literature review traditional approach

Literature Review: Traditional or narrative literature reviews

Traditional or narrative literature reviews.

• Scoping Reviews
• Systematic literature reviews
• Annotated bibliography
• Keeping up to date with literature
• Finding a thesis
• Evaluating sources and critical appraisal of literature
• Managing and analysing your literature
• Further reading and resources

A narrative or traditional literature review is a comprehensive, critical and objective analysis of the current knowledge on a topic. They are an essential part of the research process and help to establish a theoretical framework and focus or context for your research. A literature review will help you to identify patterns and trends in the literature so that you can identify gaps or inconsistencies in a body of knowledge. This should lead you to a sufficiently focused research question that justifies your research.

Onwuegbuzie and Frels (pp 24-25, 2016) define four common types of narrative reviews:

• General literature review that provides a review of the most important and critical aspects of the current knowledge of the topic. This general literature review forms the introduction to a thesis or dissertation and must be defined by the research objective, underlying hypothesis or problem or the reviewer's argumentative thesis.
• Theoretical literature review which examines how theory shapes or frames research
• Methodological literature review where the research methods and design are described. These methodological reviews outline the strengths and weaknesses of the methods used and provide future direction
• Historical literature review which focus on examining research throughout a period of time, often starting with the first time an issue, concept, theory, phenomena emerged in the literature, then tracing its evolution within the scholarship of a discipline. The purpose is to place research in a historical context to show familiarity with state-of-the-art developments and to identify the likely directions for future research.

References and additional resources

Baker, J. D. (2016) The purpose, process and methods of writing a literature review: Editorial . Association of Operating Room Nurses. AORN Journal, 103 (3), 265-269. doi:10.1016/j.aorn.2016.01.016

• << Previous: Types of literature reviews
• Next: Scoping Reviews >>
• Last Updated: Dec 10, 2024 4:45 PM
• URL: https://libguides.csu.edu.au/review

Charles Sturt University is an Australian University, TEQSA Provider Identification: PRV12018. CRICOS Provider: 00005F.

• Knowledge Base
• Get started

Narrative vs. Systematic Literature Review: Understanding the Differences

Key differences between narrative and systematic literature reviews.

When conducting research, it’s important to understand the type of literature review that best suits your research question and objectives. Two common types of literature reviews are narrative literature reviews and systematic literature reviews . Though they both aim to provide an overview of the existing knowledge on a topic, they differ significantly in their approach, methodology, level of rigor, scope, and overall purpose. Choosing the right type of literature review can significantly influence how effectively you convey your research findings and how they are received by your academic audience.

Narrative literature reviews and systematic literature reviews each have distinct characteristics that make them suitable for different kinds of research. A narrative literature review is generally more flexible and subjective, allowing researchers to provide a broad overview and identify trends in an expansive way, often incorporating the author's unique perspective. It is particularly effective when you need to summarize the overall state of knowledge on a topic and provide a contextual backdrop for your research. In contrast, a systematic literature review is much more structured and methodical, using precise protocols to minimize bias and produce reliable, reproducible results that can form the basis for evidence-based decision-making. These differences mean that each type of review is not only unique in its execution but also in the kind of insight it offers.

In this comprehensive guide, we’ll explore the key differences between narrative and systematic literature reviews, their strengths, weaknesses, and distinct features, and when to use each method. We will delve into the methodologies involved, discuss practical examples of when one type of review may be more appropriate than the other, and provide insights into how to conduct each type of review effectively. Understanding these differences is crucial because the method you choose will shape the nature of your findings, the degree of reliability, and the overall contribution your research makes to the field.

The choice between a narrative and a systematic literature review often depends on the goals of your research. For instance, if your objective is to create an informed backdrop or provide theoretical analysis that integrates multiple viewpoints, a narrative review might be the most appropriate approach. It offers the flexibility to cover a wide array of literature and to present diverse perspectives in a cohesive manner. On the other hand, if your goal is to systematically evaluate all the available evidence on a narrowly defined question—such as assessing the efficacy of a particular intervention or treatment—a systematic literature review provides the rigor and transparency needed for such a task. This type of review helps ensure that every relevant study is accounted for, minimizing bias and enhancing the reliability of your conclusions.

Knowing the difference between a narrative and a systematic literature review is not merely academic—it directly impacts the quality, depth, and reliability of your research output. By carefully considering your objectives and the specific requirements of your research topic, you can select the most appropriate review type and ensure that your literature review effectively supports your overall research aims, ultimately enhancing the impact and quality of your study.

What is a Narrative Literature Review?

A narrative literature review is often described as a traditional or qualitative review. It provides a broad overview of a topic by summarizing, synthesizing, and interpreting available research, usually without following a strict systematic approach. Narrative reviews are highly flexible, allowing authors to cover a wide range of related studies, often including their own perspectives or interpretations. This flexibility allows researchers to highlight different aspects of a topic, identify gaps, and provide a conceptual analysis that may go beyond a mere summary of existing studies.

Narrative reviews are typically used to provide context, identify trends, and offer insights into a topic. They are excellent for providing background information, forming hypotheses, exploring emerging topics, or discussing a wide body of work in a general way. Because of their broad and interpretive nature, they are often used in the early stages of research projects to build an understanding of the field before narrowing down a specific research question. They help establish a foundational understanding of a subject, making it easier for researchers to refine their questions and focus their studies effectively.

One of the key strengths of narrative reviews is their ability to incorporate diverse sources of information and offer a more creative synthesis of ideas. They are not limited to empirical studies alone; instead, they can draw on theoretical articles, conceptual papers, and even anecdotal evidence. This broader scope can be incredibly valuable when attempting to provide a holistic overview of a topic, especially when dealing with complex or interdisciplinary issues that require input from multiple fields. Researchers can also use narrative reviews to identify existing theories and frameworks, compare and contrast them, and discuss their applicability in different contexts.

However, because narrative reviews are not exhaustive and do not always follow a rigorous, standardized methodology, they may be subject to biases, such as selection bias and confirmation bias. Authors may inadvertently focus on literature that supports their own hypotheses or perspectives, leading to a skewed interpretation of the available research. Additionally, narrative reviews are typically less reproducible than systematic reviews because they do not follow a specific set of procedures for searching, selecting, and analyzing the literature. This makes them less suitable for drawing definitive conclusions or informing policy or practice.

Despite these limitations, narrative reviews are incredibly useful for synthesizing large amounts of information and presenting it in an accessible, cohesive manner. They allow researchers to convey the "big picture" and identify areas where further investigation is needed. Narrative reviews are also well-suited for discussing historical developments within a field, offering a chronological perspective on how knowledge has evolved over time. This historical insight can be crucial in understanding current debates and identifying emerging trends that may shape future research.

Moreover, narrative reviews can be a powerful tool for developing theoretical frameworks and conceptual models. By integrating findings from multiple sources, researchers can generate new hypotheses or propose new theories that can later be tested empirically. This kind of theoretical development is particularly important in fields that are still in their formative stages, where empirical data may be scarce, but there is a need to build a foundation for future research. Narrative reviews provide the flexibility needed to explore these nascent areas without being confined by strict methodological requirements.

Overall, narrative literature reviews are an essential part of the research landscape. They offer a flexible, interpretive approach to understanding a topic, allowing for a broad exploration that is often necessary in the early stages of research. While they may lack the rigor and reproducibility of systematic reviews, their ability to provide context, generate hypotheses, and synthesize diverse types of literature makes them an invaluable tool for researchers looking to navigate complex fields and lay the groundwork for more focused studies.

Key Features of a Narrative Literature Review:

• Broad Coverage : Summarizes a wide range of studies related to a topic, allowing for flexibility in coverage.
• Flexible Approach : No standardized process; allows subjective interpretations by the author, which can be influenced by personal perspective.
• Ideal for Background Context : Useful for identifying trends, forming hypotheses, providing a general understanding of a topic, and offering a broader narrative that highlights different dimensions of the research.
• Potential for Bias : Susceptible to selection and interpretation bias due to the lack of standardized procedures. This makes it less suitable for answering precise, objective research questions.
• Useful in Theoretical Discussions : Narrative reviews are often used in developing theoretical frameworks and discussing multiple viewpoints, making them ideal for interdisciplinary research.

What is a Systematic Literature Review?

A systematic literature review is a structured and comprehensive method of reviewing existing research. It follows a predefined protocol that includes clear inclusion and exclusion criteria, systematic data extraction, and critical analysis of the included studies. Systematic reviews are typically conducted to answer specific research questions by summarizing the findings of all relevant studies, often following established guidelines such as PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses).

The process of conducting a systematic review begins with defining a focused research question, which determines the direction and scope of the review. The research question must be specific, clearly defined, and relevant to ensure that the review addresses an important issue. Researchers then develop a detailed protocol that outlines the criteria for including or excluding studies, the databases to be searched, and the methods for extracting and synthesizing data. This protocol helps maintain consistency and reduces the potential for bias during the review process.

Systematic reviews are highly valued for their rigor, transparency, and reliability. They aim to minimize bias by following a well-defined and transparent methodology, making them reproducible. By adhering to strict guidelines and documenting every step, systematic reviews strive to provide a thorough and objective overview of the research, making them an excellent choice for informing evidence-based practice, policy-making, or future research. Systematic reviews also often involve quality assessment tools, such as risk of bias checklists, to evaluate the credibility of the included studies, ensuring that the synthesized findings are based on the best available evidence.

Another important aspect of systematic literature reviews is the comprehensive search strategy . Researchers must perform a thorough search across multiple databases, including peer-reviewed journals, conference proceedings, and gray literature (unpublished or non-commercial studies) to ensure that all relevant studies are captured. The search terms, keywords, and inclusion criteria are carefully designed to maximize the coverage of relevant research. The resulting studies are then screened in several stages—first by title and abstract, and then by full text—to determine whether they meet the inclusion criteria.

Once the relevant studies have been selected, the data extraction phase involves systematically collecting information from each study, such as sample size, methodology, key findings, and limitations. This information is organized in a structured format that allows for straightforward comparison and synthesis. Systematic reviews may also include a meta-analysis, which is a statistical technique used to combine the results of multiple studies to identify trends or calculate an overall effect size. Meta-analysis adds another layer of depth to the review by providing quantitative insights into the consistency and strength of the available evidence.

Systematic reviews are frequently used in healthcare, education, and social sciences to synthesize evidence on specific research questions. They play a vital role in evidence-based practice by providing a clear, unbiased summary of the existing research, which can help practitioners make informed decisions. In healthcare, for example, systematic reviews are often used to evaluate the effectiveness of treatments or interventions, guiding clinical guidelines and helping improve patient outcomes. In education, they can be used to evaluate teaching methods or curriculum changes, while in social sciences, they help consolidate evidence on social policies or interventions.

Systematic reviews are particularly important for identifying gaps in the literature and setting the agenda for future research. By systematically reviewing what is already known, researchers can highlight areas where evidence is lacking or where studies have produced conflicting results, thereby informing future studies. They also help establish the state of knowledge on a topic, which is crucial for developing new research projects, writing grant proposals, or advocating for policy changes based on solid evidence.

Overall, systematic literature reviews are a cornerstone of evidence-based research. They ensure a comprehensive, transparent, and unbiased assessment of the available literature, helping researchers, practitioners, and policymakers make well-informed decisions. The structured approach of systematic reviews not only enhances the reliability of the findings but also contributes to the development of more robust research questions and methodologies for future studies. Their utility in providing clarity amidst a vast body of information makes them an indispensable tool in academic and professional settings.

Key Features of a Systematic Literature Review:

• Structured Protocol : Follows a systematic and pre-specified protocol for literature search, study selection, and data analysis. This ensures consistency and reduces the influence of personal bias.
• Comprehensive Search : Aims to include all relevant studies based on strict inclusion and exclusion criteria, ensuring that the resulting review is thorough and represents the full scope of existing evidence.
• Minimizes Bias : Reduces selection and interpretation bias by using a consistent, repeatable methodology, which is documented for transparency.
• Evidence-Based : Often used in healthcare, social sciences, and other fields that require robust evidence to guide decision-making and practice.
• Quality Assessment : Systematic reviews often include an assessment of the quality of the included studies, helping to differentiate between high- and low-quality evidence and providing a basis for synthesizing reliable conclusions.

Narrative vs. Systematic: Key Differences

When to use each type.

Narrative Literature Review : Ideal for providing a comprehensive overview of a broad topic, understanding trends in the literature, exploring areas where the research is less structured, or generating new hypotheses. It’s particularly helpful in the early stages of a research project, where the goal is to gather insights, identify theoretical approaches, and develop a conceptual understanding of the topic. It is also suitable for interdisciplinary topics where flexibility is necessary to draw connections across various domains.

Systematic Literature Review : Best used when there is a specific research question that needs a comprehensive, unbiased answer. Systematic reviews are essential in fields that require evidence-based conclusions, such as healthcare, psychology, and education. These reviews are ideal for synthesizing the evidence around a narrowly defined research question, determining the effectiveness of an intervention, or identifying areas where further research is needed. The methodological rigor of systematic reviews makes them reliable sources of information for informing practice, policy, or clinical guidelines.

Advantages and Disadvantages

Narrative Literature Review

• Advantages : Provides a broad overview of a topic, flexible in structure, easier and faster to conduct, allows for the author’s critical insight and creative synthesis of diverse literature. Useful for generating hypotheses and exploring emerging areas of research where rigid protocols are not suitable.
• Disadvantages : Prone to bias, not exhaustive, lacks reproducibility, less suitable for informing practice or policy, and may overlook important studies due to the lack of a systematic search process.

Systematic Literature Review

• Advantages : Comprehensive and exhaustive, reduces bias, highly reproducible, well-suited for evidence-based decision-making, provides a high level of transparency, and includes a quality assessment that ensures the reliability of the synthesized evidence.
• Disadvantages : Time-consuming, requires a detailed and specific research question, rigid structure that may not accommodate exploratory or interdisciplinary topics, and often necessitates collaboration among multiple reviewers to minimize biases.

Tips for Conducting Each Type of Review

• For Narrative Reviews : Focus on synthesizing diverse literature to provide a holistic view of the topic. Be transparent about any limitations in the scope of your review, and ensure clarity about how the literature was chosen. Aim to connect different perspectives and identify themes, while clearly stating your own interpretations.
• For Systematic Reviews : Define your research question clearly, follow a well-established protocol such as PRISMA, and ensure that your search strategy is comprehensive, including multiple databases and gray literature. Document each step meticulously to maintain reproducibility, and consider involving multiple reviewers to reduce bias and ensure reliability.

Final Thoughts

Choosing between a narrative and a systematic literature review depends largely on the objectives of your research and the nature of your research question. If you need a general overview, want to explore multiple facets of a topic, or are in the preliminary stages of research, a narrative literature review is likely the best choice. It allows for creative interpretation and a broader exploration of the topic. On the other hand, if you need to answer a specific question with precision and reliability, and if minimizing bias is essential, a systematic literature review is more appropriate. Systematic reviews provide a rigorous synthesis of evidence, making them indispensable in fields requiring evidence-based conclusions.

Both types of reviews have their own strengths and limitations, and understanding these differences will help you effectively plan and execute your research. By choosing the appropriate type of literature review, you can ensure that your work is not only methodologically sound but also aligned with your research goals, ultimately contributing to a more robust and impactful study.

Sourcely weekly newsletters

Cut through the AI noise with a focus on Students! Subscribe for 3 Student AI tools every week to accelerate your academic career.

Join Sourcely weekly newsletters

Ready to get started.

Start today and explore all features with up to 300 characters included. No commitment needed — experience the full potential risk-free!

Check out our other products

Discover cutting-edge research with arXivPulse: Your AI-powered gateway to scientific papers

Don't stress about deadlines. Write better with Yomu and simplify your academic life.

Welcome to Sourcely! Our AI-powered source finding tool is built by students for students, and this approach allows us to create a tool that truly understands the needs of the academic community. Our student perspective also enables us to stay up-to-date with the latest research and trends, and our collaborative approach ensures that our tool is continually improving and evolving.

• Refund Policy
• Terms of Service
• Privacy Policy
• Friends of Sourcely
• ArXiv Pulse
• Semantic Reader
• AI Tools Inc
• AI Tools Boot Camp for Researchers

© 2024 Sourcely

Reviewing the Literature

• Introduction
• Which Methods Suit Which Types of Review?
• Meta-Syntheses
• Scoping Reviews

Definition and scope

Guidance & resources, synthesis tables for literature reviews [8:02].

Why conduct a literature review?

A traditional literature review provides the reader with an overview and synthesis of what is generally known and/or accepted on a particular topic while also providing you with the opportunity to add your c ontribution(s), which may include:  

• identifying the most significant / compelling works on a specific topic or trend  
• evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of the literature on a particular controversy, problem or trend in your field  
• providing your own answers to controversial topics  
• identifying gaps / new potential areas of research not yet tackled by your field

Synthesis Table / Matrix  

A great way to manage all the findings in your research is to create a synthesis table , also known as a synthesis matrix .  Your table should be organized so that all your sources are represented, as well as the major themes that emerge during your analysis.  

• This process of creating your table will allow you to highlight the key findings from each source and then to see how they relate - both to each other and to your own ideas.    
• Watch the Synthesis Tables video in the left-hand box to learn more.  

Online Guides  

Charles Sturt University Library. Traditional or narrative literature reviews

Monash University.  The Process of Writing a Literature Review

OWL Purdue: Writing a Literature Review

Books  

Garrard, Judith. Health sciences literature review made easy : the matrix method. [Print book.  Available at R 118.6 G274 2014, Lower-level, Coquitlam]

Machi, L. A., & McEvoy, B. T. (2009). The literature review : six steps to success . Corwin Press. [Print book.  Available at LB 1047.3 M235 2009, at both Coquitlam and New West campuses]  

Paré , G. & Kitsiou, S.  "Methods for Literature Reviews."  In F. Lau , &  C. Kuziemsky   (eds.), Handbook of eHealth Evaluation: An Evidence-based Approach .  University of Victoria.

• << Previous: Scoping Reviews
• Last Updated: Nov 28, 2024 8:26 AM
• URL: https://guides.douglascollege.ca/reviewarticles

Dissertation Canada

[email protected]

+1 647-933-5461

What is the Process of Traditional or Narrative Literature Review?

The process of traditional or narrative literature review is an important part of research. It helps us gather and understand all the existing knowledge about a specific topic. This approach is helpful in understanding the advantages of a narrative literature review. A narrative or traditional review gives a broader view and helps to see big ideas and also a clear overview of specific research findings. Additionally, this allows for the incorporation of diverse perspectives and theoretical frameworks, offering a comprehensive synthesis of the existing literature. It often highlights historical and contextual nuances, providing a richer understanding of the subject matter which is helpful for creating a better structure of traditional literature review. 

Structure of narrative literature review

– Introduction: The introduction establishes the context and introduces the topic.

– Inclusion Criteria: Defines what types of sources are included.

– Storytelling Approach: Weaves together diverse sources to create a narrative.

– Conceptual Frameworks: Emphasizes broader ideas and theories.

– Critique and Evaluation: Assesses the quality and relevance of sources.

– Synthesis of Findings: Connects information to draw meaningful conclusions.

– Discussion of Themes: Analyzes common threads and patterns.

– Conclusion: Summarizes key points and proposes avenues for future research.

– Citations: Provides proper references for all sources used in the review.

– Clarity and Flow: Ensures the narrative is easy to follow for readers.

process of traditional or narrative literature review

Now, let us know the process of traditional or narrative literature review step-by-step which can help us to overcome all the problems of literature review.

Step 1: Define Your Topic  

Before starting, decide what you want to learn about. This is your topic. It’s like choosing a subject in school. For example, if you’re interested in dogs, your topic could be “Different Breeds of Dogs.”

Step 2: Search for Sources  

– Now, find books, articles, or websites that talk about your topic. Imagine you’re collecting information like you collect toys. 

– Look for reliable sources, like books from the library or articles from trusted websites.

Step 3: Select Relevant Material

Choose the sources that directly talk about your topic. If you’re learning about different dog breeds, you’d pick books or articles that focus on breeds, not something about cats.

Step 4: Organize Your Sources  

– Sort your sources like you would arrange your toys. Put similar ones together. 

– This makes it easier to understand and write about them later.

Step 5: Summarize Each Source  

Write short explanations of what each source says. Pretend you’re telling a friend about a cool toy you found. Keep it simple and clear.

Step 6: Analyze and Compare

Now, look at your sources closely. See if they talk about similar things or if they have different ideas. It’s like comparing different types of candies.

Step 7: Create an Outline  

– Plan how you’ll talk about each source. 

– Start with an introduction, then talk about each source one by one, and finish with a conclusion. It’s like making a plan for a story.

Step 8: Write Your Review 

– Using your outline, start writing. 

– Explain what each source says and how they relate to your topic. Use simple words and sentences, like when you’re telling a story to a friend.

Step 9: Revise and Edit 

Check your writing for any mistakes. Make sure it’s easy to understand. Fix any parts that might be confusing. It’s like polishing a favorite toy to make it look nice.

Step 10: Add Citations

This means giving credit to the people who wrote the books or articles you used. It’s a way of saying “thank you” for sharing their wisdom. Use a special format to do this, like a special way of saying “thank you.”

Final Thoughts

Understanding the process of traditional or narrative literature review is like having a special tool to explore and learn about different topics. We learned about the structure of traditional literature review, which has helped us to understand the advantages of traditional literature. Furthermore, delving into the process of a narrative literature review opens up the advantages of a narrative literature review. It allows researchers to uncover overarching themes, trends, and theoretical frameworks that might not be immediately apparent in individual studies. The structure of narrative literature review encourages a more holistic comprehension of the subject matter, fostering a deeper appreciation for the broader context within which research findings emerge. 

DissertationCanada.com offers a literature review writing service that requires an in-depth study of the references, which will form the basis for your current research work. When you approach them for literature review writing service, it can be as a part of the entire dissertation assistance package, or as an individual dissertation chapter service. As the first step, they start with assessing your topic and then go out in search of books and journals that will be the most suitable for the topic. The main goal of the literature review chapter is to create a strong research gap after analysing past studies that can be used in your research. They have a team that has been working on doctoral research for over a decade and are familiar with the type of references that are used for various subjects. They follow various citation styles like APA, Turabian, MLA, ACS, and Chicago for referencing purposes while writing the literature review. They can follow alphabetical order, chronological order or group the references according to the relation that they have with your work. They can also include a table for a listing of the references at the end of the chapter. When they prepare the literature review, they also provide a list of the references which have been included in the chapter to enable cross checking and preparation of the bibliography. In fact, they work in collaboration with their clients and take inputs for references.

FAQ Questions

How do you write a traditional or narrative literature review.

To write a traditional or narrative literature review, you gather and summarize existing research on a topic in a structured way.

What are the characteristics of a narrative literature review?

A narrative literature review tells a story by weaving together diverse sources, emphasizing broader concepts and ideas.

What is the difference between a systematic literature review and a narrative literature review?

A systematic literature review follows a structured process with specific criteria for including studies, while a narrative review focuses on storytelling and doesn’t have strict inclusion criteria.

Importance of narrative literature review?

The importance of a narrative literature review lies in its ability to provide a broader perspective, highlight conceptual frameworks, and offer a cohesive narrative for understanding a topic.

Traditional Literature Review and Research Synthesis

Cite this chapter.

• Shaofeng Li 5 , 6 &
• Hong Wang 7  

9070 Accesses

26 Citations

The exponential growth of research and enormity of the body of knowledge that has been accumulated in applied linguistics make the need for quality and reliable synthesis of the available research more pressing than ever. Traditional reviews seek to critique existing research, provide an overview of the research, and/or contextualize a new study. Research syntheses aim at reaching conclusions by means of aggregating the totality of the empirical research that has been carried out on a certain topic. This chapter discusses the procedures and best practices of each of the two approaches and concludes by making a comparison between the two approaches and proposing ways to integrate them.

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

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime
• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Meta-analyzing Corpus Linguistic Research

Quantitative Research Methods and the Reform Movement in Applied Linguistics

Second-order synthesis of meta-analytic studies in applied linguistics (1998–2021)

American Psychological Association. (2001). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (5th ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Google Scholar  

Booth, W., Colomb, G., & Williams, J. (1995). The craft of research . Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Bronson, D., & Davis, T. (2012). Finding and evaluating evidence: Systematic reviews and evidence-based practice . New York: Oxford University Press.

Carpenter, H. S. (2008). A behavioural and electrophysiological investigation of different aptitudes for L2 grammar in learners equated for proficiency level . Ph.D. dissertation, Georgetown University.

Cooper, H. (2016). Research synthesis and meta-analysis: A step-by-step approach (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Cumming, G. (2012). Understanding the new statistics: Effect sizes, confidence intervals, and metaanalysis . New York: Routledge.

Dixon, L., Zhao, J., Shin, J., Wu, S., Su, J., Burgess-Brigham, R., & Snow, C. (2012). What we know about second language acquisition: A synthesis from four perspectives. Review of Educational Research, 82 (1), 5–60.

Article   Google Scholar  

Ellis, R. (2002). Does form-focused instruction affect the acquisition of implicit knowledge? A review of the research. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24 (2), 223–236.

Glass, G. (1976). Primary, secondary, and meta-analysis of research. Education Researcher, 5 , 3–8.

Imel, S. (2011). Writing a literature review. In T. Rocco & T. Hatcher (Eds.), The handbook of scholarly writing and publishing (pp. 145–160). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Jesson, J., Matheson, L., & Lacey, F. (2011). Doing your literature review: Traditional and systematic approaches . Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.

Li, S. (2010). The effectiveness of corrective feedback in SLA: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 60 (2), 309–365.

Li, S. (2015). The associations between language aptitude and second language grammar acquisition: A meta-analytic review of five decades of research. Applied Linguistics, 36 (3), 385–408.

Li, S. (2017). Teacher and learner beliefs about corrective feedback. In H. Nassaji & E. Kartchava (Eds.), Corrective feedback in second language teaching and learning (pp. 143–157). New York, NY: Routledge.

Li, S., Shintani, N., & Ellis, R. (2012). Doing meta-analysis in SLA: Practices, choices, and standards. Contemporary Foreign Language Studies, 384 (12), 1–17.

Lipsey, M., & Wilson, D. (1993). The efficacy of psychological, educational, and Behavioural treatment: Confirmation from meta-analysis. American Psychologist, 48 (12), 1181–1209.

Lipsey, M., & Wilson, D. (2001). Practical meta-analysis . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Machi, L., & McEvoy, B. (2012). The literature review: Six steps to success . Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

Ortega, L. (2015). Research synthesis. In B. Paltridge & A. Phakiti (Eds.), Research methods in applied linguistics: A practical resource (pp. 225–244). London: Bloomsbury.

Plonsky, L. (2013). Study quality in SLA: An assessment of designs, analyses, and reporting practices in quantitative L2 research. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35 , 655–687.

Plonsky, L., & Gass, S. (2011). Quantitative research methods, study quality, and outcomes: The case of interaction research. Language Learning, 61 (2), 325–366.

Plonsky, L., & Oswald, F. L. (2015). Meta-analyzing second language research. In L. Plonsky (Ed.), Advancing quantitative methods in second language research (pp. 106–128). New York, NY: Routledge.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Sun, S., Pan, W., & Wang, L. (2010). A comprehensive review of effect size reporting and interpreting practices in academic journals in education and psychology. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102 (4), 989–1004.

Valentine, J., Pigott, T., & Rothstein, H. (2010). How many studies do you need? A primer on statistical power for meta-analysis. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 3 (2), 215–247.

Xu, Y., Maeda, Y., Lv, J., & Jinther, A. (2015). Elicited imitation as a measure of second language proficiency: A narrative review and meta-analysis. Language Testing, 33 (4), 497–528.

Zaporozhetz, L. (1987). The dissertation literature review: How faculty advisors prepare their doctoral candidates. Ph.D. dissertation, The University of Oregon.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Foreign and Second Language Education Program, School of Teacher Education, Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida, USA

Shaofeng Li

Center for Linguistics and Applied Linguistics, Guangdong University of Foreign Studies, Guangzhou, China

University of Auckland Library and Learning Services, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shaofeng Li .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Sydney School of Education and Social Work, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia

Aek Phakiti

Department of Linguistics, Germanic, Slavic, Asian and African Languages, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA

Peter De Costa

Applied Linguistics, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ, USA

Luke Plonsky

School of Education, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia

Sue Starfield

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Li, S., Wang, H. (2018). Traditional Literature Review and Research Synthesis. In: Phakiti, A., De Costa, P., Plonsky, L., Starfield, S. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of Applied Linguistics Research Methodology. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-59900-1_6

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-59900-1_6

Publisher Name : Palgrave Macmillan, London

Print ISBN : 978-1-137-59899-8

Online ISBN : 978-1-137-59900-1

eBook Packages : Social Sciences Social Sciences (R0)

Share this chapter

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

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

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

ABA, Health Admin, Social Work and More: How to Write a Literature Review

Traditional or narrative literature review, other types of literature reviews.

• Ten Simple Rules for Writing a Literature Review
• How to Write a Literature Review
• RESEARCH HELP

Research Librarian

For more help on this topic, please contact our Research Help Desk: [email protected] or 781-768-7303. Stay up-to-date on our current hours . Note: all hours are EST.

This Guide was created by Carolyn Swidrak (retired).

This guide addresses how to prepare a traditional or narrative literature review. 

Why is a literature review important?

“The primary purpose of a literature review is to summarize evidence on a topic – to sum up what is known and what is not known . ” ( Polit & Beck, 2018, p. 107)

Polit, D.F., & Beck, C.T. (2018). Essentials of nursing research: Appraising evidence for nursing practice. (9th ed.). Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer

A traditional or narrative review is one type of review.  Others include:

• systematic review
• integrative review
• scoping review

For more information on various types of reviews:

• A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies Grant, M. J., & Booth, A. (2009). A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 26(2), 91-108. doi:10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x
• Next: How to Write a Literature Review >>
• Last Updated: Jun 18, 2024 10:51 AM
• URL: https://libguides.regiscollege.edu/lit_review_ABA

Conducting your literature review

• Introduction

Your literature review

• Defining a research question
• Choosing where to search
• Search strings
• Limiters and filters
• Developing inclusion/exclusion criteria
• Managing your search results
• Screening, evaluating and recording
• Snowballing and grey literature
• Further information and resources

Most PhD and masters’ theses contain some form of literature review to provide the background for the research.  The literature review is an essential step in the research process. A successful literature review will offer a coherent presentation and analysis of the existing research in your field, demonstrating:

• Your understanding of the subject area
• Gaps in current knowledge and/or originality (that may in turn influence the direction of your research) 
• Relevant methodologies

There are different approaches and methods to literature reviews, and you may have heard of terms like systematic, structured, scoping or meta-analysis. This is when the literature review becomes the research methodology in its own right, instead of forming part of the research process.

This table shows the differences between a traditional literature review and a structured or systematic literature review.

Traditional vs Systematic literature reviews  

The main types of literature review conducted at cranfield university are defined below..

• Traditional (Narrative)

Positioning Study

Traditional literature review

A traditional literature review or narrative review, is a critical review of the literature on a particular topic, often taking a thematic approach. The aim of this type of literature review is to identify research on your topic, demonstrate your understanding of the research area, and to evaluate the quality and relevance of the literature. You will use your literature review to understand what has already been researched, help develop your research questions and the methodology that you should follow to collect and to identify any areas that your research can explore. You want your research to be unique so you will use a literature review to prevent you duplicating any previous research but also identifying any errors or mistakes that you would want to avoid. A narrative literature review will have uncontrolled bias.  

Structured literature Review

A structured literature review involves bringing many research studies together to use them as the data to determine findings (known as secondary research). There is no other form of data collection involved such as creating your own surveys and questionnaires (primary research). This approach allows you to look beyond one dataset and synthesise the findings of many studies to answer a clearly formulated research question.

Sometimes a structured review may be called a systematic literature review. A structured review typically does not fulfil all the criteria of a full systematic review but may take a similar approach by taking a systematic, step by step method to finding literature. They tend to follow a set protocol for determining the research studies to be included and every stage is documented. The results and conclusions are based on the evidence found, not on the authors own views.

To help you prepare for your structured literature review please complete this interactive workbook .

For Supply chain students 

• To help you prepare for your systematic literature review please complete this interactive workbook .

Before conducting your systematic review, you need to know where your research fits in the literature.  Conducting a positioning study which will help you to identify the breadth, or scope of a topic. It will be broad and help you to map existing literature, identifying key concepts in the research. You will use the positioning study to identify and focus your research topic, becoming a subject matter expert with a strong understanding of the field. A positioning study acts as a precursor to a systematic review.

Systematic literature review

A systematic literature review is a specific research methodology to identify, select, evaluate, and synthesise relevant published and unpublished literature to answer a particular research question. The systematic literature review should be transparent and replicable, you should follow a predetermined set of criteria in your protocol to select studies and help minimise bias. The process will need to be documented throughout. A systematic literature review protocol may be registered, so that others can discover and minimise duplication, and can take several years to complete.

The  EPPI Centre  also offers support and expertise to those undertaking systematic reviews. 

Useful background reading

Cranfield Libraries have several books offering guidance on how to approach and conduct literature reviews, and structured or systematic literature reviews:

• Reading list for  literature review and study skills
• Reading list of items to support a structured or systematic literature review

Looking at previous structured and systematic literature reviews is an effective way to understand what is required and how they should be structured and written up. Structured literature reviews can be found in the Masters Thesis Archive (MTA) and systematic literature reviews can be found in the Cranfield University institutional Repository, CERES. Check out the Theses  link.

• << Previous: Introduction
• Next: Defining a research question >>
• Last Updated: Dec 16, 2024 12:51 PM
• URL: https://library.cranfield.ac.uk/literature-review