literature review research proposals

Have a language expert improve your writing

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

• Knowledge Base

Methodology

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

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

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

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

There are five key steps to writing a literature review:

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

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

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

Table of contents

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

• Quick Run-through
• Step 1 & 2

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

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

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

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

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

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

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

Download Word doc Download Google doc

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

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

Make a list of keywords

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

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

Search for relevant sources

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

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

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

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

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

For each publication, ask yourself:

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

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

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

Take notes and cite your sources

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

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

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

The academic proofreading tool has been trained on 1000s of academic texts and by native English editors. Making it the most accurate and reliable proofreading tool for students.

Try for free

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

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

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

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

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

Chronological

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

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

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

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

Methodological

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

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

Theoretical

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

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

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

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

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

As you write, you can follow these tips:

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

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

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

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

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

Open Google Slides Download PowerPoint

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

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

 Statistics

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

Research bias

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Cite this Scribbr article

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

McCombes, S. (2023, September 11). How to Write a Literature Review | Guide, Examples, & Templates. Scribbr. Retrieved April 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, unlimited academic ai-proofreading.

✔ Document error-free in 5minutes ✔ Unlimited document corrections ✔ Specialized in correcting academic texts

Literature Review in Research Proposal: A Comprehensive Guide

• Introduction: What is a Literature Review and Why is it Important?

The introduction is an essential part of any literature review in a research proposal. It provides a foundation for the entire review and gives context to the importance of conducting a literature review in the first place. In this section, you will need to provide a brief definition of what a literature review is and why it is an essential component of a research proposal.

A literature review is a critical evaluation and summary of published research studies and other sources relevant to a particular research topic. The purpose of a literature review is to identify and evaluate the existing knowledge on a topic, as well as to identify any gaps in the knowledge base that the proposed research aims to fill.

In a research proposal, the introduction section must explain the importance of the literature review to the overall project. It is an opportunity to convince the reader of the significance of the research problem and to show how the literature review will contribute to knowledge building. This section should also provide a clear and concise statement of the research problem and the research question(s).

Overall, the introduction section sets the stage for the literature review and the research proposal as a whole. It provides a context for the research problem, highlights the knowledge gaps that the proposed research aims to fill, and justifies the importance of the literature review in achieving the research objectives. By providing a clear and compelling introduction, researchers can ensure that their proposal has a strong foundation for success.

In This Article:

Defining the Research Problem

Developing a research question, conducting a literature search, analyzing and synthesizing literature, evaluating the quality of literature, identifying themes and patterns, previous articles:.

• How to Change Document to PDF: A Step-by-Step Guide
• PowerPoint Remove Background Feature:Say Goodbye to Cluttered Presentations
• How to Make Manuscript: Tips and Tricks for Writers
• Scientific Article Journal: How to Find The Right One For Your Manuscript
• Referencing Bib 101: The Basics

Subheading 2, “Defining the Research Problem: Using Literature Review to Identify Gaps in Knowledge,” is an important subheading in the literature review section of a research proposal. A literature review is an essential part of any research project as it provides a comprehensive overview of the existing body of knowledge on a specific research topic.

To define the research problem, it is crucial to identify what is already known and what is not known about the research topic. This is where a literature review comes in handy. This process of identifying gaps in knowledge allows the researcher to identify the specific research problem and develop research questions and objectives that can address those gaps.

In summary, subheading 2 is critical in the literature review section of a research proposal as it highlights the importance of using a literature review to identify gaps in knowledge and define the research problem.

The subheading “Developing a Research Question: Using Literature Review to Inform Research Questions and Objectives” highlights the crucial role of literature review in guiding the development of research questions and objectives. A well-formulated research question provides a clear focus for the study, ensuring that the research stays on track and avoids any unnecessary or irrelevant work. In addition, by conducting a thorough literature review, researchers can identify the current state of knowledge on the topic, recognize any gaps or inconsistencies in the literature, and identify potential areas of further exploration.

To develop a research question, it is important to first consider the research problem and the purpose of the study. Once the problem has been defined, the literature review can help to identify relevant theoretical and empirical frameworks that can inform the development of research questions. The literature review can also help to refine and narrow the research question, ensuring that it is feasible, relevant, and important.

The fourth subheading, “Conducting a Literature Search: Tips and Strategies for Finding Relevant Studies and Sources,” is an essential aspect of writing a comprehensive literature review for a research proposal. The literature search is a critical step in identifying relevant studies and sources that will help answer the research question and objectives.

When conducting a literature search, it is crucial to develop a systematic approach that will guide the process.

In addition, it is important to document the search process by keeping a record of the keywords used, the sources searched, and the search results. This documentation will enable researchers to retrace their steps if necessary and ensure that they are transparent in their research methods.

Another important consideration when conducting a literature search is the quality of the sources used. Researchers should be mindful of the credibility of the sources and ensure that they are peer-reviewed, reputable, and relevant to the research question. Using sources that are not reliable or relevant can weaken the literature review and the overall research proposal.

Subheading 5, “Analyzing and Synthesizing Literature: Methods for Summarizing and Integrating Findings,” is a critical component of any literature review in a research proposal. This subheading refers to the process of reviewing and synthesizing existing research to gain an understanding of the current state of knowledge on the research topic.

In the analysis and synthesis phase, the researcher begins by reviewing the literature collected in the search phase. This process involves reading through each article or source, summarizing the main findings, and noting the key points that contribute to the understanding of the research problem. The researcher may use a variety of methods to organize the information, such as tables, charts, or diagrams.

Once the researcher has completed the summary of each study, the synthesis phase begins. This is the process of integrating the findings from the individual studies into a cohesive whole. The researcher must identify commonalities and differences between the studies and identify themes and patterns that emerge across the literature.

Subheading 6, “Evaluating the Quality of Literature: Criteria for Assessing the Validity and Reliability of Studies,” is a crucial element of any literature review in a research proposal. Evaluating the quality of literature is an essential step in ensuring that the information gathered from various sources is trustworthy and accurate.

To evaluate the quality of literature, researchers must use established criteria that are specific to the research topic and questions. For example, when conducting research in the social sciences, the criteria may include the validity of the research design, the reliability of the data collection methods, and the transparency of the analysis. In contrast, when researching in the natural sciences, the criteria may include the accuracy of the measurements, the statistical analysis, and the experimental design.

One way to evaluate the quality of literature is to use a systematic review approach. Systematic reviews involve a thorough and structured process of searching, evaluating, and synthesizing existing research to answer specific research questions. This approach ensures that the quality of the literature is assessed in a rigorous and transparent way, which increases the confidence in the findings of the literature review.

Subheading 7, “Identifying Themes and Patterns: Techniques for Identifying Common Themes and Patterns Across Studies,” is an important aspect of conducting a literature review in a research proposal. After conducting a thorough literature search and analyzing and synthesizing the findings, researchers need to identify the common themes and patterns that emerge across different studies. Furthermore, this process is essential because it helps to build a solid foundation for the proposed research by identifying existing knowledge gaps and areas where further research is needed.

One technique for identifying themes and patterns is to use a thematic analysis approach. Thematic analysis involves reading through the literature and highlighting or coding relevant data that relates to the research question or objective. Once all of the data has been coded, researchers can then categorize the codes into themes, which can be used to summarize the key findings of the literature review.

Another technique for identifying themes and patterns is to use a meta-synthesis approach. Meta-synthesis involves synthesizing the findings of multiple studies and identifying common themes and patterns that emerge.

In conclusion, a literature review is an essential component of any research proposal, and its importance cannot be overstated. The literature review helps to identify existing knowledge gaps, inform research questions and objectives, and build a solid foundation for the proposed research. In addition, by conducting a thorough literature search, analyzing and synthesizing the findings, and identifying common themes and patterns, researchers can ensure that their literature review is comprehensive and relevant to their research objectives.

Similar Posts

How to Edit Word Documents Online

Introduction to Editing Word Documents Online Editing Word documents online has become increasingly popular over the past few years. With the rise of cloud-based technology, people are no longer limited to only editing their documents on their desktop or laptop. Now, you can edit your Word documents from anywhere, at any time, on any device…

Consort Defined: Exploring Different Meanings

Etymology and Origins of “Consort” As it has been in use for so long, the word “consort” has experienced several meaning and usage modifications. This article is about the topic: consort defined. The Old French word “consort,” which means “company” or “association,” is where the word “consort” originates. The Latin word “consors,” which meaning “partner”…

PowerPoint Voice Over: Bringing Your Presentations to Life

Introduction to PowerPoint Voice Over Microsoft PowerPoint voice over is a powerful tool for enhancing presentations and making them more engaging for the audience. It is a type of audio recording that is added to slides in a PowerPoint presentation, allowing the presenter to add a voice-narrated explanation or commentary to the visuals. This can…

Market Access Conditions: A Guide for Businesses

Understanding Market Access Conditions: Definitions and Key Concepts Market access conditions are the many laws, ordinances, and policies that nations enact to control international commerce and investment. These requirements are made to protect the interests of the host nation while establishing an even playing field for domestic and international firms. Businesses that wish to grow…

Writing Conferences: Maximizing Your Experience

Introduction: The Importance of Writing Conferences Writing conferences provide a unique opportunity for writers to come together, learn from one another, and connect with industry professionals. Whether you’re a seasoned writer or just starting out, attending a writing conference can help you take your craft to the next level. There are several key benefits to…

The Ultimate Guide to Job Interview Common Questions and Answers

Introduction to Common Job Interview Questions Job interviews can be a nerve-wracking experience, especially if you’re unsure what to expect. However, with a little preparation and knowledge, you can feel confident and ready to tackle any question thrown your way. In this guide, we’ll explore some of the most common job interview questions and provide…

Privacy Overview

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, automatically generate references for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Dissertation
• What is a Literature Review? | Guide, Template, & Examples

What is a Literature Review? | Guide, Template, & Examples

Published on 22 February 2022 by Shona McCombes . Revised on 7 June 2022.

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.

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 summarise sources – it analyses, synthesises, and critically evaluates to give a clear picture of the state of knowledge on the subject.

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Be assured that you'll submit flawless writing. Upload your document to correct all your mistakes.

Table of contents

Why write 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, frequently asked questions about literature reviews, introduction.

• Quick Run-through
• Step 1 & 2

When you write a dissertation or thesis, you will 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 scholarly context
• Develop a theoretical framework and methodology for your research
• Position yourself in relation to other researchers and theorists
• Show how your dissertation addresses a gap or contributes to a debate

You might also have to write a literature review as a stand-alone assignment. In this case, the purpose is to evaluate the current state of research and demonstrate your knowledge of scholarly debates around a topic.

The content will look slightly different in each case, but the process of conducting a literature review follows the same steps. We’ve written a step-by-step guide that you can follow below.

The only proofreading tool specialized in correcting academic writing

The academic proofreading tool has been trained on 1000s of academic texts and by native English editors. Making it the most accurate and reliable proofreading tool for students.

Correct my document today

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 objectives and questions .

If you are writing a literature review as a stand-alone assignment, you will have to choose a focus and develop a central question to direct your search. Unlike a dissertation research question, this question has to be answerable without collecting original data. You should be able to answer it based only on a review of existing publications.

Make a list of keywords

Start by creating a list of keywords related to your research topic. 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 if 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 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 use boolean operators to help narrow down your search:

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.

To identify the most important publications on your topic, take note of recurring citations. If the same authors, books or articles keep appearing in your reading, make sure to seek them out.

You probably won’t be able to read absolutely everything that has been written on the topic – you’ll have to evaluate which sources are most relevant to your questions.

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?
• How does the publication contribute to your understanding of the topic? What are its key insights and arguments?
• 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 find out how many times an article has been cited on Google Scholar – a high citation count means the article has been influential in the field, and should certainly be included in your literature review.

The scope of your review will depend on your topic and discipline: in the sciences you usually only review recent literature, but in the humanities you might take a long historical perspective (for example, to trace how a concept has changed in meaning over time).

Remember that you can use our template to summarise and evaluate sources you’re thinking about using!

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’s important to keep track of your sources with references to avoid plagiarism . It can be helpful to make an annotated bibliography, where you compile full reference 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.

You can use our free APA Reference Generator for quick, correct, consistent citations.

To begin organising your literature review’s argument and structure, you need to 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 organising the body of a literature review. You should have a rough idea of your strategy before you start writing.

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 summarising sources in order.

Try to analyse 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 organise 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.

If you are writing the literature review as part of your dissertation or thesis, reiterate your central problem or research question and give a brief summary of the scholarly context. You can emphasise the timeliness of the topic (“many recent studies have focused on the problem of x”) or highlight a gap in the literature (“while there has been much research on x, few researchers have taken y into consideration”).

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, make sure to follow these tips:

• Summarise and synthesise: give an overview of the main points of each source and combine them into a coherent whole.
• Analyse and interpret: don’t just paraphrase other researchers – add your own interpretations, 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 transitions and topic sentences to draw connections, comparisons and contrasts.

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

If the literature review is part of your dissertation or thesis, reiterate how your research addresses gaps and contributes new knowledge, or discuss how you have drawn on existing theories and methods to build a framework for your research. This can lead directly into your methodology section.

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 dissertation , thesis, research paper , or proposal .

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

• To familiarise 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  dissertation . After the introduction , it grounds your research in a scholarly field and leads directly to your theoretical framework or methodology .

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 Reference Generator.

McCombes, S. (2022, June 07). What is a Literature Review? | Guide, Template, & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved 9 April 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/thesis-dissertation/literature-review/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, how to write a dissertation proposal | a step-by-step guide, what is a theoretical framework | a step-by-step guide, what is a research methodology | steps & tips.

Literature Reviews

• What is a Literature Review?
• Concept Mapping
• Writing a Proposal
• For Faculty

Need help? Ask a librarian

Tools for All Writers

• Reading, Writing, Speaking
• Citing Sources
• Library Searching

Templates for Proposal Writing

• Template 1 from Drew University
• Template 2 from Rutgers University (Saracevic)

Content of a proposal for a thesis or any research project

Full Pdf  from Rutgers University

• What do you call this investigation?
• What problem or area will you investigate in general?
• Why is this problem important to investigate?
• What was previously done in relation to this problem? What were some of the significant studies? (Literature review)
• What theory or model is going to guide your research?
• What will you specifically investigate or do in the framework of that problem? What are your specific research questions or hypotheses?
• How will each research question be addressed ? What methods will you use for each research question?
• How will the results be analyzed?
• What are the deliverables? What can or will be gained by investigation of this problem?

Avoid Patchwriting

• << Previous: Concept Mapping
• Next: For Faculty >>
• Last Updated: Mar 25, 2024 8:48 AM
• URL: https://researchguides.njit.edu/literaturereview

Literature Review Example/Sample

Detailed Walkthrough + Free Literature Review Template

If you’re working on a dissertation or thesis and are looking for an example of a strong literature review chapter , you’ve come to the right place.

In this video, we walk you through an A-grade literature review from a dissertation that earned full distinction . We start off by discussing the five core sections of a literature review chapter by unpacking our free literature review template . This includes:

• The literature review opening/ introduction section
• The theoretical framework (or foundation of theory)
• The empirical research
• The research gap
• The closing section

We then progress to the sample literature review (from an A-grade Master’s-level dissertation) to show how these concepts are applied in the literature review chapter. You can access the free resources mentioned in this video below.

FAQ: Literature Review Example

Literature review example: frequently asked questions, is the sample literature review real.

Yes. The literature review example is an extract from a Master’s-level dissertation for an MBA program. It has not been edited in any way.

Can I replicate this literature review for my dissertation?

As we discuss in the video, every literature review will be slightly different, depending on the university’s unique requirements, as well as the nature of the research itself. Therefore, you’ll need to tailor your literature review to suit your specific context.

You can learn more about the basics of writing a literature review here .

Where can I find more examples of literature reviews?

The best place to find more examples of literature review chapters would be within dissertation/thesis databases. These databases include dissertations, theses and research projects that have successfully passed the assessment criteria for the respective university, meaning that you have at least some sort of quality assurance. 

The Open Access Thesis Database (OATD) is a good starting point. 

How do I get the literature review template?

You can access our free literature review chapter template here .

Is the template really free?

Yes. There is no cost for the template and you are free to use it as you wish. 

Psst… there’s more!

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

You Might Also Like:

What will it take for you to guide me in my Ph.D research work?

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

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

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

• Print Friendly

Purdue Online Writing Lab Purdue OWL® College of Liberal Arts

Writing a Literature Review

Welcome to the Purdue OWL

This page is brought to you by the OWL at Purdue University. When printing this page, you must include the entire legal notice.

Copyright ©1995-2018 by The Writing Lab & The OWL at Purdue and Purdue University. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, reproduced, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our terms and conditions of fair use.

A literature review is a document or section of a document that collects key sources on a topic and discusses those sources in conversation with each other (also called synthesis ). The lit review is an important genre in many disciplines, not just literature (i.e., the study of works of literature such as novels and plays). When we say “literature review” or refer to “the literature,” we are talking about the research ( scholarship ) in a given field. You will often see the terms “the research,” “the scholarship,” and “the literature” used mostly interchangeably.

Where, when, and why would I write a lit review?

There are a number of different situations where you might write a literature review, each with slightly different expectations; different disciplines, too, have field-specific expectations for what a literature review is and does. For instance, in the humanities, authors might include more overt argumentation and interpretation of source material in their literature reviews, whereas in the sciences, authors are more likely to report study designs and results in their literature reviews; these differences reflect these disciplines’ purposes and conventions in scholarship. You should always look at examples from your own discipline and talk to professors or mentors in your field to be sure you understand your discipline’s conventions, for literature reviews as well as for any other genre.

A literature review can be a part of a research paper or scholarly article, usually falling after the introduction and before the research methods sections. In these cases, the lit review just needs to cover scholarship that is important to the issue you are writing about; sometimes it will also cover key sources that informed your research methodology.

Lit reviews can also be standalone pieces, either as assignments in a class or as publications. In a class, a lit review may be assigned to help students familiarize themselves with a topic and with scholarship in their field, get an idea of the other researchers working on the topic they’re interested in, find gaps in existing research in order to propose new projects, and/or develop a theoretical framework and methodology for later research. As a publication, a lit review usually is meant to help make other scholars’ lives easier by collecting and summarizing, synthesizing, and analyzing existing research on a topic. This can be especially helpful for students or scholars getting into a new research area, or for directing an entire community of scholars toward questions that have not yet been answered.

What are the parts of a lit review?

Most lit reviews use a basic introduction-body-conclusion structure; if your lit review is part of a larger paper, the introduction and conclusion pieces may be just a few sentences while you focus most of your attention on the body. If your lit review is a standalone piece, the introduction and conclusion take up more space and give you a place to discuss your goals, research methods, and conclusions separately from where you discuss the literature itself.

Introduction:

• An introductory paragraph that explains what your working topic and thesis is
• A forecast of key topics or texts that will appear in the review
• Potentially, a description of how you found sources and how you analyzed them for inclusion and discussion in the review (more often found in published, standalone literature reviews than in lit review sections in an article or research paper)
• Summarize and synthesize: Give an overview of the main points of each source and combine them into a coherent whole
• Analyze and interpret: Don’t just paraphrase other researchers – add your own interpretations where possible, discussing the significance of findings in relation to the literature as a whole
• Critically Evaluate: Mention the strengths and weaknesses of your sources
• Write in well-structured paragraphs: Use transition words and topic sentence to draw connections, comparisons, and contrasts.

Conclusion:

• Summarize the key findings you have taken from the literature and emphasize their significance
• Connect it back to your primary research question

How should I organize my lit review?

Lit reviews can take many different organizational patterns depending on what you are trying to accomplish with the review. Here are some examples:

• Chronological : The simplest approach is to trace the development of the topic over time, which helps familiarize the audience with the topic (for instance if you are introducing something that is not commonly known in your field). If you choose this strategy, be careful to avoid simply listing and summarizing sources in order. Try to analyze the patterns, turning points, and key debates that have shaped the direction of the field. Give your interpretation of how and why certain developments occurred (as mentioned previously, this may not be appropriate in your discipline — check with a teacher or mentor if you’re unsure).
• Thematic : If you have found some recurring central themes that you will continue working with throughout your piece, you can organize your literature review into subsections that address different aspects of the topic. For example, if you are reviewing literature about women and religion, key themes can include the role of women in churches and the religious attitude towards women.
• Qualitative versus quantitative research
• Empirical versus theoretical scholarship
• Divide the research by sociological, historical, or cultural sources
• Theoretical : In many humanities articles, the literature review is the foundation for the theoretical framework. You can use it to discuss various theories, models, and definitions of key concepts. You can argue for the relevance of a specific theoretical approach or combine various theorical concepts to create a framework for your research.

What are some strategies or tips I can use while writing my lit review?

Any lit review is only as good as the research it discusses; make sure your sources are well-chosen and your research is thorough. Don’t be afraid to do more research if you discover a new thread as you’re writing. More info on the research process is available in our "Conducting Research" resources .

As you’re doing your research, create an annotated bibliography ( see our page on the this type of document ). Much of the information used in an annotated bibliography can be used also in a literature review, so you’ll be not only partially drafting your lit review as you research, but also developing your sense of the larger conversation going on among scholars, professionals, and any other stakeholders in your topic.

Usually you will need to synthesize research rather than just summarizing it. This means drawing connections between sources to create a picture of the scholarly conversation on a topic over time. Many student writers struggle to synthesize because they feel they don’t have anything to add to the scholars they are citing; here are some strategies to help you:

• It often helps to remember that the point of these kinds of syntheses is to show your readers how you understand your research, to help them read the rest of your paper.
• Writing teachers often say synthesis is like hosting a dinner party: imagine all your sources are together in a room, discussing your topic. What are they saying to each other?
• Look at the in-text citations in each paragraph. Are you citing just one source for each paragraph? This usually indicates summary only. When you have multiple sources cited in a paragraph, you are more likely to be synthesizing them (not always, but often
• Read more about synthesis here.

The most interesting literature reviews are often written as arguments (again, as mentioned at the beginning of the page, this is discipline-specific and doesn’t work for all situations). Often, the literature review is where you can establish your research as filling a particular gap or as relevant in a particular way. You have some chance to do this in your introduction in an article, but the literature review section gives a more extended opportunity to establish the conversation in the way you would like your readers to see it. You can choose the intellectual lineage you would like to be part of and whose definitions matter most to your thinking (mostly humanities-specific, but this goes for sciences as well). In addressing these points, you argue for your place in the conversation, which tends to make the lit review more compelling than a simple reporting of other sources.

How to Write a Research Proposal

Once you’re in college and really getting into  academic writing , you may not recognize all the kinds of assignments you’re asked to complete. You know what an essay is, and you know how to respond to readings—but when you hear your professor mention a research proposal or a literature review, your mind might do a double take. 

Don’t worry; we’ve got you. Boiled down to its core, a research proposal is simply a short piece of  writing that details exactly what you’ll be covering in a larger research project. You’ll likely be required to write one for your  thesis , and if you choose to continue in academia after earning your bachelor’s degree, you’ll be writing research proposals for your master’s thesis, your dissertation , and all other research you conduct. By then, you’ll be a research proposal pro. But for now, we’ll answer all your questions and help you confidently write your first one. 

Here’s a tip: Want to make sure your writing shines? Grammarly can check your spelling and save you from grammar and punctuation mistakes. It even proofreads your text, so your work is extra polished wherever you write.

Your writing, at its best Grammarly helps you communicate confidently Write with Grammarly

What is the goal of a research proposal?

In a research proposal, the goal is to present the author’s plan for the research they intend to conduct. In some cases, part of this goal is to secure funding for said research. In others, it’s to have the research approved by the author’s supervisor or department so they can move forward with it. In some cases, a research proposal is a required part of a graduate school application. In every one of these circumstances, research proposals follow the same structure.

In a research proposal, the author demonstrates how and why their research is relevant to their field. They demonstrate that the work is necessary to the following:

• Filling a gap in the existing body of research on their subject
• Underscoring existing research on their subject, and/or
• Adding new, original knowledge to the academic community’s existing understanding of their subject

A research proposal also demonstrates that the author is capable of conducting this research and contributing to the current state of their field in a meaningful way. To do this, your research proposal needs to discuss your academic background and credentials as well as demonstrate that your proposed ideas have academic merit. 

But demonstrating your research’s validity and your personal capability to carry it out isn’t enough to get your research proposal approved. Your research proposal also has to cover these things:

• The research methodology you plan to use
• The tools and procedures you will use to collect, analyze, and interpret the data you collect
• An explanation of how your research fits the budget and other constraints that come with conducting it through your institution, department, or academic program

If you’ve already read our post on literature reviews , you may be thinking that a research proposal sounds pretty similar. They’re more than just similar, though—a literature review is part of a research proposal. It’s the section that covers which sources you’re using, how you’re using them, and why they’re relevant. Think of a literature review as a mini-research proposal that fits into your larger, main proposal. 

How long should a research proposal be?

Generally, research proposals for bachelor’s and master’s theses are a few pages long. Research proposals for meatier projects, like Ph.D. dissertations and funding requests, are often longer and far more detailed. A research proposal’s goal is to clearly outline exactly what your research will entail and accomplish, so including the proposal’s word count or page count isn’t nearly as important as it is to ensure that all the necessary elements and content are present. 

Research proposal structure

A research proposal follows a fairly straightforward structure. In order to achieve the goals described in the previous section, nearly all research proposals include the following sections:

Introduction

Your introduction achieves a few goals:

• Introduces your topic
• States your problem statement and the questions your research aims to answer
• Provides context for your research

In a research proposal, an introduction can be a few paragraphs long. It should be concise, but don’t feel like you need to cram all of your information into one paragraph. 

In some cases, you need to include an abstract and/or a table of contents in your research proposal. These are included just before the introduction. 

Background significance

This is where you explain why your research is necessary and how it relates to established research in your field. Your work might complement existing research, strengthen it, or even challenge it—no matter how your work will “play with” other researchers’ work, you need to express it in detail in your research proposal.  

This is also the section where you clearly define the existing problems your research will address. By doing this, you’re explaining why your work is necessary—in other words, this is where you answer the reader’s “so what?” 

In your background significance section, you’ll also outline how you’ll conduct your research. If necessary, note which related questions and issues you won’t be covering in your research. 

Literature review

In your  literature review , you introduce all the sources you plan to use in your research. This includes landmark studies and their data, books, and scholarly articles. A literature review isn’t merely a list of sources (that’s what your bibliography is for); a literature review delves into the collection of sources you chose and explains how you’re using them in your research. 

Research design, methods, and schedule

Following your research review, you’ll discuss your research plans. In this section, make sure you cover these aspects:

• The type of research you will do. Are you conducting qualitative or quantitative research? Are you collecting original data or working with data collected by other researchers?
• Whether you’re doing experimental, correlational, or descriptive research
• The data you’re working with. For example, if you’re conducting research in the social sciences, you’ll need to describe the population you’re studying. You’ll also need to cover how you’ll select your subjects and how you’ll collect data from them. 
• The tools you’ll use to collect data. Will you be running experiments? Conducting surveys? Observing phenomena? Note all data collection methods here along with why they’re effective methods for your specific research.

Beyond a comprehensive look at your research itself, you’ll also need to include:

• Your research timeline
• Your research budget
• Any potential obstacles you foresee and your plan for handling them

Suppositions and implications

Although you can’t know your research’s results until you’ve actually done the work, you should be going into the project with a clear idea of how your work will contribute to your field. This section is perhaps the most critical to your research proposal’s argument because it expresses exactly why your research is necessary. 

In this section, make sure you cover the following:

• Any ways your work can challenge existing theories and assumptions in your field
• How your work will create the foundation for future research
• The practical value your findings will provide to practitioners, educators, and other academics in your field
• The problems your work can potentially help to fix
• Policies that could be impacted by your findings
• How your findings can be implemented in academia or other settings and how this will improve or otherwise transform these settings

In other words, this section isn’t about stating the specific results you expect. Rather, it’s where you state how your findings will be valuable. 

This is where you wrap it all up. Your conclusion section, just like your conclusion paragraph for an essay , briefly summarizes your research proposal and reinforces your research’s stated purpose. 

Bibliography

Yes, you need to write a bibliography in addition to your literature review. Unlike your literature review, where you explained the relevance of the sources you chose and in some cases, challenged them, your bibliography simply lists your sources and their authors.

The way you write a citation depends on the style guide you’re using. The three most common style guides for academics are MLA , APA , and Chicago , and each has its own particular rules and requirements. Keep in mind that each formatting style has specific guidelines for citing just about any kind of source, including photos , websites , speeches , and YouTube videos .

Sometimes, a full bibliography is not needed. When this is the case, you can include a references list, which is simply a scaled-down list of all the sources you cited in your work. If you’re not sure which to write, ask your supervisor. 

Here’s a tip: Grammarly’s  Citation Generator  ensures your essays have flawless citations and no plagiarism. Try it for citing journal articles in MLA , APA , and Chicago  styles.

How to write a research proposal

Research proposals, like all other kinds of academic writing, are written in a formal, objective tone. Keep in mind that being concise is a key component of academic writing; formal does not mean flowery. 

Adhere to the structure outlined above. Your reader knows how a research proposal is supposed to read and expects it to fit this template. It’s crucial that you present your research proposal in a clear, logical way. Every question the reader has while reading your proposal should be answered by the final section. 

Editing and proofreading a research proposal

When you’re writing a research proposal, follow the same six-step writing process you follow with every other kind of writing you do. 

After you’ve got a first draft written, take some time to let it “cool off” before you start proofreading . By doing this, you’re making it easier for yourself to catch mistakes and gaps in your writing. 

Common mistakes to avoid when writing a research proposal

When you’re writing a research proposal, avoid these common pitfalls: 

Being too wordy

As we said earlier, formal does not mean flowery. In fact, you should aim to keep your writing as brief and to-the-point as possible. The more economically you can express your purpose and goal, the better.   

Failing to cite relevant sources

When you’re conducting research, you’re adding to the existing body of knowledge on the subject you’re covering. Your research proposal should reference one or more of the landmark research pieces in your field and connect your work to these works in some way. This doesn’t just communicate your work’s relevance—it also demonstrates your familiarity with the field. 

Focusing too much on minor issues

There are probably a lot of great reasons why your research is necessary. These reasons don’t all need to be in your research proposal. In fact, including too many questions and issues in your research proposal can detract from your central purpose, weakening the proposal. Save the minor issues for your research paper itself and cover only the major, key issues you aim to tackle in your proposal. 

Failing to make a strong argument for your research

This is perhaps the easiest way to undermine your proposal because it’s far more subjective than the others. A research proposal is, in essence, a piece of persuasive writing . That means that although you’re presenting your proposal in an objective, academic way, the goal is to get the reader to say “yes” to your work. 

This is true in every case, whether your reader is your supervisor, your department head, a graduate school admissions board, a private or government-backed funding provider, or the editor at a journal in which you’d like to publish your work. 

Polish your writing into a stellar proposal

When you’re asking for approval to conduct research—especially when there’s funding involved—you need to be nothing less than 100 percent confident in your proposal. If your research proposal has spelling or grammatical mistakes, an inconsistent or inappropriate tone, or even just awkward phrasing, those will undermine your credibility. 

Make sure your research proposal shines by using Grammarly to catch all of those issues. Even if you think you caught all of them while you were editing, it’s critical to double-check your work. Your research deserves the best proposal possible, and Grammarly can help you make that happen. 

How to Prepare a Research Proposal and Literature Review

All HDR candidates are required to prepare a research proposal and literature review for their first Research Progress Review. If you are a PhD candidate, this will be your Confirmation Review. 

Your research proposal and literature review should be a comprehensive outline of your research topic and show how you will make an original contribution to knowledge in your field. Your Review panel will use your research proposal and literature review to assess the viability of your research project, and to provide you with valuable feedback on your topic, methodology, research design, timeline and milestones. 

UNSW Academic Skills provides a detailed description of how to develop and structure your research proposal. 

Your Faculty and/or School may have particular requirements, and you should contact your Postgraduate Coordinator or your supervisor if you’re unsure of what is required.  

Additional Resources

All disciplinary areas A guide for writing thesis proposals - UNSW Academic Skills Confirmation – not as big a deal as you think it is? - the Thesis Whisperer

Humanities and Social Sciences Essential ingredients of a good research proposal for undergraduate and postgraduate students in the social sciences – Raymond Talinbe Abdulai and Anthony Owusu-Ansah, SAGE Open, Jul-Sep 2014  Template for writing your PhD Confirmation document in Sociology and Anthropology - S A Hamed Hosseini

Science, Technology, Engineering and Medicine How to prepare a research proposal – Asya Al-Riyami, Oman Medical Journal Writing a scientific research proposal – author unknown

• Find a degree
• Ask a Question
• Getting Started
• International
• Find a Researcher/Area
• Apply for a Higher Degree Research Program
•   UNSW Sydney NSW 2052 Australia
•   Telephone +61 2 9385 5500
•   Maps

Graduate Research School, Level 2, Rupert Myers Building (South Wing), UNSW Sydney NSW 2052 Australia Telephone +61 2 93855500 Dean of Graduate Research, Professor Jonathan Morris. UNSW CRICOS   Provider Code:  00098G  TEQSA Provider ID : PRV12055  ABN:  57 195 873 179

How to write a literature review introduction (+ examples)

The introduction to a literature review serves as your reader’s guide through your academic work and thought process. Explore the significance of literature review introductions in review papers, academic papers, essays, theses, and dissertations. We delve into the purpose and necessity of these introductions, explore the essential components of literature review introductions, and provide step-by-step guidance on how to craft your own, along with examples.

Why you need an introduction for a literature review

When you need an introduction for a literature review, what to include in a literature review introduction, examples of literature review introductions, steps to write your own literature review introduction.

A literature review is a comprehensive examination of the international academic literature concerning a particular topic. It involves summarizing published works, theories, and concepts while also highlighting gaps and offering critical reflections.

In academic writing , the introduction for a literature review is an indispensable component. Effective academic writing requires proper paragraph structuring to guide your reader through your argumentation. This includes providing an introduction to your literature review.

It is imperative to remember that you should never start sharing your findings abruptly. Even if there isn’t a dedicated introduction section .

Instead, you should always offer some form of introduction to orient the reader and clarify what they can expect.

There are three main scenarios in which you need an introduction for a literature review:

• Academic literature review papers: When your literature review constitutes the entirety of an academic review paper, a more substantial introduction is necessary. This introduction should resemble the standard introduction found in regular academic papers.
• Literature review section in an academic paper or essay: While this section tends to be brief, it’s important to precede the detailed literature review with a few introductory sentences. This helps orient the reader before delving into the literature itself.
• Literature review chapter or section in your thesis/dissertation: Every thesis and dissertation includes a literature review component, which also requires a concise introduction to set the stage for the subsequent review.

You may also like: How to write a fantastic thesis introduction (+15 examples)

It is crucial to customize the content and depth of your literature review introduction according to the specific format of your academic work.

In practical terms, this implies, for instance, that the introduction in an academic literature review paper, especially one derived from a systematic literature review , is quite comprehensive. Particularly compared to the rather brief one or two introductory sentences that are often found at the beginning of a literature review section in a standard academic paper. The introduction to the literature review chapter in a thesis or dissertation again adheres to different standards.

Here’s a structured breakdown based on length and the necessary information:

Academic literature review paper

The introduction of an academic literature review paper, which does not rely on empirical data, often necessitates a more extensive introduction than the brief literature review introductions typically found in empirical papers. It should encompass:

• The research problem: Clearly articulate the problem or question that your literature review aims to address.
• The research gap: Highlight the existing gaps, limitations, or unresolved aspects within the current body of literature related to the research problem.
• The research relevance: Explain why the chosen research problem and its subsequent investigation through a literature review are significant and relevant in your academic field.
• The literature review method: If applicable, describe the methodology employed in your literature review, especially if it is a systematic review or follows a specific research framework.
• The main findings or insights of the literature review: Summarize the key discoveries, insights, or trends that have emerged from your comprehensive review of the literature.
• The main argument of the literature review: Conclude the introduction by outlining the primary argument or statement that your literature review will substantiate, linking it to the research problem and relevance you’ve established.
• Preview of the literature review’s structure: Offer a glimpse into the organization of the literature review paper, acting as a guide for the reader. This overview outlines the subsequent sections of the paper and provides an understanding of what to anticipate.

By addressing these elements, your introduction will provide a clear and structured overview of what readers can expect in your literature review paper.

Regular literature review section in an academic article or essay

Most academic articles or essays incorporate regular literature review sections, often placed after the introduction. These sections serve to establish a scholarly basis for the research or discussion within the paper.

In a standard 8000-word journal article, the literature review section typically spans between 750 and 1250 words. The first few sentences or the first paragraph within this section often serve as an introduction. It should encompass:

• An introduction to the topic: When delving into the academic literature on a specific topic, it’s important to provide a smooth transition that aids the reader in comprehending why certain aspects will be discussed within your literature review.
• The core argument: While literature review sections primarily synthesize the work of other scholars, they should consistently connect to your central argument. This central argument serves as the crux of your message or the key takeaway you want your readers to retain. By positioning it at the outset of the literature review section and systematically substantiating it with evidence, you not only enhance reader comprehension but also elevate overall readability. This primary argument can typically be distilled into 1-2 succinct sentences.

In some cases, you might include:

• Methodology: Details about the methodology used, but only if your literature review employed a specialized method. If your approach involved a broader overview without a systematic methodology, you can omit this section, thereby conserving word count.

By addressing these elements, your introduction will effectively integrate your literature review into the broader context of your academic paper or essay. This will, in turn, assist your reader in seamlessly following your overarching line of argumentation.

Introduction to a literature review chapter in thesis or dissertation

The literature review typically constitutes a distinct chapter within a thesis or dissertation. Often, it is Chapter 2 of a thesis or dissertation.

Some students choose to incorporate a brief introductory section at the beginning of each chapter, including the literature review chapter. Alternatively, others opt to seamlessly integrate the introduction into the initial sentences of the literature review itself. Both approaches are acceptable, provided that you incorporate the following elements:

• Purpose of the literature review and its relevance to the thesis/dissertation research: Explain the broader objectives of the literature review within the context of your research and how it contributes to your thesis or dissertation. Essentially, you’re telling the reader why this literature review is important and how it fits into the larger scope of your academic work.
• Primary argument: Succinctly communicate what you aim to prove, explain, or explore through the review of existing literature. This statement helps guide the reader’s understanding of the review’s purpose and what to expect from it.
• Preview of the literature review’s content: Provide a brief overview of the topics or themes that your literature review will cover. It’s like a roadmap for the reader, outlining the main areas of focus within the review. This preview can help the reader anticipate the structure and organization of your literature review.
• Methodology: If your literature review involved a specific research method, such as a systematic review or meta-analysis, you should briefly describe that methodology. However, this is not always necessary, especially if your literature review is more of a narrative synthesis without a distinct research method.

By addressing these elements, your introduction will empower your literature review to play a pivotal role in your thesis or dissertation research. It will accomplish this by integrating your research into the broader academic literature and providing a solid theoretical foundation for your work.

Comprehending the art of crafting your own literature review introduction becomes significantly more accessible when you have concrete examples to examine. Here, you will find several examples that meet, or in most cases, adhere to the criteria described earlier.

Example 1: An effective introduction for an academic literature review paper

To begin, let’s delve into the introduction of an academic literature review paper. We will examine the paper “How does culture influence innovation? A systematic literature review”, which was published in 2018 in the journal Management Decision.

The entire introduction spans 611 words and is divided into five paragraphs. In this introduction, the authors accomplish the following:

• In the first paragraph, the authors introduce the broader topic of the literature review, which focuses on innovation and its significance in the context of economic competition. They underscore the importance of this topic, highlighting its relevance for both researchers and policymakers.
• In the second paragraph, the authors narrow down their focus to emphasize the specific role of culture in relation to innovation.
• In the third paragraph, the authors identify research gaps, noting that existing studies are often fragmented and disconnected. They then emphasize the value of conducting a systematic literature review to enhance our understanding of the topic.
• In the fourth paragraph, the authors introduce their specific objectives and explain how their insights can benefit other researchers and business practitioners.
• In the fifth and final paragraph, the authors provide an overview of the paper’s organization and structure.

In summary, this introduction stands as a solid example. While the authors deviate from previewing their key findings (which is a common practice at least in the social sciences), they do effectively cover all the other previously mentioned points.

Example 2: An effective introduction to a literature review section in an academic paper

The second example represents a typical academic paper, encompassing not only a literature review section but also empirical data, a case study, and other elements. We will closely examine the introduction to the literature review section in the paper “The environmentalism of the subalterns: a case study of environmental activism in Eastern Kurdistan/Rojhelat”, which was published in 2021 in the journal Local Environment.

The paper begins with a general introduction and then proceeds to the literature review, designated by the authors as their conceptual framework. Of particular interest is the first paragraph of this conceptual framework, comprising 142 words across five sentences:

“ A peripheral and marginalised nationality within a multinational though-Persian dominated Iranian society, the Kurdish people of Iranian Kurdistan (a region referred by the Kurds as Rojhelat/Eastern Kurdi-stan) have since the early twentieth century been subject to multifaceted and systematic discriminatory and exclusionary state policy in Iran. This condition has left a population of 12–15 million Kurds in Iran suffering from structural inequalities, disenfranchisement and deprivation. Mismanagement of Kurdistan’s natural resources and the degradation of its natural environmental are among examples of this disenfranchisement. As asserted by Julian Agyeman (2005), structural inequalities that sustain the domination of political and economic elites often simultaneously result in environmental degradation, injustice and discrimination against subaltern communities. This study argues that the environmental struggle in Eastern Kurdistan can be asserted as a (sub)element of the Kurdish liberation movement in Iran. Conceptually this research is inspired by and has been conducted through the lens of ‘subalternity’ ” ( Hassaniyan, 2021, p. 931 ).

In this first paragraph, the author is doing the following:

• The author contextualises the research
• The author links the research focus to the international literature on structural inequalities
• The author clearly presents the argument of the research
• The author clarifies how the research is inspired by and uses the concept of ‘subalternity’.

Thus, the author successfully introduces the literature review, from which point onward it dives into the main concept (‘subalternity’) of the research, and reviews the literature on socio-economic justice and environmental degradation.

While introductions to a literature review section aren’t always required to offer the same level of study context detail as demonstrated here, this introduction serves as a commendable model for orienting the reader within the literature review. It effectively underscores the literature review’s significance within the context of the study being conducted.

Examples 3-5: Effective introductions to literature review chapters

The introduction to a literature review chapter can vary in length, depending largely on the overall length of the literature review chapter itself. For example, a master’s thesis typically features a more concise literature review, thus necessitating a shorter introduction. In contrast, a Ph.D. thesis, with its more extensive literature review, often includes a more detailed introduction.

Numerous universities offer online repositories where you can access theses and dissertations from previous years, serving as valuable sources of reference. Many of these repositories, however, may require you to log in through your university account. Nevertheless, a few open-access repositories are accessible to anyone, such as the one by the University of Manchester . It’s important to note though that copyright restrictions apply to these resources, just as they would with published papers.

Master’s thesis literature review introduction

The first example is “Benchmarking Asymmetrical Heating Models of Spider Pulsar Companions” by P. Sun, a master’s thesis completed at the University of Manchester on January 9, 2024. The author, P. Sun, introduces the literature review chapter very briefly but effectively:

PhD thesis literature review chapter introduction

The second example is Deep Learning on Semi-Structured Data and its Applications to Video-Game AI, Woof, W. (Author). 31 Dec 2020, a PhD thesis completed at the University of Manchester . In Chapter 2, the author offers a comprehensive introduction to the topic in four paragraphs, with the final paragraph serving as an overview of the chapter’s structure:

PhD thesis literature review introduction

The last example is the doctoral thesis Metacognitive strategies and beliefs: Child correlates and early experiences Chan, K. Y. M. (Author). 31 Dec 2020 . The author clearly conducted a systematic literature review, commencing the review section with a discussion of the methodology and approach employed in locating and analyzing the selected records.

Having absorbed all of this information, let’s recap the essential steps and offer a succinct guide on how to proceed with creating your literature review introduction:

• Contextualize your review : Begin by clearly identifying the academic context in which your literature review resides and determining the necessary information to include.
• Outline your structure : Develop a structured outline for your literature review, highlighting the essential information you plan to incorporate in your introduction.
• Literature review process : Conduct a rigorous literature review, reviewing and analyzing relevant sources.
• Summarize and abstract : After completing the review, synthesize the findings and abstract key insights, trends, and knowledge gaps from the literature.
• Craft the introduction : Write your literature review introduction with meticulous attention to the seamless integration of your review into the larger context of your work. Ensure that your introduction effectively elucidates your rationale for the chosen review topics and the underlying reasons guiding your selection.

Get new content delivered directly to your inbox!

Subscribe and receive Master Academia's quarterly newsletter.

The best answers to "What are your plans for the future?"

10 tips for engaging your audience in academic writing, related articles.

How to peer review an academic paper

PhD thesis types: Monograph and collection of articles

How to disagree with reviewers (with examples!)

How to introduce yourself in a conference presentation (in six simple steps)

15 Literature Review Examples

Literature reviews are a necessary step in a research process and often required when writing your research proposal . They involve gathering, analyzing, and evaluating existing knowledge about a topic in order to find gaps in the literature where future studies will be needed.

Ideally, once you have completed your literature review, you will be able to identify how your research project can build upon and extend existing knowledge in your area of study.

Generally, for my undergraduate research students, I recommend a narrative review, where themes can be generated in order for the students to develop sufficient understanding of the topic so they can build upon the themes using unique methods or novel research questions.

If you’re in the process of writing a literature review, I have developed a literature review template for you to use – it’s a huge time-saver and walks you through how to write a literature review step-by-step:

Get your time-saving templates here to write your own literature review.

Literature Review Examples

For the following types of literature review, I present an explanation and overview of the type, followed by links to some real-life literature reviews on the topics.

1. Narrative Review Examples

Also known as a traditional literature review, the narrative review provides a broad overview of the studies done on a particular topic.

It often includes both qualitative and quantitative studies and may cover a wide range of years.

The narrative review’s purpose is to identify commonalities, gaps, and contradictions in the literature .

I recommend to my students that they should gather their studies together, take notes on each study, then try to group them by themes that form the basis for the review (see my step-by-step instructions at the end of the article).

Example Study

Title: Communication in healthcare: a narrative review of the literature and practical recommendations

Citation: Vermeir, P., Vandijck, D., Degroote, S., Peleman, R., Verhaeghe, R., Mortier, E., … & Vogelaers, D. (2015). Communication in healthcare: a narrative review of the literature and practical recommendations. International journal of clinical practice , 69 (11), 1257-1267.

Source: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/ijcp.12686  

Overview: This narrative review analyzed themes emerging from 69 articles about communication in healthcare contexts. Five key themes were found in the literature: poor communication can lead to various negative outcomes, discontinuity of care, compromise of patient safety, patient dissatisfaction, and inefficient use of resources. After presenting the key themes, the authors recommend that practitioners need to approach healthcare communication in a more structured way, such as by ensuring there is a clear understanding of who is in charge of ensuring effective communication in clinical settings.

Other Examples

• Burnout in United States Healthcare Professionals: A Narrative Review (Reith, 2018) – read here
• Examining the Presence, Consequences, and Reduction of Implicit Bias in Health Care: A Narrative Review (Zestcott, Blair & Stone, 2016) – read here
• A Narrative Review of School-Based Physical Activity for Enhancing Cognition and Learning (Mavilidi et al., 2018) – read here
• A narrative review on burnout experienced by medical students and residents (Dyrbye & Shanafelt, 2015) – read here

2. Systematic Review Examples

This type of literature review is more structured and rigorous than a narrative review. It involves a detailed and comprehensive plan and search strategy derived from a set of specified research questions.

The key way you’d know a systematic review compared to a narrative review is in the methodology: the systematic review will likely have a very clear criteria for how the studies were collected, and clear explanations of exclusion/inclusion criteria. 

The goal is to gather the maximum amount of valid literature on the topic, filter out invalid or low-quality reviews, and minimize bias. Ideally, this will provide more reliable findings, leading to higher-quality conclusions and recommendations for further research.

You may note from the examples below that the ‘method’ sections in systematic reviews tend to be much more explicit, often noting rigid inclusion/exclusion criteria and exact keywords used in searches.

Title: The importance of food naturalness for consumers: Results of a systematic review  

Citation: Roman, S., Sánchez-Siles, L. M., & Siegrist, M. (2017). The importance of food naturalness for consumers: Results of a systematic review. Trends in food science & technology , 67 , 44-57.

Source: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S092422441730122X  

Overview: This systematic review included 72 studies of food naturalness to explore trends in the literature about its importance for consumers. Keywords used in the data search included: food, naturalness, natural content, and natural ingredients. Studies were included if they examined consumers’ preference for food naturalness and contained empirical data. The authors found that the literature lacks clarity about how naturalness is defined and measured, but also found that food consumption is significantly influenced by perceived naturalness of goods.

• A systematic review of research on online teaching and learning from 2009 to 2018 (Martin, Sun & Westine, 2020) – read here
• Where Is Current Research on Blockchain Technology? (Yli-Huumo et al., 2016) – read here
• Universities—industry collaboration: A systematic review (Ankrah & Al-Tabbaa, 2015) – read here
• Internet of Things Applications: A Systematic Review (Asghari, Rahmani & Javadi, 2019) – read here

3. Meta-analysis

This is a type of systematic review that uses statistical methods to combine and summarize the results of several studies.

Due to its robust methodology, a meta-analysis is often considered the ‘gold standard’ of secondary research , as it provides a more precise estimate of a treatment effect than any individual study contributing to the pooled analysis.

Furthermore, by aggregating data from a range of studies, a meta-analysis can identify patterns, disagreements, or other interesting relationships that may have been hidden in individual studies.

This helps to enhance the generalizability of findings, making the conclusions drawn from a meta-analysis particularly powerful and informative for policy and practice.

Title: Cholesterol and Alzheimer’s Disease Risk: A Meta-Meta-Analysis

Citation: Sáiz-Vazquez, O., Puente-Martínez, A., Ubillos-Landa, S., Pacheco-Bonrostro, J., & Santabárbara, J. (2020). Cholesterol and Alzheimer’s disease risk: a meta-meta-analysis. Brain sciences, 10(6), 386.

Source: https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci10060386  

O verview: This study examines the relationship between cholesterol and Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Researchers conducted a systematic search of meta-analyses and reviewed several databases, collecting 100 primary studies and five meta-analyses to analyze the connection between cholesterol and Alzheimer’s disease. They find that the literature compellingly demonstrates that low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels significantly influence the development of Alzheimer’s disease.

• The power of feedback revisited: A meta-analysis of educational feedback research (Wisniewski, Zierer & Hattie, 2020) – read here
• How Much Does Education Improve Intelligence? A Meta-Analysis (Ritchie & Tucker-Drob, 2018) – read here
• A meta-analysis of factors related to recycling (Geiger et al., 2019) – read here
• Stress management interventions for police officers and recruits (Patterson, Chung & Swan, 2014) – read here

Other Types of Reviews

• Scoping Review: This type of review is used to map the key concepts underpinning a research area and the main sources and types of evidence available. It can be undertaken as stand-alone projects in their own right, or as a precursor to a systematic review.
• Rapid Review: This type of review accelerates the systematic review process in order to produce information in a timely manner. This is achieved by simplifying or omitting stages of the systematic review process.
• Integrative Review: This review method is more inclusive than others, allowing for the simultaneous inclusion of experimental and non-experimental research. The goal is to more comprehensively understand a particular phenomenon.
• Critical Review: This is similar to a narrative review but requires a robust understanding of both the subject and the existing literature. In a critical review, the reviewer not only summarizes the existing literature, but also evaluates its strengths and weaknesses. This is common in the social sciences and humanities .
• State-of-the-Art Review: This considers the current level of advancement in a field or topic and makes recommendations for future research directions. This type of review is common in technological and scientific fields but can be applied to any discipline.

How to Write a Narrative Review (Tips for Undergrad Students)

Most undergraduate students conducting a capstone research project will be writing narrative reviews. Below is a five-step process for conducting a simple review of the literature for your project.

• Search for Relevant Literature: Use scholarly databases related to your field of study, provided by your university library, along with appropriate search terms to identify key scholarly articles that have been published on your topic.
• Evaluate and Select Sources: Filter the source list by selecting studies that are directly relevant and of sufficient quality, considering factors like credibility , objectivity, accuracy, and validity.
• Analyze and Synthesize: Review each source and summarize the main arguments  in one paragraph (or more, for postgrad). Keep these summaries in a table.
• Identify Themes: With all studies summarized, group studies that share common themes, such as studies that have similar findings or methodologies.
• Write the Review: Write your review based upon the themes or subtopics you have identified. Give a thorough overview of each theme, integrating source data, and conclude with a summary of the current state of knowledge then suggestions for future research based upon your evaluation of what is lacking in the literature.

Literature reviews don’t have to be as scary as they seem. Yes, they are difficult and require a strong degree of comprehension of academic studies. But it can be feasibly done through following a structured approach to data collection and analysis. With my undergraduate research students (who tend to conduct small-scale qualitative studies ), I encourage them to conduct a narrative literature review whereby they can identify key themes in the literature. Within each theme, students can critique key studies and their strengths and limitations , in order to get a lay of the land and come to a point where they can identify ways to contribute new insights to the existing academic conversation on their topic.

Ankrah, S., & Omar, A. T. (2015). Universities–industry collaboration: A systematic review. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 31(3), 387-408.

Asghari, P., Rahmani, A. M., & Javadi, H. H. S. (2019). Internet of Things applications: A systematic review. Computer Networks , 148 , 241-261.

Dyrbye, L., & Shanafelt, T. (2016). A narrative review on burnout experienced by medical students and residents. Medical education , 50 (1), 132-149.

Geiger, J. L., Steg, L., Van Der Werff, E., & Ünal, A. B. (2019). A meta-analysis of factors related to recycling. Journal of environmental psychology , 64 , 78-97.

Martin, F., Sun, T., & Westine, C. D. (2020). A systematic review of research on online teaching and learning from 2009 to 2018. Computers & education , 159 , 104009.

Mavilidi, M. F., Ruiter, M., Schmidt, M., Okely, A. D., Loyens, S., Chandler, P., & Paas, F. (2018). A narrative review of school-based physical activity for enhancing cognition and learning: The importance of relevancy and integration. Frontiers in psychology , 2079.

Patterson, G. T., Chung, I. W., & Swan, P. W. (2014). Stress management interventions for police officers and recruits: A meta-analysis. Journal of experimental criminology , 10 , 487-513.

Reith, T. P. (2018). Burnout in United States healthcare professionals: a narrative review. Cureus , 10 (12).

Ritchie, S. J., & Tucker-Drob, E. M. (2018). How much does education improve intelligence? A meta-analysis. Psychological science , 29 (8), 1358-1369.

Roman, S., Sánchez-Siles, L. M., & Siegrist, M. (2017). The importance of food naturalness for consumers: Results of a systematic review. Trends in food science & technology , 67 , 44-57.

Sáiz-Vazquez, O., Puente-Martínez, A., Ubillos-Landa, S., Pacheco-Bonrostro, J., & Santabárbara, J. (2020). Cholesterol and Alzheimer’s disease risk: a meta-meta-analysis. Brain sciences, 10(6), 386.

Vermeir, P., Vandijck, D., Degroote, S., Peleman, R., Verhaeghe, R., Mortier, E., … & Vogelaers, D. (2015). Communication in healthcare: a narrative review of the literature and practical recommendations. International journal of clinical practice , 69 (11), 1257-1267.

Wisniewski, B., Zierer, K., & Hattie, J. (2020). The power of feedback revisited: A meta-analysis of educational feedback research. Frontiers in Psychology , 10 , 3087.

Yli-Huumo, J., Ko, D., Choi, S., Park, S., & Smolander, K. (2016). Where is current research on blockchain technology?—a systematic review. PloS one , 11 (10), e0163477.

Zestcott, C. A., Blair, I. V., & Stone, J. (2016). Examining the presence, consequences, and reduction of implicit bias in health care: a narrative review. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations , 19 (4), 528-542

Chris Drew (PhD)

Dr. Chris Drew is the founder of the Helpful Professor. He holds a PhD in education and has published over 20 articles in scholarly journals. He is the former editor of the Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education. [Image Descriptor: Photo of Chris]

• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 5 Top Tips for Succeeding at University
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 50 Durable Goods Examples
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 100 Consumer Goods Examples
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 30 Globalization Pros and Cons

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

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

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Assignments

• Annotated Bibliography
• Analyzing a Scholarly Journal Article
• Group Presentations
• Dealing with Nervousness
• Using Visual Aids
• Grading Someone Else's Paper
• Types of Structured Group Activities
• Group Project Survival Skills
• Leading a Class Discussion
• Multiple Book Review Essay
• Reviewing Collected Works
• Writing a Case Analysis Paper
• Writing a Case Study
• About Informed Consent
• Writing Field Notes
• Writing a Policy Memo
• Writing a Reflective Paper
• Writing a Research Proposal
• Generative AI and Writing
• Acknowledgments

The goal of a research proposal is twofold: to present and justify the need to study a research problem and to present the practical ways in which the proposed study should be conducted. The design elements and procedures for conducting research are governed by standards of the predominant discipline in which the problem resides, therefore, the guidelines for research proposals are more exacting and less formal than a general project proposal. Research proposals contain extensive literature reviews. They must provide persuasive evidence that a need exists for the proposed study. In addition to providing a rationale, a proposal describes detailed methodology for conducting the research consistent with requirements of the professional or academic field and a statement on anticipated outcomes and benefits derived from the study's completion.

Krathwohl, David R. How to Prepare a Dissertation Proposal: Suggestions for Students in Education and the Social and Behavioral Sciences . Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 2005.

How to Approach Writing a Research Proposal

Your professor may assign the task of writing a research proposal for the following reasons:

• Develop your skills in thinking about and designing a comprehensive research study;
• Learn how to conduct a comprehensive review of the literature to determine that the research problem has not been adequately addressed or has been answered ineffectively and, in so doing, become better at locating pertinent scholarship related to your topic;
• Improve your general research and writing skills;
• Practice identifying the logical steps that must be taken to accomplish one's research goals;
• Critically review, examine, and consider the use of different methods for gathering and analyzing data related to the research problem; and,
• Nurture a sense of inquisitiveness within yourself and to help see yourself as an active participant in the process of conducting scholarly research.

A proposal should contain all the key elements involved in designing a completed research study, with sufficient information that allows readers to assess the validity and usefulness of your proposed study. The only elements missing from a research proposal are the findings of the study and your analysis of those findings. Finally, an effective proposal is judged on the quality of your writing and, therefore, it is important that your proposal is coherent, clear, and compelling.

Regardless of the research problem you are investigating and the methodology you choose, all research proposals must address the following questions:

• What do you plan to accomplish? Be clear and succinct in defining the research problem and what it is you are proposing to investigate.
• Why do you want to do the research? In addition to detailing your research design, you also must conduct a thorough review of the literature and provide convincing evidence that it is a topic worthy of in-depth study. A successful research proposal must answer the "So What?" question.
• How are you going to conduct the research? Be sure that what you propose is doable. If you're having difficulty formulating a research problem to propose investigating, go here for strategies in developing a problem to study.

Common Mistakes to Avoid

• Failure to be concise . A research proposal must be focused and not be "all over the map" or diverge into unrelated tangents without a clear sense of purpose.
• Failure to cite landmark works in your literature review . Proposals should be grounded in foundational research that lays a foundation for understanding the development and scope of the the topic and its relevance.
• Failure to delimit the contextual scope of your research [e.g., time, place, people, etc.]. As with any research paper, your proposed study must inform the reader how and in what ways the study will frame the problem.
• Failure to develop a coherent and persuasive argument for the proposed research . This is critical. In many workplace settings, the research proposal is a formal document intended to argue for why a study should be funded.
• Sloppy or imprecise writing, or poor grammar . Although a research proposal does not represent a completed research study, there is still an expectation that it is well-written and follows the style and rules of good academic writing.
• Too much detail on minor issues, but not enough detail on major issues . Your proposal should focus on only a few key research questions in order to support the argument that the research needs to be conducted. Minor issues, even if valid, can be mentioned but they should not dominate the overall narrative.

Procter, Margaret. The Academic Proposal.  The Lab Report. University College Writing Centre. University of Toronto; Sanford, Keith. Information for Students: Writing a Research Proposal. Baylor University; Wong, Paul T. P. How to Write a Research Proposal. International Network on Personal Meaning. Trinity Western University; Writing Academic Proposals: Conferences, Articles, and Books. The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University; Writing a Research Proposal. University Library. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

Structure and Writing Style

Beginning the Proposal Process

As with writing most college-level academic papers, research proposals are generally organized the same way throughout most social science disciplines. The text of proposals generally vary in length between ten and thirty-five pages, followed by the list of references. However, before you begin, read the assignment carefully and, if anything seems unclear, ask your professor whether there are any specific requirements for organizing and writing the proposal.

A good place to begin is to ask yourself a series of questions:

• What do I want to study?
• Why is the topic important?
• How is it significant within the subject areas covered in my class?
• What problems will it help solve?
• How does it build upon [and hopefully go beyond] research already conducted on the topic?
• What exactly should I plan to do, and can I get it done in the time available?

In general, a compelling research proposal should document your knowledge of the topic and demonstrate your enthusiasm for conducting the study. Approach it with the intention of leaving your readers feeling like, "Wow, that's an exciting idea and I can’t wait to see how it turns out!"

Most proposals should include the following sections:

I.  Introduction

In the real world of higher education, a research proposal is most often written by scholars seeking grant funding for a research project or it's the first step in getting approval to write a doctoral dissertation. Even if this is just a course assignment, treat your introduction as the initial pitch of an idea based on a thorough examination of the significance of a research problem. After reading the introduction, your readers should not only have an understanding of what you want to do, but they should also be able to gain a sense of your passion for the topic and to be excited about the study's possible outcomes. Note that most proposals do not include an abstract [summary] before the introduction.

Think about your introduction as a narrative written in two to four paragraphs that succinctly answers the following four questions :

• What is the central research problem?
• What is the topic of study related to that research problem?
• What methods should be used to analyze the research problem?
• Answer the "So What?" question by explaining why this is important research, what is its significance, and why should someone reading the proposal care about the outcomes of the proposed study?

II.  Background and Significance

This is where you explain the scope and context of your proposal and describe in detail why it's important. It can be melded into your introduction or you can create a separate section to help with the organization and narrative flow of your proposal. Approach writing this section with the thought that you can’t assume your readers will know as much about the research problem as you do. Note that this section is not an essay going over everything you have learned about the topic; instead, you must choose what is most relevant in explaining the aims of your research.

To that end, while there are no prescribed rules for establishing the significance of your proposed study, you should attempt to address some or all of the following:

• State the research problem and give a more detailed explanation about the purpose of the study than what you stated in the introduction. This is particularly important if the problem is complex or multifaceted .
• Present the rationale of your proposed study and clearly indicate why it is worth doing; be sure to answer the "So What? question [i.e., why should anyone care?].
• Describe the major issues or problems examined by your research. This can be in the form of questions to be addressed. Be sure to note how your proposed study builds on previous assumptions about the research problem.
• Explain the methods you plan to use for conducting your research. Clearly identify the key sources you intend to use and explain how they will contribute to your analysis of the topic.
• Describe the boundaries of your proposed research in order to provide a clear focus. Where appropriate, state not only what you plan to study, but what aspects of the research problem will be excluded from the study.
• If necessary, provide definitions of key concepts, theories, or terms.

III.  Literature Review

Connected to the background and significance of your study is a section of your proposal devoted to a more deliberate review and synthesis of prior studies related to the research problem under investigation . The purpose here is to place your project within the larger whole of what is currently being explored, while at the same time, demonstrating to your readers that your work is original and innovative. Think about what questions other researchers have asked, what methodological approaches they have used, and what is your understanding of their findings and, when stated, their recommendations. Also pay attention to any suggestions for further research.

Since a literature review is information dense, it is crucial that this section is intelligently structured to enable a reader to grasp the key arguments underpinning your proposed study in relation to the arguments put forth by other researchers. A good strategy is to break the literature into "conceptual categories" [themes] rather than systematically or chronologically describing groups of materials one at a time. Note that conceptual categories generally reveal themselves after you have read most of the pertinent literature on your topic so adding new categories is an on-going process of discovery as you review more studies. How do you know you've covered the key conceptual categories underlying the research literature? Generally, you can have confidence that all of the significant conceptual categories have been identified if you start to see repetition in the conclusions or recommendations that are being made.

NOTE: Do not shy away from challenging the conclusions made in prior research as a basis for supporting the need for your proposal. Assess what you believe is missing and state how previous research has failed to adequately examine the issue that your study addresses. Highlighting the problematic conclusions strengthens your proposal. For more information on writing literature reviews, GO HERE .

To help frame your proposal's review of prior research, consider the "five C’s" of writing a literature review:

• Cite , so as to keep the primary focus on the literature pertinent to your research problem.
• Compare the various arguments, theories, methodologies, and findings expressed in the literature: what do the authors agree on? Who applies similar approaches to analyzing the research problem?
• Contrast the various arguments, themes, methodologies, approaches, and controversies expressed in the literature: describe what are the major areas of disagreement, controversy, or debate among scholars?
• Critique the literature: Which arguments are more persuasive, and why? Which approaches, findings, and methodologies seem most reliable, valid, or appropriate, and why? Pay attention to the verbs you use to describe what an author says/does [e.g., asserts, demonstrates, argues, etc.].
• Connect the literature to your own area of research and investigation: how does your own work draw upon, depart from, synthesize, or add a new perspective to what has been said in the literature?

IV.  Research Design and Methods

This section must be well-written and logically organized because you are not actually doing the research, yet, your reader must have confidence that you have a plan worth pursuing . The reader will never have a study outcome from which to evaluate whether your methodological choices were the correct ones. Thus, the objective here is to convince the reader that your overall research design and proposed methods of analysis will correctly address the problem and that the methods will provide the means to effectively interpret the potential results. Your design and methods should be unmistakably tied to the specific aims of your study.

Describe the overall research design by building upon and drawing examples from your review of the literature. Consider not only methods that other researchers have used, but methods of data gathering that have not been used but perhaps could be. Be specific about the methodological approaches you plan to undertake to obtain information, the techniques you would use to analyze the data, and the tests of external validity to which you commit yourself [i.e., the trustworthiness by which you can generalize from your study to other people, places, events, and/or periods of time].

When describing the methods you will use, be sure to cover the following:

• Specify the research process you will undertake and the way you will interpret the results obtained in relation to the research problem. Don't just describe what you intend to achieve from applying the methods you choose, but state how you will spend your time while applying these methods [e.g., coding text from interviews to find statements about the need to change school curriculum; running a regression to determine if there is a relationship between campaign advertising on social media sites and election outcomes in Europe ].
• Keep in mind that the methodology is not just a list of tasks; it is a deliberate argument as to why techniques for gathering information add up to the best way to investigate the research problem. This is an important point because the mere listing of tasks to be performed does not demonstrate that, collectively, they effectively address the research problem. Be sure you clearly explain this.
• Anticipate and acknowledge any potential barriers and pitfalls in carrying out your research design and explain how you plan to address them. No method applied to research in the social and behavioral sciences is perfect, so you need to describe where you believe challenges may exist in obtaining data or accessing information. It's always better to acknowledge this than to have it brought up by your professor!

V.  Preliminary Suppositions and Implications

Just because you don't have to actually conduct the study and analyze the results, doesn't mean you can skip talking about the analytical process and potential implications . The purpose of this section is to argue how and in what ways you believe your research will refine, revise, or extend existing knowledge in the subject area under investigation. Depending on the aims and objectives of your study, describe how the anticipated results will impact future scholarly research, theory, practice, forms of interventions, or policy making. Note that such discussions may have either substantive [a potential new policy], theoretical [a potential new understanding], or methodological [a potential new way of analyzing] significance.   When thinking about the potential implications of your study, ask the following questions:

• What might the results mean in regards to challenging the theoretical framework and underlying assumptions that support the study?
• What suggestions for subsequent research could arise from the potential outcomes of the study?
• What will the results mean to practitioners in the natural settings of their workplace, organization, or community?
• Will the results influence programs, methods, and/or forms of intervention?
• How might the results contribute to the solution of social, economic, or other types of problems?
• Will the results influence policy decisions?
• In what way do individuals or groups benefit should your study be pursued?
• What will be improved or changed as a result of the proposed research?
• How will the results of the study be implemented and what innovations or transformative insights could emerge from the process of implementation?

NOTE:   This section should not delve into idle speculation, opinion, or be formulated on the basis of unclear evidence . The purpose is to reflect upon gaps or understudied areas of the current literature and describe how your proposed research contributes to a new understanding of the research problem should the study be implemented as designed.

ANOTHER NOTE : This section is also where you describe any potential limitations to your proposed study. While it is impossible to highlight all potential limitations because the study has yet to be conducted, you still must tell the reader where and in what form impediments may arise and how you plan to address them.

VI.  Conclusion

The conclusion reiterates the importance or significance of your proposal and provides a brief summary of the entire study . This section should be only one or two paragraphs long, emphasizing why the research problem is worth investigating, why your research study is unique, and how it should advance existing knowledge.

Someone reading this section should come away with an understanding of:

• Why the study should be done;
• The specific purpose of the study and the research questions it attempts to answer;
• The decision for why the research design and methods used where chosen over other options;
• The potential implications emerging from your proposed study of the research problem; and
• A sense of how your study fits within the broader scholarship about the research problem.

VII.  Citations

As with any scholarly research paper, you must cite the sources you used . In a standard research proposal, this section can take two forms, so consult with your professor about which one is preferred.

• References -- a list of only the sources you actually used in creating your proposal.
• Bibliography -- a list of everything you used in creating your proposal, along with additional citations to any key sources relevant to understanding the research problem.

In either case, this section should testify to the fact that you did enough preparatory work to ensure the project will complement and not just duplicate the efforts of other researchers. It demonstrates to the reader that you have a thorough understanding of prior research on the topic.

Most proposal formats have you start a new page and use the heading "References" or "Bibliography" centered at the top of the page. Cited works should always use a standard format that follows the writing style advised by the discipline of your course [e.g., education=APA; history=Chicago] or that is preferred by your professor. This section normally does not count towards the total page length of your research proposal.

Develop a Research Proposal: Writing the Proposal. Office of Library Information Services. Baltimore County Public Schools; Heath, M. Teresa Pereira and Caroline Tynan. “Crafting a Research Proposal.” The Marketing Review 10 (Summer 2010): 147-168; Jones, Mark. “Writing a Research Proposal.” In MasterClass in Geography Education: Transforming Teaching and Learning . Graham Butt, editor. (New York: Bloomsbury Academic, 2015), pp. 113-127; Juni, Muhamad Hanafiah. “Writing a Research Proposal.” International Journal of Public Health and Clinical Sciences 1 (September/October 2014): 229-240; Krathwohl, David R. How to Prepare a Dissertation Proposal: Suggestions for Students in Education and the Social and Behavioral Sciences . Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 2005; Procter, Margaret. The Academic Proposal. The Lab Report. University College Writing Centre. University of Toronto; Punch, Keith and Wayne McGowan. "Developing and Writing a Research Proposal." In From Postgraduate to Social Scientist: A Guide to Key Skills . Nigel Gilbert, ed. (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2006), 59-81; Wong, Paul T. P. How to Write a Research Proposal. International Network on Personal Meaning. Trinity Western University; Writing Academic Proposals: Conferences , Articles, and Books. The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University; Writing a Research Proposal. University Library. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

• << Previous: Writing a Reflective Paper
• Next: Generative AI and Writing >>
• Last Updated: Mar 6, 2024 1:00 PM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide/assignments

• UWF Libraries

Literature Review: Conducting & Writing

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

Sample Lit Reviews from Communication Arts

Have an exemplary literature review.

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

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

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

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

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

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper: Writing a Research Proposal

• Purpose of Guide
• Writing a Research Proposal
• Design Flaws to Avoid
• Independent and Dependent Variables
• Narrowing a Topic Idea
• Broadening a Topic Idea
• The Research Problem/Question
• Academic Writing Style
• Choosing a Title
• Making an Outline
• Paragraph Development
• The C.A.R.S. Model
• Background Information
• Theoretical Framework
• Citation Tracking
• Evaluating Sources
• Reading Research Effectively
• Primary Sources
• Secondary Sources
• What Is Scholarly vs. Popular?
• Is it Peer-Reviewed?
• Qualitative Methods
• Quantitative Methods
• Common Grammar Mistakes
• Writing Concisely
• Avoiding Plagiarism [linked guide]
• Annotated Bibliography
• Grading Someone Else's Paper

The goal of a research proposal is to present and justify the need to study a research problem and to present the practical ways in which the proposed study should be conducted. The design elements and procedures for conducting the research are governed by standards within the predominant discipline in which the problem resides, so guidelines for research proposals are more exacting and less formal than a general project proposal. Research proposals contain extensive literature reviews. They must provide persuasive evidence that a need exists for the proposed study. In addition to providing a rationale, a proposal describes detailed methodology for conducting the research consistent with requirements of the professional or academic field and a statement on anticipated outcomes and/or benefits derived from the study's completion.

Krathwohl, David R. How to Prepare a Dissertation Proposal: Suggestions for Students in Education and the Social and Behavioral Sciences . Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 2005.

How to Approach Writing a Research Proposal

Your professor may assign the task of writing a research proposal for the following reasons:

• Develop your skills in thinking about and designing a comprehensive research study;
• Learn how to conduct a comprehensive review of the literature to ensure a research problem has not already been answered [or you may determine the problem has been answered ineffectively] and, in so doing, become better at locating scholarship related to your topic;
• Improve your general research and writing skills;
• Practice identifying the logical steps that must be taken to accomplish one's research goals;
• Critically review, examine, and consider the use of different methods for gathering and analyzing data related to the research problem; and,
• Nurture a sense of inquisitiveness within yourself and to help see yourself as an active participant in the process of doing scholarly research.

A proposal should contain all the key elements involved in designing a completed research study, with sufficient information that allows readers to assess the validity and usefulness of your proposed study. The only elements missing from a research proposal are the findings of the study and your analysis of those results. Finally, an effective proposal is judged on the quality of your writing and, therefore, it is important that your writing is coherent, clear, and compelling.

Regardless of the research problem you are investigating and the methodology you choose, all research proposals must address the following questions:

• What do you plan to accomplish? Be clear and succinct in defining the research problem and what it is you are proposing to research.
• Why do you want to do it? In addition to detailing your research design, you also must conduct a thorough review of the literature and provide convincing evidence that it is a topic worthy of study. Be sure to answer the "So What?" question.
• How are you going to do it? Be sure that what you propose is doable. If you're having trouble formulating a research problem to propose investigating, go here .

Common Mistakes to Avoid

• Failure to be concise; being "all over the map" without a clear sense of purpose.
• Failure to cite landmark works in your literature review.
• Failure to delimit the contextual boundaries of your research [e.g., time, place, people, etc.].
• Failure to develop a coherent and persuasive argument for the proposed research.
• Failure to stay focused on the research problem; going off on unrelated tangents.
• Sloppy or imprecise writing, or poor grammar.
• Too much detail on minor issues, but not enough detail on major issues.

Procter, Margaret. The Academic Proposal .  The Lab Report. University College Writing Centre. University of Toronto; Sanford, Keith. Information for Students: Writing a Research Proposal . Baylor University; Wong, Paul T. P. How to Write a Research Proposal . International Network on Personal Meaning. Trinity Western University; Writing Academic Proposals: Conferences, Articles, and Books . The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University; Writing a Research Proposal . University Library. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

Structure and Writing Style

Beginning the Proposal Process

As with writing a regular academic paper, research proposals are generally organized the same way throughout most social science disciplines. Proposals vary between ten and twenty-five pages in length. However, before you begin, read the assignment carefully and, if anything seems unclear, ask your professor whether there are any specific requirements for organizing and writing the proposal.

A good place to begin is to ask yourself a series of questions:

• What do I want to study?
• Why is the topic important?
• How is it significant within the subject areas covered in my class?
• What problems will it help solve?
• How does it build upon [and hopefully go beyond] research already conducted on the topic?
• What exactly should I plan to do, and can I get it done in the time available?

In general, a compelling research proposal should document your knowledge of the topic and demonstrate your enthusiasm for conducting the study. Approach it with the intention of leaving your readers feeling like--"Wow, that's an exciting idea and I can’t wait to see how it turns out!"

In general your proposal should include the following sections:

I.  Introduction

In the real world of higher education, a research proposal is most often written by scholars seeking grant funding for a research project or it's the first step in getting approval to write a doctoral dissertation. Even if this is just a course assignment, treat your introduction as the initial pitch of an idea or a thorough examination of the significance of a research problem. After reading the introduction, your readers should not only have an understanding of what you want to do, but they should also be able to gain a sense of your passion for the topic and be excited about the study's possible outcomes. Note that most proposals do not include an abstract [summary] before the introduction.

Think about your introduction as a narrative written in one to three paragraphs that succinctly answers the following four questions :

• What is the central research problem?
• What is the topic of study related to that problem?
• What methods should be used to analyze the research problem?
• Why is this important research, what is its significance, and why should someone reading the proposal care about the outcomes of the proposed study?

II.  Background and Significance

This section can be melded into your introduction or you can create a separate section to help with the organization and narrative flow of your proposal. This is where you explain the context of your proposal and describe in detail why it's important. Approach writing this section with the thought that you can’t assume your readers will know as much about the research problem as you do. Note that this section is not an essay going over everything you have learned about the topic; instead, you must choose what is relevant to help explain the goals for your study.

To that end, while there are no hard and fast rules, you should attempt to address some or all of the following key points:

• State the research problem and give a more detailed explanation about the purpose of the study than what you stated in the introduction. This is particularly important if the problem is complex or multifaceted .
• Present the rationale of your proposed study and clearly indicate why it is worth doing. Answer the "So What? question [i.e., why should anyone care].
• Describe the major issues or problems to be addressed by your research. Be sure to note how your proposed study builds on previous assumptions about the research problem.
• Explain how you plan to go about conducting your research. Clearly identify the key sources you intend to use and explain how they will contribute to your analysis of the topic.
• Set the boundaries of your proposed research in order to provide a clear focus. Where appropriate, state not only what you will study, but what is excluded from the study.
• If necessary, provide definitions of key concepts or terms.

III.  Literature Review

Connected to the background and significance of your study is a section of your proposal devoted to a more deliberate review and synthesis of prior studies related to the research problem under investigation . The purpose here is to place your project within the larger whole of what is currently being explored, while demonstrating to your readers that your work is original and innovative. Think about what questions other researchers have asked, what methods they have used, and what is your understanding of their findings and, where stated, their recommendations. Do not be afraid to challenge the conclusions of prior research. Assess what you believe is missing and state how previous research has failed to adequately examine the issue that your study addresses. For more information on writing literature reviews, GO HERE .

Since a literature review is information dense, it is crucial that this section is intelligently structured to enable a reader to grasp the key arguments underpinning your study in relation to that of other researchers. A good strategy is to break the literature into "conceptual categories" [themes] rather than systematically describing groups of materials one at a time. Note that conceptual categories generally reveal themselves after you have read most of the pertinent literature on your topic so adding new categories is an on-going process of discovery as you read more studies. How do you know you've covered the key conceptual categories underlying the research literature? Generally, you can have confidence that all of the significant conceptual categories have been identified if you start to see repetition in the conclusions or recommendations that are being made.

To help frame your proposal's literature review, here are the "five C’s" of writing a literature review:

• Cite , so as to keep the primary focus on the literature pertinent to your research problem.
• Compare the various arguments, theories, methodologies, and findings expressed in the literature: what do the authors agree on? Who applies similar approaches to analyzing the research problem?
• Contrast the various arguments, themes, methodologies, approaches, and controversies expressed in the literature: what are the major areas of disagreement, controversy, or debate?
• Critique the literature: Which arguments are more persuasive, and why? Which approaches, findings, methodologies seem most reliable, valid, or appropriate, and why? Pay attention to the verbs you use to describe what an author says/does [e.g., asserts, demonstrates, argues, etc.] .
• Connect the literature to your own area of research and investigation: how does your own work draw upon, depart from, synthesize, or add a new perspective to what has been said in the literature?

IV.  Research Design and Methods

This section must be well-written and logically organized because you are not actually doing the research, yet, your reader must have confidence that it is worth pursuing . The reader will never have a study outcome from which to evaluate whether your methodological choices were the correct ones. Thus, the objective here is to convince the reader that your overall research design and methods of analysis will correctly address the problem and that the methods will provide the means to effectively interpret the potential results. Your design and methods should be unmistakably tied to the specific aims of your study.

Describe the overall research design by building upon and drawing examples from your review of the literature. Consider not only methods that other researchers have used but methods of data gathering that have not been used but perhaps could be. Be specific about the methodological approaches you plan to undertake to obtain information, the techniques you would use to analyze the data, and the tests of external validity to which you commit yourself [i.e., the trustworthiness by which you can generalize from your study to other people, places, events, and/or periods of time].

When describing the methods you will use, be sure to cover the following:

• Specify the research operations you will undertake and the way you will interpret the results of these operations in relation to the research problem. Don't just describe what you intend to achieve from applying the methods you choose, but state how you will spend your time while applying these methods [e.g., coding text from interviews to find statements about the need to change school curriculum; running a regression to determine if there is a relationship between campaign advertising on social media sites and election outcomes in Europe ].
• Keep in mind that a methodology is not just a list of tasks; it is an argument as to why these tasks add up to the best way to investigate the research problem. This is an important point because the mere listing of tasks to be performed does not demonstrate that, collectively, they effectively address the research problem. Be sure you explain this.
• Anticipate and acknowledge any potential barriers and pitfalls in carrying out your research design and explain how you plan to address them. No method is perfect so you need to describe where you believe challenges may exist in obtaining data or accessing information. It's always better to acknowledge this than to have it brought up by your reader.

Develop a Research Proposal: Writing the Proposal . Office of Library Information Services. Baltimore County Public Schools; Heath, M. Teresa Pereira and Caroline Tynan. “Crafting a Research Proposal.” The Marketing Review 10 (Summer 2010): 147-168; Jones, Mark. “Writing a Research Proposal.” In MasterClass in Geography Education: Transforming Teaching and Learning . Graham Butt, editor. (New York: Bloomsbury Academic, 2015), pp. 113-127; Juni, Muhamad Hanafiah. “Writing a Research Proposal.” International Journal of Public Health and Clinical Sciences 1 (September/October 2014): 229-240; Krathwohl, David R. How to Prepare a Dissertation Proposal: Suggestions for Students in Education and the Social and Behavioral Sciences . Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 2005; Procter, Margaret. The Academic Proposal . The Lab Report. University College Writing Centre. University of Toronto; Punch, Keith and Wayne McGowan. "Developing and Writing a Research Proposal." In From Postgraduate to Social Scientist: A Guide to Key Skills . Nigel Gilbert, ed. (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2006), 59-81; Wong, Paul T. P. How to Write a Research Proposal . International Network on Personal Meaning. Trinity Western University; Writing Academic Proposals: Conferences, Articles, and Books . The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University; Writing a Research Proposal . University Library. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

• << Previous: Purpose of Guide
• Next: Types of Research Designs >>
• Last Updated: Sep 8, 2023 12:19 PM
• URL: https://guides.library.txstate.edu/socialscienceresearch

• How to Write a...

How to Write a Research Proposal: A Comprehensive Guide

• By angelie karin
• Apr 08, 2024

Writing a research proposal is a pivotal step for any researcher aiming to secure funding or approval for their project. 

A well-crafted proposal not only showcases the significance and feasibility of your study but also demonstrates your capability as a researcher to conduct the study. 

Below is a detailed exploration of the process, designed to guide you through each component of crafting a compelling research proposal.

Understanding the Fundamental Elements of a Research Proposal

The journey of your research proposal begins with the title – your first opportunity to make an impression. It should be both descriptive and concise, directly reflecting the essence of your research without any ambiguity. 

This is where you capture the attention of your readers, making them eager to delve into the details of your study.

Following the title, the abstract serves as a snapshot of your research proposal. Although brief, it must encapsulate the aims, methodology, and anticipated outcomes of your study. 

Succinctness and clarity are your allies here, aiding reviewers in quickly grasping the essence of your proposed research.

Introduction

The introduction lays down the foundation of your research proposal. It is here that you articulate your research question, setting the stage by providing background information and stating the rationale behind your study. 

This section should not only highlight the significance of your research but also build a compelling argument for why it is necessary.

Literature Review

A thorough literature review is the backbone of any research proposal . It demonstrates your deep understanding of the field by summarizing existing research and identifying gaps that your study aims to fill. 

This section should underscore the originality of your proposal, making a clear case for the contribution your research will make to the field. 

Integrating a variety of sources, from academic journals to books, you should weave a narrative that supports the premise of your study, emphasizing its necessity and potential impact.

Research Design and Methods

This section is where you detail how you plan to answer your research question. Transparently discuss your research design and methodology, whether it be qualitative, quantitative, or a mixture of both. 

Describe the data collection methods you intend to use, along with your analysis plan, giving special attention to the reproducibility and ethical considerations of your approach. 

Your goal is to convince the reviewers of the soundness of your research methodology and your competence in executing it.

Implications and Contribution to the Field

Explaining the significance of your research, this part of the proposal should articulate how your study will contribute to the existing body of knowledge. 

Discuss the potential implications of your findings for the field and how they might influence future research, policy, or practice. 

This is your argument for the relevance and necessity of your study, highlighting the unique insights it promises to offer.

Budget and Resources

As pragmatic as it is essential, the budget and resources section details the financial aspects of your proposed research. 

It is important to provide a comprehensive budget that justifies each expense, whether it’s for equipment, personnel, travel, or other costs. 

Be realistic and transparent, ensuring that your budget aligns with the scope of your project. Additionally, listing the resources you have and those you need demonstrates thorough planning and feasibility.

Timeline and Milestones

A well-structured timeline not only helps in organizing your research but also reassures funders of your project’s timeliness. 

Break down the research process into phases, assigning realistic deadlines to each. Including milestones allows for a clearer understanding of the project’s progress, making this section a crucial aspect of your proposal.

Ethical Considerations

Ethical considerations are paramount in research. This section of the proposal should address potential ethical issues and describe how they will be managed. 

If applicable, mention the process of obtaining Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval. A thoughtful discussion of ethics not only highlights the integrity of your research design but also builds trust with your reviewers.

Though not always necessary, appendices can be included to provide additional supporting information that is too detailed for the main body of the proposal. This might include charts, graphs, letters of support, or any other documents that strengthen your proposal.

Crafting a compelling research proposal is a meticulous process. Tailoring your proposal to echo the priorities of the funding agency can significantly increase your chances of success. 

Furthermore, ensuring that your writing is clear, jargon-free, and meticulously proofread can make your proposal more accessible and appealing. Remember, clarity and coherence are your best tools for conveying the value of your research.

What is the typical length of a research proposal?

While the length can vary depending on the requirements of the funding agency, a research proposal typically ranges from 10 to 15 pages.

How can I make my research proposal stand out to funders?

Emphasize the originality and significance of your research, clearly articulate your methodology, and ensure your proposal is well-organized and free of jargon. Tailoring the proposal to the funder’s priorities can also make a significant difference.

What are the most common reasons for research proposal rejection?

Common reasons include a lack of originality, unclear or flawed methodology, insufficient literature review, and unrealistic goals or budgets.

How detailed should the methodology section be in a research proposal?

It should be detailed enough to clearly explain how you will conduct your research, including your research design, data collection, and analysis methods, while being concise.

Is it necessary to include a literature review in my research proposal?

Yes, a literature review is crucial as it establishes the context of your research, demonstrates your knowledge of the field, and justifies the necessity of your proposed study.

In the conclusion, succinctly recap the key points of your proposal, reinforcing the significance and feasibility of your research. 

This final pitch should leave no doubt in the reviewers’ minds about the value and necessity of your study, encouraging their support for its execution. 

In crafting your research proposal, it’s essential to communicate not only the significance of your research but also your ability to carry it out successfully. 

By carefully addressing each component of the proposal and ensuring clarity and coherence throughout, you’ll significantly increase your chances of securing the necessary approval or funding. 

Remember, a compelling research proposal is your ticket to embarking on a meaningful research journey, contributing valuable insights to your field of study.

More From The Stock Dork:

Copyright © 2023 THE STOCK DORK

• Affiliate Disclosure
• Cookie Policy

Main Navigation

• Accept offer and enrol
• Current Students

Personalise your experience

Did you mean..., diploma of arts and social sciences, art/science collaboration wins waterhouse natural science art prize, unit of study educ4015 research proposal (2025).

Future students: T: 1800 626 481 E: Email your enquiry here

Current students: Contact: SCU College

Students studying at an education collaboration: Please contact your relevant institution

updated - DO NOT REMOVE THIS LINE 6:05 AM on Fri, 12 April

Show me unit information for year

Unit snapshot, credit points, faculty & college.

SCU College

Unit description

This unit leads students through the processes required to plan and initiate an independent research project that will make an original contribution to knowledge in their discipline.  Students are required to conduct a literature review on a chosen topic within their discipline and develop a research proposal.

Unit content

Students are required to work independently on their chosen research topic under the guidance of their academic supervisor.

Availabilities

Learning outcomes.

Unit Learning Outcomes express learning achievement in terms of what a student should know, understand and be able to do on completion of a unit. These outcomes are aligned with the graduate attributes . The unit learning outcomes and graduate attributes are also the basis of evaluating prior learning.

On completion of this unit, students should be able to:

Critically review and evaluate literature relevant to a research topic in your discipline area using a thematic approach.

Develop appropriate aims, scope and methodology for a proposed industry research project to address an identified gap in existing knowledge in your discipline area.

Present a coherent written proposal that describes the background, aims, rationale, methodology and anticipated innovative solutions and outcomes for your proposed industry research project.

Consult with stakeholders to identify the resources and approvals needed to successfully complete a research project.

Teaching and assessment

Online (term), prescribed learning resources.

• Prescribed text information is not currently available.
• Prescribed resources/equipment information is not currently available.

Prescribed Learning Resources may change in future Teaching Periods.

Fee information

Commonwealth Supported courses For information regarding Student Contribution Amounts please visit the Student Contribution Amounts .

Fee paying courses For postgraduate or undergraduate full-fee paying courses please check Domestic Postgraduate Fees OR Domestic Undergraduate Fees .

International

Please check the international course and fee list to determine the relevant fees.

Courses that offer this unit

Bachelor of innovation with honours (2024), bachelor of innovation with honours (2025), any questions we'd love to help.

Log in using your username and password

• Search More Search for this keyword Advanced search
• Latest content
• Current issue
• Anniversary
• BMJ Journals More You are viewing from: Google Indexer

You are here

• Online First
• Restricting supply of tobacco products to pharmacies: a scoping review
• Article Text
• Article info
• Citation Tools
• Rapid Responses
• Article metrics

• http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1519-5678 Heewon Kang 1 , 2 , 3 ,
• Kathryn J Steadman 3 , 4 ,
• http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4362-1539 Janet Hoek 3 , 5 ,
• Wayne D Hall 6 ,
• http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6651-8035 Coral E Gartner 2 , 3
• 1 Institute of Health and Environment , Seoul National University , Gwanak-gu , Seoul , Korea (the Republic of)
• 2 School of Public Health , The University of Queensland , Brisbane , Queensland , Australia
• 3 NHMRC Centre of Research Excellence on Achieving the Tobacco Endgame , The University of Queensland , Herston , Queensland , Australia
• 4 School of Pharmacy , The University of Queensland , Brisbane , Queensland , Australia
• 5 Department of Public Health , University of Otago , Dunedin , New Zealand
• 6 National Centre for Youth Substance Use Research , The University of Queensland , St Lucia , Queensland , Australia
• Correspondence to Professor Coral E Gartner, School of Public Health, The University of Queensland Faculty of Medicine, Herston, QLD 4006, Australia; c.gartner{at}uq.edu.au

Objective We synthesised the published literature on proposals to restrict tobacco supply to pharmacies, covering (1) policy concept/rationale/attempts, (2) policy impact and implementation and (3) policy and research recommendations.

Data sources We searched eight databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, IPA, ProQuest and OATD) for publications with at least an English-language abstract. We searched reference lists of included publications manually.

Study selection One author screened all publications, and a second author reviewed a 10% subset. We focused on approaches to restrict the supply of tobacco products to pharmacies, without any restrictions on study design, location, participants or publication date.

Data extraction Data extraction adhered to the JBI Scoping Review Methodology and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews checklist.

Data synthesis We included 18 publications. Among the 13 studies conducted in specific geographical contexts, 8 were from Aotearoa/New Zealand. Most publications (n=8) focused on effectiveness domains, indicating potential reductions in retailer density, smoking prevalence, disease burden, cost and increased opportunities for cessation advice. Seven explored policy acceptability among experts, pharmacists and people who smoke. Publications noted that pharmacy-only supply aligns with other programmes involving pharmacists, such as needle exchange programmes, but conflicts with efforts to phase out tobacco sales from the US and Canadian pharmacies.

Conclusions Progress in tobacco retailing policy (eg, licensing, retailer incentives) and research (eg, assessment of policy equity and durability, application in other geographical contexts) are needed before a pharmacy-only tobacco supply model would be feasible.

• Public policy
• Health Services

Data availability statement

All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as supplementary information.

https://doi.org/10.1136/tc-2023-058486

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request permissions.

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN ON THIS TOPIC

Unlike most addictive substances, tobacco products are not regulated as drugs in most countries, such as restricting supply to pharmacies.

Restricting supply to pharmacy settings has been proposed to increase control over tobacco supply.

WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS

Policy-makers in at least two jurisdictions have considered this proposed policy, but we found no examples of successful implementation.

Restricting tobacco supply to pharmacy settings would reduce its availability and could encourage smoking cessation, particularly if it was combined with cessation counselling at the point of supply.

HOW THIS STUDY MIGHT AFFECT RESEARCH, PRACTICE OR POLICY

Pharmacy-only supply of tobacco products could contribute to achieving a commercial tobacco endgame.

However, several barriers to implementation need to be addressed to make this policy feasible, such as a current lack of support for the policy from key stakeholders, such as pharmacists.

Introduction

Tobacco smoking is the leading preventable cause of death globally, contributing to over seven million annual deaths, a figure projected to exceed eight million by 2030 if no substantial intervention occurs. 1 While demand-focused tobacco control policies have slowly reduced smoking prevalence in many countries, 2 evidence that over one billion people worldwide currently smoke tobacco 1 highlights the need for innovative new measures.

The tobacco endgame paradigm seeks to reduce smoking prevalence rapidly and permanently to near-zero levels, typically defined by reducing smoking prevalence to less than 5% within a specified time frame. 3 4 To date, at least 11 countries have established endgame goals ( online supplemental table S1 ). Proposed policies include mandating a very low nicotine content standard; restricting tobacco availability (eg, number or location of tobacco retailers); creating a tobacco-free generation 5 and completely ending commercial tobacco sales. 3 6

Supplemental material

Proposed measures to reduce tobacco availability include limiting the supply of tobacco products to pharmacy settings. This approach could enhance control over sales and promotion, and reduce enforcement costs, 7 while still facilitating access to tobacco products in most cities. 8 More importantly, this measure could enhance access to smoking cessation support, as pharmacists are well positioned to offer cessation advice and services. In 2011, these potential benefits led an Icelandic MP to introduce a Bill to make smoked tobacco products available only on prescription via pharmacies. 9 A similar Bill introduced in 2013 to the Oregon State Legislature, USA proposed classifying cigarettes as a Schedule III controlled substance, which would require a doctor’s prescription. 10 11 While neither of these bills became law, interest in the potential value of this measure as an endgame strategy has continued. For example, the rationale for pharmacy-only tobacco supply aligns with that of a ‘tobacco compassion club’ 12 distribution system, a proposed model based on cannabis dispensaries that would distribute tobacco products through a non-commercial approach focused on providing support to people who smoke.

We used a public health policy analysis framework to summarise the published literature on restricting tobacco product supply to pharmacies. This approach evaluates policy implementation and potential outcomes and can help policy-makers to identify promising public health policies. 13 We examined the policy’s potential impacts and implementation processes and summarised recommendations made in the included studies.

We followed the JBI methodology for scoping reviews 14 and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews checklist ( online supplemental table S2 ). 15 We registered a protocol online prior to commencing the review. 16 We consulted experts affiliated with the Centre for Research Excellence on Achieving the Tobacco Endgame ( https://tobacco-endgame.centre.uq.edu.au/our-people ) throughout the review.

Review questions

This review addressed the following questions in relation to restricting tobacco product supply to pharmacies:

What were the characteristics of the included studies (types of tobacco products addressed, study design, geographical location of the study, study population, etc)?

What was the concept or rationale behind the policy? Were there any attempts made to implement the policy?

What were the main research findings? Which of the following policy dimensions were addressed: effect (effectiveness, unintended effects, equity) and implementation (cost, feasibility, acceptability)?

What were the authors’ policy and research recommendations?

Eligibility criteria

Table 1 outlines the inclusion and exclusion criteria.

• View inline

Search strategy

A librarian assisted with developing search strings ( online supplemental table S3 ) adapted to PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, ProQuest and Open Access Theses Database. The initial search was conducted on 19 May 2023 and updated on 20 September 2023. We also reviewed the reference lists of relevant publications. Tobacco control experts were contacted to identify further literature. No relevant non-English language publications were identified. We selected peer-reviewed journal articles to cite over other sources (eg, thesis) where multiple publications reported the same research.

Evidence selection

One reviewer (HK) removed duplicates using Covidence 17 and screened titles and abstracts against the inclusion criteria. Articles that did not meet the inclusion criteria (eg, studies addressing the pharmacy-only supply of e-cigarettes) were excluded. A second reviewer (CEG) screened 10% of the search results (randomly selected). Full texts of studies that passed the initial screening were reviewed by HK, and CEG assessed all articles included in the final stage. Any disagreements were resolved through discussions.

Critical appraisal

Quality assessments are not typically conducted in a scoping review. However, we used the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Evidence Hierarchy, which comprises six levels of evidence hierarchy, ranging from I (systematic review of randomised controlled trials) to IV (case studies), as a broad indication of the strength of the evidence for the policy. 18

Data extraction

HK extracted the data (authors(s), publication year, title, study design and methodology, participant characteristics, aim, funding sources and conflicts of interests, findings, and recommendations) into a Microsoft Excel-based form. Where articles discussed pharmacy-only tobacco supply within a broader context, such as retail reduction strategies, only information on pharmacy-only supply was extracted. Because we included review and original research articles, we avoided duplicating information obtained from the original articles when extracting data from review articles. Separate chapters of a thesis were considered separate publications in the final stage of the selection process. We categorised findings using a policy analytical framework ( table 2 ) and considered durability across the dimensions. 13

Analytical framework 13 used for summarising the key results

Description of the included studies

After a full-text review, 10 publications of the 981 records retrieved remained ( figure 1 ). Four further publications 19–22 were identified from reference lists and experts identified three additional publications. 23–25

• Download figure
• Open in new tab
• Download powerpoint

PRISMA flow diagram. *Includes 16 journal articles and 2 chapters from a single thesis. PRISMA, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses.

The 18 included studies ( table 3 ) comprised 16 that addressed limiting smoked tobacco product sales to pharmacies 3 19–22 26–35 and 2 linked publications (a commentary and letter) that examined the supply of low nitrosamine smokeless tobacco products via pharmacies. 23 24 Of the 16 publications on smoked tobacco, 2 outlined the proposed policy rationale 19 26 9 described potential outcomes (effectiveness, unintended effects, equity), 20 21 27 29 31–35 with a focus on effectiveness, and 11 discussed implementation (cost, feasibility, acceptability), particularly acceptability ( online supplemental table S4 ). 3 21 22 25–31 34

Characteristics of the included studies (n=18)

Eight publications reported empirical findings, 20 25 26 28–30 32 33 four were commentaries/letters, 19 21 23 24 four were literature reviews 3 22 27 34 and two were modelling simulations. 31 35 Among empirical studies, three estimated the policy’s impact on tobacco retailer density and associations with neighbourhood characteristics, 20 32 33 three were qualitative studies with policy experts and pharmacists, 25 26 28 and two were surveys measuring pharmacists’ 30 and consumers’ perceptions of the policy. 29

Eight studies were from Aotearoa/New Zealand (A/NZ), 19 20 25 28–32 with an additional commentary 21 and literature review 27 providing some A/NZ context for the measure. In A/NZ, an inquiry led by the Māori Affairs Select Committee (a subcommittee of the A/NZ Parliament) recommended setting a smoke-free goal and reducing tobacco product availability to minimal levels. 36 The Australian publications were linked to commentaries that discussed supplying LNST only through pharmacies, which would relax the current comprehensive sales ban. 23 24 Scotland (UK), 35 the USA 33 and Iceland 26 each featured in one publication. The literature reviews covered varied geographical contexts, 3 22 27 34 although one review (a thesis chapter) discussed the policy within an A/NZ context. 27 Another literature review of retailer density reduction approaches did not impose geographical limitations on the included studies, 34 although all were conducted in either A/NZ or the USA.

All authors were either university academics or government officials, and no commercial funding was reported.

Level of evidence

All quantitative studies were cross-sectional designs representing level IV evidence (a cross-sectional study or case series), which is the lowest level of assessable evidence in the hierarchy. 20 29 30 32 33 The modelling studies, 31 35 qualitative studies, 25 26 28 literature reviews 3 22 27 34 and commentaries/letters 19 21 23 24 were not assessable against the NHMRC evidence hierarchy ( online supplemental table S5 ).

Concept and rationale

The earliest discussion of supplying tobacco products via a pharmacy-only policy emerged in Australia during 2008–2009. To support people who had not succeeded in quitting despite multiple attempts or who did not wish to quit, Gartner and Hall proposed making LNST products that meet carcinogen standards available in selected licensed retailers in Australia, such as pharmacies. 24 Chapman expanded on this proposal by suggesting investigating the feasibility of classifying LNST as a schedule 3 substance, which requires a pharmacist to oversee the supply. 23 Subsequent discussions considered extending this proposal to cigarettes, to dramatically reduce tobacco availability. Two published studies emphasised retail licensing to monitor and enforce retail-based strategies in A/NZ, 19 20 and one commentary 21 briefly suggested restricting tobacco sales to controlled outlets, such as pharmacies, to reduce tobacco availability. Several studies discussed how consumers could potentially benefit from a pharmacy supply model, which could provide cessation support, including professional advice, from pharmacists and access to nicotine replacement therapy products. 20 21 23 24 26 27

Attempts to implement the policy

We identified four unsuccessful attempts to implement a policy restricting tobacco supply to pharmacies in Iceland and the the US state of Oregon. 3 A case study discussed three failed attempts to introduce the policy in Iceland via a Private Member’s Bill, sponsored by a former health minister and supported by members of multiple political parties. 26 The Bill proposed a 10-year plan to reduce tobacco retailer licences, raise licence fees and end tobacco sales in supermarkets, petrol stations and convenience stores, leaving pharmacies as the only outlet permitted to supply tobacco. The Bill also proposed that once smoking had sufficiently decreased, tobacco could become a prescription-only product, accompanied by further cessation assistance and purchase cost subsidies. 26 The first two attempts to introduce the Bill faced severe criticism from the media, public, most Pharmaceutical Society members and from 21 other organisations. The third attempt received less attention but also did not pass. 26

In 2013, a Democratic member of the Oregon House of Representatives, who also chaired the Health Care Committee, sponsored a Bill to classify all nicotine-containing products as schedule 3 controlled substances, 37 with penalties for unlawful possession or distribution of >0.1 mg of nicotine subject to a maximum penalty of 1 year in prison, a fine of US$6250 or both. The sponsor publicly acknowledged that he did not expect the bill to pass but intended it to initiate discussion of categorising nicotine as an addictive substance. 38

Findings on effectiveness, unintended effects and equity

Table 4 summarises the evidence on policy evaluation dimensions. Of the nine studies addressing the effect dimension, eight discussed policy effectiveness. 20 21 27 29 31 32 34 35 Four studies estimated reductions in tobacco retailer numbers. 21 27 32 35 Simulation modelling from Scotland suggested that pharmacy-only supply would reduce the average tobacco outlet density by 75%, and the number of retailers by 87% (from 9030 to 1213 retailers). 35 Similar modelling in A/NZ suggested a >80% reduction in the number of tobacco retailers. 21 27 32 The policy was also anticipated to reduce tobacco retailers’ proximity to schools, and the hours available for tobacco purchase in A/NZ. 32 Policy effectiveness was expected to increase if pharmacies had the choice to opt out of selling tobacco. 27 32 Another modelling study suggested pharmacy-only tobacco supply combined with annual cessation advice, following a 10-year gradual reduction in the number of retailers based on licensing, 31 could accelerate the reduction in smoking prevalence by 2025 if the policy was implemented in 2020 (smoking prevalence of 17.3%/6.8% for Māori/non-Māori, compared with 20.5%/8.1% under a business-as-usual scenario) and would produce significant public health gains (41 700 discounted quality-adjusted life-years). The authors largely attributed this positive outcome to the provision of cessation advice. 31

Evidence summary by policy evaluation dimensions

Two studies described potential unintended effects, such as increased theft and workload, moral conflicts arising from health practitioners selling tobacco and risks of smoking normalisation through these sales. 29 32 Four studies addressed equity impacts, 32–35 concluding pharmacy-only tobacco supply may perpetuate socioeconomic disparities associated with smoking, given the higher density of pharmacies in areas with higher socioeconomic level, 35 urban areas 32 and areas with a lower proportion of ethnically diverse residents. 33 Differences in pharmacy density could increase travel costs and health inequities. 32 34 Additional cessation support was recommended for people residing in areas with fewer pharmacies to increase smoking cessation and reduce the need to travel to purchase tobacco. 32

Findings on cost, feasibility and acceptability

Only one study addressed the financial costs and gains of gradually restricting tobacco sales to pharmacies over 10 years. 31 In the scenario, only the 259 community pharmacies in A/NZ would supply tobacco and provide a pharmacist-led brief cessation programme. The policy would cost NZ$29.4 million including the legislation implementation (NZ$3.5 million) and cessation programme (NZ$25.9 million). However, the estimated financial gains of NZ$741 million from healthcare cost savings would make the initiative cost saving. 31

Five studies explored the policy’s feasibility. 3 21 22 25 27 Some studies suggested the policy was consistent with other public health programmes delivered by pharmacists, such as interventions for drug dependence (eg, methadone 22 and clean needle programmes 21 27 ). Reducing smoking prevalence (and therefore, the number of tobacco-purchasing customers) ahead of implementation could increase the policy’s feasibility by mitigating practical concerns regarding time, staffing and space constraints. 25 However, some studies considered the policy impractical because it conflicted with efforts to end tobacco sales in pharmacies. 3 27 Additionally, federal law in the USA would need amendment ahead of federal implementation because the 2009 Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (FSPTCA) does not allow measures restricting tobacco sales to specific retailers or requiring prescriptions to purchase tobacco. 22

Seven studies assessed the acceptability of the policy. 3 25 26 28–30 34 Of these, five were conducted in A/NZ, 25 28–30 34 where support for the policy was modest among community pharmacists; only 26% indicated their pharmacy was extremely or very likely to participate in pharmacy-only tobacco supply. 30 However, the policy was considered more acceptable if it was to be successfully implemented in another country first. Perceived advantages pharmacists saw included reduced tobacco availability, their ability to provide cessation advice and increased financial benefits for pharmacies from tobacco sales. Conversely, potential disadvantages included safety issues, increased workload, damage to pharmacists’ reputations as health professionals 30 and strong moral objections. 25 A literature review also outlined potential ethical objections clinicians held regarding prescribing cigarettes. 3 In a qualitative study, pharmacists felt concerned they may need to engage with tobacco companies and suggested an acceptable pharmacy-supply model would need to shield healthcare practitioners from direct dealings with commercial tobacco suppliers. 25

Some tobacco control experts 28 and key actors (including former government officials, medical doctors and pharmacists) in the Icelandic parliamentary resolution to restrict tobacco sales to pharmacies 26 considered the policy crucial to reduce tobacco availability and promote public health. However, they were concerned policy changes would take time to implement, and that tobacco retailers might perceive the policy as unfair, as it would impact their business. 28 Only one study assessed the policy’s acceptability among people who smoke, who saw pharmacy-only tobacco supply as more effective for preventing smoking uptake among youth and of similar effectiveness for increasing tobacco cessation compared with continued annual 10% tobacco tax increases. 29

Several policy actors in Iceland saw the policy proposed in 2011 as unacceptable and felt conventional approaches had already reduced smoking prevalence and would continue this trend. 26 The authors of the proposal were unsurprised, having already noted the considerable criticism that most new tobacco control policies initially face. In the second attempt, invited submissions from parties including the Cancer Society and Pharmaceutical Society mostly opposed the measure, which stymied progress. 26 While the reasons for continued opposition in the second attempt were not explained, the points (eg, perceived adequacy of conventional approaches) raised in the public debate during the first attempt may have continued to appear relevant, given the short time interval between the two attempts in May 2011 and October 2011.

We identified 18 publications discussing pharmacy-only tobacco supply. Policy-makers in at least two jurisdictions (ie, the US state of Oregon and Iceland) have considered this proposal, 3 but we found no examples of successful implementation. The evidence in this review suggests that supplying tobacco only via pharmacies could reduce retailer numbers by at least 80% (range 80%–87%). 21 27 32 35 While the actual reduction may vary by context, the healthcare role of pharmacies differentiates this policy from other proposals to limit tobacco availability. Pharmacists can effectively provide cessation advice, 39–42 and modelling indicates that incorporating opportunistic advice from pharmacists as part of a pharmacy-only tobacco supply would reduce smoking prevalence, disease burden and healthcare costs. 31

Potential drawbacks include limited support among key stakeholders, including moral objections from some pharmacists, and potential renormalisation of smoking by allowing tobacco sales in a healthcare setting. Geographical inequities may also occur when there are fewer pharmacies in high smoking prevalence areas. While reducing tobacco accessibility in these areas may assist in decreasing smoking prevalence, it could also exacerbate disparities for people living in these areas who do not quit, due to the increased travel costs 43 and less access to pharmacy-based cessation services. 32 Furthermore, amendments to federal legislation (eg, FSPTCA in the USA) may be necessary for implementation, although state and local levels could proceed independently. Some jurisdictions have ended tobacco sales in pharmacies, which may make the policy less feasible in these locations. However, most evidence included in this review came from regions where tobacco is currently not available in pharmacies, such as Australia, 23 24 Iceland, 26 A/NZ 19 20 28–32 and Scotland. 35 We cannot extrapolate the findings beyond these settings.

Given these potential advantages and disadvantages, we suggest possible implementation measures, should this policy be introduced. First, tobacco should be located in secure units that meet existing point-of-sales display ban requirements and practices regarding dispensing of addictive drugs in pharmacies. 44 Second, price controls, used in various public health contexts to remove profit incentives and limit discounting, may be required. 44 This measure may be important even in regions with existing high excise taxes, given it would prevent wide variations in prices. 45 Further, this approach aligns with pharmacists’ view that supplying tobacco products should sit within a health promotion paradigm rather than operate as a commercial model. 25 Additionally, enhancing cessation support in areas with limited pharmacy access (ie, pharmacy deserts) to increase cessation rates could minimise the disparities people living in these areas may otherwise face if they were to continue purchasing tobacco products due to difficulty in quitting despite reduced access. Clear communication with stakeholders that emphasises the health promotion rationale of the policy, the potential impact of pharmacy-only sales in reducing tobacco retail availability and the opportunities for pharmacists to provide smoking cessation care at the point of tobacco sale, may aid in garnering support from pharmacists. Ensuring tobacco was supplied in a health-promoting way in pharmacies (eg, combined with cessation advice), rather than just as a general consumer product, would be critical for successful policy implementation. This may be especially important in jurisdictions that are moving toward banning tobacco sales from pharmacies, given the seeming contradiction that pharmacy-only supply has with a ban on pharmacy tobacco sales.

Attempts to introduce pharmacy-only tobacco supply have included a medical prescription model, 44 46 which is likely to have low acceptability among medical practitioners. Chapman proposed an alternative model, a purchaser licence, described as akin to a prescription, that could similarly limit the amount purchased and require purchasers to complete a knowledge test, thus ensuring they were ‘informed’ about the health risks of smoking. 46 A purchaser licence and pharmacy-supply measure would be similar to Uruguay’s cannabis supply model, which allows pharmacies to sell cannabis (up to a monthly maximum) to registered purchasers for recreational or medicinal purposes. 47 Furthermore, medical prescribing of tobacco may be conceptually similar to prescribed heroin programmes in some countries. 48

Recommendations for policy

We identified several conditions that could support a pharmacy-only tobacco supply model. First, tobacco retailer licensing may be useful, 19 20 22 31 as it would document the number, types and locations of current tobacco retailers, thereby enabling a post-implementation evaluation. Furthermore, the transition to pharmacy-only supply may require time 28 ; during the transition period, licensing could reduce tobacco outlet numbers, provide sales data and enable greater monitoring. 44 In regions without a licensing system, such a system may be needed temporarily until sales are restricted to pharmacies only. However, governments could consider integrating tobacco retailer licensing into existing pharmacy licensing to monitor and support pharmacies that sell tobacco products.

Countries with a government-defined commercial tobacco endgame goal may be better suited to implementing pharmacy-only tobacco supply. 26 Within an endgame strategy, pharmacy-only supply could serve as one stage in a broader supply reduction strategy. 21 25 26 28 Integrating pharmacy-only supply with other measures could help address concerns pharmacists have raised. For example, denicotinisation, predicted to greatly reduce smoking prevalence, would reduce demands on outlets supplying tobacco. Other measures, including continued tobacco excise tax increases and enhanced community cessation support, would also reduce smoking prevalence and thus the overall demand for tobacco products. 25 Given that pharmacy-only tobacco supply aligns with how many countries regulate access to potentially dangerous and addictive substances, 8 it may offer a long-term supply option, particularly if illicit tobacco use increases or if ending legal tobacco supply completely was publicly or politically unacceptable. Nonetheless, pharmacy-only supply should ideally aim to operate as a short-term approach to support reducing smoking prevalence to minimal levels, as it may impose burdens on pharmacists. 25 To ensure feasibility and acceptability, it is crucial to address concerns raised by pharmacists and involve them, along with other health professionals, in the design and implementation of this approach. Opt-out arrangements should also be considered. 26

Governments may face opposition from tobacco companies, retailers and business groups. 3 Offering business advice, including guidance on alternative products to replace tobacco, could assist retailers in transitioning out of tobacco sales. 22 Tobacco companies have also used astroturfing to oppose policies that restrict tobacco supply, 49 making monitoring and countering these activities critical.

Recommendations for research

Our review highlights the need for more comprehensive feasibility analyses in jurisdictions considering a pharmacy-only tobacco supply approach. The reviewed studies were conducted in relatively few geographical contexts, with A/NZ providing much of the evidence assessed. Evidence from settings with different retail and regulatory environments is also required to assess both the implementation challenges and likely outcomes this policy could have. 30 34 Further research should involve various stakeholders, including pharmacy owners and pharmacists, 30 and explore how people who smoke (daily and occasionally), and those who have recently stopped smoking, 29 perceive this measure.

The existing evidence on pharmacy-only tobacco supply showed an imbalance across interconnected analytical dimensions critical for policy evaluation and implementation. 13 Most evidence we identified considered effectiveness and acceptability dimensions, while other dimensions received less attention. For example, only one study addressed the cost aspect, 31 and just two explored potential unintended effects. 29 32 We also recommend further research using an equity lens to examine intended and unintended impacts for different groups and explore mitigating measures. 32 Given the policy has not been implemented, the lack of evidence assessing durability was not surprising.

Lack of implementation also limited empirical studies assessing the effectiveness of pharmacy-only tobacco supply, a common challenge for policies involving substantial regulatory changes. However, simulation modelling using expert knowledge drawn from other related policy experiences can offer insights into the policy’s potential effectiveness. Among the five studies that quantified the policy’s potential effectiveness, four assessed the potential reduction in retailer density, 21 27 32 35 while one predicted a reduction in smoking prevalence. 31 Further research is required to quantify this latter outcome, considering both direct and indirect impacts resulting from social norm shifts and reduced environmental cues. 31 This work could also inform studies on the policy’s impacts on disease burden and government costs. Additionally, simulation modelling could also be used to compare the impact of different endgame policies and scenarios, including those conflicting with pharmacy-only supply (eg, sales only in age-restricted specialised shops).

We need research to explore legal mechanisms that could enable a pharmacy-only supply approach, including qualitative studies exploring support and opposition to this approach. In time, evaluations could consider various measures of tobacco retailer density (eg, total number, number/area, number/population, proximity) to assess effectiveness.

Limitations

More than 40% of the studies in this review were from A/NZ, a country whose relatively low smoking prevalence may limit their generalisability. Evidence from regions with higher tobacco use prevalence, more retailers and different supply arrangements, and from low-income and middle-income countries would be beneficial. The recommendations from the included studies may not consider requirements other jurisdictions could impose; we addressed this limitation by considering literature discussing pharmaceutical-like regulations on tobacco, 44 and assessing the supply of other addictive and harmful products. 48 Furthermore, while the JBI guidance on scoping reviews requires at least two reviewers for evidence screening and data extraction, a single reviewer conducted screening and extraction, with only 10% of the articles being reviewed by a second reviewer. Hence, some relevant studies may have been inadvertently excluded. However, all included studies were checked by the second reviewer.

Pharmacy-only supply would substantially reduce tobacco product availability relative to the status quo. Additionally, it would reduce tobacco purchase opportunities and enhance cessation advice at the point of sale. Despite these potential benefits, we found no evidence of successful implementation. Further research is needed on factors that would increase the policy’s appeal to stakeholders and politicians. Future studies could also examine potential unintended outcomes and equity impacts and assess the financial costs and benefits for governments and stakeholders to strengthen the policy’s viability.

Ethics statements

Patient consent for publication.

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge and thank Ms Georgia Carstensen for early preparatory work she contributed to this review and Prof Richard Edwards for expert advice on relevant literature not identified in the database searches.

• Reitsma MB ,
• Kendrick PJ ,
• Ababneh E , et al
• Cheng K-W ,
• Chaloupka FJ , et al
• McDaniel PA ,
• New Zealand Parliament
• Puljević C ,
• Morphett K ,
• Hefler M , et al
• Smoking and Health Action Foundation, Non-Smokers Rights Association
• ↵ In case you haven't heard . Alcohol Drug Abuse Week 2022 ; 34 : 8 . doi:10.1002/adaw.33563 OpenUrl
• Peters MDJ ,
• Godfrey CM ,
• Khalil H , et al
• Tricco AC ,
• Zarin W , et al
• Carstensen G ,
• ↵ Covidence systematic review software . Melbourne, Australia Veritas Health Innovation . Available : www.covidence.org
• Shekelle PG ,
• Maglione MA ,
• Luoto J , et al
• Robertson L ,
• Edwards R , et al
• Doscher C ,
• Robertson LA
• van der Deen FS ,
• Pearson AL ,
• Henriksen L
• Gartner CE ,
• Muthumala C ,
• Fenton E , et al
• van der Deen FS
• Hoek J , et al
• Gendall P ,
• Petrović-van der Deen FS ,
• Blakely T ,
• Kvizhinadze G , et al
• Cameron C , et al
• Delamater PL ,
• Gottfredson NC , et al
• Glasser AM ,
• Reid G , et al
• New Zealand Government
• Greenlick M
• Sinclair HK ,
• Harris KJ ,
• O’Malley C , et al
• Yeung SST ,
• Cleghorn CL ,
• van der Deen FS , et al
• Chapman S ,
• Branston JR
• Obradovic I
• Lintzeris N

Supplementary materials

Supplementary data.

This web only file has been produced by the BMJ Publishing Group from an electronic file supplied by the author(s) and has not been edited for content.

• Data supplement 1

X @CoralGartner

Contributors CEG and KJS conceived the study. HK, CEG, KJS, JH and WDH designed the search with contributions from Ms Georgia Carstensen. HK refined and ran the final searches and completed the screening, data extraction and wrote the first draft. CEG assisted with data quality control with screening. All authors contributed to interpretation of the data and revision of the manuscript. HK and CEG are guarantors for the study.

Funding This study was funded by a National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) grant (GNT1198301). HK is supported by a National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Korean government (MSIT) (No. 2021R1C1C2094375). CEG is supported by an ARC Future Fellowship (FT220100186).

Competing interests No, there are no competing interests.

Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.

Read the full text or download the PDF: