evaluations. However, despite these positive aspects, the success achieved in midterms was not replicated in finals due to scheduling conflicts during the final exam period and students’ prioritization of mandatory courses. Despite being informed that desk critics before the final submission influence their final grades, only a minimal group actively participated in all critiques.

Conclusively, this research underscores the vital role of student-inclusive and innovative courses in addressing educational gaps, emphasizing the need for dedicated biophilic design education in IA or IAED programs. By fostering interactive learning and addressing Generation Z’s learning needs, tailored courses can significantly enhance engagement and knowledge acquisition. This study encourages the integration of innovative teaching methods to create inclusive and engaging learning environments in design education.

Limitations of the pilot study

Since the course was offered as a faculty elective course in Near East University for the 2022–23 Spring Semester, only the proposed pilot elective course attracted a total of 26 students in the Turkish section and 11 students in the English section. Out of these, only 20 students attended the Turkish course for the entire semester, while 7 students attended the English course consistently. The relatively small sample size and the imbalance between the two language sections may affect the generalizability of the findings. However, while the numbers do highlight a relatively small sample size and an imbalance between the two language sections, these factors might not entirely undermine the validity of the findings. The consistent attendance of 20 students in the Turkish section and 7 students in the English section throughout the semester might actually provide a focused understanding of how interactive activities impact a committed subset of students. Furthermore, while the sample size could restrict the application of these findings to a wider population, it does not invalidate the insights gained from this specific group. Other research studies, as highlighted by Fernandez-Antolin et al. ( 2021 ), have also utilized similar approaches with smaller student cohorts. These attendance figures could still offer meaningful qualitative data regarding the effectiveness of hands-on activities in engaging students within the context of this pilot elective course. Also, the lack of technological infrastructure in the classrooms constrained the effortless delivery of innovative learning methods by requiring rapid solutions for those issues and another limitation despite high demand for a class trip, logistical constraints, including insufficient public transportation and a lack of support from the university, prevented the planning and execution of the trip. Last but not least, during the final exams, clashes with mandatory courses and students’ prioritization of these compulsory subjects resulted in a lack of success in finals. The limited time and attention dedicated to the elective course due to conflicting schedules may have impacted students’ performance and hindered a comprehensive assessment of their understanding and application of biophilic design concepts.

Recommendations for further course development and research

To pave the way for future course enhancements and comprehensive research there are several recommendations gathered from this study.

First of all, the inclination of 12 students towards selecting their own assignment types, while acknowledged during focus study and surveys, raises concerns about potential issues like sourcing adequacy for diverse assignment types or apprehensions regarding mutual grading accountability and perceived workload disparities among peers. Consequently, for the pilot course, assignment types were structured by the instructor. Moreover, for mid-term and final evaluations, student consultation at the course outset, leading to consensus-based decisions, was adopted. However, a future course iteration might permit students to choose their assignment types, necessitating the formulation of an assessment methodology. Additionally, as a recommendation for future terms, setting clearer final expectations earlier in the semester might allow students more time to prepare for finals. However, integration issues with other courses could arise, and students, due to their workload, might still defer final preparations until the last weeks or, as an alternative solution, reduce the percentage weight of finals and emphasize greater participation and completion of assignments throughout the term is believed to elevate the overall success level of the course.

Secondly, ensuring the successful integration of student-contributed syllabi and innovative pedagogical methods warrants a focused inquiry into teacher training and support mechanisms. Investigating the efficacy of teacher training initiatives and devising strategies to augment educators’ proficiency in fostering student engagement and learning within these frameworks would be pivotal. Moreover, the incorporation of more qualitative research tools such as interviews or focus groups for post-course reflections and feedback might diversify the nuanced perspectives, experiences, and hurdles encountered by students regarding student-contributed syllabi and innovative learning methods and those pedagogical methodologies implemented in this course, could potentially find applicability in other elective courses across the academic spectrum.

Last but not least, based on the instructor’s observation, it is advisable specifically for the biophilic design course to customize this course for upper-year students majoring in Architecture, IA/IAED. This is because students in their 1st and 2nd years may have limited technical knowledge and project development skills. Also, over time, students can cultivate their interest in elective courses with specific content such as this one, thereby the application of the course material in their project courses or their professional lives easier. In addition, if this course is offered during the Semester when the weather conditions are more favorable, it could facilitate more interaction by conducting classes outdoors and organizing field trips more easily.

Data availability

The data is accessible through Dataverse https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/SFEGA5 .

Aristizabal S, Byun K, Porter P, Clements N, Campanella C, Li L, Mullan A, Ly S, Senerat A, Nenadic I. Z, Browning W. D, Loftness V, Bauer B (2021) Biophilic office design: Exploring the impact of a multisensory approach onhuman well-being. J Environ Psychol 77:101682. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2021.101682

Article   Google Scholar  

Bovill C, CookSather A, Felten P (2011) Students as cocreators of teaching approaches, course design, and curricula: implications for academic developers. Int J Acad Dev 16(2):133–145

Browning W, Ryan C, Clancy J (2014) 14 Patterns of biophilic design. Terrapin Bright Green, LLC

Chan CKY, Lee KK (2023) The AI generation gap: Are Gen Z students more interested in adopting generative AI such as ChatGPT in teaching and learning than their Gen X and millennial generation teachers? Smart Learn Environ 10(1):60. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-023-00269-3

Cook-Sather A (2014) Student-faculty partnership in explorations of pedagogical practice: a threshold concept in academic development. Int J Acad Dev 19(3):186–198. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144X.2013.805694

Çorakçı RE (2016) İç mimarlıkta biyofilik tasarım ilkelerinin belirlenmesi. Doctoral dissertation, Mimar Sinan Güzel Sanatlar Üniversitesi. https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14124/955

Demirbaş GU, Demirbas ÖO (2019) Biyofilik tasarım kapsamında peyzaj mimarlığı ve iç mimarlık arakesiti: Eğitim programlarının karşılıklı değerlendirilmesi. Türkiye Peyzaj Araştırmaları Dergisi 2(2):50–60

Google Scholar  

Doğan D (2021) İç mimaride biyofilik tasarım [Master’s thesis]. Kocaeli Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü

Fernandez-Antolin M-M, del Río JM, Gonzalez-Lezcano R-A (2021) The use of gamification in higher technical education: Perception of university students on innovative teaching materials. Int J Technol Des Educ 31(5):1019–1038. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-020-09583-0

Gamma Tech, Inc. (2022) Gamma [Computer software]. https://gamma.app/

Genially Web SL (2021) Genially [Computer software]. https://app.genial.ly/

Ghonim M, Eweda N (2018) Investigating elective courses in architectural education. Front Architcult Research 7(2):235–256

Gupta A, Cheenath (2015) Quizizz [Computer software]. https://quizizz.com/

Heerwagen J, Loftness V, Painter S (2012) The economics of biophilia

Jaleniauskiene E, Juceviciene P (2015) Reconsidering university educational environment for the learners of generation Z. Soc Sci 88(2):38–53

Kellert SR, Heerwagen J, Mador M (2011) Biophilic design: the theory, science and practice of bringing buildings to life. Wiley. https://books.google.com.tr/books?id=FyNer_nQrW4C

Kellert SR, Wilson EO (1993) The biophilia hypothesis. Island Press

Khusid A, Shardin O (2011) Miro [Computer software]. https://miro.com/

Marie A, Kaur P (2020) Digitizing the teaching process to best meet the needs of generation za study in understanding the importance of digitizing education to match Gen Z needs. Int J Sci Technol Res 9(1):3213–3216

Mohr KA, Mohr ES (2017) Understanding Generation Z students to promote a contemporary learning environment. J Empower Teach Excell 1(1):9

MathSciNet   Google Scholar  

Moss J, Hendry G (2002) Use of electronic surveys in course evaluation. Br J Educ Stud 33(5):583–592

Movchan L, Zarishniak I (2017) The role of elective courses in students’ professional development: foreign experience. Comp Prof Pedagog 7(2):20–26

Mulisa F (2022) When Does a Researcher Choose a Quantitative, Qualitative, or Mixed Research Approach? Interchange 53(1):113–131

Nagle B, Williams N (2013) Methodology brief: Introduction to focus groups. Center for Assessment, Planning and Accountability, 1–12

Newman P, Hargroves K, Desha C, Reeve A, Moham OAAMM, Bucknum M, Zingoni M, Söderlund J, Salter R, Beatley T (2012) Can biophilic urbanism deliver strong economic and social benefits in cities? An economic and policy invetigations into the increased use of natural elements in urban design. Sci Eng Fac. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.2137.2886

Orr L, Weekley L, Reyes B (2021) Academic coaching applications and effectiveness in college teaching and learning of Generation Z students. In Coaching applications and effectiveness in higher education (pp. 97–119). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-4246-0.ch005

Özbey F, Bozkurt M, Coşkun E (2023) Blooming Village. https://www.biophiliccities.org/blooming-village

Samir S (2021) Biophilic design. J Des Sci Appl Arts. https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:234231425

Sanchez JA, Ikaga T, Sanchez SV (2018) Quantitative improvement in workplace performance through biophilic design: a pilot experiment case study. Energy Build https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:116320227

Saxena M, Mishra DK (2021) Gamification and Gen Z in higher education: a systematic review of literature. Int J Inf Commun Technol Educ 17(4):1–22

Sayed NK, Sadik H, Elnekhaily F (2021) Design considerations of biophilic design to improve human health and well-being in indoor spaces. Int J Curr Eng Technol 11(02):173–181

Szabó CM, Bartal O, Nagy B (2021) The methods and it-tools used in higher education assessed in the characteristics and attitude of Gen z. Acta Polytech Hung 18(1):121–140

Ting DH, Lee CKC (2012) Understanding students’ choice of electives and its implications. Stud High Educ 37(3):309–325

Totaforti S (2018) Applying the benefits of biophilic theory to hospital design. City Territ Archit 5(1):1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40410-018-0077-5

Turner WR, Nakamura T, Dinetti M (2004) Global urbanization and the separation of humans from nature. Bioscience 54(6):585–590

VERBI Software (2021) MAXQDA (22.4.0) [Computer software]. https://www.maxqda.com/

Wilson EO (1996) In search of nature. Island Press

Zereyalp SA, Buğra C (2019) What if we involve students in syllabus design in an elective academic translation skills course? In Energizing Teacher Research: 111–121

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Interior Architecture, Faculty of Architecture, Near East University, Nicosia, North Cyprus, Cyprus

Fulya Özbey & Simge Bardak Denerel

Department of Interior Architecture and Environmental Design, Faculty of Architecture, Yaşar University, İzmir, Türkiye

Fulya Özbey

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

This article is primarily based on Fulya Özbey’s PhD dissertation, and Simge Bardak Denerel, as the second author, contributed as thesis advisor to the study.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Fulya Özbey .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests

Ethical approval

The questionnaire and methodology for this study were approved by the NEU Scientific Research Ethics Committee (Ethics approval numbers: YDÜ/FB/2022/170 and YDÜ/FB/2023/193). All research was performed in accordance with the relevant guidelines of the NEU Scientific Research Ethics Committee.

Informed consent

To obtain the ethics approvals, an example of informed consent is provided to the NEU Scientific Research Ethics Committee. After the approvals, both the focus group study and interviews were conducted face-to-face, with participants expressing consent through wet signatures. While the original forms are securely stored and can be presented upon request, they are not initially attached individually due to containing personal participant information. For the online course surveys, informed consent was presented at the beginning of the survey; however, given the need to maintain student anonymity, individual consent is not collected during online course surveys.

Additional information

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

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Özbey, F., Bardak Denerel, S. Student involvement and innovative teaching methods in a biophilic design education pilot elective course in interior architecture. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 11 , 1155 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03559-4

Download citation

Received : 09 January 2024

Accepted : 31 July 2024

Published : 07 September 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03559-4

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Anguillids: widely studied yet poorly understood—a literature review of the current state of Anguilla eel research

• Published: 10 September 2024

Cite this article

• Rose E. Stuart 1 ,
• Jason D. Stockwell 1 &
• J. Ellen Marsden 1  

Freshwater eels (Anguillidae) are facing numerous anthropogenic impacts that have led to declines in abundance for nearly all species. They have a complex life history that includes obligate migration and flexible habitat use, characteristics which have generated much research interest in the family. Eels also have high cultural and economic value, further incentivizing the study of key species. We reviewed the scientific literature on anguillids from the last four decades, analyzing research trends among and within species of the genus Anguilla . We identified a shift in research focus from largely biological towards more applied management and conservation topics, an increased emphasis on migration and fish passage considerations, and a tendency towards research on glass eels and silver eels over other life stages. We also identified a significant disparity in research effort between temperate species and tropical species, with a scarcity of knowledge on the latter. Finally, we described several key knowledge gaps about community-based interactions of eels, notably their roles as predator, prey, and ecosystem connector, and highlight opportunities for early career researchers to establish research programs within the field of anguillid research.

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

Access this article

Subscribe and save.

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

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Eels and People in the United Kingdom

The drivers of anguillid eel movement in lentic water bodies: a systematic map

Data availability.

No datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.

Albuquerque UP, Ludwig D, Feitosa IS, de Moura JMB, Gonçalves PHS, da Silva RH, da Silva TC, Gonçalves-Souza T, Ferreira Júnior WS (2021) Integrating traditional ecological knowledge into academic research at local and global scales. Reg Environ Change 21(2):45. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-021-01774-2

Article   Google Scholar  

Alonso AI, van Uhm DP (2023) The illegal trade in European eels: outsourcing, funding, and complex symbiotic-antithetical relationships. Trends Organ Crim 26:293–307. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12117-023-09490-5

Anastasiadi D, Piferrer F (2020) A clockwork fish: age prediction using DNA methylation-based biomarkers in the European seabass. Mol Ecol Resour 20:387–397. https://doi.org/10.1111/1755-0998.13111

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Anibaldi A, Franciosi CB, Massari F, Tinti F, Piccinetti C, Riccioni G (2016) Morphology and species composition of southern Adriatic Sea leptocephali evaluated using DNA barcoding. PLoS ONE 11:e0166137. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0166137

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Aoyama J, Miller MJ (2003) The silver eel. In: Aida K, Tsukamoto K, Yamauchi K (eds) Eel biology. Springer, Tokyo, pp 107–117. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-4-431-65907-5_8

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Aoyama J, Mochioka N, Otake T, Ishikawa S, Kawakami Y, Castle P, Nishida M, Tsukamoto K (1999) Distribution and dispersal of anguillid leptocephali in the western Pacific Ocean revealed by molecular analysis. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 188:193–200. https://doi.org/10.3354/meps188193

Aoyama J, Watanabe S, Miller MJ, Mochioka N, Otake T, Yoshinaga T, Tsukamoto K (2014) Spawning sites of the Japanese eel in relation to oceanographic structure and the West Mariana Ridge. PLoS ONE 9:e88759. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0088759

Arai T (2014) Do we protect freshwater eels or do we drive them to extinction? SpringerPlus 3:534. https://doi.org/10.1186/2193-1801-3-534

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Arai T (2016) Current status and concerns on tropical anguillid eel stocks. Sci Bruneiana 15:1–12. https://doi.org/10.46537/scibru.v15i0.33

Arai T (2022) Chapter 21: sustainable management of tropical anguillid eels in Southeast Asia. In: Jhariya MK, Meena RS, Banerjee A, Meena SN (eds) Natural resources conservation and advances for sustainability. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 461–480. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-12-822976-7.00016-8

Arai T, Abdul Kadir SR (2017) Opportunistic spawning of tropical anguillid eels Anguilla bicolor bicolor and A. bengalensis bengalensis . Sci Rep 7:41649. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep41649

Arai T, Limbong D, Otake T, Tsukamoto K (2001) Recruitment mechanisms of tropical eels Anguilla spp. and implications for the evolution of oceanic migration in the genus Anguilla . Mar Ecol Prog Ser 216:253–264. https://doi.org/10.3354/meps216253

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Arai T, Abdul Kadir SR, Chino N (2016) Year-round spawning by a tropical catadromous eel Anguilla bicolor bicolor . Mar Biol 163:37. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00227-015-2792-8

Baker NJ, Boubée J, Lokman PM, Bolland JD (2020) Evaluating the impact of hydropower on downstream migrating anguillid eels: catchment-wide and fine-scale approaches to identify cost-effective solutions. Sci Total Environ 748:141111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.141111

Barak NA-E, Mason CF (1992) Population density, growth and diet of eels, Anguilla anguilla L., in two rivers in eastern England. Aquac Res 23:59–70. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2109.1992.tb00596.x

Beentjes MP, Boubée JAT, Jellyman DJ, Graynoth E (2005) Non-fishing mortality of freshwater eels ( Anguilla spp.). New Zealand Fisheries Assessment report 2005/34. Ministry of Fisheries, Wellington, New Zealand

Béguer-Pon M, Benchetrit J, Castonguay M, Aarestrup K, Campana SE, Stokesbury MJW, Dodson JJ (2012) Shark predation on migrating adult American eels ( Anguilla rostrata ) in the Gulf of St. Lawrence. PLOS ONE 7:e46830. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0046830

Bellon AM (2019) Does animal charisma influence conservation funding for vertebrate species under the US Endangered Species Act? Environ Econ Policy Stud 21:399–411. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10018-018-00235-1

Belpaire C, Hodson P, Pierron F, Freese M (2019) Impact of chemical pollution on Atlantic eels: facts, research needs, and implications for management. Curr Opin Environ Sci Health 11:26–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coesh.2019.06.008

Boswell A (2015) The sensible order of the eel. Settler Colon Stud 5:363–374. https://doi.org/10.1080/2201473X.2014.1000910

Bourillon B, Acou A, Trancart T, Belpaire C, Covaci A, Bustamante P, Faliex E, Amilhat E, Malarvannan G, Virag L, Aarestrup K, Bervoets L, Boisneau C, Boulenger C, Gargan P, Becerra-Jurado G, Lobón-Cerviá J, Maes GE, Pedersen MI, Poole R, Sjöberg N, Wickström H, Walker A, Righton D, Feunteun É (2020) Assessment of the quality of European silver eels and tentative approach to trace the origin of contaminants – A European overview. Sci Total Environ 743:140675. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.140675

Bristow LA, Mohr W, Ahmerkamp S, Kuypers MMM (2017) Nutrients that limit growth in the ocean. Curr Biol 27:R474–R478. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2017.03.030

Calles O, Olsson IC, Comoglio C, Kemp PS, Blunden L, Schmitz M, Greenberg LA (2010) Applied issues: size-dependent mortality of migratory silver eels at a hydropower plant, and implications for escapement to the sea. Freshw Biol 55:2167–2180. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2427.2010.02459.x

Carr JW, Whoriskey FG (2008) Migration of silver American eels past a hydroelectric dam and through a coastal zone. Fish Manag Ecol 15:393–400. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2400.2008.00627.x

Castonguay M, McCleave JD (1987) Vertical distributions, diel and ontogenetic vertical migrations and net avoidance of leptocephali of Anguilla and other common species in the Sargasso Sea. J Plankton Res 9:195–214. https://doi.org/10.1093/plankt/9.1.195

Charles AT (2002) The precautionary approach and “burden of proof” challenges in fishery management. Bull Mar Sci 70:683–694

Google Scholar  

CITES (2022) Eels ( Anguilla spp.) Report of the Secretariat. Seventy-fourth meeting of the Standing Committee Lyon (France), 7–11 March 2022. SC74 Doc. 64.1

Colléony A, Clayton S, Couvet D, Saint Jalme M, Prévot A-C (2017) Human preferences for species conservation: animal charisma trumps endangered status. Biol Conserv 206:263–269. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2016.11.035

Copeland LKF, Stockwell BL, Piovano S (2023) Exploring the research landscape of endemic catadromous fishes: a comprehensive bibliometric study and PRISMA review. Diversity 15:825. https://doi.org/10.3390/d15070825

Corrales X, Katsanevakis S, Coll M, Heymans JJ, Piroddi C, Ofir E, Gal G (2020) Advances and challenges in modelling the impacts of invasive alien species on aquatic ecosystems. Biol Invasions 22:907–934. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-019-02160-0

Council of the European Union (2007) Council Regulation (EC) No 1199/2007 of 18 September 2007 establishing measures for the recovery of the stock of European Eels. Official J Euro Union 50:17–23

Crook V, Nakamura M (2013) Assessing supply chain and market impacts of a CITES listing on Anguilla species. Traffic Bull 25:24–30

Cuthbert RN, Dickey JWE, McMorrow C, Laverty C, Dick JTA (2018) Resistance is futile: lack of predator switching and a preference for native prey predict the success of an invasive prey species. R Soc Open Sci 5:180339. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.180339

Darwall WRT, Holland RA, Smith KG, Allen D, Brooks EGE, Katarya V, Pollock CM, Shi Y, Clausnitzer V, Cumberlidge N, Cuttelod A, Dijkstra K-DB, Diop MD, García N, Seddon MB, Skelton PH, Snoeks J, Tweddle D, Vié J-C (2011) Implications of bias in conservation research and investment for freshwater species. Conserv Lett 4:474–482. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-263X.2011.00202.x

Davey AJH, Jellyman DJ (2005) Sex determination in freshwater eels and management options for manipulation of sex. Rev Fish Biol Fish 15:37–52. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11160-005-7431-x

Davis A (2004) The Paq’tnkek Mi’kmaq and Ka’t (American eel): a case study of cultural relations, meanings, and prospects. Can J Native Stud 24:357–388

Deegan LA (1993) Nutrient and energy transport between estuaries and coastal marine ecosystems by fish migration. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 50:74–79. https://doi.org/10.1139/f93-009

Dekker W (2003) Worldwide decline of eel resources necessitates immediate action: Quebec declaration of concern. Fisheries 28:28–30

Dekker W (2009) A conceptual management framework for the restoration of the declining European eel stock. In: Casselman JM, Cairns DK (eds) Eels at the edge: science, status, and conservation concerns. American Fisheries Society Symposium 58, American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, Maryland, pp 3–19

Dekker W, Casselman JM (2014) The 2003 Québec declaration of concern about eel declines—11 years later: are eels climbing back up the slippery slope? Fisheries 39:613–614. https://doi.org/10.1080/03632415.2014.979342

Denis J, Rabhi K, Loc’h FL, Lasram FBR, Boutin K, Kazour M, Diop M, Gruselle M-C, Amara R (2022) Role of estuarine habitats for the feeding ecology of the European eel ( Anguilla anguilla L.). PLoS ONE 17:e0270348. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0270348

Desaunay Y, Guerault D (1997) Seasonal and long-term changes in biometrics of eel larvae: a possible relationship between recruitment variation and North Atlantic ecosystem productivity. J Fish Biol 51:317–339. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8649.1997.tb06106.x

Di Marco M, Chapman S, Althor G, Kearney S, Besancon C, Butt N, Maina JM, Possingham HP, Rogalla von Bieberstein K, Venter O, Watson JEM (2017) Changing trends and persisting biases in three decades of conservation science. Glob Ecol Conserv 10:32–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2017.01.008

Durif C, Guibert A, Elie P (2009) Morphological discrimination of the silvering stages of the European eel. In: Casselman JM, Cairns DK (eds) Eels at the edge: science, status, and conservation concerns. American Fisheries Society Symposium 58, American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, Maryland, pp 103–111

Engler-Palma C, VanderZwaag DL, Apostle R, Castonguay M, Dodson JJ, Feltes E, Norchi C, White R (2013) Sustaining American eels: a slippery species for science and governance. J Int Wildl Law Policy 16:128–169. https://doi.org/10.1080/13880292.2013.805060

Eyler SM, Welsh SA, Smith DR, Rockey MM (2016) Downstream passage and impact of turbine shutdowns on survival of silver American eels at five hydroelectric dams on the Shenandoah River. T Am Fish Soc 145:964–976. https://doi.org/10.1080/00028487.2016.1176954

Falagas ME, Pitsouni EI, Malietzis GA, Pappas G (2008) Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar: strengths and weaknesses. FASEB J 22:338–342. https://doi.org/10.1096/fj.07-9492LSF

Fanelli D (2011) Negative results are disappearing from most disciplines and countries. Scientometrics 90:891–904. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0494-7

FAO (2024) Global aquatic trade statistics. In: Fisheries and aquaculture. Rome. https://www.fao.org/fishery/en/collection/global_commodity_prod

Ferreira VG, Rosa J, Almeida NM, Pereira JS, Sabater LM, Vendramin D, Zhu H, Martens K, Higuti J (2023) A comparison of three main scientific literature databases using a search in aquatic ecology. Hydrobiologia 850:1477–1486. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10750-022-05067-5

Franklin PA, Jellyman D, Baker C, Birnie-Gauvin K, Jellyman P, Aarestrup K (2023) Oceanic migration routes and behaviour of the New Zealand longfin eel Anguilla dieffenbachii . Mar Ecol Prog Ser 724:127–139. https://doi.org/10.3354/meps14443

Freese M, Rizzo LY, Pohlmann J-D, Lasse M, Witten PE, Gremse F, Rütten S, Güvener N, Michael S, Wysujack K, Lammers T, Kiessling F, Hollert H, Reinhold H, Brinkmann M (2019) Bone resorption and body reorganization during maturation induce maternal transfer of toxic metals in anguillid eels Significance Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 116: 11339-11344 https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1817738116

Friedland KD, Miller MJ, Knights B (2006) Ocean-climate change, regime shifts and possible impacts on the recruitment of the European eel, Anguilla anguilla . ICES CM 2006/C:18

Fukuda N, Aoyama J, Yokouchi K, Tsukamoto K (2016) Periodicities of inshore migration and selective tidal stream transport of glass eels, Anguilla japonica , in Hamana Lake, Japan. Environ Biol Fish 99:309–323. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10641-016-0475-z

Gansworth MKL (2022) Anguilla Rostrata , Our Teacher: Addressing Anishnabe Epistemicide Through Eels. PhD thesis, York University

Geffroy B, Bardonnet A (2016) Sex differentiation and sex determination in eels: consequences for management. Fish Fish 17:375–398. https://doi.org/10.1111/faf.12113

Gollock M, Shiraishi H, Carrizo S, Crook V, Levy E (2018) Status of non-CITES listed anguillid eels. CITES AC30 Document 18

Haddaway NR, Bayliss HR (2015) Shades of grey: two forms of grey literature important for reviews in conservation. Biol Cons 191:827–829. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2015.08.018

Haro A, Richkus W, Whalen K, Hoar A, Busch W-D, Lary S, Brush T, Dixon D (2000) Population decline of the American eel: implications for research and management. Fisheries 25:7–16. https://doi.org/10.1577/1548-8446(2000)025%3c0007:PDOTAE%3e2.0.CO;2

Hoagland SJ (2017) Integrating traditional ecological knowledge with western science for optimal natural resource management. IK Other Ways Knowing. https://doi.org/10.18113/P8ik359744

Höhne L, Briand C, Freese M, Marohn L, Pohlmann J-D, van der Hammen T, Hanel R (2024) Risks of regionalized stock assessments for widely distributed species like the panmictic European eel. ICES J Mar Sci. https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsae069

Holtgrieve GW, Schindler DE (2011) Marine-derived nutrients, bioturbation, and ecosystem metabolism: reconsidering the role of salmon in streams. Ecology 92:373–385. https://doi.org/10.1890/09-1694.1

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

ICES (2023) Report of the joint EIFAAC/ICES/GFCM working group on eels (WGEEL). ICES Sci Rep 5:175. https://doi.org/10.17895/ices.pub.24420868

Itakura H, Wakiya R, Gollock M, Kaifu K (2020) Anguillid eels as a surrogate species for conservation of freshwater biodiversity in Japan. Sci Rep 10:8790. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-65883-4

Jacoby DMP, Casselman JM, Crook V, DeLucia M-B, Ahn H, Kaifu K, Kurwie T, Sasal P, Silfvergrip AMC, Smith KG, Uchida K, Walker AM, Gollock MJ (2015) Synergistic patterns of threat and the challenges facing global anguillid eel conservation. Glob Ecol Conserv 4:321–333. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2015.07.009

Jellyman DJ (1979) Upstream migration of glass-eels ( Anguilla spp.) in the Waikato River. N Z J Mar Freshw Res 13:13–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/00288330.1979.9515776

Jellyman DJ (1989) Diet of two species of freshwater eel ( Anguilla spp.) in Lake Pounui, New Zealand. N Z J Mar Freshw Res 23:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1080/00288330.1989.9516334

Jellyman DJ (1995) Longevity of longfinned eels Anguilla dieffenbachii in a New Zealand high country lake. Ecol Freshw Fish 4:106–112. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0633.1995.tb00123.x

Jellyman DJ (2003) The distribution and biology of the South Pacific species of Anguilla . In: Aida K, Tsukamoto K, Yamauchi K (eds) Eel biology. Springer, Tokyo, pp 275–292

Jellyman DJ (2022) An enigma: how can freshwater eels ( Anguilla spp.) be such a successful genus yet be universally threatened? Rev Fish Biol Fish 32:701–718. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11160-021-09658-8

Jellyman DJ, Unwin MJ (2019) Fine-scale swimming movement and behaviour of female silver eels, Anguilla dieffenbachii , within a lake affected by hydro-power generation. Fish Manag Ecol 26:57–69. https://doi.org/10.1111/fme.12279

Jessop BM (1987) Migrating American eels in Nova Scotia. Trans Am Fish Soc 116:161–170. https://doi.org/10.1577/1548-8659(1987)116%3c161:MAEINS%3e2.0.CO;2

Jessop BM (2010) Geographic effects on American eel ( Anguilla rostrata ) life history characteristics and strategies. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 67:326–346. https://doi.org/10.1139/F09-189

Jessop BM, Cairns DK, Thibault I, Tzeng WN (2008) Life history of American eel Anguilla rostrata : new insights from otolith microchemistry. Aquat Biol 1:205–216. https://doi.org/10.3354/ab00018

Jonsson B, Jonsson N (2003) Migratory Atlantic salmon as vectors for the transfer of energy and nutrients between freshwater and marine environments. Freshw Biol 48:21–27. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2427.2003.00964.x

Jowett IG, Richardson J (1996) Distribution and abundance of freshwater fish in New Zealand rivers. N Z J Mar Freshw Res 30:239–255. https://doi.org/10.1080/00288330.1996.9516712

Joyce PWS, Dickey JWE, Cuthbert RN, Dick JTA, Kregting L (2019) Using functional responses and prey switching to quantify invasion success of the Pacific oyster, Crassostrea gigas . Mar Env Res 145:66–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marenvres.2019.02.010

Kaifu K, Miyazaki S, Aoyama J, Kimura S, Tsukamoto K (2013) Diet of Japanese eels Anguilla japonica in the Kojima Bay-Asahi River system, Japan. Environ Biol Fish 96:439–446. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10641-012-0027-0

Kaifu K, Mochioka N, Yamaoka M, Kurota H, Yoshida T (2018) Current activities and challenges for conservation and sustainable harvest of Japanese eel in Japan. Jpn J Ecol 68:43–57. https://doi.org/10.18960/seitai.68.1_43

Kaifu K, Stein F, Dekker W, Walker N, Dolloff CA, Steele K, Aguirre AA, Nijman V, Siriwat P, Sasal P (2019) Global exploitation of freshwater eels (genus Anguilla ): fisheries, stock status and illegal trade. In: Don A, Coulson P (eds) Eels. Biology, monitoring, management, culture and exploitation. Proceedings of the first international eel science symposium. 5m Publishing, Sheffield, pp 377–422

Kaifu K, Yokouchi K, Miller MJ, Washitani I (2021) Management of glass eel fisheries is not a sufficient measure to recover a local Japanese eel population. Mar Pol 134:104806. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2021.104806

Kimura S, Inoue T, Sugimoto T (2001) Fluctuation in the distribution of low-salinity water in the North Equatorial Current and its effect on the larval transport of the Japanese eel. Fish Oceanogr 10:51–60. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2419.2001.00159.x

Kirk RS (2003) The impact of Anguillicola crassus on European eels. Fish Manag Ecol 10:385–394. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2400.2003.00355.x

Kneib RT (2000) Salt marsh ecoscapes and production transfers by estuarine nekton in the southeastern United States. In: Weinstein MP, Kreeger DA (eds) Concepts and controversies in tidal marsh ecology. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 267–291

Knights B (2003) A review of the possible impacts of long-term oceanic and climate changes and fishing mortality on recruitment of anguillid eels of the Northern Hemisphere. Sci Total Environ 310:237–244. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-9697(02)00644-7

Krueger WH, Oliveira K (1999) Evidence for environmental sex determination in the American eel, Anguilla rostrata . Environ Biol Fishes 55:381–389. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007575600789

Krupa V (2002) A mythological metamorphosis: snake or eel? Asian Afr Stud 11:9–14

Kunich JC (1994) The fallacy of deathbed conservation under the Endangered Species Act. Endangered Species Act at twenty-one: species & habitat conservation. Environ Law 24:501–580

Kuroki M, Righton D, Walker AM (2014) The importance of anguillids: a cultural and historical perspective introducing papers from the World Fisheries Congress. Ecol Freshw Fish 23:2–6. https://doi.org/10.1111/eff.12089

Kuroki M, Miller MJ, Feunteun E, Sasal P, Pikering T, Han Y-S, Faliex E, Acou A, Dessier A, Schabetsberger R, Watanabe S, Kawakami T, Onda H, Higuchi T, Takeuchi A, Shimizu M, Hewavitharane CA, Hagihara S, Taka T, Kimura S, Mochioka N, Otake T, Tsukamoto K (2020) Distribution of anguillid leptocephali and possible spawning areas in the South Pacific Ocean. Progr Oceanogr 180:102234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pocean.2019.102234

Laffaille P, Acou A, Guillouët J, Mounaix B, Legault A (2006) Patterns of silver eel ( Anguilla anguilla L.) sex ratio in a catchment. Ecol Freshw Fish 15:583–588. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0633.2006.00195.x

Larinier M (2000) Dams and fish migration. World Commission on Dams, Toulouse

Leach BF, Davidson JM, Teal FJ (2022) Freshwater and marine eels in the Pacific and New Zealand: food avoidance behaviour and prohibitions. Archaeofauna 31:11–56. https://doi.org/10.15366/archaeofauna2022.31.001

De Leo GA, Melià P, Gatto M, Crivelli AJ (2009) Eel population modeling and its application to conservation management. In: Casselman JM, Cairns DK (eds) Eels at the edge: science, status, and conservation concerns. Proceedings of the 2003 international eel symposium. American Fisheries Society symposium publication 58, Bethesda, Maryland, pp 327–345

Lesser JS, Floyd O, Fedors K, Deegan LA, Johnson DS, Nelson JA (2021) Cross-habitat access modifies the ‘trophic relay’ in New England saltmarsh ecosystems. Food Webs 29:e00206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fooweb.2021.e00206

Lookabaugh PS, Angermeier PL (1992) Diet patterns of American eel, Anguilla rostrata , in the James River drainage, Virginia. J Freshw Ecol 7:425–431. https://doi.org/10.1080/02705060.1992.9664712

Magalhães MF, Beja P, Schlosser IJ, Collares-Pereira MJ (2007) Effects of multi-year droughts on fish assemblages of seasonally drying Mediterranean streams. Freshw Biol 52:1494–1510. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2427.2007.01781.x

Martin LJ, Blossey B, Ellis E (2012) Mapping where ecologists work: biases in the global distribution of terrestrial ecological observations. Front Ecol Environ 10:195–201. https://doi.org/10.1890/110154

Martín-Forés I, Martín-López B, Montes C (2013) Anthropomorphic factors influencing Spanish conservation policies of vertebrates. Int J Biodivers 2013:e142670. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/142670

Masuda Y, Imaizumi H, Oda K, Hashimoto H, Usuki H, Teruya K (2012) Artificial completion of the Japanese eel, Anguilla japonica , life cycle: challenge to mass production. Bull Fish Res Agency 35:111–117

Mayne B, Espinoza T, Roberts D, Butler GL, Brooks S, Korbie D, Jarman S (2021) Nonlethal age estimation of three threatened fish species using DNA methylation: Australian lungfish, Murray cod and Mary River cod. Mol Ecol Resour 21:2324–2332. https://doi.org/10.1111/1755-0998.13440

McCleave JD, Jellyman DJ (2004) Male dominance in the New Zealand longfin eel population of a New Zealand river: probable causes and implications for management. N Am J Fish Manag 24:490–505. https://doi.org/10.1577/M03-045.1

McDowall RM (2006) Fish, fish habitats and fisheries in New Zealand. Aquat Ecosyst Health 9:391–405. https://doi.org/10.1080/14634980601026352

Merz JE, Moyle PB (2006) Salmon, wildlife, and wine: marine-derived nutrients in human-dominated ecosystems of Central California. Ecol Appl 16:999–1009. https://doi.org/10.1890/1051-0761(2006)016[0999:SWAWMN]2.0.CO;2

Miller M (2009) Ecology of Anguilliform leptocephali: remarkable transparent fish larvae of the ocean surface layer. Aqua-biosci Monogr. https://doi.org/10.5047/absm.2009.00204.0001

Miller MJ, McCleave JD (2007) Species assemblages of leptocephali in the southwestern Sargasso Sea. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 344:197–212. https://doi.org/10.3354/meps06923

Moore CM, Mills MM, Arrigo KR, Berman-Frank I, Bopp L, Boyd PW, Galbraith ED, Geider RJ, Guieu C, Jaccard SL, Jickells TD, La Roche J, Lenton TM, Mahowald NM, Marañón E, Marinov I, Moore JK, Nakatsuka T, Oschlies A, Saito MA, Thingstad TF, Tsuda A, Ulloa O (2013) Processes and patterns of oceanic nutrient limitation. Nat Geosci 6:701–710. https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo1765

Moorhouse TP, Macdonald DW (2015) Are invasives worse in freshwater than terrestrial ecosystems? Wires Water 2:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1059

Münderle M, Taraschewski H, Klar B, Chang CW, Shiao JC, Shen KN, He JT, Lin SH, Tzeng WN (2006) Occurrence of Anguillicola crassus (Nematoda: Dracunculoidea) in Japanese eels Anguilla japonica from a river and an aquaculture unit in SW Taiwan. Dis Aquat Organ 71:101–108. https://doi.org/10.3354/dao071101

Myrenås E, Näslund J, Persson J, Sundin J (2023) Effects of the invasive swim bladder parasite Anguillicola crassus on health and condition indicators in the European eel. J Fish Dis 46:1029–1047. https://doi.org/10.1111/jfd.13822

Naiman RJ, Bilby RE, Schindler DE, Helfield JM (2002) Pacific salmon, nutrients, and the dynamics of freshwater and riparian ecosystems. Ecosystems 5:399–417. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10021-001-0083-3

Nelson J, Wilson R, Coleman F, Koenig C, DeVries D, Gardner C, Chanton J (2012) Flux by fin: fish-mediated carbon and nutrient flux in the northeastern Gulf of Mexico. Mar Biol 159:365–372. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00227-011-1814-4

Neumann W (1985) Schwimmblasenparasit Anguillicola bei aalen. Fischer Teichwirt 11:322

Noble M, Duncan P, Perry D, Prosper K, Rose D, Schnierer S, Tipa G, Williams E, Woods R, Pittock J (2016) Culturally significant fisheries: keystones for management of freshwater social-ecological systems. Ecol Soc. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-08353-210222

Okamura A, Horie N, Mikawa N, Yamada Y, Tsukamoto K (2014) Recent advances in artificial production of glass eels for conservation of anguillid eel populations. Ecol Freshw Fish 23:95–110. https://doi.org/10.1111/eff.12086

Pike C, Crook V, Gollock M (2020) Anguilla anguilla. IUCN Red List Threat Species. https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2020-2.RLTS.T60344A152845178.en

Piper AT, Svendsen JC, Wright RM, Kemp PS (2017) Movement patterns of seaward migrating European eel ( Anguilla anguilla ) at a complex of riverine barriers: implications for conservation. Ecol Freshw Fish 26:87–98. https://doi.org/10.1111/eff.12257

Podda C, Palmas F, Pusceddu A, Sabatini A (2022) When the Eel meets dams: larger dams’ long-term impacts on Anguilla anguilla (L., 1758). Front Environ Sci 10

Polis GA, Anderson WB, Holt RD (1997) Toward an integration of landscape and food web ecology: the dynamics of spatially subsidized food webs. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 28:289–316. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.28.1.289

Quadroni S, Galassi S, Capoccioni F, Ciccotti E, Grandi G, De Leo GA, Bettinetti R (2013) Contamination, parasitism and condition of Anguilla anguilla in three Italian stocks. Ecotoxicology 22:94–108. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10646-012-1006-0

R Core Team (2023) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.

Reid AJ, Eckert LE, Lane J-F, Young N, Hinch SG, Darimont CT, Cooke SJ, Ban NC, Marshall A (2021) “Two-Eyed Seeing”: an Indigenous framework to transform fisheries research and management. Fish Fish 22:243–261. https://doi.org/10.1111/faf.12516

Réveillac E, Feunteun E, Berrebi P, Gagnaire P-A, Lecomte-Finiger R, Bosc P, Robinet T (2008) Anguilla marmorata larval migration plasticity as revealed by otolith microstructural analysis. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 65:2127–2137. https://doi.org/10.1139/F08-122

Ribeiro CAO, Vollaire Y, Sanchez-Chardi A, Roche H (2005) Bioaccumulation and the effects of organochlorine pesticides, PAH and heavy metals in the Eel ( Anguilla anguilla ) at the Camargue Nature Reserve, France. Aquat Toxicol 74:53–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquatox.2005.04.008

Richards JL, Sheng V, Yi CW, Ying CL, Ting NS, Sadovy Y, Baker D (2020) Prevalence of critically endangered European eel ( Anguilla anguilla ) in Hong Kong supermarkets. Sci Adv 6:eaay0317. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aay0317

Righton D, Roberts M (2014) Eels and people in the United Kingdom. In: Tsukamoto K, Kuroki M (eds) Eels and humans. Springer, Tokyo, pp 1–12

Righton D, Walker AM (2013) Anguillids: conserving a global fishery. J Fish Biol 83:754–765. https://doi.org/10.1111/jfb.12157

Righton D, Piper A, Aarestrup K, Amilhat E, Belpaire C, Casselman J, Castonguay M, Díaz E, Dörner H, Faliex E, Feunteun E, Fukuda N, Hanel R, Hanzen C, Jellyman D, Kaifu K, McCarthy K, Miller MJ, Pratt T, Sasal P, Schabetsberger R, Shiraishi H, Simon G, Sjöberg N, Steele K, Tsukamoto K, Walker A, Westerberg H, Yokouchi K, Gollock M (2021) Important questions to progress science and sustainable management of anguillid eels. Fish Fish 22:762–788. https://doi.org/10.1111/faf.12549

Robinson NM, Scheele BC, Legge S, Southwell DM, Carter O, Lintermans M, Radford JQ, Skroblin A, Dickman CR, Koleck J, Wayne AF, Kanowski J, Gillespie GR, Lindenmayer DB (2018) How to ensure threatened species monitoring leads to threatened species conservation. Ecol Manag Restor 19:222–229. https://doi.org/10.1111/emr.12335

Schabetsberger R, Miller MJ, Dall’Olmo G, Kaiser R, Økland F, Watanabe S, Aarestrup K, Tsukamoto K (2016) Hydrographic features of anguillid spawning areas: potential signposts for migrating eels. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 554:141–155. https://doi.org/10.3354/meps11824

Scheuerell MD, Levin PS, Zabel RW, Williams JG, Sanderson BL (2005) A new perspective on the importance of marine-derived nutrients to threatened stocks of Pacific salmon ( Oncorhynchus spp.). Can J Fish Aquat Sci 62:961–964. https://doi.org/10.1139/f05-113

Shepard SL (2015) American eel biological species report. U.S Fish and Wildlife Service, Hadley

Shiraishi H, Crook V (2015) Eel market dynamics: an analysis of Anguilla production, trade and consumption in East Asia. TRAFFIC, Tokyo

Shiraishi H, Kaifu K (2024) Early warning of an upsurge in international trade in the American eel. Mar Pol 159:105938. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2023.105938

Silva AT, Lucas MC, Castro-Santos T, Katopodis C, Baumgartner LJ, Thiem JD, Aarestrup K, Pompeu PS, O’Brien GC, Braun DC, Burnett NJ, Zhu DZ, Fjeldstad H-P, Forseth T, Rajaratnam N, Williams JG, Cooke SJ (2018) The future of fish passage science, engineering, and practice. Fish Fish 19:340–362. https://doi.org/10.1111/faf.12258

Sjöberg NB, Petersson E, Wickström H, Hansson S (2009) Effects of the swimbladder parasite Anguillicola crassus on the migration of European silver eels Anguilla anguilla in the Baltic Sea. J Fish Biol 74:2158–2170. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8649.2009.02296.x

Smith DG (1979) Guide to the leptocephali (Elopiformes, Anguilliformes, and Notacanthiformes). NOAA Technical Report NMFS Circular 424. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service

Spangenberg VR, Reinhold H (1992) Fundbericht zum Anguillicola -Befall von Aalen in den ostdeutschen Bundesländern. J Appl Ichthyol 8:323–323. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0426.1992.tb00700.x

Stein FM, Wong JCY, Sheng V, Law CSW, Schröder B, Baker DM (2016) First genetic evidence of illegal trade in endangered European eel ( Anguilla anguilla ) from Europe to Asia. Conserv Genet Resour 8:533–537. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12686-016-0576-1

Stockwell JD, Yule DL, Hrabik TR, Sierszen ME, Isaac EJ (2014) Habitat coupling in a large lake system: delivery of an energy subsidy by an offshore planktivore to the nearshore zone of Lake Superior. Freshw Biol 59:1197–1212. https://doi.org/10.1111/fwb.12340

Tamario C, Calles O, Watz J, Nilsson PA, Degerman E (2019) Coastal river connectivity and the distribution of ascending juvenile European eel ( Anguilla anguilla L.): implications for conservation strategies regarding fish-passage solutions. Aquat Conserv Mar Freshw Ecosyst 29:612–622. https://doi.org/10.1002/aqc.3064

Tanaka H (2015) Progression in artificial seedling production of Japanese eel Anguilla japonica . Fish Sci 81:11–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12562-014-0821-z

Tanaka H, Kagawa H, Ohta H, Unuma T, Nomura K (2003) The first production of glass eel in captivity: fish reproductive physiology facilitates great progress in aquaculture. Fish Physiol Biochem 28:493–497. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:FISH.0000030638.56031.ed

Titley MA, Snaddon JL, Turner EC (2017) Scientific research on animal biodiversity is systematically biased towards vertebrates and temperate regions. PLoS ONE 12:e0189577. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0189577

Todd PR (1981) Timing and periodicity of migrating New Zealand freshwater eels ( Anguilla spp.). N Z J Mar Freshw Res 15:225–235. https://doi.org/10.1080/00288330.1981.9515915

Trancart T, Carpentier A, Acou A, Charrier F, Mazel V, Danet V, Feunteun É (2020) When “safe” dams kill: analyzing combination of impacts of overflow dams on the migration of silver eels. Ecol Eng 145:105741. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2020.105741

Tremblay V (2009) Reproductive strategy of female American eels among five subpopulations in the St. Lawrence River watershed. In: Casselman JM, Cairns DK (eds) Eels at the edge: science, status, and conservation concerns. American Fisheries Society Symposium, vol 58. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, Maryland, pp 85–102

Tremblay V, Cossette C, Dutil J-D, Verreault G, Dumont P (2016) Assessment of upstream and downstream passability for eel at dams. ICES J Mar Sci 73:22–32. https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsv106

Trimble MJ, van Aarde RJ (2012) Geographical and taxonomic biases in research on biodiversity in human-modified landscapes. Ecosphere 3:art119. https://doi.org/10.1890/ES12-00299.1

Tsukamoto K (1992) Discovery of the spawning area for Japanese eel. Nature 356:789–791. https://doi.org/10.1038/356789a0

Tsukamoto K, Kuroki M (2014) Eels and humans. Springer, Tokyo. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-4-431-54529-3

Book   Google Scholar  

Tsukamoto K, Kuroki M, Watanabe S (2020) Common names for all species and subspecies of the genus Anguilla . Environ Biol Fish 103:985–991. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10641-020-00988-3

Turan F, Karan S, Ergenler A (2020) Effect of heavy metals on toxicogenetic damage of European eels Anguilla anguilla . Environ Sci Pollut Res 27:38047–38055. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-09749-2

Uprety Y, Asselin H, Bergeron Y, Doyon F, Boucher J-F (2012) Contribution of traditional knowledge to ecological restoration: practices and applications. Écoscience 19(3):225–237. https://doi.org/10.2980/19-3-3530

USFWS (2007) Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; 12-month finding on a petition to list the American eel as threatened or endangered. United States Department of the Interior Federal Register 72, 4967–4997

van der Oost R, Opperhuizen A, Satumalay K, Heida H, Vermeulen NPE (1996) Biomonitoring aquatic pollution with feral eel ( Anguilla anguilla ) I. Bioaccumulation: biota-sediment ratios of PCBs, OCPs, Pcdds and PCDFs. Aquat Toxicol 35:21–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/0166-445X(96)00002-1

van Ginneken VJT, van den Thillart GEEJM (2000) Eel fat stores are enough to reach the Sargasso. Nature 403:156–157. https://doi.org/10.1038/35003110

Verhelst P, Reubens J, Coeck J, Moens T, Simon J, Van Wichelen J, Westerberg H, Wysujack K, Righton D (2022) Mapping silver eel migration routes in the North Sea. Sci Rep 12:318. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-04052-7

Verreault G, Dumont P, Mailhot Y (2004) Habitat losses and anthropogenic barriers as a cause of population decline for American eel ( Anguilla rostrata ) in the St. Lawrence watershed, Canada. International Council for the Exploration of the Sea ICES CM 2004/S:04

Vøllestad LA (1992) Geographic variation in age and length at metamorphosis of maturing European eel: environmental effects and phenotypic plasticity. J Anim Ecol 61:41–48. https://doi.org/10.2307/5507

Wahlberg M, Westerberg H, Aarestrup K, Feunteun E, Gargan P, Righton D (2014) Evidence of marine mammal predation of the European eel ( Anguilla anguilla L.) on its marine migration. Deep Sea Res I Oceanogr Res Pap 86:32–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dsr.2014.01.003

Watanabe S (2003) Taxonomy of the freshwater eels, genus Anguilla Schrank, 1798. In: Aida K, Tsukamoto K, Yamauchi K (eds) Eel biology. Springer, Tokyo, pp 3–18

Watanabe S, Aoyama J, Tsukamoto K (2009) A new species of freshwater eel Anguilla luzonensis (Teleostei: Anguillidae) from Luzon Island of the Philippines. Fish Sci 75:387–392. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12562-009-0087-z

Watanabe S, Miller MJ, Aoyama J, Tsukamoto K (2014) Evaluation of the population structure of Anguilla bicolor and A. bengalensis using total number of vertebrae and consideration of the subspecies concept for the genus Anguilla . Ecol Freshw Fish 23:77–85. https://doi.org/10.1111/eff.12076

Watene EM, Boubée JAT (2005) Selective opening of hydroelectric dam spillway gates for downstream migrant eels in New Zealand. Fish Manag Ecol 12:69–75. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2400.2004.00422.x

Westberry A (2024) Framing science: the endangered species act and the scientization of politics. Environ Sociol 1:17. https://doi.org/10.1080/23251042.2024.2307672

Westerberg H, Amilhat E, Wahlberg M, Aarestrup K, Faliex E, Simon G, Tardy C, Righton D (2021) Predation on migrating eels ( Anguilla anguilla L.) from the Western Mediterranean. J Exper Marine Biol Ecol 544:151613. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jembe.2021.151613

Whittaker KA, Goldman P (2021) 12: shifting the burden of proof to minimize impacts during the science-policy process. In: DellaSala DA (ed) Conservation science and advocacy for a planet in peril. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 249–273

Wickham H (2023) stringr: simple, consistent wrappers for common string operations

Williamson MJ, Pike C, Gollock M, Jacoby DMP, Piper AT (2023) Anguillid eels. Current Biol 33:R888–R893. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2023.07.044

Wistbacka R, Orell M, Santangeli A (2018) The tragedy of the science-policy gap: revised legislation fails to protect an endangered species in a managed boreal landscape. For Ecol Manag 422:172–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2018.04.017

Wysujack K, Dorow M, Ubl C (2014) The infection of the European eel with the parasitic nematode Anguillicoloides crassus in inland and coastal waters of northern Germany. J Coast Conserv 18:121–130. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11852-013-0274-z

Yokouchi K, Itakura H, Wakiya R, Yoshinaga T, Mochioka N, Kimura S, Kaifu K (2022) Cumulative effects of low-height barriers on distributions of catadromous Japanese eels in Japan. Animal Conserv 25:137–149. https://doi.org/10.1111/acv.12725

Yoshinaga T, Miller MJ, Yokouchi K, Otake T, Kimura S, Aoyama J, Watanabe S, Shinoda A, Oya M, Miyazaki S, Zenimoto K, Sudo R, Takahashi T, Ahn H, Manabe R, Hagihara S, Morioka H, Itakura H, Machida M, Ban K, Shiozaki M, Ai B, Tsukamoto K (2011) Genetic identification and morphology of naturally spawned eggs of the Japanese eel Anguilla japonica collected in the western North Pacific. Fish Sci 77:983–992. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12562-011-0418-8

Yuan Y, Yuan Y, Dai Y, Gong Y, Yuan Y (2022) Development status and trends in the eel farming industry in Asia. N Am J Aquac 84:3–17. https://doi.org/10.1002/naaq.10187

Zhang Y, Negishi JN, Richardson JS, Kolodziejczyk R (2003) Impacts of marine-derived nutrients on stream ecosystem functioning. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 270:2117–2123. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2003.2478

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Nikolai Tang for assistance in creating the species distribution map, and the members of the Marsden-Stockwell lab for their thoughtful comments on the manuscript. We also thank the two anonymous reviewers for their valuable feedback.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Rubenstein Ecosystem Science Laboratory, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT, USA

Rose E. Stuart, Jason D. Stockwell & J. Ellen Marsden

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

RES conceptualized the review, conducted analyses, and produced the first draft of the manuscript. JDS and JEM provided review and editing of the manuscript. All authors contributed to and approved the final version of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rose E. Stuart .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

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

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 16 KB)

Rights and permissions.

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

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Stuart, R.E., Stockwell, J.D. & Marsden, J.E. Anguillids: widely studied yet poorly understood—a literature review of the current state of Anguilla eel research. Rev Fish Biol Fisheries (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11160-024-09892-w

Download citation

Received : 18 June 2024

Accepted : 02 September 2024

Published : 10 September 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11160-024-09892-w

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Freshwater eels
• Species management
• Conservation
• Ecosystem roles
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Explore Community Content

FinDev Gateway hosts the largest, free collection of online resources on microfinance and financial inclusion. Explore over 8,000 publications, trainings, events, jobs and announcements which have been curated by our editors and submitted by a wide range of organizations from around the world.

Learn how you can share content >

Designing Cash Transfer and Graduation Programs to Support Women’s Economic Activity: Synthesis of Recent Literature

Women are particularly vulnerable to poverty, given inequitable gender dynamics that may limit ownership of productive assets, decision-making, control over money, and access to markets. A number of interventions—including graduation programs and cash transfers—have emerged as effective tools to alleviate poverty and improve well-being. However, less is known about how these interventions can simultaneously enhance household well-being while improving women’s empowerment. To better understand how cash transfers and graduation programs can improve the lives of women, this review summarizes the impact of these programs, as well as variations in design and delivery, on economic, and non-economic outcomes among female recipients.

About this Publication

View All Publications

Share a Publication from your organization.   

FinDev Editor's Collections

Climate Change and Financial Inclusion

Microfinance Adaptation and Resilience

Migration and Forced Displacement