literature review plot

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.

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

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.

The only proofreading tool specialized in correcting academic writing - try for free!

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.

Try for free

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

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

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

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

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

Chronological

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

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

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

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

Methodological

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

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

Theoretical

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

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

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

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

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

As you write, you can follow these tips:

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

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

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

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

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

Open Google Slides Download PowerPoint

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

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

 Statistics

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

Research bias

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Cite this Scribbr article

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

McCombes, S. (2023, September 11). How to Write a Literature Review | Guide, Examples, & Templates. Scribbr. Retrieved March 25, 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”

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
• CAREER FEATURE
• 04 December 2020
• Correction 09 December 2020

How to write a superb literature review

Andy Tay is a freelance writer based in Singapore.

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Literature reviews are important resources for scientists. They provide historical context for a field while offering opinions on its future trajectory. Creating them can provide inspiration for one’s own research, as well as some practice in writing. But few scientists are trained in how to write a review — or in what constitutes an excellent one. Even picking the appropriate software to use can be an involved decision (see ‘Tools and techniques’). So Nature asked editors and working scientists with well-cited reviews for their tips.

Access options

Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals

Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription

24,99 € / 30 days

cancel any time

Subscribe to this journal

Receive 51 print issues and online access

185,98 € per year

only 3,65 € per issue

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-03422-x

Interviews have been edited for length and clarity.

Updates & Corrections

Correction 09 December 2020 : An earlier version of the tables in this article included some incorrect details about the programs Zotero, Endnote and Manubot. These have now been corrected.

Hsing, I.-M., Xu, Y. & Zhao, W. Electroanalysis 19 , 755–768 (2007).

Article   Google Scholar  

Ledesma, H. A. et al. Nature Nanotechnol. 14 , 645–657 (2019).

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Brahlek, M., Koirala, N., Bansal, N. & Oh, S. Solid State Commun. 215–216 , 54–62 (2015).

Choi, Y. & Lee, S. Y. Nature Rev. Chem . https://doi.org/10.1038/s41570-020-00221-w (2020).

Download references

Related Articles

• Research management

Overcoming low vision to prove my abilities under pressure

Career Q&A 28 MAR 24

How a spreadsheet helped me to land my dream job

Career Column 28 MAR 24

Maple-scented cacti and pom-pom cats: how pranking at work can lift lab spirits

Career Feature 27 MAR 24

Superconductivity case shows the need for zero tolerance of toxic lab culture

Correspondence 26 MAR 24

Cuts to postgraduate funding threaten Brazilian science — again

The beauty of what science can do when urgently needed

Career Q&A 26 MAR 24

The corpse of an exploded star and more — March’s best science images

News 28 MAR 24

How papers with doctored images can affect scientific reviews

Nature is committed to diversifying its journalistic sources

Editorial 27 MAR 24

Zhejiang Provincial Hospital of Chinese Medicine on Open Recruitment of Medical Talents and Postdocs

Director of Clinical Department, Professor, Researcher, Post-doctor

Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China

The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang Chinese Medical University

Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Warmly Welcomes Talents Abroad

“Qiushi” Distinguished Scholar, Zhejiang University, including Professor and Physician

No. 3, Qingchun East Road, Hangzhou, Zhejiang (CN)

Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital Affiliated with Zhejiang University School of Medicine

Global Faculty Recruitment of School of Life Sciences, Tsinghua University

The School of Life Sciences at Tsinghua University invites applications for tenure-track or tenured faculty positions at all ranks (Assistant/Ass...

Beijing, China

Tsinghua University (The School of Life Sciences)

Faculty Positions at Great Bay University, China

We are now seeking outstanding candidates in Physics, Chemistry and Physical Sciences.

Dongguan, Guangdong, China

Great Bay University, China (GBU)

Postdoctoral Fellowships at West China Hospital/West China School of Medicine of Sichuan University

Open to PhD students, PhD, Post-Doc and residents.

Chengdu, Sichuan, China

West China School of Medicine/West China Hospital

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Quick links

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

Literature Reviews

What this handout is about.

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

Introduction

OK. You’ve got to write a literature review. You dust off a novel and a book of poetry, settle down in your chair, and get ready to issue a “thumbs up” or “thumbs down” as you leaf through the pages. “Literature review” done. Right?

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

What is a literature review, then?

A literature review discusses published information in a particular subject area, and sometimes information in a particular subject area within a certain time period.

A literature review can be just a simple summary of the sources, but it usually has an organizational pattern and combines both summary and synthesis. 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. It might give a new interpretation of old material or combine new with old interpretations. Or it might trace the intellectual progression of the field, including major debates. And depending on the situation, the literature review may evaluate the sources and advise the reader on the most pertinent or relevant.

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

The main focus of an academic research paper is to develop a new argument, and a research paper is likely to contain a literature review as one of its parts. In a research paper, you use the literature as a foundation and as support for a new insight that you contribute. The focus of a literature review, however, is to summarize and synthesize the arguments and ideas of others without adding new contributions.

Why do we write literature reviews?

Literature reviews provide you with a handy guide to a particular topic. If you have limited time to conduct research, literature reviews can give you an overview or act as a stepping stone. For professionals, they are useful reports that keep them up to date with what is current in the field. For scholars, the depth and breadth of the literature review emphasizes the credibility of the writer in his or her field. Literature reviews also provide a solid background for a research paper’s investigation. Comprehensive knowledge of the literature of the field is essential to most research papers.

Who writes these things, anyway?

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

Let’s get to it! What should I do before writing the literature review?

If your assignment is not very specific, seek clarification from your instructor:

• Roughly how many sources should you include?
• What types of sources (books, journal articles, websites)?
• Should you summarize, synthesize, or critique your sources by discussing a common theme or issue?
• Should you evaluate your sources?
• Should you provide subheadings and other background information, such as definitions and/or a history?

Find models

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

Narrow your topic

There are hundreds or even thousands of articles and books on most areas of study. The narrower your topic, the easier it will be to limit the number of sources you need to read in order to get a good survey of the material. Your instructor will probably not expect you to read everything that’s out there on the topic, but you’ll make your job easier if you first limit your scope.

Keep in mind that UNC Libraries have research guides and to databases relevant to many fields of study. You can reach out to the subject librarian for a consultation: https://library.unc.edu/support/consultations/ .

And don’t forget to tap into your professor’s (or other professors’) knowledge in the field. Ask your professor questions such as: “If you had to read only one book from the 90’s on topic X, what would it be?” Questions such as this help you to find and determine quickly the most seminal pieces in the field.

Consider whether your sources are current

Some disciplines require that you use information that is as current as possible. In the sciences, for instance, treatments for medical problems are constantly changing according to the latest studies. Information even two years old could be obsolete. However, if you are writing a review in the humanities, history, or social sciences, a survey of the history of the literature may be what is needed, because what is important is how perspectives have changed through the years or within a certain time period. Try sorting through some 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 consider what is currently of interest to scholars in this field and what is not.

Strategies for writing the literature review

Find a focus.

A literature review, like a term paper, is usually organized around ideas, not the sources themselves as an annotated bibliography would be organized. This means that you will not just simply list your sources and go into detail about each one of them, one at a time. No. As you read widely but selectively in your topic area, consider instead what themes or issues connect your sources together. Do they present one or different solutions? Is there an aspect of the field that is missing? How well do they present the material and do they portray it according to an appropriate theory? Do they reveal a trend in the field? A raging debate? Pick one of these themes to focus the organization of your review.

Convey it to your reader

A literature review may not have a traditional thesis statement (one that makes an argument), but you do need to tell readers what to expect. Try writing a simple statement that lets the reader know what is your main organizing principle. Here are a couple of examples:

The current trend in treatment for congestive heart failure combines surgery and medicine. More and more cultural studies scholars are accepting popular media as a subject worthy of academic consideration.

Consider organization

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

First, cover the basic categories

Just like most academic papers, literature reviews also must contain at least three basic elements: an introduction or background information section; the body of the review containing the discussion of sources; and, finally, a conclusion and/or recommendations section to end the paper. The following provides a brief description of the content of each:

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

Organizing the body

Once you have the basic categories in place, then you must consider how you will present the sources themselves within the body of your paper. Create an organizational method to focus this section even further.

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

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

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

• Chronological: If your review follows the chronological method, you could write about the materials above according to when they were published. For instance, first you would talk about the British biological studies of the 18th century, then about Moby Dick, published in 1851, then the book on sperm whales in other art (1968), and finally the biology articles (1980s) and the recent articles on American whaling of the 19th century. But there is relatively no continuity among subjects here. And notice that even though the sources on sperm whales in other art and on American whaling are written recently, they are about other subjects/objects that were created much earlier. Thus, the review loses its chronological focus.
• By publication: 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 biological studies of sperm whales if the progression revealed a change in dissection practices of the researchers who wrote and/or conducted the studies.
• By trend: A better way to organize the above sources chronologically is to examine the sources under another trend, such as the history of whaling. Then your review would have subsections according to eras within this period. For instance, the review might examine whaling from pre-1600-1699, 1700-1799, and 1800-1899. Under this method, you would combine the recent studies on American whaling in the 19th century with Moby Dick itself in the 1800-1899 category, even though the authors wrote a century apart.
• Thematic: Thematic reviews of literature are organized around a topic or issue, rather than the progression of time. However, progression of time may still be an important factor in a thematic review. For instance, the sperm whale review could focus on the development of the harpoon for whale hunting. While the study focuses on one topic, harpoon technology, it will still be organized chronologically. The only difference here between a “chronological” and a “thematic” approach is what is emphasized the most: the development of the harpoon or the harpoon technology.But more authentic thematic reviews tend to break away from chronological order. For instance, a thematic review of material on sperm whales might examine how they are portrayed as “evil” in cultural documents. The subsections might include how they are personified, how their proportions are exaggerated, and their behaviors misunderstood. A review organized in this manner would shift between time periods within each section according to the point made.
• Methodological: A methodological approach differs from the two above in that the focusing factor usually does not have to do with the content of the material. Instead, it focuses on the “methods” of the researcher or writer. For the sperm whale project, one methodological approach would be to look at cultural differences between the portrayal of whales in American, British, and French art work. Or the review might focus on the economic impact of whaling on a community. A methodological scope will influence either the types of documents in the review or the way in which these documents are discussed. Once you’ve decided on the organizational method for the body of the review, the sections you need to include in the paper should be easy to figure out. They should arise out of your organizational strategy. In other words, a chronological review would have subsections for each vital time period. A thematic review would have subtopics based upon factors that relate to the theme or issue.

Sometimes, though, you might 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. Put in only what is necessary. Here are a few other sections you might want to consider:

• Current Situation: Information necessary to understand the topic or focus of the literature review.
• History: The chronological progression of the field, the literature, or an idea that is necessary to understand the literature review, if the body of the literature review is not already a chronology.
• Methods and/or Standards: The criteria you used to select the sources in your literature review or the way in which you present your information. For instance, you might explain that your review includes only peer-reviewed articles and journals.

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?

Begin composing

Once you’ve settled on a general pattern of organization, you’re ready to write each section. There are a few guidelines you should follow during the writing stage as well. Here is a sample paragraph from a literature review about sexism and language to illuminate the following discussion:

However, other studies have shown that even gender-neutral antecedents are more likely to produce masculine images than feminine ones (Gastil, 1990). Hamilton (1988) asked students to complete sentences that required them to fill in pronouns that agreed with gender-neutral antecedents such as “writer,” “pedestrian,” and “persons.” The students were asked to describe any image they had when writing the sentence. Hamilton found that people imagined 3.3 men to each woman in the masculine “generic” condition and 1.5 men per woman in the unbiased condition. Thus, while ambient sexism accounted for some of the masculine bias, sexist language amplified the effect. (Source: Erika Falk and Jordan Mills, “Why Sexist Language Affects Persuasion: The Role of Homophily, Intended Audience, and Offense,” Women and Language19:2).

Use evidence

In the example above, the writers refer to several other sources when making their point. A literature review in this sense is just like any other academic research paper. Your interpretation of the available sources must be backed up with evidence to show 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 review’s focus, whether it is thematic, methodological, or chronological.

Use quotes sparingly

Falk and Mills do not use any direct quotes. That is because the survey nature of the literature review does not allow for in-depth discussion or detailed quotes from the text. Some short quotes here and there are okay, though, if you want to emphasize a point, or if what the author said just cannot be rewritten in your own words. Notice that Falk and Mills do quote certain terms that were coined by the author, not common knowledge, or taken directly from the study. But if you find yourself wanting to put in more quotes, check with your instructor.

Summarize and synthesize

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

Keep your own voice

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

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. In the preceding example, Falk and Mills either directly refer in the text to the author of their source, such as Hamilton, or they provide ample notation in the text when the ideas they are mentioning are not their own, for example, Gastil’s. For more information, please see our handout on plagiarism .

Revise, revise, revise

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

Works consulted

We consulted these works while writing this handout. This is not a comprehensive list of resources on the handout’s topic, and we encourage you to do your own research to find additional publications. Please do not use this list as a model for the format of your own reference list, as it may not match the citation style you are using. For guidance on formatting citations, please see the UNC Libraries citation tutorial . We revise these tips periodically and welcome feedback.

Anson, Chris M., and Robert A. Schwegler. 2010. The Longman Handbook for Writers and Readers , 6th ed. New York: Longman.

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

Lamb, Sandra E. 1998. How to Write It: A Complete Guide to Everything You’ll Ever Write . Berkeley: Ten Speed Press.

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

Troyka, Lynn Quittman, and Doug Hesse. 2016. Simon and Schuster Handbook for Writers , 11th ed. London: Pearson.

You may reproduce it for non-commercial use if you use the entire handout and attribute the source: The Writing Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Make a Gift

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.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• PLoS Comput Biol
• v.9(7); 2013 Jul

Ten Simple Rules for Writing a Literature Review

Marco pautasso.

1 Centre for Functional and Evolutionary Ecology (CEFE), CNRS, Montpellier, France

2 Centre for Biodiversity Synthesis and Analysis (CESAB), FRB, Aix-en-Provence, France

Literature reviews are in great demand in most scientific fields. Their need stems from the ever-increasing output of scientific publications [1] . For example, compared to 1991, in 2008 three, eight, and forty times more papers were indexed in Web of Science on malaria, obesity, and biodiversity, respectively [2] . Given such mountains of papers, scientists cannot be expected to examine in detail every single new paper relevant to their interests [3] . Thus, it is both advantageous and necessary to rely on regular summaries of the recent literature. Although recognition for scientists mainly comes from primary research, timely literature reviews can lead to new synthetic insights and are often widely read [4] . For such summaries to be useful, however, they need to be compiled in a professional way [5] .

When starting from scratch, reviewing the literature can require a titanic amount of work. That is why researchers who have spent their career working on a certain research issue are in a perfect position to review that literature. Some graduate schools are now offering courses in reviewing the literature, given that most research students start their project by producing an overview of what has already been done on their research issue [6] . However, it is likely that most scientists have not thought in detail about how to approach and carry out a literature review.

Reviewing the literature requires the ability to juggle multiple tasks, from finding and evaluating relevant material to synthesising information from various sources, from critical thinking to paraphrasing, evaluating, and citation skills [7] . In this contribution, I share ten simple rules I learned working on about 25 literature reviews as a PhD and postdoctoral student. Ideas and insights also come from discussions with coauthors and colleagues, as well as feedback from reviewers and editors.

Rule 1: Define a Topic and Audience

How to choose which topic to review? There are so many issues in contemporary science that you could spend a lifetime of attending conferences and reading the literature just pondering what to review. On the one hand, if you take several years to choose, several other people may have had the same idea in the meantime. On the other hand, only a well-considered topic is likely to lead to a brilliant literature review [8] . The topic must at least be:

• interesting to you (ideally, you should have come across a series of recent papers related to your line of work that call for a critical summary),
• an important aspect of the field (so that many readers will be interested in the review and there will be enough material to write it), and
• a well-defined issue (otherwise you could potentially include thousands of publications, which would make the review unhelpful).

Ideas for potential reviews may come from papers providing lists of key research questions to be answered [9] , but also from serendipitous moments during desultory reading and discussions. In addition to choosing your topic, you should also select a target audience. In many cases, the topic (e.g., web services in computational biology) will automatically define an audience (e.g., computational biologists), but that same topic may also be of interest to neighbouring fields (e.g., computer science, biology, etc.).

Rule 2: Search and Re-search the Literature

After having chosen your topic and audience, start by checking the literature and downloading relevant papers. Five pieces of advice here:

• keep track of the search items you use (so that your search can be replicated [10] ),
• keep a list of papers whose pdfs you cannot access immediately (so as to retrieve them later with alternative strategies),
• use a paper management system (e.g., Mendeley, Papers, Qiqqa, Sente),
• define early in the process some criteria for exclusion of irrelevant papers (these criteria can then be described in the review to help define its scope), and
• do not just look for research papers in the area you wish to review, but also seek previous reviews.

The chances are high that someone will already have published a literature review ( Figure 1 ), if not exactly on the issue you are planning to tackle, at least on a related topic. If there are already a few or several reviews of the literature on your issue, my advice is not to give up, but to carry on with your own literature review,

The bottom-right situation (many literature reviews but few research papers) is not just a theoretical situation; it applies, for example, to the study of the impacts of climate change on plant diseases, where there appear to be more literature reviews than research studies [33] .

• discussing in your review the approaches, limitations, and conclusions of past reviews,
• trying to find a new angle that has not been covered adequately in the previous reviews, and
• incorporating new material that has inevitably accumulated since their appearance.

When searching the literature for pertinent papers and reviews, the usual rules apply:

• be thorough,
• use different keywords and database sources (e.g., DBLP, Google Scholar, ISI Proceedings, JSTOR Search, Medline, Scopus, Web of Science), and
• look at who has cited past relevant papers and book chapters.

Rule 3: Take Notes While Reading

If you read the papers first, and only afterwards start writing the review, you will need a very good memory to remember who wrote what, and what your impressions and associations were while reading each single paper. My advice is, while reading, to start writing down interesting pieces of information, insights about how to organize the review, and thoughts on what to write. This way, by the time you have read the literature you selected, you will already have a rough draft of the review.

Of course, this draft will still need much rewriting, restructuring, and rethinking to obtain a text with a coherent argument [11] , but you will have avoided the danger posed by staring at a blank document. Be careful when taking notes to use quotation marks if you are provisionally copying verbatim from the literature. It is advisable then to reformulate such quotes with your own words in the final draft. It is important to be careful in noting the references already at this stage, so as to avoid misattributions. Using referencing software from the very beginning of your endeavour will save you time.

Rule 4: Choose the Type of Review You Wish to Write

After having taken notes while reading the literature, you will have a rough idea of the amount of material available for the review. This is probably a good time to decide whether to go for a mini- or a full review. Some journals are now favouring the publication of rather short reviews focusing on the last few years, with a limit on the number of words and citations. A mini-review is not necessarily a minor review: it may well attract more attention from busy readers, although it will inevitably simplify some issues and leave out some relevant material due to space limitations. A full review will have the advantage of more freedom to cover in detail the complexities of a particular scientific development, but may then be left in the pile of the very important papers “to be read” by readers with little time to spare for major monographs.

There is probably a continuum between mini- and full reviews. The same point applies to the dichotomy of descriptive vs. integrative reviews. While descriptive reviews focus on the methodology, findings, and interpretation of each reviewed study, integrative reviews attempt to find common ideas and concepts from the reviewed material [12] . A similar distinction exists between narrative and systematic reviews: while narrative reviews are qualitative, systematic reviews attempt to test a hypothesis based on the published evidence, which is gathered using a predefined protocol to reduce bias [13] , [14] . When systematic reviews analyse quantitative results in a quantitative way, they become meta-analyses. The choice between different review types will have to be made on a case-by-case basis, depending not just on the nature of the material found and the preferences of the target journal(s), but also on the time available to write the review and the number of coauthors [15] .

Rule 5: Keep the Review Focused, but Make It of Broad Interest

Whether your plan is to write a mini- or a full review, it is good advice to keep it focused 16 , 17 . Including material just for the sake of it can easily lead to reviews that are trying to do too many things at once. The need to keep a review focused can be problematic for interdisciplinary reviews, where the aim is to bridge the gap between fields [18] . If you are writing a review on, for example, how epidemiological approaches are used in modelling the spread of ideas, you may be inclined to include material from both parent fields, epidemiology and the study of cultural diffusion. This may be necessary to some extent, but in this case a focused review would only deal in detail with those studies at the interface between epidemiology and the spread of ideas.

While focus is an important feature of a successful review, this requirement has to be balanced with the need to make the review relevant to a broad audience. This square may be circled by discussing the wider implications of the reviewed topic for other disciplines.

Rule 6: Be Critical and Consistent

Reviewing the literature is not stamp collecting. A good review does not just summarize the literature, but discusses it critically, identifies methodological problems, and points out research gaps [19] . After having read a review of the literature, a reader should have a rough idea of:

• the major achievements in the reviewed field,
• the main areas of debate, and
• the outstanding research questions.

It is challenging to achieve a successful review on all these fronts. A solution can be to involve a set of complementary coauthors: some people are excellent at mapping what has been achieved, some others are very good at identifying dark clouds on the horizon, and some have instead a knack at predicting where solutions are going to come from. If your journal club has exactly this sort of team, then you should definitely write a review of the literature! In addition to critical thinking, a literature review needs consistency, for example in the choice of passive vs. active voice and present vs. past tense.

Rule 7: Find a Logical Structure

Like a well-baked cake, a good review has a number of telling features: it is worth the reader's time, timely, systematic, well written, focused, and critical. It also needs a good structure. With reviews, the usual subdivision of research papers into introduction, methods, results, and discussion does not work or is rarely used. However, a general introduction of the context and, toward the end, a recapitulation of the main points covered and take-home messages make sense also in the case of reviews. For systematic reviews, there is a trend towards including information about how the literature was searched (database, keywords, time limits) [20] .

How can you organize the flow of the main body of the review so that the reader will be drawn into and guided through it? It is generally helpful to draw a conceptual scheme of the review, e.g., with mind-mapping techniques. Such diagrams can help recognize a logical way to order and link the various sections of a review [21] . This is the case not just at the writing stage, but also for readers if the diagram is included in the review as a figure. A careful selection of diagrams and figures relevant to the reviewed topic can be very helpful to structure the text too [22] .

Rule 8: Make Use of Feedback

Reviews of the literature are normally peer-reviewed in the same way as research papers, and rightly so [23] . As a rule, incorporating feedback from reviewers greatly helps improve a review draft. Having read the review with a fresh mind, reviewers may spot inaccuracies, inconsistencies, and ambiguities that had not been noticed by the writers due to rereading the typescript too many times. It is however advisable to reread the draft one more time before submission, as a last-minute correction of typos, leaps, and muddled sentences may enable the reviewers to focus on providing advice on the content rather than the form.

Feedback is vital to writing a good review, and should be sought from a variety of colleagues, so as to obtain a diversity of views on the draft. This may lead in some cases to conflicting views on the merits of the paper, and on how to improve it, but such a situation is better than the absence of feedback. A diversity of feedback perspectives on a literature review can help identify where the consensus view stands in the landscape of the current scientific understanding of an issue [24] .

Rule 9: Include Your Own Relevant Research, but Be Objective

In many cases, reviewers of the literature will have published studies relevant to the review they are writing. This could create a conflict of interest: how can reviewers report objectively on their own work [25] ? Some scientists may be overly enthusiastic about what they have published, and thus risk giving too much importance to their own findings in the review. However, bias could also occur in the other direction: some scientists may be unduly dismissive of their own achievements, so that they will tend to downplay their contribution (if any) to a field when reviewing it.

In general, a review of the literature should neither be a public relations brochure nor an exercise in competitive self-denial. If a reviewer is up to the job of producing a well-organized and methodical review, which flows well and provides a service to the readership, then it should be possible to be objective in reviewing one's own relevant findings. In reviews written by multiple authors, this may be achieved by assigning the review of the results of a coauthor to different coauthors.

Rule 10: Be Up-to-Date, but Do Not Forget Older Studies

Given the progressive acceleration in the publication of scientific papers, today's reviews of the literature need awareness not just of the overall direction and achievements of a field of inquiry, but also of the latest studies, so as not to become out-of-date before they have been published. Ideally, a literature review should not identify as a major research gap an issue that has just been addressed in a series of papers in press (the same applies, of course, to older, overlooked studies (“sleeping beauties” [26] )). This implies that literature reviewers would do well to keep an eye on electronic lists of papers in press, given that it can take months before these appear in scientific databases. Some reviews declare that they have scanned the literature up to a certain point in time, but given that peer review can be a rather lengthy process, a full search for newly appeared literature at the revision stage may be worthwhile. Assessing the contribution of papers that have just appeared is particularly challenging, because there is little perspective with which to gauge their significance and impact on further research and society.

Inevitably, new papers on the reviewed topic (including independently written literature reviews) will appear from all quarters after the review has been published, so that there may soon be the need for an updated review. But this is the nature of science [27] – [32] . I wish everybody good luck with writing a review of the literature.

Acknowledgments

Many thanks to M. Barbosa, K. Dehnen-Schmutz, T. Döring, D. Fontaneto, M. Garbelotto, O. Holdenrieder, M. Jeger, D. Lonsdale, A. MacLeod, P. Mills, M. Moslonka-Lefebvre, G. Stancanelli, P. Weisberg, and X. Xu for insights and discussions, and to P. Bourne, T. Matoni, and D. Smith for helpful comments on a previous draft.

Funding Statement

This work was funded by the French Foundation for Research on Biodiversity (FRB) through its Centre for Synthesis and Analysis of Biodiversity data (CESAB), as part of the NETSEED research project. The funders had no role in the preparation of the manuscript.

How To Write An A-Grade Literature Review

3 straightforward steps (with examples) + free template.

By: Derek Jansen (MBA) | Expert Reviewed By: Dr. Eunice Rautenbach | October 2019

Quality research is about building onto the existing work of others , “standing on the shoulders of giants”, as Newton put it. The literature review chapter of your dissertation, thesis or research project is where you synthesise this prior work and lay the theoretical foundation for your own research.

Long story short, this chapter is a pretty big deal, which is why you want to make sure you get it right . In this post, I’ll show you exactly how to write a literature review in three straightforward steps, so you can conquer this vital chapter (the smart way).

Overview: The Literature Review Process

• Understanding the “ why “
• Finding the relevant literature
• Cataloguing and synthesising the information
• Outlining & writing up your literature review
• Example of a literature review

But first, the “why”…

Before we unpack how to write the literature review chapter, we’ve got to look at the why . To put it bluntly, if you don’t understand the function and purpose of the literature review process, there’s no way you can pull it off well. So, what exactly is the purpose of the literature review?

Well, there are (at least) four core functions:

• For you to gain an understanding (and demonstrate this understanding) of where the research is at currently, what the key arguments and disagreements are.
• For you to identify the gap(s) in the literature and then use this as justification for your own research topic.
• To help you build a conceptual framework for empirical testing (if applicable to your research topic).
• To inform your methodological choices and help you source tried and tested questionnaires (for interviews ) and measurement instruments (for surveys ).

Most students understand the first point but don’t give any thought to the rest. To get the most from the literature review process, you must keep all four points front of mind as you review the literature (more on this shortly), or you’ll land up with a wonky foundation.

Okay – with the why out the way, let’s move on to the how . As mentioned above, writing your literature review is a process, which I’ll break down into three steps:

• Finding the most suitable literature
• Understanding , distilling and organising the literature
• Planning and writing up your literature review chapter

Importantly, you must complete steps one and two before you start writing up your chapter. I know it’s very tempting, but don’t try to kill two birds with one stone and write as you read. You’ll invariably end up wasting huge amounts of time re-writing and re-shaping, or you’ll just land up with a disjointed, hard-to-digest mess . Instead, you need to read first and distil the information, then plan and execute the writing.

Step 1: Find the relevant literature

Naturally, the first step in the literature review journey is to hunt down the existing research that’s relevant to your topic. While you probably already have a decent base of this from your research proposal , you need to expand on this substantially in the dissertation or thesis itself.

Essentially, you need to be looking for any existing literature that potentially helps you answer your research question (or develop it, if that’s not yet pinned down). There are numerous ways to find relevant literature, but I’ll cover my top four tactics here. I’d suggest combining all four methods to ensure that nothing slips past you:

Method 1 – Google Scholar Scrubbing

Google’s academic search engine, Google Scholar , is a great starting point as it provides a good high-level view of the relevant journal articles for whatever keyword you throw at it. Most valuably, it tells you how many times each article has been cited, which gives you an idea of how credible (or at least, popular) it is. Some articles will be free to access, while others will require an account, which brings us to the next method.

Method 2 – University Database Scrounging

Generally, universities provide students with access to an online library, which provides access to many (but not all) of the major journals.

So, if you find an article using Google Scholar that requires paid access (which is quite likely), search for that article in your university’s database – if it’s listed there, you’ll have access. Note that, generally, the search engine capabilities of these databases are poor, so make sure you search for the exact article name, or you might not find it.

Method 3 – Journal Article Snowballing

At the end of every academic journal article, you’ll find a list of references. As with any academic writing, these references are the building blocks of the article, so if the article is relevant to your topic, there’s a good chance a portion of the referenced works will be too. Do a quick scan of the titles and see what seems relevant, then search for the relevant ones in your university’s database.

Method 4 – Dissertation Scavenging

Similar to Method 3 above, you can leverage other students’ dissertations. All you have to do is skim through literature review chapters of existing dissertations related to your topic and you’ll find a gold mine of potential literature. Usually, your university will provide you with access to previous students’ dissertations, but you can also find a much larger selection in the following databases:

• Open Access Theses & Dissertations
• Stanford SearchWorks

Keep in mind that dissertations and theses are not as academically sound as published, peer-reviewed journal articles (because they’re written by students, not professionals), so be sure to check the credibility of any sources you find using this method. You can do this by assessing the citation count of any given article in Google Scholar. If you need help with assessing the credibility of any article, or with finding relevant research in general, you can chat with one of our Research Specialists .

Alright – with a good base of literature firmly under your belt, it’s time to move onto the next step.

Need a helping hand?

Step 2: Log, catalogue and synthesise

Once you’ve built a little treasure trove of articles, it’s time to get reading and start digesting the information – what does it all mean?

While I present steps one and two (hunting and digesting) as sequential, in reality, it’s more of a back-and-forth tango – you’ll read a little , then have an idea, spot a new citation, or a new potential variable, and then go back to searching for articles. This is perfectly natural – through the reading process, your thoughts will develop , new avenues might crop up, and directional adjustments might arise. This is, after all, one of the main purposes of the literature review process (i.e. to familiarise yourself with the current state of research in your field).

As you’re working through your treasure chest, it’s essential that you simultaneously start organising the information. There are three aspects to this:

• Logging reference information
• Building an organised catalogue
• Distilling and synthesising the information

I’ll discuss each of these below:

2.1 – Log the reference information

As you read each article, you should add it to your reference management software. I usually recommend Mendeley for this purpose (see the Mendeley 101 video below), but you can use whichever software you’re comfortable with. Most importantly, make sure you load EVERY article you read into your reference manager, even if it doesn’t seem very relevant at the time.

2.2 – Build an organised catalogue

In the beginning, you might feel confident that you can remember who said what, where, and what their main arguments were. Trust me, you won’t. If you do a thorough review of the relevant literature (as you must!), you’re going to read many, many articles, and it’s simply impossible to remember who said what, when, and in what context . Also, without the bird’s eye view that a catalogue provides, you’ll miss connections between various articles, and have no view of how the research developed over time. Simply put, it’s essential to build your own catalogue of the literature.

I would suggest using Excel to build your catalogue, as it allows you to run filters, colour code and sort – all very useful when your list grows large (which it will). How you lay your spreadsheet out is up to you, but I’d suggest you have the following columns (at minimum):

• Author, date, title – Start with three columns containing this core information. This will make it easy for you to search for titles with certain words, order research by date, or group by author.
• Categories or keywords – You can either create multiple columns, one for each category/theme and then tick the relevant categories, or you can have one column with keywords.
• Key arguments/points – Use this column to succinctly convey the essence of the article, the key arguments and implications thereof for your research.
• Context – Note the socioeconomic context in which the research was undertaken. For example, US-based, respondents aged 25-35, lower- income, etc. This will be useful for making an argument about gaps in the research.
• Methodology – Note which methodology was used and why. Also, note any issues you feel arise due to the methodology. Again, you can use this to make an argument about gaps in the research.
• Quotations – Note down any quoteworthy lines you feel might be useful later.
• Notes – Make notes about anything not already covered. For example, linkages to or disagreements with other theories, questions raised but unanswered, shortcomings or limitations, and so forth.

If you’d like, you can try out our free catalog template here (see screenshot below).

2.3 – Digest and synthesise

Most importantly, as you work through the literature and build your catalogue, you need to synthesise all the information in your own mind – how does it all fit together? Look for links between the various articles and try to develop a bigger picture view of the state of the research. Some important questions to ask yourself are:

• What answers does the existing research provide to my own research questions ?
• Which points do the researchers agree (and disagree) on?
• How has the research developed over time?
• Where do the gaps in the current research lie?

To help you develop a big-picture view and synthesise all the information, you might find mind mapping software such as Freemind useful. Alternatively, if you’re a fan of physical note-taking, investing in a large whiteboard might work for you.

Step 3: Outline and write it up!

Once you’re satisfied that you have digested and distilled all the relevant literature in your mind, it’s time to put pen to paper (or rather, fingers to keyboard). There are two steps here – outlining and writing:

3.1 – Draw up your outline

Having spent so much time reading, it might be tempting to just start writing up without a clear structure in mind. However, it’s critically important to decide on your structure and develop a detailed outline before you write anything. Your literature review chapter needs to present a clear, logical and an easy to follow narrative – and that requires some planning. Don’t try to wing it!

Naturally, you won’t always follow the plan to the letter, but without a detailed outline, you’re more than likely going to end up with a disjointed pile of waffle , and then you’re going to spend a far greater amount of time re-writing, hacking and patching. The adage, “measure twice, cut once” is very suitable here.

In terms of structure, the first decision you’ll have to make is whether you’ll lay out your review thematically (into themes) or chronologically (by date/period). The right choice depends on your topic, research objectives and research questions, which we discuss in this article .

Once that’s decided, you need to draw up an outline of your entire chapter in bullet point format. Try to get as detailed as possible, so that you know exactly what you’ll cover where, how each section will connect to the next, and how your entire argument will develop throughout the chapter. Also, at this stage, it’s a good idea to allocate rough word count limits for each section, so that you can identify word count problems before you’ve spent weeks or months writing!

PS – check out our free literature review chapter template…

3.2 – Get writing

With a detailed outline at your side, it’s time to start writing up (finally!). At this stage, it’s common to feel a bit of writer’s block and find yourself procrastinating under the pressure of finally having to put something on paper. To help with this, remember that the objective of the first draft is not perfection – it’s simply to get your thoughts out of your head and onto paper, after which you can refine them. The structure might change a little, the word count allocations might shift and shuffle, and you might add or remove a section – that’s all okay. Don’t worry about all this on your first draft – just get your thoughts down on paper.

Once you’ve got a full first draft (however rough it may be), step away from it for a day or two (longer if you can) and then come back at it with fresh eyes. Pay particular attention to the flow and narrative – does it fall fit together and flow from one section to another smoothly? Now’s the time to try to improve the linkage from each section to the next, tighten up the writing to be more concise, trim down word count and sand it down into a more digestible read.

Once you’ve done that, give your writing to a friend or colleague who is not a subject matter expert and ask them if they understand the overall discussion. The best way to assess this is to ask them to explain the chapter back to you. This technique will give you a strong indication of which points were clearly communicated and which weren’t. If you’re working with Grad Coach, this is a good time to have your Research Specialist review your chapter.

Finally, tighten it up and send it off to your supervisor for comment. Some might argue that you should be sending your work to your supervisor sooner than this (indeed your university might formally require this), but in my experience, supervisors are extremely short on time (and often patience), so, the more refined your chapter is, the less time they’ll waste on addressing basic issues (which you know about already) and the more time they’ll spend on valuable feedback that will increase your mark-earning potential.

Literature Review Example

In the video below, we unpack an actual literature review so that you can see how all the core components come together in reality.

Let’s Recap

In this post, we’ve covered how to research and write up a high-quality literature review chapter. Let’s do a quick recap of the key takeaways:

• It is essential to understand the WHY of the literature review before you read or write anything. Make sure you understand the 4 core functions of the process.
• The first step is to hunt down the relevant literature . You can do this using Google Scholar, your university database, the snowballing technique and by reviewing other dissertations and theses.
• Next, you need to log all the articles in your reference manager , build your own catalogue of literature and synthesise all the research.
• Following that, you need to develop a detailed outline of your entire chapter – the more detail the better. Don’t start writing without a clear outline (on paper, not in your head!)
• Write up your first draft in rough form – don’t aim for perfection. Remember, done beats perfect.
• Refine your second draft and get a layman’s perspective on it . Then tighten it up and submit it to your supervisor.

Psst… there’s more!

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

You Might Also Like:

38 Comments

Thank you very much. This page is an eye opener and easy to comprehend.

This is awesome!

I wish I come across GradCoach earlier enough.

But all the same I’ll make use of this opportunity to the fullest.

Thank you for this good job.

Keep it up!

You’re welcome, Yinka. Thank you for the kind words. All the best writing your literature review.

Thank you for a very useful literature review session. Although I am doing most of the steps…it being my first masters an Mphil is a self study and one not sure you are on the right track. I have an amazing supervisor but one also knows they are super busy. So not wanting to bother on the minutae. Thank you.

You’re most welcome, Renee. Good luck with your literature review 🙂

This has been really helpful. Will make full use of it. 🙂

Thank you Gradcoach.

Really agreed. Admirable effort

thank you for this beautiful well explained recap.

Thank you so much for your guide of video and other instructions for the dissertation writing.

It is instrumental. It encouraged me to write a dissertation now.

Thank you the video was great – from someone that knows nothing thankyou

an amazing and very constructive way of presetting a topic, very useful, thanks for the effort,

It is timely

It is very good video of guidance for writing a research proposal and a dissertation. Since I have been watching and reading instructions, I have started my research proposal to write. I appreciate to Mr Jansen hugely.

I learn a lot from your videos. Very comprehensive and detailed.

Thank you for sharing your knowledge. As a research student, you learn better with your learning tips in research

I was really stuck in reading and gathering information but after watching these things are cleared thanks, it is so helpful.

Really helpful, Thank you for the effort in showing such information

This is super helpful thank you very much.

Thank you for this whole literature writing review.You have simplified the process.

I’m so glad I found GradCoach. Excellent information, Clear explanation, and Easy to follow, Many thanks Derek!

You’re welcome, Maithe. Good luck writing your literature review 🙂

Thank you Coach, you have greatly enriched and improved my knowledge

Great piece, so enriching and it is going to help me a great lot in my project and thesis, thanks so much

This is THE BEST site for ANYONE doing a masters or doctorate! Thank you for the sound advice and templates. You rock!

Thanks, Stephanie 🙂

This is mind blowing, the detailed explanation and simplicity is perfect.

I am doing two papers on my final year thesis, and I must stay I feel very confident to face both headlong after reading this article.

thank you so much.

if anyone is to get a paper done on time and in the best way possible, GRADCOACH is certainly the go to area!

This is very good video which is well explained with detailed explanation

Thank you excellent piece of work and great mentoring

Thanks, it was useful

Thank you very much. the video and the information were very helpful.

Good morning scholar. I’m delighted coming to know you even before the commencement of my dissertation which hopefully is expected in not more than six months from now. I would love to engage my study under your guidance from the beginning to the end. I love to know how to do good job

Thank you so much Derek for such useful information on writing up a good literature review. I am at a stage where I need to start writing my one. My proposal was accepted late last year but I honestly did not know where to start

Like the name of your YouTube implies you are GRAD (great,resource person, about dissertation). In short you are smart enough in coaching research work.

This is a very well thought out webpage. Very informative and a great read.

Very timely.

I appreciate.

Very comprehensive and eye opener for me as beginner in postgraduate study. Well explained and easy to understand. Appreciate and good reference in guiding me in my research journey. Thank you

Thank you. I requested to download the free literature review template, however, your website wouldn’t allow me to complete the request or complete a download. May I request that you email me the free template? Thank you.

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

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

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

• Print Friendly

How to Write a Literature Review

• What Is a Literature Review
• What Is the Literature

Writing the Review

Why Are You Writing This?

There are two primary points to remember as you are writing your literature review:

• Stand-alone review: provide an overview and analysis of the current state of research on a topic or question
• Research proposal: explicate the current issues and questions concerning a topic to demonstrate how your proposed research will contribute to the field
• Research report: provide the context to which your work is a contribution.
• Write as you read, and revise as you read more. Rather than wait until you have read everything you are planning to review, start writing as soon as you start reading. You will need to reorganize and revise it all later, but writing a summary of an article when you read it helps you to think more carefully about the article. Having drafts and annotations to work with will also make writing the full review easier since you will not have to rely completely on your memory or have to keep thumbing back through all the articles. Your draft does not need to be in finished, or even presentable, form. The first draft is for you, so you can tell yourself what you are thinking. Later you can rewrite it for others to tell them what you think.

General Steps for Writing a Literature Review

Here is a general outline of steps to write a thematically organized literature review. Remember, though, that there are many ways to approach a literature review, depending on its purpose.

• Stage one: annotated bibliography. As you read articles, books, etc, on your topic, write a brief critical synopsis of each. After going through your reading list, you will have an abstract or annotation of each source you read. Later annotations are likely to include more references to other works since you will have your previous readings to compare, but at this point the important goal is to get accurate critical summaries of each individual work.
• Stage two: thematic organization. Find common themes in the works you read, and organize the works into categories. Typically, each work you include in your review can fit into one category or sub-theme of your main theme, but sometimes a work can fit in more than one. (If each work you read can fit into all the categories you list, you probably need to rethink your organization.) Write some brief paragraphs outlining your categories, how in general the works in each category relate to each other, and how the categories relate to each other and to your overall theme.
• Stage three: more reading. Based on the knowledge you have gained in your reading, you should have a better understanding of the topic and of the literature related to it. Perhaps you have discovered specific researchers who are important to the field, or research methodologies you were not aware of. Look for more literature by those authors, on those methodologies, etc. Also, you may be able to set aside some less relevant areas or articles which you pursued initially. Integrate the new readings into your literature review draft. Reorganize themes and read more as appropriate.
• Stage four: write individual sections. For each thematic section,  use your draft annotations (it is a good idea to reread the articles and revise annotations, especially the ones you read initially) to write a section which discusses the articles relevant to that theme. Focus your writing on the theme of that section, showing how the articles relate to each other and to the theme, rather than focusing your writing on each individual article. Use the articles as evidence to support your critique of the theme rather than using the theme as an angle to discuss each article individually.
• Stage five: integrate sections. Now that you have the thematic sections, tie them together with an introduction, conclusion, and some additions and revisions in the sections to show how they relate to each other and to your overall theme.

Specific Points to Include

More specifically, here are some points to address when writing about specific works you are reviewing. In dealing with a paper or an argument or theory, you need to assess it (clearly understand and state the claim) and analyze it (evaluate its reliability, usefulness, validity). Look for the following points as you assess and analyze papers, arguments, etc. You do not need to state them all explicitly, but keep them in mind as you write your review:

• Be specific and be succinct. Briefly state specific findings listed in an article, specific methodologies used in a study, or other important points. Literature reviews are not the place for long quotes or in-depth analysis of each point.
• Be selective. You are trying to boil down a lot of information into a small space. Mention just the most important points (i.e. those most relevant to the review's focus) in each work you review.
• Is it a current article? How old is it? Have its claims, evidence, or arguments been superceded by more recent work? If it is not current, is it important for historical background?
• What specific claims are made? Are they stated clearly?
• What evidence, and what type (experimental, statistical, anecdotal, etc) is offered? Is the evidence relevant? sufficient?
• What arguments are given? What assumptions are made, and are they warranted?
• What is the source of the evidence or other information? The author's own experiments, surveys, etc? Historical records? Government documents? How reliable are the sources?
• Does the author take into account contrary or conflicting evidence and arguments? How does the author address disagreements with other researchers?
• What specific conclusions are drawn? Are they warranted by the evidence?
• How does this article, argument, theory, etc, relate to other work?

These, however, are just the points that should be addressed when writing about a specific work. It is not an outline of how to organize your writing. Your overall theme and categories within that theme should organize your writing, and the above points should be integrated into that organization. That is, rather than write something like:

     Smith (2019) claims that blah, and provides evidence x to support it, and says it is probably because of blip. But Smith seems to have neglected factor b.      Jones (2021) showed that blah by doing y, which, Jones claims, means it is likely because of blot. But that methodology does not exclude other possibilities.      Johnson (2022) hypothesizes blah might be because of some other cause.

list the themes and then say how each article relates to that theme. For example:

     Researchers agree that blah (Smith 2019, Jones 2021, Johnson 2022), but they do not agree on why. Smith claims it is probably due to blip, but Jones, by doing y, tries to show it is likely because of blot. Jones' methodology, however, does not exclude other possibilities. Johnson hypothesizes ...

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

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: Jan 4, 2024 10:52 AM
• URL: https://guides.library.yale.edu/YSNDoctoral

• University of Texas Libraries

Literature Reviews

• What is a literature review?
• Steps in the Literature Review Process
• Define your research question
• Determine inclusion and exclusion criteria
• Choose databases and search
• Review Results
• Synthesize Results
• Analyze Results
• Librarian Support

What is a Literature Review?

A literature or narrative review is a comprehensive review and analysis of the published literature on a specific topic or research question. The literature that is reviewed contains: books, articles, academic articles, conference proceedings, association papers, and dissertations. It contains the most pertinent studies and points to important past and current research and practices. It provides background and context, and shows how your research will contribute to the field. 

A literature review should: 

• Provide a comprehensive and updated review of the literature;
• Explain why this review has taken place;
• Articulate a position or hypothesis;
• Acknowledge and account for conflicting and corroborating points of view

From  S age Research Methods

Purpose of a Literature Review

A literature review can be written as an introduction to a study to:

• Demonstrate how a study fills a gap in research
• Compare a study with other research that's been done

Or it can be a separate work (a research article on its own) which:

• Organizes or describes a topic
• Describes variables within a particular issue/problem

Limitations of a Literature Review

Some of the limitations of a literature review are:

• It's a snapshot in time. Unlike other reviews, this one has beginning, a middle and an end. There may be future developments that could make your work less relevant.
• It may be too focused. Some niche studies may miss the bigger picture.
• It can be difficult to be comprehensive. There is no way to make sure all the literature on a topic was considered.
• It is easy to be biased if you stick to top tier journals. There may be other places where people are publishing exemplary research. Look to open access publications and conferences to reflect a more inclusive collection. Also, make sure to include opposing views (and not just supporting evidence).

Source: Grant, Maria J., and Andrew Booth. “A Typology of Reviews: An Analysis of 14 Review Types and Associated Methodologies.” Health Information & Libraries Journal, vol. 26, no. 2, June 2009, pp. 91–108. Wiley Online Library, doi:10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x.

Meryl Brodsky : Communication and Information Studies

Hannah Chapman Tripp : Biology, Neuroscience

Carolyn Cunningham : Human Development & Family Sciences, Psychology, Sociology

Larayne Dallas : Engineering

Janelle Hedstrom : Special Education, Curriculum & Instruction, Ed Leadership & Policy ​

Susan Macicak : Linguistics

Imelda Vetter : Dell Medical School

For help in other subject areas, please see the guide to library specialists by subject .

Periodically, UT Libraries runs a workshop covering the basics and library support for literature reviews. While we try to offer these once per academic year, we find providing the recording to be helpful to community members who have missed the session. Following is the most recent recording of the workshop, Conducting a Literature Review. To view the recording, a UT login is required.

• October 26, 2022 recording
• Last Updated: Oct 26, 2022 2:49 PM
• URL: https://guides.lib.utexas.edu/literaturereviews

Academic Muse

• About Alan Klima
• Join the Bootcamp!

A Simple Plot for a Literature Review

There’s an easy way to chart your course through it..

There are two things you need any time you are stuck in writing. You need to set the course and steady the course.

If you are stuck while writing a literature review,

then each of these things– set the course and steady the course– have particular ways in which you can do them easily,

and each have their particular threats to doing so.

I think you’ll recognize the threats, so let’s start there, and then get to what you can do to quickly set the course and steady the course for a lit review.

Threat number one: Where do I start, what needs to be there?

When you are at the drafting stage and it’s time for the little song and dance we call the literature review, often you can get stuck because there are a whole bunch of things you could bring up in an infinite variety of orders.

Your knowledge is here in your head more or less simultaneously. How do you get it out in a legible line on the page?

What choice do you have besides just going in historical order? What if that’s not interesting enough for your genre, discipline, or most importantly, for yourself?

And the answer is:

Think Story.

And by story I mean plot.

Even if we go in historical order, that is not a story or a plot. That’s just sequence and it doesn’t communicate enough. A good literature review or review article, you’ll notice, may sometimes proceed in historical order, but it’s also communicating something far more, and that far more is a story.

So think in the elements of story plotting and you’ll know how to proceed.

And boiler plate story plotting works great. Remember you want simple and easy, because you are stuck. If you are not stuck, then just go for it. If you are stuck, find your protagonist, their goal, the conflict they face and the obstacles or even mustachioed villains they face.

Here’s how things move in a boilerplate plot.

Joe Sloppyburger lives his life, wistful about his past rockstar dreams, working in the post office every day, trying to support his family. He hates to slog through life sometimes, hates a particular dog on his route, and wants to get to a point where he can pay the bills and even have some money for his kids to go to college.

Then one day the dog he hates speaks to him as he drops an Amazon envelope into the door slot of it’s house, and offers him a deal. I’ll give you stardom if you give me your soul. And Joe, thinking of his children and how they deserve a stable future, says yes.

But then, as his rock career picks up, he starts having doubts about whether it’s really happening, or he is just imagining it and instead playing a broken guitar in the park with no pants on. Which is real and which isn’t?

He tries this, that, and the other thing to find out. He’s got to figure it out so that he can secure his children’s future…

I know you are dying to know what happens next, but let’s get back to you!

So…the elements of this plot are:

Here’s how it was or is,

Then something comes along and changes everything

If you respond to that in this way, that problem comes up

This problem is a serious conflict

There are ways to try to overcome it

And then new possibilities (or in the case of boiler plate, an ending) are arrived at.

Character– Conflict– Resolution.

So how would this work in a literature review?

The theme, topic, question, issue is your character.

But there are problems for your hero. Problems in the world, in the data, in challenges from other intellectual directions, or a challenge you pose to it.

There have been attempts to answer these challenges.

But they revealed new challenges.

And there were responses to those challenges.

And they revealed new possibilities or, in some genres, but not many, new conclusions.

The number of steps challenges confronting your protagonist can vary, but the basic structure is

Character — Conflict — Resolution.

You are telling a story that moves from an unsatisfactory and unstable status quo to a new realm of possibility.

So ask yourself, what is your protagonist?

It could be more or less your goal, if the literature review is heading toward some argument about the next phase. Or it could be simply “understanding x” and the challenges and attempts along the way, always thwarted somehow.

In an article I recently read, the protagonist was: a mode of anthropological ethnography that is based more in sense experience and less in textual and conceptual knowledge.

That is the hero of the literature review. And it starts in the post office job of an interpretive anthropology that depends primarily on concepts told to ethnographers and unable to process bodily or embodied meanings.

It wants more, but can’t get that, in it’s current situation. But then it meets phenomenology. And certain authors start  trying out this new way.

But there are problems with that, and subsequent authors try this. Another group tries that.

But “I” think this is the way, and here’s what we face, what we might gain, and what needs still to be resolved.

There is a hero, there’s a conflict, and this becomes a story that has it’s redemption, even if only partial and temporary at the end.

It’s like characters and challenges, but its ideas, approaches.

Write your blockbuster thriller redemption STORY.

Most of the people having an easy time with literature reviews are just intuitively in touch with a sense of story.

Or even if it once was easy, but now you are stuck, chances are you intuitively knew your story before and right now the only problem now is that you need your sense of plot.

So identify your hero, the conflict, and the resolution or next stage. That will set your course!

How to Steady the Course against Procrastereading

That’s all fine as long as you do it. But will you?

The other major obstacle when we are stuck is that there’s just too many possible literatures, and you might even feel “I don’t know enough.”

Interestingly, whether you know too much or (according to your inner party pooper) not enough, steadying the course is the same.

You need to stay on the course of your simple plot, and not get bogged down into the rabbit-hole of reading.

There’s a time and a place for reading, even while we are writing.

But that fact does not magically make procrastereading not a real thing.

And it’s going to happen.

You are going to go to a citation, glance at a page, then start reading a paragraph, which turns into a page or two, which might reference many other readings or make you think of them, and then your looking them up and reading them, which leads to more…

And that practical glance just became a two-hour blackout that you just woke up out of,

and you see your page…

and there’s like two sentences written in two hours.

No matter what, you’re going to feel inadequate.

Fun fact: the number of things written by humanity is greater, by some degree, than what you have read so far.

You have to steady the course and have a way to control this look into the vast ocean of what’s been thought before.

Once you have your basic simple course set, then next thing is to do it simply and stay on track, keeping track of the time that you are telling the story and how much time is spent reading.

It’s not that you don’t want or need to read, it’s that you need to know and choose for yourself how it’s going to play out, and that what needs to get written, gets written.

So staying on course during literature reviews means keeping your writing and reading time as separate as possible, and tracking the amount of time you spend reading and the time you use to move your story forward in writing.

When you are ready to tell the story of your hero, keep track of the time you use to do that. When you are reading, keep track of the time you spend on that. Know what’s happening! The light of awareness will help you to snap out of the spell, out of the awe at the amount that has been written, and get back down to specific moves in your story.

Remember, at bottom a literature review is a sketch! It’s not a realm of pure potential that exists in your brain and not on paper, and it’s not a fully fleshed accounting of anything.

And if you need help with setting the course and steadying the course, then download the  Free eBook Series on Writing.

There are very specific things you can do to move forward with your writing in surprisingly swift ways. You can learn a whole lot with these Free books, so

to do that right now, and begin writing with ease, Click Here to download the Free Writing Training now .

• UWF Libraries

Literature Review: Conducting & Writing

• Sample Literature Reviews
• Steps for Conducting a Lit Review
• Finding "The Literature"
• Organizing/Writing
• APA Style This link opens in a new window
• Chicago: Notes Bibliography This link opens in a new window
• MLA Style This link opens in a new window

Sample Lit Reviews from Communication Arts

Have an exemplary literature review.

• Literature Review Sample 1
• Literature Review Sample 2
• Literature Review Sample 3

Have you written a stellar literature review you care to share for teaching purposes?

Are you an instructor who has received an exemplary literature review and have permission from the student to post?

Please contact Britt McGowan at [email protected] for inclusion in this guide. All disciplines welcome and encouraged.

• << Previous: MLA Style
• Next: Get Help! >>
• Last Updated: Mar 22, 2024 9:37 AM
• URL: https://libguides.uwf.edu/litreview

• How It Works
• Prices & Discounts

How to Outline a Literature Review in 5 Steps

Table of contents

Have you ever had to write a literature review, not knowing what it is or how to write it, and then failed miserably on paper and in the eyes of your professor?

But first - why should one have to write a stellar literature review ?

Yes, it absolutely does!

The purpose of writing a literature review is to summarize and analyze the ideas and concepts of the author, without bringing your personal opinions and ideas into the review.

In this article, you will learn how to outline a literature review in five simple steps.

What are the Elements of a Literature Review Outline

The objective of a literature review is to identify a central trend, theme, principle, or concept that exists in the publication. This gives the plot meaning and highlights the significance of the topic within the specific subject area, which eventually ties the entire text together.

Literature reviews help in finding the relationship between two existing ideas and recognize major gaps and controversial elements within the topic.

The best way to deliver a top-notch literature review is to construct a well-structured outline.

3 Key Elements of a Literature Review Outline

Introduction.

The introduction of this paper should give a basic gist about your topic, have a strong thesis statement, and should establish the purpose of writing about your chosen topic.

Additionally, you should also include your point of view about the subject matter as well as the process or methodology that you’ll use to frame your literature review.

It is also a good idea to write the outcome you would expect to see by the end of your paper, for your professor to understand what you want to achieve from this.

The body paragraph of a literature review can be approached using different approaches. This portion of the review analyzes and interprets the different findings that relate to the literature, as well as includes the central theme that ties it together as a whole.

Always remember to use transition words, as well as subheadings, to make it easier for your professor to be able to understand the systematic flow of words.

Here are three of the most important ones that have been used to effectively structure the body paragraph of a literature review:

Chronologically

This approach is the simplest as you write the review based on the overall timeline, which starts at the beginning, and to the end.

In this approach, you can identify the development and growth of the chosen topic or a particular concept that you have examined over time. Keep in mind not to list down all the events in order, but to rather analyze important patterns, major themes, or key turning points in chronological order.

Thematically

Very different from the timeline approach, in this, you are required to examine, elaborate, and find a link between your sources and your chosen literary text.

The thematic approach revolves around the central issue or dispute, which is organized into subsections that address each aspect of the issue(s). These are analyzed in-depth and are time-consuming.

Methodologically

This type of approach is to understand the methods used to define or analyze a certain concept. By presenting the methods, you can compare them based on the severity, the sociological or cultural impacts, the qualitative or quantitative nature, the ethicality of the literature, and so on.

Summarize all your important points into a short paragraph, point out the strengths and weaknesses that you’ve gathered after researching the literature you analyzed, and emphasize the significance of writing a literature review on this chosen text.

5 Steps to Outline a Literature Review

Now that you know what goes into a literature review outline let’s take a look at how you can outline a literature review in five steps.

Narrow down on your topic

Before you start looking for literary texts to analyze, you need to figure out a clear and defined topic . Based on this topic, you can start searching for relevant literature that surrounds your chosen topic or the question that is to be analyzed.

During the search for your literature review topic, consider subject matters that are interesting to you or something that you would want to know in-depth about. You can also look for popular texts that could have multiple sources to work with.

To make this process easier, you should:

• Start writing down keywords that are related and relevant to your topic of choice. List any synonyms or related terms that you think would help in narrowing down your topic. As you keep searching for your literature, you can add any other keywords that come your way.
• Ask yourself questions and brainstorm topic ideas that can lead to you figuring out your chosen topic, or talk to your professor if you require their guidance.
• Try mapping out the concepts for your outline by creating a graphic map with all the ideas and concepts that you would want to include in the review. Make it a point to incorporate all of these ideas while writing your literature review.

Review relevant sources

When you have your topic picked out, the first thing you should do is use your compiled list of keywords to search for relevant literature and sources. At this time, it is crucial to use trusted sources like libraries, published research papers , and online databases.

After finding credible sources for your literature review, take a minute to see if your topic is actually related to the sources that you’ve found. Assess these sources and prioritize them according to what is relevant, what fits, and what doesn’t.

Map out a structure

For outlining the body of your literature review, multiple approaches can be used to create a proper, well-organized structure, which we have discussed in the above section.

Before you begin, you should have a rough idea about how you would wish to start your literature review. No academic paper should be attempted before having a proper plan for framing the content of your paper.

Through this organized skeleton structure of the paper, you can quickly and easily identify the points that you want to be included.

Identifying key themes and patterns

Read your literature multiple times to understand the connections and the relationship between the sources you’ve used and the text that needs to be analyzed.

This will help you have a solid knowledge about the subject before you start writing, as well as create a proper flow of ideas to make writing your literature review a simpler process.

Some of the things you need to look out for during this process include the following:

• themes and concepts that recur throughout the literature;
• debates or contradictions that include conflicts around the theories present in the text;
• gaps and weaknesses in the literature that needs to be filled or addressed;
• trends and patterns that are prevalent and are an important portion of the review.

Working on this point will help show your professor that you can contribute a major portion of ideas and knowledge through your research, to the already existing content.

Here’s a useful video by Scribbr on identifying themes in literature

Write your draft and proofread

At this point, you can start writing your literature review. Since you have all your sources, citations, a complete detailed outline, and extra notes, figuring out which point needs to go in which section will become a much smoother process.

All you need to do now is to follow your plan and maintain the structure that you have created to draft your review.

Most students neglect to revise and proofread their papers, which can cause unnecessary, avoidable errors that bring down the entire quality and authority of your submission. Make sure to check for spelling and grammatical mistakes as well as the flow of your sentences.

Check to make sure that there is no portion in your literature review that has been plagiarized . This can happen if you have failed to cite a source or reference or if you have used (copied) phrases directly from another source.

Proofreading your submissions before sending them out will help you pinpoint these mistakes.

Final thoughts

Writing a literature review is intimidating and not anywhere near to being an easy process, but it can be made simpler if you know the correct strategies and have appropriate ideas to deal with tough academic papers like these.

So, keep these five effective steps in mind to create a top-notch literature review that will leave your professor impressed.

Still not confident? Writers Per Hour is just an email away.

Our expert writers can help you outline and write a literature review from scratch for you . All you need to do is give us your requirements, and we’ll have an original, 100% plagiarism-free literature review delivered right on time.

Share this article

Achieve Academic Success with Expert Assistance!

Crafted from Scratch for You.

Ensuring Your Work’s Originality.

Transform Your Draft into Excellence.

Perfecting Your Paper’s Grammar, Style, and Format (APA, MLA, etc.).

Calculate the cost of your paper

Get ideas for your essay

Citation Styles

• Chicago Style
• Annotated Bibliographies

What is a Lit Review?

How to write a lit review.

• Video Introduction to Lit Reviews

Main Objectives

Examples of lit reviews, additional resources.

• Zotero (Citation Management)

What is a literature review?

• Either a complete piece of writing unto itself or a section of a larger piece of writing like a book or article
• A thorough and critical look at the information and perspectives that other experts and scholars have written about a specific topic
• A way to give historical perspective on an issue and show how other researchers have addressed a problem
• An analysis of sources based on your own perspective on the topic
• Based on the most pertinent and significant research conducted in the field, both new and old

• A descriptive list or collection of summaries of other research without synthesis or analysis
• An annotated bibliography
• A literary review (a brief, critical discussion about the merits and weaknesses of a literary work such as a play, novel or a book of poems)
• Exhaustive; the objective is not to list as many relevant books, articles, reports as possible
• To convey to your reader what knowledge and ideas have been established on a topic
• To explain what the strengths and weaknesses of that knowledge and those ideas might be
• To learn how others have defined and measured key concepts    
• To keep the writer/reader up to date with current developments and historical trends in a particular field or discipline
• To establish context for the argument explored in the rest of a paper
• To provide evidence that may be used to support your own findings
• To demonstrate your understanding and your ability to critically evaluate research in the field
• To suggest previously unused or underused methodologies, designs, and quantitative and qualitative strategies
• To identify gaps in previous studies and flawed methodologies and/or theoretical approaches in order to avoid replication of mistakes
• To help the researcher avoid repetition of earlier research
• To suggest unexplored populations
• To determine whether past studies agree or disagree and identify strengths and weaknesses on both sides of a controversy in the literature

• Choose a topic that is interesting to you; this makes the research and writing process more enjoyable and rewarding.
• For a literature review, you'll also want to make sure that the topic you choose is one that other researchers have explored before so that you'll be able to find plenty of relevant sources to review.

• Your research doesn't need to be exhaustive. Pay careful attention to bibliographies. Focus on the most frequently cited literature about your topic and literature from the best known scholars in your field. Ask yourself: "Does this source make a significant contribution to the understanding of my topic?"
• Reading other literature reviews from your field may help you get ideas for themes to look for in your research. You can usually find some of these through the library databases by adding literature review as a keyword in your search.
• Start with the most recent publications and work backwards. This way, you ensure you have the most current information, and it becomes easier to identify the most seminal earlier sources by reviewing the material that current researchers are citing.

The organization of your lit review should be determined based on what you'd like to highlight from your research. Here are a few suggestions:

• Chronology : Discuss literature in chronological order of its writing/publication to demonstrate a change in trends over time or to detail a history of controversy in the field or of developments in the understanding of your topic.  
• Theme: Group your sources by subject or theme to show the variety of angles from which your topic has been studied. This works well if, for example, your goal is to identify an angle or subtopic that has so far been overlooked by researchers.  
• Methodology: Grouping your sources by methodology (for example, dividing the literature into qualitative vs. quantitative studies or grouping sources according to the populations studied) is useful for illustrating an overlooked population, an unused or underused methodology, or a flawed experimental technique.

• Be selective. Highlight only the most important and relevant points from a source in your review.
• Use quotes sparingly. Short quotes can help to emphasize a point, but thorough analysis of language from each source is generally unnecessary in a literature review.
• Synthesize your sources. Your goal is not to make a list of summaries of each source but to show how the sources relate to one another and to your own work.
• Make sure that your own voice and perspective remains front and center. Don't rely too heavily on summary or paraphrasing. For each source, draw a conclusion about how it relates to your own work or to the other literature on your topic.
• Be objective. When you identify a disagreement in the literature, be sure to represent both sides. Don't exclude a source simply on the basis that it does not support your own research hypothesis.
• At the end of your lit review, make suggestions for future research. What subjects, populations, methodologies, or theoretical lenses warrant further exploration? What common flaws or biases did you identify that could be corrected in future studies?

• Double check that you've correctly cited each of the sources you've used in the citation style requested by your professor (APA, MLA, etc.) and that your lit review is formatted according to the guidelines for that style.

Your literature review should:

• Be focused on and organized around your topic.
• Synthesize your research into a summary of what is and is not known about your topic.
• Identify any gaps or areas of controversy in the literature related to your topic.
• Suggest questions that require further research.
• Have your voice and perspective at the forefront rather than merely summarizing others' work.
• Cyberbullying: How Physical Intimidation Influences the Way People are Bullied
• Use of Propofol and Emergence Agitation in Children
• Eternity and Immortality in Spinoza's 'Ethics'
• Literature Review Tutorials and Samples - Wilson Library at University of La Verne
• Literature Reviews: Introduction - University Library at Georgia State
• Literature Reviews - The Writing Center at UNC Chapel Hill
• Writing a Literature Review - Boston College Libraries
• Write a Literature Review - University Library at UC Santa Cruz
• << Previous: Annotated Bibliographies
• Next: Zotero (Citation Management) >>
• Last Updated: Jan 17, 2024 2:47 PM
• URL: https://researchguides.elac.edu/Citation

Plot Definition

What is plot? Here’s a quick and simple definition:

Plot is the sequence of interconnected events within the story of a play, novel, film, epic, or other narrative literary work. More than simply an account of what happened, plot reveals the cause-and-effect relationships between the events that occur.

Some additional key details about plot:

• The plot of a story explains not just what happens, but how and why the major events of the story take place.
• Plot is a key element of novels, plays, most works of nonfiction, and many (though not all) poems.
• Since ancient times, writers have worked to create theories that can help categorize different types of plot structures.

Plot Pronounciation

Here's how to pronounce plot: plaht

The Difference Between Plot and Story

Perhaps the best way to say what a plot is would be to compare it to a story. The two terms are closely related to one another, and as a result, many people often use the terms interchangeably—but they're actually different. A story is a series of events; it tells us what happened . A plot, on the other hand, tells us how the events are connected to one another and why the story unfolded in the way that it did. In Aspects of the Novel, E.M. Forster uses the following examples to distinguish between story and plot:

“The king died, and then the queen died” is a story. “The king died, and then the queen died of grief” is a plot. The time-sequence is preserved, but the sense of causality overshadows it. Or again: “The queen died, no one knew why, until it was discovered that it was through grief at the death of the king.” This is a plot with a mystery in it.

Therefore, when examining a plot, it's helpful to look for events that change the direction of the story and consider how one event leads to another.

The Structure of a Plot

For nearly as long as there have been narratives with plots, there have been people who have tried to analyze and describe the structure of plots. Below we describe two of the most well-known attempts to articulate the general structure of plot.

Freytag's Pyramid

One of the first and most influential people to create a framework for analyzing plots was 19th-century German writer Gustav Freytag, who argued that all plots can be broken down into five stages: exposition, rising action, climax, falling action, and dénouement. Freytag originally developed this theory as a way of describing the plots of plays at a time when most plays were divided into five acts, but his five-layered "pyramid" can also be used to analyze the plots of other kinds of stories, including novels, short stories, films, and television shows.

• Exposition is the first section of the plot. During the exposition, the audience is introduced to key background information, including characters and their relationships to one another, the setting (or time and place) of events, and any other relevant ideas, details, or historical context. In a five-act play, the exposition typically occurs in the first act.
• The rising action begins with the "inciting incident" or "complication"—an event that creates a problem or conflict for the characters, setting in motion a series of increasingly significant events. Some critics describe the rising action as the most important part of the plot because the climax and outcome of the story would not take place if the events of the rising action did not occur. In a five-act play, the rising action usually takes place over the course of act two and perhaps part of act three.
• The climax of a plot is the story's central turning point, which the exposition and the rising action have all been leading up to. The climax is the moment with the greatest tension or conflict. Though the climax is also sometimes called the crisis , it is not necessarily a negative event. In a tragedy , the climax will result in an unhappy ending; but in a comedy , the climax usually makes it clear that the story will have a happy ending. In a five-act play, the climax usually takes place at the end of the third act.
• Whereas the rising action is the series of events leading up to the climax, the falling action is the series of events that follow the climax, ending with the resolution, an event that indicates that the story is reaching its end. In a five-act play, the falling action usually takes place over the course of the fourth act, ending with the resolution.
• Dénouement is a French word meaning "outcome." In literary theory, it refers to the part of the plot which ties up loose ends and reveals the final consequences of the events of the story. During the dénouement, the author resolves any final or outstanding questions about the characters’ fates, and may even reveal a little bit about the characters’ futures after the resolution of the story. In a five-act play, the dénouement takes place in the fifth act.

While Freytag's pyramid is very handy, not every work of literature fits neatly into its structure. In fact, many modernist and post-modern writers intentionally subvert the standard narrative and plot structure that Freytag's pyramid represents.

Booker's "Meta-Plot"

In his 2004 book The Seven Basic Plots: Why We Tell Stories, Christopher Booker outlines an overarching "meta-plot" which he argues can be used to describe the plot structure of almost every story. Like Freytag's pyramid, Booker's meta-plot has five stages:

• The anticipation stage , in which the hero prepares to embark on adventure;
• The dream stage , in which the hero overcomes a series of minor challenges and gains a sense of confidence and invincibility;
• The frustration stage , in which the hero confronts the villain of the story;
• The nightmare stage , in which the hero fears they will be unable to overcome their enemy;
• The resolution , in which the hero finally triumphs.

Of course, like Freytag's Pyramid, Booker's meta-plot isn't actually a fool-proof way of describing the structure of every plot, but rather an attempt to describe structural elements that many (if not most) plots have in common.

Types of Plot

In addition to analyzing the general structure of plots, many scholars and critics have attempted to describe the different types of plot that serve as the basis of most narratives.

Booker's Seven Basic Plots

Within the overarching structure of Booker's "meta-plot" (as described above), Booker argues that plot types can be further subdivided into the following seven categories. Booker himself borrows most of these definitions of plot types from much earlier writers, such as Aristotle. Here's a closer look at each of the seven types:

• Comedy: In a comedy , characters face a series of increasingly absurd challenges, conflicts, and misunderstandings, culminating in a moment of revelation, when the confusion of the early part of the plot is resolved and the story ends happily. In romantic comedies, the early conflicts in the plot act as obstacles to a happy romantic relationship, but the conflicts are resolved and the plot ends with an orderly conclusion (and often a wedding). A Midsummer Night's Dream , When Harry Met Sally, and Pride and Prejudice are all examples of comedies.
• Tragedy: The plot of a tragedy follows a tragic hero —a likable, well-respected, morally upstanding character who has a tragic flaw or who makes some sort of fatal mistake (both flaw and/or mistake are known as hamartia ). When the tragic hero becomes aware of his mistake (this realization is called anagnorisis ), his happy life is destroyed. This reversal of fate (known as peripeteia ) leads to the plot's tragic ending and, frequently, the hero's death. Booker's tragic plot is based on Aristotle's theory of tragedy, which in turn was based on patterns in classical drama and epic poetry. Antigone , Hamlet , and The Great Gatsby are all examples of tragedies.
• Rebirth: In stories with a rebirth plot, one character is literally or metaphorically imprisoned by a dark force, enchantment, and/or character flaw. Through an act of love, another character helps the imprisoned character overcome the dark force, enchantment, or character flaw. Many stories of rebirth allude to Jesus Christ or other religious figures who sacrificed themselves for others and were resurrected. Beauty and the Beast , The Snow Queen , and A Christmas Carol are all examples of stories with rebirth plots.
• Overcoming the Monster: The hero sets out to fight an evil force and thereby protect their loved ones or their society. The "monster" could be literal or metaphorical: in ancient Greek mythology, Perseus battles the monster Medusa, but in the television show Good Girls Revolt , a group of women files a lawsuit in order to fight discriminatory policies in their workplace. Both examples follow the "Overcoming the Monster" plot, as does the epic poem Beowulf .
• Rags-to-Riches : In a rags-to-riches plot, a disadvantaged person comes very close to gaining success and wealth, but then appears to lose everything, before they finally achieve the happy life they have always deserved. Cinderella and Oliver Twist are classic rags-to-riches stories; movies with rags-to-riches plots include Slumdog Millionaire and Joy .
• The Quest: In a quest story, a hero sets out to accomplish a specific task, aided by a group of friends. Often, though not always, the hero is looking for an object endowed with supernatural powers. Along the way, the hero and their friends face challenges together, but the hero must complete the final stage of the quest alone. The Celtic myth of "The Fisher-King and the Holy Grail" is one of the oldest quest stories; Monty Python and the Holy Grail is a satire that follows the same plot structure; while Heart of Darkness plays with the model of a quest but has the quest end not with the discovery of a treasure or enlightenment but rather with emptiness and disillusionment.
• Voyage and Return: The hero goes on a literal journey to an unfamiliar place where they overcome a series of challenges, then return home with wisdom and experience that help them live a happier life. The Odyssey , Alice's Adventures in Wonderland , Chronicles of Narnia, and Eat, Pray, Love all follow the voyage and return plot.

As you can probably see, there's lots of room for these categories to overlap. This is one of the problems with trying to create any sort of categorization scheme for plots such as this—an issue we'll cover in greater detail below.

The Hero's Journey

The Hero's Journey is an attempt to describe a narrative archetype , or a common plot type that has specific details and structure (also known as a monomyth ). The Hero's Journey plot follows a protagonist's journey from the known to the unknown, and back to the known world again. The journey can be a literal one, as in the Lord of the Rings trilogy, or a purely metaphorical one. Regardless, the protagonist is a changed person by the end of the story. The Hero's Journey structure was first popularized by Joseph Campbell's 1949 book The Hero With a Thousand Faces. Later, theorists David Adams Leeming, Phil Cousineau, and Christopher Vogler all developed their own versions of the Hero's Journey structure. Each of these theorists divides The Hero's Journey into slightly different stages (Campbell identifies 17 stages, whereas Vogler finds 12 stages and Leeming and Cousineau use just 8). Below, we'll take a closer look at the 12 stages that Vogler outlines in his analysis of this plot type:

• The Ordinary World: When the story begins, the hero is a seemingly ordinary person living an ordinary life. This section of the story often includes expository details about the story's setting and the hero's background and personality.
• The Call to Adventure: Soon, the hero's ordinary life is interrupted when someone or something gives them an opportunity to go on a quest. Often, the hero is asked to find something or someone, or to defeat a powerful enemy. The call to adventure sometimes, but not always, involves a supernatural event. (In Star Wars: A New Hope , the call to adventure occurs when Luke sees the message from Leia to Obi-Wan Kenobi.)
• The Refusal of the Call: Some heroes are initially reluctant to embark on their journey and instead attempt to continue living their ordinary life. When this refusal takes place, it is followed by another event that prompts the hero to accept the call to adventure (Luke's aunt and uncle getting killed in Star Wars ).
• Meeting the Mentor: The hero meets a mentor: a wiser, more experienced person who gives them advice and guidance. The mentor trains and protects the hero until the hero is ready to embark on the next phase of the journey. (Obi-Wan Kenobi is Luke's mentor in Star Wars .)
• Crossing the Threshold: The hero "crosses the threshold" when they have left the familiar, ordinary world behind. Some heroes are eager to enter a new and unfamiliar world, while others may be uncertain if they are making the right choice, but in either case, once the hero crosses the threshold, there is no way to turn back. (Luke about to enter Mos Eisley, or of Frodo leaving the Shire in Lord of the Rings .)
• Tests, Allies, and Enemies: As the hero continues on their journey, they face a series of increasingly difficult "tests" or challenges. Along the way, they acquire friends who help them overcome these challenges, and enemies who attempt to thwart their quest. The hero may defeat some enemies during this phase or find ways to keep them temporarily at bay. These challenges help the reader develop a better a sense of the hero's strengths and weaknesses, and they help the hero become wiser and more experienced. This phase is part of the rising action .
• Approach to the Innermost Cave: At this stage, the hero prepares to face the greatest challenge of the journey, which lies within the "innermost cave." In some stories, the hero must literally enter an isolated and dangerous place and do battle with an evil force; in others, the hero must confront a fear or face an internal conflict; or, the hero may do both. You can think of the approach to the innermost cave as a second threshold—a moment when the hero faces their doubts and fears and decides to continue on the quest. (Think of Frodo entering Mordor, or Harry Potter entering the Forbidden Forest with the Deathly Hallows, ready to confront Lord Voldemort.)
• The Ordeal: The ordeal is the greatest challenge that the hero faces. It may take the form of a battle or physically dangerous task, or it may represent a moral or personal crisis that threatens to destroy the hero. Earlier (in the "Tests, Allies, and Enemies" phase), the hero might have overcome challenges with the help of friends, but the hero must face the ordeal alone. The outcome of the ordeal often determines the fate of the hero's loved ones, society, or the world itself. In many stories, the ordeal involves a literal or metaphorical resurrection, in which the hero dies or has a near-death experience, and is reborn with new knowledge or abilities. This constitutes the climax of the story.
• Reward: After surviving the ordeal, the hero receives a reward of some kind. Depending on the story, it may come in the form of new wisdom and personal strengths, the love of a romantic interest, a supernatural power, or a physical prize. The hero takes the reward or rewards with them as they return to the ordinary world.
• The Road Back: The hero begins to make their way home, either by retracing their steps or with the aid of supernatural powers. They may face a few minor challenges or setbacks along the way. This phase is part of the falling action .
• The Resurrection: The hero faces one final challenge in which they must use all of the powers and knowledge that they have gained throughout their journey. When the hero triumphs, their rebirth is completed and their new identity is affirmed. This phase is not present in all versions of the hero's journey.
• Return with the Elixir: The hero reenters the ordinary world, where they find that they have changed (and perhaps their home has changed too). Among the things they bring with them when they return is an "elixir," or something that will transform their ordinary life for the better. The elixir could be a literal potion or gift, or it may take the form of the hero's newfound perspective on life: the hero now possesses love, forgiveness, knowledge, or another quality that will help them build a better life.

Other Genre-Specific Plots

Apart from the plot types described above (the "Hero's Journey" and Booker's seven basic plots), there are a couple common plot types worth mentioning. When a story uses one of the following plots, it usually means that it belongs to a specific genre of literature—so these plot structures can be thought of as being specific to their respective genres.

• Mystery : A story that centers around the solving of a baffling crime—especially a murder. The plot structure of a mystery can often be described using Freytag's pyramid (i.e., it has exposition, rising action, climax, falling action, and denouement), but the plots of mysteries also tend to follow other, more genre-specific conventions, such as the gradual discovery of clues culminating in the revelation of the culprit's identity as well as their motive. In a typical story (i.e., a non-mystery) key characters and their motives are usually revealed before the central conflict arises, not after.
• Bindungsroman : A story that shows a young protagonist's journey from childhood to adulthood (or immaturity to maturity), with a focus on the trials and misfortunes that affect the character's growth. The term "coming-of-age novel" is sometimes used interchangeably with Bildungsroman. This is not necessarily incorrect—in most cases the terms can be used interchangeably—but Bildungsroman carries the connotation of a specific and well-defined literary tradition, which tends to follow certain genre-specific conventions (for example, the main character often gets sent away from home, falls in love, and squanders their fortune). The climax of the Bildungsroman typically coincides with the protagonist reaching maturity.

Other Attempts to Classify Types of Plots

In addition to Freytag, Booker, and Campbell, many other theorists and literary critics have created systems classifying different kinds of plot structures. Among the best known are:

• William Foster-Harris, who outlined three archetypal plot structures in The Basic Patterns of Plot
• Ronald R. Tobias, who wrote a book claiming there are 20 Master Plots
• Georges Polti, who argued there are in fact Thirty-Six Dramatic Situations
• Sir Arthur Thomas Quiller-Couch, who in the early twentieth century outlined seven types of plot

And then there are the more atypical approaches to classifying the different types of plots:

• In 1965, the University of Chicago rejected Kurt Vonnegut's college thesis, which claimed that folktales and fairy tales shared common structures, or "shapes," including "man in a hole," "boy gets girl" and "Cinderella." He went on to write Slaughterhouse-Five , a novel which subverts traditional narrative structures, and later developed a lecture based on his failed thesis .
• Two recent studies, led by University of Nebraska professor Matthew Jockers and researchers at the University of Adelaide and the University of Vermont respectively, have used machine learning to analyze the plot structures and emotional ups-and-downs of stories. Both projects concluded that there are six types of stories.

Criticism of Efforts to Categorize Plot Types

Some critics argue that though archetypal plot structures can be useful tools for both writers and readers, we shouldn't rely on them too heavily when analyzing a work of literature. One such skeptic is New York Times book critic Michiko Kakutani, who in a 2005 review described Christopher Booker's Seven Basic Plots as "sometimes absorbing and often blockheaded." Kakutani writes that while Booker finds interesting ways to categorize stories by plot type, he is too fixated on finding stories that fit these plot types perfectly. As a result, Booker tends to idealize overly simplistic stories (and Hollywood films in particular), instead of analyzing more complex stories that may not fit the conventions of his seven plot types. Kakutani argues that, as a result of this approach, Booker undervalues modern and contemporary writers who structure their plots in different and innovative ways.

Kakutani's argument is a reminder that while some great works of literature may follow archetypal plot structures, they may also have unconventional plot structures that defy categorization. Authors who use nonlinear structures or multiple narrators often intentionally create stories that do not perfectly fit any of the "plot types" discussed above. William Faulker's The Sound and the Fury and Jennifer Egan's A Visit From the Goon Squad are both examples of this kind of work. Even William Shakespeare, who wrote many of his plays following the traditional structures for tragedies and comedies, authored several "problem plays," which many scholars struggle to categorize as strictly tragedy or comedy: All's Well That Ends Well , Measure for Measure , Troilus and Cressida, The Winter's Tale , Timon of Athens, and The Merchant of Venice are all examples of "problem plays."

Plot Examples

The following examples are representative of some of the most common types of plot.

The "Hero's Journey" Plot in The Hobbit by J.R.R. Tolkien

The plot of The Hobbit closely follows the structure of a typical hero's journey.

• The Ordinary World: At the beginning of The Hobbit , the story's hero, Bilbo Baggins, is living a comfortable life alongside his fellow hobbits in the Shire. (Hobbits are short, human-like creatures predisposed to peaceful, domestic routines.)
• The Call to Adventure: The wizard Gandalf arrives in the Shire with a band of 13 dwarves and asks Bilbo to go with them to Lonely Mountain in order to reclaim the dwarves' treasure, which has been stolen by the dragon Smaug.
• The Refusal of the Call: At first, Bilbo refuses to join Gandalf and the dwarves, explaining that it isn't in a hobbit's nature to go on adventures.
• Meeting the Mentor: Gandalf, who serves as Bilbo's mentor throughout The Hobbit, persuades Bilbo to join the dwarves on their journey.
• Cross the Threshold: Gandalf takes Bilbo to meet the dwarves at the Green Dragon Inn in Bywater, and the group leaves the Shire together.
• Tests, Allies, and Enemies: Bilbo faces many challenges and trials on the way to the Lonely Mountain. Early in the trip, they are kidnapped by trolls and are rescued by Gandalf. Bilbo takes an elvish dagger from the trolls' supply of weapons that he uses throughout the rest of the journey. Soon Bilbo and the dwarves are captured by goblins, but they are rescued by Gandalf who also kills the Great Goblin. Later, Bilbo finds a magical ring (which becomes the focus of the Lord of the Rings books), and when the dwarves are captured later in the journey (once by giant spiders and once by elves), Bilbo uses the ring and the dagger to rescue them. Finally, Bilbo and the dwarves arrive at Lake Town, near the Lonely Mountain.
• Approach to the Innermost Cave: Bilbo and the dwarves makes his way from Lake Town to the Lonely Mountain, where the dragon Smaug is guarding the dwarves' treasure. Bilbo alone is brave enough to enter the Smaug's lair. Bilbo steals a cup from Smaug, and also learns that Smaug has a weak spot in his scaly armor. Enraged at Bilbo's theft, Smaug flies to Lake-Town and devastates it, but is killed by a human archer who learns of Smaug's weak spot from a bird that overheard Bilbo speaking of it.
• The Ordeal: After Smaug's death, elves and humans march to the Lonely Mountain to claim what they believe is their portion of the treasure (as Smaug plundered from them, too). The dwarves refuse to share the treasure and a battle seems evident, but Bilbo steals the most beautiful gem from the treasure and gives it to the humans and elves. The greedy dwarves banish Bilbo from their company. Meanwhile, an army of wargs (magical wolves) and goblins descend on the Lonely Mountain to take vengeance on the dwarves for the death of the Great Goblin. The dwarves, humans, and elves form an alliance to fight the wargs and goblins, and eventually triumph, though Bilbo is knocked unconscious for much of the battle. (It might seem odd that Bilbo doesn't participate in the battle, but that fact also seems to suggest that the true ordeal of the novel was not the battle but rather Bilbo's moral choice to steal the gem and give it to the men and elves to counter the dwarves growing greed.)
• Reward: The victorious dwarves, humans, and elves share the treasure among themselves, and Bilbo receives a share of the treasure, which he takes home, along with the dagger and the ring.
• The Road Back: It takes Bilbo and Gandalf nearly a year to travel back to the Shire. During that time they e-visit with some of the people they met on their journey out and have many adventures, though none are as difficult as those they undertook on the way to the Lonely Mountain.
• The Resurrection: Bilbo's return to the Shire as a changed person is underlined by the fact that he has been away so long, the other hobbits in the Shire believe that he has died and are preparing to sell his house and belongings.
• Return with the Elixir: Bilbo returns to the shire with the ring, the dagger, and his treasure—enough to make him rich. He also has his memories of the adventure, which he turns into a book.

Other examples of the Hero's Journey Plot Structure:

• Siddhartha by Herman Hesse
• The Epic of Gilgamesh
• The Martian by Andy Weir
• The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain
• The Iliad by Homer

The Comedic Plot in Twelfth Night by William Shakespeare

William Shakespeare's play, Twelfth Night , is generally described as a comedy and follows what Booker would call comedic plot structure. At the beginning of the play, the protagonist, Viola is shipwrecked far from home in the kingdom of Illyria. Her twin brother, Sebastian, appears to have died in the storm. Viola disguises herself as a boy, calls herself Cesario, and gets a job as the servant of Count Orsino, who is in love with the Lady Olivia. When Orsino sends Cesario to deliver romantic messages to Olivia on his behalf, Olivia falls in love with Cesario. Meanwhile, Viola falls in love with Orsino, but she cannot confess her love without revealing her disguise.

In another subplot, Olivia's uncle Toby and his friend Sir Andrew Aguecheek persuade the servant Maria to play a prank convincing another servant, Malvolio, that Olivia loves him. The plot thickens when Sebastian (Viola's lost twin) arrives in town and marries Olivia, who believes she is marrying Cesario. At the end of the play, Viola is reunited with her brother, reveals her identity, and confesses her love to Orsino, who marries her. In spite of the chaos, misunderstandings, and challenges the characters face in the early part of the plot—a source of much of the play's humor— Twelfth Night reaches an orderly conclusion and ends with two marriages.

Other examples of comedic plot structure:

• Much Ado About Nothing by William Shakespeare
• A Midsummer Night's Dream by William Shakespeare
• Love's Labor's Lost by William Shakespeare
• Emma by Jane Austen
• Sense and Sensibility by Jane Austen
• Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen
• Lysistrata by Aristophanes
• The Importance of Being Earnest by Oscar Wilde

The Tragic Plot in Macbeth by William Shakespeare

William Shakespeare's play Macbeth follows the tragic plot structure. The tragic hero , Macbeth, is a Scottish nobleman, who receives a prophecy from three witches saying that he will become the Thane of Cawdor and eventually the King. After King Duncan makes Macbeth Thane of Cawdor, Lady Macbeth persuades her husband to fulfill the prophecy by secretly murdering Duncan. He does, and is named King. Later, to ensure that Macbeth will remain king, they also order the assassination of the nobleman Banquo, his son, and the wife and children of the nobleman Macduff. However, as Macbeth protects his throne in ever more bloody ways, Lady Macbeth begins to go mad with guilt. Macbeth consults the witches again, and they reassure him that "no man from woman born can harm Macbeth" and that he will not be defeated until the "wood begins to move" to Dunsinane castle. Therefore, Macbeth is reassured that he is invincible. Lady Macbeth never recovers from her guilt and commits suicide, and Macbeth feels numb and empty, even as he is certain he can never be killed. Meanwhile an army led by Duncan's son Malcolm, their number camouflaged by the branches they carry, so that they look like a moving forest, approaches Dunsinane. In the fighting Macduff reveals he was born by cesarian section, and kills Macbeth.

Macbeth's mistake ( hamartia ) is his unrelenting ambition to be king, and his trust in the witches' prophecies. He realizes his mistake in a moment of anagnorisis when the forest full of camouflaged soldiers seems to be moving, and he experiences a reversal of fate ( peripeteia ) when he is defeated by Macduff.

Other examples of tragic plot structure:

• Antigone by Sophocles
• Oedipus at Colonus by Sophocles
• Agamemnon by Aeschylus
• The Libation Bearers by Aeschylus
• The Eumenides by Aeschylus
• Romeo and Juliet by William Shakespeare
• Hamlet by William Shakespeare
• Othello by William Shakespeare
• Anna Karenina by Leo Tolstoy
• The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald
• Madame Bovary by Gustave Flaubert
• The Picture of Dorian Gray by Oscar Wilde

The "Rebirth" Plot in A Christmas Carol by Charles Dickens

Charles Dickens' novel A Christmas Carol is an example of the "rebirth" plot. The novel's protagonist is the miserable, selfish businessman Ebenezer Scrooge, who mistreats his clerk, Bob Cratchit, who is a loving father struggling to support his family. Scrooge scoffs at the notion that Christmas is a time for joy, love, and generosity. But on Christmas Eve, he is visited by the ghost of his deceased business partner, who warns Scrooge that if he does not change his ways, his spirit will be condemned to wander the earth as a ghost. Later that night, he is visited by the ghosts of Christmas Past, Christmas Present, and Christmas Yet to Come. With these ghosts, Scrooge revisits lonely and joyful times of his youth, sees Cratchit celebrating Christmas with his loved ones, and finally foresees his own lonely death. Scrooge awakes on Christmas morning and resolves to change his ways. He not only celebrates Christmas with the Cratchits, but embraces the Christmas spirit of love and generosity all year long. By the end of the novel, Scrooge has been "reborn" through acts of generosity and love.

Other examples of "rebirth" plot structure:

• The Winter's Tale by William Shakespeare
• The Grapes of Wrath by John Steinbeck
• The Handmaid's Tale by Margaret Atwood
• Beloved by Toni Morrison
• Snow White by Jacob and Wilhelm Grimm
• The Snow Queen by Hans Christian Anderson
• Beauty and the Beast by Gabrielle-Suzanne Barbot de Villeneuve

The "Overcoming the Monster" Plot in Beowulf

The Old English epic poem, Beowulf , follows the structure of an "overcoming the monster" plot. In fact, the poem's hero, Beowulf, defeats not just one monster, but three. As a young warrior, Beowulf slays Grendel, a swamp-dwelling demon who has been raiding the Danish king's mead hall. Later, when Grendel's mother attempts to avenge her son's death, Beowulf kills her, too. Beowulf eventually becomes king of the Geats, and many years later, he battles a dragon who threatens his people. Beowulf manages to kill the dragon, but dies from his wounds, and is given a hero's funeral. Three times, Beowulf succeeds in protecting his people by defeating a monster.

Other examples of the overcoming the monster plot structure:

• Dracula by Bram Stoker
• Speak by Laurie Halse Anderson
• Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets by J.K. Rowling

The "Rags-to-Riches" Plot in Jane Eyre by Charlotte Brontë

Charlotte Brontë's novel Jane Eyre is an example of a "rags-to-riches" plot. The protagonist, Jane, is a mistreated orphan who is eventually sent away to a boarding school where students are severely mistreated. Jane survives the school and goes on to become a governess at Thornfield Manor, where Jane falls in love with Mr. Rochester. The two become engaged, but on their wedding day, Jane discovers that Rochester's first wife, Bertha, has gone insane and is imprisoned in Thornfield's attic. She leaves Rochester and ends up finding long-lost cousins. After a time, her very religious cousin, St. John, proposes to her. Jane almost accepts, but then rejects the proposal. She returns to Thornfield to discover that Bertha started a house fire and leapt off the roof of the burning building to her death, and that Rochester had been blinded by the fire in an attempt to save Bertha. Jane and Rochester marry, and live a quiet and happy life together. Jane begins the story with nothing, seems poised to achieve true happiness before losing everything, but ultimately has a happy ending.

Other examples of the rags-to-riches plot structure:

• Cinderella by Charles Perrault
• David Copperfield by Charles Dickens
• Oliver Twist by Charles Dickens
• The Once and Future King by T.H. White
• Villette by Charlotte Brontë
• Pygmalion by George Bernard Shaw
• Vanity Fair by William Makepeace Thackery

The Quest Plot in Siddhartha by Herman Hesse

Siddhartha , by Herman Hesse, follows the structure of the "quest" plot. The novel's protagonist, Siddartha, leaves his hometown in search of spiritual enlightenment, accompanied by his friend, Govinda. On their journey, they join a band of holy men who seek enlightenment through self-denial, and later, they study with a group of Bhuddists. Disillusioned with religion, Siddartha leaves Govinda and the Bhuddists behind and takes up a hedonistic lifestyle with the beautiful Kamala. Still unsatisfied with his life, he considers suicide in a river, but instead decides to apprentice himself to the man who runs the ferry boat. By studying the river, Siddhartha eventually obtains enlightenment.

Other examples of the quest plot structure:

• Candide by Voltaire
• Don Quixote by Migel de Cervantes
• A Passage to India by E.M. Forster
• The Hobbit by J.R.R. Tolkien
• The Lord of the Rings by J.R.R. Tolkien
• Perceval by Chrétien
• Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows by J.K. Rowling

The "Voyage and Return" Plot in Their Eyes Were Watching God by Zora Neale Hurston

Zora Neale Hurston's novel Their Eyes Were Watching God follows what Booker would describe as a voyage and return plot structure. The plot follows the hero, Janie, as she seeks love and happiness. The novel begins and ends in Eatonville, Florida, where Janie was brought up by her grandmother. Janie has three romantic relationships, each better than the last. She marries a man named Logan Killicks on her grandmother's advice, but she finds the marriage stifling and she soon leaves him. Janie's second, more stable marriage to the prosperous Joe Starks lasts 20 years, but Janie does not feel truly loved by him. After Joe dies, she marries Tea Cake, a farm worker who loves, respects, and cherishes her. They move to the Everglades and live there happily for just over a year, when Tea Cake dies of rabies after getting bitten by a dog during a hurricane. Janie mourns Tea Cake's death, but returns to Eatonville with a sense of peace: she has known true love, and she will always carry her memories of Tea Cake with her. Her journey and her return home have made her stronger and wiser.

Other examples of the voyage and return plot structure:

• The Odyssey by Homer
• Great Expectations by Charles Dickens
• Gulliver's Travels by Jonathan Swift
• Alice's Adventures in Wonderland by Lewis Carroll
• By the Waters of Babylon by Stephen Vincent Benét

Other Helpful Plot Resources

• What Makes a Hero? Check out this awesome video on the hero's journey from Ted-Ed.
• The Thirty-Six Dramatic Situations : Visit Wikipedia for an overview of George Polti's theory of dramatic plot structure.
• Why Tragedies Are Alluring : Learn more about Aristotle's tragic structure, ancient Greek and Shakespearean tragedy, and contemporary tragic plots.
• The Wikipedia Page on Plot: A basic but helpful overview of plots.

• PDFs for all 136 Lit Terms we cover
• Downloads of 1894 LitCharts Lit Guides
• Teacher Editions for every Lit Guide
• Explanations and citation info for 39,894 quotes across 1894 books
• Downloadable (PDF) line-by-line translations of every Shakespeare play
• Bildungsroman
• Climax (Figure of Speech)
• Falling Action
• Rising Action
• Tragic Hero
• Blank Verse
• Dynamic Character
• Dramatic Irony
• Verbal Irony
• Round Character
• Extended Metaphor

Plant Science

• Key resources
• Journal articles
• Specialised resources

What is a literature review?

Finding the gaps and advances in your topic, literature review resources.

• Statistics and data
• Referencing and assignments
• Literature reviews guide How to search for, store, organise, evaluate and critique information for your literature review. Includes techniques, books, articles and more to help you do your literature review.
• Systematic reviews guide

A literature review is a critical assessment of the literature pertaining to a particular topic or subject.  It is a 'systematic, explicit, and reproducible method for identifying, evaluating and synthesising the existing body of completed and recorded work produced by researchers, scholars, and practitioners'  Fink, (2005).

What's its purpose?

• justify your research
• provide context for your research
• identify new ways, to interpret and highlight gaps in previous research
• ensure that the research has not been done before
• signpost a way forward for further research
• show where the research fits into the existing literature
• highlight flaws in previous research
• UQ Student Support - writing a literature review A guide to the process of planning and writing a literature review.
• Annotated bibliography A useful guide on how to write entries for your annotated bibliography, from UQ Student Support
• Finding review articles Reading review articles is a good way to get an overview of the current research on a topic. Review articles provide a comprehensive summary of the research on a topic, offer a perspective on the status, and often deliver recommendations for future research.
• Annual reviews online This database provides review journals from across the sciences, with articles that review significant primary research literature to help you keep up to date in the area of your research. Titles include Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Science.
• Set up research alerts Keep up to date with new research on your topic by setting up alerts.
• Cited reference searching Find more articles on your topic.
• Writing an effective literature review
• Writing a literature review Includes checklists
• << Previous: Specialised resources
• Next: Statistics and data >>
• Last Updated: Mar 18, 2024 2:50 PM
• URL: https://guides.library.uq.edu.au/plant-science

What Is Plot? Definition, Usage, and Literary Examples

Plot definition.

Plot  (PLAWT) is the series of events that comprise a story’s main action. It is typically made up of a sequence of individual but connected elements that compels the main character(s) to embark on a journey. This journey can be physically or mentally and emotionally in nature, though it is often both. The plot’s primary journey leads to a climactic event and a resolution.

One of the defining features of a plot is that it includes more than a list of facts. The facts have a purpose that supports the overall journey of the character(s). Another hallmark of plot is the unfolding of a cause-and-effect relationship. Characters make decisions and experience the resulting consequences, good or bad. In other words, plot encompasses not just the  what  but the  how  and the  why .

Plot  derives from the Old French word  complot , which refers to a secret plan or conspiracy. Plots have long been a central component of storytelling, with Greek philosopher Aristotle observing in the fourth century BCE that plot, which he called  mythos , is the “soul” of all tragedy.

The Traditional Plot Structure

Modern interpretations and understandings of plot are largely based on the 1863 model devised by German author Gustav Freytag, called Freytag’s Pyramid. Freytag based it on Aristotle’s analysis of dramatic tragedy. Most plotlines follow the same basic structure made of five essential ingredients.

A story begins by introducing the protagonist and other key characters, their inter- and intra-relationships, the  setting , and relevant background information. This is called exposition. In this section, the protagonist discovers their main goal, typically a problem that needs surmounting. For example, in  Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone , the exposition introduces Harry Potter, his bleak life with the Dursleys, and the subsequent revelation of the wizarding world and Harry’s place in it.

Rising Action  

The next phase is the rising action, which begins with an inciting incident or complication that triggers the ensuing series of events. Since the rising action propels the protagonist on their journey, the inciting incident usually comes with high stakes. The protagonist sees what they stand to lose by not accomplishing their goal, allowing them to start taking proactive steps toward said goal. Throughout the unfolding of the rising action, the protagonist encounters numerous obstacles. They often come in the form of an antagonist character and their disruptive actions. Such obstacles only strengthen—and occasionally frustrate—the protagonist’s determination. Tension tends to build as rising action progresses toward the next phase.

In  Harry Potter , the rising action occurs when Harry and his friends begin to suspect primary villain Voldemort is alive and that he’s after the legendary Sorcerer’s Stone. They assume that Professor Snape, an openly antagonistic character that Harry encounters, is helping the dark lord.

This is the main turning point of the story, when all the events and emotions built up during the exposition and rising action come to a head. Naturally, these are the moments of greatest tension,  conflict , and drama.

Most climaxes involve the protagonist making a major decision that seals both their fate and the outcome of the story. In some cases, climaxes are not the complex moral dilemmas they initially appear to be. These are called anticlimaxes, and they accomplish the story’s main goals through trivial actions. In  Harry Potter , Harry and his friends fight their way through a complex series of barriers to protect the stone, only to discover that the seemingly incompetent Professor Quirrell was aiding Voldemort all along.

Falling Action

In this stage, characters’ actions resolve the story’s central problem, leading to a resolution. In  Harry Potter , Harry manages to keep the stone away from Voldemort and drives him away (for the time being).

The final plot element is the official completion of the goal, solution to the problem, and end to the conflict. The denouement reveals the characters’ fates. The protagonist or the antagonist might win, or each could experience certain degrees of both triumph and defeat. Some stories wrap up by providing information on what happens to the central character(s) in the future.  Harry Potter  ends with Harry and his friends being rewarded for their valiant efforts and the school year coming to a close.

Other Elements of Plot

• The Hero’s Journey

The hero’s journey is a variation of Freytag’s Pyramid. It was first codified in 1871 when anthropologist Edward Burnett Tylor noticed that many classic stories contained the same basic plot elements. In the mid-20th century, scholar Joseph Campbell famously expounded upon this theory in his seminal exploration of  The Hero with a Thousand Faces . In it, Campbell identifies the universal components shared by many stories of classic heroes and their epic adventures.

The hero’s journey, also called a monomyth, can get much more complex and involved, but it always possesses the same structural plot bedrock. It typically unfolds as follows:

• The hero ventures from the common, everyday world into an unknown region filled with supernatural elements.
• The hero encounters fantastic forces in this foreign realm.
• In this new world, the hero achieves a decisive victory of some sort.
• In the end, the hero returns home, changed for the better by their experiences.

Catastrophe and Eucatastrophe

Catastrophes are an aspect of the denouement. They are common in the epic tragedies and comedies of antiquity. In tragedies, catastrophes are the ultimate resolution of the central plot, often involving a major character’s death. Despite their name, catastrophes aren’t inherently devastating or disastrous. In ancient comedies, for instance, the catastrophe is usually a happy one, with a central character’s marriage or another much-sought happily-ever-after.

A eucatastrophe is a catastrophe with an unexpectedly and almost implausibly happy conclusion, achieved via a sudden turn of events. When a character seems invariably doomed, a eucatastrophe overturns this ending and allows the character to avoid their ruin. J. R. R. Tolkien coined the word  eucatastrophe , and his works contain many of them. At the climax of  The Return of the King , Frodo seems permanently possessed by the Ring’s dark power. However, Gollum reappears and bites the Ring off Frodo’s finger. As the creature excitedly celebrates his reclaiming of the Ring, he loses his footing and plunges into the Fire of Mt. Doom—destroying the ring and inadvertently completing Frodo’s quest.

• Deus Ex Machina

A  deus ex machina  is a plot device where an ostensibly unsolvable problem is suddenly solved through surprising and unlikely means. It’s like a eucatastrophe—the main difference being that eucatastrophes tend to have a more optimistic tone. Writers use these devices to shock readers, enhance comedic effect, or quickly introduce an ending. An example is H. G. Wells’s  War of the Worlds . All signs point to the Martians overtaking humanity until they’re all suddenly, inexplicably killed by bacteria. Because of the abrupt nature of this device, it’s not uncommon for readers to view a  deus ex machina  as illogical and contrived.

This is a secondary plot that unfolds in tandem with a story’s main plot. It may involve central characters, minor characters, or both. A subplot can occur independent of the main plotline’s action, or the two can converge at certain points with one affecting the other’s chain of events.

Subplots usually follow the basic structure of Freytag’s Pyramid and are common in most types of literature. An example of a subplot comes from Jane Austen’s  Pride and Prejudice . Protagonist Elizabeth Bennet’s cousin, Mr. Collins, asks her to marry him partway through the novel. She declines the offer, and as she pursues her romance Mr. Darcy, Mr. Collins develops a relationship with Elizabeth’s friend, Charlotte Lucas, whom he eventually marries.

A plot hole is an inconsistency that defies the rest of the story’s logic. Plot holes can take a variety of forms, including illogical or impossible events, contradictions in character or action, unresolved plots, or mistakes in continuity.

A plot hole can occur at any point. Often, they’re a subject of debate as readers wonder if the author knew they were making such a glaring error. In Raymond Chandler’s  The Big Sleep , for example, Chandler never reveals who kills the chauffer. Years later, when the script for the film adaptation was in progress, the screenwriters contacted Chandler directly and asked him for the identity of the chauffer’s murderer. “Damned if I know,” he said.

Plot Twists

A plot twist is a dramatic change in the expected trajectory of a plotline. Plot twists are distinct from eucatastrophes and  dei ex machina  because they’re typically rooted in logic. Even though the twist itself is shocking and might call into question readers’ perception of prior events or characters, it still makes sense. Though they can happen at any time, plot twists most often appear during or after a story’s climax. In the real world, disclosing a plot twist to someone who hasn’t encountered the story is called a spoiler.

Agatha Christie’s  The Murder of Roger Ackroyd  contains one of the greatest plot twists in all of mystery writing—a genre known for plot twists. The book is a first-person narrative, which allows readers to presume the narrator is trustworthy as he relates the story of the title character’s murder and the attempts to solve the crime. In the end, the narrator reveals himself as the killer, altering readers’ perception of everything.

The Function of Plot

Plot’s function is simple but essential. It provides structure, builds tension and excitement, and keeps the reader engaged. Without plot, a story would be nothing more than exposition or a series of interconnected thoughts. There would be no momentum, rendering the story lifeless and  didactic . Even in works that contain an abundance of commentary on their contents, some semblance of plot is necessary to capture the reader’s attention and hold their interest.

Common Plot Structures by Genre

English journalist and author Christopher Booker devoted much of his career to studying plot and how writers use it. He identified features that are near-universal in their application based on the type of work in which they’re found—all of which also adhere to Freytag’s Pyramid.

In a comedic work, the character has a dilemma they must work out. They then encounter several obstacles as they attempt to solve their problem, with each being more outlandish than the one before. At the climax, a revelation resolves the central dilemma and explains the absurdity of the earlier obstacles, resulting in a happy ending. Throughout the entire work, humor is a primary component.

Oscar Wilde’s play  The Importance of Being Earnest  is an example of a classic comedy plot. In it, John “Jack” Worthing invents a fake brother named Ernest, whose identity both he and his friend Algernon assume. This results in a series of increasingly chaotic and farcical encounters, until John learns that he really  is  a man named Ernest. Then, he and Algernon, now revealed to be biological brothers, win the hearts of their respective love interests.

In a tragedy, a likable, respectable character wants more out of life—something typically forbidden to them. To satiate this need, the character focuses intensely on their goal. When this objective is obtained, things go well…at first. But then, things inevitably go wrong, and the character commits a series of irreversibly damaging acts to try and amend their misdeeds. They lose control of the situation, the antagonist closes in, and tragedy, typically death, ensues.

Shakespeare ’s  Macbeth  is a tragedy that holds to this plot structure. At first, Macbeth is a revered Scottish general. After a group of witches tells him he will someday take the throne, he grows consumed with this ambition. This is supported by the machinations of his power-hungry wife. Macbeth murders King Duncan and assumes his place. But fear, guilt, and paranoia follow, and Macbeth commits more murders to cover his tracks. Civil war erupts, chaos reigns, and Macbeth’s enemies overthrow and behead him.

Popular in all literary genres—especially dramatic works, fairy tales, and redemption stories—the protagonist falls under threat from a dark force. At first, things proceed well, and the threat dissipates. However, the dark force comes back stronger, imprisoning the protagonist in a state of distress. It takes a great force of will—sometimes in the form of a secondary character’s intervention—for the protagonist to break free and earn redemption.

Charles Dickens’s  A Christmas Carol  is a story of rebirth. Ebenezer Scrooge lives his life under the dark forces of greed and misanthropy. As a result, he experiences great success and wealth. Then, mystic forces intervene when three ghosts visit him and force him to confront his cruelty. After seeing the damage he has caused, Scrooge chooses to change and is thus redeemed.

Overcoming the Monster

In this type of plot, the hero squares off with a monster, which can be literal or metaphorical. At the beginning of the story, the hero learns about the threat of the monster and answers the call to fight it. The journey to the confrontation goes well, though the hero realizes they may be outmatched by the monster. There is an epic battle with all signs pointing to the hero losing. But, the monster is slayed and the hero escapes, often being rewarded in some way after claiming victory.

Many myths involving humans and/or deities battling monsters follow this kind of plot. So too do adventure and spy stories; Ian Fleming’s  James Bond  novels, for example, all stick to a general overcoming-the-monster narrative.

Examples of Plot in Literature

1. Charlotte Brontë,  Jane Eyre

Brontë’s classic novel follows titular character Jane from her dismal childhood to her shockingly eventful adulthood.

• Exposition:  Brontë establishes Jane as a headstrong, resilient orphan who attends a sinister boarding school.
• Rising Action:  Now a young woman, Jane arrives at Thornfield Hall, the grand manor of the coarse Mr. Rochester, to work as a governess. Jane and Rochester develop romantic feelings for one another, and they get engaged.
• Climax:  Jane and Rochester are about to marry when Jane learns that Rochester’s first wife is not dead as previously assumed; she is alive and violently insane. Long ago, Rochester imprisoned her in her third-floor bedroom at Thornfield, where she remains.
• Falling Action:  Jane leaves Thornfield Hall and begins a new life with her cousins. She comes into a great inheritance left to her by her deceased father.
• Denouement:  With Rochester’s voice haunting her, Jane returns to Thornfield Hall and finds the place in ruins after Mrs. Rochester set the house on fire and committed suicide. Mr. Rochester has lost his hand and eyesight. With Mrs. Rochester dead, he proposes to Jane, and she accepts.

2. Virginia Woolf,  Mrs. Dalloway

One of the most famous works by Woolf, the novel spans a single day in the life of high-society woman Clarissa Dalloway as she prepares for a dinner party.  Mrs. Dalloway  is an example of a story that relies primarily on exposition and commentary while having enough plot to keep the story moving forward.

• Exposition:  Clarissa Dalloway and the people in her orbit—including the sensitive poet and WWI veteran Septimus Smith—face a seemingly normal day in June 1923.
• Rising Action:  As Clarissa makes plans for a formal party that evening, her friends go about their respective days. Each character reflects on their life and choices.
• Climax:  Tormented by posttraumatic stress disorder and fearing that his soul is tainted, Septimus commits suicide.
• Falling Action:  At her party, Clarissa learns of Septimus’s suicide and excuses herself to mull over his death. She begins to identify with Septimus’s desire to die and feels content with his decision because she thinks it allowed him to save his soul.
• Denouement:  Clarissa goes back to the party. Her acceptance of Septimus’s death brings her happiness, and it is palpable to the others in attendance.

3. Suzanne Collins,  The Hunger Games

Collins’s novel—and its sequels—has become a new classic in young adult literature. In it, protagonist Katniss Everdeen goes on a hero’s journey as she tries to survive a violent tradition.

• Exposition:  Collins introduces Katniss and life in the post-apocalyptic North American nation of Panem, comprised of 12 (formerly 13) Districts. Preparations are being made for the annual Hunger Games, an event wherein one adolescent boy and one adolescent girl from each District take part in a violent televised battle until only one remains. Every adolescent in Panem is eligible, and the participants (called “tributes”) are randomly chosen through a lottery drawing.
• Rising Action:  During the selection, Katniss’s little sister, Primrose, is chosen as the girl tribute for their District. Katniss volunteers to take Primrose’s place, something that has never happened before, and the organizers allow it. Katniss and Peeta (the boy tribute) leave to train for the Games at the Capitol. The Games begin, with nearly half of the tributes dying at the outset, and Katniss spends her time trying to avoid the violence.
• Climax:  When only a handful of tributes remain, the Games organizers announce a rule change: for the first time, a pair of tributes can jointly win the Games. Working together, Katniss and Peeta are the last two standing. But the rules are changed once more, and the pair is expected to fight to the death.
• Falling Action:  In defiance of the rules, Katniss and Peeta agree to eat fatally poisonous berries instead of killing one another. Stymied, the organizers name them mutual winners.
• Denouement:  Katniss and Peeta return home, where they are celebrated as heroes. However, Katniss wonders if the Capitol will retaliate against her and Peeta, setting up a sequel novel.

4. Colson Whitehead,  The Underground Railroad

This 2016 novel tells an alternate history wherein the metaphorical Underground Railroad is also manifested literally. The story follows two young slaves as they try to escape their plantation.

• Exposition:  Cora is a slave on a Georgia plantation. Her mother, Mabel, escaped some years prior and made Cora an outcast.
• Rising Action:  Cora and a fellow slave, Caesar, escape via the Underground Railroad. They are chased by a slavecatcher named Ridgeway, who successfully catches Cora. A Railroad operator named Royal rescues Cora, taking her to a farm with other freedmen.
• Climax:  Ridgeway reappears, burning the farm down and killing Royal. He takes Cora to an abandoned Railroad station near the farm, where she pushes him down a flight of stairs.
• Falling Action:  Cora runs through the underground tunnels, hoping to put as much distance as possible between her and Ridgeway.
• Denouement:  Cora emerges from the tunnel and comes across a westward-bound wagon. The driver, Ollie, offers her a ride, and she gets on.

Further Resources on Plot

A professor at Carson-Newman University diagrammed Freytag’s Pyramid , explaining each stage in depth.

Well-Storied breaks down the arc of the hero's journey in this article, which is also available as a podcast.

How to Write a Book Now has an in-depth article on Christopher Booker’s basic plot points .

Vulture  compiled a slightly tongue-in-cheek, encyclopedia-style rundown of  every plot ever .

The Write Practice has a “cheat sheet” for writing  plot and story structure .

Related Terms

• Catastrophe
• Cliffhanger
• Didacticism
• Eucatastrophe
• Protagonist

• Search Menu
• Supplements
• Cohort Profiles
• Education Corner
• Author Guidelines
• Submission Site
• Open Access
• About the International Journal of Epidemiology
• About the International Epidemiological Association
• Editorial Team
• Editorial Board
• Advertising and Corporate Services
• Journals Career Network
• Self-Archiving Policy
• Dispatch Dates
• Contact the IEA
• Journals on Oxford Academic
• Books on Oxford Academic

Article Contents

Introduction, acknowledgements.

• < Previous

Forest plots in reports of systematic reviews: a cross-sectional study reviewing current practice

• Article contents
• Figures & tables
• Supplementary Data

David L Schriger, Douglas G Altman, Julia A Vetter, Thomas Heafner, David Moher, Forest plots in reports of systematic reviews: a cross-sectional study reviewing current practice, International Journal of Epidemiology , Volume 39, Issue 2, April 2010, Pages 421–429, https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyp370

• Permissions Icon Permissions

Background Forest plots are graphical displays of findings of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Little is known about the style and content of these plots and whether published plots maximize the graphic’s potential for information exchange.

Methods We examine the number, style and content of forest plots presented in a previously studied cross-sectional sample of 300 systematic reviews. We studied all forest plots in non-Cochrane reviews and a sample of forest plots in Cochrane reviews.

Results The database contained 129 Cochrane reviews and 171 non-Cochrane reviews. All the Cochrane reviews had forest plots (2197 in total), and a random sample of 500 of these plots were included. In total, 28 of the non-Cochrane reviews had forest plots (139 in total), all of which were included. Plots in Cochrane reviews were standardized but often contained little data (80% had three or fewer studies; 10% had no studies) and always presented studies in alphabetical order. Non-Cochrane plots depicted a larger number of studies (60% had four or more studies) and 59% ordered studies by a potentially meaningful characteristic, but important information was often missing. Of the 28 reviews that had a forest plots with at least 10 studies, 3 (11%) had funnel plots.

Conclusions Forest plots in Cochrane reviews were highly standardized but some of the standards do not optimize information exchange, and many of the plots had too little data to be useful. Forest plots in non-Cochrane reviews often omitted key elements but had more data and were often more thoughtfully constructed.

Systematic reviews are an important means of summarizing the methods and results of individual studies and increasingly are being used as a starting point in the development of clinical practice guidelines 1 and have been advocated as the starting and ending point of all randomized trials. 2 Forest plots—the graphical display of individual study results and, usually, the weighted average of studies included in a systematic review—are one way of summarizing the review’s results for a specific outcome. 3–6 Plots of this kind first appeared in the 1970s and were refined over the next two decades; they were first called ‘forest plots’ in the mid-1990s. 4 Since that time the elements contained in a forest plot and the layout of such plots have become somewhat standardized, largely due to the introduction of software that helps authors construct these plots ( Figure 1 ). 7 , 8

A standardized format for forest plots no doubt helps readers because repeated exposure to a familiar format decreases the time and effort required to become oriented to the graphic and likely facilities their interpretation. Nevertheless, many of the de facto standards for the construction of forest plots were not based on theory or empirical evidence regarding optimal information exchange and, for a number of issues, theory would suggest that current practice is suboptimal.

The plot is drawn in STATA 11 (Stata Corp., College Station, TX, USA) from data presented in Ezekowitz et al. 22 Note that studies have been sorted first by whether they addressed primary or secondary prevention and second by year of publication. This organization allows readers to easily determine whether they believe that these variables affect the outcome.

Recently, Moher et al. characterized many of the qualities of the text and tables in a group of systematic reviews. 9 We now examine the forest plots contained in this set of systematic reviews with the goal of describing current practice regarding their construction and display. By defining current practice we hope to identify ways that forest plots in future systematic reviews can be improved.

We used the database assembled by Moher et al. , which consists 300 English language reports of systematic reviews (of various study designs) that were indexed on Medline during November 2004. 9 These papers were found by reviewing 1046 potential citations and keeping those that were systematic reviews, which offered explicit methods for article identification and eligibility. The 300 papers were found in 132 journals, and mainly reviewed therapeutic (71%), epidemiologic (13%) and diagnostic (8%) questions. A total of 54% of the systematic reviews did some type of mathematical pooling of individual study results.

We reviewed each paper for the presence of any graphical attempt to simultaneously portray the results of the individual studies included in the systematic review. We also noted whether each paper contained funnel plots—a graphical display used to assess asymmetry of results, a possible explanation for publication bias. 10 We did not count isolated data tables; we required that there be some form of graphic presentation of the individual study data.

We counted the number of plots in each paper and noted whether each paper was a Cochrane review. 11 All plots from non-Cochrane reviews were included. We sampled the plots in Cochrane reviews because the number of forest plots they contained substantially outnumbered the forest plots found in non-Cochrane reviews. We used the random number function in STATA 9.0 to select two plots from every Cochrane review. We completed the sampling by randomly selecting from the pool of remaining Cochrane review plots sufficient plots to bring the total sample of Cochrane review plots to 500.

Plots were independently rated by two members of the research team (J.V. and T.H.) who had been trained by the principal investigator (D.S.) and had proved their accuracy on a set of training plots. Data forms were reviewed for inconsistencies between the raters, and the principal investigator adjudicated discrepancies. Forest plots were assessed for: whether the individual studies were separated into sub-panels and on what basis; how the studies in each plot (or each sub-panel if there were sub-panels) were ordered—alphabetically, by effect size, by weight, by year of publication, by study characteristic (e.g. dose used); and what measure of effect was used, what scale was used and what data elements were presented in the graphic.

Of the 300 systematic reviews in the data-set, 129 (43%) were Cochrane reviews ( Table 1 ). Although all the reviews had forest plot frameworks, only 115 (89%) had data in the frameworks (in 14 Cochrane reviews all forest plot frameworks were empty as no eligible studies were included). There were 2197 individual forest plots (although ∼10% had no data, see below), a mean of 17 plots per Cochrane review [median 9, interquartile range (IQR) 4–24]. The maximum number of forest plots in a Cochrane review was 125.

Number of forest and funnel plots in 300 systematic reviews

a All 129 Cochrane papers had forest plot frameworks but 14 had no studies in the framework.

Of the 171 non-Cochrane reviews, 28 (16%) had at least one forest plot. Non-Cochrane reviews with a forest plot had a mean of five plots (median 2, IQR 1–4). The three studies with the largest number of plots had 44, 20 and 9. A total of 3% (4/129) of Cochrane and 3% (5/171) of non-Cochrane reviews had funnel plots. Of the 28 reviews that had a forest plot that contained at least 10 studies, 3 (11%) had funnel plots.

The number of individual studies represented within the forest plots is presented in Table 2 . In general, there were fewer studies in the plots presented in Cochrane reviews than in non-Cochrane reviews. This was true for plots that contained a single panel of studies (median one vs seven studies) and plots that divided the studies into sub-panels (median one vs two studies per sub-panel). One paper 12 contributed 44 (32%) of 139 non-Cochrane plots. These plots were atypical of the other non-Cochrane plots—88 of the 92 panels and sub-panels had one study, 3 had two studies and 1 had three studies. Excluding this paper, single panel non-Cochrane plots had a median of eight studies and multi-paneled plots had a median five studies per panel. Although 36% of non-Cochrane plots that used sub-panels (71% if we exclude the one aberrant study) had two sub-panels that contained at least four studies, only 16% of Cochrane plots did so. When present, sub-panels were organized by an explanatory variable in 78% of Cochrane and 70% of non-Cochrane studies with the remaining plots organized by outcome variables. (Table S1, Supplementary data are available at IJE online).

Number of studies in forest plots

a This column reports non-Cochrane results with one large, atypical paper 12 removed. See text.

b We randomly sampled 500 plots from the 2137 Cochrane plots.

All Cochrane review plots displayed individual study results in alphabetical order, either by first author last name or study acronym ( Table 3 ). In contrast, 46% of non-Cochrane review plots displayed study results by year of publication and a smaller number sorted the study results by effect size, and sample size. Ratio measures were the predominant reported outcome and most were scaled between either 0.01 and 100 or 0.1 and 10. Cochrane review plots were always scaled symmetrically whereas non-Cochrane review plots used a variety of scales. A logarithmic scale was used for all plots of ratio measures. In all Cochrane plots the symbol used to indicate the estimated effect size (e.g. mean, relative risk) for each study was sized to reflect that study’s weight. A total of 17 of 28 (61%) non-Cochrane papers (49% of all plots) had sized symbols.

Characteristics of forest plots

a When the one atypical article 12 with 31 plots is removed, ratio measures account for 56% and difference measures for 40% of the remaining 108 studies.

The typical Cochrane review plot includes: (i) a title that states the research question, the comparison being made and the outcome measure; (ii) a description of each study including author last name, publication year, the n / N (binary outcome) or N (continuous outcome) for each group, the point estimate and 95% CI both numerically and as a graphic, and the weight that the study was given if meta-analysis was performed; (iii) for each meta-analysis—a summary diamond, a pooled estimate of the outcome and its CI, the total N for binary measures, a test of heterogeneity and a test for overall effect; and (iv) a scale for the forest plot with labels indicating which direction favours one group or the other ( Table 4 and Figure 1 ). With the exception of one plot that did not indicate which direction favoured the treatment group, all Cochrane review plots contained all these elements except those listed in (iii) above when meta-analysis was not performed. The non-Cochrane review plots were less standardized in this regard, with roughly half of the plots missing many of the elements outlined above ( Table 4 ). In particular, the majority did not include the summary results of each of the studies depicted in the plot.

Items reported in forest plots

SD, Standard deviation.

The majority of Cochrane review plots presented summary diamonds—graphical representations of the summation of the findings of the individual studies derived from meta-analytic techniques (Table S1, Supplementary data are available at IJE online). Summary diamonds were presented in 70% of plots that had only one study and were used more judiciously in non-Cochrane review plots where they were seldom provided unless there were several studies to be combined. Of the 28 non-Cochrane papers with forest plots, 12 (43%) did not state the statistical method by which the summary diamond was created. Of the other 16 articles, 8 (50%) stated the method used random effects, 5 (31%) used fixed effects, 1 (6%) had some plots that used fixed and others random effects and 1 (6%) reported two summary diamonds, one for each method. In the 115 Cochrane reviews 64% used fixed effects, 17% random effects, 15% had some plots for which each method was used and 4% used neither. The ratio of fixed effects to random effects meta-analytic techniques was roughly 4:1 in Cochrane review plots and 3:4 in non-Cochrane review plots.

Plots in all Cochrane and 8 (28%) of the 28 non-Cochrane reviews that had plots appear to have been generated in Review Manager (RevMan), available at the Cochrane website ( http://www.cc-ims.net/RevMan ). Only 8 of the 28 non-Cochrane reviews stated the software used to create the plots (6 RevMan, 2 Stats Direct), although we can assume, based on forest plot style and the software used for the statistical analysis, that some authors used Stata and StatXact. In 18 of 28 papers it was not clear to us the software that was used to make the plot, and in 11 of 28 papers the authors neither stated the software used to make the plot nor the software used to perform the analyses.

Forest plots are a concise graphical way of summarizing the quantitative findings of a systematic review. Such plots are informative whether they contain a summary diamond from a meta-analysis of the included study results or just present the results of individual studies. Our cross-sectional study reveals several important findings. First, authors of Cochrane reviews generally follow a recipe whereby forest plots are created based on the existence of a question rather than the availability of data. As a result, all Cochrane reviews had forest plots, but 10% contained no data and >65% contained just one or two studies. While these sparsely populated plots certainly emphasize that “more research is needed,” plots with 0 or 1 studies serve no other purpose and the message that data are sparse could be made more efficiently. Of note, the 2008 version of the ‘ Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions ’ states: ‘Forest plots should not be generated that contain no studies, and are discouraged when only a single study is found for a particular outcome’. 13 The paucity of information contained in forest plots with sparse data is exacerbated when these plots present summary diamonds that ‘summarize’ one study. The information in these diamonds is redundant and may falsely inflate readers’ assessments of the amount of available information.

The majority (84%) of non-Cochrane reviews did not contain even one forest plot. Although it is possible that the authors of some reviews had ample data from many studies but naively did not know to include such a plot, there was little evidence of this. More commonly, when data were sparse and the plot would have contained less than three studies, authors of non-Cochrane reviews wisely decided to omit the plot. As a result, when non-Cochrane reviews did have plots these plots tended to be richer; they contained sufficient papers to make the plot interesting and helpful.

Only 3% of both Cochrane and non-Cochrane reviews presented funnel plots. Some authors believe that when there are a sufficient number of studies (e.g. 10 or more), funnel plots can be very useful for detecting asymmetry, perhaps suggesting publication bias, 10 , 14 whereas others argue that funnel plots are not particularly helpful. 15 , 16 Regardless, our study suggests that they are reported infrequently.

Scientists use graphics to communicate because graphics can have far greater data density and multidimensionality than text. 17 Although the horizontal dimension of each forest plot represents the magnitude and precision of each study’s result, our data demonstrate that authors’ use of forest plots does not exploit the vertical dimension. All Cochrane review plots and 44% of non-Cochrane review plots presented studies in either alphabetical order or some other order that had little potential for illuminating the meaning of the data. This is unfortunate as one of the main benefits of a systematic review is the opportunity to explore why study results differ from one another. 18 For example, when ordered by year of publication, forest plots can reveal trends related to changing technologies (early studies of computerized tomography will have lower sensitivity than more recent ones because scan resolution has improved). They can also be useful when cumulative meta-analysis is performed or to show how beliefs are modified by the addition of new data to an existing meta-analysis (i.e. updating systematic reviews). 2 , 19 Ordering by effect size can aid in the detection of heterogeneity, and ordering on sample size or some analogue (e.g. study weight) can aid in the detection of publication bias (in a manner similar to funnel plots). When ordered by a characteristic of the studies (e.g. dosage used, or severity of illness of the subjects, risk of bias), plots may reveal patterns that would otherwise go unobserved ( Figure 2 ). It is therefore unfortunate that alphabetical order, which wastes the vertical dimension, predominates. We found no directions regarding this concern in the 2008 Cochrane Handbook . 13

Effect of ordering on appearance of forest plot. ( A ) Ordered by author last name. ( B ) Ordered by dose. These data, adapted from Annane et al. 23 , are shown ordered by author last name and the dose employed by each study. Within each dosage level, studies are ordered by effect size. From the bottom panel we easily see that there is a suggestion that dose is an effect modifier. This is not apparent in the upper panel.

All Cochrane review forest plots were created using RevMan software, which ensured that they appeared in a standard format. The benefit of this strategy is homogeneous-appearing forest plots that contain all the desired elements ( Table 4 ). A downside of this approach is that these elements appear even when they are wholly irrelevant. In contrast, authors of non-Cochrane reviews employed a variety of methods to create their plots. As a result, their plots are not standardized and many omit important information ( Table 4 ). However, these plots seldom display nonsense graphics (e.g. meta-analyses of single studies).

Our findings provide a baseline from which authors, peer reviewers and editors can contemplate how to further improve the information content and organization of forest plots. The most obvious first steps are listed in Figure 3 . We emphasize that authors should: (i) only use forest plots when there are sufficient studies to make them of value; (ii) ensure that plots contain all the important elements; and (iii) exploit the plot’s vertical dimension by ordering studies in a way that might illustrate important differences among them, such as by year of publication, effect size or important study characteristic.

Suggestions for making high-quality forest plots. a Median (IQR) may be more appropriate when data are skewed though there is no widely used mechanism for pooling data in this form.

We also encourage authors to consult item 21 of the PRISMA Statement 20 [‘For all outcomes considered (benefits or harms) present, for each study: (i) simple summary data for each intervention group, (ii) effect estimates and confidence intervals, ideally with a forest plot’], and the accompanying PRISMA explanation document. 21 That paper provides examples of ‘good reporting’ including use of tables and graphics to present the results of systematic reviews, along with an explanation and evidence, when available, for reporting this information.

This work was supported in part by an unrestricted grant from the Korein Foundation to D.L.S. Cancer Research UK to D.G.A. and University of Ottawa Research Chair to D.M.

The authors thank Jennifer Tetzlaff for her help with file management, and Jessica Brown, Louis Muscarella and Gina Pang for their help in conducting this research.

Plots in Cochrane reviews were standardized but often contained little data (80% had 3 or fewer studies; 10% had no studies) and always presented studies in alphabetical order.

Non-Cochrane plots depicted a larger number of studies (60% had 4 or more studies) and 59% ordered studies by a potentially meaningful characteristic, but important information was often missing.

We emphasize that authors should: 1) only use forest plots when there are sufficient studies to make them of value 2) ensure that plots contain all of the important elements, and 3) exploit the plot's vertical dimension by ordering studies in a way that might illustrate important differences among them, such as by year of publication, effect size, or important study characteristic.

Google Scholar

Google Preview

• graphical displays
• cochrane collaboration

Supplementary data

Email alerts, citing articles via, looking for your next opportunity.

• About International Journal of Epidemiology
• Recommend to your Library

Affiliations

• Online ISSN 1464-3685
• Copyright © 2024 International Epidemiological Association
• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Institutional account management
• Rights and permissions
• Get help with access
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.