role of review of literature in thesis

Reference management. Clean and simple.

How to write a literature review in 6 steps

What is a literature review?

How to write a literature review, 1. determine the purpose of your literature review, 2. do an extensive search, 3. evaluate and select literature, 4. analyze the literature, 5. plan the structure of your literature review, 6. write your literature review, other resources to help you write a successful literature review, frequently asked questions about writing a literature review, related articles.

A literature review is an assessment of the sources in a chosen topic of research.

A good literature review does not just summarize sources. It analyzes the state of the field on a given topic and creates a scholarly foundation for you to make your own intervention. It demonstrates to your readers how your research fits within a larger field of study.

In a thesis, a literature review is part of the introduction, but it can also be a separate section. In research papers, a literature review may have its own section or it may be integrated into the introduction, depending on the field.

➡️ Our guide on what is a literature review covers additional basics about literature reviews.

• Identify the main purpose of the literature review.
• Do extensive research.
• Evaluate and select relevant sources.
• Analyze the sources.
• Plan a structure.
• Write the review.

In this section, we review each step of the process of creating a literature review.

In the first step, make sure you know specifically what the assignment is and what form your literature review should take. Read your assignment carefully and seek clarification from your professor or instructor if needed. You should be able to answer the following questions:

• How many sources do I need to include?
• What types of sources should I review?
• Should I evaluate the sources?
• Should I summarize, synthesize or critique sources?
• Do I need to provide any definitions or background information?

In addition to that, be aware that 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 overview of the topic.

Now you need to find out what has been written on the topic and search for literature related to your research topic. Make sure to select appropriate source material, which means using academic or scholarly sources , including books, reports, journal articles , government documents and web resources.

➡️ If you’re unsure about how to tell if a source is scholarly, take a look at our guide on how to identify a scholarly source .

Come up with a list of relevant keywords and then start your search with your institution's library catalog, and extend it to other useful databases and academic search engines like:

• Google Scholar
• Science.gov

➡️ Our guide on how to collect data for your thesis might be helpful at this stage of your research as well as the top list of academic search engines .

Once you find a useful article, check out the reference list. It should provide you with even more relevant sources. Also, keep a note of the:

• authors' names
• page numbers

Keeping track of the bibliographic information for each source will save you time when you’re ready to create citations. You could also use a reference manager like Paperpile to automatically save, manage, and cite your references.

Read the literature. You will most likely not be able to read absolutely everything that is out there on the topic. Therefore, read the abstract first to determine whether the rest of the source is worth your time. If the source is relevant for your topic:

• Read it critically.
• Look for the main arguments.
• Take notes as you read.
• Organize your notes using a table, mind map, or other technique.

Now you are ready to analyze the literature you have gathered. While your are working on your analysis, you should ask the following questions:

• What are the key terms, concepts and problems addressed by the author?
• How is this source relevant for my specific topic?
• How is the article structured? What are the major trends and findings?
• What are the conclusions of the study?
• How are the results presented? Is the source credible?
• When comparing different sources, how do they relate to each other? What are the similarities, what are the differences?
• Does the study help me understand the topic better?
• Are there any gaps in the research that need to be filled? How can I further my research as a result of the review?

Tip: Decide on the structure of your literature review before you start writing.

There are various ways to organize your literature review:

• Chronological method : Writing in the chronological method means you are presenting the materials according to when they were published. Follow this approach only if a clear path of research can be identified.
• Thematic review : A thematic review of literature is organized around a topic or issue, rather than the progression of time.
• Publication-based : You can order your sources by publication, if the way you present the order of your sources demonstrates a more important trend. This is the case when a progression revealed from study to study and the practices of researchers have changed and adapted due to the new revelations.
• Methodological approach : A methodological approach focuses on the methods used by the researcher. If you have used sources from different disciplines that use a variety of research methods, you might want to compare the results in light of the different methods and discuss how the topic has been approached from different sides.

Regardless of the structure you chose, a review should always include the following three sections:

• An introduction, which should give the reader an outline of why you are writing the review and explain the relevance of the topic.
• A body, which divides your literature review into different sections. Write in well-structured paragraphs, use transitions and topic sentences and critically analyze each source for how it contributes to the themes you are researching.
• A conclusion , which summarizes the key findings, the main agreements and disagreements in the literature, your overall perspective, and any gaps or areas for further research.

➡️ If your literature review is part of a longer paper, visit our guide on what is a research paper for additional tips.

➡️ UNC writing center: Literature reviews

➡️ How to write a literature review in 3 steps

➡️ How to write a literature review in 30 minutes or less

The goal of a literature review is to asses the state of the field on a given topic in preparation for making an intervention.

A literature review should have its own independent section. You should indicate clearly in the table of contents where it can be found, and address this section as “Literature Review.”

There is no set amount of words for a literature review; the length depends on the research. If you are working with a large amount of sources, then it will be long. If your paper does not depend entirely on references, then it will be short.

Most research papers include a literature review. By assessing the available sources in your field of research, you will be able to make a more confident argument about the topic.

Literature reviews are most commonly found in theses and dissertations. However, you find them in research papers as well.

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

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

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

What are Literature Reviews?

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

Goals of Literature Reviews

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

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

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

What kinds of sources require a Literature Review?

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

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

Types of Literature Reviews

What kinds of literature reviews are written?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Literature Reviews in the Health Sciences

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

Frequently asked questions

What is the purpose of a literature review.

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.

Frequently asked questions: Academic writing

A rhetorical tautology is the repetition of an idea of concept using different words.

Rhetorical tautologies occur when additional words are used to convey a meaning that has already been expressed or implied. For example, the phrase “armed gunman” is a tautology because a “gunman” is by definition “armed.”

A logical tautology is a statement that is always true because it includes all logical possibilities.

Logical tautologies often take the form of “either/or” statements (e.g., “It will rain, or it will not rain”) or employ circular reasoning (e.g., “she is untrustworthy because she can’t be trusted”).

You may have seen both “appendices” or “appendixes” as pluralizations of “ appendix .” Either spelling can be used, but “appendices” is more common (including in APA Style ). Consistency is key here: make sure you use the same spelling throughout your paper.

The purpose of a lab report is to demonstrate your understanding of the scientific method with a hands-on lab experiment. Course instructors will often provide you with an experimental design and procedure. Your task is to write up how you actually performed the experiment and evaluate the outcome.

In contrast, a research paper requires you to independently develop an original argument. It involves more in-depth research and interpretation of sources and data.

A lab report is usually shorter than a research paper.

The sections of a lab report can vary between scientific fields and course requirements, but it usually contains the following:

• Title: expresses the topic of your study
• Abstract: summarizes your research aims, methods, results, and conclusions
• Introduction: establishes the context needed to understand the topic
• Method: describes the materials and procedures used in the experiment
• Results: reports all descriptive and inferential statistical analyses
• Discussion: interprets and evaluates results and identifies limitations
• Conclusion: sums up the main findings of your experiment
• References: list of all sources cited using a specific style (e.g. APA)
• Appendices: contains lengthy materials, procedures, tables or figures

A lab report conveys the aim, methods, results, and conclusions of a scientific experiment . Lab reports are commonly assigned in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields.

The abstract is the very last thing you write. You should only write it after your research is complete, so that you can accurately summarize the entirety of your thesis , dissertation or research paper .

If you’ve gone over the word limit set for your assignment, shorten your sentences and cut repetition and redundancy during the editing process. If you use a lot of long quotes , consider shortening them to just the essentials.

If you need to remove a lot of words, you may have to cut certain passages. Remember that everything in the text should be there to support your argument; look for any information that’s not essential to your point and remove it.

To make this process easier and faster, you can use a paraphrasing tool . With this tool, you can rewrite your text to make it simpler and shorter. If that’s not enough, you can copy-paste your paraphrased text into the summarizer . This tool will distill your text to its core message.

Revising, proofreading, and editing are different stages of the writing process .

• Revising is making structural and logical changes to your text—reformulating arguments and reordering information.
• Editing refers to making more local changes to things like sentence structure and phrasing to make sure your meaning is conveyed clearly and concisely.
• Proofreading involves looking at the text closely, line by line, to spot any typos and issues with consistency and correct them.

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 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.

Avoid citing sources in your abstract . There are two reasons for this:

• The abstract should focus on your original research, not on the work of others.
• The abstract should be self-contained and fully understandable without reference to other sources.

There are some circumstances where you might need to mention other sources in an abstract: for example, if your research responds directly to another study or focuses on the work of a single theorist. In general, though, don’t include citations unless absolutely necessary.

An abstract is a concise summary of an academic text (such as a journal article or dissertation ). It serves two main purposes:

• To help potential readers determine the relevance of your paper for their own research.
• To communicate your key findings to those who don’t have time to read the whole paper.

Abstracts are often indexed along with keywords on academic databases, so they make your work more easily findable. Since the abstract is the first thing any reader sees, it’s important that it clearly and accurately summarizes the contents of your paper.

In a scientific paper, the methodology always comes after the introduction and before the results , discussion and conclusion . The same basic structure also applies to a thesis, dissertation , or research proposal .

Depending on the length and type of document, you might also include a literature review or theoretical framework before the methodology.

Whether you’re publishing a blog, submitting a research paper , or even just writing an important email, there are a few techniques you can use to make sure it’s error-free:

• Take a break : Set your work aside for at least a few hours so that you can look at it with fresh eyes.
• Proofread a printout : Staring at a screen for too long can cause fatigue – sit down with a pen and paper to check the final version.
• Use digital shortcuts : Take note of any recurring mistakes (for example, misspelling a particular word, switching between US and UK English , or inconsistently capitalizing a term), and use Find and Replace to fix it throughout the document.

If you want to be confident that an important text is error-free, it might be worth choosing a professional proofreading service instead.

Editing and proofreading are different steps in the process of revising a text.

Editing comes first, and can involve major changes to content, structure and language. The first stages of editing are often done by authors themselves, while a professional editor makes the final improvements to grammar and style (for example, by improving sentence structure and word choice ).

Proofreading is the final stage of checking a text before it is published or shared. It focuses on correcting minor errors and inconsistencies (for example, in punctuation and capitalization ). Proofreaders often also check for formatting issues, especially in print publishing.

The cost of proofreading depends on the type and length of text, the turnaround time, and the level of services required. Most proofreading companies charge per word or page, while freelancers sometimes charge an hourly rate.

For proofreading alone, which involves only basic corrections of typos and formatting mistakes, you might pay as little as $0.01 per word, but in many cases, your text will also require some level of editing , which costs slightly more.

It’s often possible to purchase combined proofreading and editing services and calculate the price in advance based on your requirements.

There are many different routes to becoming a professional proofreader or editor. The necessary qualifications depend on the field – to be an academic or scientific proofreader, for example, you will need at least a university degree in a relevant subject.

For most proofreading jobs, experience and demonstrated skills are more important than specific qualifications. Often your skills will be tested as part of the application process.

To learn practical proofreading skills, you can choose to take a course with a professional organization such as the Society for Editors and Proofreaders . Alternatively, you can apply to companies that offer specialized on-the-job training programmes, such as the Scribbr Academy .

Ask our team

Want to contact us directly? No problem.  We  are always here for you.

• Email [email protected]
• Start live chat
• Call +1 (510) 822-8066
• WhatsApp +31 20 261 6040

Our team helps students graduate by offering:

• A world-class citation generator
• Plagiarism Checker software powered by Turnitin
• Innovative Citation Checker software
• Professional proofreading services
• Over 300 helpful articles about academic writing, citing sources, plagiarism, and more

Scribbr specializes in editing study-related documents . We proofread:

• PhD dissertations
• Research proposals
• Personal statements
• Admission essays
• Motivation letters
• Reflection papers
• Journal articles
• Capstone projects

Scribbr’s Plagiarism Checker is powered by elements of Turnitin’s Similarity Checker , namely the plagiarism detection software and the Internet Archive and Premium Scholarly Publications content databases .

The add-on AI detector is powered by Scribbr’s proprietary software.

The Scribbr Citation Generator is developed using the open-source Citation Style Language (CSL) project and Frank Bennett’s citeproc-js . It’s the same technology used by dozens of other popular citation tools, including Mendeley and Zotero.

You can find all the citation styles and locales used in the Scribbr Citation Generator in our publicly accessible repository on Github .

• Link to facebook
• Link to linkedin
• Link to twitter
• Link to youtube
• Writing Tips

What is the Purpose of a Literature Review?

4-minute read

• 23rd October 2023

If you’re writing a research paper or dissertation , then you’ll most likely need to include a comprehensive literature review . In this post, we’ll review the purpose of literature reviews, why they are so significant, and the specific elements to include in one. Literature reviews can:

1. Provide a foundation for current research.

2. Define key concepts and theories.

3. Demonstrate critical evaluation.

4. Show how research and methodologies have evolved.

5. Identify gaps in existing research.

6. Support your argument.

Keep reading to enter the exciting world of literature reviews!

What is a Literature Review?

A literature review is a critical summary and evaluation of the existing research (e.g., academic journal articles and books) on a specific topic. It is typically included as a separate section or chapter of a research paper or dissertation, serving as a contextual framework for a study. Literature reviews can vary in length depending on the subject and nature of the study, with most being about equal length to other sections or chapters included in the paper. Essentially, the literature review highlights previous studies in the context of your research and summarizes your insights in a structured, organized format. Next, let’s look at the overall purpose of a literature review.

Find this useful?

Subscribe to our newsletter and get writing tips from our editors straight to your inbox.

Literature reviews are considered an integral part of research across most academic subjects and fields. The primary purpose of a literature review in your study is to:

Provide a Foundation for Current Research

Since the literature review provides a comprehensive evaluation of the existing research, it serves as a solid foundation for your current study. It’s a way to contextualize your work and show how your research fits into the broader landscape of your specific area of study.  

Define Key Concepts and Theories

The literature review highlights the central theories and concepts that have arisen from previous research on your chosen topic. It gives your readers a more thorough understanding of the background of your study and why your research is particularly significant .

Demonstrate Critical Evaluation 

A comprehensive literature review shows your ability to critically analyze and evaluate a broad range of source material. And since you’re considering and acknowledging the contribution of key scholars alongside your own, it establishes your own credibility and knowledge.

Show How Research and Methodologies Have Evolved

Another purpose of literature reviews is to provide a historical perspective and demonstrate how research and methodologies have changed over time, especially as data collection methods and technology have advanced. And studying past methodologies allows you, as the researcher, to understand what did and did not work and apply that knowledge to your own research.  

Identify Gaps in Existing Research

Besides discussing current research and methodologies, the literature review should also address areas that are lacking in the existing literature. This helps further demonstrate the relevance of your own research by explaining why your study is necessary to fill the gaps.

Support Your Argument

A good literature review should provide evidence that supports your research questions and hypothesis. For example, your study may show that your research supports existing theories or builds on them in some way. Referencing previous related studies shows your work is grounded in established research and will ultimately be a contribution to the field.  

Literature Review Editing Services 

Ensure your literature review is polished and ready for submission by having it professionally proofread and edited by our expert team. Our literature review editing services will help your research stand out and make an impact. Not convinced yet? Send in your free sample today and see for yourself! 

Share this article:

Post A New Comment

Got content that needs a quick turnaround? Let us polish your work. Explore our editorial business services.

6-minute read

How to Write a Nonprofit Grant Proposal

If you’re seeking funding to support your charitable endeavors as a nonprofit organization, you’ll need...

9-minute read

How to Use Infographics to Boost Your Presentation

Is your content getting noticed? Capturing and maintaining an audience’s attention is a challenge when...

8-minute read

Why Interactive PDFs Are Better for Engagement

Are you looking to enhance engagement and captivate your audience through your professional documents? Interactive...

7-minute read

Seven Key Strategies for Voice Search Optimization

Voice search optimization is rapidly shaping the digital landscape, requiring content professionals to adapt their...

Five Creative Ways to Showcase Your Digital Portfolio

Are you a creative freelancer looking to make a lasting impression on potential clients or...

How to Ace Slack Messaging for Contractors and Freelancers

Effective professional communication is an important skill for contractors and freelancers navigating remote work environments....

Make sure your writing is the best it can be with our expert English proofreading and editing.

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.

What is a Literature Review? How to Write It (with Examples)

A literature review is a critical analysis and synthesis of existing research on a particular topic. It provides an overview of the current state of knowledge, identifies gaps, and highlights key findings in the literature. 1 The purpose of a literature review is to situate your own research within the context of existing scholarship, demonstrating your understanding of the topic and showing how your work contributes to the ongoing conversation in the field. Learning how to write a literature review is a critical tool for successful research. Your ability to summarize and synthesize prior research pertaining to a certain topic demonstrates your grasp on the topic of study, and assists in the learning process. 

Table of Contents

• What is the purpose of literature review? 
• a. Habitat Loss and Species Extinction: 
• b. Range Shifts and Phenological Changes: 
• c. Ocean Acidification and Coral Reefs: 
• d. Adaptive Strategies and Conservation Efforts: 

How to write a good literature review 

• Choose a Topic and Define the Research Question: 
• Decide on the Scope of Your Review: 
• Select Databases for Searches: 
• Conduct Searches and Keep Track: 
• Review the Literature: 
• Organize and Write Your Literature Review: 
• How to write a literature review faster with Paperpal? 
• Frequently asked questions 

What is a literature review?

A well-conducted literature review demonstrates the researcher’s familiarity with the existing literature, establishes the context for their own research, and contributes to scholarly conversations on the topic. One of the purposes of a literature review is also to help researchers avoid duplicating previous work and ensure that their research is informed by and builds upon the existing body of knowledge.

What is the purpose of literature review?

A literature review serves several important purposes within academic and research contexts. Here are some key objectives and functions of a literature review: 2  

1. Contextualizing the Research Problem: The literature review provides a background and context for the research problem under investigation. It helps to situate the study within the existing body of knowledge. 

2. Identifying Gaps in Knowledge: By identifying gaps, contradictions, or areas requiring further research, the researcher can shape the research question and justify the significance of the study. This is crucial for ensuring that the new research contributes something novel to the field. 

Find academic papers related to your research topic faster. Try Research on Paperpal  

3. Understanding Theoretical and Conceptual Frameworks: Literature reviews help researchers gain an understanding of the theoretical and conceptual frameworks used in previous studies. This aids in the development of a theoretical framework for the current research. 

4. Providing Methodological Insights: Another purpose of literature reviews is that it allows researchers to learn about the methodologies employed in previous studies. This can help in choosing appropriate research methods for the current study and avoiding pitfalls that others may have encountered. 

5. Establishing Credibility: A well-conducted literature review demonstrates the researcher’s familiarity with existing scholarship, establishing their credibility and expertise in the field. It also helps in building a solid foundation for the new research. 

6. Informing Hypotheses or Research Questions: The literature review guides the formulation of hypotheses or research questions by highlighting relevant findings and areas of uncertainty in existing literature. 

Literature review example

Let’s delve deeper with a literature review example: Let’s say your literature review is about the impact of climate change on biodiversity. You might format your literature review into sections such as the effects of climate change on habitat loss and species extinction, phenological changes, and marine biodiversity. Each section would then summarize and analyze relevant studies in those areas, highlighting key findings and identifying gaps in the research. The review would conclude by emphasizing the need for further research on specific aspects of the relationship between climate change and biodiversity. The following literature review template provides a glimpse into the recommended literature review structure and content, demonstrating how research findings are organized around specific themes within a broader topic. 

Literature Review on Climate Change Impacts on Biodiversity:

Climate change is a global phenomenon with far-reaching consequences, including significant impacts on biodiversity. This literature review synthesizes key findings from various studies: 

a. Habitat Loss and Species Extinction:

Climate change-induced alterations in temperature and precipitation patterns contribute to habitat loss, affecting numerous species (Thomas et al., 2004). The review discusses how these changes increase the risk of extinction, particularly for species with specific habitat requirements. 

b. Range Shifts and Phenological Changes:

Observations of range shifts and changes in the timing of biological events (phenology) are documented in response to changing climatic conditions (Parmesan & Yohe, 2003). These shifts affect ecosystems and may lead to mismatches between species and their resources. 

c. Ocean Acidification and Coral Reefs:

The review explores the impact of climate change on marine biodiversity, emphasizing ocean acidification’s threat to coral reefs (Hoegh-Guldberg et al., 2007). Changes in pH levels negatively affect coral calcification, disrupting the delicate balance of marine ecosystems. 

d. Adaptive Strategies and Conservation Efforts:

Recognizing the urgency of the situation, the literature review discusses various adaptive strategies adopted by species and conservation efforts aimed at mitigating the impacts of climate change on biodiversity (Hannah et al., 2007). It emphasizes the importance of interdisciplinary approaches for effective conservation planning. 

Strengthen your literature review with factual insights. Try Research on Paperpal for free!    

Writing a literature review involves summarizing and synthesizing existing research on a particular topic. A good literature review format should include the following elements. 

Introduction: The introduction sets the stage for your literature review, providing context and introducing the main focus of your review. 

• Opening Statement: Begin with a general statement about the broader topic and its significance in the field. 
• Scope and Purpose: Clearly define the scope of your literature review. Explain the specific research question or objective you aim to address. 
• Organizational Framework: Briefly outline the structure of your literature review, indicating how you will categorize and discuss the existing research. 
• Significance of the Study: Highlight why your literature review is important and how it contributes to the understanding of the chosen topic. 
• Thesis Statement: Conclude the introduction with a concise thesis statement that outlines the main argument or perspective you will develop in the body of the literature review. 

Body: The body of the literature review is where you provide a comprehensive analysis of existing literature, grouping studies based on themes, methodologies, or other relevant criteria. 

• Organize by Theme or Concept: Group studies that share common themes, concepts, or methodologies. Discuss each theme or concept in detail, summarizing key findings and identifying gaps or areas of disagreement. 
• Critical Analysis: Evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of each study. Discuss the methodologies used, the quality of evidence, and the overall contribution of each work to the understanding of the topic. 
• Synthesis of Findings: Synthesize the information from different studies to highlight trends, patterns, or areas of consensus in the literature. 
• Identification of Gaps: Discuss any gaps or limitations in the existing research and explain how your review contributes to filling these gaps. 
• Transition between Sections: Provide smooth transitions between different themes or concepts to maintain the flow of your literature review. 

Write and Cite as you go with Paperpal Research. Start now for free.   

Conclusion: The conclusion of your literature review should summarize the main findings, highlight the contributions of the review, and suggest avenues for future research. 

• Summary of Key Findings: Recap the main findings from the literature and restate how they contribute to your research question or objective. 
• Contributions to the Field: Discuss the overall contribution of your literature review to the existing knowledge in the field. 
• Implications and Applications: Explore the practical implications of the findings and suggest how they might impact future research or practice. 
• Recommendations for Future Research: Identify areas that require further investigation and propose potential directions for future research in the field. 
• Final Thoughts: Conclude with a final reflection on the importance of your literature review and its relevance to the broader academic community. 

Conducting a literature review

Conducting a literature review is an essential step in research that involves reviewing and analyzing existing literature on a specific topic. It’s important to know how to do a literature review effectively, so here are the steps to follow: 1  

Choose a Topic and Define the Research Question:

• Select a topic that is relevant to your field of study. 
• Clearly define your research question or objective. Determine what specific aspect of the topic do you want to explore? 

Decide on the Scope of Your Review:

• Determine the timeframe for your literature review. Are you focusing on recent developments, or do you want a historical overview? 
• Consider the geographical scope. Is your review global, or are you focusing on a specific region? 
• Define the inclusion and exclusion criteria. What types of sources will you include? Are there specific types of studies or publications you will exclude? 

Select Databases for Searches:

• Identify relevant databases for your field. Examples include PubMed, IEEE Xplore, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. 
• Consider searching in library catalogs, institutional repositories, and specialized databases related to your topic. 

Conduct Searches and Keep Track:

• Develop a systematic search strategy using keywords, Boolean operators (AND, OR, NOT), and other search techniques. 
• Record and document your search strategy for transparency and replicability. 
• Keep track of the articles, including publication details, abstracts, and links. Use citation management tools like EndNote, Zotero, or Mendeley to organize your references. 

Review the Literature:

• Evaluate the relevance and quality of each source. Consider the methodology, sample size, and results of studies. 
• Organize the literature by themes or key concepts. Identify patterns, trends, and gaps in the existing research. 
• Summarize key findings and arguments from each source. Compare and contrast different perspectives. 
• Identify areas where there is a consensus in the literature and where there are conflicting opinions. 
• Provide critical analysis and synthesis of the literature. What are the strengths and weaknesses of existing research? 

Organize and Write Your Literature Review:

• Literature review outline should be based on themes, chronological order, or methodological approaches. 
• Write a clear and coherent narrative that synthesizes the information gathered. 
• Use proper citations for each source and ensure consistency in your citation style (APA, MLA, Chicago, etc.). 
• Conclude your literature review by summarizing key findings, identifying gaps, and suggesting areas for future research. 

Whether you’re exploring a new research field or finding new angles to develop an existing topic, sifting through hundreds of papers can take more time than you have to spare. But what if you could find science-backed insights with verified citations in seconds? That’s the power of Paperpal’s new Research feature!  

How to write a literature review faster with Paperpal?

Paperpal, an AI writing assistant, integrates powerful academic search capabilities within its writing platform. With the Research feature, you get 100% factual insights, with citations backed by 250M+ verified research articles, directly within your writing interface with the option to save relevant references in your Citation Library. By eliminating the need to switch tabs to find answers to all your research questions, Paperpal saves time and helps you stay focused on your writing.   

Here’s how to use the Research feature:  

• Ask a question: Get started with a new document on paperpal.com. Click on the “Research” feature and type your question in plain English. Paperpal will scour over 250 million research articles, including conference papers and preprints, to provide you with accurate insights and citations. 
• Review and Save: Paperpal summarizes the information, while citing sources and listing relevant reads. You can quickly scan the results to identify relevant references and save these directly to your built-in citations library for later access. 
• Cite with Confidence: Paperpal makes it easy to incorporate relevant citations and references into your writing, ensuring your arguments are well-supported by credible sources. This translates to a polished, well-researched literature review. 

The literature review sample and detailed advice on writing and conducting a review will help you produce a well-structured report. But remember that a good literature review is an ongoing process, and it may be necessary to revisit and update it as your research progresses. By combining effortless research with an easy citation process, Paperpal Research streamlines the literature review process and empowers you to write faster and with more confidence. Try Paperpal Research now and see for yourself.  

Frequently asked questions

A literature review is a critical and comprehensive analysis of existing literature (published and unpublished works) on a specific topic or research question and provides a synthesis of the current state of knowledge in a particular field. A well-conducted literature review is crucial for researchers to build upon existing knowledge, avoid duplication of efforts, and contribute to the advancement of their field. It also helps researchers situate their work within a broader context and facilitates the development of a sound theoretical and conceptual framework for their studies.

Literature review is a crucial component of research writing, providing a solid background for a research paper’s investigation. The aim is to keep professionals up to date by providing an understanding of ongoing developments within a specific field, including research methods, and experimental techniques used in that field, and present that knowledge in the form of a written report. Also, the depth and breadth of the literature review emphasizes the credibility of the scholar in his or her field.  

Before writing a literature review, it’s essential to undertake several preparatory steps to ensure that your review is well-researched, organized, and focused. This includes choosing a topic of general interest to you and doing exploratory research on that topic, writing an annotated bibliography, and noting major points, especially those that relate to the position you have taken on the topic. 

Literature reviews and academic research papers are essential components of scholarly work but serve different purposes within the academic realm. 3 A literature review aims to provide a foundation for understanding the current state of research on a particular topic, identify gaps or controversies, and lay the groundwork for future research. Therefore, it draws heavily from existing academic sources, including books, journal articles, and other scholarly publications. In contrast, an academic research paper aims to present new knowledge, contribute to the academic discourse, and advance the understanding of a specific research question. Therefore, it involves a mix of existing literature (in the introduction and literature review sections) and original data or findings obtained through research methods. 

Literature reviews are essential components of academic and research papers, and various strategies can be employed to conduct them effectively. If you want to know how to write a literature review for a research paper, here are four common approaches that are often used by researchers.  Chronological Review: This strategy involves organizing the literature based on the chronological order of publication. It helps to trace the development of a topic over time, showing how ideas, theories, and research have evolved.  Thematic Review: Thematic reviews focus on identifying and analyzing themes or topics that cut across different studies. Instead of organizing the literature chronologically, it is grouped by key themes or concepts, allowing for a comprehensive exploration of various aspects of the topic.  Methodological Review: This strategy involves organizing the literature based on the research methods employed in different studies. It helps to highlight the strengths and weaknesses of various methodologies and allows the reader to evaluate the reliability and validity of the research findings.  Theoretical Review: A theoretical review examines the literature based on the theoretical frameworks used in different studies. This approach helps to identify the key theories that have been applied to the topic and assess their contributions to the understanding of the subject.  It’s important to note that these strategies are not mutually exclusive, and a literature review may combine elements of more than one approach. The choice of strategy depends on the research question, the nature of the literature available, and the goals of the review. Additionally, other strategies, such as integrative reviews or systematic reviews, may be employed depending on the specific requirements of the research.

The literature review format can vary depending on the specific publication guidelines. However, there are some common elements and structures that are often followed. Here is a general guideline for the format of a literature review:  Introduction:   Provide an overview of the topic.  Define the scope and purpose of the literature review.  State the research question or objective.  Body:   Organize the literature by themes, concepts, or chronology.  Critically analyze and evaluate each source.  Discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the studies.  Highlight any methodological limitations or biases.  Identify patterns, connections, or contradictions in the existing research.  Conclusion:   Summarize the key points discussed in the literature review.  Highlight the research gap.  Address the research question or objective stated in the introduction.  Highlight the contributions of the review and suggest directions for future research.

Both annotated bibliographies and literature reviews involve the examination of scholarly sources. While annotated bibliographies focus on individual sources with brief annotations, literature reviews provide a more in-depth, integrated, and comprehensive analysis of existing literature on a specific topic. The key differences are as follows: 

References 

• Denney, A. S., & Tewksbury, R. (2013). How to write a literature review.  Journal of criminal justice education ,  24 (2), 218-234. 
• Pan, M. L. (2016).  Preparing literature reviews: Qualitative and quantitative approaches . Taylor & Francis. 
• Cantero, C. (2019). How to write a literature review.  San José State University Writing Center . 

Paperpal is an AI writing assistant that help academics write better, faster with real-time suggestions for in-depth language and grammar correction. Trained on millions of research manuscripts enhanced by professional academic editors, Paperpal delivers human precision at machine speed.  

Try it for free or upgrade to  Paperpal Prime , which unlocks unlimited access to premium features like academic translation, paraphrasing, contextual synonyms, consistency checks and more. It’s like always having a professional academic editor by your side! Go beyond limitations and experience the future of academic writing.  Get Paperpal Prime now at just US$19 a month!

Related Reads:

• Empirical Research: A Comprehensive Guide for Academics 
• How to Write a Scientific Paper in 10 Steps 
• How Long Should a Chapter Be?
• How to Use Paperpal to Generate Emails & Cover Letters?

6 Tips for Post-Doc Researchers to Take Their Career to the Next Level

Self-plagiarism in research: what it is and how to avoid it, you may also like, how to write a research proposal: (with examples..., apa format: basic guide for researchers, how to choose a dissertation topic, how to write a phd research proposal, how to write an academic paragraph (step-by-step guide), five things authors need to know when using..., 7 best referencing tools and citation management software..., maintaining academic integrity with paperpal’s generative ai writing..., research funding basics: what should a grant proposal..., how to write an abstract in research papers....

Research Process :: Step by Step

• Introduction
• Select Topic
• Identify Keywords
• Background Information
• Develop Research Questions
• Refine Topic
• Search Strategy
• Popular Databases
• Evaluate Sources
• Types of Periodicals
• Reading Scholarly Articles
• Primary & Secondary Sources
• Organize / Take Notes
• Writing & Grammar Resources
• Annotated Bibliography
• Literature Review
• Citation Styles
• Paraphrasing
• Privacy / Confidentiality
• Research Process
• Selecting Your Topic
• Identifying Keywords
• Gathering Background Info
• Evaluating Sources

Organize the literature review into sections that present themes or identify trends, including relevant theory. You are not trying to list all the material published, but to synthesize and evaluate it according to the guiding concept of your thesis or research question.  

What is a literature review?

A literature review is an account of what has been published on a topic by accredited scholars and researchers. Occasionally you will be asked to write one as a separate assignment, but more often it is part of the introduction to an essay, research report, or thesis. In writing the literature review, your purpose is to convey to your reader what knowledge and ideas have been established on a topic, and what their strengths and weaknesses are. As a piece of writing, the literature review must be defined by a guiding concept (e.g., your research objective, the problem or issue you are discussing, or your argumentative thesis). It is not just a descriptive list of the material available, or a set of summaries

A literature review must do these things:

• be organized around and related directly to the thesis or research question you are developing
• synthesize results into a summary of what is and is not known
• identify areas of controversy in the literature
• formulate questions that need further research

Ask yourself questions like these:

• What is the specific thesis, problem, or research question that my literature review helps to define?
• What type of literature review am I conducting? Am I looking at issues of theory? methodology? policy? quantitative research (e.g. on the effectiveness of a new procedure)? qualitative research (e.g., studies of loneliness among migrant workers)?
• What is the scope of my literature review? What types of publications am I using (e.g., journals, books, government documents, popular media)? What discipline am I working in (e.g., nursing psychology, sociology, medicine)?
• How good was my information seeking? Has my search been wide enough to ensure I've found all the relevant material? Has it been narrow enough to exclude irrelevant material? Is the number of sources I've used appropriate for the length of my paper?
• Have I critically analyzed the literature I use? Do I follow through a set of concepts and questions, comparing items to each other in the ways they deal with them? Instead of just listing and summarizing items, do I assess them, discussing strengths and weaknesses?
• Have I cited and discussed studies contrary to my perspective?
• Will the reader find my literature review relevant, appropriate, and useful?

Ask yourself questions like these about each book or article you include:

• Has the author formulated a problem/issue?
• Is it clearly defined? Is its significance (scope, severity, relevance) clearly established?
• Could the problem have been approached more effectively from another perspective?
• What is the author's research orientation (e.g., interpretive, critical science, combination)?
• What is the author's theoretical framework (e.g., psychological, developmental, feminist)?
• What is the relationship between the theoretical and research perspectives?
• Has the author evaluated the literature relevant to the problem/issue? Does the author include literature taking positions she or he does not agree with?
• In a research study, how good are the basic components of the study design (e.g., population, intervention, outcome)? How accurate and valid are the measurements? Is the analysis of the data accurate and relevant to the research question? Are the conclusions validly based upon the data and analysis?
• In material written for a popular readership, does the author use appeals to emotion, one-sided examples, or rhetorically-charged language and tone? Is there an objective basis to the reasoning, or is the author merely "proving" what he or she already believes?
• How does the author structure the argument? Can you "deconstruct" the flow of the argument to see whether or where it breaks down logically (e.g., in establishing cause-effect relationships)?
• In what ways does this book or article contribute to our understanding of the problem under study, and in what ways is it useful for practice? What are the strengths and limitations?
• How does this book or article relate to the specific thesis or question I am developing?

Text written by Dena Taylor, Health Sciences Writing Centre, University of Toronto

http://www.writing.utoronto.ca/advice/specific-types-of-writing/literature-review

• << Previous: Annotated Bibliography
• Next: Step 5: Cite Sources >>
• Last Updated: Jun 13, 2024 4:27 PM
• URL: https://libguides.uta.edu/researchprocess

University of Texas Arlington Libraries 702 Planetarium Place · Arlington, TX 76019 · 817-272-3000

• Internet Privacy
• Accessibility
• Problems with a guide? Contact Us.

Conduct a literature review

What is a literature review.

A literature review is a summary of the published work in a field of study. This can be a section of a larger paper or article, or can be the focus of an entire paper. Literature reviews show that you have examined the breadth of knowledge and can justify your thesis or research questions. They are also valuable tools for other researchers who need to find a summary of that field of knowledge.

Unlike an annotated bibliography, which is a list of sources with short descriptions, a literature review synthesizes sources into a summary that has a thesis or statement of purpose—stated or implied—at its core.

How do I write a literature review?

Step 1: define your research scope.

• What is the specific research question that your literature review helps to define?
• Are there a maximum or minimum number of sources that your review should include?

Ask us if you have questions about refining your topic, search methods, writing tips, or citation management.

Step 2: Identify the literature

Start by searching broadly. Literature for your review will typically be acquired through scholarly books, journal articles, and/or dissertations. Develop an understanding of what is out there, what terms are accurate and helpful, etc., and keep track of all of it with citation management tools . If you need help figuring out key terms and where to search, ask us .

Use citation searching to track how scholars interact with, and build upon, previous research:

• Mine the references cited section of each relevant source for additional key sources
• Use Google Scholar or Scopus to find other sources that have cited a particular work

Step 3: Critically analyze the literature

Key to your literature review is a critical analysis of the literature collected around your topic. The analysis will explore relationships, major themes, and any critical gaps in the research expressed in the work. Read and summarize each source with an eye toward analyzing authority, currency, coverage, methodology, and relationship to other works. The University of Toronto's Writing Center provides a comprehensive list of questions you can use to analyze your sources.

Step 4: Categorize your resources

Divide the available resources that pertain to your research into categories reflecting their roles in addressing your research question. Possible ways to categorize resources include organization by:

• methodology
• theoretical/philosophical approach

Regardless of the division, each category should be accompanied by thorough discussions and explanations of strengths and weaknesses, value to the overall survey, and comparisons with similar sources. You may have enough resources when:

• You've used multiple databases and other resources (web portals, repositories, etc.) to get a variety of perspectives on the research topic.
• The same citations are showing up in a variety of databases.

Additional resources

Undergraduate student resources.

• Literature Review Handout (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill)
• Learn how to write a review of literature (University of Wisconsin-Madison)

Graduate student and faculty resources

• Information Research Strategies (University of Arizona)
• Literature Reviews: An Overview for Graduate Students (NC State University)
• Oliver, P. (2012). Succeeding with Your Literature Review: A Handbook for Students [ebook]
• Machi, L. A. & McEvoy, B. T. (2016). The Literature Review: Six Steps to Success [ebook]
• Graustein, J. S. (2012). How to Write an Exceptional Thesis or Dissertation: A Step-by-Step Guide from Proposal to Successful Defense [ebook]
• Thomas, R. M. & Brubaker, D. L. (2008). Theses and Dissertations: A Guide to Planning, Research, and Writing

Research for Thesis & Dissertation Literature Reviews: What is a Literature Review?

• What is a Literature Review?
• Understand Scope of Search Tools
• Search Strategies
• Research Article Databases
• Gray Literature
• Find Thesis & Dissertation Models
• Stay Up to Date
• Citation Managers & Info Organization

What's a Literature Review?

A Literature Review...

• Provides comprehensive discussion of the scholarly research that has already been done on a topic.
• Includes some summary of important articles on a topic.
• Includes comparison: between how different authors discuss the same topic and how the topic has been handled over time.
• Synthesizes previous ideas on a topic, but also looks for gaps in the literature: what needs to be investigated further?

What Should a Literature Review Do?

A Literature Review should...

• Relate directly and clearly to your thesis or research question.
• Synthesize and contextualize results, not just report them.
• Identify areas of controversy in the literature.
• Formulate questions that need further research.

Adapted from “The Literature Review: A Few Tips on Conducting It”, by Dena Taylor and Margaret Procter, University of Toronto: www.writing.utoronto.ca (file linked below)

• The Literature Review: A Few Tips on Conducting It This two-page PDF handout created by Dena Taylor and Margaret Procter at the University of Toronto has excellent guidance on conducting a literature review.

Literature Reviews: An Overview for Graduate Students

This excellent overview of the literature review explains what a literature review and outlines processes and best practices for doing one. It includes input from an NCSU professor on what a literature review is and what it should do. (Shared under a CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 US license, attributed to North Carolina State University Libraries ).

• << Previous: Home
• Next: Understand Scope of Search Tools >>
• Last Updated: Jul 17, 2024 11:35 AM
• URL: https://guides.library.pdx.edu/literaturereviews

• Library Homepage

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

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

What is a Literature Review?

So, what is a literature review .

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

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

What kinds of literature reviews are written?

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

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

What are the Goals of Creating a Literature Review?

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

When do you need to write a Literature Review?

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

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

Where I can find examples of Literature Reviews?

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

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

Where to Find Standalone Literature Reviews

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

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

Social Sciences

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

Hard science and health sciences:

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

Honors thesis guidelines: Literature review

• Introduction
• Why write an honors thesis?
• How to begin
• Signature page
• Acknowledgements
• Table of contents
• List of tables or figures

Literature review

• Methodology
• References/Works cited
• How to submit thesis

A literature review is a section of your thesis where you summarize and synthesize significant research conducted by others related to your topic. This is an essential component that establishes the context and foundation for your thesis, ensuring your research is well-informed, credible, and contributes to the existing body of knowledge. The purpose of a literature review is to establish what's already known and what areas require further investigation. However, it's important to note that it's not merely a collection of source summaries. Instead, it's a discussion that connects and integrates these sources to provide a complete understanding of the topic. This process involves synthesizing, which means weaving the summarized sources together into a cohesive narrative.

In certain fields like Social Sciences and the Humanities, it is common to incorporate a theoretical framework within the literature review section of your research thesis. A theoretical framework is a set of theories, concepts, and models that serve as an intellectual base for your research. This section is important because it provides you with a well-structured perspective to guide the interpretation of findings, and it helps the reader understand where the study stands in relation to current literature and other theoretical viewpoints. 

The way in which you organize your literature review will depend on your research goals and the specific characteristics of your topic. To write a strong literature review, ask yourself what aspects are most pertinent to your thesis's objectives. Consider organizing by themes, chronology, methodology, or other relevant factors that you might find in the process.

• << Previous: Introduction
• Next: Methodology >>
• Last Updated: Jul 26, 2024 3:52 PM
• URL: https://wiu.libguides.com/c.php?g=1412226

How To Structure Your Literature Review

3 options to help structure your chapter.

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

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

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

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

But wait – is this the right time?

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

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

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

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

Need a helping hand?

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

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

1: The Introduction Section

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

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

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

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

2: The Body Section

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

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

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

Option 1: Chronological (according to date)

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

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

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

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

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

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

Option 2: Thematic (grouped by theme)

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

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

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

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

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

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

Option 3: Methodological

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

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

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

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

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

3: The Conclusion Section

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

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

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

Example: Thematically Structured Review

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

Let’s Recap

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

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

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

Psst… there’s more!

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

27 Comments

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

I agree with you Marin… A great piece

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

Awesome article for my research.

I thank you immensely for this wonderful guide

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

Very educative and good time to get guide. Thank you

Great work, very insightful. Thank you.

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

Thank you very much, very helpful

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

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

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

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

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

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

Beautifully clear.nThank you!

Lucid! Thankyou!

Brilliant work, well understood, many thanks

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

• Library databases
• Library website

Library Guide to Capstone Literature Reviews: Role of the Literature Review

The role of the literature review.

Your literature review gives readers an understanding of the scholarly research on your topic.

In your literature review you will:

• demonstrate that you are a well-informed scholar with expertise and knowledge in the field by giving an overview of the current state of the literature
• find a gap in the literature, or address a business or professional issue, depending on your doctoral study program; the literature review will illustrate how your research contributes to the scholarly conversation
• provide a synthesis of the issues, trends, and concepts surrounding your research

Be aware that the literature review is an iterative process. As you read and write initial drafts, you will find new threads and complementary themes, at which point you will return to search, find out about these new themes, and incorporate them into your review.

The purpose of this guide is to help you through the literature review process. Take some time to look over the resources in order to become familiar with them. The tabs on the left side of this page have additional information.

Short video: Research for the Literature Review

Short Video: Research for the Literature Review

(4 min 10 sec) Recorded August 2019 Transcript 

Literature review as a dinner party

To think about the role of the literature review, consider this analogy:  pretend that you throw a dinner party for the other researchers working in your topic area. First, you’d need to develop a guest list.

• The guests of honor would be early researchers or theorists; their work likely inspired subsequent studies, ideas, or controversies that the current researchers pursue.
• Then, think about the important current researchers to invite. Which guests might agree with each other?  Which others might provide useful counterpoints?
• You likely won’t be able to include everyone on the guest list, so you may need to choose carefully so that you don’t leave important figures out. 
• Alternatively, if there aren’t many researchers working in your topic area, then your guest list will need to include people working in other, related areas, who can still contribute to the conversation.

After the party, you describe the evening to a friend. You’ll summarize the evening’s conversation. Perhaps one guest made a comment that sparked a conversation, and then you describe who responded and how the topic evolved. There are other conversations to share, too. This is how you synthesize the themes and developments that you find in your research. Thinking about your literature research this way will help you to present your dinner party (and your literature review) in a lively and engaging way.

Short video: Empirical research

Video: How to locate and identify empirical research for your literature review

(6 min 16 sec) Recorded May 2020 Transcript 

Here are some useful resources from the Writing Center, the Office of Research and Doctoral Services, and other departments within the Office of Academic Support. Take some time to look at what is available to help you with your capstone/dissertation.

• Familiarize yourself with Walden support
• Doctoral Capstone Resources website
• Capstone writing resources
• Office of Student Research Administration
• Office of Research and Doctoral Services
• Visit the Writing Center

You can watch recorded webinars on the literature review in our Library Webinar Archives .

• Next Page: Scope
• Office of Student Disability Services

Walden Resources

Departments.

• Academic Residencies
• Academic Skills
• Career Planning and Development
• Customer Care Team
• Field Experience
• Military Services
• Student Success Advising
• Writing Skills

Centers and Offices

• Center for Social Change
• Office of Academic Support and Instructional Services
• Office of Degree Acceleration
• Office of Student Affairs

Student Resources

• Doctoral Writing Assessment
• Form & Style Review
• Quick Answers
• ScholarWorks
• SKIL Courses and Workshops
• Walden Bookstore
• Walden Catalog & Student Handbook
• Student Safety/Title IX
• Legal & Consumer Information
• Website Terms and Conditions
• Cookie Policy
• Accessibility
• Accreditation
• State Authorization
• Net Price Calculator
• Contact Walden

Walden University is a member of Adtalem Global Education, Inc. www.adtalem.com Walden University is certified to operate by SCHEV © 2024 Walden University LLC. All rights reserved.

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.

Why is it important to do a literature review in research?

The importance of scientific communication in the healthcare industry

The Importance and Role of Biostatistics in Clinical Research

 “A substantive, thorough, sophisticated literature review is a precondition for doing substantive, thorough, sophisticated research”. Boote and Baile 2005

Authors of manuscripts treat writing a literature review as a routine work or a mere formality. But a seasoned one knows the purpose and importance of a well-written literature review.  Since it is one of the basic needs for researches at any level, they have to be done vigilantly. Only then the reader will know that the basics of research have not been neglected.

The aim of any literature review is to summarize and synthesize the arguments and ideas of existing knowledge in a particular field without adding any new contributions.   Being built on existing knowledge they help the researcher to even turn the wheels of the topic of research.  It is possible only with profound knowledge of what is wrong in the existing findings in detail to overpower them.  For other researches, the literature review gives the direction to be headed for its success. 

The common perception of literature review and reality:

As per the common belief, literature reviews are only a summary of the sources related to the research. And many authors of scientific manuscripts believe that they are only surveys of what are the researches are done on the chosen topic.  But on the contrary, it uses published information from pertinent and relevant sources like

• Scholarly books
• Scientific papers
• Latest studies in the field
• Established school of thoughts
• Relevant articles from renowned scientific journals

and many more for a field of study or theory or a particular problem to do the following:

• Summarize into a brief account of all information
• Synthesize the information by restructuring and reorganizing
• Critical evaluation of a concept or a school of thought or ideas
• Familiarize the authors to the extent of knowledge in the particular field
• Encapsulate
• Compare & contrast

By doing the above on the relevant information, it provides the reader of the scientific manuscript with the following for a better understanding of it:

• It establishes the authors’  in-depth understanding and knowledge of their field subject
• It gives the background of the research
• Portrays the scientific manuscript plan of examining the research result
• Illuminates on how the knowledge has changed within the field
• Highlights what has already been done in a particular field
• Information of the generally accepted facts, emerging and current state of the topic of research
• Identifies the research gap that is still unexplored or under-researched fields
• Demonstrates how the research fits within a larger field of study
• Provides an overview of the sources explored during the research of a particular topic

Importance of literature review in research:

The importance of literature review in scientific manuscripts can be condensed into an analytical feature to enable the multifold reach of its significance.  It adds value to the legitimacy of the research in many ways:

• Provides the interpretation of existing literature in light of updated developments in the field to help in establishing the consistency in knowledge and relevancy of existing materials
• It helps in calculating the impact of the latest information in the field by mapping their progress of knowledge.
• It brings out the dialects of contradictions between various thoughts within the field to establish facts
• The research gaps scrutinized initially are further explored to establish the latest facts of theories to add value to the field
• Indicates the current research place in the schema of a particular field
• Provides information for relevancy and coherency to check the research
• Apart from elucidating the continuance of knowledge, it also points out areas that require further investigation and thus aid as a starting point of any future research
• Justifies the research and sets up the research question
• Sets up a theoretical framework comprising the concepts and theories of the research upon which its success can be judged
• Helps to adopt a more appropriate methodology for the research by examining the strengths and weaknesses of existing research in the same field
• Increases the significance of the results by comparing it with the existing literature
• Provides a point of reference by writing the findings in the scientific manuscript
• Helps to get the due credit from the audience for having done the fact-finding and fact-checking mission in the scientific manuscripts
• The more the reference of relevant sources of it could increase more of its trustworthiness with the readers
• Helps to prevent plagiarism by tailoring and uniquely tweaking the scientific manuscript not to repeat other’s original idea
• By preventing plagiarism , it saves the scientific manuscript from rejection and thus also saves a lot of time and money
• Helps to evaluate, condense and synthesize gist in the author’s own words to sharpen the research focus
• Helps to compare and contrast to  show the originality and uniqueness of the research than that of the existing other researches
• Rationalizes the need for conducting the particular research in a specified field
• Helps to collect data accurately for allowing any new methodology of research than the existing ones
• Enables the readers of the manuscript to answer the following questions of its readers for its better chances for publication
• What do the researchers know?
• What do they not know?
• Is the scientific manuscript reliable and trustworthy?
• What are the knowledge gaps of the researcher?

22. It helps the readers to identify the following for further reading of the scientific manuscript:

• What has been already established, discredited and accepted in the particular field of research
• Areas of controversy and conflicts among different schools of thought
• Unsolved problems and issues in the connected field of research
• The emerging trends and approaches
• How the research extends, builds upon and leaves behind from the previous research

A profound literature review with many relevant sources of reference will enhance the chances of the scientific manuscript publication in renowned and reputed scientific journals .

References:

http://www.math.montana.edu/jobo/phdprep/phd6.pdf

journal Publishing services  |  Scientific Editing Services  |  Medical Writing Services  |  scientific research writing service  |  Scientific communication services

Related Topics:

Meta Analysis

Scientific Research Paper Writing

Medical Research Paper Writing

Scientific Communication in healthcare

pubrica academy

Related posts.

Statistical analyses of case-control studies

Selecting material (e.g. excipient, active pharmaceutical ingredient, packaging material) for drug development

Health economics in clinical trials

Comments are closed.

The Literature Review: A Guide for Postgraduate Students

This guide provides postgraduate students with an overview of the literature review required for most research degrees. It will advise you on the common types of literature reviews across disciplines and will outline how the purpose and structure of each may differ slightly. Various approaches to effective content organisation and writing style are offered, along with some common strategies for effective writing and avoiding some common mistakes. This guide focuses mainly on the required elements of a standalone literature review, but the suggestions and advice apply to literature reviews incorporated into other chapters.

Please see the companion article ‘ The Literature Review: A Guide for Undergraduate Students ’ for an introduction to the basic elements of a literature review. This article focuses on aspects that are particular to postgraduate literature reviews, containing detailed advice and effective strategies for writing a successful literature review. It will address the following topics:

• The purpose of a literature review
• The structure of your literature review
• Strategies for writing an effective literature review
• Mistakes to avoid

The Purpose of a Literature Review

After developing your research proposal and writing a research statement, your literature review is one of the most important early tasks you will undertake for your postgraduate research degree. Many faculties and departments require postgraduate research students to write an initial literature review as part of their research proposal, which forms part of the candidature confirmation process that occurs six months into the research degree for full-time students (12 months for part-time students).

For example, a postgraduate student in history would normally write a 10,000-word research proposal—including a literature review—in the first six months of their PhD. This would be assessed in order to confirm the ongoing candidature of the student.

The literature review is your opportunity you show your supervisor (and ultimately, your examiners) that you understand the most important debates in your field, can identify the texts and authors most relevant to your particular topic, and can examine and evaluate these debates and texts both critically and in depth. You will be expected to provide a comprehensive, detailed and relevant range of scholarly works in your literature review.

In general, a literature review has a specific and directed purpose: to focus the reader’s attention on the significance and necessity of your research. By identifying a ‘gap’ in the current scholarship, you convince your readers that your own research is vital.

As the author, you will achieve these objectives by displaying your in-depth knowledge and understanding of the relevant scholarship in your field, situating your own research within this wider body of work , while critically analysing the scholarship and highlighting your own arguments in relation to that scholarship.

A well-focused, well-developed and well-researched literature review operates as a linchpin for your thesis, provides the background to your research and demonstrates your proficiency in some requisite academic skills.

The Structure of Your Literature Review

Postgraduate degrees can be made up of a long thesis (Master’s and PhD by research) or a shorter thesis and coursework (Master’s by coursework; although some Australian universities now require PhD students to undertake coursework in the first year of their degree). Some disciplines involve creative work (such as a novel or artwork) and an exegesis (such as a creative writing research or fine arts degree). Others can comprise a series of published works in the form of a ‘thesis by publication’ (most common in the science and medical fields).

The structure of a literature review will thus vary according to the discipline and the type of thesis. Some of the most common discipline-based variations are outlined in the following paragraphs.

Humanities and Social Science Degrees

Many humanities and social science theses will include a standalone literature review chapter after the introduction and before any methodology (or theoretical approaches) chapters. In these theses, the literature review might make up around 15 to 30 per cent of the total thesis length, reflecting its purpose as a supporting chapter.

Here, the literature review chapter will have an introduction, an appropriate number of discussion paragraphs and a conclusion. As with a research essay, the introduction operates as a ‘road map’ to the chapter. The introduction should outline and clarify the argument you are making in your thesis (Australian National University 2017), as readers will then have a context for the discussion and critical analysis paragraphs that follow.

The main discussion section can be divided further with subheadings, and the material organised in several possible ways: chronologically, thematically or from the better- to the lesser-known issues and arguments. The conclusion should provide a summary of the chapter overall, and should re-state your thesis statement, linking this to the gap you have identified in the literature that confirms the necessity of your research.

For some humanities’ disciplines, such as literature or history (Premaratne 2013, 236–54), where primary sources are central, the literature review may be conducted chapter-by-chapter, with each chapter focusing on one theme and set of scholarly secondary sources relevant to the primary source material.

Science and Mathematics Degrees

For some science or mathematics research degrees, the literature review may be part of the introduction. The relevant literature here may be limited in number and scope, and if the research project is experiment-based, rather than theoretically based, a lengthy critical analysis of past research may be unnecessary (beyond establishing its weaknesses or failings and thus the necessity for the current research). The literature review section will normally appear after the paragraphs that outline the study’s research question, main findings and theoretical framework. Other science-based degrees may follow the standalone literature review chapter more common in the social sciences.

Strategies for Writing an Effective Literature Review

A research thesis—whether for a Master’s degree or Doctor of Philosophy—is a long project, and the literature review, usually written early on, will most likely be reviewed and refined over the life of the thesis. This section will detail some useful strategies to ensure you write a successful literature review that meets the expectations of your supervisor and examiners.

Using a Mind Map

Before planning or writing, it can be beneficial to undertake a brainstorm exercise to initiate ideas, especially in relation to the organisation of your literature review. A mind map is a very effective technique that can get your ideas flowing prior to a more formal planning process.

A mind map is best created in landscape orientation. Begin by writing a very brief version of your research topic in the middle of the page and then expanding this with themes and sub-themes, identified by keywords or phrases and linked by associations or oppositions. The University of Adelaide provides an excellent introduction to mind mapping.

Planning is as essential at the chapter level as it is for your thesis overall. If you have begun work on your literature review with a mind map or similar process, you can use the themes or organisational categories that emerged to begin organising your content. Plan your literature review as if it were a research essay with an introduction, main body and conclusion.

Create a detailed outline for each main paragraph or section and list the works you will discuss and analyse, along with keywords to identify important themes, arguments and relevant data. By creating a ‘planning document’ in this way, you can keep track of your ideas and refine the plan as you go.

Maintaining a Current Reference List or Annotated Bibliography

It is vital that you maintain detailed and up-to-date records of all scholarly works that you read in relation to your thesis. You will need to ensure that you remain aware of current and developing research, theoretical debates and data as your degree progresses; and review and update the literature review as you work through your own research and writing.

To do this most effectively and efficiently, you will need to record precisely the bibliographic details of each source you use. Decide on the referencing style you will be using at an early stage (this is often dictated by your department or discipline, or suggested by your supervisor). If you begin to construct your reference list as you write your thesis, ensure that you follow any formatting and stylistic requirements for your chosen referencing style from the start (nothing is more onerous than undertaking this task as you are finishing your research degree).

Insert references (also known as ‘citations’) into the text or footnote section as you write your literature review, and be aware of all instances where you need to use a reference . The literature review chapter or section may appear to be overwhelmed with references, but this is just a reflection of the source-based content and purpose.

The Drawbacks of Referencing Software

We don’t recommend the use of referencing software to help you with your references because using this software almost always leads to errors and inconsistencies. They simply can’t be trusted to produce references that will be complete and accurate, properly following your particular referencing style to the letter.

Further, relying on software to create your references for you usually means that you won’t learn how to reference correctly yourself, which is an absolutely vital skill, especially if you are hoping to continue in academia.

Writing Style

Similar to structural matters, your writing style will depend to some extent on your discipline and the expectations and advice of your supervisors. Humanities- and creative arts–based disciplines may be more open to a wider variety of authorial voices. Even if this is so, it remains preferable to establish an academic voice that is credible, engaging and clear.

Simple stylistic strategies such as using the active—instead of the passive—voice, providing variety in sentence structure and length and preferring (where appropriate) simple language over convoluted or overly obscure words can help to ensure your academic writing is both formal and highly readable.

Reviewing, Rewriting and Editing

Although an initial draft is essential (and in some departments it is a formal requirement) to establish the ground for your own research and its place within the wider body of scholarship, the literature review will evolve, develop and be modified as you continue to research, write, review and rewrite your thesis. It is likely that your literature review will not be completed until you have almost finished the thesis itself, and a final assessment and edit of this section is essential to ensure you have included the most important scholarship that is relevant and necessary to your research.

It has happened to many students that a crucial piece of literature is published just as they are about to finalise their thesis, and they must revise their literature review in light of it. Unfortunately, this cannot be avoided, lest your examiners think that you are not aware of this key piece of scholarship. You need to ensure your final literature review reflects how your research now fits into the new landscape in your field after any recent developments.

Mistakes to Avoid

Some common mistakes can result in an ineffective literature review that could then flow on to the rest of your thesis. These mistakes include:

• Trying to read and include everything you find on your topic. The literature review should be selective as well as comprehensive, examining only those sources relevant to your research topic.
• Listing the scholarship as if you are writing an annotated bibliography or a series of summaries. Your discussion of the literature should be synthesised and holistic, and should have a logical progression that is appropriate to the organisation of your content.
• Failing to integrate your examination of the literature with your own thesis topic. You need to develop your discussion of each piece of scholarship in relation to other pieces of research, contextualising your analyses and conclusions in relation to your thesis statement or research topic and focusing on how your own research relates to, complements and extends the existing scholarship.

Writing the literature review is often the first task of your research degree. It is a focused reading and research activity that situates your own research in the wider scholarship, establishing yourself as an active member of the academic community through dialogue and debate. By reading, analysing and synthesising the existing scholarship on your topic, you gain a comprehensive and in-depth understanding, ensuring a solid basis for your own arguments and contributions. If you need advice on referencing , academic writing , time management or other aspects of your degree, you may find Capstone Editing’s other resources and blog articles useful.

Australian National University. 2017. ‘Literature Reviews’. Last accessed 28 March. http://www.anu.edu.au/students/learning-development/research-writing/literature-reviews.

Premaratne, Dhilara Darshana. 2013. ‘Discipline Based Variations in the Literature Review in the PhD Thesis: A Perspective from the Discipline of History’. Education and Research Perspectives 40: 236–54.

Other guides you may be interested in

Essay writing: everything you need to know and nothing you don&rsquo;t&mdash;part 1: how to begin.

This guide will explain everything you need to know about how to organise, research and write an argumentative essay.

Essay Writing Part 2: How to Organise Your Research

Organising your research effectively is a crucial and often overlooked step to successful essay writing.

Located in northeastern New South Wales 200 kilometres south of Brisbane, Lismore offers students a good study–play balance, in a gorgeous sub-tropical climate.

Rockhampton

The administrative hub for Central Queensland, Rockhampton is a popular tourist attraction due to its many national parks and proximity to Great Keppel Island.

Thesis Statement for Review

Ai generator.

In the realm of reviews, whether they concern books, films, products, or services, a compelling thesis statement is pivotal. It serves as the anchor, succinctly conveying your evaluative stance and guiding readers through your perspective. As reviews often sway opinions and decisions, mastering the art of crafting a potent thesis statement is essential. Dive into stellar examples, learn the crafting process, and grasp pro tips to perfect your review narratives.

What is a Review Thesis Statement? – Definition

A concise thesis statement summary of the reviewer’s main evaluation or judgment about the subject under consideration. Unlike research or argumentative thesis statements, a review thesis primarily focuses on the reviewer’s stance, be it positive, negative, or mixed, providing readers with a clear indication of the overall tone and direction the review will take.

What is a good thesis statement Example for a Review?

Book Review : “In J.K. Rowling’s ‘Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban’, the intricacies of the plot, combined with the depth of character development, create not only the strongest book in the series but also a testament to her evolving writing prowess.”

Movie Review : “Christopher Nolan’s ‘Inception’ masterfully combines complex storytelling with breathtaking visuals, making it an audacious and mesmerizing cinematic experience.”

Product Review : “Apple’s iPhone 12 Pro offers a harmonious blend of cutting-edge technology and sleek design, setting a new benchmark in the smartphone industry despite its steep price.”

Each of these good thesis statements offers a clear evaluative stance, providing a snapshot of the reviewer’s perspective on the subject in question.

100 Thesis Statement Examples for Review

Size: 211 KB

In crafting a review, your specific thesis statement sets the tone, offering readers a glimpse into your assessment. Whether it’s a book, film, product, or service, a well-penned thesis encapsulates your viewpoint, guiding readers through your evaluative journey. Below are diverse examples to inspire and guide your review writing endeavors.

• “Margaret Atwood’s ‘The Handmaid’s Tale’ presents a haunting dystopian world, prompting readers to reflect on societal structures.”
• “Martin Scorsese’s ‘The Irishman’ delves deep into the psyche of its characters, showcasing his directorial genius.”
• “Samsung’s Galaxy S21 fuses functionality with design, though its battery life leaves room for improvement.”
• “The newly opened ‘Cafe Delight’ boasts an eclectic menu but struggles with service consistency.”
• “Netflix’s ‘The Crown’ brilliantly captures the nuances of the British monarchy, making it a binge-worthy series.”
• “Nike’s latest running shoes offer unparalleled comfort but come with a hefty price tag.”
• “Trevor Noah’s ‘Born a Crime’ is an enlightening memoir that seamlessly blends humor and poignant moments.”
• “Taylor Swift’s ‘Folklore’ is a melodious departure from her usual genre, proving her versatile artistry.”
• “The MacBook Air M1 is Apple’s crowning achievement in balancing performance and portability.”
• “Spielberg’s ‘Schindler’s List’ remains a cinematic masterpiece, shedding light on humanity’s darkest hours.”
• “The PlayStation 5, while boasting groundbreaking graphics, suffers from limited availability.”
• “The vegan dishes at ‘Green Haven’ are a delight, offering both flavor and nutritional value.”
• “Disney’s ‘Mulan’ remake, although visually stunning, lacks the charm of the original animation.”
• “Fender’s latest guitar series is a boon for professionals, though beginners might find them overwhelming.”
• “Erin Morgenstern’s ‘The Starless Sea’ is a lyrical journey through whimsical worlds, though it occasionally loses its narrative thread.”
• “The ‘Zen Retreat Spa’ offers a holistic wellness experience but could benefit from a wider range of services.”
• “Billie Eilish’s ‘When We All Fall Asleep, Where Do We Go?’ pushes musical boundaries, heralding a new era of pop.”
• “The Pixel 6, with its AI capabilities, sets a new standard, though it falls short in the aesthetics department.”
• “Amazon’s ‘The Boys’ offers a gritty take on superheroes, breaking away from conventional portrayals.”
• “The latest Adidas workout gear combines style with functionality but demands a premium.”
• “The new Honda Accord impresses with its fuel efficiency, though the interior design feels dated.”
• “BBC’s adaptation of ‘Pride and Prejudice’ remains unparalleled in capturing the essence of Austen’s classic.”
• “While GoPro’s latest model offers groundbreaking stabilization, its battery life remains a sore point.”
• “Rihanna’s Fenty Beauty line is revolutionary in its inclusivity, setting new standards for the cosmetic industry.”
• “Ubisoft’s ‘Assassin’s Creed Valhalla’ offers a rich historical setting, but glitches occasionally disrupt gameplay.”
• “While the ‘Eco Bistro’ boasts an organic menu, its dishes often lack seasoning and flavor.”
• “Jordan Peele’s ‘Get Out’ is a masterclass in blending horror with societal commentary.”
• “The Dyson V11 stands out in performance among vacuum cleaners, but its price is discouraging for many.”
• “Spotify’s user interface makes it the top choice for music streaming, though its podcast section could be improved.”
• “Stephen King’s ‘The Institute’ reiterates his prowess in writing gripping narratives but treads familiar themes.”
• “The newly launched Microsoft Surface Pro excels in versatility but struggles with battery longevity.”
• “‘Circe’ by Madeline Miller is a spellbinding retelling of mythology, highlighting the nuances of its titular character.”
• “While the Xbox Series X boasts impressive specs, its game library needs expansion.”
• “Leonardo DiCaprio’s performance in ‘The Revenant’ is raw and captivating, making it a cinematic gem.”
• “Nikon’s latest DSLR camera offers stunning photo quality but falls short in video capabilities.”
• “The ‘Mountain View Resort’ provides a serene escape, though its dining options are limited.”
• “Beyonce’s ‘Lemonade’ is a powerful blend of music and activism, showcasing her evolution as an artist.”
• “Adobe’s Photoshop remains the top choice for professionals, though its steep learning curve is daunting for newbies.”
• “Joaquin Phoenix’s portrayal in ‘Joker’ provides a harrowing look into mental health issues, making it a standout film.”
• “The Tesla Model X, with its innovative features, is reshaping the automobile industry.”
• “George Orwell’s ‘1984’ is eerily relevant today, underlining the dangers of unchecked power.”
• “While the iPhone SE offers value for money, it lacks the flair of its high-end counterparts.”
• “Netflix’s ‘Stranger Things’ blends nostalgia with suspense, creating an irresistible binge-watch.”
• “While Bose’s new headphones provide exceptional sound, they are not the most comfortable for extended use.”
• “Barack Obama’s ‘A Promised Land’ is an introspective memoir providing invaluable insights into his presidency.”
• “Sony’s Bravia range offers unmatched picture quality, but its sound system could use an upgrade.”
• “The ‘Desert Oasis Retreat’ stands out for its rejuvenating experiences, though it’s far removed from urban amenities.”
• “Ariana Grande’s ‘Sweetener’ album showcases her vocal prowess, though some tracks feel repetitive.”
• “The Nikon Z5, while great for photography enthusiasts, might be an overkill for casual users.”
• “HBO’s ‘Game of Thrones’, despite its controversial ending, has set a benchmark for fantasy television.”
• “The Google Home smart speaker, with its intuitive features, stands out in the crowded smart home market.”
• “Ernest Hemingway’s ‘The Old Man and the Sea’ is a testament to human resilience and determination.”
• “Canon’s EOS series offers versatility for both amateurs and professionals, though its price range is vast.”
• “Marvel’s ‘Avengers: Endgame’ serves as a fitting conclusion to an epic saga, balancing emotion with action.”
• “Fitbit’s latest model excels in tracking accuracy but lacks in battery longevity.”
• “Starbucks, while offering a wide coffee range, often compromises on the personal touch of local cafes.”
• “Christopher Nolan’s ‘Dunkirk’ is a technical marvel, but its narrative feels disjointed at times.”
• “The Galaxy Tab series is a strong contender to the iPad, offering versatility at a competitive price.”
• “Paulo Coelho’s ‘The Alchemist’ remains a timeless tale of dreams and destiny.”
• “‘The Mediterranean Breeze’ restaurant offers authentic flavors but could work on ambiance.”
• “Apple Watch, with its health features, is more than just a smart accessory.”
• “Lana Del Rey’s ‘Norman F***ing Rockwell’ is a musical journey of melancholy and romance.”
• “While Canon’s mirrorless cameras offer innovation, they come with a steep learning curve.”
• “Amazon Prime’s ‘The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel’ is a refreshing take on comedy, set against a vibrant period backdrop.”
• “Samsung’s QLED TVs, while providing stunning visuals, are on the pricier side.”
• “Agatha Christie’s ‘And Then There Were None’ is a masterful suspense that keeps readers on edge.”
• “Bose’s SoundTouch 300 offers cinematic sound but falls short in bass depth.”
• “The French bakery ‘La Delice’ offers authentic pastries but is often crowded due to limited seating.”
• “Hulu’s ‘The Handmaid’s Tale’ is a chilling adaptation, shedding light on societal regression.”
• “The Tesla Model 3, while revolutionary in design, often faces software glitches.”
• “Tom Hanks’ performance in ‘Saving Private Ryan’ delivers a raw portrayal of the horrors of war, making it an iconic film.”
• “The latest update of the Android OS impresses with its user-friendly features but is not without minor bugs.”
• “The Broadway musical ‘Hamilton’ revolutionizes theater by blending history with contemporary music genres.”
• “Sony’s WH-1000XM4 headphones provide noise-cancellation at its best, but their hefty price tag is a deterrent for some.”
• “J.K. Rowling’s ‘Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban’ brilliantly blends mystery and magic, setting the tone for the series’ darker undertones.”
• “The ‘Seaside Resort’ is perfect for a tranquil getaway, but its remote location might not appeal to those seeking more lively surroundings.”
• “Lady Gaga’s ‘Chromatica’ is a powerful return to her dance-pop roots, resonating with many of her longtime fans.”
• “Adobe Premiere Pro stands tall in video editing software but demands a high-performance machine for smooth functioning.”
• “Scorsese’s ‘The Wolf of Wall Street’ is a gritty dive into corporate greed, bolstered by DiCaprio’s stellar performance.”
• “Fitbit’s Versa 3 excels in sleep tracking, but its design is somewhat generic.”
• “The novel ‘To Kill a Mockingbird’ by Harper Lee remains a poignant exploration of racial and moral complexities in the American South.”
• “LG’s OLED TV lineup boasts unrivaled picture quality, but concerns over screen burn-in persist.”
• “The restaurant ‘Urban Eats’ offers innovative fusion cuisine, though sometimes it tries too hard to impress.”
• “The movie ‘Parasite’ by Bong Joon-ho is a masterclass in genre-blending, tackling social issues with dark humor.”
• “Apple’s iPad Pro is a formidable contender in the tablet market but is often seen as overpriced.”
• “BTS’s album ‘Map of the Soul: 7’ showcases their evolution as artists, touching upon themes of self-reflection and growth.”
• “The video game ‘The Last of Us Part II’ is a narrative powerhouse, though it polarized fans with its bold storytelling choices.”
• “The ‘Alpine Lodge’ offers a cozy winter retreat with stunning mountain views, but its in-house dining options are limited.”
• “Dua Lipa’s ‘Future Nostalgia’ is a refreshing blend of pop genres, echoing past eras while sounding unmistakably modern.”
• “The novel ‘The Night Circus’ by Erin Morgenstern paints a mesmerizing picture, though its plot occasionally meanders.”
• “Samsung’s Fold series pushes the boundaries of smartphone design but raises durability concerns.”
• “The documentary ‘Our Planet’ is a visual spectacle that underscores the urgent need for environmental conservation.”
• “The ‘Zenbook’ series by Asus strikes a balance between portability and performance, appealing to both students and professionals.”
• “Ari Aster’s ‘Midsommar’ is a haunting exploration of grief, set against the eerie backdrop of a Swedish midsummer festival.”
• “Nike’s React series offers unmatched cushioning for runners, but some find its design too flashy.”
• “The film ‘La La Land’ is a heartfelt homage to classic Hollywood musicals, blending romance with stunning cinematography.”
• “OnePlus, with its latest smartphone, offers flagship features at a competitive price but compromises on camera quality.”
• “The musical ‘Dear Evan Hansen’ touches upon pressing issues of mental health, resonating deeply with contemporary audiences.”
• “Canon’s RF lens lineup provides stunning clarity, setting new benchmarks in photography.”
• “The TV show ‘Breaking Bad’ remains a testament to character development, chronicling Walter White’s descent into the criminal underworld.”

Thesis Statement Examples for Literature Review

In literature reviews, the goal is often to identify trends, gaps, or controversies in the body of literature on a specific topic. The statements should reflect a comprehensive understanding of various works under review.

• “An examination of 20th-century Russian literature reveals a recurring theme of resistance against political oppression.”
• “Post-colonial African literature predominantly focuses on the struggle for identity amidst external influences.”
• “Modern American poets have shown a distinct shift towards exploring the nuances of urban life.”
• “Romantic-era literature frequently romanticizes nature as an antidote to the perils of industrialization.”
• “The rise of feminist literature in the 1960s challenged conventional gender norms and roles.”
• “A review of dystopian literature exposes society’s fears and anxieties about technological advancement.”
• “Contemporary Asian literature reveals the tensions between tradition and modernity.”
• “Magic realism in Latin American literature serves as a tool to critique political and social realities.”
• “Victorian literature’s portrayal of women reflects the era’s restrictive gender expectations.”
• “Middle Eastern literature post-9/11 frequently grapples with themes of identity, migration, and conflict.”

Thesis Statement Examples for Book Review

Book reviews encapsulate the essence, themes, and overall impact of a specific book.

• “In ‘1984’, George Orwell presents a harrowing vision of a totalitarian future that challenges the essence of individuality.”
• “J.D. Salinger’s ‘Catcher in the Rye’ offers an introspective look at teenage angst and the quest for purpose.”
• “Through ‘Beloved’, Toni Morrison confronts the haunting legacies of slavery on personal and collective memory.”
• “J.R.R. Tolkien’s ‘The Hobbit’ is a captivating adventure tale that also delves into themes of bravery and friendship.”
• “In ‘The Road’, Cormac McCarthy paints a bleak post-apocalyptic world, highlighting the enduring spirit of human survival.”
• “Jane Austen’s ‘Pride and Prejudice’ masterfully weaves a tale of societal norms and true love.”
• “‘The Great Gatsby’ by F. Scott Fitzgerald critiques the American Dream’s elusive nature amidst the Roaring Twenties’ excess.”
• “Harper Lee’s ‘To Kill a Mockingbird’ is a profound exploration of racial prejudice and moral growth in the American South.”
• “Paulo Coelho’s ‘The Alchemist’ is a spiritual journey emphasizing the importance of following one’s dreams.”
• “Gabriel García Márquez’s ‘One Hundred Years of Solitude’ chronicles the Buendía family’s generational saga, infused with magic realism.”

Thesis Statement Examples for Restaurant Review

Restaurant reviews offer insights into the dining experience, emphasizing ambiance, service, and cuisine.

• “The Bistro delights with its fusion of Asian and Mediterranean flavors, though it falls short in ambiance.”
• “OceanView offers fresh seafood dishes with a panoramic view that justifies its premium pricing.”
• “At Bella Italia, authentic Italian cuisine meets a rustic and cozy environment.”
• “Despite its urban setting, Green Haven surprises with its farm-to-table approach, prioritizing organic and locally-sourced ingredients.”
• “Midtown Diner offers classic American dishes but needs to improve its service times during rush hours.”
• “Le Petite Café stands out for its delicate pastries and a delightful Parisian atmosphere.”
• “Tex-Mex Hub is a must-visit for spicy food lovers, offering a genuine taste of Southern American cuisine.”
• “While the sushi at DragonRoll is top-notch, the limited vegetarian options can be off-putting for some.”
• “UrbanGrill impresses with its innovative dishes but sometimes tries too hard to stand out.”
• “Moonlit offers a unique rooftop dining experience, though its menu is somewhat predictable.”

Thesis Statement Examples for Product Review

Product reviews evaluate the efficiency, design, and value of a specific product.

• “Apple’s iPhone 13 boasts improved battery life and camera enhancements but still struggles with iOS restrictions.”
• “Sony’s A7IV camera sets new standards in mirrorless technology, though it’s not budget-friendly.”
• “The Dyson V11 vacuum impresses with its suction power, but its weight can be cumbersome for extended use.”
• “Adidas’ Ultraboost 21 shoes provide exceptional comfort for runners but might feel too soft for some.”
• “Samsung’s QLED TV series offers vibrant colors and sharp contrasts, but the smart interface needs refining.”
• “Bose’s QuietComfort earbuds lead in noise cancellation, yet some users report connectivity issues.”
• “The Kindle Paperwhite’s latest version offers a warmer light feature, enhancing the reading experience at night.”
• “GoPro’s Hero 9 is a significant improvement in stabilization and resolution, but its bulkiness can be a drawback for some.”
• “Nespresso’s Vertuo machine delivers on taste and convenience but is limited by its pod variety.”
• “Fitbit’s Charge 4 excels in fitness tracking but falls short in smart features compared to competitors.”

Thesis Statement Examples for Movie Review

Movie reviews provide an analysis of a film’s storyline, cinematography, performances, and overall impact.

• “Christopher Nolan’s ‘Inception’ challenges viewers with its intricate plot but rewards with stunning visuals and performances.”
• “‘Parasite’ is a masterclass in genre-blending, tackling social issues with dark humor and suspense.”
• “Disney’s ‘Mulan’ offers a fresh take on a beloved story, but some purists might miss the original’s songs and humor.”
• “Martin Scorsese’s ‘The Irishman’ is a lengthy yet riveting exploration of crime, loyalty, and aging.”
• “Greta Gerwig’s adaptation of ‘Little Women’ brings a contemporary feel while honoring the classic’s spirit.”
• “‘Joker’, led by Joaquin Phoenix’s haunting portrayal, delves deep into the psyche of Batman’s iconic nemesis.”
• “Despite its blockbuster action sequences, ‘Avengers: Endgame’ shines brightest in its quieter, character-driven moments.”
• “Pixar’s ‘Soul’ is a heartwarming exploration of life’s purposes and passions, appealing to both kids and adults.”
• “Tarantino’s ‘Once Upon a Time in Hollywood’ is a nostalgic trip back to a bygone era, sprinkled with his signature style.”
• “‘Frozen II’ expands the magical world of Arendelle but struggles to capture the original’s charm.”

Thesis Statement Examples for Evaluation

Evaluation thesis statements provide a balanced assessment, considering various criteria.

• “While the government’s new policy promises economic growth, it lacks clear provisions for environmental protection.”
• “The museum’s latest exhibit excels in interactivity, though some historical inaccuracies weaken its credibility.”
• “The new school curriculum offers a broader range of subjects, but its heavy workload might stress students.”
• “The city’s public transportation overhaul is commendable for its coverage but needs to prioritize punctuality.”
• “The company’s rebranding strategy succeeded in attracting a younger demographic, though it alienated its long-term customers.”
• “The festival, while boasting international artists, lacked adequate facilities and organization.”
• “The new app update enhances user experience with its design but raises privacy concerns with data collection.”
• “While the online course offers flexibility, it lacks the community engagement of traditional classroom settings.”
• “The company’s sustainability initiative is praiseworthy, but its implementation in overseas factories remains questionable.”
• “The software’s latest version promises enhanced features, but its steep learning curve can deter novice users.”

Thesis Statement Examples for Analysis

Analysis thesis statements delve deep into subjects, dissecting their intricacies.

• “Shakespeare’s ‘Hamlet’ intricately explores the human psyche through its complex protagonist.”
• “The architectural design of the new library emphasizes accessibility, reflecting a democratic approach to knowledge.”
• “Beethoven’s Symphony No. 5 represents a triumphant battle against fate, evident in its progression from minor to major tonalities.”
• “Picasso’s ‘Guernica’ is a profound commentary on the horrors of war, using distorted imagery to convey pain and chaos.”
• “The marketing campaign’s success lies in its appeal to emotions, creating a strong brand-community connection.”
• “The poem’s use of iambic pentameter mirrors the rhythmic quality of natural speech, drawing readers into its narrative.”
• “The software’s code reveals an emphasis on user privacy, using encryption techniques that prioritize data protection.”
• “The character’s development throughout the novel is a reflection of society’s evolving views on gender roles.”
• “The film’s use of light and shadow not only establishes mood but also accentuates character dynamics.”
• “The policy’s language subtly promotes corporate interests, evident in its emphasis on deregulation and market freedoms.

Does a review need a thesis statement?

Absolutely! A review, whether of a book, film, product, or any other subject, should possess a clear thesis statement. This statement helps set the tone for the review and provides readers or listeners with an understanding of the reviewer’s main stance or perspective. The thesis establishes the foundational argument or point the reviewer is trying to convey. This clarity not only aids in structuring the review but also offers readers a lens through which they can understand the subsequent analysis and critique.  In addition, you should review our  college essay thesis statement .

How do you write a thesis statement for a review? – Step by Step Guide

• Identify the Main Element : Begin by pinpointing what the core element or aspect of the item you’re reviewing is. For a book, this could be the plot or a character; for a product, perhaps its primary function.
• Evaluate Your Response : Reflect on your reactions to this core element. Did it resonate with you? Was there something lacking?
• Draft a Preliminary Statement : Start with a general statement that captures your initial thoughts about the review subject.
• Be Specific : Avoid vague phrases. For instance, rather than saying a book was “good” or “bad,” specify what made it so – was the character development rich, or was the plot predictable?
• Consider Counterarguments : Think about potential counterarguments to your stance. This doesn’t mean you should necessarily include them in the thesis, but being aware of them can help you craft a more robust statement.
• Revise and Refine : Like all thesis statements, your initial draft might not be perfect. Revisit and refine it to ensure it’s concise, clear, and compelling.
• Ensure It’s Arguable : A good thesis statement for a review should present a point that someone could reasonably disagree with.
• Avoid Subjectivity : While reviews are inherently subjective, try to ground your thesis in objective observations. Instead of “I didn’t like the book,” you might say, “The book lacked depth in character development, leading to a less immersive experience.”
• Test It : Before finalizing your thesis statement, present it to someone unfamiliar with the review subject. If they get a clear sense of your stance and the direction of your review, you’re on the right track.
• Position Appropriately : Place your thesis statement at the beginning of your review to give readers a clear sense of direction from the outset.

Tips for Writing a Review Thesis Statement

• Stay Concise : Brevity is key. Ensure your thesis is one to two sentences long and clearly encapsulates your main argument or perspective.
• Use Active Voice : Active voice makes your statement sound more decisive. For instance, “The film delivers a powerful message about resilience” is preferable to “A powerful message about resilience is delivered by the film.”
• Be Open to Change : As you delve deeper into your review, you might find your perspective shifting slightly. Be ready to adjust your thesis accordingly.
• Avoid Spoilers : Especially for book and movie reviews, make sure your thesis doesn’t give away key plot points.
• Stay Objective : While personal opinions in reviews are inevitable, aim for a balanced view that’s grounded in observable facts or features.
• Remember the Audience : Consider who you’re writing for. If your audience is more specialized, like in a scholarly review, your thesis might be more detailed and nuanced. If it’s for a broader audience, clarity and accessibility are paramount.
• Seek Feedback : Sometimes, having another set of eyes on your thesis can be invaluable. They might catch ambiguities or vaguenesses that you missed.

Writing a specific thesis statement for a review is as much an art as it is a science. It requires introspection, a clear understanding of the review subject, and the ability to articulate one’s thoughts concisely and compellingly. By following the above steps and tips, you can craft a thesis that anchors your review effectively.

Text prompt

• Instructive
• Professional

10 Examples of Public speaking

20 Examples of Gas lighting

Information

• Author Services

Initiatives

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

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

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

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

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

Original Submission Date Received: .

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

Article Menu

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

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

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

Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.

JSmol Viewer

A review of foot–terrain interaction mechanics for heavy-duty legged robots.

1. Introduction

2. supporting feet of heavy-duty legged robots, 2.1. supporting foot configurations of heavy-duty legged robots, 2.1.1. feet with passive adaptive joints, cylindrical supporting foot configurations, semi-cylindrical supporting foot configurations, spherical supporting foot configurations, hemispherical supporting foot configurations, square supporting foot configurations, special supporting foot configurations, 2.1.2. feet with active driving joints, 2.2. plantar patterns of supporting foot of legged robots, 3. dynamics analysis of robot, 3.1. models of pressure–sinkage for mobile robot, 3.1.1. models for pressure–sinkage at zero slip conditions, a theoretical exploration of the wheeled robots, a theoretical exploration of the wheel-legged composite robots, a theoretical exploration of the legged robots, 3.1.2. models for pressure–sinkage at non-zero slip conditions, 3.2. tangential force models, 4. further research, 4.1. configuration research of biomimetic supporting feet, 4.1.1. application of bionic technology in supporting feet design, 4.1.2. design and distribution of plantar patterns of supporting feet, 4.2. study of effective contact area between irregular foot and dynamic deformable terrain, 4.3. mechanical behavior modeling of interaction between supporting feet and extreme/dynamic environments, 4.3.1. construction of nonlinear tangential force mathematical model, 4.3.2. construction of resultant force mathematical model, 4.4. parameterization research of soil characteristics in extreme/dynamic environments, 4.5. cross-application of multimodal information fusion and foot–terrain interaction mechanics, 5. conclusions, author contributions, conflicts of interest, nomenclature.

• Zhuang, H.; Gao, H.; Deng, Z.; Ding, L.; Liu, Z. A review of heavy-duty legged robots. Sci. China Technol. Sci. 2014 , 57 , 298–314. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Biswal, P.; Mohanty, P.K. Development of quadruped walking robots: A review. Ain Shams Eng. J. 2021 , 12 , 2017–2031. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Maity, A.; Majumder, S.; Ghosh, S. An experimental hyper redundant serpentine robot. In Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics—SMC, Istanbul, Turkey, 10–13 October 2010; pp. 3180–3185. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Joshi, V.A.; Banavar, R.N.; Hippalgaonkar, R. Design and analysis of a spherical mobile robot. Mech. Mach. Theory 2010 , 45 , 130–136. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bartsch, S.; Manz, M.; Kampmann, P.; Dettmann, A.; Hanff, H.; Langosz, M.; von Szadkowski, K.; Hilljegerdes, J.; Simnofske, M.; Kloss, P.; et al. Development and Control of the Multi-Legged Robot MANTIS. In Proceedings of the ISR 2016: 47st International Symposium on Robotics, Munich, Germany, 21–22 June 2016; pp. 1–8. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cobano, J.; Ponticelli, R.; de Santos, P.G. Mobile robotic system for detection and location of antipersonnel land mines: Field tests. Ind. Robot. Int. J. Robot. Res. Appl. 2008 , 35 , 520–527. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Carbone, G.; Ceccarelli, M. Legged Robotic Systems ; Intech Open Access Publisher: London, UK, 2005. [ Google Scholar ]
• Zhang, Q.; Zhao, W.; Chu, S.; Wang, L.; Fu, J.; Yang, J.; Gao, B. Research Progress of Nuclear Emergency Response Robot. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2018 , 452 , 042102. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zhuang, H.C.; Wang, N.; Gao, H.B.; Deng, Z.Q. Autonomous fault-tolerant gait planning research for electrically driven large-load-ratio six-legged robot. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Intelligent Robotics and Applications (ICIRA 2019), Shenyang, China, 8–11 August 2019; pp. 231–244. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zhuang, H.-C.; Gao, H.-B.; Deng, Z.-Q. Gait Planning Research for an Electrically Driven Large-Load-Ratio Six-Legged Robot. Appl. Sci. 2017 , 7 , 296. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zhuang, H.-C.; Gao, H.-B.; Deng, Z.-Q. Analysis Method of Articulated Torque of Heavy-Duty Six-Legged Robot under Its Quadrangular Gait. Appl. Sci. 2016 , 6 , 323. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bloesch, M.; Gehring, C.; Fankhauser, P.; Hutter, M.; Hoepflinger, M.A.; Siegwart, R. State estimation for legged robots on unstable and slippery terrain. In Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS 2013), Tokyo, Japan, 3–7 November 2013; pp. 6058–6064. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Voloshina, A.S.; Kuo, A.D.; Ferris, D.P.; Remy, D.C. A model-based analysis of the mechanical cost of walking on uneven terrain. bioRxiv 2020 . [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zhuang, H.; Xia, Y.; Wang, N.; Li, W.; Dong, L.; Li, B. Interactive method research of dual mode information coordination integration for astronaut gesture and eye movement signals based on hybrid model. Sci. China Technol. Sci. 2023 , 66 , 1717–1733. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Saraiva, L.; da Silva, M.R.; Marques, F.; da Silva, M.T.; Flores, P. A review on foot-ground contact modeling strategies for human motion analysis. Mech. Mach. Theory 2022 , 177 , 105046. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hodoshima, R.; Doi, T.; Fukuda, Y.; Hirose, S.; Okamoto, T.; Mori, J. Development of a Quadruped Walking Robot TITAN XI for Steep Slope Operation—Step Over Gait to Avoid Concrete Frames on Steep Slopes. J. Robot. Mechatron. 2007 , 19 , 13–26. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hirose, S.; Yokota, S.; Torii, A.; Ogata, M.; Suganuma, S.; Takita, K.; Kato, K. Quadruped Walking Robot Centered Demining System—Development of TITAN-IX and its Operation. In Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Barcelona, Spain, 18–22 April 2005; pp. 1284–1290. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hirose, S.; Fukuda, Y.; Kikuchi, H. The gait control system of a quadruped walking vehicle. Adv. Robot. 1986 , 1 , 289–323. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Irawan, A.; Nonami, K. Compliant Walking Control for Hydraulic Driven Hexapod Robot on Rough Terrain. J. Robot. Mechatronics 2011 , 23 , 149–162. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bares, J.E.; Wettergreen, D.S. Dante II: Technical Description, Results, and Lessons Learned. Int. J. Robot. Res. 1999 , 18 , 621–649. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• A Galvez, J.; Estremera, J.; de Santos, P.G. A new legged-robot configuration for research in force distribution. Mechatronics 2003 , 13 , 907–932. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zhuang, H.C. Electrically Driven Large-Load-Ratio Six-Legged Robot Structural Design and Its Mobile Characteristics Research. Ph.D. Dissertation, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin, China, 2014. (In Chinese). [ Google Scholar ]
• Zhuang, H.; Wang, N.; Gao, H.; Deng, Z. Quickly Obtaining Range of Articulated Rotating Speed for Electrically Driven Large-Load-Ratio Six-Legged Robot Based on Maximum Walking Speed Method. IEEE Access 2019 , 7 , 29453–29470. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Liu, Y.; Ding, L.; Gao, H.; Liu, G.; Deng, Z.; Yu, H. Efficient force distribution algorithm for hexapod robot walking on uneven terrain. In Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics (ROBIO), Qingdao, China, 3–7 December 2016; pp. 432–437. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Xu, P.; Ding, L.; Li, Z.; Yang, H.; Wang, Z.; Gao, H.; Zhou, R.; Su, Y.; Deng, Z.; Huang, Y. Learning physical characteristics like animals for legged robots. Natl. Sci. Rev. 2023 , 10 , nwad045. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Pan, Y.; Gao, F. A new six-parallel-legged walking robot for drilling holes on the fuselage. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part C J. Mech. Eng. Sci. 2014 , 228 , 753–764. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Yang, P.; Gao, F. Kinematical Model and Topology Patterns of a New 6-Parallel-Legged Walking Robot. In Proceedings of the ASME 2012 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, Volume 4: 36th Mechanisms and Robotics Conference, Parts A and B, Chicago, IL, USA, 12–15 August 2012; pp. 1197–1205. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Pan, Y.; Gao, F. Payload capability analysis of a new kind of parallel leg hexapod walking robot. In Proceedings of the 2013 International Conference on Advanced Mechatronic Systems (ICAMechS), Luoyang, China, 25–27 September 2013; pp. 541–544. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Yang, P.; Gao, F. Leg kinematic analysis and prototype experiments of walking-operating multifunctional hexapod robot. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part C J. Mech. Eng. Sci. 2013 , 228 , 2217–2232. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zhang, H.Y. Analysis of the Structure and Stability of a Large and Highly Adaptable Hexapod Robot. Master’s Thesis, Jilin University, Changchun, China, 2021. (In Chinese). [ Google Scholar ]
• Zhai, C. Research on Motion Trajectory Planning of Heavy-Load Hydraulic Driven Hexapod Robots. Master’s Thesis, Jilin University, Changchun, China, 2023. (In Chinese). [ Google Scholar ]
• Gao, J. Leg Mechanism Design and Simulation Analysis for a Heavy-Duty Hydraulic Hexapod Robot. Master’s Thesis, Jilin University, Changchun, China, 2017. (In Chinese). [ Google Scholar ]
• Xu, Z.; Yi, H.; Liu, D.; Zhang, R.; Luo, X. Design a Hybrid Energy-Supply for the Electrically Driven Heavy-Duty Hexapod Vehicle. J. Bionic Eng. 2023 , 20 , 1434–1448. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Xu, Z.; Chen, X.; Liu, Y.; Wang, L.; Zhou, L.; Yi, H.; Bao, C. Design and Implementation of a Novel Robot Foot with High-adaptability and High-adhesion for Heavy-load Walking Robots. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE 9th Annual International Conference on CYBER Technology in Automation, Control, and Intelligent Systems (CYBER), Suzhou, China, 29 July–2 August 2019; pp. 1509–1514. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Raibert, M.; Blankespoor, K.; Nelson, G.; Playter, R. BigDog, the rough-terrain quadruped robot. IFAC Proc. Vol. 2008 , 41 , 10822–10825. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wooden, D.; Malchano, M.; Blankespoor, K.; Howardy, A.; Rizzi, A.A.; Raibert, M. Autonomous navigation for BigDog. In Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA 2010), Anchorage, AK, USA, 3–7 May 2010; pp. 4736–4741. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Meng, X.; Wang, S.; Cao, Z.; Zhang, L. A review of quadruped robots and environment perception. In Proceedings of the IEEE 35th Control Conference (CCC), Chengdu, China, 27–29 July 2016; pp. 6350–6356. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zang, H.; Zhao, D.; Shen, L. Theoretical Study of Global Scale Analysis Method for Agile Bionic Leg Mechanism. Robotica 2020 , 38 , 427–441. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Han, B.; Yi, H.; Xu, Z.; Yang, X.; Luo, X. 3D-SLIP model based dynamic stability strategy for legged robots with impact disturbance rejection. Sci. Rep. 2022 , 12 , 5892. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zhong, J.F. Design, Control of Hydraulical Actuators for Quadruped Legged Robot. Master’s Thesis, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China, 2014. (In Chinese). [ Google Scholar ]
• Cheng, P. Research, Design of Control System for Bionic Quadruped Robot. Master’s Thesis, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China, 2014. (In Chinese). [ Google Scholar ]
• Qi, C.; Gao, F.; Sun, Q.; Chen, X.; Xu, Y.; Zhao, X. A foot force sensing approach for a legged walking robot using the motor current. In Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics (ROBIO), Zhuhai, China, 6–9 December 2015; pp. 1078–1083. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sun, Q.; Gao, F.; Chen, X. Towards dynamic alternating tripod trotting of a pony-sized hexapod robot for disaster rescuing based on multi-modal impedance control. Robotica 2018 , 36 , 1048–1076. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Qiao, S. Design, Dynamic Gait Control of the Rescue Hexapod Robot with Erect Posture and Parallel Mechanism Leg. Ph.D. Dissertation, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, China, 2018. (In Chinese). [ Google Scholar ]
• Michael, K. Meet Boston Dynamics’ LS3—The Latest Robotic War Machine ; University of Wollongong: Wollongong, NSW, Australia, 2012. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rong, X.; Li, Y.; Ruan, J.; Li, B. Design and simulation for a hydraulic actuated quadruped robot. J. Mech. Sci. Technol. 2012 , 26 , 1171–1177. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chen, T.; Rong, X.; Li, Y.; Ding, C.; Chai, H.; Zhou, L. A compliant control method for robust trot motion of hydraulic actuated quadruped robot. Int. J. Adv. Robot. Syst. 2018 , 15 , 1729881418813235. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Yang, K.; Zhou, L.; Rong, X.; Li, Y. Onboard hydraulic system controller design for quadruped robot driven by gasoline engine. Mechatronics 2018 , 52 , 36–48. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bartsch, S.; Birnschein, T.; Cordes, F.; Kuehn, D.; Kampmann, P.; Hilljegerdes, J.; Planthaber, S.; Roemmermann, M.; Kirchner, F. Spaceclimber: Development of a six-legged climbing robot for space exploration. In Proceedings of the ISR 2010 (41st International Symposium on Robotics) and ROBOTIK 2010 (6th German Conference on Robotics), Munich, Germany, 7–9 June 2010; pp. 1–8. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bartsch, S.; Birnschein, T.; Römmermann, M.; Hilljegerdes, J.; Kühn, D.; Kirchner, F. Development of the six-legged walking and climbing robot SpaceClimber. J. Field Robot. 2012 , 29 , 506–532. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kitano, S.; Hirose, S.; Horigome, A.; Endo, G. TITAN-XIII: Sprawling-type quadruped robot with ability of fast and energy-efficient walking. ROBOMECH J. 2016 , 3 , 8. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ohtsuka, S.; Endo, G.; Fukushima, E.F.; Hirose, S. Development of terrain adaptive sole for multi-legged walking robot. In Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS 2010), Taipei, Taiwan, 18–22 October 2010; pp. 5354–5359. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Talebi, S.; Poulakakis, I.; Papadopoulos, E.; Buehler, M. Quadruped robot running with a bounding gait. In Experimental Robotics VII ; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2001; pp. 281–289. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• de Santos, P.G.; Cobano, J.; Garcia, E.; Estremera, J.; Armada, M. A six-legged robot-based system for humanitarian demining missions. Mechatronics 2007 , 17 , 417–430. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chen, T.; Li, Y.; Rong, X.; Zhang, G.; Chai, H.; Bi, J.; Wang, Q. Design and Control of a Novel Leg-Arm Multiplexing Mobile Operational Hexapod Robot. IEEE Robot. Autom. Lett. 2022 , 7 , 382–389. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Nelson, G.; Saunders, A.; Neville, N.; Swilling, B.; Bondaryk, J.; Billings, D.; Lee, C.; Playter, R.; Raibert, M. PETMAN: A Humanoid Robot for Testing Chemical Protective Clothing. J. Robot. Soc. Jpn. 2012 , 30 , 372–377. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kuindersma, S.; Deits, R.; Fallon, M.; Valenzuela, A.; Dai, H.; Permenter, F.; Koolen, T.; Marion, P.; Tedrake, R. Optimization-based locomotion planning, estimation, and control design for the atlas humanoid robot. Auton. Robot. 2016 , 40 , 429–455. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kuehn, D.; Schilling, M.; Stark, T.; Zenzes, M.; Kirchner, F. System Design and Testing of the Hominid Robot Charlie. J. Field Robot. 2017 , 34 , 666–703. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Fondahl, K.; Kuehn, D.; Beinersdorf, F.; Bernhard, F.; Grimminger, F.; Schilling, M.; Stark, T.; Kirchner, F. An adaptive sensor foot for a bipedal and quadrupedal robot. In Proceedings of the 2012 4th IEEE RAS & EMBS International Conference on Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics (BioRob 2012), Rome, Italy, 24–27 June 2012; pp. 270–275. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mosher, R. Test and evaluation of a versatile walking truck. In Proceedings of the Off-Road Mobility Research Symposium, Washington, DC, USA, 1968; pp. 359–379. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hirose, S.; Yoneda, K.; Tsukagoshi, H. TITAN VII: Quadruped walking and manipulating robot on a steep slope. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Albuquerque, NM, USA, 25 April 1987; pp. 494–500. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• He, G.; Xu, J.; Jiang, J.; Cao, Z.; Zhu, D. Soil arching effect analysis and structure optimization of a robot foot sinking in soft soil. Adv. Mech. Eng. 2017 , 9 , 1687814017727940. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• He, G.; Cao, Z.; Li, Q.; Zhu, D.; Aimin, J. Influence of hexapod robot foot shape on sinking considering multibody dynamics. J. Mech. Sci. Technol. 2020 , 34 , 3823–3831. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chopra, S.; Tolley, M.T.; Gravish, N. Granular Jamming Feet Enable Improved Foot-Ground Interactions for Robot Mobility on Deformable Ground. IEEE Robot. Autom. Lett. 2020 , 5 , 3975–3981. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hong, Y.; Yi, S.; Ryu, S.; Lee, C. Design and experimental test of a new robot foot for a quadrupedal jointed-leg type walking robot. In Proceedings of the 5th IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Communication. RO-MAN’96 TSUKUBA, Tsukuba, Japan, 11–14 November 1996; pp. 317–322. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Yamamoto, K.; Sugihara, T.; Nakamura, Y. Toe joint mechanism using parallel four-bar linkage enabling humanlike multiple support at toe pad and toe tip. In Proceedings of the 2007 7th IEEE-RAS International Conference on Humanoid Robots (Humanoids 2007), Pittsburgh, PA, USA, 29 November–1 December 2007; pp. 410–415. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Borovac, B.; Slavnic, S. Design of Multi-segment Humanoid Robot Foot. In Proceedings of the Research and Education in Robotics—EUROBOT 2008: International Conference, Heidelberg, Germany, 22–24 May 2008; pp. 12–18. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Nabulsi, S.; Sarria, J.F.; Montes, H.; Armada, M.A. High-Resolution Indirect Feet–Ground Interaction Measurement for Hydraulic-Legged Robots. IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas. 2009 , 58 , 3396–3404. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Collins, S.H.; Kuo, A.D. Recycling Energy to Restore Impaired Ankle Function during Human Walking. PLoS ONE 2010 , 5 , e9307. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Song, Y. The Analysis and Test of the Robot Foot-Ground Adhesion Properties. Master’s Thesis, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin, China, 2014. (In Chinese). [ Google Scholar ]
• Zou, Y.Y. Landing Point Planning and Foot Pattern Design of Hexapod Robot. Master’s Thesis, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian, China, 2019. (In Chinese). [ Google Scholar ]
• Li, J. The Design and Research of Heavy-Duty Robot High Adaptability Foot. Master’s Thesis, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian, China, 2016. (In Chinese). [ Google Scholar ]
• Li, K.W.; Wu, H.H.; Lin, Y.-C. The effect of shoe sole tread groove depth on the friction coefficient with different tread groove widths, floors and contaminants. Appl. Ergon. 2006 , 37 , 743–748. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Li, K.W.; Chen, C.J.; Lin, C.-H.; Hsu, Y.W. Relationship between measured friction coefficients and two tread groove design parameters for footwear pads. Tsinghua Sci. Technol. 2006 , 11 , 712–719. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Li, K.W.; Chen, C.J. Effects of tread groove orientation and width of the footwear pads on measured friction coefficients. Saf. Sci. 2005 , 43 , 391–405. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Irani, R.; Bauer, R.; Warkentin, A. A dynamic terramechanic model for small lightweight vehicles with rigid wheels and grousers operating in sandy soil. J. Terramechanics 2011 , 48 , 307–318. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ding, L.; Yang, H.; Gao, H.; Li, N.; Deng, Z.; Guo, J.; Li, N. Terramechanics-based modeling of sinkage and moment for in-situ steering wheels of mobile robots on deformable terrain. Mech. Mach. Theory 2017 , 116 , 14–33. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zhuang, H.; Wang, N.; Gao, H.; Deng, Z. Power Consumption Characteristics Research on Mobile System of Electrically Driven Large-Load-Ratio Six-Legged Robot. Chin. J. Mech. Eng. 2023 , 36 , 26. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Liu, Z.; Zhuang, H.-C.; Gao, H.-B.; Deng, Z.-Q.; Ding, L. Static Force Analysis of Foot of Electrically Driven Heavy-Duty Six-Legged Robot under Tripod Gait. Chin. J. Mech. Eng. 2018 , 31 , 63. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bernstein, R. Problems of the experimental mechanics of motor ploughs. Der Motorwagen 1913 , 16 , 1–10. [ Google Scholar ]
• Saakyan, S.S. Vzaimodeistrie vedomogo kolesa i pochvi. 1959. [ Google Scholar ]
• Comin, F.J.; Saaj, C.M. Models for Slip Estimation and Soft Terrain Characterization with Multilegged Wheel–Legs. IEEE Trans. Robot. 2017 , 33 , 1438–1452. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Komizunai, S.; Konno, A.; Abiko, S.; Uchiyama, M. Development of a static sinkage model for a biped robot on loose soil. In Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE/SICE International Symposium on System Integration (SII 2010), Sendai, Japan, 21–22 December 2010; pp. 61–66. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bekker, M.G. Land Locomotion on the Surface of Planets. ARS J. 1962 , 32 , 1651–1659. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Patel, N.; Scott, G.; Ellery, A. Application of Bekker Theory for Planetary Exploration Through Wheeled, Tracked, and Legged Vehicle Locomotion. In Proceedings of the Space 2004 Conference and Exhibit, San Diego, CA, USA, 28–30 September 2004; p. 6091. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Reece, A.R. Principles of Soil-Vehicle Mechanics. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Automob. Div. 1965 , 180 , 45–66. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Gotteland, P.; Benoit, O. Sinkage tests for mobility study, modelling and experimental validation. J. Terramechan. 2006 , 43 , 451–467. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ding, L.; Gao, H.; Deng, Z.; Li, Y.; Liu, G. New perspective on characterizing pressure–sinkage relationship of terrains for estimating interaction mechanics. J. Terramechan. 2014 , 52 , 57–76. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hunt, K.; Crossley, F.R.E. Coefficient of Restitution Interpreted as Damping in Vibroimpact. J. Appl. Mech. 1975 , 42 , 440–445. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wheeler, D.D.; Chavez-Clemente, D.; Sunspiral, V.K. FootSpring: A compliance model for the ATHLETE family of robots. In Proceedings of the 10th International Symposium on Artificial Intelligence, Toronto, ON, Canada, 20–21 June 2010. [ Google Scholar ]
• Youssef, A.-F.A.; Ali, G.A. Determination of soil parameters using plate test. J. Terramechan. 1982 , 19 , 129–147. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Han, D.; Zhang, R.; Zhang, H.; Hu, Z.; Li, J. Mechanical Performances of Typical Robot Feet Intruding into Sands. Energies 2020 , 13 , 1867. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ding, L.; Gao, H.; Deng, Z.; Song, J.; Liu, Y.; Liu, G.; Iagnemma, K. Foot–terrain interaction mechanics for legged robots: Modeling and experimental validation. Int. J. Robot. Res. 2013 , 32 , 1585–1606. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Gao, H.; Jin, M.; Ding, L.; Liu, Y.; Li, W.; Yu, X.; Deng, Z.; Liu, Z. A real-time, high fidelity dynamic simulation platform for hexapod robots on soft terrain. Simul. Model. Pract. Theory 2016 , 68 , 125–145. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Yang, C.; Ding, L.; Tang, D.; Gao, H.; Deng, Z.; Wang, G. Analysis of the normal bearing capacity of the terrain in case of foot-terrain interaction based on Terzaghi theory. In Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics (ROBIO), Qingdao, China, 3–7 December 2016; pp. 443–448. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Vasilev, A.V.; Dokychaeva, E.N.; Utkin-Lubovtsov, O.L. Effect of Tracked Tractor Design Parameters on Tractive Performance ; Mashinostroenie: Moscow, Russia, 1969.
• Yeomans, B.; Saaj, C.M. Towards terrain interaction prediction for bioinspired planetary exploration rovers. Bioinspiration Biomim. 2014 , 9 , 016009. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Awrejcewicz, J.; Olejnik, P. Analysis of Dynamic Systems with Various Friction Laws. Appl. Mech. Rev. 2005 , 58 , 389–411. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Olsson, H.; Åström, K.; de Wit, C.C.; Gäfvert, M.; Lischinsky, P. Friction Models and Friction Compensation. Eur. J. Control 1998 , 4 , 176–195. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Haddadi, A.; Hashtrudi-Zaad, K. A New Method for Online Parameter Estimation of Hunt-Crossley Environment Dynamic Models. In Proceedings of the 2008 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Nice, France, 22–26 September 2008; pp. 981–986. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zapolsky, S.; Drumwright, E. Inverse dynamics with rigid contact and friction. Auton. Robot. 2017 , 41 , 831–863. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Senoo, T.; Ishikawa, M. Analysis of sliding behavior of a biped robot in centroid acceleration space. Robotica 2017 , 35 , 636–653. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Liang, H.; Xie, W.; Zhang, Z.; Wei, P.; Cui, C. A Three-Dimensional Mass-Spring Walking Model Could Describe the Ground Reaction Forces. Math. Probl. Eng. 2021 , 2021 , 6651715. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ding, L.; Xu, P.; Li, Z.; Zhou, R.; Gao, H.; Deng, Z.; Liu, G. Pressing and Rubbing: Physics-Informed Features Facilitate Haptic Terrain Classification for Legged Robots. IEEE Robot. Autom. Lett. 2022 , 7 , 5990–5997. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Yang, C.; Ding, L.; Tang, D.; Gao, H.; Niu, L.; Lan, Q.; Li, C.; Deng, Z. Improved Terzaghi-theory-based interaction modeling of rotary robotic locomotors with granular substrates. Mech. Mach. Theory 2020 , 152 , 103901. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Iagnemma, K.; Kang, S.; Shibly, H.; Dubowsky, S. Online Terrain Parameter Estimation for Wheeled Mobile Robots with Application to Planetary Rovers. IEEE Trans. Robot. 2004 , 20 , 921–927. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wu, C. Space exploration: Secrets of the martian soil. Nature 2007 , 448 , 742–744. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Yen, A.S.; Gellert, R.; Schröder, C.; Morris, R.V.; Bell, J.F.; Knudson, A.T.; Clark, B.C.; Ming, D.W.; Crisp, J.A.; Arvidson, R.E.; et al. An integrated view of the chemistry and mineralogy of martian soils. Nature 2005 , 436 , 49–54. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hecht, M.H.; Kounaves, S.P.; Quinn, R.C.; West, S.J.; Young, S.M.M.; Ming, D.W.; Catling, D.C.; Clark, B.C.; Boynton, W.V.; Hoffman, J.; et al. Detection of Perchlorate and the Soluble Chemistry of Martian Soil at the Phoenix Lander Site. Science 2009 , 325 , 64–67. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Shorthill, R.W.; Moore, H.J.; Hutton, R.E.; Scott, R.F.; Spitzer, C.R. The Environs of Viking 2 Lander. Science 1976 , 194 , 1309–1318. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Moore, H.J.; Hutton, R.E.; Clow, G.D.; Spitzer, C.R. Physical Properties of the Surface Materials at the Viking Landing Sites on Mars ; United States Government Printing Office: Washington, USA, 1987. Available online: https://pubs.usgs.gov/publication/pp1389 (accessed on 1 July 2024).
• Ding, L.; Zhou, R.; Yuan, Y.; Yang, H.; Li, J.; Yu, T.; Liu, C.; Wang, J.; Gao, H.; Deng, Z.; et al. A 2-year locomotive exploration and scientific investigation of the lunar farside by the Yutu-2 rover. Sci. Robot. 2022 , 7 , eabj6660. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Heiken, G.H.; Vaniman, D.T.; French, B.M. Lunar Sourcebook: A User’s Guide to the Moon ; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1991. [ Google Scholar ]
• Slyuta, E.N. Physical and mechanical properties of the lunar soil (a review). Sol. Syst. Res. 2014 , 48 , 330–353. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]

Click here to enlarge figure

Share and Cite

Zhuang, H.; Wang, J.; Wang, N.; Li, W.; Li, N.; Li, B.; Dong, L. A Review of Foot–Terrain Interaction Mechanics for Heavy-Duty Legged Robots. Appl. Sci. 2024 , 14 , 6541. https://doi.org/10.3390/app14156541

Zhuang H, Wang J, Wang N, Li W, Li N, Li B, Dong L. A Review of Foot–Terrain Interaction Mechanics for Heavy-Duty Legged Robots. Applied Sciences . 2024; 14(15):6541. https://doi.org/10.3390/app14156541

Zhuang, Hongchao, Jiaju Wang, Ning Wang, Weihua Li, Nan Li, Bo Li, and Lei Dong. 2024. "A Review of Foot–Terrain Interaction Mechanics for Heavy-Duty Legged Robots" Applied Sciences 14, no. 15: 6541. https://doi.org/10.3390/app14156541

Article Metrics

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

Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals