what is a theoretical literature review

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

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

Table of Contents

What is the purpose of literature review , a. habitat loss and species extinction: , b. range shifts and phenological changes: , c. ocean acidification and coral reefs: , d. adaptive strategies and conservation efforts: .

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

Frequently asked questions 

What is a literature review .

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Literature review example 

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

Literature Review on Climate Change Impacts on Biodiversity:  

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

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

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

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

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

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

How to write a good literature review 

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

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

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

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

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

Write and Cite as yo u go with Paperpal Research. Start now for free!

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

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

Conducting a literature review 

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

Choose a Topic and Define the Research Question:  

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

Decide on the Scope of Your Review:  

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

Select Databases for Searches:  

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

Conduct Searches and Keep Track:  

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

Review the Literature:  

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

Organize and Write Your Literature Review:  

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

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

How to write a literature review faster with Paperpal?  

Paperpal, an AI writing assistant, integrates powerful academic search capabilities within its writing platform. With the Research | Cite feature, you get 100% factual insights, with citations backed by 250M+ verified research articles, directly within your writing interface. It also allows you auto-cite references in 10,000+ styles and save relevant references in your Citation Library. By eliminating the need to switch tabs to find answers to all your research questions, Paperpal saves time and helps you stay focused on your writing.   

Here’s how to use the Research feature:  

• Ask a question: Get started with a new document on paperpal.com. Click on the “Research | Cite” feature and type your question in plain English. Paperpal will scour over 250 million research articles, including conference papers and preprints, to provide you with accurate insights and citations. 

• Review and Save: Paperpal summarizes the information, while citing sources and listing relevant reads. You can quickly scan the results to identify relevant references and save these directly to your built-in citations library for later access. 
• Cite with Confidence: Paperpal makes it easy to incorporate relevant citations and references in 10,000+ styles into your writing, ensuring your arguments are well-supported by credible sources. This translates to a polished, well-researched literature review. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

References 

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

Paperpal is a comprehensive AI writing toolkit that helps students and researchers achieve 2x the writing in half the time. It leverages 22+ years of STM experience and insights from millions of research articles to provide in-depth academic writing, language editing, and submission readiness support to help you write better, faster.  

Get accurate academic translations, rewriting support, grammar checks, vocabulary suggestions, and generative AI assistance that delivers human precision at machine speed. Try for free or upgrade to Paperpal Prime starting at US$19 a month to access premium features, including consistency, plagiarism, and 30+ submission readiness checks to help you succeed.  

Experience the future of academic writing – Sign up to Paperpal and start writing for free!  

Related Reads:

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

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

Self-plagiarism in research: what it is and how to avoid it, you may also like, academic integrity vs academic dishonesty: types & examples, dissertation printing and binding | types & comparison , what is a dissertation preface definition and examples , the ai revolution: authors’ role in upholding academic..., the future of academia: how ai tools are..., how to write a research proposal: (with examples..., how to write your research paper in apa..., how to choose a dissertation topic, how to write a phd research proposal, how to write an academic paragraph (step-by-step guide).

• USC Libraries
• Research Guides

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper

• 5. The Literature Review
• Purpose of Guide
• Design Flaws to Avoid
• Independent and Dependent Variables
• Glossary of Research Terms
• Reading Research Effectively
• Narrowing a Topic Idea
• Broadening a Topic Idea
• Extending the Timeliness of a Topic Idea
• Academic Writing Style
• Applying Critical Thinking
• Choosing a Title
• Making an Outline
• Paragraph Development
• Research Process Video Series
• Executive Summary
• The C.A.R.S. Model
• Background Information
• The Research Problem/Question
• Theoretical Framework
• Citation Tracking
• Content Alert Services
• Evaluating Sources
• Primary Sources
• Secondary Sources
• Tiertiary Sources
• Scholarly vs. Popular Publications
• Qualitative Methods
• Quantitative Methods
• Insiderness
• Using Non-Textual Elements
• Limitations of the Study
• Common Grammar Mistakes
• Writing Concisely
• Avoiding Plagiarism
• Footnotes or Endnotes?
• Further Readings
• Generative AI and Writing
• USC Libraries Tutorials and Other Guides
• Bibliography

A literature review surveys prior research published in books, scholarly articles, and any other sources relevant to a particular issue, area of research, or theory, and by so doing, provides a description, summary, and critical evaluation of these works in relation to the research problem being investigated. Literature reviews are designed to provide an overview of sources you have used in researching a particular topic and to demonstrate to your readers how your research fits within existing scholarship about the topic.

Fink, Arlene. Conducting Research Literature Reviews: From the Internet to Paper . Fourth edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, 2014.

Importance of a Good Literature Review

A literature review may consist of simply a summary of key sources, but in the social sciences, a literature review usually has an organizational pattern and combines both summary and synthesis, often within specific conceptual categories . A summary is a recap of the important information of the source, but a synthesis is a re-organization, or a reshuffling, of that information in a way that informs how you are planning to investigate a research problem. The analytical features of a literature review might:

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

Given this, the purpose of a literature review is to:

• Place each work in the context of its contribution to understanding the research problem being studied.
• Describe the relationship of each work to the others under consideration.
• Identify new ways to interpret prior research.
• Reveal any gaps that exist in the literature.
• Resolve conflicts amongst seemingly contradictory previous studies.
• Identify areas of prior scholarship to prevent duplication of effort.
• Point the way in fulfilling a need for additional research.
• Locate your own research within the context of existing literature [very important].

Fink, Arlene. Conducting Research Literature Reviews: From the Internet to Paper. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2005; Hart, Chris. Doing a Literature Review: Releasing the Social Science Research Imagination . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1998; Jesson, Jill. Doing Your Literature Review: Traditional and Systematic Techniques . Los Angeles, CA: SAGE, 2011; Knopf, Jeffrey W. "Doing a Literature Review." PS: Political Science and Politics 39 (January 2006): 127-132; Ridley, Diana. The Literature Review: A Step-by-Step Guide for Students . 2nd ed. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE, 2012.

Types of Literature Reviews

It is important to think of knowledge in a given field as consisting of three layers. First, there are the primary studies that researchers conduct and publish. Second are the reviews of those studies that summarize and offer new interpretations built from and often extending beyond the primary studies. Third, there are the perceptions, conclusions, opinion, and interpretations that are shared informally among scholars that become part of the body of epistemological traditions within the field.

In composing a literature review, it is important to note that it is often this third layer of knowledge that is cited as "true" even though it often has only a loose relationship to the primary studies and secondary literature reviews. Given this, while literature reviews are designed to provide an overview and synthesis of pertinent sources you have explored, there are a number of approaches you could adopt depending upon the type of analysis underpinning your study.

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

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

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

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

Systematic Review This form consists of an overview of existing evidence pertinent to a clearly formulated research question, which uses pre-specified and standardized methods to identify and critically appraise relevant research, and to collect, report, and analyze data from the studies that are included in the review. The goal is to deliberately document, critically evaluate, and summarize scientifically all of the research about a clearly defined research problem . Typically it focuses on a very specific empirical question, often posed in a cause-and-effect form, such as "To what extent does A contribute to B?" This type of literature review is primarily applied to examining prior research studies in clinical medicine and allied health fields, but it is increasingly being used in the social sciences.

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

NOTE: Most often the literature review will incorporate some combination of types. For example, a review that examines literature supporting or refuting an argument, assumption, or philosophical problem related to the research problem will also need to include writing supported by sources that establish the history of these arguments in the literature.

Baumeister, Roy F. and Mark R. Leary. "Writing Narrative Literature Reviews."  Review of General Psychology 1 (September 1997): 311-320; Mark R. Fink, Arlene. Conducting Research Literature Reviews: From the Internet to Paper . 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2005; Hart, Chris. Doing a Literature Review: Releasing the Social Science Research Imagination . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1998; Kennedy, Mary M. "Defining a Literature." Educational Researcher 36 (April 2007): 139-147; Petticrew, Mark and Helen Roberts. Systematic Reviews in the Social Sciences: A Practical Guide . Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers, 2006; Torracro, Richard. "Writing Integrative Literature Reviews: Guidelines and Examples." Human Resource Development Review 4 (September 2005): 356-367; Rocco, Tonette S. and Maria S. Plakhotnik. "Literature Reviews, Conceptual Frameworks, and Theoretical Frameworks: Terms, Functions, and Distinctions." Human Ressource Development Review 8 (March 2008): 120-130; Sutton, Anthea. Systematic Approaches to a Successful Literature Review . Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications, 2016.

Structure and Writing Style

I.  Thinking About Your Literature Review

The structure of a literature review should include the following in support of understanding the research problem :

• An overview of the subject, issue, or theory under consideration, along with the objectives of the literature review,
• Division of works under review into themes or categories [e.g. works that support a particular position, those against, and those offering alternative approaches entirely],
• An explanation of how each work is similar to and how it varies from the others,
• Conclusions as to which pieces are best considered in their argument, are most convincing of their opinions, and make the greatest contribution to the understanding and development of their area of research.

The critical evaluation of each work should consider :

• Provenance -- what are the author's credentials? Are the author's arguments supported by evidence [e.g. primary historical material, case studies, narratives, statistics, recent scientific findings]?
• Methodology -- were the techniques used to identify, gather, and analyze the data appropriate to addressing the research problem? Was the sample size appropriate? Were the results effectively interpreted and reported?
• Objectivity -- is the author's perspective even-handed or prejudicial? Is contrary data considered or is certain pertinent information ignored to prove the author's point?
• Persuasiveness -- which of the author's theses are most convincing or least convincing?
• Validity -- are the author's arguments and conclusions convincing? Does the work ultimately contribute in any significant way to an understanding of the subject?

II.  Development of the Literature Review

Four Basic Stages of Writing 1.  Problem formulation -- which topic or field is being examined and what are its component issues? 2.  Literature search -- finding materials relevant to the subject being explored. 3.  Data evaluation -- determining which literature makes a significant contribution to the understanding of the topic. 4.  Analysis and interpretation -- discussing the findings and conclusions of pertinent literature.

Consider the following issues before writing the literature review: Clarify If your assignment is not specific about what form your literature review should take, seek clarification from your professor by asking these questions: 1.  Roughly how many sources would be appropriate to include? 2.  What types of sources should I review (books, journal articles, websites; scholarly versus popular sources)? 3.  Should I summarize, synthesize, or critique sources by discussing a common theme or issue? 4.  Should I evaluate the sources in any way beyond evaluating how they relate to understanding the research problem? 5.  Should I provide subheadings and other background information, such as definitions and/or a history? Find Models Use the exercise of reviewing the literature to examine how authors in your discipline or area of interest have composed their literature review sections. Read them to get a sense of the types of themes you might want to look for in your own research or to identify ways to organize your final review. The bibliography or reference section of sources you've already read, such as required readings in the course syllabus, are also excellent entry points into your own research. Narrow the Topic The narrower your topic, the easier it will be to limit the number of sources you need to read in order to obtain a good survey of relevant resources. Your professor will probably not expect you to read everything that's available about the topic, but you'll make the act of reviewing easier if you first limit scope of the research problem. A good strategy is to begin by searching the USC Libraries Catalog for recent books about the topic and review the table of contents for chapters that focuses on specific issues. You can also review the indexes of books to find references to specific issues that can serve as the focus of your research. For example, a book surveying the history of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict may include a chapter on the role Egypt has played in mediating the conflict, or look in the index for the pages where Egypt is mentioned in the text. Consider Whether Your Sources are Current Some disciplines require that you use information that is as current as possible. This is particularly true in disciplines in medicine and the sciences where research conducted becomes obsolete very quickly as new discoveries are made. However, when writing a review in the social sciences, a survey of the history of the literature may be required. In other words, a complete understanding the research problem requires you to deliberately examine how knowledge and perspectives have changed over time. Sort through other current bibliographies or literature reviews in the field to get a sense of what your discipline expects. You can also use this method to explore what is considered by scholars to be a "hot topic" and what is not.

III.  Ways to Organize Your Literature Review

Chronology of Events If your review follows the chronological method, you could write about the materials according to when they were published. This approach should only be followed if a clear path of research building on previous research can be identified and that these trends follow a clear chronological order of development. For example, a literature review that focuses on continuing research about the emergence of German economic power after the fall of the Soviet Union. By Publication Order your sources by publication chronology, then, only if the order demonstrates a more important trend. For instance, you could order a review of literature on environmental studies of brown fields if the progression revealed, for example, a change in the soil collection practices of the researchers who wrote and/or conducted the studies. Thematic [“conceptual categories”] A thematic literature review is the most common approach to summarizing prior research in the social and behavioral sciences. Thematic reviews are organized around a topic or issue, rather than the progression of time, although the progression of time may still be incorporated into a thematic review. For example, a review of the Internet’s impact on American presidential politics could focus on the development of online political satire. While the study focuses on one topic, the Internet’s impact on American presidential politics, it would still be organized chronologically reflecting technological developments in media. The difference in this example between a "chronological" and a "thematic" approach is what is emphasized the most: themes related to the role of the Internet in presidential politics. Note that more authentic thematic reviews tend to break away from chronological order. A review organized in this manner would shift between time periods within each section according to the point being made. Methodological A methodological approach focuses on the methods utilized by the researcher. For the Internet in American presidential politics project, one methodological approach would be to look at cultural differences between the portrayal of American presidents on American, British, and French websites. Or the review might focus on the fundraising impact of the Internet on a particular political party. A methodological scope will influence either the types of documents in the review or the way in which these documents are discussed.

Other Sections of Your Literature Review Once you've decided on the organizational method for your literature review, the sections you need to include in the paper should be easy to figure out because they arise from your organizational strategy. In other words, a chronological review would have subsections for each vital time period; a thematic review would have subtopics based upon factors that relate to the theme or issue. However, sometimes you may need to add additional sections that are necessary for your study, but do not fit in the organizational strategy of the body. What other sections you include in the body is up to you. However, only include what is necessary for the reader to locate your study within the larger scholarship about the research problem.

Here are examples of other sections, usually in the form of a single paragraph, you may need to include depending on the type of review you write:

• Current Situation : Information necessary to understand the current topic or focus of the literature review.
• Sources Used : Describes the methods and resources [e.g., databases] you used to identify the literature you reviewed.
• History : The chronological progression of the field, the research literature, or an idea that is necessary to understand the literature review, if the body of the literature review is not already a chronology.
• Selection Methods : Criteria you used to select (and perhaps exclude) sources in your literature review. For instance, you might explain that your review includes only peer-reviewed [i.e., scholarly] sources.
• Standards : Description of the way in which you present your information.
• Questions for Further Research : What questions about the field has the review sparked? How will you further your research as a result of the review?

IV.  Writing Your Literature Review

Once you've settled on how to organize your literature review, you're ready to write each section. When writing your review, keep in mind these issues.

Use Evidence A literature review section is, in this sense, just like any other academic research paper. Your interpretation of the available sources must be backed up with evidence [citations] that demonstrates that what you are saying is valid. Be Selective Select only the most important points in each source to highlight in the review. The type of information you choose to mention should relate directly to the research problem, whether it is thematic, methodological, or chronological. Related items that provide additional information, but that are not key to understanding the research problem, can be included in a list of further readings . Use Quotes Sparingly Some short quotes are appropriate if you want to emphasize a point, or if what an author stated cannot be easily paraphrased. Sometimes you may need to quote certain terminology that was coined by the author, is not common knowledge, or taken directly from the study. Do not use extensive quotes as a substitute for using your own words in reviewing the literature. Summarize and Synthesize Remember to summarize and synthesize your sources within each thematic paragraph as well as throughout the review. Recapitulate important features of a research study, but then synthesize it by rephrasing the study's significance and relating it to your own work and the work of others. Keep Your Own Voice While the literature review presents others' ideas, your voice [the writer's] should remain front and center. For example, weave references to other sources into what you are writing but maintain your own voice by starting and ending the paragraph with your own ideas and wording. Use Caution When Paraphrasing When paraphrasing a source that is not your own, be sure to represent the author's information or opinions accurately and in your own words. Even when paraphrasing an author’s work, you still must provide a citation to that work.

V.  Common Mistakes to Avoid

These are the most common mistakes made in reviewing social science research literature.

• Sources in your literature review do not clearly relate to the research problem;
• You do not take sufficient time to define and identify the most relevant sources to use in the literature review related to the research problem;
• Relies exclusively on secondary analytical sources rather than including relevant primary research studies or data;
• Uncritically accepts another researcher's findings and interpretations as valid, rather than examining critically all aspects of the research design and analysis;
• Does not describe the search procedures that were used in identifying the literature to review;
• Reports isolated statistical results rather than synthesizing them in chi-squared or meta-analytic methods; and,
• Only includes research that validates assumptions and does not consider contrary findings and alternative interpretations found in the literature.

Cook, Kathleen E. and Elise Murowchick. “Do Literature Review Skills Transfer from One Course to Another?” Psychology Learning and Teaching 13 (March 2014): 3-11; Fink, Arlene. Conducting Research Literature Reviews: From the Internet to Paper . 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2005; Hart, Chris. Doing a Literature Review: Releasing the Social Science Research Imagination . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1998; Jesson, Jill. Doing Your Literature Review: Traditional and Systematic Techniques . London: SAGE, 2011; Literature Review Handout. Online Writing Center. Liberty University; Literature Reviews. The Writing Center. University of North Carolina; Onwuegbuzie, Anthony J. and Rebecca Frels. Seven Steps to a Comprehensive Literature Review: A Multimodal and Cultural Approach . Los Angeles, CA: SAGE, 2016; Ridley, Diana. The Literature Review: A Step-by-Step Guide for Students . 2nd ed. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE, 2012; Randolph, Justus J. “A Guide to Writing the Dissertation Literature Review." Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation. vol. 14, June 2009; Sutton, Anthea. Systematic Approaches to a Successful Literature Review . Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications, 2016; Taylor, Dena. The Literature Review: A Few Tips On Conducting It. University College Writing Centre. University of Toronto; Writing a Literature Review. Academic Skills Centre. University of Canberra.

Writing Tip

Break Out of Your Disciplinary Box!

Thinking interdisciplinarily about a research problem can be a rewarding exercise in applying new ideas, theories, or concepts to an old problem. For example, what might cultural anthropologists say about the continuing conflict in the Middle East? In what ways might geographers view the need for better distribution of social service agencies in large cities than how social workers might study the issue? You don’t want to substitute a thorough review of core research literature in your discipline for studies conducted in other fields of study. However, particularly in the social sciences, thinking about research problems from multiple vectors is a key strategy for finding new solutions to a problem or gaining a new perspective. Consult with a librarian about identifying research databases in other disciplines; almost every field of study has at least one comprehensive database devoted to indexing its research literature.

Frodeman, Robert. The Oxford Handbook of Interdisciplinarity . New York: Oxford University Press, 2010.

Another Writing Tip

Don't Just Review for Content!

While conducting a review of the literature, maximize the time you devote to writing this part of your paper by thinking broadly about what you should be looking for and evaluating. Review not just what scholars are saying, but how are they saying it. Some questions to ask:

• How are they organizing their ideas?
• What methods have they used to study the problem?
• What theories have been used to explain, predict, or understand their research problem?
• What sources have they cited to support their conclusions?
• How have they used non-textual elements [e.g., charts, graphs, figures, etc.] to illustrate key points?

When you begin to write your literature review section, you'll be glad you dug deeper into how the research was designed and constructed because it establishes a means for developing more substantial analysis and interpretation of the research problem.

Hart, Chris. Doing a Literature Review: Releasing the Social Science Research Imagination . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1 998.

Yet Another Writing Tip

When Do I Know I Can Stop Looking and Move On?

Here are several strategies you can utilize to assess whether you've thoroughly reviewed the literature:

• Look for repeating patterns in the research findings . If the same thing is being said, just by different people, then this likely demonstrates that the research problem has hit a conceptual dead end. At this point consider: Does your study extend current research?  Does it forge a new path? Or, does is merely add more of the same thing being said?
• Look at sources the authors cite to in their work . If you begin to see the same researchers cited again and again, then this is often an indication that no new ideas have been generated to address the research problem.
• Search Google Scholar to identify who has subsequently cited leading scholars already identified in your literature review [see next sub-tab]. This is called citation tracking and there are a number of sources that can help you identify who has cited whom, particularly scholars from outside of your discipline. Here again, if the same authors are being cited again and again, this may indicate no new literature has been written on the topic.

Onwuegbuzie, Anthony J. and Rebecca Frels. Seven Steps to a Comprehensive Literature Review: A Multimodal and Cultural Approach . Los Angeles, CA: Sage, 2016; Sutton, Anthea. Systematic Approaches to a Successful Literature Review . Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications, 2016.

• << Previous: Theoretical Framework
• Next: Citation Tracking >>
• Last Updated: Sep 4, 2024 9:40 AM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide

• Resources Home 🏠
• Try SciSpace Copilot
• Search research papers
• Add Copilot Extension
• Try AI Detector
• Try Paraphraser
• Try Citation Generator
• April Papers
• June Papers
• July Papers

Literature Review and Theoretical Framework: Understanding the Differences

Table of Contents

A literature review and a theoretical framework are both important components of academic research. However, they serve different purposes and have distinct characteristics. In this article, we will examine the concepts of literature review and theoretical framework, explore their significance, and highlight the key differences between the two.

Defining the Concepts: Literature Review and Theoretical Framework

Before we dive into the details, let's clarify what a literature review and a theoretical framework actually mean.

What is a Literature Review?

A literature review is a critical analysis and synthesis of existing research and scholarly articles on a specific topic. It involves reviewing and summarizing the current knowledge and understanding of the subject matter. By examining previous studies, the scholar can identify knowledge gaps, assess the strengths and weaknesses of existing research, and present a comprehensive overview of the topic.

When conducting a literature review, the scholar delves into a vast array of sources, including academic journals, books, conference proceedings, and reputable online databases. This extensive exploration allows them to gather relevant information, theories, and methodologies related to their research topic.

Furthermore, a literature review provides a solid foundation for the research by establishing the context and significance of the study. It helps researchers identify the key concepts, theories, and variables that are relevant to their research objectives. By critically analyzing the existing literature, scholars can identify research gaps and propose new avenues for scientific investigation.

Moreover, a literature review is not merely a summary of previous studies. It requires a critical evaluation of the methodologies used, the quality of the data collected, and the validity of the conclusions drawn.

Researchers must assess the credibility and reliability of the sources they include in their review to ensure the accuracy and robustness of their analysis.

What is a Theoretical Framework?

A theoretical framework provides a conceptual explanation for the research problem or question being investigated. It serves as a foundation that guides the formulation of hypotheses and research objectives. A theoretical framework helps researchers to analyze and interpret their findings by establishing a set of assumptions, concepts, and relationships that underpin their study. It provides a structured framework for organizing and presenting research outcomes.

When developing a theoretical framework, researchers draw upon existing theories and concepts from relevant disciplines to create a conceptual framework that aligns with their research objectives. This framework helps researchers to define the variables they will study, establish the relationships between these variables, and propose hypotheses that can be tested through empirical research.

Furthermore, a theoretical framework provides a roadmap for researchers to navigate through the complexities of their study. It helps them to identify the key constructs and variables that need to be measured and analyzed. By providing a clear structure, the theoretical framework ensures that researchers stay focused on their research objectives and avoid getting lost in a sea of information.

Moreover, a theoretical framework allows researchers to make connections between their study and existing theories or models. By building upon established knowledge, researchers can contribute to the advancement of their field and provide new insights and perspectives. The theoretical framework also helps researchers interpret their findings in a meaningful way and draw conclusions that have theoretical and practical implications.

In summary, both a literature review and a theoretical framework play crucial roles in the research process. While a literature review provides a comprehensive overview of existing knowledge and identifies research gaps, a theoretical framework establishes the conceptual foundation for the study and guides the formulation of research objectives and hypotheses. Together, these two elements contribute to the development of a robust and well-grounded research study.

The Purpose and Importance of Literature Reviews

Now that we have a clear understanding of what a literature review is, let's explore its purpose and significance.

A literature review plays a crucial role in academic research. It serves several purposes, including:

• Providing a comprehensive understanding of the existing literature in a particular field.
• Identifying the gaps, controversies, or inconsistencies in the current knowledge.
• Helping researchers to refine their research questions and objectives.
• Ensuring that the research being conducted is novel and contributes to the existing body of knowledge.

The Benefits of Conducting a Literature Review

There are numerous benefits to conducting a literature review, such as:

• Enhancing the researcher's knowledge and understanding of the subject area.
• Providing a framework for developing research hypotheses and objectives.
• Identifying potential research methodologies and approaches.
• Informing the selection of appropriate data collection and analysis methods.
• Guiding the interpretation and discussion of research findings.

The Purpose and Importance of Theoretical Frameworks

Moving on to theoretical frameworks, let us discuss their purpose and importance.

When conducting research, theoretical frameworks play a crucial role in providing a solid foundation for the study. They serve as a guiding tool for researchers, helping them navigate through the complexities of their research and providing a framework for understanding and interpreting their findings.

The Function of Theoretical Frameworks in Research

Theoretical frameworks serve multiple functions in research:

• Providing a conceptual framework enables researchers to clearly define the scope and direction of their study.
• Acting as a roadmap, guiding researchers in formulating their research objectives and hypotheses. It helps them identify the key variables and relationships they want to explore, providing a solid foundation for their research.
• Helping researchers identify and select appropriate research methods and techniques. When it comes to selecting research methods and techniques, theoretical frameworks are invaluable. They provide researchers with a lens through which they can evaluate different methods and techniques, ensuring that they choose the most appropriate ones for their study. By aligning their methods with the theoretical framework, researchers can enhance the validity and reliability of their research.
• Supporting the interpretation and explanation of research findings. Once the data has been collected, theoretical frameworks help researchers make sense of their findings. They provide a framework for interpreting and explaining the results, allowing researchers to draw meaningful conclusions. By grounding their analysis in a theoretical framework, researchers can provide a solid foundation for their findings and contribute to the existing body of knowledge.
• Facilitating the integration of new knowledge with existing theories and concepts. Theoretical frameworks also play a crucial role in the advancement of knowledge. By integrating new findings with existing theories and concepts, researchers can contribute to the development of their field.

The Advantages of Developing a Theoretical Framework

Developing a theoretical framework offers several advantages:

• Enhancing the researcher's understanding of the research problem. By developing a theoretical framework, researchers gain a deeper understanding of the research problem they are investigating.  This enhanced understanding allows researchers to approach their study with clarity and purpose.
• Facilitating the selection of an appropriate research design. Choosing the right research design is crucial for the success of a study. A well-developed theoretical framework helps researchers select the most appropriate research design by providing a clear direction and focus. It ensures that the research design aligns with the research objectives and hypotheses, maximizing the chances of obtaining valid and reliable results.
• Helping researchers organize their thoughts and ideas systematically. This organization helps researchers stay focused and ensures that all aspects of the research problem are considered. By structuring their thoughts, researchers can effectively communicate their ideas and findings to others.
• Guiding the analysis and interpretation of research findings. When it comes to analyzing and interpreting research findings, a theoretical framework provides researchers with a framework to guide their process. It helps researchers identify patterns, relationships, and themes within the data, allowing for a more comprehensive analysis.

Developing a theoretical framework is essential for ensuring the validity and reliability of a study. By aligning the research with established theories and concepts, researchers can enhance the credibility of their study. A well-developed theoretical framework provides a solid foundation for the research, increasing the chances of obtaining accurate and meaningful results.

Differences Between Literature Reviews and Theoretical Frameworks

Now, let's explore the key differences between literature reviews and theoretical frameworks.

Key Differences:

• Focus: A literature review focuses on summarizing existing research, while a theoretical framework focuses on providing a conceptual foundation for the study.
• Scope: A literature review covers a broad range of related research, while a theoretical framework is more specific to the research problem at hand.
• Timing: A literature review is typically conducted early in the research process, while a theoretical framework is often developed alongside the research design.
• Purpose: A literature review aims to inform the research and establish its context, while a theoretical framework aims to guide the interpretation and analysis of findings.

In conclusion

Understanding the distinction between a literature review and a theoretical framework is crucial for conducting effective and meaningful academic research. While a literature review provides an overview of existing research, a theoretical framework guides the formulation, analysis, and interpretation of research. Both components are essential for building a strong foundation of knowledge in any field. By comprehending their purpose, significance, and key differences, researchers can enhance the quality and rigor of their research endeavors.

Love using SciSpace tools? Enjoy discounts! Use SR40 (40% off yearly) and SR20 (20% off monthly). Claim yours here 👉 SciSpace Premium

Learn more about Literature Review

5 literature review tools to ace your reseach (+2 bonus tools)

Role of AI in Systematic Literature Review

Evaluating literature review: systematic vs. scoping reviews

A complete guide on how to write a literature review

How to Use AI Tools for Conducting a Literature Review

You might also like

This ChatGPT Alternative Will Change How You Read PDFs Forever!

Smallpdf vs SciSpace: Which ChatPDF is Right for You?

Adobe PDF Reader vs. SciSpace ChatPDF — Best Chat PDF Tools

Literature Review: Types of Literature Reviews

• Literature Review
• Purpose of a Literature Review
• Work in Progress
• Compiling & Writing
• Books, Articles, & Web Pages

Types of Literature Reviews

• Departmental Differences
• Citation Styles & Plagiarism
• Know the Difference! Systematic Review vs. Literature Review

It is important to think of knowledge in a given field as consisting of three layers.

• First, there are the primary studies that researchers conduct and publish.
• Second, are the reviews of those studies that summarize and offer new interpretations built from and often extending beyond the original studies.
• Third, there are the perceptions, conclusions, opinions, and interpretations that are shared informally that become part of the lore of the field.

In composing a literature review, it is important to note that it is often this third layer of knowledge that is cited as "true" even though it often has only a loose relationship to the primary studies and secondary literature reviews.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

• << Previous: Books, Articles, & Web Pages
• Next: Departmental Differences >>
• Last Updated: Sep 10, 2024 11:32 AM
• URL: https://uscupstate.libguides.com/Literature_Review

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.

Prevent plagiarism, run a free check.

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 September 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.

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.

Research Methods

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

Literature Review

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

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

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

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

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

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

A literature review is important because it:

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

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

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

Not an essay 

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

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

A literature review serves several purposes. For example, it

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Systematic review or meta-analysis?

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

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

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

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

Not all systematic reviews contain meta-analysis. 

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

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

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

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

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

• Library Homepage

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

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

What is a Literature Review?

So, what is a literature review .

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

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

What kinds of literature reviews are written?

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

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

What are the Goals of Creating a Literature Review?

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

When do you need to write a Literature Review?

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

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

Where I can find examples of Literature Reviews?

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

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

Where to Find Standalone Literature Reviews

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

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

Social Sciences

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

Hard science and health sciences:

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

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Clinics (Sao Paulo)

Approaching literature review for academic purposes: The Literature Review Checklist

Debora f.b. leite.

I Departamento de Ginecologia e Obstetricia, Faculdade de Ciencias Medicas, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Campinas, SP, BR

II Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Pernambuco, PE, BR

III Hospital das Clinicas, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Pernambuco, PE, BR

Maria Auxiliadora Soares Padilha

Jose g. cecatti.

A sophisticated literature review (LR) can result in a robust dissertation/thesis by scrutinizing the main problem examined by the academic study; anticipating research hypotheses, methods and results; and maintaining the interest of the audience in how the dissertation/thesis will provide solutions for the current gaps in a particular field. Unfortunately, little guidance is available on elaborating LRs, and writing an LR chapter is not a linear process. An LR translates students’ abilities in information literacy, the language domain, and critical writing. Students in postgraduate programs should be systematically trained in these skills. Therefore, this paper discusses the purposes of LRs in dissertations and theses. Second, the paper considers five steps for developing a review: defining the main topic, searching the literature, analyzing the results, writing the review and reflecting on the writing. Ultimately, this study proposes a twelve-item LR checklist. By clearly stating the desired achievements, this checklist allows Masters and Ph.D. students to continuously assess their own progress in elaborating an LR. Institutions aiming to strengthen students’ necessary skills in critical academic writing should also use this tool.

INTRODUCTION

Writing the literature review (LR) is often viewed as a difficult task that can be a point of writer’s block and procrastination ( 1 ) in postgraduate life. Disagreements on the definitions or classifications of LRs ( 2 ) may confuse students about their purpose and scope, as well as how to perform an LR. Interestingly, at many universities, the LR is still an important element in any academic work, despite the more recent trend of producing scientific articles rather than classical theses.

The LR is not an isolated section of the thesis/dissertation or a copy of the background section of a research proposal. It identifies the state-of-the-art knowledge in a particular field, clarifies information that is already known, elucidates implications of the problem being analyzed, links theory and practice ( 3 - 5 ), highlights gaps in the current literature, and places the dissertation/thesis within the research agenda of that field. Additionally, by writing the LR, postgraduate students will comprehend the structure of the subject and elaborate on their cognitive connections ( 3 ) while analyzing and synthesizing data with increasing maturity.

At the same time, the LR transforms the student and hints at the contents of other chapters for the reader. First, the LR explains the research question; second, it supports the hypothesis, objectives, and methods of the research project; and finally, it facilitates a description of the student’s interpretation of the results and his/her conclusions. For scholars, the LR is an introductory chapter ( 6 ). If it is well written, it demonstrates the student’s understanding of and maturity in a particular topic. A sound and sophisticated LR can indicate a robust dissertation/thesis.

A consensus on the best method to elaborate a dissertation/thesis has not been achieved. The LR can be a distinct chapter or included in different sections; it can be part of the introduction chapter, part of each research topic, or part of each published paper ( 7 ). However, scholars view the LR as an integral part of the main body of an academic work because it is intrinsically connected to other sections ( Figure 1 ) and is frequently present. The structure of the LR depends on the conventions of a particular discipline, the rules of the department, and the student’s and supervisor’s areas of expertise, needs and interests.

Interestingly, many postgraduate students choose to submit their LR to peer-reviewed journals. As LRs are critical evaluations of current knowledge, they are indeed publishable material, even in the form of narrative or systematic reviews. However, systematic reviews have specific patterns 1 ( 8 ) that may not entirely fit with the questions posed in the dissertation/thesis. Additionally, the scope of a systematic review may be too narrow, and the strict criteria for study inclusion may omit important information from the dissertation/thesis. Therefore, this essay discusses the definition of an LR is and methods to develop an LR in the context of an academic dissertation/thesis. Finally, we suggest a checklist to evaluate an LR.

WHAT IS A LITERATURE REVIEW IN A THESIS?

Conducting research and writing a dissertation/thesis translates rational thinking and enthusiasm ( 9 ). While a strong body of literature that instructs students on research methodology, data analysis and writing scientific papers exists, little guidance on performing LRs is available. The LR is a unique opportunity to assess and contrast various arguments and theories, not just summarize them. The research results should not be discussed within the LR, but the postgraduate student tends to write a comprehensive LR while reflecting on his or her own findings ( 10 ).

Many people believe that writing an LR is a lonely and linear process. Supervisors or the institutions assume that the Ph.D. student has mastered the relevant techniques and vocabulary associated with his/her subject and conducts a self-reflection about previously published findings. Indeed, while elaborating the LR, the student should aggregate diverse skills, which mainly rely on his/her own commitment to mastering them. Thus, less supervision should be required ( 11 ). However, the parameters described above might not currently be the case for many students ( 11 , 12 ), and the lack of formal and systematic training on writing LRs is an important concern ( 11 ).

An institutional environment devoted to active learning will provide students the opportunity to continuously reflect on LRs, which will form a dialogue between the postgraduate student and the current literature in a particular field ( 13 ). Postgraduate students will be interpreting studies by other researchers, and, according to Hart (1998) ( 3 ), the outcomes of the LR in a dissertation/thesis include the following:

• To identify what research has been performed and what topics require further investigation in a particular field of knowledge;
• To determine the context of the problem;
• To recognize the main methodologies and techniques that have been used in the past;
• To place the current research project within the historical, methodological and theoretical context of a particular field;
• To identify significant aspects of the topic;
• To elucidate the implications of the topic;
• To offer an alternative perspective;
• To discern how the studied subject is structured;
• To improve the student’s subject vocabulary in a particular field; and
• To characterize the links between theory and practice.

A sound LR translates the postgraduate student’s expertise in academic and scientific writing: it expresses his/her level of comfort with synthesizing ideas ( 11 ). The LR reveals how well the postgraduate student has proceeded in three domains: an effective literature search, the language domain, and critical writing.

Effective literature search

All students should be trained in gathering appropriate data for specific purposes, and information literacy skills are a cornerstone. These skills are defined as “an individual’s ability to know when they need information, to identify information that can help them address the issue or problem at hand, and to locate, evaluate, and use that information effectively” ( 14 ). Librarian support is of vital importance in coaching the appropriate use of Boolean logic (AND, OR, NOT) and other tools for highly efficient literature searches (e.g., quotation marks and truncation), as is the appropriate management of electronic databases.

Language domain

Academic writing must be concise and precise: unnecessary words distract the reader from the essential content ( 15 ). In this context, reading about issues distant from the research topic ( 16 ) may increase students’ general vocabulary and familiarity with grammar. Ultimately, reading diverse materials facilitates and encourages the writing process itself.

Critical writing

Critical judgment includes critical reading, thinking and writing. It supposes a student’s analytical reflection about what he/she has read. The student should delineate the basic elements of the topic, characterize the most relevant claims, identify relationships, and finally contrast those relationships ( 17 ). Each scientific document highlights the perspective of the author, and students will become more confident in judging the supporting evidence and underlying premises of a study and constructing their own counterargument as they read more articles. A paucity of integration or contradictory perspectives indicates lower levels of cognitive complexity ( 12 ).

Thus, while elaborating an LR, the postgraduate student should achieve the highest category of Bloom’s cognitive skills: evaluation ( 12 ). The writer should not only summarize data and understand each topic but also be able to make judgments based on objective criteria, compare resources and findings, identify discrepancies due to methodology, and construct his/her own argument ( 12 ). As a result, the student will be sufficiently confident to show his/her own voice .

Writing a consistent LR is an intense and complex activity that reveals the training and long-lasting academic skills of a writer. It is not a lonely or linear process. However, students are unlikely to be prepared to write an LR if they have not mastered the aforementioned domains ( 10 ). An institutional environment that supports student learning is crucial.

Different institutions employ distinct methods to promote students’ learning processes. First, many universities propose modules to develop behind the scenes activities that enhance self-reflection about general skills (e.g., the skills we have mastered and the skills we need to develop further), behaviors that should be incorporated (e.g., self-criticism about one’s own thoughts), and each student’s role in the advancement of his/her field. Lectures or workshops about LRs themselves are useful because they describe the purposes of the LR and how it fits into the whole picture of a student’s work. These activities may explain what type of discussion an LR must involve, the importance of defining the correct scope, the reasons to include a particular resource, and the main role of critical reading.

Some pedagogic services that promote a continuous improvement in study and academic skills are equally important. Examples include workshops about time management, the accomplishment of personal objectives, active learning, and foreign languages for nonnative speakers. Additionally, opportunities to converse with other students promotes an awareness of others’ experiences and difficulties. Ultimately, the supervisor’s role in providing feedback and setting deadlines is crucial in developing students’ abilities and in strengthening students’ writing quality ( 12 ).

HOW SHOULD A LITERATURE REVIEW BE DEVELOPED?

A consensus on the appropriate method for elaborating an LR is not available, but four main steps are generally accepted: defining the main topic, searching the literature, analyzing the results, and writing ( 6 ). We suggest a fifth step: reflecting on the information that has been written in previous publications ( Figure 2 ).

First step: Defining the main topic

Planning an LR is directly linked to the research main question of the thesis and occurs in parallel to students’ training in the three domains discussed above. The planning stage helps organize ideas, delimit the scope of the LR ( 11 ), and avoid the wasting of time in the process. Planning includes the following steps:

• Reflecting on the scope of the LR: postgraduate students will have assumptions about what material must be addressed and what information is not essential to an LR ( 13 , 18 ). Cooper’s Taxonomy of Literature Reviews 2 systematizes the writing process through six characteristics and nonmutually exclusive categories. The focus refers to the reviewer’s most important points of interest, while the goals concern what students want to achieve with the LR. The perspective assumes answers to the student’s own view of the LR and how he/she presents a particular issue. The coverage defines how comprehensive the student is in presenting the literature, and the organization determines the sequence of arguments. The audience is defined as the group for whom the LR is written.
• Designating sections and subsections: Headings and subheadings should be specific, explanatory and have a coherent sequence throughout the text ( 4 ). They simulate an inverted pyramid, with an increasing level of reflection and depth of argument.
• Identifying keywords: The relevant keywords for each LR section should be listed to guide the literature search. This list should mirror what Hart (1998) ( 3 ) advocates as subject vocabulary . The keywords will also be useful when the student is writing the LR since they guide the reader through the text.
• Delineating the time interval and language of documents to be retrieved in the second step. The most recently published documents should be considered, but relevant texts published before a predefined cutoff year can be included if they are classic documents in that field. Extra care should be employed when translating documents.

Second step: Searching the literature

The ability to gather adequate information from the literature must be addressed in postgraduate programs. Librarian support is important, particularly for accessing difficult texts. This step comprises the following components:

• Searching the literature itself: This process consists of defining which databases (electronic or dissertation/thesis repositories), official documents, and books will be searched and then actively conducting the search. Information literacy skills have a central role in this stage. While searching electronic databases, controlled vocabulary (e.g., Medical Subject Headings, or MeSH, for the PubMed database) or specific standardized syntax rules may need to be applied.

In addition, two other approaches are suggested. First, a review of the reference list of each document might be useful for identifying relevant publications to be included and important opinions to be assessed. This step is also relevant for referencing the original studies and leading authors in that field. Moreover, students can directly contact the experts on a particular topic to consult with them regarding their experience or use them as a source of additional unpublished documents.

Before submitting a dissertation/thesis, the electronic search strategy should be repeated. This process will ensure that the most recently published papers will be considered in the LR.

• Selecting documents for inclusion: Generally, the most recent literature will be included in the form of published peer-reviewed papers. Assess books and unpublished material, such as conference abstracts, academic texts and government reports, are also important to assess since the gray literature also offers valuable information. However, since these materials are not peer-reviewed, we recommend that they are carefully added to the LR.

This task is an important exercise in time management. First, students should read the title and abstract to understand whether that document suits their purposes, addresses the research question, and helps develop the topic of interest. Then, they should scan the full text, determine how it is structured, group it with similar documents, and verify whether other arguments might be considered ( 5 ).

Third step: Analyzing the results

Critical reading and thinking skills are important in this step. This step consists of the following components:

• Reading documents: The student may read various texts in depth according to LR sections and subsections ( defining the main topic ), which is not a passive activity ( 1 ). Some questions should be asked to practice critical analysis skills, as listed below. Is the research question evident and articulated with previous knowledge? What are the authors’ research goals and theoretical orientations, and how do they interact? Are the authors’ claims related to other scholars’ research? Do the authors consider different perspectives? Was the research project designed and conducted properly? Are the results and discussion plausible, and are they consistent with the research objectives and methodology? What are the strengths and limitations of this work? How do the authors support their findings? How does this work contribute to the current research topic? ( 1 , 19 )
• Taking notes: Students who systematically take notes on each document are more readily able to establish similarities or differences with other documents and to highlight personal observations. This approach reinforces the student’s ideas about the next step and helps develop his/her own academic voice ( 1 , 13 ). Voice recognition software ( 16 ), mind maps ( 5 ), flowcharts, tables, spreadsheets, personal comments on the referenced texts, and note-taking apps are all available tools for managing these observations, and the student him/herself should use the tool that best improves his/her learning. Additionally, when a student is considering submitting an LR to a peer-reviewed journal, notes should be taken on the activities performed in all five steps to ensure that they are able to be replicated.

Fourth step: Writing

The recognition of when a student is able and ready to write after a sufficient period of reading and thinking is likely a difficult task. Some students can produce a review in a single long work session. However, as discussed above, writing is not a linear process, and students do not need to write LRs according to a specific sequence of sections. Writing an LR is a time-consuming task, and some scholars believe that a period of at least six months is sufficient ( 6 ). An LR, and academic writing in general, expresses the writer’s proper thoughts, conclusions about others’ work ( 6 , 10 , 13 , 16 ), and decisions about methods to progress in the chosen field of knowledge. Thus, each student is expected to present a different learning and writing trajectory.

In this step, writing methods should be considered; then, editing, citing and correct referencing should complete this stage, at least temporarily. Freewriting techniques may be a good starting point for brainstorming ideas and improving the understanding of the information that has been read ( 1 ). Students should consider the following parameters when creating an agenda for writing the LR: two-hour writing blocks (at minimum), with prespecified tasks that are possible to complete in one section; short (minutes) and long breaks (days or weeks) to allow sufficient time for mental rest and reflection; and short- and long-term goals to motivate the writing itself ( 20 ). With increasing experience, this scheme can vary widely, and it is not a straightforward rule. Importantly, each discipline has a different way of writing ( 1 ), and each department has its own preferred styles for citations and references.

Fifth step: Reflecting on the writing

In this step, the postgraduate student should ask him/herself the same questions as in the analyzing the results step, which can take more time than anticipated. Ambiguities, repeated ideas, and a lack of coherence may not be noted when the student is immersed in the writing task for long periods. The whole effort will likely be a work in progress, and continuous refinements in the written material will occur once the writing process has begun.

LITERATURE REVIEW CHECKLIST

In contrast to review papers, the LR of a dissertation/thesis should not be a standalone piece or work. Instead, it should present the student as a scholar and should maintain the interest of the audience in how that dissertation/thesis will provide solutions for the current gaps in a particular field.

A checklist for evaluating an LR is convenient for students’ continuous academic development and research transparency: it clearly states the desired achievements for the LR of a dissertation/thesis. Here, we present an LR checklist developed from an LR scoring rubric ( 11 ). For a critical analysis of an LR, we maintain the five categories but offer twelve criteria that are not scaled ( Figure 3 ). The criteria all have the same importance and are not mutually exclusive.

First category: Coverage

1. justified criteria exist for the inclusion and exclusion of literature in the review.

This criterion builds on the main topic and areas covered by the LR ( 18 ). While experts may be confident in retrieving and selecting literature, postgraduate students must convince their audience about the adequacy of their search strategy and their reasons for intentionally selecting what material to cover ( 11 ). References from different fields of knowledge provide distinct perspective, but narrowing the scope of coverage may be important in areas with a large body of existing knowledge.

Second category: Synthesis

2. a critical examination of the state of the field exists.

A critical examination is an assessment of distinct aspects in the field ( 1 ) along with a constructive argument. It is not a negative critique but an expression of the student’s understanding of how other scholars have added to the topic ( 1 ), and the student should analyze and contextualize contradictory statements. A writer’s personal bias (beliefs or political involvement) have been shown to influence the structure and writing of a document; therefore, the cultural and paradigmatic background guide how the theories are revised and presented ( 13 ). However, an honest judgment is important when considering different perspectives.

3. The topic or problem is clearly placed in the context of the broader scholarly literature

The broader scholarly literature should be related to the chosen main topic for the LR ( how to develop the literature review section). The LR can cover the literature from one or more disciplines, depending on its scope, but it should always offer a new perspective. In addition, students should be careful in citing and referencing previous publications. As a rule, original studies and primary references should generally be included. Systematic and narrative reviews present summarized data, and it may be important to cite them, particularly for issues that should be understood but do not require a detailed description. Similarly, quotations highlight the exact statement from another publication. However, excessive referencing may disclose lower levels of analysis and synthesis by the student.

4. The LR is critically placed in the historical context of the field

Situating the LR in its historical context shows the level of comfort of the student in addressing a particular topic. Instead of only presenting statements and theories in a temporal approach, which occasionally follows a linear timeline, the LR should authentically characterize the student’s academic work in the state-of-art techniques in their particular field of knowledge. Thus, the LR should reinforce why the dissertation/thesis represents original work in the chosen research field.

5. Ambiguities in definitions are considered and resolved

Distinct theories on the same topic may exist in different disciplines, and one discipline may consider multiple concepts to explain one topic. These misunderstandings should be addressed and contemplated. The LR should not synthesize all theories or concepts at the same time. Although this approach might demonstrate in-depth reading on a particular topic, it can reveal a student’s inability to comprehend and synthesize his/her research problem.

6. Important variables and phenomena relevant to the topic are articulated

The LR is a unique opportunity to articulate ideas and arguments and to purpose new relationships between them ( 10 , 11 ). More importantly, a sound LR will outline to the audience how these important variables and phenomena will be addressed in the current academic work. Indeed, the LR should build a bidirectional link with the remaining sections and ground the connections between all of the sections ( Figure 1 ).

7. A synthesized new perspective on the literature has been established

The LR is a ‘creative inquiry’ ( 13 ) in which the student elaborates his/her own discourse, builds on previous knowledge in the field, and describes his/her own perspective while interpreting others’ work ( 13 , 17 ). Thus, students should articulate the current knowledge, not accept the results at face value ( 11 , 13 , 17 ), and improve their own cognitive abilities ( 12 ).

Third category: Methodology

8. the main methodologies and research techniques that have been used in the field are identified and their advantages and disadvantages are discussed.

The LR is expected to distinguish the research that has been completed from investigations that remain to be performed, address the benefits and limitations of the main methods applied to date, and consider the strategies for addressing the expected limitations described above. While placing his/her research within the methodological context of a particular topic, the LR will justify the methodology of the study and substantiate the student’s interpretations.

9. Ideas and theories in the field are related to research methodologies

The audience expects the writer to analyze and synthesize methodological approaches in the field. The findings should be explained according to the strengths and limitations of previous research methods, and students must avoid interpretations that are not supported by the analyzed literature. This criterion translates to the student’s comprehension of the applicability and types of answers provided by different research methodologies, even those using a quantitative or qualitative research approach.

Fourth category: Significance

10. the scholarly significance of the research problem is rationalized.

The LR is an introductory section of a dissertation/thesis and will present the postgraduate student as a scholar in a particular field ( 11 ). Therefore, the LR should discuss how the research problem is currently addressed in the discipline being investigated or in different disciplines, depending on the scope of the LR. The LR explains the academic paradigms in the topic of interest ( 13 ) and methods to advance the field from these starting points. However, an excess number of personal citations—whether referencing the student’s research or studies by his/her research team—may reflect a narrow literature search and a lack of comprehensive synthesis of ideas and arguments.

11. The practical significance of the research problem is rationalized

The practical significance indicates a student’s comprehensive understanding of research terminology (e.g., risk versus associated factor), methodology (e.g., efficacy versus effectiveness) and plausible interpretations in the context of the field. Notably, the academic argument about a topic may not always reflect the debate in real life terms. For example, using a quantitative approach in epidemiology, statistically significant differences between groups do not explain all of the factors involved in a particular problem ( 21 ). Therefore, excessive faith in p -values may reflect lower levels of critical evaluation of the context and implications of a research problem by the student.

Fifth category: Rhetoric

12. the lr was written with a coherent, clear structure that supported the review.

This category strictly relates to the language domain: the text should be coherent and presented in a logical sequence, regardless of which organizational ( 18 ) approach is chosen. The beginning of each section/subsection should state what themes will be addressed, paragraphs should be carefully linked to each other ( 10 ), and the first sentence of each paragraph should generally summarize the content. Additionally, the student’s statements are clear, sound, and linked to other scholars’ works, and precise and concise language that follows standardized writing conventions (e.g., in terms of active/passive voice and verb tenses) is used. Attention to grammar, such as orthography and punctuation, indicates prudence and supports a robust dissertation/thesis. Ultimately, all of these strategies provide fluency and consistency for the text.

Although the scoring rubric was initially proposed for postgraduate programs in education research, we are convinced that this checklist is a valuable tool for all academic areas. It enables the monitoring of students’ learning curves and a concentrated effort on any criteria that are not yet achieved. For institutions, the checklist is a guide to support supervisors’ feedback, improve students’ writing skills, and highlight the learning goals of each program. These criteria do not form a linear sequence, but ideally, all twelve achievements should be perceived in the LR.

CONCLUSIONS

A single correct method to classify, evaluate and guide the elaboration of an LR has not been established. In this essay, we have suggested directions for planning, structuring and critically evaluating an LR. The planning of the scope of an LR and approaches to complete it is a valuable effort, and the five steps represent a rational starting point. An institutional environment devoted to active learning will support students in continuously reflecting on LRs, which will form a dialogue between the writer and the current literature in a particular field ( 13 ).

The completion of an LR is a challenging and necessary process for understanding one’s own field of expertise. Knowledge is always transitory, but our responsibility as scholars is to provide a critical contribution to our field, allowing others to think through our work. Good researchers are grounded in sophisticated LRs, which reveal a writer’s training and long-lasting academic skills. We recommend using the LR checklist as a tool for strengthening the skills necessary for critical academic writing.

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS

Leite DFB has initially conceived the idea and has written the first draft of this review. Padilha MAS and Cecatti JG have supervised data interpretation and critically reviewed the manuscript. All authors have read the draft and agreed with this submission. Authors are responsible for all aspects of this academic piece.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We are grateful to all of the professors of the ‘Getting Started with Graduate Research and Generic Skills’ module at University College Cork, Cork, Ireland, for suggesting and supporting this article. Funding: DFBL has granted scholarship from Brazilian Federal Agency for Support and Evaluation of Graduate Education (CAPES) to take part of her Ph.D. studies in Ireland (process number 88881.134512/2016-01). There is no participation from sponsors on authors’ decision to write or to submit this manuscript.

No potential conflict of interest was reported.

1 The questions posed in systematic reviews usually follow the ‘PICOS’ acronym: Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes, Study design.

2 In 1988, Cooper proposed a taxonomy that aims to facilitate students’ and institutions’ understanding of literature reviews. Six characteristics with specific categories are briefly described: Focus: research outcomes, research methodologies, theories, or practices and applications; Goals: integration (generalization, conflict resolution, and linguistic bridge-building), criticism, or identification of central issues; Perspective: neutral representation or espousal of a position; Coverage: exhaustive, exhaustive with selective citations, representative, central or pivotal; Organization: historical, conceptual, or methodological; and Audience: specialized scholars, general scholars, practitioners or policymakers, or the general public.

Frequently asked questions

What is the difference between a literature review and a theoretical framework.

A literature review and a theoretical framework are not the same thing and cannot be used interchangeably. While a theoretical framework describes the theoretical underpinnings of your work, a literature review critically evaluates existing research relating to your topic. You’ll likely need both in your dissertation .

Frequently asked questions: Dissertation

Dissertation word counts vary widely across different fields, institutions, and levels of education:

• An undergraduate dissertation is typically 8,000–15,000 words
• A master’s dissertation is typically 12,000–50,000 words
• A PhD thesis is typically book-length: 70,000–100,000 words

However, none of these are strict guidelines – your word count may be lower or higher than the numbers stated here. Always check the guidelines provided by your university to determine how long your own dissertation should be.

A dissertation prospectus or proposal describes what or who you plan to research for your dissertation. It delves into why, when, where, and how you will do your research, as well as helps you choose a type of research to pursue. You should also determine whether you plan to pursue qualitative or quantitative methods and what your research design will look like.

It should outline all of the decisions you have taken about your project, from your dissertation topic to your hypotheses and research objectives , ready to be approved by your supervisor or committee.

Note that some departments require a defense component, where you present your prospectus to your committee orally.

A thesis is typically written by students finishing up a bachelor’s or Master’s degree. Some educational institutions, particularly in the liberal arts, have mandatory theses, but they are often not mandatory to graduate from bachelor’s degrees. It is more common for a thesis to be a graduation requirement from a Master’s degree.

Even if not mandatory, you may want to consider writing a thesis if you:

• Plan to attend graduate school soon
• Have a particular topic you’d like to study more in-depth
• Are considering a career in research
• Would like a capstone experience to tie up your academic experience

The conclusion of your thesis or dissertation should include the following:

• A restatement of your research question
• A summary of your key arguments and/or results
• A short discussion of the implications of your research

The conclusion of your thesis or dissertation shouldn’t take up more than 5–7% of your overall word count.

For a stronger dissertation conclusion , avoid including:

• Important evidence or analysis that wasn’t mentioned in the discussion section and results section
• Generic concluding phrases (e.g. “In conclusion …”)
• Weak statements that undermine your argument (e.g., “There are good points on both sides of this issue.”)

Your conclusion should leave the reader with a strong, decisive impression of your work.

While it may be tempting to present new arguments or evidence in your thesis or disseration conclusion , especially if you have a particularly striking argument you’d like to finish your analysis with, you shouldn’t. Theses and dissertations follow a more formal structure than this.

All your findings and arguments should be presented in the body of the text (more specifically in the discussion section and results section .) The conclusion is meant to summarize and reflect on the evidence and arguments you have already presented, not introduce new ones.

A theoretical framework can sometimes be integrated into a  literature review chapter , but it can also be included as its own chapter or section in your dissertation . As a rule of thumb, if your research involves dealing with a lot of complex theories, it’s a good idea to include a separate theoretical framework chapter.

While a theoretical framework describes the theoretical underpinnings of your work based on existing research, a conceptual framework allows you to draw your own conclusions, mapping out the variables you may use in your study and the interplay between them.

A thesis or dissertation outline is one of the most critical first steps in your writing process. It helps you to lay out and organize your ideas and can provide you with a roadmap for deciding what kind of research you’d like to undertake.

Generally, an outline contains information on the different sections included in your thesis or dissertation , such as:

• Your anticipated title
• Your abstract
• Your chapters (sometimes subdivided into further topics like literature review , research methods , avenues for future research, etc.)

When you mention different chapters within your text, it’s considered best to use Roman numerals for most citation styles. However, the most important thing here is to remain consistent whenever using numbers in your dissertation .

In most styles, the title page is used purely to provide information and doesn’t include any images. Ask your supervisor if you are allowed to include an image on the title page before doing so. If you do decide to include one, make sure to check whether you need permission from the creator of the image.

Include a note directly beneath the image acknowledging where it comes from, beginning with the word “ Note .” (italicized and followed by a period). Include a citation and copyright attribution . Don’t title, number, or label the image as a figure , since it doesn’t appear in your main text.

Definitional terms often fall into the category of common knowledge , meaning that they don’t necessarily have to be cited. This guidance can apply to your thesis or dissertation glossary as well.

However, if you’d prefer to cite your sources , you can follow guidance for citing dictionary entries in MLA or APA style for your glossary.

A glossary is a collection of words pertaining to a specific topic. In your thesis or dissertation, it’s a list of all terms you used that may not immediately be obvious to your reader. In contrast, an index is a list of the contents of your work organized by page number.

The title page of your thesis or dissertation goes first, before all other content or lists that you may choose to include.

The title page of your thesis or dissertation should include your name, department, institution, degree program, and submission date.

Glossaries are not mandatory, but if you use a lot of technical or field-specific terms, it may improve readability to add one to your thesis or dissertation. Your educational institution may also require them, so be sure to check their specific guidelines.

A glossary or “glossary of terms” is a collection of words pertaining to a specific topic. In your thesis or dissertation, it’s a list of all terms you used that may not immediately be obvious to your reader. Your glossary only needs to include terms that your reader may not be familiar with, and is intended to enhance their understanding of your work.

A glossary is a collection of words pertaining to a specific topic. In your thesis or dissertation, it’s a list of all terms you used that may not immediately be obvious to your reader. In contrast, dictionaries are more general collections of words.

An abbreviation is a shortened version of an existing word, such as Dr. for Doctor. In contrast, an acronym uses the first letter of each word to create a wholly new word, such as UNESCO (an acronym for the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization).

As a rule of thumb, write the explanation in full the first time you use an acronym or abbreviation. You can then proceed with the shortened version. However, if the abbreviation is very common (like PC, USA, or DNA), then you can use the abbreviated version from the get-go.

Be sure to add each abbreviation in your list of abbreviations !

If you only used a few abbreviations in your thesis or dissertation , you don’t necessarily need to include a list of abbreviations .

If your abbreviations are numerous, or if you think they won’t be known to your audience, it’s never a bad idea to add one. They can also improve readability, minimizing confusion about abbreviations unfamiliar to your reader.

A list of abbreviations is a list of all the abbreviations that you used in your thesis or dissertation. It should appear at the beginning of your document, with items in alphabetical order, just after your table of contents .

Your list of tables and figures should go directly after your table of contents in your thesis or dissertation.

Lists of figures and tables are often not required, and aren’t particularly common. They specifically aren’t required for APA-Style, though you should be careful to follow their other guidelines for figures and tables .

If you have many figures and tables in your thesis or dissertation, include one may help you stay organized. Your educational institution may require them, so be sure to check their guidelines.

A list of figures and tables compiles all of the figures and tables that you used in your thesis or dissertation and displays them with the page number where they can be found.

The table of contents in a thesis or dissertation always goes between your abstract and your introduction .

You may acknowledge God in your dissertation acknowledgements , but be sure to follow academic convention by also thanking the members of academia, as well as family, colleagues, and friends who helped you.

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 .  

In a thesis or dissertation, the discussion is an in-depth exploration of the results, going into detail about the meaning of your findings and citing relevant sources to put them in context.

The conclusion is more shorter and more general: it concisely answers your main research question and makes recommendations based on your overall findings.

In the discussion , you explore the meaning and relevance of your research results , explaining how they fit with existing research and theory. Discuss:

• Your  interpretations : what do the results tell us?
• The  implications : why do the results matter?
• The  limitation s : what can’t the results tell us?

The results chapter or section simply and objectively reports what you found, without speculating on why you found these results. The discussion interprets the meaning of the results, puts them in context, and explains why they matter.

In qualitative research , results and discussion are sometimes combined. But in quantitative research , it’s considered important to separate the objective results from your interpretation of them.

Results are usually written in the past tense , because they are describing the outcome of completed actions.

The results chapter of a thesis or dissertation presents your research results concisely and objectively.

In quantitative research , for each question or hypothesis , state:

• The type of analysis used
• Relevant results in the form of descriptive and inferential statistics
• Whether or not the alternative hypothesis was supported

In qualitative research , for each question or theme, describe:

• Recurring patterns
• Significant or representative individual responses
• Relevant quotations from the data

Don’t interpret or speculate in the results chapter.

To automatically insert a table of contents in Microsoft Word, follow these steps:

• Apply heading styles throughout the document.
• In the references section in the ribbon, locate the Table of Contents group.
• Click the arrow next to the Table of Contents icon and select Custom Table of Contents.
• Select which levels of headings you would like to include in the table of contents.

Make sure to update your table of contents if you move text or change headings. To update, simply right click and select Update Field.

All level 1 and 2 headings should be included in your table of contents . That means the titles of your chapters and the main sections within them.

The contents should also include all appendices and the lists of tables and figures, if applicable, as well as your reference list .

Do not include the acknowledgements or abstract in the table of contents.

The abstract appears on its own page in the thesis or dissertation , after the title page and acknowledgements but before the table of contents .

An abstract for a thesis or dissertation is usually around 200–300 words. There’s often a strict word limit, so make sure to check your university’s requirements.

In a thesis or dissertation, the acknowledgements should usually be no longer than one page. There is no minimum length.

The acknowledgements are generally included at the very beginning of your thesis , directly after the title page and before the abstract .

Yes, it’s important to thank your supervisor(s) in the acknowledgements section of your thesis or dissertation .

Even if you feel your supervisor did not contribute greatly to the final product, you must acknowledge them, if only for a very brief thank you. If you do not include your supervisor, it may be seen as a snub.

In the acknowledgements of your thesis or dissertation, you should first thank those who helped you academically or professionally, such as your supervisor, funders, and other academics.

Then you can include personal thanks to friends, family members, or anyone else who supported you during the process.

Ask our team

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

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

Our team helps students graduate by offering:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Libraries | Research Guides

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

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

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

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

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

• University of Texas Libraries

Literature Reviews

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

What is a Literature Review?

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

A literature review should: 

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

From  S age Research Methods

Purpose of a Literature Review

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

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

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

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

Limitations of a Literature Review

Some of the limitations of a literature review are:

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

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

Librarian Assistance

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

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

Literature Reviews

What is a Literature Review?

• Steps for Creating a Literature Review
• Providing Evidence / Critical Analysis
• Challenges when writing a Literature Review
• Systematic Literature Reviews

A literature review is an academic text that surveys, synthesizes, and critically evaluates the existing literature on a specific topic. It is typically required for theses, dissertations, or long reports and  serves several key purposes:

• Surveying the Literature : It involves a comprehensive search and examination of relevant academic books, journal articles, and other sources related to the chosen topic.
• Synthesizing Information : The literature review summarizes and organizes the information found in the literature, often identifying patterns, themes, and gaps in the current knowledge.
• Critical Analysis : It critically analyzes the collected information, highlighting limitations, gaps, and areas of controversy, and suggests directions for future research.
• Establishing Context : It places the current research within the broader context of the field, demonstrating how the new research builds on or diverges from previous studies.

Types of Literature Reviews

Literature reviews can take various forms, including:

• Narrative Reviews : These provide a qualitative summary of the literature and are often used to give a broad overview of a topic. They may be less structured and more subjective, focusing on synthesizing the literature to support a particular viewpoint.
• Systematic Reviews : These are more rigorous and structured, following a specific methodology to identify, evaluate, and synthesize all relevant studies on a particular question. They aim to minimize bias and provide a comprehensive summary of the existing evidence.
• Integrative Reviews : Similar to systematic reviews, but they aim to generate new knowledge by integrating findings from different studies to develop new theories or frameworks.

Importance of Literature Reviews

• Foundation for Research : They provide a solid background for new research projects, helping to justify the research question and methodology.

Identifying Gaps : Literature reviews highlight areas where knowledge is lacking, guiding future research efforts.

• Building Credibility : Demonstrating familiarity with existing research enhances the credibility of the researcher and their work.

In summary, a literature review is a critical component of academic research that helps to frame the current state of knowledge, identify gaps, and provide  a basis for new research.

The research, the body of current literature, and the particular objectives should all influence the structure of a literature review. It is also critical to remember that creating a literature review is an ongoing process - as one reads and analyzes the literature, one's understanding may change, which could require rearranging the literature review.

Paré, G. and Kitsiou, S. (2017) 'Methods for Literature Reviews' , in: Lau, F. and Kuziemsky, C. (eds.)  Handbook of eHealth evaluation: an evidence-based approach . Victoria (BC): University of Victoria.

Perplexity AI (2024) Perplexity AI response to Kathy Neville, 31 July.       

Royal Literary Fund (2024)  The structure of a literature review.  Available at: https://www.rlf.org.uk/resources/the-structure-of-a-literature-review/ (Accessed: 23 July 2024).

Library Services for Undergraduate Research (2024) Literature review: a definition . Available at: https://libguides.wustl.edu/our?p=302677 (Accessed: 31 July 2024).

Further Reading:

Methods for Literature Reviews

Literature Review (The University of Edinburgh)

Literature Reviews (University of Sheffield)

• How to Write a Literature Review Paper? Wee, Bert Van ; Banister, David ISBN: 0144-1647

• Next: Steps for Creating a Literature Review >>
• Last Updated: Sep 4, 2024 11:43 AM
• URL: https://library.lsbu.ac.uk/literaturereviews

Theoretical Literature Review: Tracing the Life Cycle of a Theory and Its Verified and Falsified Statements

• January 2018
• Human Resource Development Review 17(1):153448431774968
• 17(1):153448431774968

• Texas A&M University

• University of North Texas
• This person is not on ResearchGate, or hasn't claimed this research yet.

Abstract and Figures

Discover the world's research

• 25+ million members
• 160+ million publication pages
• 2.3+ billion citations

• Leticia Komba Rwakijuma

• INT J BEHAV NUTR PHY

• Nigel Thurlow
• J MANAGE INQUIRY

• Kathleen M. Eisenhardt

• Karen E. Watkins
• Kyoungshin Kim
• Karl Popper
• Hum Resource Dev Rev
• Seung-hyun Han

• Seung Won Yoon

• T.R. Mitchell
• A.M. Huberman
• Learn Organ

• Richard J. Torraco
• Recruit researchers
• Join for free
• Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up

• +44 (0) 207 391 9032

Recent Posts

What is a literature review definition, types, and examples.

• Why Is Your CV Getting Rejected and How to Avoid It
• Where to Find Images for Presentations
• What Is an Internship? Everything You Should Know
• How Long Should a Thesis Statement Be?
• How to Write a Character Analysis Essay
• Best Colours for Your PowerPoint Presentation: Top Colour Combinations
• How to Write a Nursing Essay – With Examples
• Top 5 Essential Skills You Should Build As An International Student
• How Professional Editing Services Can Take Your Writing to the Next Level
• Academic News
• Custom Essays
• Dissertation Writing
• Essay Marking
• Essay Writing
• Essay Writing Companies
• Model Essays
• Model Exam Answers
• Oxbridge Essays Updates
• PhD Writing
• Significant Academics
• Student News
• Study Skills
• University Applications
• University Essays
• University Life
• Writing Tips

Since 2006, Oxbridge Essays has been the UK’s leading paid essay-writing and dissertation service

We have helped 10,000s of undergraduate, Masters and PhD students to maximise their grades in essays, dissertations, model-exam answers, applications and other materials. If you would like a free chat about your project with one of our UK staff, then please just reach out on one of the methods below.

A literature review is an essential part of any academic research paper, thesis, or dissertation. It provides a thorough examination of existing research on a particular topic, allowing the researcher to identify gaps, areas of agreement or disagreement, and emerging trends in the field. In this post, we’ll delve into the definition of a literature review, explore the different types of literature reviews, and provide examples of literature review structures that can guide your own work. Additionally, we’ll offer tips on how to craft a compelling literature review that strengthens the foundation of your research.

Literature Review Meaning

The term "literature review" refers to a comprehensive survey of the scholarly works, books, journal articles, and other sources relevant to a particular research topic. Its primary purpose is to offer a critical evaluation of the existing body of knowledge. The literature review helps set the context for the research question, showing what has already been explored and where gaps in knowledge or methodological limitations may exist. By examining various sources, you can assess how your research fits into the broader conversation within your field. The literature review also provides the foundation for your argument, helping to justify the importance of your research and explain how it contributes to the ongoing academic discussion.

Why Is a Literature Review Important?

A literature review is not just a summary of previous research but a critical analysis of the work that has been done in a particular area of study. It helps demonstrate your understanding of the topic and situates your work within the existing academic landscape. By conducting a literature review, you ensure that your research is not redundant and identify the unique contributions your study can make. Furthermore, the literature review informs your methodology, highlighting which methods have been successful in previous studies and which have encountered limitations. By understanding what has worked before, you can avoid potential pitfalls and build upon the successes of earlier researchers.

Literature Review Structure

The structure of a literature review can vary depending on the nature of your research and the field of study. However, the most common literature review structure includes several key components:

• Introduction :This section outlines the scope of the literature review, defines the key terms, and states the overall purpose of the review. It provides the reader with an understanding of what the review will cover.
• Thematic Organisation : The literature is often organised thematically, grouping together works that address similar aspects of the research topic. Themes can relate to theoretical approaches, methodologies, or different interpretations of key issues.
• Critical Evaluation : The body of the literature review should not only summarise the existing research but also critically evaluate it. This might involve identifying strengths and weaknesses in methodologies, assessing the reliability of findings, and discussing how well the research supports the claims made.
• Conclusion : The conclusion should summarise the main findings of the review, restate the key themes, and highlight gaps in the research that your study will address. It should also reflect on how the literature review has shaped your own research design.

Types of Literature Reviews

There are several different forms of literature reviews, each with a distinct focus and structure. Understanding these types can help you choose the approach that best fits your research needs. Here are some of the most common types of literature reviews:

• Narrative Literature Review : This is the most traditional form of literature review. It provides a comprehensive summary and analysis of the literature on a particular topic. Narrative reviews are often broad in scope and provide an overview of key themes and trends.
• Systematic Literature Review : This type of review involves a rigorous, structured process that aims to identify all relevant studies on a specific research question. Systematic reviews follow a clearly defined methodology, including specific criteria for selecting and analysing studies. They are commonly used in fields such as healthcare, where a comprehensive synthesis of evidence is needed.
• Scoping Review : Clearly outline your main argument or position. This should guide the direction of your essay.
• Scoping Review : A scoping review is used to map the key concepts, sources, and evidence in a research area. It is often the first step before a systematic review and is useful for identifying gaps in the literature and guiding further research.
• Meta-Analysis : This is a form of literature review that uses statistical techniques to combine the results of multiple studies. Meta-analyses are typically used to provide an overall estimate of the effect size for a particular intervention or phenomenon.
• Integrative Review : An integrative review synthesises qualitative and quantitative data to provide a more holistic view of the research on a particular topic. It aims to generate new perspectives by integrating findings from different types of studies.
• Critical Review : This type of literature review goes beyond merely describing the literature. A critical review analyses and synthesises the research, evaluating its strengths and weaknesses and offering new insights and perspectives on the topic.

Short Example of a Literature Review

Below is an example of the literature review from a dissertation on climate change policies. The example demonstrates how to structure a literature review and critically engage with the literature:

Introduction of the Literature Review

Climate change has been a topic of growing concern over the past few decades, with numerous policies introduced globally to mitigate its effects. This review examines the existing literature on climate change policies, focusing on the effectiveness of carbon pricing, renewable energy subsidies, and regulatory approaches. The review aims to highlight the strengths and limitations of these policies and identify gaps in the research that future studies should address.

Thematic Organisation

The literature is organised into three main themes: carbon pricing mechanisms, renewable energy subsidies, and regulatory approaches to emissions reduction. Each theme is analysed in detail, examining the key findings of previous research and assessing the impact of these policies on greenhouse gas emissions.

Critical Evaluation

The review finds that while carbon pricing mechanisms have been effective in reducing emissions in some contexts, their success is heavily dependent on political and economic factors. Renewable energy subsidies have contributed to significant increases in renewable energy capacity, but their long-term sustainability remains in question. Regulatory approaches, while often politically contentious, have proven to be effective in certain jurisdictions.

The literature review concludes that although significant progress has been made in the development of climate change policies, further research is needed to evaluate the long-term impacts of these policies and to explore new approaches that may be more effective in reducing emissions.

Key Considerations

Writing a literature review can be a complex task, but it is a vital part of the research process. By understanding the meaning of a literature review, familiarising yourself with different forms of literature reviews, and following a clear structure, you can create a review that enhances your research project and demonstrates your knowledge of the field.

Top 10 tips for writing a dissertation methodology

Advice for successfully writing a dissertation, how to structure your dissertation in 2024, writing services.

• Essay Plans
• Critical Reviews
• Literature Reviews
• Presentations
• Dissertation Title Creation
• Dissertation Proposals
• Dissertation Chapters
• PhD Proposals
• Journal Publication
• CV Writing Service
• Business Proofreading Services

Editing Services

• Proofreading Service
• Editing Service
• Academic Editing Service

Additional Services

• Marking Services
• Consultation Calls
• Personal Statements
• Tutoring Services

Our Company

• Frequently Asked Questions
• Become a Writer

Terms & Policies

• Fair Use Policy
• Policy for Students in England
• Privacy Policy
• Terms & Conditions
• Editing Service Examples
• [email protected]
• Contact Form

Payment Methods

Cryptocurrency payments.

Information

• Author Services

Initiatives

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

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

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

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

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

Original Submission Date Received: .

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

Article Menu

• Subscribe SciFeed
• Author Biographies
• Google Scholar
• on Google Scholar
• Table of Contents

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

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

Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.

JSmol Viewer

Blockchain technology adoption for disrupting fintech functionalities: a systematic literature review for corporate management, supply chain, banking industry, and stock markets.

1. Introduction

2. research background, 2.1. literature review, 2.2. bca/fintech application domain areas, 3. methodology.

• Timeframe: 2013–2022;
• Data source: Journal articles and conference papers published in English;
• Search keywords and terms: (“corporate management” OR “supply chain” OR “banking industry” OR “stock markets”) AND (“Blockchain technology adoption”);
• Searched databases: Web of Science, Scopus, and MDPI archives.
• Expectation: Best BCA practices have been identified;
• Language: English;
• Years considered (SLR time scope): 2013–2022;
• Publication identity: DOI;
• Outcomes: Disrupting FinTech functionalities.
• Articles about theory rather than practice;
• Non-English articles;
• Articles published before 1 January 2013;
• Non-peer-reviewed articles.
• Smart contract utilization advances BCA/FinTech loyalty, commitment, and faithfulness.
• Credit corruption problems in BCA/FinTech are considered trust issues in digital transactions (banking industry, stock markets, government, etc.).
• Information sharing problems in BCA/FinTech are considered fidelity issues in markets, investments, and financial services.
• Corporate ESG activities facilitate BCA integrity.
• Corporate DEI initiatives enhance BCA traceability.
• By adopting cryptocurrencies, the BCA/FinTech becomes more efficient, scalable, and durable with anonymity, security, privacy, and transparency functionalities.

4. Research Strategy for Exhausting the Literature—A Multidisciplinary Approach (Fourth Methodology Criterion)

4.1. find top-cited articles in library databases, 4.2. define an article as a prototype and find related articles, 4.3. use clarivate’s web of knowledge, 4.4. use of sage navigator, 4.5. get librarian assistance for research consultations and recorded video research consultations, 5. results and analysis.

• Expectation: Best BCA practices have been identified
• Language: English
• Years considered (SLR time scope): 2013–2022,
• Publication identity: DOI
• Outcomes: Disrupting FinTech functionalities
• Articles about theory rather than practice
• Non-English articles
• Articles published before 1 January 2013
• Non-peer-reviewed articles

5.1. Corporate Management

• [Key finding #1] Smart contract utilization advances BCA/FinTech loyalty, commitment, and faithfulness.
• [Key finding #2] Corporate ESG activities facilitate BCA integrity.
• [Key finding #3] Credit corruption problems in BCA/FinTech are considered trust issues in digital transactions.
• [Key finding #4] Corporate DEI initiatives enhance BCA traceability and accountability.
• [Key finding #5] By adopting cryptocurrencies the BCA/FinTech become more efficient, scalable, and durable with anonymity, security, privacy, and transparency functionalities.

5.2. Supply Chain

• [Key finding #3] Credit corruption problems in BCA/FinTech are considered trust issues in digital transactions (banking industry, stock markets, government, etc.).
• [Key finding #6] Information-sharing problems in BCA/FinTech are considered fidelity issues in markets, investments, and financial services.

5.3. Banking Industry

• [Key finding #6] Information sharing problems in BCA/FinTech are considered fidelity issues in markets, investments, and financial services.

5.4. Stock Markets

• [Key finding #3] Credit corruption problems in BCA/FinTech are considered trust issues in digital transactions (stock markets, etc.).

5.5. Derived Quantitative Assessment

5.6. BCA Effect on Critical Financial Variables

5.6.1. first layer of the proposed slr research sequence (rq1: what are the financial variables (bca functionalities) of present bca/fintech applications and their implications in a particular business sector).

Click here to enlarge figure

5.6.2. Second Layer of the Proposed SLR Research Sequence (RQ2: What Are the Issues and Opportunities Associated with Financial Variables Operated as BCA Functionalities in a Particular Business Sector?)

5.6.3. third layer of the proposed slr research sequence (rq3: what are the implications, theoretical contributions (hypotheses, propositions, etc.), questions, potentiality, and outlook of bca/fintech issues, risks, limitations, and opportunities in a particular business sector), 5.7. statistics, 5.7.1. content classification statistics.

5.7.2. Spatial–Temporal Evolution Statistics

6. Discussion

7. conclusions, 7.1. results and accomplishments, 7.2. findings and practical applications, 7.3. theoretical and practical implications, 7.4. contributions, 7.4.1. theoretical contributions, 7.4.2. practical contributions, 7.5. limitations and recommendations, 7.6. future research directions, author contributions, data availability statement, acknowledgments, conflicts of interest.

• Morkunas, V.J.; Paschen, J.; Boon, E. How blockchain technologies impact your business model. Bus. Horiz. 2019 , 62 , 295–306. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chang, V.; Baudier, P.; Zhang, H.; Xu, Q.; Zhang, J.; Arami, M. How Blockchain can impact financial services—The overview, challenges and recommendations from expert interviewees. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2020 , 158 , 120166. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Varveris, D.; Styliadis, A.; Xofis, P.; Dimen, L. Tree Architecture & Blockchain Integration: An off-the-shelf Experimental Approach. WSEAS Trans. Environ. Dev. 2023 , 19 , 969–977. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Varveris, D.; Styliadis, A.; Xofis, P.; Dimen, L. Distributed and Collaborative Tree Architecture: A Low-cost Experimental Approach for Smart Forest Monitoring. Balt. J. Mod. Comput. 2023 , 11 , 653–685. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Tsitouras, A.; Papapanagos, H. Income Inequality, Economic Freedom, and Economic Growth in Greece: A Multivariate Analysis. In Advances in Empirical Economic Research, 2023, ICOAE 2022 ; Tsounis, N., Vlachvei, A., Eds.; Springer Proceedings in Business and Economics; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2023. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ramli, F.A.A.; Hamzah, M.I.; Wahab, S.N.; Shekhar, R. Modeling the Brand Equity and Usage Intention of QR-Code E-Wallets. FinTech 2023 , 2 , 205–220. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bühler, M.M.; Calzada, I.; Cane, I.; Jelinek, T.; Kapoor, A.; Mannan, M.; Mehta, S.; Mookerje, V.; Nübel, K.; Pentland, A.; et al. Unlocking the Power of Digital Commons: Data Cooperatives as a Pathway for Data Sovereign, Innovative and Equitable Digital Communities. Digital 2023 , 3 , 146–171. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Anita, D.; Bhappu, T.L.; Yeo, M.L. Platform Service Designs: A Comparative Case Analysis of Technology Features, Affordances, and Constraints for Ridesharin. Digital 2022 , 2 , 320–332. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Basdekidou, V.A.; Papapanagos, H. Empirical Model for Estimating Sustainable Entrepreneurship’s Growth Potential and Positive Outlook. Balt. J. Mod. Comput. 2023 , 11 , 181–201. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Basdekidou, V.A.; Papapanagos, H. The Use of DEA for ESG Activities and DEI Initiatives Considered as “Pillar of Sustainability” for Economic Growth Assessment in Western Balkans. Digital 2024 , 4 , 572–598. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Basdekidou, V.A.; Papapanagos, H. The mediating role of the corporate culture in the relationship between Blockchain adoption and ESG performance. SSRN J. 2024 . [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Khan, N.; Zafar, M.; Okunlola, A.F.; Zoltan, Z.; Robert, M. Effects of Financial Inclusion on Economic Growth, Poverty, Sustainability, and Financial Efficiency: Evidence from the G20 Countries. Sustainability 2022 , 14 , 12688. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mohammad, A.; Chirchir, B. Challenges of Integrating Artificial Intelligence in Software Project Planning: A Systematic Literature Review. Digital 2024 , 4 , 555–571. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Salcedo, E.; Gupta, M. The effects of individual-level espoused national cultural values on the willingness to use Bitcoin-like blockchain currencies. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2021 , 60 , 102388. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Christidis, K.; Devetsikiotis, M. Blockchains and Smart Contracts for the Internet of Things. IEEE Access 2016 , 4 , 2292–2303. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zheng, Z.; Xie, S.; Dai, H.; Chen, X.; Wang, H. An Overview of Blockchain Technology: Architecture, Consensus, and Future Trends. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE International Congress on Big Data (BigData Congress), Honolulu, HI, USA, 25–30 June 2017; pp. 557–564. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Renduchintala, T.; Alfauri, H.; Yang, Z.; Pietro, R.D.; Jain, R. A Survey of Blockchain Applications in the FinTech Sector. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2022 , 8 , 185. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zheng, Z.; Xie, S.; Dai, H.-N.; Chen, X.; Wang, H. Blockchain challenges and opportunities: A survey. Int. J. Web Grid Serv. 2018 , 14 , 352–375. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Pal, A.; Tiwari, C.K.; Haldar, N. Blockchain for business management: Applications, challenges and potentials. J. High Technol. Manag. Res. 2021 , 32 , 100414. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Saheb, T.; Mamaghani, F.H. Exploring the barriers and organizational values of blockchain adoption in the banking industry. J. High Technol. Manag. Res. 2021 , 32 , 100417. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Su, F.; Xu, C. Curbing credit corruption in China: The role of FinTech. J. Innov. Knowl. 2023 , 8 , 100292. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zheng, K.; Zheng, L.J.; Gauthier, J.; Zhou, L.; Xu, Y.; Behl, A.; Zhang, J.Z. Blockchain technology for enterprise credit information sharing in supply chain finance. J. Innov. Knowl. 2022 , 7 , 100256. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• UN. Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. 2015. Available online: https://sdgs.un.org/2030agenda (accessed on 23 January 2024).
• Basdekidou, C.; Styliadis, A.D.; Argyriadis, A.; Dimen, L. A Low-cost Feasibility Training Study for DCD Children’s Perceptual-motor Therapy. Balt. J. Mod. Comput. 2023 , 11 , 726–754. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Li, Y.; Zhao, T. How Digital Transformation Enables Corporate Sustainability: Based on the Internal and External Efficiency Improvement Perspective. Sustainability 2024 , 16 , 5037. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lee, C.-W.; Fu, M.-W. Conceptualizing Sustainable Business Models Aligning with Corporate Responsibility. Sustainability 2024 , 16 , 5015. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Huang, L.; Liu, Q. The Impact of Natural Disasters on Corporate ESG Performance: Evidence from China. Sustainability 2024 , 16 , 5252. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Casteleiro-Pitrez, J. Generative Artificial Intelligence Image Tools among Future Designers: A Usability, User Experience, and Emotional Analysis. Digital 2024 , 4 , 316–332. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mohammad, A.; Abbas, Y. Key Challenges of Cloud Computing Resource Allocation in Small and Medium Enterprises. Digital 2024 , 4 , 372–388. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Liyanaarachchi, G.; Viglia, G.; Kurtaliqi, F. Addressing challenges of digital transformation with modified blockchain. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2024 , 201 , 123254. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zheng, C. An innovative MS-VAR model with integrated financial knowledge for measuring the impact of stock market bubbles on financial security. J. Innov. Knowl. 2022 , 7 , 100207. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sanda, O.; Pavlidis, M.; Polatidis, N. A Regulatory Readiness Assessment Framework for Blockchain Adoption in Healthcare. Digital 2022 , 2 , 65–87. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Masoud, R.; Basahel, S. The Effects of Digital Transformation on Firm Performance: The Role of Customer Experience and IT Innovation. Digital 2023 , 3 , 109–126. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Deuber, D.; Gruber, J.; Humml, M.; Ronge, V.; Scheler, N. Argumentation Schemes for Blockchain Deanonymisation. FinTech 2024 , 3 , 236–248. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kus Khalilov, M.C.; Levi, A. A Survey on Anonymity and Privacy in Bitcoin-Like Digital Cash Systems. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor. 2018 , 20 , 2543–2585. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• The Bitcoin Project. Bitcoin Developer Guide-Wallets. 2024. Available online: https://developer.bitcoin.org/devguide/wallets.html (accessed on 14 March 2024).
• Eyal, I.; Sirer, E.G. Majority is not Enough: Bitcoin Mining is Vulnerable. In Financial Cryptography and Data Security: FC 2014 ; Christin, N., Safavi-Naini, R., Eds.; Lecture Notes in Computer Science; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2014; Volume 8437. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kosba, A.; Miller, A.; Shi, E.; Wen, Z.; Papamanthou, C. Hawk: The Blockchain Model of Cryptography and Privacy-Preserving Smart Contracts. In Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP), San Jose, CA, USA, 22–26 May 2016; pp. 839–858. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Yli-Huumo, J.; Ko, D.; Choi, S.; Park, S.; Smolander, K. Where Is Current Research on Blockchain Technology?—A Systematic Review. PLoS ONE 2016 , 11 , e0163477. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Luu, L.; Chu, D.-H.; Olickel, H.; Saxena, P.; Hobor, A. Making Smart Contracts Smarter. In CCS ‘16: Proceedings of the 2016 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security ; Association for Computing Machinery: New York, NY, USA, 2016; pp. 254–269. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Khan, M.A.; Salah, K. IoT security: Review, blockchain solutions, and open challenges. Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 2018 , 82 , 395–411. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Agbo, C.C.; Mahmoud, Q.H.; Eklund, J.M. Blockchain Technology in Healthcare: A Systematic Review. Healthcare 2019 , 7 , 56. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Jena, R.K. Examining the Factors Affecting the Adoption of Blockchain Technology in the Banking Sector: An Extended UTAUT Model. Int. J. Financ. Stud. 2022 , 10 , 90. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Alcarria, R.; Bordel, B.; Robles, T.; Martín, D.; Manso-Callejo, M.-Á. A Blockchain-Based Authorization System for Trustworthy Resource Monitoring and Trading in Smart Communities. Sensors 2018 , 18 , 3561. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Azzi, R.; Chamoun, R.K.; Sokhn, M. The power of a blockchain-based supply chain. Comput. Ind. Eng. 2019 , 135 , 582–592. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Dissanayake, H.; Popescu, C.; Iddagoda, A. A Bibliometric Analysis of Financial Technology: Unveiling the Research Landscape. FinTech 2023 , 2 , 527–542. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chong, T.T.L.; Wu, Y.; Su, J. The Unusual Trading Volume and Earnings Surprises in China’s Market. J. Risk Financ. Manag. 2020 , 13 , 244. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kao, Y.-C.; Shen, K.-Y.; Lee, S.-T.; Shieh, J.C.P. Selecting the Fintech Strategy for Supply Chain Finance: A Hybrid Decision Approach for Banks. Mathematics 2022 , 10 , 2393. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Yogarajan, L.; Masukujjaman, M.; Ali, M.H.; Khalid, N.; Osman, L.H.; Alam, S.S. Exploring the Hype of Blockchain Adoption in Agri-Food Supply Chain: A Systematic Literature Review. Agriculture 2023 , 13 , 1173. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Guo, Y.; Liang, C. Blockchain application and outlook in the banking industry. Financ. Innov. 2016 , 2 , 24. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chiu, J.; Koeppl, T.V. Blockchain-Based Settlement for Asset Trading, Bank of Canada Staff Working Paper, No. 2018-45, Bank of Canada, Ottawa. 2018. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Gervais, A.; Karame, G.O.; Wüst, K.; Glykantzis, V.; Ritzdorf, H.; Capkun, S. On the Security and Performance of Proof of Work Blockchains. In CCS ‘16: Proceedings of the 2016 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security ; Association for Computing Machinery: New York, NY, USA, 2016; pp. 3–16. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• UN. United Nations Millennium Declaration. General Assembly. 2000. Available online: https://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/migration/generalassembly/docs/globalcompact/A_RES_55_2.pdf (accessed on 6 January 2024).
• Li, Z.F.; Lu, X.; Wang, J. Corporate Social Responsibility and Goodwill Impairment: Charitable Donations of Chinese Listed Companies. 2024. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Filip, A.; Lobo, G.J.; Paugam, L. Managerial discretion to delay the recognition of goodwill impairment: The role of enforcement. J. Bus. Financ. Account. 2021 , 48 , 36–69. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kraus, S.; Breier, M.; Lim, W.M.; Dabić, M.; Kumar, S.; Kanbach, D.; Mukherjee, D.; Corvello, V.; Piñeiro-Chousa, J.; Liguori, E.; et al. Literature reviews as independent studies: Guidelines for academic practice. Rev. Manag. Sci. 2022 , 16 , 2577–2595. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lim, W.M.; Kumar, S.; Ali, F. Advancing knowledge through literature reviews: ‘What’, ‘why’, and ‘how to contribute’. Serv. Ind. J. 2022 , 42 , 481–513. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Khan, K.S.; Kunz, R.; Kleijnen, J.; Antes, G. Five steps to conducting a systematic review. J. R. Soc. Med. 2003 , 96 , 118–121. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Page, M.J.; McKenzie, J.E.; Bossuyt, P.M.; Boutron, I.; Hoffmann, T.C.; Mulrow, C.D.; Shamseer, L.; Tetzlaff, J.M.; Akl, E.A.; Brennan, S.E.; et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 2021 , 372 , n71. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Unal, I.M.; Aysan, A.F. Fintech, Digitalization, and Blockchain in Islamic Finance: Retrospective Investigation. FinTech 2022 , 1 , 388–398. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Basdekidou, V.; Styliadou, A.A. Corporate Social Responsibility & Market Volatility: Relationship and Trading Opportunities. Int. Bus. Res. 2017 , 10 , 1–12. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Basdekidou, V.; Styliadou, A.A. Corporate Social Responsibility Performance & ETF Historical Market Volatility. Int. J. Econ. Financ. 2017 , 6 , 30–39. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hasanagas, N.D.; Styliadis, A.D.; Papadopoulou, E.I. Environmental policy and science management: Using a scientometric-specific GIS for E-learning purposes. Int. J. Comput. Commun. Control 2010 , 5 , 171–178. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hasanagas, N.D.; Styliadis, A.D.; Papadopoulou, E.I.; Sechidis, L.A. E-Learning & environmental policy: The case of a politico-administrative GIS. Int. J. Comput. Commun. Control 2010 , 5 , 517–524. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Varma, P.; Nijjer, S.; Sood, K.; Grima, S.; Rupeika-Apoga, R. Thematic Analysis of Financial Technology (Fintech) Influence on the Banking Industry. Risks 2022 , 10 , 186. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Tsang, K.K.; Teng, Y.; Lian, Y.; Wang, L. School management culture, emotional labor, and teacher burnout in Mainland China. Sustainability 2021 , 13 , 9141. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zyskind, G.; Nathan, O.; Pentland, A. Decentralizing Privacy: Using Blockchain to Protect Personal Data. In Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE Security and Privacy Workshops, San Jose, CA, USA, 21–22 May 2015; pp. 180–184. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• United States District Court for the Central District of California. Criminal Complaint-United States of America v. Tibo Lousee, Klaus-Martin Frost, and Jonathan Kalla-Case No. 19MJ1843. 2019. Available online: https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/1159706/download (accessed on 14 March 2024).
• Grewal, D.; Puccinelli, N.; Monroe, K.B. Meta-analysis: Integrating accumulated knowledge. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2018 , 46 , 9–30. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Budde, L.; Benninghaus, C.; Hänggi, R.; Friedli, T. Managerial Practices for the Digital Transformation of Manufacturers. Digital 2022 , 2 , 463–483. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Erboz, G.; Abbas, H.; Nosratabadi, S. Investigating supply chain research trends amid COVID-19: A bibliometric analysis. Manag. Res. Rev. 2023 , 46 , 413–436. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Nosratabadi, S.; Zahed, R.K.; Ponkratov, V.V.; Kostyrin, E.V. Artificial Intelligence Models and Employee Lifecycle Management: A systematic Literature Review. Organizacija 2022 , 55 , 181–198. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Singh, V.K.; Singh, P.; Karmakar, M.; Leta, J.; Mayr, P. The journal coverage of Web of Science, Scopus and Dimensions: A comparative analysis. Scientometrics 2021 , 126 , 5113–5142. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Nelaturu, K.; Du, H.; Le, D.-P. A Review of Blockchain in Fintech: Taxonomy, Challenges, and Future Directions. Cryptography 2022 , 6 , 18. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kountios, G.; Kanakaris, S.; Moulogianni, C.; Bournaris, T. Strengthening AKIS for Sustainable Agricultural Features: Insights and Innovations from the European Union: A Literature Review. Sustainability 2024 , 16 , 7068. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sandra, K.-A.; Cevers, A.; Kovalenko, A.; Auzins, A. Challenges for Customs Risk Management Today: A Literature Review. J. Risk Financ. Manag. 2024 , 17 , 321. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bortey, L.; Edwards, D.J.; Roberts, C.; Rillie, I. A Review of Safety Risk Theories and Models and the Development of a Digital Highway Construction Safety Risk Model. Digital 2022 , 2 , 206–223. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sun, Y.; Jiang, S.; Jia, W.; Wang, Y. Blockchain as a cutting-edge technology impacting business: A systematic literature review perspective. Telecommun. Policy 2022 , 46 , 102443. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sadman, N.; Ahsan, M.M.; Rahman, A.; Siddique, Z.; Gupta, K.D. Promise of AI in DeFi, a Systematic Review. Digital 2022 , 2 , 88–103. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bhowmik, K.; Ralescu, A. Leveraging Vector Space Similarity for Learning Cross-Lingual Word Embeddings: A Systematic Review. Digital 2021 , 1 , 145–161. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Nwaiwu, F. Review and Comparison of Conceptual Frameworks on Digital Business Transformation. J. Compet. 2018 , 10 , 86–100. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hess, T.; Benlian, A.; Matt, C.; Wiesböck, F. How German Media Companies Defined Their Digital Transformation Strategies. MIS Q. Exec. 2016 , 15 , 103–119. [ Google Scholar ]
• Reddy, S.K.; Reinartz, W. Digital Transformation and Value Creation: Sea Change Ahead. Mark. Intell. Rev. 2017 , 9 , 10–17. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Reinartz, W.; Wiegand, N.; Imschloss, M. The Impact of Digital Transformation on the Retailing Value Chain. Int. J. Res. Mark. 2019 , 36 , 350–366. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Vaska, S.; Massaro, M.; Bagarotto, E.M.; Dal Mas, F. The Digital Transformation of Business Model Innovation: A Structured Literature Review. Front. Psychol. 2021 , 11 , 3557. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Arjun, R.; Suprabha, K.R. Innovation and Challenges of Blockchain in Banking: A Scientometric View. Int. J. Interact. Multimed. Artif. Intell. 2020 , 6 , 7–14. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Gao, J.; Wang, H.; Shen, H. Smartly Handling Renewable Energy Instability in Supporting a Cloud Datacenter. In Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE International Parallel and Distributed Processing Symposium (IPDPS), New Orleans, LA, USA, 18–22 May 2020; pp. 769–778. [ Google Scholar ]
• Fardbastani, M.A.; Allahdadi, F.; Sharifi, M. Business process monitoring via decentralized complex event processing. Enterp. Inf. Syst. 2018 , 12 , 1257–1284. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Manogaran, G.; Rawal, B.S.; Saravanan, V.; Kumar, P.M.; Martínez, O.S.; Crespo, R.G.; Krishnamoorthy, S. Blockchain-Based Integrated Security Measure for Reliable Service Delegation in 6G Communication Environment. Comput. Commun. 2020 , 161 , 248–256. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Filimonau, V.; Naumova, E. The Blockchain Technology and the Scope of Its Application in Hospitality Operations. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2020 , 87 , 102383. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Khelifi, H.; Luo, S.; Nour, B.; Moungla, H.; Ahmed, S.H.; Guizani, M. A Blockchain-Based Architecture for Secure VehicularNamed Data Networks. Comput. Electr. Eng. 2020 , 86 , 106715. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Tönnissen, S.; Beinke, J.H.; Teuteberg, F. Understanding Token-Based Ecosystems—A Taxonomy of Blockchain-Based Business Models of Startups. Electron. Mark. 2020 , 30 , 307–323. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Nguyen, Q.N.; Sidorova, A.; Torres, R. Artificial Intelligence in Business: A Literature Review and Research Agenda. Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 2022 , 50 , 7. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Geissdoerfer, M.; Vladimirova, D.; Evans, S. Sustainable Business Model Innovation: A Review. J. Clean. Prod. 2018 , 198 , 401–416. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Clauss, T. Measuring Business Model Innovation: Conceptualization, Scale Development, and Proof of Performance. R&D Manag. 2017 , 47 , 385–403. [ Google Scholar ]
• Moosavi, J.; Naeni, L.M.; Fathollahi-Fard, A.M.; Fiore, U. Blockchain in Supply Chain Management: A Review, Bibliometric, and Network Analysis. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2021 , 1 , 1–15. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Suša Vugec, D.; Tomicic-Pupek, K.; Vukšic, V.B. Social business process management in practice: Overcoming the limitations of the traditional business process management. Int. J. Eng. Bus. Manag. 2018 , 10 , 1847979017750927. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Makowski, E.K.; Wu, L.; Gupta, P.; Tessier, P.M. Discovery-Stage Identification of Drug-Like Antibodies Using Emerging Experimental and Computational Methods. MAbs 2021 , 13 , 1895540. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Trischler, M.F.G.; Li-Ying, J. Digital Business Model Innovation: Toward Construct Clarity and Future Research Directions. Rev. Manag. Sci. 2022 , 17 , 3–32. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Teece, D.J. Business Models and Dynamic Capabilities. Long Range Plan. 2018 , 51 , 40–49. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Blaschke, M.; Cigaina, M.; Riss, U.V.; Shoshan, I. Designing Business Models for the Digital Economy. In Shaping the Digital Enterprise ; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; pp. 121–136. [ Google Scholar ]
• Snihur, Y.; Zott, C.; Amit, R. Managing the Value Appropriation Dilemma in Business Model Innovation. Strategy Sci. 2021 , 6 , 22–38. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Müller, S.; Hundahl, M. IT-Driven Business Model Innovation: Sources and Ripple Effects. Int. J. E-Bus. Res. 2018 , 14 , 14–38. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sjödin, D.; Parida, V.; Jovanovic, M.; Visnjic, I. Value Creation and Value Capture Alignment in Business Model Innovation: A Process View on Outcome-Based Business Models. J. Prod. Innov. Manag. 2020 , 37 , 158–183. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Grieco, C.; Michelini, L.; Iasevoli, G. Which Sharing Are We Betting On? Analyzing the Financial Attractiveness of Sharing Business Models. J. Clean. Prod. 2021 , 314 , 75–86. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Feng, Q.; He, D.; Zeadally, S.; Khan, M.K.; Kumar, N. A Survey on Privacy Protection in Blockchain System. J. Netw. Comput. Appl. 2019 , 126 , 45–58. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Minatogawa, V.; Franco, M.; Pinto, J.; Batocchio, A. Business Model Innovation Influencing Factors: An Integrative Literature Review. Braz. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 2018 , 15 , 610–617. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Namasudra, S.; Deka, G.C.; Johri, P.; Hosseinpour, M.; Gandomi, A.H. The revolution of blockchain: State-of-the-art and research challenges. Arch. Comput. Methods Eng. 2021 , 28 , 1497–1515. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zhang, J.; Thomas, C.; FragaLamas, P.; Fernández-Caramés, T. Deploying blockchain technology in the supply chain. In Computer Security Threats ; BoD—Books on Demand: Norderstedt, Germany, 2019; Volume 57. [ Google Scholar ]
• Khalifa, E. Blockchain: Technological Revolution in Business and Administration. Am. J. Manag. 2019 , 19 , 40–46. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ahmad, L.; Khanji, S.; Iqbal, F.; Kamoun, F. Blockchain-based chain of custody: Towards real-time tamper-proof evidence management. In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Availability, Reliability and Security, Virtual Event, 25–28 August 2020; pp. 1–8. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rebello, G.A.F.; Camilo, G.F.; Guimaraes, L.C.; de Souza, L.A.C.; Thomaz, G.A.; Duarte, O.C.M. A security and performance analysis of proof-based consensus protocols. Ann. Telecommun. 2021 , 77 , 517–537. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Borselli, A. Smart Contracts in Insurance: A Law and Futurology Perspective ; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2020. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dutta, P.; Choi, T.-M.; Somani, S.; Butala, R. Blockchain technology in supply chain operations: Applications, challenges and research opportunities. Transp. Res. Part E Logist. Transp. Rev. 2020 , 142 , 102067. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wang, Y.; Han, J.H.; Beynon-Davies, P. Understanding blockchain technology for future supply chains: A systematic literature review and research agenda. Supply Chain Manag. Int. J. 2019 , 24 , 62–84. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Yang, R.; Wakefield, R.; Lyu, S.; Jayasuriya, S.; Han, F.; Yi, X.; Yang, X.; Amarasinghe, G.; Chen, S. Public and private blockchain in construction business process and information integration. Autom. Constr. 2020 , 118 , 103276. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Viriyasitavat, W.; Da Xu, L.; Bi, Z.; Pungpapong, V. Blockchain and internet of things for modern business process in digital economy—The state of the art. IEEE Trans. Comput. Soc. Syst. 2019 , 6 , 1420–1432. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Eggers, J.; Hein, A.; Weking, J.; Böhm, M.; Krcmar, H. Process automation on the blockchain: An exploratory case study on smart contracts. In Proceedings of the 54th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Kauai, HI, USA, 5 January 2021. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gayialis, S.P.; Kechagias, E.P.; Papadopoulos, G.A.; Panayiotou, N.A. A Business Process Reference Model for the Development of a Wine Traceability System. Sustainability 2022 , 14 , 11687. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hameed, K.; Barika, M.; Garg, S.; Amin, M.B.; Kang, B. A taxonomy study on securing Blockchain-based Industrial applications: An overview, application perspectives, requirements, attacks, countermeasures, and open issues. J. Ind. Inf. Integr. 2022 , 26 , 100312. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Viriyasitavat, W.; Da Xu, L.; Bi, Z.; Sapsomboon, A. Blockchain-based business process management (BPM) framework for service composition in industry 4.0. J. Intell. Manuf. 2020 , 31 , 1737–1748. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bodkhe, U.; Tanwar, S.; Parekh, K.; Khanpara, P.; Tyagi, S.; Kumar, N.; Alazab, M. Blockchain for industry 4.0: A comprehensive review. IEEE Access 2020 , 8 , 79764–79800. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Upadhyay, N. Demystifying blockchain: A critical analysis of challenges, applications and opportunities. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2020 , 54 , 102120. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ahmad, A.; Saad, M.; Al Ghamdi, M.; Nyang, D.; Mohaisen, D. Blocktrail: A service for secure and transparent blockchain-driven audit trails. IEEE Syst. J. 2021 , 16 , 1367–1378. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Garg, P.; Gupta, B.; Chauhan, A.K.; Sivarajah, U.; Gupta, S.; Modgil, S. Measuring the perceived benefits of implementing blockchain technology in the banking sector. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2021 , 163 , 120407. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lyridis, D.V.; Andreadis, G.O.; Papaleonidas, C.; Tsiampa, V. A BPM-based framework for the impact assessment of blockchain to the midstream LNG supply chain. Marit. Bus. Rev. 2021 , 7 , 49–69. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Vertakova, Y.V.; Golovina, T.A.; Polyanin, A.V. Synergy of blockchain technologies and “big data” in business process management of economic systems. In Proceedings of the Institute of Scientific Communications Conference, Seattle, WA, USA, 20–22 June 2019; pp. 856–865. [ Google Scholar ]
• Garcia-Garcia, J.A.; Sánchez-Gómez, N.; Lizcano, D.; Escalona, M.J.; Wojdynski, T. Using blockchain to improve collaborative business process management: Systematic literature review. IEEE Access 2020 , 8 , 142312–142336. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Di Ciccio, C.; Meroni, G.; Plebani, P. Business process monitoring on blockchains: Potentials and challenges. In Proceedings of the Enterprise, Business-Process and Information Systems Modeling: 21st International Conference, BPMDS 2020, 25th International Conference, EMMSAD 2020, Held at CAiSE 2020, Grenoble, France, 8–9 June 2020; pp. 36–51. [ Google Scholar ]
• Viriyasitavat, W.; Da Xu, L.; Niyato, D.; Bi, Z.; Hoonsopon, D. Applications of blockchain in business processes: A comprehensive review. IEEE Access 2022 , 10 , 118900–118925. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Aagesen, G.; Krogstie, J. BPMN 2.0 for modeling business processes. In Handbook on Business Process Management 1: Introduction, Methods, and Information Systems ; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2015; pp. 219–250. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sukhera, S. Modeling Process and Information Systems: Leveraging Technology to Improve Service Operations. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Ontario Institute of Technology, Oshawa, ON, Canada, 2017. [ Google Scholar ]
• De Filippi, P.; Mannan, M.; Reijers, W. Blockchain as a confidence machine: The problem of trust & challenges of governance. Technol. Soc. 2020 , 62 , 101284. [ Google Scholar ]
• Yapa, C.; De Alwis, C.; Liyanage, M.; Ekanayake, J. Survey on blockchain for future smart grids: Technical aspects, applications, integration challenges and future research. Energy Rep. 2021 , 7 , 6530–6564. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Leng, J.; Ruan, G.; Jiang, P.; Xu, K.; Liu, Q.; Zhou, X.; Liu, C. Blockchain-empowered sustainable manufacturing and product life cycle management in industry 4.0: A survey. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2020 , 132 , 110112. [ Google Scholar ]
• Osterland, T.; Jarke, M.; Karagiannis, D.; Rose, T. Analyzing the Sustainability of Distributed Ledger Applications. Ph.D. Thesis, Universitätsbibliothek der RWTH Aachen, Aachen, Germany, 2022. [ Google Scholar ]
• Khan, S.N.; Loukil, F.; Ghedira-Guegan, C.; Benkhelifa, E.; Bani-Hani, A. Blockchain smart contracts: Applications, challenges, and future trends. Peer-to-Peer Netw. Appl. 2021 , 14 , 2901–2925. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Nawari, N.O.; Ravindran, S. Blockchain technology and BIM process: Review and potential applications. J. Inf. Technol. Constr. 2019 , 24 , 209–238. [ Google Scholar ]
• Porru, S.; Pinna, A.; Marchesi, M.; Tonelli, R. Blockchain-oriented software engineering: Challenges and new directions. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE/ACM 39th International Conference on Software Engineering Companion (ICSE-C), Buenos Aires, Argentina, 20–28 May 2017; pp. 169–171. [ Google Scholar ]
• Di Ciccio, C.; Meroni, G.; Plebani, P. On the adoption of blockchain for business process monitoring. Softw. Syst. Model. 2022 , 21 , 915–937. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Viriyasitavat, W.; Hoonsopon, D. Blockchain characteristics and consensus in modern business processes. J. Ind. Inf. Integr. 2019 , 13 , 32–39. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Milani, F.; Garcia-Banuelos, L.; Filipova, S.; Markovska, M. Modelling blockchain-based business processes: A comparative analysis of BPMN vs. CMMN. Bus. Process Manag. J. 2021 , 27 , 638–657. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Demichev, A.; Kryukov, A.; Prikhod’ko, N. Business Process Engineering for Data Storing and Processing in a Collaborative Distributed Environment Based on Provenance Metadata, Smart Contracts and Blockchain Technology. J. Grid Comput. 2021 , 19 , 3. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kopp, A.; Orlovskyi, D. Towards the Tokenization of Business Process Models using the Blockchain Technology and Smart Contracts. CMIS 2022 , 3137 , 274–287. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lu, Q.; Binh Tran, A.; Weber, I.; O’Connor, H.; Rimba, P.; Xu, X.; Staples, M.; Zhu, L.; Jeffery, R. Integrated model-driven engineering of blockchain applications for business processes and asset management. Softw. Pract. Exp. 2021 , 51 , 1059–1079. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Osterwalder, A.; Pigneur, Y.; Tucci, C.L. Clarifying business models: Origins, present, and future of the concept. Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 2017 , 41 , 1–25. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Antonopoulos, A.M. Mastering Bitcoin: Unlocking Digital Cryptocurrencies ; O’Reilly Media, Inc.: Sebastopol, CA, USA, 2014. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mougayar, W. The Business Blockchain: Promise, Practice, and Application of the Next Internet Technology ; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2016. [ Google Scholar ]
• Buterin, V. A Next-Generation Smart Contract and Decentralized Application Platform. 2014. Available online: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/A-NEXT-GENERATION-SMART-CONTRACT-&-DECENTRALIZED-Buterin/0dbb8a54ca5066b82fa086bbf5db4c54b947719a (accessed on 5 December 2023).
• Croman, K.; Decker, C.; Eyal, I.; Gencer, A.E.; Juels, A.; Kosba, A.E.; Miller, A.; Saxena, P.; Shi, E.; Sirer, E.G.; et al. On Scaling Decentralized Blockchains. 2016. Available online: https://eprint.iacr.org/2016/1159.pdf (accessed on 5 December 2023).
• Tapscott, D.; Tapscott, A. Blockchain Revolution: How the Technology behind Bitcoin Is Changing Money, Business, and the World ; Penguin: London, UK, 2016. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kim, Y.; Lacity, M.C. Leveraging Blockchain technology to enhance supply chain management. J. Supply Chain Manag. 2018 , 54 , 3–11. [ Google Scholar ]
• Chen, J.; Zhao, H.; Li, X.; Shi, Y. Blockchain technology and its applications in the food supply chain. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2019 , 91 , 237–248. [ Google Scholar ]
• Fan, J.; Yang, Z.; Lai, K.K. Blockchain technology for food traceability: A systematic review of the current status, applications, and future prospects. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2020 , 106 , 215–232. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sarmah, S.P.; Yen, D.C. Blockchain for supply chain traceability: A systematic review of the literature. J. Bus. Res. 2020 , 116 , 461–472. [ Google Scholar ]
• Li, S.; Li, J.; Li, Y.; Li, H. Blockchain-based supply chain finance: A systematic review and future research directions. Sustainability 2020 , 12 , 2722. [ Google Scholar ]
• Li, T.; Cao, L. Blockchain-based supply chain finance: A case study. IEEE Access 2019 , 7 , 145540–145548. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dorri, A.; Kanhere, S.S.; Jurdak, R.; Gauravaram, P. Blockchain for IoT security and privacy: The case study of a smart home. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE International Conference on Blockchain and Cryptocurrency (ICBC), Seoul, Republic of Korea, 14–17 May 2019; IEEE: New York, NY, USA, 2019; pp. 257–265. [ Google Scholar ]
• Guo, Y.; Li, Y. Blockchain for supply chain management: A bibliometric analysis. J. Clean. Prod. 2021 , 305 , 127031. [ Google Scholar ]
• Srinivasan, A.; Srivastava, B.; Teo, C.P. Blockchain in supply chain management: An analysis of applications and potentials. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2019 , 46 , 87–97. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lee, J.; Lee, D.; Lee, I.; Kim, K. An analysis of Blockchain adoption in supply chain management: A literature review. Sustainability 2021 , 13 , 406. [ Google Scholar ]
• Zeng, Y.; Xu, X.; Xu, X. The impact of Blockchain on supply chain management: A systematic literature review. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2019 , 49 , 36–43. [ Google Scholar ]
• He, Q.; Zeng, D.; Li, X.; Chen, Y. Research on Blockchain-based intelligent supply chain management system. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform. 2021 , 17 , 390–398. [ Google Scholar ]
• Fanning, K.; Centers, D.P. Blockchain and its coming impact on supply chain management. Transp. Res. Part E Logist. Transp. Rev. 2018 , 114 , 264–280. [ Google Scholar ]
• Xu, X.; Xu, X.; Liang, X. The application of Blockchain in e-supply chain management. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE International Conference on Service Operations and Logistics, and Informatics (SOLI), Singapore, 31 July–2 August 2018; IEEE: New York, NY, USA, 2018; pp. 416–420. [ Google Scholar ]
• Li, H.; Jiang, B. Blockchain technology in logistics and supply chain management: A review. Int. J. Transp. Sci. Technol. 2019 , 8 , 85–102. [ Google Scholar ]
• Reijers, H.A. Business Process Management: The evolution of a discipline. Comput. Ind. 2021 , 126 , 103404. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sarkis, J.; Cohen, M.; Dewick, P.; Schröder, P. Blockchain and supply chain: A review, a proposed framework, and future implications. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2019 , 57 , 2117–2135. [ Google Scholar ]
• Petrini, M.; Pozzebon, M. Blockchain technology for supply chain: A review. In Proceedings of the 2018 6th International Conference on Future Internet of Things and Cloud (FiCloud), Barcelona, Spain, 6–8 August 2018; IEEE: New York, NY, USA, 2018; pp. 140–147. [ Google Scholar ]
• Li, J.; Liu, J. Blockchain technology and supply chain financing. In Proceedings of the 2020 3rd International Conference on Intelligent Transportation, Big Data & Smart City (ICITBS), Vientiane, Laos, 11–12 January 2020; IEEE: New York, NY, USA, 2020; pp. 1–6. [ Google Scholar ]
• Tse, E. Blockchain and supply chain finance: The missing link. In Handbook of Blockchain, Digital Finance, and Inclusion ; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2019; pp. 375–387. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wood, G. Ethereum: A Secure Decentralized Generalized Transaction Ledger. 2014. Available online: https://ethereum.org/en/whitepaper/ (accessed on 7 June 2024).
• Paliwal, V.; Chandra, S.; Sharma, S. Blockchain Technology for Sustainable Supply Chain Management: A Systematic Literature Review and a Classification Framework. Sustainability 2020 , 12 , 7638. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Vistro, D.M.; Farooq, M.S.; Rehman, A.U.; Sultan, H. Applications and Challenges of Blockchain with IoT in Food Supply Chain Management System: A Review. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Integrated Intelligent Computing Communication & Security (ICIIC 2021), Bangalore, India, 6–7 August 2021; Volume 4, pp. 596–605. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hussain, M.; Javed, W.; Hakeem, O.; Yousafzai, A.; Younas, A.; Awan, M.J.; Nobanee, H.; Zain, A.M. Blockchain-Based IoT Devices in Supply Chain Management: A Systematic Literature Review. Sustainability 2021 , 13 , 3646. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Deepa, N.; Pham, Q.V.; Nguyen, D.C.; Bhattacharya, S.; Prabadevi, B.; Gadekallu, T.R.; Maddikunta, P.K.R.; Fang, F.; Pathirana, P.N. A survey on blockchain for big data: Approaches, opportunities, and future directions. Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 2022 , 209–226. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kassen, M. Blockchain and e-government innovation: Automation of public information processes. Inf. Syst. 2022 , 103 , 101862. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Malik, S.; Kanhere, S.S.; Jurdak, R. ProductChain: Scalable blockchain framework to support provenance in supply chains. In Proceedings of the NCA 2018—2018 IEEE 17th International Symposium on Network Computing and Applications, Cambridge, MA, USA, 1–3 November 2018; IEEE: New York, NY, USA, 2018. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mangla, S.K.; Kazancoglu, Y.; Ekinci, E.; Liu, M.; Özbiltekin, M.; Sezer, M.D. Using system dynamics to analyze the societal impacts of blockchain technology in milk supply chains refer. Transp. Res. Part E Logist. Transp. Rev. 2021 , 149 , 102289. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Manolache, M.A.; Tapus, N. Universal resource management and logistics using blockchain technology. In Proceedings of the Proceedings—2019 22nd International Conference on Control Systems and Computer Science, CSCS 2019, Bucharest, Romania, 28–30 May 2019; pp. 575–582. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Manupati, V.K.K.; Schoenherr, T.; Ramkumar, M.; Wagner, S.M.S.M.; Pabba, S.K.S.K. Inder Raj Singh, R.. A blockchain-based approach for a multi-echelon sustainable supply chain. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2019 , 58 , 2222–2241. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mao, D.; Wang, F.; Hao, Z.; Li, H. Credit evaluation system based on blockchain for multiple stakeholders in the food supply chain. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018 , 15 , 1627. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Marinello, F.; Atzori, M.; Lisi, L.; Boscaro, D.; Pezzuolo, A. Development of a traceability system for the animal product supply chain based on blockchain technology. In Proceedings of the Precision Livestock Farming 2017—Papers Presented at the 8th European Conference on Precision Livestock Farming, ECPLF 2017, Nantes, France, 12–14 September 2017; pp. 258–268. [ Google Scholar ]
• Maroun, E.A.E.A.; Daniel, J. Opportunities for use of blockchain technology in supply chains: Australian manufacturer case study. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management, Bangkok, Thailand, 5–7 March 2019; pp. 1603–1613. [ Google Scholar ]
• Martins, G.J.D.U.; Reis, J.Z.; Petroni, B.C.A.; Gonçalves, R.F.; Andrlic, B. Evaluating a Blockchain-Based Supply Chain Purchasing Process Through Simulation. In IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology ; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2020. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mathivathanan, D.; Mathiyazhagan, K.; Rana, N.P.; Khorana, S.; Dwivedi, Y.K. Barriers to the adoption of block chain technology in business supply chains: A total interpretive structural modelling (TISM) approach. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2021 , 59 , 3338–3359. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mattke, J.; Hund, A.; Maier, C.; Weitzel, T. How an enterprise blockchain application in the U.S. Pharmaceuticals supply chain is saving lives. MIS Q. Exec. 2019 , 18 , 245–261. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Meng, M.H.; Qian, Y. A Blockchain Aided Metric for Predictive Delivery Performance in Supply Chain Management. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE International Conference on Service Operations and Logistics, and Informatics, SOLI, Singapore, 31 July–2 August 2018; pp. 285–290. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Merkaš, Z.; Perkov, D.; Bonin, V. The significance of blockchain technology in digital transformation of logistics and transportation. Int. J. E-Serv. Mob. Appl. 2020 , 12 , 1–20. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mezquita, Y.; González-Briones, A.; Casado-Vara, R.; Chamoso, P.; Prieto, J.; Corchado, J.M. Blockchain-based architecture: A MAS proposal for efficient agri-food supply chains. In Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing ; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2020. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Min, H. Blockchain technology for enhancing supply chain resilience. Bus. Horiz. 2019 , 62 , 35–45. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mirabelli, G.; Solina, V. Blockchain and agricultural supply chains traceability: Research trends and future challenges. Procedia Manuf. 2020 , 42 , 414–421. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Molina, J.C.; Delgado, D.T.; Tarazona, G. Using blockchain for traceability in the drug supply chain. In Communications in Computer and Information Science ; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2019. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mondal, S.; Wijewardena, K.P.; Karuppuswami, S.; Kriti, N.; Kumar, D.; Chahal, P. Blockchain inspired RFID-based information architecture for food supply chain. IEEE Internet Things J. 2019 , 6 , 5803–5813. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mondragon, A.E.C.; Coronado, C.E.; Coronado, E.S. Investigating the Applicability of Distributed Ledger/Blockchain Technology in Manufacturing and Perishable Goods Supply Chains. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE 6th International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Applications, ICIEA, Tokyo, Japan, 12–15 April 2019; pp. 728–732. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mondragon, A.E.C.; Mondragon, C.E.C.; Coronado, E.S. Feasibility of Internet of Things and Agnostic Blockchain Technology Solutions: A Case in the Fisheries Supply Chain. In Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE 7th International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Applications, ICIEA, Bangkok, Thailand, 16–21 April 2020; pp. 504–508. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mondragon, A.E.C.; Mondragon, C.E.C.; Coronado, E.S. Exploring the applicability of blockchain technology to enhance manufacturing supply chains in the composite materials industry. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE International Conference on Applied System Invention, ICASI, Chiba, Japan, 13–17 April 2018; pp. 1300–1303. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Montecchi, M.; Plangger, K.; Etter, M. It’s real, trust me! Establishing supply chain provenance using blockchain. Bus. Horiz. 2019 , 62 , 283–293. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Morten Komdeur, E.F.; Ingenbleek, P.T.M. The potential of blockchain technology in the procurement of sustainable timber products. Int. Wood Prod. J. 2021 , 12 , 249–257. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Moudoud, H.; Cherkaoui, S.; Khoukhi, L. An IoT Blockchain Architecture Using Oracles and Smart Contracts: The Use-Case of a Food Supply Chain. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Symposium on Personal, Indoor and Mobile Radio Communications, PIMRC, Istanbul, Turkey, 8–11 September 2019. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mukherjee, A.A.; Singh, R.K.; Mishra, R.; Bag, S. Application of blockchain technology for sustainability development in agricultural supply chain: Justification framework. Oper. Manag. Res. 2021 , 15 , 46–61. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kaur, R.; Sandhu, R.S.; Gera, A.; Kaur, T.; Gera, P. Intelligent Voice Bots for Digital Banking. In Proceedings of the Smart Systems and IoT: Innovations in Computing, Jaipur, India, 18–20 January 2019; Volume 141, pp. 401–409. [ Google Scholar ]
• Aithal, S.; Karan, K.P. Massive Growth of Banking Technology with the Aid of 5G Technology. Int. J. Technol. Manag. 2015 , 5 , 617–626. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bunea, D.; Karakitsos, P.; Merriman, N.; Studener, W. Profit Distribution and Loss Coverage Rules for Central Banks ; ECB Occasional Paper 169; European Central Bank: Frankfurt, Germany, 2016; pp. 1–56. [ Google Scholar ]
• Burda, D.; Teuteberg, F. The role of trust and risk perceptions in cloud archiving—Results from an empirical study. J. High Technol. Manag. Res. 2014 , 25 , 172–187. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Vial, G. Understanding Digital Transformation: A Review and A Research Agenda. J. Strateg. Inf. Syst. 2019 , 28 , 118–144. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chao, C.-M. Factors determining the behavioral intention to use mobile learning: An application and extension of the UTAUT model. Front. Psychol. 2019 , 10 , 1652. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chaouali, W.; Yahia, I.B.; Souiden, N. The interplay of counter-conformity motivation, social influence, and trust in customers’ intention to adopt Internet banking services: The case of an emerging country. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2016 , 28 , 209–218. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Cheng, R.J. UTAUT implementation of cryptocurrency-based Islamic financing instrument. Int. J. Acad. Res. Bus. Soc. Sci. 2020 , 10 , 873–884. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Creswell, J.W.; Creswell, J.D. Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches ; Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2017. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cucari, N.; Lagasio, V.; Lia, G.; Torrier, C. The impact of blockchain in banking processes: The Interbank Spunta case study. Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag. 2022 , 34 , 138–150. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Dwivedi, Y.K.; Ismagilova, E.; Sarker, P.; Jeyaraj, A.; Jadil, Y.; Hughes, L. A meta-analytic structural equation model for understanding social commerce adoption. Inf. Syst. Front. 2021 , 25 , 1421–1437. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Dwivedi, Y.K.; Rana, N.R.; Jeyaraj, A.; Clement, M.; Williams, M.F.D. Re-examining the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT): Towards a revised theoretical model. Inf. Syst. Front. 2019 , 21 , 719–734. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Scott, F.W.; Wall, L.D.; White, L.J. Technological Change and Financial Innovation in Banking: Some Implications for Fintech. 2018. Available online: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3261732 (accessed on 3 March 2022).
• Franch-Pardo, I.; Napoletano, B.M.; Rosete-Verges, F.; Billa, L. Spatial analysis and GIS in the study of COVID-19. A review. Sci. Total Environ. 2020 , 739 , 140033. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Franque, F.B.; Oliveira, T.; Tam, C. Continuance intention of mobile payment: TTF model with Trust in an African context. Inf. Syst. Front. 2022 , 25 , 775–793. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Junqueira, G.C.; Ferreira, J.B.; da Silva, J.F.; Ferreira, D.B. The effects of trust transference, mobile attributes and enjoyment on mobile trust. BAR-Braz. Adm. Rev. 2015 , 12 , 88–108. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gupta, A.; Gupta, S. Blockchain technology: Application in Indian banking sector. Delhi Bus. Rev. 2018 , 19 , 75–84. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Gupta, S.; Ghardallou, W.; Pandey, D.K.; Sahu, G.P. Artificial intelligence adoption in the insurance industry: Evidence using the technology–organization–environment framework. Res. Int. Bus. Financ. 2022 , 5 , 101757. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Haferkorn, M.; Diaz, J.M.Q. Seasonality and interconnectivity within cryptocurrencies-an analysis on the basis of bitcoin, litecoin and namecoin. Int. Workshop Enterp. Appl. Serv. Financ. Ind. 2014 , 217 , 106–120. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hair, J.F.; Matthews, L.M., Jr.; Matthews, R.L.; Sarstedt, M. PLS-SEM or CB-SEM: Updated guidelines on which method to use. Int. J. Multivar. Data Anal. 2017 , 1 , 107–123. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Heidari, H.; Mousakhani, M.; Alborzi, M.; Divandari, A.; Radfar, R. Explaining the Blockchain Acceptance Indices in Iran Financial Markets: A Fuzzy Delphi Study. J. Money Econ. 2019 , 14 , 335–365. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hew, T.S.; Kadir, S.L.S.A. Predicting instructional effectiveness of cloud-based virtual learning environment. Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 2016 , 116 , 1557–1584. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hmoud, B.I.; Várallyai, L. Artificial intelligence in human resources information systems: Investigating its trust and adoption determinants. Int. J. Eng. Manag. Sci. 2020 , 5 , 749–765. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Jena, R.K. Exploring Antecedents of Peoples’ Intentions to Use Smart Services in a Smart City Environment: An Extended UTAUT Model. J. Inf. Syst. 2022 , 36 , 133–149. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Jevsikova, T.; Gabrielė, S.; Stumbrienė, D.; Juškevičienė, A.; Dagienė, V. Acceptance of distance learning technologies by teachers: Determining factors and emergency state influence. Informatica 2021 , 32 , 517–542. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Karim, S.; Rabbani, M.R.; Bawazir, H. Applications of blockchain technology in the finance and banking industry beyond digital currencies. In Blockchain Technology and Computational Excellence for Society 5.0 ; IGI Global: Hershey, PA, USA, 2022; pp. 216–238. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kawasmi, Z.; Gyasi, E.A.; Dadd, D. Blockchain adoption model for the global banking industry. J. Int. Technol. Inf. Manag. 2020 , 28 , 112–154. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Khalil, M.; Khawaja, K.F.; Sarfraz, M. The adoption of blockchain technology in the financial sector during the era of fourth industrial revolution: A moderated mediated model. Qual. Quant. 2021 , 56 , 2435–2452. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kopp, T.; Baumgartner, M.; Kinkel, S. How Linguistic Framing Affects Factory Workers’ Initial Trust in Collaborative Robots: The Interplay Between Anthropomorphism and Technological Replacement. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud. 2022 , 158 , 102730. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kumari, A.; Devi, N.C. Determinants of user’s behavioural intention to use blockchain technology in the digital banking services. Int. J. Electron. Financ. 2022 , 11 , 159–174. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• MacDonald, T.J.; Allen, D.W.E.; Potts, J. Blockchains and the boundaries of self-organized economies: Predictions for the future of banking. In Banking beyond Banks and Money ; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2016; pp. 279–296. [ Google Scholar ]
• Manchon, J.-B.; Bueno, M.; Navarro, J. How the initial level of trust in automated driving impacts drivers’ behaviour and early trust construction. Transp. Res. Part F Traffic Psychol. Behav. 2022 , 86 , 281–295. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Martins, C.; Oliveira, T.; Popovič, A. Understanding the Internet banking adoption: A unified theory of acceptance and use of technology and perceived risk application. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2014 , 34 , 1–13. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Masrek, M.N.; Mohamed, I.S.; Daud, N.M.; Omar, N. Technology trust and mobile banking satisfaction: A case of Malaysian consumers. Procedia-Soc. Behav. Sci. 2014 , 129 , 53–58. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Nazim, N.F.; Razis, N.M.; Hatta, M.F.M. Behavioural intention to adopt blockchain technology among bankers in islamic financial system: Perspectives in Malaysia. Rom. J. Inf. Technol. Autom. Control. 2021 , 31 , 11–28. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Oliveira, T.; Faria, M.; Thomas, M.A.; Popovič, A. Extending the understanding of mobile banking adoption: When UTAUT meets TTF and ITM. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2014 , 34 , 689–703. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Osmani, M.; El-Haddadeh, R.; Hindi, N.; Janssen, M.; Weerakkody, V. Blockchain for next generation services in banking and finance: Cost, benefit, risk and opportunity analysis. J. Enterp. Inf. Manag. 2020 , 34 , 884–899. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Patel, R.; Migliavacca, M.; Oriani, M. Blockchain in banking and finance: A bibliometric review. Res. Int. Bus. Financ. 2022 , 62 , 101718. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Patki, A.; Sople, V. Indian banking sector: Blockchain implementation, challenges and way forward. J. Bank. Financ. Technol. 2020 , 4 , 65–73. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Raza, S.A.; Qazi, W.; Khan, K.A.; Salam, J. Social isolation and acceptance of the learning management system (LMS) in the time of COVID-19 pandemic: An expansion of the UTAUT model. J. Educ. Comput. Res. 2021 , 59 , 183–208. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Oliveira, T.; Alhinho, M.; Rita, P.; Dhillon, G. Modelling and testing consumer trust dimensions in e-commerce. Computers in Human Behavior 2017 , 71 , 153–164. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Saputra, U.W.E.; Darma, G.S. The Intention to Use Blockchain in Indonesia Using Extended Approach Technology Aceptance Model (TAM). CommIT (Commun. Inf. Technol.) J. 2022 , 16 , 27–35. [ Google Scholar ]
• Goudenege, L.; Molent, A.; Zanette, A. Machine learning for pricing American options in high-dimensional Markovian and non-Markovian models. Quant. Financ. 2020 , 20 , 573–591. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Alsubaie, S.M.; Mahmoud, K.H.; Bossman, A.; Asafo-Adjei, E. Vulnerability of sustainable Islamic stock returns to implied market volatilities: An asymmetric approach. Discret. Dyn. Nat. Soc. 2022 , 2022 , 3804871. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zhu, X.; Niu, Z.; Zhang, H.; Huang, J.; Zuo, X. Can gold and bitcoin hedge against the COVID-19 related news sentiment risk? New evidence from a NARDL approach. Resour. Policy 2022 , 79 , 103098. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Basdekis, C.; Christopoulos, A.; Katsampoxakis, I.; Nastas, V. The impact of the Ukrainian war on stock and energy markets: A wavelet coherence analysis. Energies 2022 , 15 , 8174. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Angerer, M.; Hoffmann, C.H.; Neitzert, F.; Kraus, S. Objective and subjective risks of investing. Financ. Res. Lett. 2021 , 40 , 101737. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Charfeddine, L.; Benlagha, N.; Maouchi, Y. Investigating the dynamic relationship between cryptocurrencies and conventional assets: Implications for financial investors. Econ. Model. 2020 , 85 , 198–217. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Gandal, N.; Hamrick, J.T.; Moore, T.; Oberman, T. Price manipulation in the Bitcoin ecosystem. J. Monet. Econ. 2018 , 95 , 86–96. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Abbasi, G.A.; Tiew, L.Y.; Tang, J.; Goh, Y.N.; Thurasamy, R. The adoption of cryptocurrency as a disruptive force: Deep learning-based dual stage structural equation modelling and artificial neural network analysis. PLoS ONE 2021 , 16 , e0247582. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]

Share and Cite

Basdekidou, V.; Papapanagos, H. Blockchain Technology Adoption for Disrupting FinTech Functionalities: A Systematic Literature Review for Corporate Management, Supply Chain, Banking Industry, and Stock Markets. Digital 2024 , 4 , 762-803. https://doi.org/10.3390/digital4030039

Basdekidou V, Papapanagos H. Blockchain Technology Adoption for Disrupting FinTech Functionalities: A Systematic Literature Review for Corporate Management, Supply Chain, Banking Industry, and Stock Markets. Digital . 2024; 4(3):762-803. https://doi.org/10.3390/digital4030039

Basdekidou, Vasiliki, and Harry Papapanagos. 2024. "Blockchain Technology Adoption for Disrupting FinTech Functionalities: A Systematic Literature Review for Corporate Management, Supply Chain, Banking Industry, and Stock Markets" Digital 4, no. 3: 762-803. https://doi.org/10.3390/digital4030039

Article Metrics

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

Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals

Ammonia inhibition in anaerobic digestion of organic waste: a review

• Open access
• Published: 09 September 2024

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• J. Yang 1 , 2 ,
• J. Zhang 1 ,
• Z. Cheng 1 ,
• W. Fu 1 &
• S. Wang 1  

18 Accesses

Explore all metrics

Anaerobic digestion (AD) has become the technology of choice for organic waste treatment as an environmentally beneficial and sustainable waste treatment technology. However, the nitrogen content of these organic waste streams is generally high. Ammonia is produced in the biodegradation of nitrogenous organic matter. Low concentrations of ammonia favour AD, but high concentrations can lead to digestive system failure. To address the issue of ammonia inhibition and ensure the stability of the digestive system, numerous physical, chemical, and biologicalmethods aimed at controlling ammonia levels and/or strengthening the biological processes have been proposedand developed. Literature evidence suggests that differences in AD reaction conditions and microbial sources result in different tolerances of the digestive system to ammonia and nitrogen. This paper summarises and compares the inhibitory effects of ammonia nitrogen under different conditions and the existing regulatory measures to alleviate ammonia nitrogen inhibition. In addition, since the core of the digestive system is microorganisms, this paper explains the mechanism of ammonia stress especially at the microbial level, and in this way, it explores the future direction of research using biofortification. This review provides a theoretical reference for solving the problem of ammonia nitrogen inhibition.

Explore related subjects

• Environmental Chemistry

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Introduction

As the global population continues to grow and the economy develops at a rapid pace, municipal solid waste (MSW) generation has surged worldwide. Currently, the global generation of MSW is about 2.01 billion tonnes per year (ranging from 0.11 to 4.54 kg/capita/day), but it is projected to increase to 3.40 billion tonnes by 2050 (Rosas-Mendoza et al. 2024 ). Most of this MSW is openly wasted and very little of it is converted into useful resources. An estimated 93% of waste is either dumped or incinerated, predominantly in less developed countries (Khurram et al. 2024 ). Organic waste (OW) accounts for 42–69 percent of MSW. These include crop residues, animal manure, landscaping waste, municipal sludge, animal inclusions from slaughterhouses, food waste, etc. (Pongsopon et al. 2023 ; Khurram et al. 2024 ). Inadequate management of organic waste can lead to various environmental hazards and even threaten human health. It is estimated that about 5% of total greenhouse gas emissions are due to open dumping of OW (Sailer et al. 2021 ).

How to properly deal with organic waste has become an important issue for human beings to solve at present, the current conventional treatment technology includes measures such as crushing direct discharge, landfill, incineration and so on (Guo et al. 2023 ) but faces the problem of secondary pollution from siltation and blockage of urban sewage network, leachate leakage and dioxin and greenhouse gas emissions. Anaerobic digestion of organic waste has received widespread attention as an eco-friendly and economically viable method. the technology has been applied to treat a variety of wastes, including municipal sludge, poultry manure, food/fermentation industry wastes, and concentrated municipal wastewater. (Tiwari et al. 2023 ; Rivera et al. 2023 ; Paranjpe et al. 2023 ).As of 2017, there were at least 118 kitchen waste treatment projects in China with a scale of 50 t/d or more, of which 76.1% used anaerobic digestion technology. From 2009 to 2020, the number of anaerobic digestion plants in Europe increased from 6,227 to 19,000 (Zhang et al. 2023 ). Simply put, anaerobic digestion relies on the synergistic action of hydrolysing acidifying microorganisms and methanogenic microorganisms, a process that converts organic matter into biogas, biogas residue and a carbon-rich fermentation broth. As the technology continues to mature, it has become a key technology for reducing organic waste, recovering biomass energy, and producing biofuels and energy (O'Connor et al. 2021 ). Research indicates that AD is highly effective for treating and managing OW (Granzotto et al. 2021 ).

Ammonia inhibition is a challenging issue in the AD of nitrogen-rich substrates(e.g.food waste and animal waste) and hindersthe energy recovery from organic wastes. Ammonia is produced by the biodegradation of nitrogenous organic matter in organic waste. The low concentrations of ammonia favor AD, but high concentrations of ammonia can lead to digestive system failure (Li et al.. 2023 ; O'Connor et al. 2023 ). The two main forms of total ammonia nitrogen (TAN) are ammonium ions (NH 4 + ) and free ammonia (NH 3 , FAN), both of which can directly or indirectly cause inhibition in AD systems (Lendormi et al. 2022 ; Mlinar et al. 2022 ). The relationship between the two is expressed in Eq. ( 1 ) (Xiao et al. 2022a ). Typically, FAN is considered the primary cause of inhibition because hydrophobic FAN molecules may passively diffuse through cellular membranes, leading to proton imbalance and/or potassium deficiency (Shi et al. 2017 ). Additionally, FAN enters microbial cells by passive diffusion and is subsequently converted to NH4 + through binding with extracellular protons (H + ), resulting in alterations in intracellular pH. To maintain intracellular proton homeostasis, cells actively transport potassium ions out of the cell via energy-consuming potassium pumps in the cell membrane. This process increases the energy required for cellular maintenance and limits certain specific enzymatic reactions(Mlinar et al. 2022 ; Peng et al. 2023a ). Various inhibitory thresholds of total ammonia nitrogen (TAN) concentrations, ranging from 3.4 to 5.77 gL −1 , have been reported, resulting in severe methane yield losses in the AD process ranging from 39 to 100% (Li et al. 2023 ). These outcome variations can be attributed to differences in temperature, reactor configuration, and the microbial communities that develop in distinct systems [Li et al. 2023 ].

Recent studies have focused on regulatory strategies to mitigate ammonia inhibition during anaerobic digestion (AD) of nitrogenous organic wastes. Various physical, chemical, and biological methods have been developed to control ammonia levels and enhance biological processes. Examples include substrate dilution, adjustment of the carbon to nitrogen ratio, pH control and ammonia recovery through membrane distillation, in addition, other methods have been tested to enhance the biological process including bioaugmentation and domestication(Jo et al. 2022 ; Wang et al. 2023 ); addition of various support materials such as activated carbon and magnetite (Li et al. 2023 ); and provision of trace elements and use of blowdown processes (Meng et al. 2020 ; Pedizzi et al. 2017 ). However, few articles have discussed and summarised the mechanism of ammonia inhibition in the AD process of nitrogenous organic wastes at the microbial level. Fundamentally, the AD process is a multi-stage, multi-level biochemical process that is mainly influenced by microorganisms, which are the core of the AD system(Li et al. 2017 ). It has been found that certain microorganisms are resistant to ammonia nitrogen inhibition during AD. However, coherent and targeted regulatory mechanisms to alleviate ammonia nitrogen inhibition remain elusive due to the complexity and variability of substrate properties, microbial sources and reaction conditions. To address ammonia inhibition and ensure digestive system stability, it is imperative to understand the extent of ammonia inhibition under various conditions, investigate the mechanisms and patterns of ammonia inhibition, and develop potential future regulatory strategies (Qian et al. 2017 ).

Based on this, this paper firstly describes the ammonia inhibition under different temperature, pH and reactor conditions. And the study of process intensification to implement ammonia inhibition mitigation in AD systems is described in detail. In addition, since the digestion process is mainly dominated by microorganisms, this paper focuses on analysing the causes and patterns of ammonia inhibition in AD from a microbial perspective. Finally, this paper summarises the current strategies and measures for mitigating ammonia inhibition in AD of nitrogenous organic wastes and looks forward to future research directions. This review aims to provide theoretical guidance for mitigating ammonia inhibition in AD.Fig.  1 describes the structure of this review.

Technology Roadmap

Inhibitory effect of ammonia nitrogen on AD process under different conditions

Although ammonia nitrogen promotes the growth of microorganisms at certain concentrations, it can exceed a threshold during substrate degradation and become toxic to microorganisms. Specifically, Anaerobic microorganisms are favorable to AD at ammonia concentrations of 50 ~ 200 mg/L, experience no antagonistic effects at 200 ~ 1000 mg/L, and are inhibited at 1500 ~ 3000 mg/L, especially in high pH anaerobic systems. Moreover, When ammonia nitrogen exceeds 3000 mg/L, microorganisms are inhibited to varying degrees in the AD process under any pH condition (Sung et al. 2003; Procházka et al. 2012b ). However, differences in temperature, reactor configuration, and the ammonia nitrogen inhibition levels tolerated by microbial communities in different systems make it impossible to accurately define thresholds. Table 1 lists the extent of ammonia nitrogen inhibition by each type of substrate under different conditions (Alsouleman,K 2019 ).

Different reactor types

Conventional AD systems are mainly categorized into single-phase and two-phase systems. In single-phase AD systems, all four AD steps occur concurrently within one reactor, while in two-phase AD systems, the acidification and methanization phases are separated into two tandem reactors (Ren et al. 2018 ; Shen et al. 2013 ), thus providing suitable conditions for the survival of acid-producing bacteria and methanogenic archaea. However Single-phase reactors lead to an increase in system loading because each reaction occurs in the same reactor. The rapid degradation of nitrogen-containing organic matter in a short period results in a swift increase in ammonia nitrogen content, which inhibits the activity of methanogenic bacteria and affects subsequent reactions (Bouallagui et al. 2009 ). For the same reactor, different feeding methods result in varying resistance to ammonia inhibition. For instance, Tian et al. ( 2017 ) evaluated three reactors (batch, fed-batch, and continuous) operating at medium (37 °C) and high (55 °C) temperatures and found that the batch-fed reactor had twice the free ammonia concentration of the batch reactor and that the continuously stirred reactor was inhibited at lower ammonia levels. In contrast, The two-phase reactor has the advantage of buffering the load in the first stage, allowing a more stable feed rate into the second stage for methane production. Ding et al. ( 2021 ) investigated the feasibility of a two-stage system to digest high-solids food waste as the sole feedstock in long-term operation. Compared to a single-stage system, the two-stage system had a 33.3% increase in food waste load, an 18.2% increase in energy yield, and was more resistant to ammonia nitrogen inhibition. However, the increase in system load can also lead to instability in the two-phase system. Ganesh et al. ( 2014a ) conducted a comparative study between single-phase and two-phase digestion of fruit and vegetable wastes and found that the two-phase system showed instability with lower methane and energy yields when the system load reached 7.0 kg VS/m 3 d. Since high concentrations of ammonia nitrogen can inhibit the digestion system and limit its organic load, future research should focus on reactor design to increase the organic load and avoid ammonia nitrogen inhibition (Nasr et al. 2012 ; Shen et al. 2013 ; Christou et al. 2021 ; Adghim et al. 2022 ). Figure  2 depicts the suppression of ammonia nitrogen under different conditions.

Suppression of ammonia nitrogen under different conditions

Different pH

The pH of an anaerobic fermentation system affects both microbial activity and ammonia nitrogen concentration. Under normal reactor operation, if the digested substrate is mainly composed of proteins, the pH of the digestion reactor is generally high. However, When the system pH is elevated, the transition of ammonia nitrogen to free state NH 3 will further affect the activities of anaerobic microorganisms, thus causing the accumulation of volatile fatty acids (VFAs) (Zhang et al. 2018 ; Park et al. 2018 ). At pH 6.5–8.5, the free ammonia content in the system increases by 3–18 times with a pH increase of 0.6–1.3. Consequently, after the accumulation of VFAs exceeds the buffer threshold, the system's pH will decrease significantly, resulting in system destabilization (Tian et al. 2019 ). For example, Ho et al. ( 2012 ) increased the biogas production of the system from 200 mL/L at pH 8.3 to 680 mL/L at pH 6.5 by adjusting the pH of the AD reactor feed, a 2.4-fold increase. Therefore, controlling the system pH is key to alleviating ammonia and nitrogen inhibition and maintaining the smooth operation of AD.

Different temperatures

Temperature is a significant factor affecting the ammonia threshold of the digestion system, as it isdirectly related to the microbial growth rate and free ammonia concentration in the digestion system (Ye et al. 2022 ; Liu et al. 2024 ). Medium and high temperature digestion each have their own advantages and disadvantages. Specifically, medium-temperature AD is cost-effective, has slow ammonia nitrogen accumulation, and higher biogas purity, but the biogas production rate is slower, and the tolerance limit for ammonia nitrogen is lower than that of high temperature digestion. Additionally, it also cannot effectively kill pathogens in the digestive system. High-temperature digestion is faster and more productive due to more complete degradation of raw materials, and the high temperature can effectively kill pathogens in the system, which is conducive to the secondary utilization of digestate. However, the methane content of the gas produced is lower, and ammonia nitrogen accumulates faster, leading to inhibition. Kim et al. ( 2011 ) found that the degree of protein destruction was higher under thermophilic conditions, and ammonia nitrogen content was higher in thermophilic phases due to protein degradation at increased organic loading rates (OLR). Furthermore, when the temperature increases, it enhances microbial metabolism, and the free ammonia content in the system rises consequently, increasing the ammonia nitrogen content in the system (Massé. et al. 2014 ; Angelidaki and Ahring 1993 ). For high ammonia loading digesters, the low-temperature AD process tends to have less ammonia inhibition and is found to be more stable than high/moderate temperatures. High-temperature digestion (operating temperature: 50 °C ~ 55 °C) is more susceptible to ammonia inhibition than moderate temperature digestion (operating temperature: 35 °C ~ 40 °C), leading to an unstable digestion system (Montecchio et al. 2017 ). Li et al. ( 2022 ) investigated the effects of bio-reinforcement on ammonia nitrogen in the digestive system at moderate and high temperatures using sludge as the substrate to explore the mitigation of ammonia inhibition by bio-augmentation. The results showed that methane production decreased by about 21% and 28% under medium and high temperature conditions, respectively, and thermophilic microorganisms responded more strongly to ammonia inhibition.

Microbial domestication

Different inoculated microorganisms have varying levels of tolerance to ammonia nitrogen, and microorganisms domesticated with high concentrations of ammonia nitrogen can improve their resistance to it. Studies have shown (Yenigün and Demirel 2013 ; Christou et al. 2021 ) that domestication of the microbial community in AD systems by progressively increasing the ammonia levels can increase the community's tolerance to ammonia. Specifically, inoculation with undomesticated microorganisms completely inhibited the digestion process when the system TAN concentration reached1700 ~ 1800 mg/L, while inoculation with domesticated microorganisms increased the inhibition threshold of TAN concentration to 5000 mg/L. Corresponding to a FAN concentration of 256 mg/L, the acid production process remained stable, indicating that the digester could still operate stably under low methane production conditions. However, Complete inhibition was observed when the TAN concentration reached 6700 mg/L. The effectiveness of biofortification is significantly influenced by the microbial composition of consortia. Wang et al. ( 2023 ) obtained two microbial consortia (syntrophic microbial consortium, MC, and hydrogenotrophic methanogen consortium, SS) by pure culture domestication and applied them to a nitrogen-enriched AD system (TAN concentration > 8 g/L). The results indicated that AD performance was restored within 21 days for the MC treatment and 83 days for the SS treatment. Although domestication of microorganisms is an effective method for resisting ammonia inhibition, it should be noted that domestication at high ammonia concentrations may cause irreversible damage to the microbial community structure (Nie et al. 2015 ; Zhang et al. 2022 ; Poirier et al. 2017 ).

To summarize, in the practical application of AD, two-phase reactors stand out due to their strong buffering capacity. Nevertheless, when the system load continuously increases, two-phase reactors can be inhibited. In engineering applications, the system load can be equalized by choosing an intermittent feeding method to ensure stable reactor operation. The selection of temperature and pH should focus on the appropriate range for microorganisms in the digestive system; Specifically, medium and high temperatures enhance microbial activity, thereby increasing the free ammonia concentration in the system, which leads to higher ammonia–nitrogen concentrations. Furthermore, changes in pH indicate variations in ammonia nitrogen and volatile acid concentrations in the system. Therefore, to prevent ammonia nitrogen inhibition, pH adjustment should be carried out based on low-temperature digestion. To further enhance the system's tolerance to ammonia nitrogen, inoculation with microorganisms that have been domesticated with high ammonia nitrogen concentrations can be considered. Within a certain range, as the ammonia nitrogen concentration in the system gradually increases,microorganisms can adapt to higher ammonia nitrogen environments, thus resisting ammonia nitrogen inhibition.

Ammonia Stress Mechanism

High ammonia nitrogen concentrations are an important factor contributing to the instability of AD. The bacterial flora is closely related to the operational efficiency and methane production rate of AD. The system includes hydrolysis-acidification bacteria, hydrogen-producing acetogens, acetotrophic methanogenic archaea, and hydrogenotrophic methanogenic archaea (Yang et al. 2018 ; Tian et al. 2018b ). Specifically, high ammonia concentrations affect the structure of the bacterial population in the AD system, thereby reducing the efficiency of AD. For instance, it has been demonstrated that the microbial community within the AD system responds to high concentrations of ammonia nitrogen, with methanogens being more sensitive to ammonia stress than hydrolysis-acidification bacteria and hydrogen-producing acetogens. Under nitrogen stress, the pathway of methane production is altered, and the dominant community in the system shifts from acetotrophic methanogenic archaea to hydrogenotrophic methanogenic archaea (Wang et al. 2022 ). Figure  3 shows the mechanism of ammonia inhibition in the AD system.

Mechanism of ammonia inhibition in AD system

Effect of ammonia on VFAs accumulation in AD systems

When the anaerobic system is destabilized by ammonia inhibition, both inhibition of acid secretion and the accumulation of large amounts of short-chain fatty acids, such as propionic acid and butyric acid, are often observed. However, the inhibitory effect of high nitrogen stress on acetogenic bacteria is selective, affecting the overall abundance of acetogenic bacteria such as digestive Enterobacteriaceae of the genus Pelotomaculum, desulphurizing Enterobacteriaceae of the genus Desulfotomaculium, and acid-producing hydroxyacetic acid bacteria of the genus Pelotomaculum. High nitrogen stress also resulted in a reduction in the genera Syntrophomonas and Syntrophus, as well as the overall abundance of the phylum Ascomycetes. The relative abundance of Desulfovibrio, a phylum of Proteobacteria, has also decreased. According to the literature, propionate and butyrate are directly utilized by Desulfovibrio, which converts them into acetate (Chen et al. 2016 ). Therefore, high ammonia concentrations significantly reduce the abundance of propionate and butyrate oxidizing microorganisms and their accessory bacteria.

Changes in the efficiency of the AD process and microbial population dynamics in food waste were examined by Peng et al. ( 2018 ). The study found that higher ammonia nitrogen concentrations significantly reduced Methanosaeta species abundance and inhibited acetic acid metabolism in the AD system. The accumulation of acetic acid inhibits the degradation of other volatile fatty acids, such as propionic acid and valeric acid, leading to a complete disruption of the entire AD metabolic network and possibly the collapse of the AD reactor. Niu et al. ( 2015a ) found that high ammonia concentration increased the diversity of bacterial communities and enriched acid-producing bacteria. Furthermore, throughout the entire AD process, hydrogenotrophic methanogenic archaea predominated, and the lack of acetotrophic methanogenic archaea led to the accumulation of acetic acid and other volatile fatty acids. This accumulation resulted in a reduction in methane production and destabilization of the reactor. It is evident that hydrogenotrophic methanogenic archaea are more resistant to ammonia stress than acetotrophic methanogenic archaea, and blocking acetic acid metabolism is the main cause of AD system destabilization (Ziganshin et al. 2013 ). In addition, Among the microorganisms that metabolize acetic acid, Methanosaeta is the most sensitive to ammonia, with its activity inhibited when TAN exceeds 2000 mg/L. In contrast, Methanosarcina and syntrophic acetate-oxidizing bacteria (SAOB) are more tolerant to ammonia. Thus,the introduction of domesticated Methanosarcina and SAOB into the system can restore system stability.

Effects of ammonia nitrogen on the dominant bacterial species in the AD system

In recent years, many researchers have attempted to introduce ammonia–nitrogen interference into reactors to study the microbial community structure, dominant bacterial species, and metabolic functions of AD flora under nitrogen stress conditions. For example, Ruiz-Sánchez et al. ( 2018 ) studied bacteria and archaea in AD systems under ammonia stress. They assessed diversity and found that ammonia had different effects on microbial diversity in different groups and conflicting effects on microbial diversity for each metabolic function. By comparing differences in the number of dominant microorganisms in AD reaction systems operating at four ammonia concentrations, they found that the dominant acidifying hydrolysing bacteria were from the genera Sporocytophaga and Nitratalea in AD reaction systems with TAN < 3000 mg/L. Similarly, Buhlman et al. ( 2019 ) showed that the dominant methanogenic pathway shifted from acetotrophic methanogens to synthetic trophic acetate oxidative-hydrogenotrophic methanogens when ammonia nitrogen concentration increased to 6133–8366 mg/L (Wang et al. 2015 ; Lee et al. 2021 ). In addition, the results of Niu et al. ( 2015a ) showed that bacterial communities subjected to ammonia inhibition mainly exhibited resistant or redundant traits. During ammonia inhibition, the dominant bacterial species were replaced to ensure that the gas production efficiency of the anaerobic digestion (AD) system was restored.

Influence of ammonia nitrogen on the activity of intracellular enzymes of microorganisms

During the AD process, the biotransformation of organic substrates is facilitated by various enzymes within microbial cells, as illustrated in Fig.  3 . Recent studies have increasingly focused on the role of microbial enzymes during anaerobic fermentation under ammonia stress. Using integrated multi-omics analysis, Zhang et al. ( 2022 ) demonstrated that ammonia stress in the AD system significantly reduces the expression activity of methyl coenzyme M reductase in methanogenic filamentous bacteria, thereby inhibiting the conversion of acetate to methane (Yan et al. 2020 ). In addition, Ammonia also inhibits the methylmalonyl-CoA (MMC) pathway in Pelotomaculum by suppressing the expression of succinyl coenzyme A synthetase, leading to the inhibition of propionate oxidation. Acetic acid metabolism is particularly sensitive to ammonia stress in AD. High ammonia nitrogen concentrations inhibit the expression of methyl coenzyme M reductase in methanogenic filamentous bacteria, thereby inhibiting acetic acid metabolism. However, continuous ammonia stress shifts the dominant acetate-degrading microorganisms to methanotrophic octococci with higher ammonia tolerance. The microbial community can be continuously optimized to restore acetate metabolism through the acetate-methane (AM) pathway, facilitated by enzymes such as acetic acid kinase, phosphoacetyltransferase, and deaminase (Poirier et al. 2016 ).

Under ammonia stress, propionic acid accumulates in the system, significantly reducing the rate of methane production. The abundance of propionate-oxidizing bacteria (SPOB) decreases, along with the expression of methane-related enzymes that degrade propionate, indicating that propionate metabolism is highly inhibited and more sensitive to ammonia stress. Therefore, SPOBs are crucial in influencing the function of the AD system under ammonia stress. They inhibit propionate metabolism by suppressing the expression of succinyl coenzyme A synthetase and the conversion of methylmalonyl coenzyme A. Wang et al. ( 2023 ) found that the accumulation of short-chain fatty acids, such as propionic acid, affects the activity of methanogenic bacteria, indirectly leading to system destabilization. Excess free ammonia reduces the number and activity of filamentous methanogenic bacteria of the genus Methanosaeta, inhibiting acetate metabolism and leading to reactor destabilization. Excess long-chain fatty acids (LCFAs) in the system create a synergistic inhibitory effect with ammonia. The relative abundance of Petrimonas and Paraclostridium species decreases, suggesting that high ammonia concentrations inhibit the β-oxidation of LCFAs (Wu et al. 2019 ). The abundance of enzymes such as acetate kinase, phosphopyruvate acetyltransferase, pyruvate synthase, phosphopyruvate hydratase, phosphoglycerate dehydrogenase, and glycine hydroxymethyltransferase, which are associated with acetic acid dehydroxylation, is significantly reduced. This suggests that high concentrations of nitrogen and ammonium primarily inhibit the oxidation reaction step of methane under synergistic inhibition conditions (Capson-Tojo et al. 2020 ; Peng et al. 2023b ; Yu et al. 2021 ).

Effect of ammonia on microbial cell morphology

The effect of free ammonia on AD performance was investigated by Calli et al ( 2005 ).They found that the cluster structure of Methanosarcina Methanoctococcus spp. was significantly decomposed at free ammonia concentrations greater than 700 mg/L. Furthermore, scanning electron microscope observations revealed obvious wrinkles, deformations, and cracks on the surface of the cells, indicating the destruction of cellular integrity (Park et al. 2018 ). In contrast, cells in the blank control group were intact in shape, tightly packed, and had smooth surfaces. The breakdown of cellular integrity leads to the loss of protective functions, which in turn results in cell damage, lysis, and death (Yan et al. 2019 ). Therefore, this study suggests that the effect of high concentrations of ammonia nitrogen on microbial cell activity and morphological structure is a crucial factor in ammonia inhibition. Different species of methanogenic bacteria exhibit varying tolerance to ammonia nitrogen, likely due to differences in cell morphology. For instance, filamentous cells with a larger specific surface area, characteristic of acetotrophic methanogenic archaea of the genus Methanosaeta, allow free ammonia to diffuse more easily into the cell. On the other hand, Methanosarcina and some species of hydrogenotrophic methanogenic archaea can form cell clusters under high ammonia stress, creating ecological niches in the centers of these clusters that help resist ammonia toxicity.

Effect of ammonia nitrogen on lipid molecules of microbial cells

The cell membrane is the main route for the exchange of substances between the cell and its environment and is crucial for maintaining growth and proper function. During the AD process, organic substrates generally need to be transported into the cell by crossing the cell membrane to metabolize substances (Linda-M et al. 2001 ). In recent years, researchers have shown interest in the effects of high ammonia nitrogen exposure on the key properties of microbial cell membranes. For example, Liu et al. ( 2023 ) showed that the permeability of the acetotrophic methanogenic archaea cell membrane increased significantly under nitrogen stress, exhibiting significant depolarization of the membrane potential, as shown in Fig.  4 . Furthermore, fluorescence polarization detection was conducted, revealing that the fluorescence polarization of cells in the AD system under high concentrations of ammonium nitrogen was significantly higher than in the control group (Tian et al. 2018a ; Astals et al. 2021 ). These results indicate that high concentrations of ammonium nitrogen cause a significant decrease in cell membrane fluidity.

cell membrane transport under nitrogen stress

Controlling strategy

During the AD process, approximately 33–80% of nitrogenous organic matter, such as urea, proteins, amino acids, and nucleic acids, are hydrolyzed and fermented, releasing ammonia and nitrogen as end products. Ammonia inhibits the normal metabolic functions of anaerobic microorganisms by disrupting intracellular pH/proton and potassium (K + ) ion balances, exacerbating cellular energy depletion, and inhibiting the activities of specific enzymes associated with methanogenic metabolism. Furthermore, due to the heightened sensitivity of methanogenic bacteria to ammonia, it leads to the accumulation of volatile fatty acids, thereby exacerbating the deterioration of the AD process. Strategies to mitigate ammonia inhibition by adjusting operating parameters (e.g., temperature, pH, and carbon to nitrogen ratio) and employing physicochemical methods (e.g., dilution, precipitation, air stripping, membrane separation, and ion exchange) have been extensively studied and reviewed. (Xu et al. 2022 ) Table  2 lists several measures to mitigate ammonia inhibition in the AD process.

Adjustment of the C/N ratio

The adjustment of the carbon to nitrogen (C/N) ratio is considered a crucial measure in mitigating the inhibition caused by ammonia nitrogen during the AD of organic wastes. When the C/N ratio is too low, it can lead to the accumulation of ammonia nitrogen within the system, potentially inhibiting AD microorganisms (Capson-Tojo et al. 2020 ; Yang et al. 2022 ). Conversely, a fermentation feedstock with an excessively high C/N ratio may result in an inadequate nitrogen source within the system, leading to an underutilized carbon source. The combined AD of various organic wastes is recognized for its ability to enhance waste utilization efficiency and reduce the need for multiple treatment facilities, thereby resulting in cost savings (Peng et al. 2022 ). Moreover, it is acknowledged that this process aids in improving the stability of the digestion procedure by increasing the C/N ratio of the feedstock, effectively mitigating the effects of ammonia nitrogen inhibition. In a study conducted by Wang et al. ( 2022 ), it was observed that when kitchen waste and food waste were co-digested at a mass ratio of 2:1, there was a significant increase in the gas production rate and methane content compared to the AD of kitchen waste alone. Specifically, at an organic loading rate (OLR) of about 120 kg·d -1 , the average volumetric mean biogas production rates for the AD and co-digestion of the two substrates were measured at 2.02, 0.75, and 2.3 m 3 ·m -3 ·d -1 , respectively. Similarly, the average methane content in the produced biogas was recorded at 38.4%, 21.2%, and 63.8% for the AD of kitchen waste alone and the co-digestion of the two substrates, respectively (Mahdy et al. 2020 ). Furthermore, Beniche et al. ( 2021 ) observed promising outcomes from the co-digestion of food waste combined with leaves and stems of kale and cauliflower at a C/N ratio of 45. The resultant mixed substrate exhibited high biodegradability, reaching 98%. This co-digestion process yielded a methane production of 475 mL STP CH 4 /g VS, both of which displayed enhancements compared to the performance achieved through sole AD.

Selection of adapted microorganisms

Microbial domestication is a pivotal strategy in alleviating ammonia nitrogen inhibition within waste digestion systems. This approach involves the deliberate cultivation or introduction of microbial flora capable of tolerating elevated ammonia nitrogen concentrations, thereby significantly enhancing the system's ability to manage ammonia nitrogen effectively. An essential phase in the domestication process is the screening and cultivation of microorganisms resilient to high ammonia nitrogen concentrations (Chen et al. 2018 ). This is typically achieved by subjecting the microbial flora to gradually increasing levels of ammonia nitrogen. Jo et al. ( 2022 ) demonstrated the enhancement of methane production rates within the system, increasing from 154.6 ± 9.9 mL/g COD to 269.6 ± 3.6 mL/g COD through microbial domestication. This domestication led to observable alterations in both bacterial and archaeal populations. Notably, the transition of archaeal populations from Methanobacterium spp. to Methanosaeta spp. and Methanosarcina spp. occurred concurrently throughout the domestication process (Carballa et al. 2015 ; Peng et al. 2023c ). Wang et al.( 2023 ) applied two microbial communities (MC and SS) through domestication to a nitrogen-enriched AD system and found that the MC and SS treatments restored AD performance within 21 and 83 days, respectively. Analysis of the 13 C isotope indicated that both MC and SS enhanced the hydrogenotrophic pathway.

Ammonia removal

The accumulation of ammonia nitrogen can significantly impede the efficiency of AD and potentially cause process failure. Ameliorating ammonia nitrogen inhibition can be accomplished through several methods, including the addition of auxiliary materials such as clay, zeolite, and guano, as well as utilizing membrane reaction contactors, incorporating trace elements, and employing the blow-off method. For instance, the guano stone method involves leveraging magnesium and phosphorus within guano to create insoluble magnesium ammonium phosphate precipitation (Ye et al. 2024 ; Zhuo et al. 2018 ). This process effectively removes phosphorus and aids in denitrification, thereby mitigating ammonia nitrogen accumulation. Li et al. ( 2022 ) investigated the impact of guano stone precipitation in removing ammonia nitrogen from the anaerobic fermentation process of chicken manure. Their study revealed a significant reduction in the ammonia nitrogen concentration within the test group reactor, decreasing from 2,937 mg/L to 1,466 mg/L. Consequently, the average methane production improved by 18%, increasing to 0.39 L/g compared to the control group's 0.33 L/g. Furthermore, the addition of trace element Fe demonstrated an antagonistic effect on ammonia nitrogen, with this effect notably intensifying as the ammonia nitrogen concentration increased. Meng et al. ( 2020 ) explored the use of zero valent iron (ZVI, 150 µm) to enhance methanogenic capacity. The introduction of ZVI at 160 mM notably amplified cumulative methane production by 22.2% and further reduced the high-solid anaerobic digestion (HSAD) duration by 50.6%. Additionally, the blow-off method, which transfers ammonia nitrogen from the liquid phase to the gas phase, emerged as an efficient physical nitrogen removal process with low investment costs, relatively straightforward equipment requirements, and simple operational procedures. Pedizzi et al. ( 2017 ) implemented an air sidestream vapor stripping process to reduce ammonia nitrogen concentration. Their study demonstrated a successful reduction of ammonia nitrogen concentration from 2.4 ± 0.1 g N-TAN L -1 to 1.1 ± 0.1 g N-TAN L -1 , without compromising process stability. Furthermore, they achieved a reduction from 4.5 ± 2.0 g N-TAN L -1 to 2.0 ± 0.1 g N-TAN L -1 , highlighting the effectiveness of their approach. Similarly, Zhuang et al. ( 2018 ) demonstrated that the addition of magnetite nanoparticles resulted in a 36–58% increase in methane production compared to the control group. Additionally, it was observed that magnetite nanoparticles had a minimal impact on TAN concentration, suggesting that conductive materials have a relatively minor effect on ammonia levels, yet they diminish the inhibitory effects of ammonia nitrogen (Ngo et al. 2023 ; Provolo et al. 2017 ; Zhao et al. 2019 ).

limitations and future directions of research

Based on the above, the anaerobic digestion (AD) process is a complex biochemical system grounded in thermodynamic principles and driven by microorganisms that work synergistically through commensal linkages to maintain system stability. However, these microorganisms are highly sensitive to environmental fluctuations, which, given the complexity of the substrates and the stochastic nature of AD operating conditions, could adversely affect the performance of AD facilities. Consequently, there has been significant scientific interest in exploring whether the addition of microorganisms with specific biodegradative capabilities—a bioaugmentation strategy involving the introduction of specialized microbial functional groups into inhibited AD systems—can mitigate toxicity under high ammonia concentrations and enhance reactor performance. For instance, Methanoculleus and Methanosarcina have been identified as effective bioaugmentation agents for counteracting ammonia inhibition. Research has shown that adding Methanoculleus to an AD system utilizing municipal solid waste as a substrate can increase methane production by 21% (Wang et al. 2023 ). Additionally, the introduction of bacteria-rich bioadditives, such as propionic acid and butyric acid-degrading bacteria, has been found to accelerate the conversion of volatile fatty acids (VFAs) to methane. This acceleration is largely attributed to the interactions within the complex bacterial community, which help reduce hydrogen partial pressure (Li et al. 2022 ).

Although the bioaugmentation strategy of cultivating pure strains can be effective in enhancing the digestive performance of anaerobic reactors under ammonia stress, it is accompanied by some risks, i.e., it is difficult for a single archaea to colonise and rebuild the microbial community in systems suppressed by high ammonia and nitrogen concentrations (Wang et al. 2023 ). In addition, the cost and technical requirements (sterile environment, culture media) associated with the cultivation of pure strains are realities that have to be taken into account. Therefore, biofortification strategies using mixed microbial consortia (consisting of microorganisms that can tolerate inhibitory factors) are a more effective alternative in order to better fit the host microbial community as well as to improve the tolerance of the system to ammonia stress. For example, Yang et al. ( 2019 ) combined Methanobrevibacter and syntrophic acetate oxidizing bacteria (SAOB) (Syntrophaceticu schinkii) as a microbial consortium and methane yield was improved by 71%. However, whether these selected microbial consortia are stably able to function in high-ammonia inhibition systems needs to be confirmed by extensive experiments. For instance, Westerholm et al. ( 2012 ) combined some SAOBs (Clostridium ultunense sp,Tepidanaerobacter acetatoxydans, and Syntrophaceticus schinkii) with ahydrogenotrophic methanogen (Methanoculleus) to construct a microbial consortium as a biological additive but the digestion performance was not improved after adding the microbial consortium. Interestingly, microbial symbionts obtained through purposeful domestication are more closely related yet better adapted than artificial microbial symbionts. Consequently, they may yield superior results in enhancing digestive performance in AD systems with high TAN concentrations (Wang et al. 2023 ). However, there remains a knowledge gap regarding the effectiveness and potential mechanisms of microbial symbionts acquired through purposeful domestication as bioadditives for alleviating ammonia inhibition. Specifically, the potential mechanisms of microbial symbionts obtained through purposeful domestication in mitigating ammonia inhibition may be more complex than those of individual archaea or artificially assembled microbial symbionts, and the roles of individual members within a microbial symbiont in mitigating ammonia inhibition are still unknown. Much future research is needed. In addition, a reliable set of mathematical models to predict the efficiency of different biofortification would provide a more efficient solution for selecting a mixed microbial consortium that is tolerant to ammonia stress and thus improve the digestive performance of the AD system.

AD stands as a pivotal biological treatment method that effectively converts organic wastes into valuable biogas while simultaneously reducing waste volume. Nevertheless, the accumulation of ammonia nitrogen within this process can trigger ammonia nitrogen inhibition, thereby restricting the efficiency and stability of the digestion process. To mitigate this inhibition, various measures have been implemented. These include the adjustment of the C/N ratio, pH regulation, addition of VFAs, utilization of ammonia nitrogen adsorbents, adoption of ammonia nitrogen removal processes, alongside gas stripping and blow-off techniques. In essence, these collective measures collectively contribute to the reduction of ammonia–nitrogen concentrations and serve to alleviate the inhibition effects within the AD system. Adjusting the C/N ratio through co-elimination methods aids in diminishing the accumulation of ammonia nitrogen. pH regulation and the utilization of ammonia nitrogen adsorbents assist in preserving a neutral or alkaline environment, thereby reducing the concentration of free ammonia nitrogen. Additionally, vapor stripping and blow-off techniques work to facilitate the release of ammonia nitrogen by enhancing the rate of gas–liquid mass transfer. These approaches collectively enhance the efficiency and stability of the AD system.

In the future, there is potential for further exploration of novel methods and advanced technologies aimed at more effectively mitigating ammonia nitrogen inhibition. Particularly, the investigation of innovative microbial domestication strategies holds promise in enhancing microbial adaptation within high ammonia–nitrogen environments. Moreover, delving into the intricate interrelationships between ammonia nitrogen inhibition and various other waste treatment parameters can significantly contribute to the refinement and optimization of waste digestion systems. Ultimately, such endeavors are poised to significantly enhance the feasibility of mitigating ammonia nitrogen inhibition, thus fostering improvements in the efficiency and stability of the AD process.

Abbreviations

Municipal solid waste

Organic waste

• Anaerobic digestion

Total ammonia nitrogen

Free ammonia

Organic loading rates

Syntrophic microbial consortium

Hydrogenotrophic methanogen consortium

Syntrophic acetate-oxidizing bacteria

Wood-Ljungdahl pathway

Methylmalonyl-CoA

Acetate-methane

Propionate-oxidizing bacteria

Long-chain fatty acids

Volatile fatty acids

Carbon to nitrogen

Organic loading rate

Zero valent iron

High-solid anaerobic digestion

Syntrophic acetate oxidizing bacteria

Adghim M, Sartaj M, Abdehagh N (2022) Post-hydrolysis ammonia stripping as a new approach to enhance the two-stage anaerobic digestion of poultry manure: Optimization and statistical modelling. J Environ Manage 319:115717. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.115717

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Adghim M, Sartaj M, Abdehagh N, Strehlar B (2023) Post-hydrolysis versus side-stream ammonia stripping in semi-continuous two-stage anaerobic digestion of high nitrogen feedstock. Waste Manage 168:74–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2023.05.041

Alsouleman K (2019) Effect of increasing amounts of ammonium nitrogen induced by consecutive mixture of poultry manure and cattle slurry on the microbial community during thermophilic anaerobic digestion. J Microbio Biotechnol 29(12):1993–2005

Angelidaki I, Ahring B (1993) Thermophilic anaerobic digestion of livestock waste: the effect of ammonia. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 38:560–564. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00242955

Astals S, José Chávez-Fuentes J, Capson-Tojo G, Hutňan M, Jensen PD (2021) The interaction between lipids and ammoniacal nitrogen mitigates inhibition in mesophilic anaerobic digestion. Waste Manage 136:244–252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2021.10.015

Beniche I, Hungría J, El Bari H, Siles J, Chica A, Martín M (2021) Effects of C/N ratio on anaerobic co-digestion of cabbage, cauliflower, and restaurant food waste. Biomass Conversion Biorefinery 11:2133–2145. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13399-020-00733-x

Bouallagui H, Lahdheb H, Romdan EB, Rachdi B, Hamdi M (2009) Improvement of fruit and vegetable waste anaerobic digestion performance and stability with co-substrates addition. J Environ Manage 90:1844–1849. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2008.12.002

Buhlmann CH, Mickan BS, Jenkins SN, Tait S, Kahandawala TK, Bahri PA (2019) Ammonia stress on a resilient mesophilic anaerobic inoculum: methane production, microbial community, and putative metabolic pathways. Biores Technol 275:70–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2018.12.012

Calli B, Mertoglu B, Inanc B, Yenigun O (2005) Methanogenic diversity in anaerobic bioreactors under extremely high ammonia levels. Enzyme Microb Technol 37:448–455. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enzmictec.2005.03.013

Capson-Tojo G, Moscoviz R, Astals S, Robles Á, Steyer JP (2020) Unraveling the literature chaos around free ammonia inhibition in anaerobic digestion. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 117:109487. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2019.109487

Carballa M, Regueiro L, Lema J (2015) Microbial management of anaerobic digestion: exploiting the microbiome-functionality nexus. Curr Opin Biotechnol 33:103–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copbio.2015.01.008

Chen H, Wang W, Xue L, Chen C, Liu G, Zhang R (2016) Effects of ammonia on anaerobic digestion of food waste: process performance and microbial community. Energy Fuels 30:5749–5757. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.energyfuels.6b00715

Chen S, He J, Wang H, Dong B, Li N, Dai X (2018) Microbial responses and metabolic pathways reveal the recovery mechanism of an anaerobic digestion system subjected to progressive inhibition by ammonia. Chem Eng J 350:312–323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2018.05.168

Christou ML, Vasileiadis S, Kalamaras SD, Karpouzas DG, Angelidaki I, Kotsopoulos TA (2021) Ammonia-induced inhibition of manure-based continuous biomethanation process under different organic loading rates and associated microbial community dynamics. Biores Technol 320:124323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2020.124323

Ding L, Chen Y, Xu Y, Hu B (2021) Improving treatment capacity and process stability via a two-stage anaerobic digestion of food waste combining solid-state acidogenesis and leachate methanogenesis/recirculation. J Clean Prod 279:123644. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123644

Ganesh R, Torrijos M, Sousbie P, Lugardon A, Steyer JP, Delgenes JP (2014) Single-phase and two-phase anaerobic digestion of fruit and vegetable waste: comparison of start-up, reactor stability and process performance. Waste Manage 34:875–885. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2014.02.023

Gao Y, Fang Z, Liang P, Zhang X, Qiu Y, Kimura K, Huang X (2019) Anaerobic digestion performance of concentrated municipal sewage by forward osmosis membrane: focus on the impact of salt and ammonia nitrogen. Biores Technol 276:204–210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2019.01.016

Granzotto F, Aita C, Silveira DD, Mayer FD, Pujol SB, Pinas JAV, Hoffmann R (2021) Use of anaerobic biodigestor in the treatment of organic waste from a university restaurant. J Environ Chem Eng 9(5):105795

Guo Y, Liu C, Yin LX, Zhang XX, Shan YQ, Duan PG (2023) Preparation of supercapacitor carbon materials from food waste via low-temperature pyrolysis. J Anal Appl Pyrol 2023(170):105880. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaap.2023.105880

Ho L, Ho G (2012) Mitigating ammonia inhibition of thermophilic anaerobic treatment of digested piggery wastewater: use of pH reduction, zeolite, biomass and humic acid. Water Res 46:4339–4350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2012.05.016

Jo Y, Cayetano RDA, Kim G-B, Park J, Kim S-H (2022) The effects of ammonia acclimation on biogas recovery and the microbial population in continuous anaerobic digestion of swine manure. Environ Res 212:113483. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2022.113483

Khurram P, Mansoor Ahammed M (2024) Effect of composition on anaerobic digestion of organic fraction of municipal solid wastes: a review. Bioresour Technol Rep 2024:101777. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biteb.2024.101777

Kim H-W, Nam J-Y, Shin H-S (2011) A comparison study on the high-rate co-digestion of sewage sludge and food waste using a temperature-phased anaerobic sequencing batch reactor system. Biores Technol 102:7272–7279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2011.04.088

Kizito S, Jjagwe J, Mdondo SW, Nagawa CB, Bah H, Tumutegyereize P (2022) Synergetic effects of biochar addition on mesophilic and high total solids anaerobic digestion of chicken manure. J Environ Manage 315:115192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.115192

Lee J, Kim E, Hwang S (2021) Effects of inhibitions by sodium ion and ammonia and different inocula on acetate-utilizing methanogenesis: Methanogenic activity and succession of methanogens. Biores Technol 334:125202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2021.125202

Lendormi T, Jaziri K, Béline F, Le Roux S, Bureau C, Midoux C, Barrington S, Dabert P (2022) Methane production and microbial community acclimation of five manure inocula during psychrophilic anaerobic digestion of swine manure. J Clean Prod 340:130772. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.130772

Li Y, Jin Y, Borrion A, Li H, Li J (2017) Effects of organic composition on mesophilic anaerobic digestion of food waste. Biores Technol 244:213–224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2017.07.006

Li M-T, Rao L, Wang L, Gou M, Sun Z-Y, Xia Z-Y, Song W-F, Tang Y-Q (2022) Bioaugmentation with syntrophic volatile fatty acids-oxidizing consortia to alleviate the ammonia inhibition in continuously anaerobic digestion of municipal sludge. Chemosphere 288:132389. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2021.132389

Li Z-Y, Inoue D, Ike M (2023) Mitigating ammonia-inhibition in anaerobic digestion by bioaugmentation: a review. J Water Process Eng 52:103506. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwpe.2023.103506

Article   Google Scholar  

Linda M, I.de Poorter, & J. T. Keltjens, (2001) Convenient fluorescence-based methods to measure membrane potential and intracellular pH in the Archaeon Methanobacterium thermoautotrophicum. J Microbiol Methods 47:233–241. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-7012(01)00312-8

Liu C, Zhang X, Chen C, Yin Y, Zhao G, Chen Y (2023) Physiological responses of methanosarcina barkeri under ammonia stress at the molecular level: the unignorable lipid reprogramming. Environ Sci Technol 57:3917–3929. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwpe.2023.103506

Liu F, Zhang Y, Zhang Y, Yang J, Shen W, Yang S, Quan Z, Liu B, Yuan Z, Zhang Y (2024) Thermodynamic restrictions determine ammonia tolerance of functional floras during anaerobic digestion. Biores Technol 391:129919. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.2c09631

Mahdy A, Bi S, Song Y, Qiao W, Dong R (2020) Overcome inhibition of anaerobic digestion of chicken manure under ammonia-stressed condition by lowering the organic loading rate. Bioresour Tech Reports 9:100359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biteb.2019.100359

Massé DI, Rajagopal R, Singh G (2014) Technical and operational feasibility of psychrophilic anaerobic digestion biotechnology for processing ammonia-rich waste. Appl Energy 120:49–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.01.034

Meng X, Sui Q, Liu J, Yu D, Wang Y, Wei Y (2020) Relieving ammonia inhibition by zero-valent iron (ZVI) dosing to enhance methanogenesis in the high solid anaerobic digestion of swine manure. Waste Manage 118:452–462. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2020.08.021

Mlinar S, Weig AR, Freitag R (2022) Influence of NH3 and NH4+ on anaerobic digestion and microbial population structure at increasing total ammonia nitrogen concentrations. Biores Technol 361:127638. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2022.127638

Montecchio D, Gallipoli A, Gianico A, Mininni G, Pagliaccia P, Braguglia C (2017) Biomethane potential of food waste: modeling the effects of mild thermal pretreatment and digestion temperature. Environ Technol 38:1452–1464. https://doi.org/10.1080/09593330.2016.1233293

Nasr N, Elbeshbishy E, Hafez H, Nakhla G, Hesham El Naggar M (2012) Comparative assessment of single-stage and two-stage anaerobic digestion for the treatment of thin stillage. Biores Technol 111:122–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2012.02.019

Ngo T, Khudur LS, Krohn C, Hassan S, Jansriphibul K, Hakeem IG, Shah K, Surapaneni A, Ball AS (2023) Wood biochar enhances methanogenesis in the anaerobic digestion of chicken manure under ammonia inhibition conditions. Heliyon 9:e21100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e21100

Nie H, Jacobi HF, Strach K, Xu C, Zhou H, Liebetrau J (2015) Mono-fermentation of chicken manure: ammonia inhibition and recirculation of the digestate. Biores Technol 178:238–246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2014.09.029

Niu Q, Qiao W, Qiang H, Hojo T, Li YY (2013) Mesophilic methane fermentation of chicken manure at a wide range of ammonia concentration: stability, inhibition and recovery. Bioresou Tech 137:358–367

Niu Q, Qiao W, Qiang H, Hojo T, Li YY (2013a) Mesophilic methane fermentation of chicken manure at a wide range of ammonia concentration: stability, inhibition and recovery. Bioresour Techn 137:358–367

Niu Q, Takemura Y, Kubota K, Li Y-Y (2015b) Comparing mesophilic and thermophilic anaerobic digestion of chicken manure: Microbial community dynamics and process resilience. Waste Manage 43:114–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2016.10.038

O’Connor S, Ehimen E, Pillai SC, Black A, Tormey D, Bartlett J (2021) Biogas production from small-scale anaerobic digestion plants on European farms. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 139:110580. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2020.110580

O’Connor J, Mickan BS, Gurung SK, Siddique KHM, Leopold M, Bolan NS (2023) Enhancing nutrient recovery from food waste anaerobic digestate. Biores Technol 390:129869. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2023.129869

Pan J, Chen X, Sheng K, Yu Y, Zhang C, Ying Y (2013) Effect of ammonia on biohydrogen production from food waste via anaerobic fermentation. Int j Hydrog Energy 38(29):12747–12754

Paranjpe A, Saxena S, Jain P (2023) A review on performance improvement of anaerobic digestion using co-digestion of food waste and sewage sludge. J Environ Manage 338:117733. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.117733

Park J-H, Yoon J-J, Kumar G, Jin Y-S, Kim S-H (2018) Effects of acclimation and pH on ammonia inhibition for mesophilic methanogenic microflora. Waste Manage 80:218–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2018.09.016

Pedizzi C, Lema JM, Carballa M (2017) Enhancing thermophilic co-digestion of nitrogen-rich substrates by air side-stream stripping. Biores Technol 241:397–405. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2017.05.113

Peng X, Zhang S, Li L, Zhao X, Ma Y, Shi D (2018) Long-term high-solids anaerobic digestion of food waste: effects of ammonia on process performance and microbial community. Biores Technol 262:148–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2018.04.076

Peng Y, Li L, Yuan W, Wu D, Yang P, Peng X (2022) Long-term evaluation of the anaerobic co-digestion of food waste and landfill leachate to alleviate ammonia inhibition. Energy Convers Manage 270:116195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2022.116195

Peng L, Li Y, Li Q, Liang C, Nasr M, Xu Y, Liu Y, Zhou Y (2023a) The effect of free ammonia on ammonium removal and N2O production in a consortium of microalgae and partial nitritation cultures. Chem Eng J 474:145572. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2023.145572

Peng Y, Li L, Dong Q, Yang P, Liu H, Ye W, Wu D, Peng X (2023b) Evaluation of digestate-derived biochar to alleviate ammonia inhibition during long-term anaerobic digestion of food waste. Chemosphere 311:137150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2022.137150

Peng Y, Li L, Yang P, Liu H, Ye W, Xue Z, Peng X, Wang X (2023c) Integrated genome-centric metagenomic and metaproteomic analyses unravel the responses of the microbial community to ammonia stress. Water Res 242:120239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2023.120239

Poirier S, Desmond-Le Quéméner E, Madigou C, Bouchez T, Chapleur O (2016) Anaerobic digestion of biowaste under extreme ammonia concentration: identification of key microbial phylotypes. Biores Technol 207:92–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2016.01.124

Poirier S, Madigou C, Bouchez T, Chapleur O (2017) Improving anaerobic digestion with support media: mitigation of ammonia inhibition and effect on microbial communities. Biores Technol 235:229–239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2017.03.099

Pongsopon M, Woraruthai T, Anuwan P, Amawatjana T, Tirapanampai C, Prombun P, Kusonmano K, Weeranoppanant N, Chaiyen P, Wongnate T (2023) Anaerobic co-digestion of yard waste, food waste, and pig slurry in a batchexperiment: an investigation on methane potential, performance, and microbialcommunity. Bioresour Technol Rep 21:101364. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biteb.2023.101364

Procházka J, Dolejš P, Máca J, Dohányos M (2012a) Stability and inhibition of anaerobic processes caused by insufficiency or excess of ammonia nitrogen. Appl Microbio Biotech. 93:439–447

Procházka J, Dolejš P, Máca J, Dohányos M (2012b) Stability and inhibition of anaerobic processes caused by insufficiency or excess of ammonia nitrogen. Appl Microbio Biotech 93:439–447

Provolo G, Perazzolo F, Mattachini G, Finzi A, Naldi E, Riva E (2017) Nitrogen removal from digested slurries using a simplified ammonia stripping technique. Waste Manage 69:154–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2017.07.047

Qian W, Peng Y, Li X, Zhang Q, Ma B (2017) The inhibitory effects of free ammonia on ammonia oxidizing bacteria and nitrite oxidizing bacteria under anaerobic condition. Biores Technol 243:1247–1250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2017.07.047

Rajagopal R, Massé DI, Singh G (2013) A critical review on inhibition of anaerobic digestion process by excess ammonia. Biores Tech 143:632–641

Ren Y, Yu M, Wu C, Wang Q, Gao M, Huang Q, Liu Y (2018) A comprehensive review on food waste anaerobic digestion: Research updates and tendencies. Biores Technol 247:1069–1076. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2017.09.109

Rivera F, Akpan J, Prádanos P, Hernández A, Palacio L, Muñoz R (2023) Side-stream membrane-based NH3 extraction to improve the anaerobic digestion of poultry manure. J Water Process Eng 54:103990. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwpe.2023.103990

Rosas-Mendoza ES, Alvarado-Vallejo A, Vallejo-Cantú NA, Velasco-Santos C, Alvarado-Lassman A (2024) Valorization of the complex organic waste in municipal solid wastes through the combination of hydrothermal carbonization and anaerobic digestion. Renew Energy 231:120916

Ruiz-Sánchez J, Campanaro S, Guivernau M, Fernández B, Prenafeta-Boldú F (2018) Effect of ammonia on the active microbiome and metagenome from stable full-scale digesters. Biores Technol 250:513–522. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2017.11.068

Sailer G, Eichermüller J, Poetsch J, Paczkowski S, Pelz S, Oechsner H, Müller J (2021) Characterization of the separately collected organic fraction of municipal solidwaste (OFMSW) from rural and urban districts for a one-year period in Germany. Waste Manag 131:471–482. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2021.07.004

Sanjaya EH, Cheng H, Li Y-Y (2020) Mesophilic methane fermentation performance and ammonia inhibition of fish processing wastewater treatment using a self-agitated anaerobic baffled reactor. Biores Technol 313:123644. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2020.123644

Shen F, Yuan H, Pang Y, Chen S, Zhu B, Zou D, Liu Y, Ma J, Yu L, Li X (2013) Performances of anaerobic co-digestion of fruit & vegetable waste (FVW) and food waste (FW): single-phase versus two-phase. Biores Technol 144:80–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2013.06.099

Shi X, Lin J, Zuo J, Li P, Li X, Guo X (2017) Effects of free ammonia on volatile fatty acid accumulation and process performance in the anaerobic digestion of two typical bio-wastes. J Environ Sci 55:49–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jes.2016.07.006

Shi X, Zuo J, Zhang M, Wang Y, Yu H, Li B (2019) Enhanced biogas production and in situ ammonia recovery from food waste using a gas-membrane absorption anaerobic reactor. Biores Technol 292:121864. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2019.121864

Sung S, Liu T (2003) Ammonia inhibition on thermophilic anaerobic digestion. Chemosphere 53:43–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0045-6535(03)00434-X

Tian H, Fotidis IA, Mancini E, Angelidaki I (2017) Different cultivation methods to acclimatise ammonia-tolerant methanogenic consortia. Biores Technol 232:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0045-6535(03)00434-X

Tian H, Fotidis IA, Mancini E, Treu L, Mahdy A, Ballesteros M, González-Fernández C, Angelidaki I (2018a) Acclimation to extremely high ammonia levels in continuous biomethanation process and the associated microbial community dynamics. Biores Technol 247:616–623. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2017.09.148

Tian H, Karachalios P, Angelidaki I, Fotidis IA (2018b) A proposed mechanism for the ammonia-LCFA synergetic co-inhibition effect on anaerobic digestion process. Chem Eng J 349:574–580. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2018.05.083

Tian H, Mancini E, Treu L, Angelidaki I, Fotidis IA (2019) Bioaugmentation strategy for overcoming ammonia inhibition during biomethanation of a protein-rich substrate. Chemosphere 231:415–422. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2019.05.140

Tiwari BR, Brar SK, Surampalli RY (2023) Enhancing thermophilic anaerobic digestion of municipal sludge: an investigation. J Water Process Engineering 56:104293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwpe.2023.104293

Wang H, Fotidis IA, Angelidaki I (2015) Ammonia effect on hydrogenotrophic methanogens and syntrophic acetate-oxidizing bacteria. FEMS Microbiol Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1093/femsec/fiv130

Wang Z, Wang S, Hu Y, Du B, Meng J, Wu G, Liu H, Zhan X (2022) Distinguishing responses of acetoclastic and hydrogenotrophic methanogens to ammonia stress in mesophilic mixed cultures. Water Res 224:119029. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2022.119029

Wang S, Wang Z, Usman M, Zheng Z, Zhao X, Meng X, Hu K, Shen X, Wang X, Cai Y (2023) Two microbial consortia obtained through purposive acclimatization as biological additives to relieve ammonia inhibition in anaerobic digestion. Water Res 230:119583. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2023.119583

Westerholm M, Lev´en, L., Schnürer, A. (2012) Bioaugmentation of syntrophic acetate-oxidizing culture in biogas reactors exposed to increasing levels of ammonia. Appl Environ Microb 78(21):7619–7625. https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.01637-12

Wu D, Li L, Zhao X, Peng Y, Yang P, Peng X (2019) Anaerobic digestion: A review on process monitoring. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 103:1–12

Xiao Y, Yang H, Zheng D, Liu Y, Deng L (2022a) Alleviation of ammonia inhibition in dry anaerobic digestion of swine manure. Energy 253:124149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2022.124149

Xiao Y, Yang H, Zheng D, Liu Y, Deng L (2022b) Alleviation of ammonia inhibition in dry anaerobic digestion of swine manure. Energy 253:124149

Xu J, Khanal SK, Kang Y, Zhu J, Huang X, Zong Y, Xie L (2022) Role of interspecies electron transfer stimulation in enhancing anaerobic digestion under ammonia stress: Mechanisms, advances, and perspectives. Biores Tech 360:127558

Yan M, Fotidis IA, Tian H, Khoshnevisan B, Treu L, Tsapekos P, Angelidaki I (2019) Acclimatization contributes to stable anaerobic digestion of organic fraction of municipal solid waste under extreme ammonia levels: Focusing on microbial community dynamics. Biores Technol 286:121376. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2019.121376

Yan M, Treu L, Campanaro S, Tian H, Zhu X, Khoshnevisan B, Tsapekos P, Angelidaki I, Fotidis IA (2020) Effect of ammonia on anaerobic digestion of municipal solid waste: inhibitory performance, bioaugmentation and microbiome functional reconstruction. Chem Eng J 401:126159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2020.126159

Yang Z, Wang W, He Y, Zhang R, Liu G (2018) Effect of ammonia on methane production, methanogenesis pathway, microbial community and reactor performance under mesophilic and thermophilic conditions. Renewable Energy 125:915–925. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2018.03.032

Yang Z, Wang W, Liu C, Zhang R, Liu G (2019) Mitigation of ammonia inhibition through bioaugmentation with different microorganisms during anaerobic digestion: selection of strains and reactor performance evaluation. Water Res 155:214–224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2019.02.048

Yang Z, Sun H, Zhao Q, Kubonova M, Zhang R, Liu G, Wang W (2020) Long-termevaluation of bioaugmentation to alleviate ammonia inhibition during anaerobicdigestion: process monitoring, microbial community response, and methanogenic pathway modeling. Chem Eng J 399:125765. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2020.125765

Yang Z, Sun H, Kurbonova M, Zhou L, Arhin SG, Papadakis VG, Goula MA, Liu G, Zhang Y, Wang W (2022) Simultaneous supplementation of magnetite and polyurethane foam carrier can reach a Pareto-optimal point to alleviate ammonia inhibition during anaerobic digestion. Renew Energy 189:104–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2022.02.092

Ye M, Zhu A, Sun B, Qin Y, Li Y-Y (2022) Methanogenic treatment of dairy product wastewater by thermophilic anaerobic membrane bioreactor: ammonia inhibition and microbial community. Biores Technol 357:127349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2022.127349

Ye X, Jia Z, Liu Y, Wang C, Cao C, Zhang Y, Han T, Wang L, Guo T, Xi Y (2024) Constructing carbon-based materials loaded with MOFs to realize efficient anaerobic digestion of rural organic waste. Fuel 355:129536. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2023.129536

Yenigün O, Demirel B (2013) Ammonia inhibition in anaerobic digestion: a review. Process Biochem 48:901–911. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procbio.2013.04.012

Yu D, Wang T, Liang Y, Liu J, Zheng J, Chen M, Wei Y (2021) Delivery and effects of proton pump inhibitor on anaerobic digestion of food and kitchen waste under ammonia stress. J Hazard Mater 416:126211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2021.126211

Zhang W, Xing W, Li R (2018) Real-time recovery strategies for volatile fatty acid-inhibited anaerobic digestion of food waste for methane production. Biores Technol 265:82–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2018.05.098

Zhang H, Yuan W, Dong Q, Wu D, Yang P, Peng Y, Li L, Peng X (2022) Integrated multi-omics analyses reveal the key microbial phylotypes affecting anaerobic digestion performance under ammonia stress. Water Res 213:118152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2022.118152

Zhang H, Fu Z, Guan D, Zhao J, Wang Y, Zhang Q, Xie J, Sun Y, Guo L, Wang D (2023) A comprehensive review on food waste anaerobic co-digestion: current situation and research prospect. Process Saf Environ Prot 179(2023):546–558. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2023.09.030

Zhao P, Wang Y, Lin Z, Zhou J, Chai H, He Q, Li Y, Wang J (2019) The alleviative effect of exogenous phytohormones on the growth, physiology and gene expression of tetraselmis cordiformis under high ammonia-nitrogen stress. Biores Technol 282:339–347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2019.03.031

Zhuang L, Ma J, Yu Z, Wang Y, Tang J (2018) Magnetite accelerates syntrophic acetate oxidation in methanogenic systems with high ammonia concentrations. Microb Biotechnol 11:710–720. https://doi.org/10.1111/1751-7915.13286

Zhuo Y, Han Y, Qu Q, Cao Y, Peng D, Li Y (2018) Pre-separation of ammonium content during high solid thermal-alkaline pretreatment to mitigate ammonia inhibition: kinetics and feasibility analysis. Water Res 139:363–371. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2018.03.064

Ziganshin AM, Liebetrau J, Pröter J, Kleinsteuber S (2013) Microbial community structure and dynamics during anaerobic digestion of various agricultural waste materials. Appl Microbio Biotech 97:5161–5174

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Gansu Province University Industry Support Program Project (2020c-38); Gansu Province Key R&D Project Program (2021-0201-GXC-0145).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Environmental And Municipal Engineering, Lanzhou Jiao Tong University, 88 Anning West Road, Lanzhou, 730070, China

J. Yang, J. Zhang, X. Du, T. Gao, Z. Cheng, W. Fu & S. Wang

Gansu Key Laboratory of Yellow River Water Environment, Lanzhou, 730070, China

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to J. Zhang .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Additional information

Editorial responsibility: S.Mirkia.

Rights and permissions

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

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Yang, J., Zhang, J., Du, X. et al. Ammonia inhibition in anaerobic digestion of organic waste: a review. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-024-06029-1

Download citation

Received : 01 January 2024

Revised : 06 August 2024

Accepted : 27 August 2024

Published : 09 September 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-024-06029-1

Share this article

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

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

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Ammonia nitrogen
• Microorganisms
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research