A literature review is both a process and a product. As a process, it involves searching for information related to your topic to familiarize yourself with the relevant research. This process also helps you identify issues and gaps in the research. Remember that you're seeking to identify the key authors and key arguments that are relevant to your topic, not to exhaustively read everything written on the subject.
"Literature reviews are systematic syntheses of previous work around a particular topic" (Card, 2010). A key word in this definition is syntheses. Most literature reviews go beyond mere summarization to involve a certain level of analysis.
As a finished product, a literature review tells the reader the current state of understanding about a topic. However it's more than a summary of what you've read; it's a critical analysis, which argues the need for your own study. It provides a context for your own research, by showing the relationship between it and existing scholarship.
A literature review can be a component of a research paper, or it can be published on its own as a 'review article.' A literature review is the mandatory first part of your Culminating Project here at Cummings, and indeed -- it is required of every thesis and dissertation at any institution of higher learning.
The type of literature review you write for your Culminating Project depends upon your research question. Be sure to discuss this with your Culminating Project committee and instructor.
Here are some brief descriptions of types of literature reviews from Litr-Ex.com. This is a website developed by healthcare librarians to guide researchers in their choice of a review methodology. Each type of review below has a detailed explanation and supporting resources.
| Methodology | Explanation |
| Systematic | Conducted to answer specific research questions and use transparent and pre-determined scientific methods to identify, select, and synthesize findings from similar but separate studies. |
| Realist | Explores how and why outcomes of an intervention take their form by specifically exploring contexts and mechanisms. Reporting requires explicit description of contexts, mechanisms, and outcomes. Learn more at https://www.litr-ex.com/realist-reviews-1 |
| Narrative | Flexible yet rigorous approach to creating a rich description or overview about a topic. Researcher reflexivity is paramount to understand how their experiences shaped their interpretations in the review. Learn more at https://www.litr-ex.com/narrative-reviews. |
| Scoping |
Systematic approach to capturing information about the current state of knowledge and/or identifying gaps in the literature. While similar to other review types, scoping reviews produce a clear picture of the "lay of the land." Learn more at https://www.litr-ex.com/scoping-reviews |
| State of the art | Consolidates evidence from the past and present to develop suggestions of what can happen next, in the future. Learn more at https://www.litr-ex.com/state-of-the-art-reviews. |
| Meta-ethnography | Uses original interpretations from a series of primary qualitative studies to synthesize a new understanding of phenomena. Does not include quantitative data. Learn more at https://www.litr-ex.com/meta-ethnography |
| Critical | Requires creativity, flexibility, and expert judgement (over systematicity) to explore current research and clinical practices and propose a modified or new way forward. Learn more at https://www.litr-ex.com/critical-reviews |
| Integrative | Draws on existing theories from diverse disciplines to identify which theory is more relevant to a particular context, or propose a modified or new theory to explain phenomena. Learn more at https://www.litr-ex.com/integrative-reviews |