importance of literary research

Service update: Some parts of the Library’s website will be down for maintenance on August 11.

Secondary menu

• Log in to your Library account
• Hours and Maps
• Connect from Off Campus
• UC Berkeley Home

Search form

Conducting a literature review: why do a literature review, why do a literature review.

• How To Find "The Literature"
• Found it -- Now What?

Besides the obvious reason for students -- because it is assigned! -- a literature review helps you explore the research that has come before you, to see how your research question has (or has not) already been addressed.

You identify:

• core research in the field
• experts in the subject area
• methodology you may want to use (or avoid)
• gaps in knowledge -- or where your research would fit in

It Also Helps You:

• Publish and share your findings
• Justify requests for grants and other funding
• Identify best practices to inform practice
• Set wider context for a program evaluation
• Compile information to support community organizing

Great brief overview, from NCSU

Want To Know More?

• Next: How To Find "The Literature" >>
• Last Updated: Apr 25, 2024 1:10 PM
• URL: https://guides.lib.berkeley.edu/litreview

Libraries | Research Guides

Literature reviews, what is a literature review, learning more about how to do a literature review.

• Planning the Review
• The Research Question
• Choosing Where to Search
• Organizing the Review
• Writing the Review

A literature review is a review and synthesis of existing research on a topic or research question. A literature review is meant to analyze the scholarly literature, make connections across writings and identify strengths, weaknesses, trends, and missing conversations. A literature review should address different aspects of a topic as it relates to your research question. A literature review goes beyond a description or summary of the literature you have read. 

• Sage Research Methods Core This link opens in a new window SAGE Research Methods supports research at all levels by providing material to guide users through every step of the research process. SAGE Research Methods is the ultimate methods library with more than 1000 books, reference works, journal articles, and instructional videos by world-leading academics from across the social sciences, including the largest collection of qualitative methods books available online from any scholarly publisher. – Publisher

• Next: Planning the Review >>
• Last Updated: Jul 8, 2024 11:22 AM
• URL: https://libguides.northwestern.edu/literaturereviews

• 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

A Guide to Literature Reviews

Importance of a good literature review.

• Conducting the Literature Review
• Structure and Writing Style
• Types of Literature Reviews
• Citation Management Software This link opens in a new window
• Acknowledgements

A literature review is not only a summary of key sources, but  has an organizational pattern which combines both summary and synthesis, often within specific conceptual categories . A summary is a recap of the important information of the source, but a synthesis is a re-organization, or a reshuffling, of that information in a way that informs how you are planning to investigate a research problem. The analytical features of a literature review might:

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

The purpose of a literature review is to:

• Place each work in the context of its contribution to understanding the research problem being studied.
• Describe the relationship of each work to the others under consideration.
• Identify new ways to interpret prior research.
• Reveal any gaps that exist in the literature.
• Resolve conflicts amongst seemingly contradictory previous studies.
• Identify areas of prior scholarship to prevent duplication of effort.
• Point the way in fulfilling a need for additional research.
• Locate your own research within the context of existing literature [very important].
• << Previous: Definition
• Next: Conducting the Literature Review >>
• Last Updated: Jul 3, 2024 3:13 PM
• URL: https://libguides.mcmaster.ca/litreview

• 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

Literature Review - what is a Literature Review, why it is important and how it is done

What are literature reviews, goals of literature reviews, types of literature reviews, about this guide/licence.

• Strategies to Find Sources
• Evaluating Literature Reviews and Sources
• Tips for Writing Literature Reviews
• Writing Literature Review: Useful Sites
• Citation Resources
• Other Academic Writings
• Useful Resources

Help is Just a Click Away

Search our FAQ Knowledge base, ask a question, chat, send comments...

Go to LibAnswers

 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"

Source NC State University Libraries. This video is published under a Creative Commons 3.0 BY-NC-SA US license.

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 have been written about your research topic and to point out how your own research will shed a new light into these body of scholarship.

Literature reviews are also written as standalone articles as a way to survey a particular research topic in-depth. This type of literature reviews look at a topic from a historical perspective to see how the understanding of the topic have change through time.

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.
• Book review essays/ Historiographical review essays : This is a type of review that focus on a small set of research books on a particular topic " to locate these books within current scholarship, critical methodologies, and approaches" in the field. - LARR
• 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 . San Diego, CA: Plural Publishing.
• 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 . Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub.
• 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.

Guide adapted from "Literature Review" , a guide developed by Marisol Ramos used under CC BY 4.0 /modified from original.

• Next: Strategies to Find Sources >>
• Last Updated: Jul 3, 2024 10:56 AM
• URL: https://lit.libguides.com/Literature-Review

The Library, Technological University of the Shannon: Midwest

Research Methods

• Getting Started
• Literature Review Research
• Research Design
• Research Design By Discipline
• SAGE Research Methods
• Teaching with SAGE Research Methods

Literature Review

• What is a Literature Review?
• What is NOT a Literature Review?
• Purposes of a Literature Review
• Types of Literature Reviews
• Literature Reviews vs. Systematic Reviews
• Systematic vs. Meta-Analysis

Literature Review  is a comprehensive survey of the works published in a particular field of study or line of research, usually over a specific period of time, in the form of an in-depth, critical bibliographic essay or annotated list in which attention is drawn to the most significant works.

Also, we can define a literature review as the collected body of scholarly works related to a topic:

• Summarizes and analyzes previous research relevant to a topic
• Includes scholarly books and articles published in academic journals
• Can be an specific scholarly paper or a section in a research paper

The objective of a Literature Review is to find previous published scholarly works relevant to an specific topic

• Help gather ideas or information
• Keep up to date in current trends and findings
• Help develop new questions

A literature review is important because it:

• Explains the background of research on a topic.
• Demonstrates why a topic is significant to a subject area.
• Helps focus your own research questions or problems
• Discovers relationships between research studies/ideas.
• Suggests unexplored ideas or populations
• Identifies major themes, concepts, and researchers on a topic.
• Tests assumptions; may help counter preconceived ideas and remove unconscious bias.
• Identifies critical gaps, points of disagreement, or potentially flawed methodology or theoretical approaches.
• Indicates potential directions for future research.

All content in this section is from Literature Review Research from Old Dominion University 

Keep in mind the following, a literature review is NOT:

Not an essay 

Not an annotated bibliography  in which you summarize each article that you have reviewed.  A literature review goes beyond basic summarizing to focus on the critical analysis of the reviewed works and their relationship to your research question.

Not a research paper   where you select resources to support one side of an issue versus another.  A lit review should explain and consider all sides of an argument in order to avoid bias, and areas of agreement and disagreement should be highlighted.

A literature review serves several purposes. For example, it

• provides thorough knowledge of previous studies; introduces seminal works.
• helps focus one’s own research topic.
• identifies a conceptual framework for one’s own research questions or problems; indicates potential directions for future research.
• suggests previously unused or underused methodologies, designs, quantitative and qualitative strategies.
• identifies gaps in previous studies; identifies flawed methodologies and/or theoretical approaches; avoids replication of mistakes.
• helps the researcher avoid repetition of earlier research.
• suggests unexplored populations.
• determines whether past studies agree or disagree; identifies controversy in the literature.
• tests assumptions; may help counter preconceived ideas and remove unconscious bias.

As Kennedy (2007) notes*, it is important to think of knowledge in a given field as consisting of three layers. First, there are the primary studies that researchers conduct and publish. Second are the reviews of those studies that summarize and offer new interpretations built from and often extending beyond the original studies. Third, there are the perceptions, conclusions, opinion, and interpretations that are shared informally that become part of the lore of field. In composing a literature review, it is important to note that it is often this third layer of knowledge that is cited as "true" even though it often has only a loose relationship to the primary studies and secondary literature reviews.

Given this, while literature reviews are designed to provide an overview and synthesis of pertinent sources you have explored, there are several approaches to how they can be done, depending upon the type of analysis underpinning your study. Listed below are definitions of types of literature reviews:

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

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

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

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

Systematic Review      This form consists of an overview of existing evidence pertinent to a clearly formulated research question, which uses pre-specified and standardized methods to identify and critically appraise relevant research, and to collect, report, and analyse data from the studies that are included in the review. Typically it focuses on a very specific empirical question, often posed in a cause-and-effect form, such as "To what extent does A contribute to B?"

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

* Kennedy, Mary M. "Defining a Literature."  Educational Researcher  36 (April 2007): 139-147.

All content in this section is from The Literature Review created by Dr. Robert Larabee USC

Robinson, P. and Lowe, J. (2015),  Literature reviews vs systematic reviews.  Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 39: 103-103. doi: 10.1111/1753-6405.12393

What's in the name? The difference between a Systematic Review and a Literature Review, and why it matters . By Lynn Kysh from University of Southern California

Systematic review or meta-analysis?

A  systematic review  answers a defined research question by collecting and summarizing all empirical evidence that fits pre-specified eligibility criteria.

A  meta-analysis  is the use of statistical methods to summarize the results of these studies.

Systematic reviews, just like other research articles, can be of varying quality. They are a significant piece of work (the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination at York estimates that a team will take 9-24 months), and to be useful to other researchers and practitioners they should have:

• clearly stated objectives with pre-defined eligibility criteria for studies
• explicit, reproducible methodology
• a systematic search that attempts to identify all studies
• assessment of the validity of the findings of the included studies (e.g. risk of bias)
• systematic presentation, and synthesis, of the characteristics and findings of the included studies

Not all systematic reviews contain meta-analysis. 

Meta-analysis is the use of statistical methods to summarize the results of independent studies. By combining information from all relevant studies, meta-analysis can provide more precise estimates of the effects of health care than those derived from the individual studies included within a review.  More information on meta-analyses can be found in  Cochrane Handbook, Chapter 9 .

A meta-analysis goes beyond critique and integration and conducts secondary statistical analysis on the outcomes of similar studies.  It is a systematic review that uses quantitative methods to synthesize and summarize the results.

An advantage of a meta-analysis is the ability to be completely objective in evaluating research findings.  Not all topics, however, have sufficient research evidence to allow a meta-analysis to be conducted.  In that case, an integrative review is an appropriate strategy. 

Some of the content in this section is from Systematic reviews and meta-analyses: step by step guide created by Kate McAllister.

• << Previous: Getting Started
• Next: Research Design >>
• Last Updated: Jul 15, 2024 10:34 AM
• URL: https://guides.lib.udel.edu/researchmethods

Have a language expert improve your writing

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

• Knowledge Base

Methodology

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

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

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

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

There are five key steps to writing a literature review:

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

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

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

Table of contents

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

• Quick Run-through
• Step 1 & 2

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

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

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

Don't submit your assignments before you do this

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

Try for free

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

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

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

Download Word doc Download Google doc

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

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

Make a list of keywords

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

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

Search for relevant sources

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

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

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

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

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

For each publication, ask yourself:

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

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

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

Take notes and cite your sources

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Chronological

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

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

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

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

Methodological

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

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

Theoretical

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

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

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

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

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

As you write, you can follow these tips:

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

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

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

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

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

Open Google Slides Download PowerPoint

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

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

 Statistics

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

Research bias

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Cite this Scribbr article

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

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

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

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

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

• University of Texas Libraries

Literature Reviews

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

What is a Literature Review?

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

A literature review should: 

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

From  S age Research Methods

Purpose of a Literature Review

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

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

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

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

Limitations of a Literature Review

Some of the limitations of a literature review are:

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

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

Librarian Assistance

For help, please contact the librarian for your subject area.  We have a guide to library specialists by subject .

• Last Updated: Aug 26, 2024 5:59 AM
• URL: https://guides.lib.utexas.edu/literaturereviews

Harvey Cushing/John Hay Whitney Medical Library

• Collections
• Research Help

YSN Doctoral Programs: Steps in Conducting a Literature Review

• Biomedical Databases
• Global (Public Health) Databases
• Soc. Sci., History, and Law Databases
• Grey Literature
• Trials Registers
• Data and Statistics
• Public Policy
• Google Tips
• Recommended Books
• Steps in Conducting a Literature Review

What is a literature review?

A literature review is an integrated analysis -- not just a summary-- of scholarly writings and other relevant evidence related directly to your research question.  That is, it represents a synthesis of the evidence that provides background information on your topic and shows a association between the evidence and your research question.

A literature review may be a stand alone work or the introduction to a larger research paper, depending on the assignment.  Rely heavily on the guidelines your instructor has given you.

Why is it important?

A literature review is important because it:

• Explains the background of research on a topic.
• Demonstrates why a topic is significant to a subject area.
• Discovers relationships between research studies/ideas.
• Identifies major themes, concepts, and researchers on a topic.
• Identifies critical gaps and points of disagreement.
• Discusses further research questions that logically come out of the previous studies.

APA7 Style resources

APA Style Blog - for those harder to find answers

1. Choose a topic. Define your research question.

Your literature review should be guided by your central research question.  The literature represents background and research developments related to a specific research question, interpreted and analyzed by you in a synthesized way.

• Make sure your research question is not too broad or too narrow.  Is it manageable?
• Begin writing down terms that are related to your question. These will be useful for searches later.
• If you have the opportunity, discuss your topic with your professor and your class mates.

2. Decide on the scope of your review

How many studies do you need to look at? How comprehensive should it be? How many years should it cover? 

• This may depend on your assignment.  How many sources does the assignment require?

3. Select the databases you will use to conduct your searches.

Make a list of the databases you will search. 

Where to find databases:

• use the tabs on this guide
• Find other databases in the Nursing Information Resources web page
• More on the Medical Library web page
• ... and more on the Yale University Library web page

4. Conduct your searches to find the evidence. Keep track of your searches.

• Use the key words in your question, as well as synonyms for those words, as terms in your search. Use the database tutorials for help.
• Save the searches in the databases. This saves time when you want to redo, or modify, the searches. It is also helpful to use as a guide is the searches are not finding any useful results.
• Review the abstracts of research studies carefully. This will save you time.
• Use the bibliographies and references of research studies you find to locate others.
• Check with your professor, or a subject expert in the field, if you are missing any key works in the field.
• Ask your librarian for help at any time.
• Use a citation manager, such as EndNote as the repository for your citations. See the EndNote tutorials for help.

Review the literature

Some questions to help you analyze the research:

• What was the research question of the study you are reviewing? What were the authors trying to discover?
• Was the research funded by a source that could influence the findings?
• What were the research methodologies? Analyze its literature review, the samples and variables used, the results, and the conclusions.
• Does the research seem to be complete? Could it have been conducted more soundly? What further questions does it raise?
• If there are conflicting studies, why do you think that is?
• How are the authors viewed in the field? Has this study been cited? If so, how has it been analyzed?

Tips: 

• Review the abstracts carefully.  
• Keep careful notes so that you may track your thought processes during the research process.
• Create a matrix of the studies for easy analysis, and synthesis, across all of the studies.
• << Previous: Recommended Books
• Last Updated: Jun 20, 2024 9:08 AM
• URL: https://guides.library.yale.edu/YSNDoctoral

Chapter Four: Theory, Methodologies, Methods, and Evidence

Research Methods

You are viewing the first edition of this textbook. a second edition is available – please visit the latest edition for updated information..

This page discusses the following topics:

Research Goals

Research method types.

Before discussing research   methods , we need to distinguish them from  methodologies  and  research skills . Methodologies, linked to literary theories, are tools and lines of investigation: sets of practices and propositions about texts and the world. Researchers using Marxist literary criticism will adopt methodologies that look to material forces like labor, ownership, and technology to understand literature and its relationship to the world. They will also seek to understand authors not as inspired geniuses but as people whose lives and work are shaped by social forces.

Example: Critical Race Theory Methodologies

Critical Race Theory may use a variety of methodologies, including

• Interest convergence: investigating whether marginalized groups only achieve progress when dominant groups benefit as well
• Intersectional theory: investigating how multiple factors of advantage and disadvantage around race, gender, ethnicity, religion, etc. operate together in complex ways
• Radical critique of the law: investigating how the law has historically been used to marginalize particular groups, such as black people, while recognizing that legal efforts are important to achieve emancipation and civil rights
• Social constructivism: investigating how race is socially constructed (rather than biologically grounded)
• Standpoint epistemology: investigating how knowledge relates to social position
• Structural determinism: investigating how structures of thought and of organizations determine social outcomes

To identify appropriate methodologies, you will need to research your chosen theory and gather what methodologies are associated with it. For the most part, we can’t assume that there are “one size fits all” methodologies.

Research skills are about how you handle materials such as library search engines, citation management programs, special collections materials, and so on.

Research methods  are about where and how you get answers to your research questions. Are you conducting interviews? Visiting archives? Doing close readings? Reviewing scholarship? You will need to choose which methods are most appropriate to use in your research and you need to gain some knowledge about how to use these methods. In other words, you need to do some research into research methods!

Your choice of research method depends on the kind of questions you are asking. For example, if you want to understand how an author progressed through several drafts to arrive at a final manuscript, you may need to do archival research. If you want to understand why a particular literary work became a bestseller, you may need to do audience research. If you want to know why a contemporary author wrote a particular work, you may need to do interviews. Usually literary research involves a combination of methods such as  archival research ,  discourse analysis , and  qualitative research  methods.

Literary research methods tend to differ from research methods in the hard sciences (such as physics and chemistry). Science research must present results that are reproducible, while literary research rarely does (though it must still present evidence for its claims). Literary research often deals with questions of meaning, social conventions, representations of lived experience, and aesthetic effects; these are questions that reward dialogue and different perspectives rather than one great experiment that settles the issue. In literary research, we might get many valuable answers even though they are quite different from one another. Also in literary research, we usually have some room to speculate about answers, but our claims have to be plausible (believable) and our argument comprehensive (meaning we don’t overlook evidence that would alter our argument significantly if it were known).

A literary researcher might select the following:

Theory: Critical Race Theory

Methodology: Social Constructivism

Method: Scholarly

Skills: Search engines, citation management

Wendy Belcher, in  Writing Your Journal Article in 12 Weeks , identifies two main approaches to understanding literary works: looking at a text by itself (associated with New Criticism ) and looking at texts as they connect to society (associated with Cultural Studies ). The goal of New Criticism is to bring the reader further into the text. The goal of Cultural Studies is to bring the reader into the network of discourses that surround and pass through the text. Other approaches, such as Ecocriticism, relate literary texts to the Sciences (as well as to the Humanities).

The New Critics, starting in the 1940s,  focused on meaning within the text itself, using a method they called “ close reading .” The text itself becomes e vidence for a particular reading. Using this approach, you should summarize the literary work briefly and q uote particularly meaningful passages, being sure to introduce quotes and then interpret them (never let them stand alone). Make connections within the work; a sk  “why” and “how” the various parts of the text relate to each other.

Cultural Studies critics see all texts  as connected to society; the critic  therefore has to connect a text to at least one political or social issue. How and why does  the text reproduce particular knowledge systems (known as discourses) and how do these knowledge systems relate to issues of power within the society? Who speaks and when? Answering these questions helps your reader understand the text in context. Cultural contexts can include the treatment of gender (Feminist, Queer), class (Marxist), nationality, race, religion, or any other area of human society.

Other approaches, such as psychoanalytic literary criticism , look at literary texts to better understand human psychology. A psychoanalytic reading can focus on a character, the author, the reader, or on society in general. Ecocriticism  look at human understandings of nature in literary texts.

We select our research methods based on the kinds of things we want to know. For example, we may be studying the relationship between literature and society, between author and text, or the status of a work in the literary canon. We may want to know about a work’s form, genre, or thematics. We may want to know about the audience’s reading and reception, or about methods for teaching literature in schools.

Below are a few research methods and their descriptions. You may need to consult with your instructor about which ones are most appropriate for your project. The first list covers methods most students use in their work. The second list covers methods more commonly used by advanced researchers. Even if you will not be using methods from this second list in your research project, you may read about these research methods in the scholarship you find.

Most commonly used undergraduate research methods:

• Scholarship Methods:  Studies the body of scholarship written about a particular author, literary work, historical period, literary movement, genre, theme, theory, or method.
• Textual Analysis Methods:  Used for close readings of literary texts, these methods also rely on literary theory and background information to support the reading.
• Biographical Methods:  Used to study the life of the author to better understand their work and times, these methods involve reading biographies and autobiographies about the author, and may also include research into private papers, correspondence, and interviews.
• Discourse Analysis Methods:  Studies language patterns to reveal ideology and social relations of power. This research involves the study of institutions, social groups, and social movements to understand how people in various settings use language to represent the world to themselves and others. Literary works may present complex mixtures of discourses which the characters (and readers) have to navigate.
• Creative Writing Methods:  A literary re-working of another literary text, creative writing research is used to better understand a literary work by investigating its language, formal structures, composition methods, themes, and so on. For instance, a creative research project may retell a story from a minor character’s perspective to reveal an alternative reading of events. To qualify as research, a creative research project is usually combined with a piece of theoretical writing that explains and justifies the work.

Methods used more often by advanced researchers:

• Archival Methods: Usually involves trips to special collections where original papers are kept. In these archives are many unpublished materials such as diaries, letters, photographs, ledgers, and so on. These materials can offer us invaluable insight into the life of an author, the development of a literary work, or the society in which the author lived. There are at least three major archives of James Baldwin’s papers: The Smithsonian , Yale , and The New York Public Library . Descriptions of such materials are often available online, but the materials themselves are typically stored in boxes at the archive.
• Computational Methods:  Used for statistical analysis of texts such as studies of the popularity and meaning of particular words in literature over time.
• Ethnographic Methods:  Studies groups of people and their interactions with literary works, for instance in educational institutions, in reading groups (such as book clubs), and in fan networks. This approach may involve interviews and visits to places (including online communities) where people interact with literary works. Note: before you begin such work, you must have  Institutional Review Board (IRB)  approval “to protect the rights and welfare of human participants involved in research.”
• Visual Methods:  Studies the visual qualities of literary works. Some literary works, such as illuminated manuscripts, children’s literature, and graphic novels, present a complex interplay of text and image. Even works without illustrations can be studied for their use of typography, layout, and other visual features.

Regardless of the method(s) you choose, you will need to learn how to apply them to your work and how to carry them out successfully. For example, you should know that many archives do not allow you to bring pens (you can use pencils) and you may not be allowed to bring bags into the archives. You will need to keep a record of which documents you consult and their location (box number, etc.) in the archives. If you are unsure how to use a particular method, please consult a book about it. [1] Also, ask for the advice of trained researchers such as your instructor or a research librarian.

• What research method(s) will you be using for your paper? Why did you make this method selection over other methods? If you haven’t made a selection yet, which methods are you considering?
• What specific methodological approaches are you most interested in exploring in relation to the chosen literary work?
• What is your plan for researching your method(s) and its major approaches?
• What was the most important lesson you learned from this page? What point was confusing or difficult to understand?

Write your answers in a webcourse discussion page.

• Introduction to Research Methods: A Practical Guide for Anyone Undertaking a Research Project  by Catherine, Dr. Dawson
• Practical Research Methods: A User-Friendly Guide to Mastering Research Techniques and Projects  by Catherine Dawson
• Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches  by John W. Creswell  Cheryl N. Poth
• Qualitative Research Evaluation Methods: Integrating Theory and Practice  by Michael Quinn Patton
• Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches  by John W. Creswell  J. David Creswell
• Research Methodology: A Step-by-Step Guide for Beginners  by Ranjit Kumar
• Research Methodology: Methods and Techniques  by C.R. Kothari

Strategies for Conducting Literary Research Copyright © 2021 by Barry Mauer & John Venecek is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

• 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.

5-minute read

Free Email Newsletter Template

Promoting a brand means sharing valuable insights to connect more deeply with your audience, and...

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...

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

• Search Menu

Sign in through your institution

• Browse content in Arts and Humanities
• Browse content in Architecture
• History of Architecture
• Browse content in Art
• History of Art
• Browse content in Classical Studies
• Classical Literature
• Religion in the Ancient World
• Browse content in History
• Colonialism and Imperialism
• Diplomatic History
• Environmental History
• Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing
• Historical Geography
• History by Period
• History of Agriculture
• History of Gender and Sexuality
• Industrial History
• Intellectual History
• International History
• Legal and Constitutional History
• Local and Family History
• Maritime History
• Military History
• Political History
• Regional and National History
• Revolutions and Rebellions
• Slavery and Abolition of Slavery
• Social and Cultural History
• Theory, Methods, and Historiography
• Urban History
• World History
• Linguistics
• Browse content in Literature
• Literary Studies (Romanticism)
• Literary Studies (American)
• Literary Studies (European)
• Literary Studies - World
• Literary Studies (1500 to 1800)
• Literary Studies (19th Century)
• Literary Studies (20th Century onwards)
• Literary Studies (British and Irish)
• Literary Studies (Early and Medieval)
• Literary Studies (Fiction, Novelists, and Prose Writers)
• Literary Studies (Plays and Playwrights)
• Literary Studies (Poetry and Poets)
• Literary Studies (Postcolonial Literature)
• Literary Studies (Queer Studies)
• Literary Studies (War Literature)
• Literary Studies (Women's Writing)
• Literary Theory and Cultural Studies
• Shakespeare Studies and Criticism
• Media Studies
• Browse content in Music
• Applied Music
• Ethnomusicology
• Music Cultures
• Music and Media
• Music Theory and Analysis
• Musical Scores, Lyrics, and Libretti
• Musical Structures, Styles, and Techniques
• Musicology and Music History
• Performance Practice and Studies
• Race and Ethnicity in Music
• Browse content in Performing Arts
• Browse content in Philosophy
• Aesthetics and Philosophy of Art
• Epistemology
• History of Western Philosophy
• Metaphysics
• Moral Philosophy
• Philosophy of Language
• Philosophy of Mind
• Philosophy of Science
• Philosophy of Law
• Philosophy of Religion
• Philosophy of Mathematics and Logic
• Social and Political Philosophy
• Browse content in Religion
• Biblical Studies
• Christianity
• History of Religion
• Judaism and Jewish Studies
• Qumran Studies
• Religion and Politics
• Religion and Art, Literature, and Music
• Religious Studies
• Browse content in Society and Culture
• Cultural Studies
• Technology and Society
• Browse content in Law
• Company and Commercial Law
• Browse content in Comparative Law
• Systems of Law
• Browse content in Constitutional and Administrative Law
• Government Powers
• Local Government Law
• Criminal Law
• Employment and Labour Law
• Environment and Energy Law
• History of Law
• Human Rights and Immigration
• Intellectual Property Law
• Browse content in International Law
• Public International Law
• Jurisprudence and Philosophy of Law
• Law and Politics
• Law and Society
• Browse content in Legal System and Practice
• Legal Skills and Practice
• Medical and Healthcare Law
• Browse content in Policing
• Police Regional Planning
• Property Law
• Browse content in Medicine and Health
• History of Medicine
• Browse content in Public Health and Epidemiology
• Public Health
• Browse content in Science and Mathematics
• Browse content in Biological Sciences
• Microbiology
• Zoology and Animal Sciences
• Browse content in Earth Sciences and Geography
• Palaeontology
• Environmental Science
• History of Science and Technology
• Browse content in Psychology
• Clinical Psychology
• Cognitive Psychology
• Developmental Psychology
• Evolutionary Psychology
• Health Psychology
• Social Psychology
• Browse content in Social Sciences
• Browse content in Anthropology
• Theory and Practice of Anthropology
• Browse content in Business and Management
• Business Ethics
• Business History
• Corporate Social Responsibility
• Criminology and Criminal Justice
• Browse content in Economics
• Agricultural, Environmental, and Natural Resource Economics
• Econometrics and Mathematical Economics
• Economic History
• Economic Systems
• Economic Development and Growth
• Financial Markets
• History of Economic Thought
• International Economics
• Labour and Demographic Economics
• Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics
• Microeconomics
• Public Economics
• Urban, Rural, and Regional Economics
• Browse content in Environment
• Climate Change
• Conservation of the Environment (Social Science)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Social Science)
• Browse content in Politics
• African Politics
• Comparative Politics
• Conflict Politics
• Environmental Politics
• International Relations
• Middle Eastern Politics
• Political Economy
• Political Theory
• Politics and Law
• Public Policy
• Russian Politics
• UK Politics
• US Politics
• Browse content in Regional and Area Studies
• African Studies
• Asian Studies
• Native American Studies
• Browse content in Sociology
• Childhood Studies
• Economic Sociology
• Health, Illness, and Medicine
• Migration Studies
• Organizations
• Race and Ethnicity
• Social Theory
• Social Stratification, Inequality, and Mobility
• Sociology of Religion
• Sociology of Education
• Urban and Rural Studies
• Reviews and Awards
• Journals on Oxford Academic
• Books on Oxford Academic

• < Previous chapter
• Next chapter >

3 The Value of Literary Criticism

• Published: November 2004
• Cite Icon Cite
• Permissions Icon Permissions

This chapter inspects and studies what value literary criticism has to offer. It talks of the hermeneutic process and the hermeneutic principles, wherein the meaning and significance of literary works is dependent upon the concepts, categories and questions we bring to them. In understanding literature, then, the discovery of insight, wisdom and principles is dependent upon these factors. Consequently, the stronger our concept and categories are, the better questions that can be asked of literary works—resulting in the expansion of our imaginations and the stretching of our minds. Meaning is not self-evident in art. In fact art often makes meaning inaccessible and incomprehensible. That is why there is value in literary criticism. This chapter thus looks at other principles and aesthetics that highlight this importance of literary criticism.

Personal account

• Sign in with email/username & password
• Get email alerts
• Save searches
• Purchase content
• Activate your purchase/trial code
• Add your ORCID iD

Institutional access

Sign in with a library card.

• Sign in with username/password
• Recommend to your librarian
• Institutional account management
• Get help with access

Access to content on Oxford Academic is often provided through institutional subscriptions and purchases. If you are a member of an institution with an active account, you may be able to access content in one of the following ways:

IP based access

Typically, access is provided across an institutional network to a range of IP addresses. This authentication occurs automatically, and it is not possible to sign out of an IP authenticated account.

Choose this option to get remote access when outside your institution. Shibboleth/Open Athens technology is used to provide single sign-on between your institution’s website and Oxford Academic.

• Click Sign in through your institution.
• Select your institution from the list provided, which will take you to your institution's website to sign in.
• When on the institution site, please use the credentials provided by your institution. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.
• Following successful sign in, you will be returned to Oxford Academic.

If your institution is not listed or you cannot sign in to your institution’s website, please contact your librarian or administrator.

Enter your library card number to sign in. If you cannot sign in, please contact your librarian.

Society Members

Society member access to a journal is achieved in one of the following ways:

Sign in through society site

Many societies offer single sign-on between the society website and Oxford Academic. If you see ‘Sign in through society site’ in the sign in pane within a journal:

• Click Sign in through society site.
• When on the society site, please use the credentials provided by that society. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.

If you do not have a society account or have forgotten your username or password, please contact your society.

Sign in using a personal account

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members. See below.

A personal account can be used to get email alerts, save searches, purchase content, and activate subscriptions.

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members.

Viewing your signed in accounts

Click the account icon in the top right to:

• View your signed in personal account and access account management features.
• View the institutional accounts that are providing access.

Signed in but can't access content

Oxford Academic is home to a wide variety of products. The institutional subscription may not cover the content that you are trying to access. If you believe you should have access to that content, please contact your librarian.

For librarians and administrators, your personal account also provides access to institutional account management. Here you will find options to view and activate subscriptions, manage institutional settings and access options, access usage statistics, and more.

Our books are available by subscription or purchase to libraries and institutions.

• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Rights and permissions
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

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

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

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

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

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

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 09 September 2024

Navigating post-pandemic challenges through institutional research networks and talent management

• Muhammad Zada   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-0466-4229 1 , 2 ,
• Imran Saeed 3 ,
• Jawad Khan   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-6673-7617 4 &
• Shagufta Zada 5 , 6  

Humanities and Social Sciences Communications volume  11 , Article number:  1164 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

20 Accesses

Metrics details

• Business and management

Institutions actively seek global talent to foster innovation in the contemporary landscape of scientific research, education, and technological progress. The COVID-19 pandemic underscored the importance of international collaboration as researchers and academicians faced limitations in accessing labs and conducting research experiments. This study uses a research collaboration system to examine the relationship between organizational intellectual capital (Human and structural Capital) and team scientific and technological performance. Further, this study underscores the moderating role of top management support. Using a time-lagged study design, data were collected from 363 participants in academic and research institutions. The results show a positive relationship between organizational intellectual capital (Human and structural Capital) and team scientific and technological performance using a research collaboration system. Moreover, top management support positively moderates the study’s hypothesized relationships. The study’s findings contribute significantly to existing knowledge in this field, with implications for academia, researchers, and government focused on technology transmission, talent management, research creative collaboration, supporting innovation, scientific research, technological progress, and preparing for future challenges.

Similar content being viewed by others

Towards understanding the characteristics of successful and unsuccessful collaborations: a case-based team science study

Remote collaboration fuses fewer breakthrough ideas

Interpersonal relationships drive successful team science: an exemplary case-based study

Introduction.

Global talent management and the talent hunt within research and educational institutions have become extensively discussed topics in international human resource management (HRM) (Al et al., 2022 ). Global talent management is intricately connected to the notion of finding, managing, and facilitating the fetch of research, skills, techniques, and knowledge among team members and progress in education and technology (Kwok, 2022 ; Sommer et al., 2017 ). This topic assumes a greater position when it is looked at through the lens of research, academicians, and educational institutions serving as a means of achieving scientific and technological advancement and performance (Kaliannan et al., 2023 ; Patnaik et al., 2022 ). Effective knowledge management and transfer occur between teams engaged in cross-border research collaborations (Davenport et al., 2002 ; Fasi, 2022 ). Effective team management, global talent recruitment, and the exchange of scientific knowledge across national boundaries face different challenges due to the swift growth of economic and political fanaticism. This is particularly evident in advanced economies that rely heavily on knowledge-based industries (Vaiman et al., 2018 ). Research and educational sectors are encountering significant challenges in effectively hunting and managing international talent, particularly in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic, during which approximately half of the global workforce faced the possibility of job loss (Almeida et al., 2020 ; Radhamani et al., 2021 ). Due to the implementation of lockdown measures by governments, many research intuitions are facing significant issues, and the pandemic has changed the situation; work was stuck, and scientists around the globe are thinking to be prepared for this kind of situation, which is possible through the use scientific research collaboration platforms. These platforms serve as a means to exchange research and knowledge, which is crucial in the talent hunt and management (Haak-Saheem, 2020 ). In the situation above, wherein limitations exist regarding the exchange of research and knowledge within the institutions, it becomes imperative for the top management of institutions to incentivize employees to engage the team in knowledge sharing actively and achieve team-level scientific and technological advancement. It can be achieved by implementing a research collaboration system that facilitates knowledge exchange and contributes to effective talent hunt and management (Haider et al., 2022 ; Xu et al., 2024 ).

A research collaboration network is a tool for scientific and technological advancement and talent management encompassing various processes and practices to facilitate the sharing, integration, translation, and transformation of scientific knowledge (Biondi & Russo, 2022 ). During and after the COVID-19 era characterized by travel restrictions, research networking platforms serve as valuable tools for students and researchers located in variance regions to engage in the exchange of research knowledge and achieve team-level scientific and technological advancement (Yang et al., 2024 ). Enhancing intellectual capital (IC) within the organizations is imperative within this framework (Pellegrini et al., 2022 ; Vătămănescu et al., 2023 ). Intellectual capital (IC) is the intangible assets owned by an organization that has the potential to generate value (Stewart, 1991 ). An organization’s intellectual capital (IC) includes human and structural capital (Marinelli et al., 2022 ). According to Vătămănescu et al. ( 2023 ), the organization can effectively manage the skills and abilities of its team members across different countries by properly utilizing both human and structural capital and establishing a strong research collaboration system with the help of top management support. This capability remains intact even during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. This study emphasizes the importance of talent hunt and management within research and educational institutions in the post-COVID-19 pandemic because of every country’s following implementation of lockdown measures. Our study focuses on the implication of facilitating the exchange of research, knowledge, and techniques among team members during and after this period. The effective way to share research expertise and techniques in such a scenario is through a research collaboration network (O’Dwyer et al., 2023 ).

While previous research has extensively explored talent management in various industries (Al Ariss, Cascio, & Paauwe, 2014 ; Susanto, Sawitri, Ali, & Rony, 2023 ), a noticeable gap exists in the body of knowledge regarding the discussion of global talent acquisition and management within research and academic institutions, particularly within volatile environments and about scientific and technological advancements (Harsch & Festing, 2020 ). The objective of this research is to fill this research gap.1) To investigate the strategies of how research and educational institutions hunt and manage gobble talent. 2)To analyze the impact of human and structural capital and team scientific and technological performance using a research collaboration system. 3) To examine the moderating effect of top management support on the IC to use the research collation network among institution research teams and scientific and technological performance.

In addition, current research contributes significantly to the literature by elucidating the pivotal role of organizational intellectual capital in strengthening scientific and technological performance through research collaborative networks. This study advances our grip on how internal resources drive innovation and research outcomes by empirically demonstrating the positive association between human and structural capital and team-level scientific and technological performance. Furthermore, the current study highlights the moderating effect of top management support, suggesting that management commitment can amplify the benefits of intellectual capital (human and structural capital). These results show a subtle perspective on how organizations can influence their intellectual assets to foster higher levels of productivity and innovation. The study’s theoretical contributions lie in integrating resource-based views and organizational theory with performance metrics, while its practical implications provide actionable insights for institutions aiming to optimize their intellectual resources and management practices. This research also sets the stage for future inquiries into the dynamics of intellectual capital and management support in various collaborative contexts.

Research theories, literature review, and hypotheses development

Research theories.

The focus of the current study pertains to the challenges surrounding talent management within institutions during and after the COVID-19 pandemic(Fernandes et al., 2023 ). Global talent management is intently linked to the objective of enhancing the intellectual capital of the organization (Zada et al., 2023 ). Considering the COVID-19 pandemic, which raised much more attention toward scientific and technological advancement, the academic sector has noticed an observable shift towards utilizing research collaboration platforms to share scientific knowledge effectively and achieve scientific and technological performance. Intellectual capital encompasses five distinct resource categories, as identified by Roos and Roos ( 1997 ), comprising three immaterial and two touchable resources. Intangible resources such as human capital, structural capital, and customer capital are complemented by tangible resources, encompassing monetary and physical assets. Global talent management encompasses human and structural capital management (Felin & Hesterly, 2007 ). The enhancement of talent management capabilities within the institution can be achieved by cultivating institution-specific competencies in both human and structural capital (Al Ariss et al., 2014 ). This concept lines up with the theoretical background of the resource-based view (RBV) theory presented by Barney ( 1991 ). According to this theory, organizations should prioritize examining their core resources to recognize valuable assets, competencies, and capabilities that can contribute to attaining a sustainable competitive advantage (Barney, 1991 ).

During and after the COVID-19 scenario, virtual platforms are utilized by institutions to engage students and staff abroad in research and knowledge exchange, which is part of global talent management. Staff possessing adequate knowledge repositories will likely participate in knowledge exchange activities. Therefore, organizations must improve their internal resources to enhance talent management, as per the fundamental principle of the RBV theory (Barney, 1991 ). Enhancing internal resources entails strengthening an organization’s human capital, which refers to its staff’s scientific research and technical skills and knowledge and structural capital. Strengthening these two resources can facilitate the institution in effectively sharing knowledge through a research collaboration platform, consequently enhancing their global talent management endeavors and contributing to the team’s scientific and technological performance.

In this research, we also utilize institutional theory (Oliver, 1997 ) and Scott ( 2008 ) as a framework to examine the utilization of research collaboration social platforms by faculty of institutions. Our focus is on exchanging research and technical knowledge within the climate of global talent management during and after the COVID-19 epidemic. According to Scott ( 2008 ), “Institutional theory is a widely recognized theoretical framework emphasizing rational myths, isomorphism, and legitimacy (p. 78)”. For electronic data interchange, the theory has been utilized in technology adoption research (Damsgaard, Lyytinen ( 2001 )) and educational institutes (J. et al., 2007 ). In the pandemic situation, institutional theory provides researchers with a framework to analyze the motivations of employees within institutions to engage in teams to achieve team-level scientific and technological performance through a research collaboration system. According to institutional theory, organizations should utilize a research collaboration network to ensure that their staff do not need to compromise their established norms, values, and expectations. During the COVID-19 pandemic, numerous countries implemented limitations on international movement as a preventive measure. Consequently, there has been a growing identification of the potential importance of utilizing an institutional research collaboration platform for facilitating the online exchange of knowledge, skills, research techniques, and global talent management among employees of institutions operating across various countries. The active support of staff by the top management of an institution can play a key role in expediting the implementation of social networks for research collaboration within the institution (Zada et al., 2023 ).

Literature review

An institution’s scientific and technological advancement is contingent upon optimal resource utilization (Muñoz et al., 2022 ). Global talent hunt and management encompasses utilizing information and communication technologies (ICT) to provide a way for the exchange of research knowledge and techniques, thereby enabling the implementation of knowledge-based strategies (Muñoz et al., 2022 ). In a high research-level turbulent environment, it becomes imperative to effectively manage human capital (HUC) to facilitate the appropriate exchange of research knowledge and techniques (Salamzadeh, Tajpour, Hosseini, & Brahmi, 2023 ). Research shows that transferring research knowledge and techniques across national boundaries, exchanging best practices, and cultivating faculty skills are crucial factors in maintaining competitiveness (Farahian, Parhamnia, & Maleki, 2022 ; Shao & Ariss, 2020 ).

It is widely acknowledged in scholarly literature that there is a prevailing belief among individuals that talent possesses movability and that research knowledge and techniques can be readily transferred (Bakhsh et al., 2022 ; Council, 2012 ). However, it is essential to note that the matter is more complex than it may initially appear (Biondi & Russo, 2022 ). The proliferation of political and economic nationalism in developed knowledge-based economies poses a significant risk to exchanging research knowledge and techniques among faculty members in research and educational institutions worldwide (Arocena & Sutz, 2021 ). During and after COVID-19, knowledge transfer can be effectively facilitated by utilizing a research collaboration network platform (Duan & Li, 2023 ; Sulaiman et al., 2022 ). This circumstance is noticeable within the domain of international research and development, wherein academic professionals have the opportunity to utilize research collaboration platforms as a means of disseminating valuable research knowledge and techniques to their counterparts in various nations (Jain et al., 2022 ).

The scientific and technological advancement of institutions linked by intuition research and development level and research and development depend on the intuition’s quality of research, knowledge, and management (Anshari & Hamdan, 2022 ). However, there is a need to enhance the research team’s capacity to learn and transfer research knowledge and techniques effectively. Research suggests that institutional human capital (HUC) is critical in managing existing resources and hunting international talent, particularly after the COVID-19 pandemic (Sigala, Ren, Li, & Dioko, 2023 ). Human capital refers to the combined implicit and crystal clear knowledge of employees within an institution and their techniques and capabilities to effectively apply this knowledge to achieve scientific and technological advancements (Al-Tit et al., 2022 ). According to Baron and Armstrong ( 2007 ) Human capital refers to the abilities, knowledge, techniques, skills, and expertise of individuals, particularly research team members, that are relevant to the current task.

Furthermore, HUC encompasses the scope of individuals who can contribute to this reservoir of research knowledge, techniques, and expertise through individual learning. As the literature shows, the concept of IC encompasses the inclusion of structural capital (STC), which requires fortification through the implementation of a proper global talent acquisition and management system (Pak et al., 2023 ; Phan et al., 2020 ). STC encompasses various mechanisms to enhance an institution’s performance and productivity (Barpanda, 2021 ). STC is extensively acknowledged as an expedited framework for HUC, as discussed by Bontis ( 1998 ) and further explored by Gogan, Duran, and Draghici ( 2015 ). During and after the COVID-19 epidemic, a practical approach to global talent management involves leveraging research collaboration network platforms to facilitate knowledge exchange among research teams (Arslan et al., 2021 ). However, the crucial involvement of top management support is imperative to effectively manage talent by utilizing research collaboration network platforms for knowledge transfer (Zada et al., 2023 ). Nevertheless, the existing body of knowledge needs to adequately explore the topic of talent management about knowledge transfer on research collaboration platforms, particularly in the context of institution-active management support (Tan & Md. Noor, 2013 ).

Conceptual model and research hypothesis

By analyzing pertinent literature and theoretical frameworks, we have identified the factors influencing staff intention in research and academic institutions to utilize research collaboration networks after the COVID-19 pandemic and achieve scientific and technical performance. This study aims to explain the determinants. Additionally, this study has considered the potential influence of top management support as a moderator on the associations between education and research institution staff intention on IC to utilize research collaboration platforms in the post-COVID-19 era and predictors. Through this discourse, we shall generate several hypotheses to serve as the basis for constructing a conceptual model (see Fig. 1 ).

Relationships between study variables: human capital, structural capital, top management support, and team scientific and technological performance. Source: authors’ development.

Human capital and team scientific and technological performance

According to Dess and Picken ( 2000 ), HUC encompasses individuals’ capabilities, knowledge, skills, research techniques, and experience, including staff and supervisors, relevant to the specific task. Human capital also refers to the ability to pay to this reservoir of knowledge, techniques, and expertize through individual learning (Dess & Picken, 2000 ). HUC refers to the combinations of characteristics staff possess, including but not limited to research proficiency, technical aptitude, business acumen, process comprehension, and other similar competencies (Kallmuenzer et al., 2021 ). The HUC is considered an institutional repository of knowledge, as Bontis and Fitz‐enz ( 2002 ) indicated, with its employees serving as representatives. The concept of HUC refers to the combined abilities, research proficiency, and competencies that individuals possess to address and resolve operational challenges within an institutional setting (Barpanda, 2021 ; Yang & Xiangming, 2024 ). The human capital possessed by institutions includes crucial attributes that allow organizations to acquire significant internal resources that are valuable, difficult to replicate, scarce, and cannot be substituted. It aligns with the theoretical framework of the RBV theory, as suggested by Barney ( 1991 ). IC is extensively recognized as a main factor in revitalizing organizational strategy and promoting creativity and innovation. It is crucial to enable organizations to acquire and effectively disseminate knowledge among their employees, contribute to talent management endeavors, and achieve scientific and technological performance (Alrowwad et al., 2020 ; He et al., 2023 ). Human capital is linked to intrinsic aptitude, cognitive capabilities, creative problem-solving, exceptional talent, and the capacity for originality (Bontis & Fitz‐enz, 2002 ). In talent management, there is a focus on enhancing scientific and technological performance and development. According to Shao and Ariss ( 2020 ), HUC is expected to strengthen employee motivation to utilize research collaboration networks for scientific knowledge-sharing endeavors. Based on these arguments, we proposed that.

Hypothesis 1 Human capital (HUC) positively impacts team scientific and technological performance using a research collaboration system.

Structural capital and team scientific and technological Performance

According to Mehralian, Nazari, and Ghasemzadeh ( 2018 ) structural capital (STC) encompasses an organization’s formalized knowledge assets. It consists of the structures and mechanisms employed by the institution to enhance its talent management endeavors. The concept of STC is integrated within the framework of institutions’ programs, laboratory settings, and databases (Cavicchi & Vagnoni, 2017 ). The significance of an organization’s structural capital as an internal tangible asset that bolsters its human capital has been recognized by scholars such as Secundo, Massaro, Dumay, and Bagnoli ( 2018 ), and This concept also lines up with the RBV theory (J. Barney, 1991 ). The strategic assets of an organization encompass its capabilities, organizational culture, patents, and trademarks (Gogan et al., 2015 ).

Furthermore, Birasnav, Mittal, and Dalpati ( 2019 ) Suggested that these strategic assets promote high-level organizational performance, commonly called STC. Literature shows that STC encompasses an organization’s collective expertise and essential knowledge that remains intact even when employees depart (Alrowwad et al., 2020 ; Mehralian et al., 2018 ; Sarwar & Mustafa, 2023 ). The institution’s socialization, training, and development process facilitates the transfer of scientific research knowledge, skills, and expertise to its team (Arocena & Sutz, 2021 ; Marchiori et al., 2022 ). The STC is broadly recognized as having important potential and is a highly productive resource for generating great value. STC motivates its team member to share expertise with their counterparts at subordinate organizations by utilizing an institution’s research collaboration network and achieving team-level scientific and technological performance. This method remains effective even in challenging environments where traditional means of data collection, face-to-face meetings, and travel are not feasible (Secundo et al., 2016 ). In light of the above literature and theory, we propose the following hypothesis.

Hypothesis 2: Structural capital (STC) positively impacts team scientific and technological performance using a research collaboration system.

Top management support as a moderator

If the relationship between two constructs is not constant, the existence of a third construct can potentially affect this relationship by enhancing or diminishing its strength. In certain cases, the impact of a third construct can adjust the trajectory of the relationship between two variables. The variable in question is commonly called the “moderating variable.” According to Zada et al. ( 2023 ), top management support to leaders efficiently encourages team members within institutions to share research scientific knowledge with their counterparts in different countries through international research collaboration systems. Similarly, another study shows that the active endorsement of the top management significantly affects the development of direct associations, thereby influencing the team and organization’s overall performance (Biondi & Russo, 2022 ; Phuong et al., 2024 ). Different studies have confirmed that top management support is crucial in fostering a conducive knowledge-sharing environment by offering necessary resources (Ali et al., 2021 ; Lee et al., 2016 ; Zada et al., 2023 ). During and after the COVID-19 epidemic, numerous nations implemented nonessential travel restrictions and lockdown measures. In the given context, utilizing a research collaboration system would effectively facilitate the exchange of research, skills, and knowledge among staff belonging to various subsidiaries of an institution (Rådberg & Löfsten, 2024 ; Rasheed et al., 2024 ). However, it is common for researchers to exhibit resistance to adopting a novel research technique, often citing various justifications for their reluctance. To address the initial hesitance of employees at subsidiary institutes towards utilizing research collaborative networking within the institute, top management must employ strategies that foster motivation, encouragement, and incentives. These measures help create an atmosphere where team members feel empowered to engage with the new system freely. Institutional theory asserts that top management support is crucial for aligning talent management with institutional norms. Human and structural capital, pivotal within the institutional framework, contributes to an institution’s capacity to attract and retain talent, enhancing legitimacy. Adaptation to scientific and technological advancements is imperative for international institutional competitiveness, as institutional theory dictates (Oliver, 1997 ). Grounded on the above discussion, we have hypothesized.

Hypothesis 3a : Top management support moderates the relationship between human capital (HUC) and team scientific and technological performance. Specifically, this relationship will be stronger for those with higher top management support and weaker for those with lower top management support.

Hypothesis 3b : Top management support moderates the relationship between structural capital (STC) and team scientific and technological performance through the use of research collaboration network platforms. Specifically, this relationship will be stronger for those with higher top management support and weaker for those with lower top management support.

Methods data and sample

Sample and procedures.

To test the proposed model, we collected data from respondents in China’s research and academic sector in three phases to mitigate standard method variance (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee, & Podsakoff, 2003 ). In the first phase (T1-phase), respondents rated human capital, structural capital, and demographic information. After one month, respondents rated the team’s scientific and technological performance in the second phase (T2-phase). Following another one-month interval, respondents were asked to rate top management support in the third phase (T3-phase). In the first phase, after contacting 450 respondents, we received 417 usable questionnaires (92.66%). In the second phase, we received 403 usable questionnaires. In the third phase, we received 363 usable questionnaires (90.07%), constituting our final sample for interpreting the results. The sample comprises 63.4% male and 36.6% female respondents. The age distribution of the final sample was as follows: 25–30 years old (6.6%), 31–35 years old (57%), 36–40 years old (19.8%), and above 40 years old (16.5%). Regarding respondents’ experience, 45.7% had 1–5 years, 39.4% had 6–10 years, 11.3% had 11–15 years, and 3.6% had over 16 years. According to the respondents’ levels of education, 4.1% had completed bachelor’s degrees, 11.6% had earned master’s degrees, 78.8% were doctorate (PhD) scholars, and 5.5% were postdoctoral and above.

Measurement

To measure the variables, the current study adopted a questionnaire from previous literature, and age, gender, education, and experience were used as control variables. A five-point Likert scale was used (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree). Human capital (HUC) was measured through an eight-item scale adopted by Kim, Atwater, Patel, and Smither ( 2016 ). The sample item is “The extent to which human capital of research and development department is competitive regarding team performance”. The self-reported scale developed by Nezam, Ataffar, Isfahani, and Shahin ( 2013 ) was adopted to measure structural capital. The scale consists of seven items. The sample scale item is “My organization emphasizes IT investment.” In order to measure top management support, a six-item scale was developed by Singh, Gupta, Busso, and Kamboj ( 2021 ), was adopted, and sample item includes “Sufficient incentives were provided by top management (TM) for achieving scientific and technological performance.” Finlay, the self-reported scale developed by Gonzalez-Mulé, Courtright, DeGeest, Seong, and Hong ( 2016 ) was adopted to gauge team scientific and technological performance and scales items are four. The sample item is “This team achieves its goals.”

Assessment of measurement model

In the process of employing AMOS for analysis, the initial step encompasses an assessment of the model to determine the strength and validity of the study variables. The evaluation of variable reliability conventionally revolves around two key aspects, which are indicator scale reliability and internal reliability. More precisely, indicator reliability is deemed to be recognized when factor loadings exceed the threshold of 0.60. In parallel, internal consistency reliability is substantiated by the attainment of values exceeding 0.70 for both Cronbach’s alpha and composite reliability, aligning with well-established and recognized guidelines (Ringle et al., 2020 ).

To gauge the reliability of construct indicators, we utilized two key metrics which are composite reliability (CR) and average variance extracted (AVE). The CR values for all variables were notably high, exceeding 0.70 and falling within the range of 0.882 to 0.955. This signifies a robust level of reliability for the indicators within each construct. Furthermore, the AVE values, which indicate convergent validity, exceeded the minimum threshold of 0.50, with each construct value varying from 0.608 to 0.653, thus affirming the presence of adequate convergent validity.

In addition to assessing convergent validity, we also examined discriminant validity by scrutinizing the cross-loadings of indicators on the corresponding variables and the squared correlations between constructs and AVE values. Our findings indicated that all measures exhibited notably stronger loadings on their intended constructs, thereby underscoring the measurement model’s discriminant validity.

Discriminant validity was recognized by observing average variance extracted (AVE) values that exceeded the squared correlations between constructs, as indicated in Table 1 . In conjunction with the Composite Reliability (CR) and AVE values, an additional discriminant validity assessment was conducted through a Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio (HTMT) analysis. This analysis entailed a comparison of inter-construct correlations against a predefined upper threshold of 0.85. The results demonstrated that all HTMT values remained significantly below this threshold, affirming satisfactory discriminant validity for each variable (Henseler et al., 2015 ). Every HTMT value recorded was situated beneath the specified threshold, thereby supplying supplementary confirmation regarding the constructs’ discriminant validity. In summary, the results of the outer model assessment indicate that the variables showcased commendable levels of reliability and validity, with the discriminant validity being suitably and convincingly established.

Moreover, correlation Table 2 shows that human capital is significantly and positively correlated with structural capital ( r  = 0.594**), TMS ( r  = 0.456 **), and STP ( r  = 0.517**). Structural capital is also significantly and positively correlated with TMS ( r  = 0.893**) and STP ( r  = 0.853**). Furthermore, TMS is significantly and positively correlated with STP (0.859**).

Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA)

A comprehensive confirmatory factor analysis was estimated by employing the software AMOS version 24 to validate the distinctiveness of the variables. CFA shows the fitness of the hypothesized four factors model, including human capital, structural capital, top management support, and team scientific and technological performance, as delineated in Table 3 ; the results show that the hypothesized four-factor model shows fit and excellent alternative models. Consequently, The study variables demonstrate validity and reliability, which makes the dimension model appropriate for conducting a structural path analysis, as advocated by Hair, Page, and Brunsveld ( 2019 ).

Hypotheses testing

This study used the bootstrapping approach, which involves 5,000 bootstrap samples to test the proposed study model and assess the significance and strength of the structural correlations. Using this approach, bias-corrected confidence intervals and p-values were generated in accordance with Streukens and Leroi-Werelds ( 2016 ) guidelines. First, we did an analysis that entailed checking the path coefficients and their connected significance. The findings, as shown in Table 4 , validate Hypothesis 1, revealing a positive correlation between HUC and STP ( β  = 0.476, p  < 0.001). Additionally, the finding validates Hypothesis 2, highlighting a positive association between structural capital and STP ( β  = 0.877, p  < 0.001). For the moderation analysis, we utilized confidence intervals that do not encompass zero, per the guidelines that Preacher and Hayes ( 2008 ) recommended.

In our analysis, we found support for Hypothesis 3a, which posited that top management support (TMS) moderates the relationship between human capital (HUC) and team scientific and technological performance (STP). The results in Table 4 showed that the moderating role, more precisely, the interaction between HUC and TMS, was substantial and positive ( β  = −0.131, p  = 0.001). These results suggest that TMS enhances the positive association between HUC and STP, as shown in Fig. 2 . Consequently, we draw the conclusion that our data substantiates hypothesis 3a. Furthermore, Hypothesis 3b posited that TMS moderates the relationship between STC and STP. The results indicate that TMS moderates the association between STC and STP ( β  = −0.141, p  = 0.001, as presented in Table 4 and Fig. 3 ).

The moderating effect of top management support (TMS) on the relationship between human capital (HUC) and team scientific and technological performance (STP). Source: authors’ development.

The moderating effect of top management support (TMS) on the relationship between structural capital (SUC) and team scientific and technological performance (STP). Source: authors’ development.

The current study highlights the importance of research and academic institutions effectively enhancing their scientific and technological capabilities to manage their global talent within an international research collaboration framework and meet future challenges. Additionally, it underscores the need for these institutions to facilitate scientific knowledge exchange among their employees and counterparts in different countries. The enhancement of talent management through the exchange of scientific research knowledge can be most effectively accomplished by utilizing a collaborative research system between educational and research institutions (Shofiyyah et al., 2023 ), particularly in the context of the COVID-19 landscape. This study has confirmed that enhancing the higher education and research institutions’ human capital (HUC) and structural capital (STC) could attract and maintain global talent management and lead to more effective scientific and technological progress. The findings indicate that the utilization of human capital (HUC) has a significant and positive effect on scientific and technological term performance (STP) (Hypothesis 1), which is consistent with previous research (Habert & Huc, 2010 ). This study has additionally demonstrated that the implementation of s tructural capital (STC) has a significant and positive effect on team scientific and technological performance (STP), as indicated by hypothesis 2, which is also supported by the previous studies finding in different ways (Sobaih et al., 2022 ). This study has also shown that top management support moderates the association between human capital (HUC) and team scientific and technological performance hypothesis 3a and the association between structural capital (STC) and team scientific and technological performance hypothesis 3b. These hypotheses have garnered support from previous studies’ findings in different domains (Chatterjee et al., 2022 ). The study’s empirical findings also confirm the substantial moderating influence exerted by top management support on the relationships between HUC and STP described in hypothesis 3a and STC and STP described in hypothesis 3b, as evidenced by the results presented in Table 4 . Additionally, graphical representations are conducted to investigate the impacts on hypotheses 3a and 3b resulting from the application of high-top management support (TMS) and weak TMS.

The effect of high-top management support (TMS) and weak TMS on Hypothesis 3a is depicted in Fig. 2 . The solid line illustrates the effects of robust TMS on Hypothesis 3a, while the dashed line shows the effects of weak TMS on Hypothesis 3a. The graphic description validates that, as human capital (HUC) increases, team scientific and technological performance (STP) is more pronounced when influenced by robust TMS than weak TMS. This is evidenced by the steeper slope of the solid line in comparison to the dashed line. This finding suggests that employees within the research and academic sectors are more likely to utilize research collaboration networks when influenced by HUC and receive strong support from the organization’s top management.

The graph in Fig. 3 shows the impact of solid top management support (TMS) and weak TMS on Hypothesis 3b. The dotted lines continuous on the graph correspond to the effects of robust TMS and weak TMS, respectively. Figure 3 illustrates that, with increasing top management support (TMS), scientific and technological performance (STP) increase is more significant for robust TMS than weak TMS. This is evident from the steeper slope of the continuous line compared to the slope of the dotted line. This finding suggests that employees within universities and institutes are more likely to engage in research collaboration systems when they receive strong support from top management despite enhanced structural support.

Theoretical contribution

The current study makes significant contributions to the existing body of knowledge by exploring the intricate dynamics between organizational intellectual capital and team performance within scientific and technological research, especially during the unprecedented times brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic. Through its detailed examination of human and structural capital, alongside the moderating impact of top management support, the study provides a multi-faceted understanding of how these factors interact to enhance team outcomes.

This research enriches the literature on intellectual capital by providing empirical evidence on the positive association between HUC and STC and team performance. HUC, which includes employees’ skills, knowledge, and expertise, is a critical driver of innovation and productivity (Lenihan et al., 2019 ). The study highlights how a team’s collective intelligence and capabilities can lead to superior scientific and technological outputs. This finding aligns with and extends previous research that underscores the importance of skilled HR in achieving organizational success (Luo et al., 2023 ; Salamzadeh et al., 2023 ). Structural capital, encompassing organizational processes, databases, and intellectual property, contributes significantly to team performance(Ling, 2013 ). The study illustrates how well-established structures and systems facilitate knowledge sharing, streamline research processes, and ultimately boost the efficiency and effectiveness of research teams. This aspect of the findings adds depth to the existing literature by demonstrating the tangible benefits of investing in robust organizational infrastructure to support research activities.

Another essential contribution of this study is integrating a research collaboration network as a facilitating factor. This network, including digital platforms and tools that enable seamless communication and collaboration among researchers, has become increasingly vital in remote work and global collaboration (Mitchell, 2023 ). By examining how these systems leverage HUC and STC to enhance team performance, the study provides a practical understanding of the mechanisms through which technology can facilitate team scientific and technological performance.

One of the most novel contributions of this study is its emphasis on the moderating role of top management support. The findings suggest that when top management actively supports research initiatives, provides required resources, and fosters innovation, the positive effects of human and structural capital on team performance are amplified (Zada et al., 2023 ). This aspect of the study addresses a gap in the literature by highlighting the critical influence of top management on the success of intellectual capital investments. It underscores the importance of managerial involvement and strategic vision in driving research excellence and team scientific and technological performance.

Practical implications

The practical implications of the current study are weightage for organizations aiming to enhance their research and innovation capabilities and boost their scientific and technical progress. Organizations should prioritize recruiting, training, and retaining highly skilled and trained researchers and professionals globally. This can be achieved through targeted hiring practices, offering competitive compensation and retention, providing continuous professional development opportunities, and developing proper research collaboration networks. Organizations can leverage their expertize to drive innovative research and technological advancements by nurturing a global, talented workforce. Investing in robust organizational structures, processes, and systems is critical (Joseph & Gaba, 2020 ). This includes developing comprehensive databases, implementing efficient research processes, securing intellectual property, and strengthening collaborations. These factors support efficient knowledge sharing and streamline research activities, leading to higher productivity and quality research outcomes (Azeem et al., 2021 ). Organizations should ensure that their infrastructure is adaptable and can support remote and collaborative work environments.

The current study emphasizes the importance of digital platforms and tools facilitating research collaboration. Organizations should adopt advanced research collaboration networks that enable seamless communication, data sharing, and talent management. These systems are particularly crucial in a globalized research environment where team members may be geographically dispersed. Investing in such technology can significantly enhance research projects’ productivity in a sustainable way (Susanto et al., 2023 ). Top Management plays a vital role in the success of research initiatives and contributes to scientific and technological performance. Top management should actively support research teams by providing required resources, setting clear strategic directions, and fostering a culture of innovation. This includes allocating budgets for organizational research and development, encouraging cross-border collaboration, recognizing and rewarding research achievements, and enhancing overall performance. Effective Management ensures that the intellectual capital within the organization is fully utilized and aligned with organizational developmental goals (Paoloni et al., 2020 ). Organizations should create a working atmosphere that encourages research, creativity, and innovation. This can be done by establishing innovation labs, promoting interdisciplinary research, recruiting international talents, sharing research scholars, and encouraging the sharing of ideas across different departments globally. A research-oriented culture that supports innovation can inspire researchers to pursue groundbreaking work and contribute to the organization’s competitive edge.

Limitations and future research direction

The research presents numerous theoretical and practical implications; however, it has. The potential limitation of common method bias could impact the findings of this study. This concern arises because the data for the study variables were obtained from a single source and relied on self-report measures (Podsakoff, 2003 ). Therefore, it is recommended that future studies be conducted longitudinally to gain additional insights into organizations’ potential to enhance efficiency. Furthermore, it is essential to note that the sample size for this study was limited to 363 respondents who were deemed usable. These respondents were drawn from only ten research and academic institutions explicitly targeting the education and research sector.

Consequently, this restricted sample size may hinder the generalizability of the findings. Future researchers may employ a larger sample size and implement a more systematic approach to the organization to enhance the comprehensiveness and generalizability of findings in the context of global talent management and scientific and technological advancement. Furthermore, in future investigations, researchers may explore alternative boundary conditions to ascertain whether additional factors could enhance the model’s efficacy.

Numerous academic studies have emphasized the significance of examining talent management outcomes in global human resource management (HRM). The continuous international movement of highly qualified individuals is viewed as a driving force behind the development of new technologies, the dissemination of scientific findings, and the collaboration between institutions worldwide. Every organization strives to build a qualified and well-trained team, and the personnel department of the organization focuses on finding ways to transfer knowledge from experienced workers to new hires. This study uses a research collaboration system to examine the relationship between organizational intellectual capital (Human and structural Capital) and team scientific and technological performance. Further, this study underscores the moderating role of top management support. These findings offer a nuanced perspective on how organizations can leverage their intellectual assets to foster higher productivity and innovation, especially in emergencies.

Data availability

Due to respondents’ privacy concerns, data will not be publicly available. However, it can be made available by contacting the corresponding author at a reasonable request.

Al-Tit AA, Al-Ayed S, Alhammadi A, Hunitie M, Alsarayreh A, Albassam W (2022) The impact of employee development practices on human capital and social capital: the mediating contribution of knowledge management. J Open Innov 8(4):218

Article   Google Scholar  

Al Ariss A, Cascio WF, Paauwe J (2014) Talent management: current theories and future research directions. J World Bus 49(2):173–179

Al Jawali H, Darwish TK, Scullion H, Haak-Saheem W (2022) Talent management in the public sector: empirical evidence from the Emerging Economy of Dubai. Int J Hum Resour Manag 33(11):2256–2284

Ali M, Li Z, Khan S, Shah SJ, Ullah R (2021) Linking humble leadership and project success: the moderating role of top management support with mediation of team-building. Int J Manag Proj Bus 14(3):545–562

Almeida F, Santos JD, Monteiro JA (2020) The challenges and opportunities in the digitalization of companies in a post-COVID-19 World. IEEE Eng Manag Rev 48(3):97–103

Alrowwad AA, Abualoush SH, Masa’deh RE (2020) Innovation and intellectual capital as intermediary variables among transformational leadership, transactional leadership, and organizational performance. J Manag Dev 39(2):196–222

Anshari M, Hamdan M (2022) Understanding knowledge management and upskilling in Fourth Industrial Revolution: transformational shift and SECI model. VINE J Inf Knowl Manag Syst 52(3):373–393

Google Scholar  

Arocena R, Sutz J (2021) Universities and social innovation for global sustainable development as seen from the south. Technol Forecast Soc change 162:120399

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Arslan A, Golgeci I, Khan Z, Al-Tabbaa O, Hurmelinna-Laukkanen P (2021) Adaptive learning in cross-sector collaboration during global emergency: conceptual insights in the context of COVID-19 pandemic. Multinatl Bus Rev 29(1):21–42

Azeem M, Ahmed M, Haider S, Sajjad M (2021) Expanding competitive advantage through organizational culture, knowledge sharing and organizational innovation. Technol Soc 66:101635

Bakhsh K, Hafeez M, Shahzad S, Naureen B, Faisal Farid M (2022) Effectiveness of digital game based learning strategy in higher educational perspectives. J Educ e-Learn Res 9(4):258–268

Barney J (1991) Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. J Manag 17(1):99–120

Barney JB, Clark DN (2007) Resource-based theory: Creating and sustaining competitive advantage. Oup Oxford

Baron A, Armstrong M (2007) Human capital management: achieving added value through people. Kogan Page Publishers

Barpanda S (2021) Role of human and structural capital on performance through human resource practices in Indian microfinance institutions: a mediated moderation approach. Knowl Process Manag 28(2):165–180

Biondi L, Russo S (2022) Integrating strategic planning and performance management in universities: a multiple case-study analysis. J Manag Gov 26(2):417–448

Birasnav M, Mittal R, Dalpati A (2019) Integrating theories of strategic leadership, social exchange, and structural capital in the context of buyer–supplier relationship: an empirical study. Glob J Flex Syst Manag 20:219–236

Bontis N (1998) Intellectual capital: an exploratory study that develops measures and models. Manag Decis 36(2):63–76

Bontis N, Fitz‐enz J (2002) Intellectual capital ROI: a causal map of human capital antecedents and consequents. J Intellect Cap 3(3):223–247

Cavicchi C, Vagnoni E (2017) Does intellectual capital promote the shift of healthcare organizations towards sustainable development? Evidence from Italy. J Clean Prod 153:275–286

Chatterjee S, Chaudhuri R, Vrontis D (2022) Does remote work flexibility enhance organization performance? Moderating role of organization policy and top management support. J Bus Res 139:1501–1512

Council NR (2012) Education for life and work: developing transferable knowledge and skills in the 21st century. National Academies Press

Davenport S, Carr A, Bibby D (2002) Leveraging talent: spin–off strategy at industrial research. RD Manag 32(3):241–254

Dess GG, Picken JC (2000) Changing roles: Leadership in the 21st century. Organ Dyn 28(3):18–34

Duan W, Li C (2023) Be alert to dangers: collapse and avoidance strategies of platform ecosystems. J Bus Res 162:113869

Farahian M, Parhamnia F, Maleki N (2022) The mediating effect of knowledge sharing in the relationship between factors affecting knowledge sharing and reflective thinking: the case of English literature students during the COVID-19 crisis. Res Pract Technol Enhanc Learn 17(1):1–25

Fasi MA (2022) An overview on patenting trends and technology commercialization practices in the university Technology Transfer Offices in USA and China. World Pat Inf 68:102097

Felin T, Hesterly WS (2007) The knowledge-based view, nested heterogeneity, and new value creation: philosophical considerations on the locus of knowledge. Acad Manag Rev 32(1):195–218

Fernandes C, Veiga PM, Lobo CA, Raposo M (2023) Global talent management during the COVID‐19 pandemic? The Gods must be crazy! Thunderbird Int Bus Rev 65(1):9–19

Gogan LM, Duran DC, Draghici A (2015) Structural capital—a proposed measurement model. Procedia Econ Financ 23:1139–1146

Gonzalez-Mulé E, Courtright SH, DeGeest D, Seong J-Y, Hong D-S (2016) Channeled autonomy: the joint effects of autonomy and feedback on team performance through organizational goal clarity. J Manag 42(7):2018–2033

Haak-Saheem W (2020) Talent management in Covid-19 crisis: how Dubai manages and sustains its global talent pool. Asian Bus Manag 19:298–301

Habert B, Huc C (2010) Building together digital archives for research in social sciences and humanities. Soc Sci Inf 49(3):415–443

Haider SA, Akbar A, Tehseen S, Poulova P, Jaleel F (2022) The impact of responsible leadership on knowledge sharing behavior through the mediating role of person–organization fit and moderating role of higher educational institute culture. J Innov Knowl 7(4):100265

Hair JF, Page M, Brunsveld N (2019) Essentials of business research methods. Routledge

Harsch K, Festing M (2020) Dynamic talent management capabilities and organizational agility—a qualitative exploration. Hum Resour Manag 59(1):43–61

He S, Chen W, Wang K, Luo H, Wang F, Jiang W, Ding H (2023) Region generation and assessment network for occluded person re-identification. IEEE Trans Inf Forensic Secur 19:120–132

Henseler J, Ringle CM, Sarstedt M (2015) A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. J Acad Mark Sci 43:115–135

Jain N, Thomas A, Gupta V, Ossorio M, Porcheddu D (2022) Stimulating CSR learning collaboration by the mentor universities with digital tools and technologies—an empirical study during the COVID-19 pandemic. Manag Decis 60(10):2824–2848

Joseph J, Gaba V (2020) Organizational structure, information processing, and decision-making: a retrospective and road map for research. Acad Manag Ann 14(1):267–302

Kaliannan M, Darmalinggam D, Dorasamy M, Abraham M (2023) Inclusive talent development as a key talent management approach: a systematic literature review. Hum Resour Manag Rev 33(1):100926

Kallmuenzer A, Baptista R, Kraus S, Ribeiro AS, Cheng C-F, Westhead P (2021) Entrepreneurs’ human capital resources and tourism firm sales growth: a fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis. Tour Manag Perspect 38:100801

Kim KY, Atwater L, Patel PC, Smither JW (2016) Multisource feedback, human capital, and the financial performance of organizations. J Appl Psychol 101(11):1569

Kwok L (2022) Labor shortage: a critical reflection and a call for industry-academia collaboration. Int J Contemp Hosp Manag 34(11):3929–3943

Lee J-C, Shiue Y-C, Chen C-Y (2016) Examining the impacts of organizational culture and top management support of knowledge sharing on the success of software process improvement. Comput Hum Behav 54:462–474

Lenihan H, McGuirk H, Murphy KR (2019) Driving innovation: public policy and human capital. Res policy 48(9):103791

Ling Y-H (2013) The influence of intellectual capital on organizational performance—knowledge management as moderator. Asia Pac J Manag 30(3):937–964

Luo J, Zhuo W, Xu B (2023) The bigger, the better? Optimal NGO size of human resources and governance quality of entrepreneurship in circular economy. Manag Decis (ahead-of-print) https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-03-2023-0325

Damsgaard J, Lyytinen K (2001) The role of intermediating institutions in the diffusion of electronic data interchange (EDI): how industry associations intervened in Denmark, Finland, and Hong Kong. Inf Soc 17(3):195–210

Marchiori DM, Rodrigues RG, Popadiuk S, Mainardes EW (2022) The relationship between human capital, information technology capability, innovativeness and organizational performance: an integrated approach. Technol Forecast Soc Change 177:121526

Marinelli L, Bartoloni S, Pascucci F, Gregori GL, Briamonte MF (2022) Genesis of an innovation-based entrepreneurial ecosystem: exploring the role of intellectual capital. J Intellect Cap 24(1):10–34

Mehralian G, Nazari JA, Ghasemzadeh P (2018) The effects of knowledge creation process on organizational performance using the BSC approach: the mediating role of intellectual capital. J Knowl Manag 22(4):802–823

Mitchell A (2023) Collaboration technology affordances from virtual collaboration in the time of COVID-19 and post-pandemic strategies. Inf Technol People 36(5):1982–2008

Muñoz JLR, Ojeda FM, Jurado DLA, Peña PFP, Carranza CPM, Berríos HQ, Vasquez-Pauca MJ (2022) Systematic review of adaptive learning technology for learning in higher education. Eurasia J Educ Res 98(98):221–233

Nezam MHK, Ataffar A, Isfahani AN, Shahin A (2013) The impact of structural capital on new product development performance effectiveness—-the mediating role of new product vision and competitive advantage. Int J Hum Resour Stud 3(4):281

O’Dwyer M, Filieri R, O’Malley L (2023) Establishing successful university–industry collaborations: barriers and enablers deconstructed. J Technol Transf 48(3):900–931

Oliver C (1997) Sustainable competitive advantage: combining institutional and resource‐based views. Strateg Manag J 18(9):697–713

Pak J, Heidarian Ghaleh H, Mehralian G (2023) How does human resource management balance exploration and exploitation? The differential effects of intellectual capital‐enhancing HR practices on ambidexterity and firm innovation. Human Resource Manag https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.22180

Paoloni M, Coluccia D, Fontana S, Solimene S (2020) Knowledge management, intellectual capital and entrepreneurship: a structured literature review. J Knowl Manag 24(8):1797–1818

Patnaik S, Munjal S, Varma A, Sinha S (2022) Extending the resource-based view through the lens of the institution-based view: a longitudinal case study of an Indian higher educational institution. J Bus Res 147:124–141

Pellegrini L, Aloini D, Latronico L (2022) Open innovation and intellectual capital during emergency: evidence from a case study in telemedicine. Knowl Manag Res Pract 21(4), 765–776

Phan LT, Nguyen TV, Luong QC, Nguyen TV, Nguyen HT, Le HQ, Pham QD (2020) Importation and human-to-human transmission of a novel coronavirus in Vietnam. N Engl J Med 382(9):872–874

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Phuong QN, Le Ngoc M, Dong HT, Thao TLT, Tran T, Cac T (2024) Enhancing employment opportunities for people with disabilities in Vietnam: the role of vocational training and job placement centers. J Chin Hum Resour Manag 15(3):64–75

Podsakoff N (2003) Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J Appl Psychol 885(879):10.1037

Podsakoff PM, MacKenzie SB, Lee J-Y, Podsakoff NP (2003) Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J Appl Psychol 88(5):879

Preacher KJ, Hayes AF (2008) Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects inmultiple mediator models. Behav Res Methods 40(3):879–891

Rådberg KK, Löfsten H (2024) The entrepreneurial university and development of large-scale research infrastructure: Exploring the emerging university function of collaboration and leadership. J Technol Transf 49(1):334–366

Radhamani R, Kumar D, Nizar N, Achuthan K, Nair B, Diwakar S (2021) What virtual laboratory usage tells us about laboratory skill education pre-and post-COVID-19: Focus on usage, behavior, intention and adoption. Educ Inf Technol 26(6):7477–7495

Rasheed MH, Khalid J, Ali A, Rasheed MS, Ali K (2024) Human resource analytics in the era of artificial intelligence: Leveraging knowledge towards organizational success in Pakistan. J Chin Hum Resour Manag 15:3–20

Ringle CM, Sarstedt M, Mitchell R, Gudergan SP (2020) Partial least squares structural equation modeling in HRM research. Int J Hum Resour Manag 31(12):1617–1643

Roos G, Roos J (1997) Measuring your company’s intellectual performance. Long Range Plan 30(3):413–426

Salamzadeh A, Tajpour M, Hosseini E, Brahmi MS (2023) Human capital and the performance of Iranian Digital Startups: the moderating role of knowledge sharing behaviour. Int J Public Sect Perform Manag 12(1-2):171–186

Sarwar A, Mustafa A (2023) Analysing the impact of green intellectual capital on environmental performance: the mediating role of green training and development. Technol Anal Strateg Manag 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2023.2209205

Scott WR (2008) Institutions and organizations: ideas and interests. Sage

Secundo G, Dumay J, Schiuma G, Passiante G (2016) Managing intellectual capital through a collective intelligence approach: an integrated framework for universities. J Intellect Cap 17(2):298–319

Secundo G, Massaro M, Dumay J, Bagnoli C (2018) Intellectual capital management in the fourth stage of IC research: a critical case study in university settings. J Intellect Cap 19(1):157–177

Shao JJ, Ariss AA (2020) Knowledge transfer between self-initiated expatriates and their organizations: research propositions for managing SIEs. Int Bus Rev 29(1):101634

Shofiyyah NA, Komarudin TS, Hasan MSR (2023) Innovations in Islamic Education Management within the University Context: addressing challenges and exploring future prospects. Nidhomul Haq 8(2):193–209

Sigala M, Ren L, Li Z, Dioko LA (2023) Talent management in hospitality during the COVID-19 pandemic in Macao: a contingency approach. Int J Contemp Hosp Manag 35(8):2773–2792

Singh SK, Gupta S, Busso D, Kamboj S (2021) Top management knowledge value, knowledge sharing practices, open innovation and organizational performance. J Bus Res 128:788–798

Sobaih AEE, Hasanein A, Elshaer IA (2022) Higher education in and after COVID-19: the impact of using social network applications for e-learning on students’ academic performance. Sustainability 14(9):5195

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Sommer LP, Heidenreich S, Handrich M (2017) War for talents—how perceived organizational innovativeness affects employer attractiveness. RD Manag 47(2):299–310

Stewart T (1991) Brainpower: how intellectual capital is becoming America’s most valuable. Fortune

Streukens S, Leroi-Werelds S (2016) Bootstrapping and PLS-SEM: A step-by-step guide to get more out of your bootstrap results. Eur Manage J 34(6):618–632

Sulaiman F, Uden L, Eldy EF (2022) Online Learning in Higher Education Institution During COVID-19: A Review and the Way Forward. Paper presented at the International Workshop on Learning Technology for Education Challenges

Susanto P, Sawitri NN, Ali H, Rony ZT (2023) Employee performance and talent management impact increasing construction company productivity. Int J Psychol Health Sci 1(4):144–152

Tan CN-L, Md. Noor S (2013) Knowledge management enablers, knowledge sharing and research collaboration: a study of knowledge management at research universities in Malaysia. Asian J Technol Innov 21(2):251–276

Vaiman V, Sparrow P, Schuler R, Collings DG (2018) Macro talent management: a global perspective on managing talent in developed markets. Routledge

Vătămănescu E-M, Cegarra-Navarro J-G, Martínez-Martínez A, Dincă V-M, Dabija D-C (2023) Revisiting online academic networks within the COVID-19 pandemic–From the intellectual capital of knowledge networks towards institutional knowledge capitalization. J Intellect Cap 24(4):948–973

Wang Y, Lee L-H, Braud T, Hui P (2022) Re-shaping Post-COVID-19 teaching and learning: A blueprint of virtual-physical blended classrooms in the metaverse era. Paper presented at the 2022 IEEE 42nd International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems Workshops (ICDCSW)

Wang Z, Wang N, Liang H (2014) Knowledge sharing, intellectual capital and firm performance. Manag Decis 52(2):230–258

Xu A, Li Y, Donta PK (2024) Marketing decision model and consumer behavior prediction with deep learning. J Organ End Use Comput (JOEUC) 36(1):1–25

Yang G, Xiangming L (2024) Graduate socialization and anxiety: insights via hierarchical regression analysis and beyond. Stud High Educ 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2024.2375563

Zada M, Khan J, Saeed I, Zada S, Jun ZY (2023) Linking public leadership with project management effectiveness: mediating role of goal clarity and moderating role of top management support. Heliyon 9(5)

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Economics and Management, Hanjiang Normal University, Shiyan, 442000, China

Muhammad Zada

Facultad de Administración y Negocios, Universidad Autónoma de Chile, Santiago, 8320000, Chile

School of Law, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubie, China

Imran Saeed

College of Management, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, China

Department of Business Administration, Faculty of Management Sciences, Ilma University, Karachi, Pakistan

Shagufta Zada

Business School Henan University, Kaifeng, Henan, China

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualization: Muhammad Zada and Imran Saeed. Methodology: Jawad Khan. Software: Shagufta Zada. Data collection: Muhammad Zada, Shagufta Zada and Jawad Khan. Formal analysis: Imran Saeed and Jawad Khan. Resources: Muhammad Zada. Writing original draft preparation: Muhammad Zada and Imran Saeed. Writing review and editing: Jawad Khan, Shagufta Zada. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the paper.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Muhammad Zada .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethical approval

The author sought and received ethical approval from the Research Ethical Committee School of Economics and Management at Hanjiang Normal University, China, with approval number 2023REC001, and the study complied with ethical standards.

Informed consent statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study. All the participants were accessed with the support of the HR Department employed in China’s research and academia sector. Response Participants were provided with comprehensive information regarding the study’s purpose and procedures. Confidentiality and privacy were strictly implemented throughout the research process. Using the time lag data collection approach, we collected from 393 employees employed in China’s research and academic sector.

Additional information

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

Rights and permissions

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

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Zada, M., Saeed, I., Khan, J. et al. Navigating post-pandemic challenges through institutional research networks and talent management. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 11 , 1164 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03697-9

Download citation

Received : 28 February 2024

Accepted : 30 August 2024

Published : 09 September 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03697-9

Share this article

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

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

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Quick links

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

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.

IEEE Account

• Change Username/Password
• Update Address

Purchase Details

• Payment Options
• Order History
• View Purchased Documents

Profile Information

• Communications Preferences
• Profession and Education
• Technical Interests
• US & Canada: +1 800 678 4333
• Worldwide: +1 732 981 0060
• Contact & Support
• About IEEE Xplore
• Accessibility
• Terms of Use
• Nondiscrimination Policy
• Privacy & Opting Out of Cookies

A not-for-profit organization, IEEE is the world's largest technical professional organization dedicated to advancing technology for the benefit of humanity. © Copyright 2024 IEEE - All rights reserved. Use of this web site signifies your agreement to the terms and conditions.