introduction and literature review example

How to write a literature review introduction (+ examples)

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

Why you need an introduction for a literature review

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

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

When you need an introduction for a literature review

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

What to include in a literature review introduction

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

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

Academic literature review paper

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

Regular literature review section in an academic article or essay

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

In some cases, you might include:

Introduction to a literature review chapter in thesis or dissertation

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

Examples of literature review introductions

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

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

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

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

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

Examples 3-5: Effective introductions to literature review chapters

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

Master’s thesis literature review introduction

Phd thesis literature review chapter introduction, phd thesis literature review introduction.

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

Steps to write your own literature review introduction

Master academia, get new content delivered directly to your inbox, the best answers to "what are your plans for the future", 10 tips for engaging your audience in academic writing, related articles, 37 creative ways to get motivation to study, minimalist writing for a better thesis, separating your self-worth from your phd work, how to develop an awesome phd timeline step-by-step.

Have a language expert improve your writing

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

• Knowledge Base

Methodology

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

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

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

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

There are five key steps to writing a literature review:

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

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

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

Table of contents

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

• Quick Run-through
• Step 1 & 2

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

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

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

Receive feedback on language, structure, and formatting

Professional editors proofread and edit your paper by focusing on:

• Academic style
• Vague sentences
• Style consistency

See an example

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

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

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

Download Word doc Download Google doc

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

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

Make a list of keywords

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

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

Search for relevant sources

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

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

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

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

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

For each publication, ask yourself:

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

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

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

Take notes and cite your sources

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

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

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

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

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

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

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

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

Chronological

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

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

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

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

Methodological

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

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

Theoretical

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

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

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

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

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

As you write, you can follow these tips:

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

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

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

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

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

Open Google Slides Download PowerPoint

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

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

 Statistics

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

Research bias

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Cite this Scribbr article

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

McCombes, S. (2023, September 11). How to Write a Literature Review | Guide, Examples, & Templates. Scribbr. Retrieved August 26, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/dissertation/literature-review/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

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

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

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.

• UWF Libraries

Literature Review: Conducting & Writing

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

Sample Lit Reviews from Communication Arts

Have an exemplary literature review.

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

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

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

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

• << Previous: MLA Style
• Next: Get Help! >>
• Last Updated: Aug 8, 2024 11:00 AM
• URL: https://libguides.uwf.edu/litreview

• UConn Library
• Literature Review: The What, Why and How-to Guide
• Introduction

Literature Review: The What, Why and How-to Guide — Introduction

• Getting Started
• How to Pick a Topic
• Strategies to Find Sources
• Evaluating Sources & Lit. Reviews
• Tips for Writing Literature Reviews
• Writing Literature Review: Useful Sites
• Citation Resources
• Other Academic Writings

What are Literature Reviews?

So, what is a literature review? "A literature review is an account of what has been published on a topic by accredited scholars and researchers. In writing the literature review, your purpose is to convey to your reader what knowledge and ideas have been established on a topic, and what their strengths and weaknesses are. As a piece of writing, the literature review must be defined by a guiding concept (e.g., your research objective, the problem or issue you are discussing, or your argumentative thesis). It is not just a descriptive list of the material available, or a set of summaries." Taylor, D.  The literature review: A few tips on conducting it . University of Toronto Health Sciences Writing Centre.

Goals of Literature Reviews

What are the goals of creating a Literature Review?  A literature could be written to accomplish different aims:

• To develop a theory or evaluate an existing theory
• To summarize the historical or existing state of a research topic
• Identify a problem in a field of research 

Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1997). Writing narrative literature reviews .  Review of General Psychology , 1 (3), 311-320.

What kinds of sources require a Literature Review?

• A research paper assigned in a course
• A thesis or dissertation
• A grant proposal
• An article intended for publication in a journal

All these instances require you to collect what has been written about your research topic so that you can demonstrate how your own research sheds new light on the topic.

Types of Literature Reviews

What kinds of literature reviews are written?

Narrative review: The purpose of this type of review is to describe the current state of the research on a specific topic/research and to offer a critical analysis of the literature reviewed. Studies are grouped by research/theoretical categories, and themes and trends, strengths and weakness, and gaps are identified. The review ends with a conclusion section which summarizes the findings regarding the state of the research of the specific study, the gaps identify and if applicable, explains how the author's research will address gaps identify in the review and expand the knowledge on the topic reviewed.

• Example : Predictors and Outcomes of U.S. Quality Maternity Leave: A Review and Conceptual Framework:  10.1177/08948453211037398  

Systematic review : "The authors of a systematic review use a specific procedure to search the research literature, select the studies to include in their review, and critically evaluate the studies they find." (p. 139). Nelson, L. K. (2013). Research in Communication Sciences and Disorders . Plural Publishing.

• Example : The effect of leave policies on increasing fertility: a systematic review:  10.1057/s41599-022-01270-w

Meta-analysis : "Meta-analysis is a method of reviewing research findings in a quantitative fashion by transforming the data from individual studies into what is called an effect size and then pooling and analyzing this information. The basic goal in meta-analysis is to explain why different outcomes have occurred in different studies." (p. 197). Roberts, M. C., & Ilardi, S. S. (2003). Handbook of Research Methods in Clinical Psychology . Blackwell Publishing.

• Example : Employment Instability and Fertility in Europe: A Meta-Analysis:  10.1215/00703370-9164737

Meta-synthesis : "Qualitative meta-synthesis is a type of qualitative study that uses as data the findings from other qualitative studies linked by the same or related topic." (p.312). Zimmer, L. (2006). Qualitative meta-synthesis: A question of dialoguing with texts .  Journal of Advanced Nursing , 53 (3), 311-318.

• Example : Women’s perspectives on career successes and barriers: A qualitative meta-synthesis:  10.1177/05390184221113735

Literature Reviews in the Health Sciences

• UConn Health subject guide on systematic reviews Explanation of the different review types used in health sciences literature as well as tools to help you find the right review type
• << Previous: Getting Started
• Next: How to Pick a Topic >>
• Last Updated: Sep 21, 2022 2:16 PM
• URL: https://guides.lib.uconn.edu/literaturereview

The Sheridan Libraries

• Write a Literature Review
• Sheridan Libraries
• Evaluate This link opens in a new window

What Will You Do Differently?

Please help your librarians by filling out this two-minute survey of today's class session..

Professor, this one's for you .

Introduction

Literature reviews take time. here is some general information to know before you start.  .

•  VIDEO -- This video is a great overview of the entire process.  (2020; North Carolina State University Libraries) --The transcript is included --This is for everyone; ignore the mention of "graduate students" --9.5 minutes, and every second is important  
• OVERVIEW -- Read this page from Purdue's OWL. It's not long, and gives some tips to fill in what you just learned from the video.  
• NOT A RESEARCH ARTICLE -- A literature review follows a different style, format, and structure from a research article.  

• Next: Evaluate >>
• Last Updated: Jul 30, 2024 1:42 PM
• URL: https://guides.library.jhu.edu/lit-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.

Prevent plagiarism, run a free check.

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

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

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

Download Word doc Download Google doc

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

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

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

Make a list of keywords

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

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

Search for relevant sources

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

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

You can use boolean operators to help narrow down your search:

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

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

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

For each publication, ask yourself:

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

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

You can find out how many times an article has been cited on Google Scholar – a high citation count means the article has been influential in the field, and should certainly be included in your literature review.

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

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

Take notes and cite your sources

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

There are various approaches to organising the body of a literature review. You should have a rough idea of your strategy before you start writing.

Depending on the length of your literature review, you can combine several of these strategies (for example, your overall structure might be thematic, but each theme is discussed chronologically).

Chronological

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

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

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

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

Methodological

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

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

Theoretical

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

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

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

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

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

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

As you write, make sure to follow these tips:

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

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

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

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

It is often written as part of a dissertation , thesis, research paper , or proposal .

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

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

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

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

Cite this Scribbr article

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

McCombes, S. (2022, June 07). What is a Literature Review? | Guide, Template, & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved 26 August 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.

Reference management. Clean and simple.

What is a literature review? [with examples]

What is a literature review?

The purpose of a literature review, how to write a literature review, the format of a literature review, general formatting rules, the length of a literature review, literature review examples, frequently asked questions about literature reviews, related articles.

A literature review is an assessment of the sources in a chosen topic of research.

In a literature review, you’re expected to report on the existing scholarly conversation, without adding new contributions.

If you are currently writing one, you've come to the right place. In the following paragraphs, we will explain:

• the objective of a literature review
• how to write a literature review
• the basic format of a literature review

Tip: It’s not always mandatory to add a literature review in a paper. Theses and dissertations often include them, whereas research papers may not. Make sure to consult with your instructor for exact requirements.

The four main objectives of a literature review are:

• Studying the references of your research area
• Summarizing the main arguments
• Identifying current gaps, stances, and issues
• Presenting all of the above in a text

Ultimately, the main goal of a literature review is to provide the researcher with sufficient knowledge about the topic in question so that they can eventually make an intervention.

The format of a literature review is fairly standard. It includes an:

• introduction that briefly introduces the main topic
• body that includes the main discussion of the key arguments
• conclusion that highlights the gaps and issues of the literature

➡️ Take a look at our guide on how to write a literature review to learn more about how to structure a literature review.

First of all, a literature review should have its own labeled section. You should indicate clearly in the table of contents where the literature can be found, and you should label this section as “Literature Review.”

➡️ For more information on writing a thesis, visit our guide on how to structure a thesis .

There is no set amount of words for a literature review, so the length depends on the research. If you are working with a large amount of sources, it will be long. If your paper does not depend entirely on references, it will be short.

Take a look at these three theses featuring great literature reviews:

• School-Based Speech-Language Pathologist's Perceptions of Sensory Food Aversions in Children [ PDF , see page 20]
• Who's Writing What We Read: Authorship in Criminological Research [ PDF , see page 4]
• A Phenomenological Study of the Lived Experience of Online Instructors of Theological Reflection at Christian Institutions Accredited by the Association of Theological Schools [ PDF , see page 56]

Literature reviews are most commonly found in theses and dissertations. However, you find them in research papers as well.

There is no set amount of words for a literature review, so the length depends on the research. If you are working with a large amount of sources, then it will be long. If your paper does not depend entirely on references, then it will be short.

No. A literature review should have its own independent section. You should indicate clearly in the table of contents where the literature review can be found, and label this section as “Literature Review.”

The main goal of a literature review is to provide the researcher with sufficient knowledge about the topic in question so that they can eventually make an intervention.

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: 

How to write a good literature review 

• 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.

What is the purpose of literature review?

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: 

a. Habitat Loss and Species Extinction:

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. 

b. Range Shifts and Phenological Changes:

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. 

c. Ocean Acidification and Coral Reefs:

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. 

d. Adaptive Strategies and Conservation Efforts:

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!    

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 you 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 feature, you get 100% factual insights, with citations backed by 250M+ verified research articles, directly within your writing interface with the option to 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” 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 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.  

Frequently asked questions

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 an AI writing assistant that help academics write better, faster with real-time suggestions for in-depth language and grammar correction. Trained on millions of research manuscripts enhanced by professional academic editors, Paperpal delivers human precision at machine speed.  

Try it for free or upgrade to  Paperpal Prime , which unlocks unlimited access to premium features like academic translation, paraphrasing, contextual synonyms, consistency checks and more. It’s like always having a professional academic editor by your side! Go beyond limitations and experience the future of academic writing.  Get Paperpal Prime now at just US$19 a month!

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).

How To Structure Your Literature Review

3 options to help structure your chapter.

By: Amy Rommelspacher (PhD) | Reviewer: Dr Eunice Rautenbach | November 2020 (Updated May 2023)

Writing the literature review chapter can seem pretty daunting when you’re piecing together your dissertation or thesis. As  we’ve discussed before , a good literature review needs to achieve a few very important objectives – it should:

• Demonstrate your knowledge of the research topic
• Identify the gaps in the literature and show how your research links to these
• Provide the foundation for your conceptual framework (if you have one)
• Inform your own  methodology and research design

To achieve this, your literature review needs a well-thought-out structure . Get the structure of your literature review chapter wrong and you’ll struggle to achieve these objectives. Don’t worry though – in this post, we’ll look at how to structure your literature review for maximum impact (and marks!).

But wait – is this the right time?

Deciding on the structure of your literature review should come towards the end of the literature review process – after you have collected and digested the literature, but before you start writing the chapter. 

In other words, you need to first develop a rich understanding of the literature before you even attempt to map out a structure. There’s no use trying to develop a structure before you’ve fully wrapped your head around the existing research.

Equally importantly, you need to have a structure in place before you start writing , or your literature review will most likely end up a rambling, disjointed mess. 

Importantly, don’t feel that once you’ve defined a structure you can’t iterate on it. It’s perfectly natural to adjust as you engage in the writing process. As we’ve discussed before , writing is a way of developing your thinking, so it’s quite common for your thinking to change – and therefore, for your chapter structure to change – as you write. 

Need a helping hand?

Like any other chapter in your thesis or dissertation, your literature review needs to have a clear, logical structure. At a minimum, it should have three essential components – an  introduction , a  body   and a  conclusion . 

Let’s take a closer look at each of these.

1: The Introduction Section

Just like any good introduction, the introduction section of your literature review should introduce the purpose and layout (organisation) of the chapter. In other words, your introduction needs to give the reader a taste of what’s to come, and how you’re going to lay that out. Essentially, you should provide the reader with a high-level roadmap of your chapter to give them a taste of the journey that lies ahead.

Here’s an example of the layout visualised in a literature review introduction:

Your introduction should also outline your topic (including any tricky terminology or jargon) and provide an explanation of the scope of your literature review – in other words, what you  will   and  won’t   be covering (the delimitations ). This helps ringfence your review and achieve a clear focus . The clearer and narrower your focus, the deeper you can dive into the topic (which is typically where the magic lies). 

Depending on the nature of your project, you could also present your stance or point of view at this stage. In other words, after grappling with the literature you’ll have an opinion about what the trends and concerns are in the field as well as what’s lacking. The introduction section can then present these ideas so that it is clear to examiners that you’re aware of how your research connects with existing knowledge .

2: The Body Section

The body of your literature review is the centre of your work. This is where you’ll present, analyse, evaluate and synthesise the existing research. In other words, this is where you’re going to earn (or lose) the most marks. Therefore, it’s important to carefully think about how you will organise your discussion to present it in a clear way. 

The body of your literature review should do just as the description of this chapter suggests. It should “review” the literature – in other words, identify, analyse, and synthesise it. So, when thinking about structuring your literature review, you need to think about which structural approach will provide the best “review” for your specific type of research and objectives (we’ll get to this shortly).

There are (broadly speaking)  three options  for organising your literature review.

Option 1: Chronological (according to date)

Organising the literature chronologically is one of the simplest ways to structure your literature review. You start with what was published first and work your way through the literature until you reach the work published most recently. Pretty straightforward.

The benefit of this option is that it makes it easy to discuss the developments and debates in the field as they emerged over time. Organising your literature chronologically also allows you to highlight how specific articles or pieces of work might have changed the course of the field – in other words, which research has had the most impact . Therefore, this approach is very useful when your research is aimed at understanding how the topic has unfolded over time and is often used by scholars in the field of history. That said, this approach can be utilised by anyone that wants to explore change over time .

For example , if a student of politics is investigating how the understanding of democracy has evolved over time, they could use the chronological approach to provide a narrative that demonstrates how this understanding has changed through the ages.

Here are some questions you can ask yourself to help you structure your literature review chronologically.

• What is the earliest literature published relating to this topic?
• How has the field changed over time? Why?
• What are the most recent discoveries/theories?

In some ways, chronology plays a part whichever way you decide to structure your literature review, because you will always, to a certain extent, be analysing how the literature has developed. However, with the chronological approach, the emphasis is very firmly on how the discussion has evolved over time , as opposed to how all the literature links together (which we’ll discuss next ).

Option 2: Thematic (grouped by theme)

The thematic approach to structuring a literature review means organising your literature by theme or category – for example, by independent variables (i.e. factors that have an impact on a specific outcome).

As you’ve been collecting and synthesising literature , you’ll likely have started seeing some themes or patterns emerging. You can then use these themes or patterns as a structure for your body discussion. The thematic approach is the most common approach and is useful for structuring literature reviews in most fields.

For example, if you were researching which factors contributed towards people trusting an organisation, you might find themes such as consumers’ perceptions of an organisation’s competence, benevolence and integrity. Structuring your literature review thematically would mean structuring your literature review’s body section to discuss each of these themes, one section at a time.

Here are some questions to ask yourself when structuring your literature review by themes:

• Are there any patterns that have come to light in the literature?
• What are the central themes and categories used by the researchers?
• Do I have enough evidence of these themes?

PS – you can see an example of a thematically structured literature review in our literature review sample walkthrough video here.

Option 3: Methodological

The methodological option is a way of structuring your literature review by the research methodologies used . In other words, organising your discussion based on the angle from which each piece of research was approached – for example, qualitative , quantitative or mixed  methodologies.

Structuring your literature review by methodology can be useful if you are drawing research from a variety of disciplines and are critiquing different methodologies. The point of this approach is to question  how  existing research has been conducted, as opposed to  what  the conclusions and/or findings the research were.

For example, a sociologist might centre their research around critiquing specific fieldwork practices. Their literature review will then be a summary of the fieldwork methodologies used by different studies.

Here are some questions you can ask yourself when structuring your literature review according to methodology:

• Which methodologies have been utilised in this field?
• Which methodology is the most popular (and why)?
• What are the strengths and weaknesses of the various methodologies?
• How can the existing methodologies inform my own methodology?

3: The Conclusion Section

Once you’ve completed the body section of your literature review using one of the structural approaches we discussed above, you’ll need to “wrap up” your literature review and pull all the pieces together to set the direction for the rest of your dissertation or thesis.

The conclusion is where you’ll present the key findings of your literature review. In this section, you should emphasise the research that is especially important to your research questions and highlight the gaps that exist in the literature. Based on this, you need to make it clear what you will add to the literature – in other words, justify your own research by showing how it will help fill one or more of the gaps you just identified.

Last but not least, if it’s your intention to develop a conceptual framework for your dissertation or thesis, the conclusion section is a good place to present this.

Example: Thematically Structured Review

In the video below, we unpack a literature review chapter so that you can see an example of a thematically structure review in practice.

Let’s Recap

In this article, we’ve  discussed how to structure your literature review for maximum impact. Here’s a quick recap of what  you need to keep in mind when deciding on your literature review structure:

• Just like other chapters, your literature review needs a clear introduction , body and conclusion .
• The introduction section should provide an overview of what you will discuss in your literature review.
• The body section of your literature review can be organised by chronology , theme or methodology . The right structural approach depends on what you’re trying to achieve with your research.
• The conclusion section should draw together the key findings of your literature review and link them to your research questions.

If you’re ready to get started, be sure to download our free literature review template to fast-track your chapter outline.

Psst… there’s more!

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

28 Comments

Great work. This is exactly what I was looking for and helps a lot together with your previous post on literature review. One last thing is missing: a link to a great literature chapter of an journal article (maybe with comments of the different sections in this review chapter). Do you know any great literature review chapters?

I agree with you Marin… A great piece

I agree with Marin. This would be quite helpful if you annotate a nicely structured literature from previously published research articles.

Awesome article for my research.

I thank you immensely for this wonderful guide

It is indeed thought and supportive work for the futurist researcher and students

Very educative and good time to get guide. Thank you

Great work, very insightful. Thank you.

Thanks for this wonderful presentation. My question is that do I put all the variables into a single conceptual framework or each hypothesis will have it own conceptual framework?

Thank you very much, very helpful

This is very educative and precise . Thank you very much for dropping this kind of write up .

Pheeww, so damn helpful, thank you for this informative piece.

I’m doing a research project topic ; stool analysis for parasitic worm (enteric) worm, how do I structure it, thanks.

comprehensive explanation. Help us by pasting the URL of some good “literature review” for better understanding.

great piece. thanks for the awesome explanation. it is really worth sharing. I have a little question, if anyone can help me out, which of the options in the body of literature can be best fit if you are writing an architectural thesis that deals with design?

I am doing a research on nanofluids how can l structure it?

Beautifully clear.nThank you!

Lucid! Thankyou!

Brilliant work, well understood, many thanks

I like how this was so clear with simple language 😊😊 thank you so much 😊 for these information 😊

Insightful. I was struggling to come up with a sensible literature review but this has been really helpful. Thank you!

You have given thought-provoking information about the review of the literature.

Thank you. It has made my own research better and to impart your work to students I teach

I learnt a lot from this teaching. It’s a great piece.

I am doing research on EFL teacher motivation for his/her job. How Can I structure it? Is there any detailed template, additional to this?

You are so cool! I do not think I’ve read through something like this before. So nice to find somebody with some genuine thoughts on this issue. Seriously.. thank you for starting this up. This site is one thing that is required on the internet, someone with a little originality!

I’m asked to do conceptual, theoretical and empirical literature, and i just don’t know how to structure it

Asking questions are actually fastidious thing if you are not understanding anything fully, but this article presents good understanding yet.

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

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

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

• Print Friendly

How to Write a Literature Review

What is a literature review.

• What Is the Literature
• Writing the Review

A literature review is much more than an annotated bibliography or a list of separate reviews of articles and books. It is a critical, analytical summary and synthesis of the current knowledge of a topic. Thus it should compare and relate different theories, findings, etc, rather than just summarize them individually. In addition, it should have a particular focus or theme to organize the review. It does not have to be an exhaustive account of everything published on the topic, but it should discuss all the significant academic literature and other relevant sources important for that focus.

This is meant to be a general guide to writing a literature review: ways to structure one, what to include, how it supplements other research. For more specific help on writing a review, and especially for help on finding the literature to review, sign up for a Personal Research Session .

The specific organization of a literature review depends on the type and purpose of the review, as well as on the specific field or topic being reviewed. But in general, it is a relatively brief but thorough exploration of past and current work on a topic. Rather than a chronological listing of previous work, though, literature reviews are usually organized thematically, such as different theoretical approaches, methodologies, or specific issues or concepts involved in the topic. A thematic organization makes it much easier to examine contrasting perspectives, theoretical approaches, methodologies, findings, etc, and to analyze the strengths and weaknesses of, and point out any gaps in, previous research. And this is the heart of what a literature review is about. A literature review may offer new interpretations, theoretical approaches, or other ideas; if it is part of a research proposal or report it should demonstrate the relationship of the proposed or reported research to others' work; but whatever else it does, it must provide a critical overview of the current state of research efforts. 

Literature reviews are common and very important in the sciences and social sciences. They are less common and have a less important role in the humanities, but they do have a place, especially stand-alone reviews.

Types of Literature Reviews

There are different types of literature reviews, and different purposes for writing a review, but the most common are:

• Stand-alone literature review articles . These provide an overview and analysis of the current state of research on a topic or question. The goal is to evaluate and compare previous research on a topic to provide an analysis of what is currently known, and also to reveal controversies, weaknesses, and gaps in current work, thus pointing to directions for future research. You can find examples published in any number of academic journals, but there is a series of Annual Reviews of *Subject* which are specifically devoted to literature review articles. Writing a stand-alone review is often an effective way to get a good handle on a topic and to develop ideas for your own research program. For example, contrasting theoretical approaches or conflicting interpretations of findings can be the basis of your research project: can you find evidence supporting one interpretation against another, or can you propose an alternative interpretation that overcomes their limitations?
• Part of a research proposal . This could be a proposal for a PhD dissertation, a senior thesis, or a class project. It could also be a submission for a grant. The literature review, by pointing out the current issues and questions concerning a topic, is a crucial part of demonstrating how your proposed research will contribute to the field, and thus of convincing your thesis committee to allow you to pursue the topic of your interest or a funding agency to pay for your research efforts.
• Part of a research report . When you finish your research and write your thesis or paper to present your findings, it should include a literature review to provide the context to which your work is a contribution. Your report, in addition to detailing the methods, results, etc. of your research, should show how your work relates to others' work.

A literature review for a research report is often a revision of the review for a research proposal, which can be a revision of a stand-alone review. Each revision should be a fairly extensive revision. With the increased knowledge of and experience in the topic as you proceed, your understanding of the topic will increase. Thus, you will be in a better position to analyze and critique the literature. In addition, your focus will change as you proceed in your research. Some areas of the literature you initially reviewed will be marginal or irrelevant for your eventual research, and you will need to explore other areas more thoroughly. 

Examples of Literature Reviews

See the series of Annual Reviews of *Subject* which are specifically devoted to literature review articles to find many examples of stand-alone literature reviews in the biomedical, physical, and social sciences. 

Research report articles vary in how they are organized, but a common general structure is to have sections such as:

• Abstract - Brief summary of the contents of the article
• Introduction - A explanation of the purpose of the study, a statement of the research question(s) the study intends to address
• Literature review - A critical assessment of the work done so far on this topic, to show how the current study relates to what has already been done
• Methods - How the study was carried out (e.g. instruments or equipment, procedures, methods to gather and analyze data)
• Results - What was found in the course of the study
• Discussion - What do the results mean
• Conclusion - State the conclusions and implications of the results, and discuss how it relates to the work reviewed in the literature review; also, point to directions for further work in the area

Here are some articles that illustrate variations on this theme. There is no need to read the entire articles (unless the contents interest you); just quickly browse through to see the sections, and see how each section is introduced and what is contained in them.

The Determinants of Undergraduate Grade Point Average: The Relative Importance of Family Background, High School Resources, and Peer Group Effects , in The Journal of Human Resources , v. 34 no. 2 (Spring 1999), p. 268-293.

This article has a standard breakdown of sections:

• Introduction
• Literature Review
• Some discussion sections

First Encounters of the Bureaucratic Kind: Early Freshman Experiences with a Campus Bureaucracy , in The Journal of Higher Education , v. 67 no. 6 (Nov-Dec 1996), p. 660-691.

This one does not have a section specifically labeled as a "literature review" or "review of the literature," but the first few sections cite a long list of other sources discussing previous research in the area before the authors present their own study they are reporting.

• Next: What Is the Literature >>
• Last Updated: Jan 11, 2024 9:48 AM
• URL: https://libguides.wesleyan.edu/litreview

 CREATE ACCOUNT  LOG IN

Writing: Literature Review Basics

• What is Synthesis?
• Organizing Your Research
• Paraphrasing, Summary, or Direct Quotation?
• Introductions
• Conclusions
• All Writing Guides: Home
• CORE Library Home

The Most Important Thing

The best time to write an introduction is AFTER you write the body of your paper.

Well, how do you know what to introduce until after you've figured out what you want to say?

The best time to write an introduction is as one of the last things you do.

Basic Introduction Template

For any other sort of scholarly writing, the following basic structure works well for an introduction:

• What has been said or done on this topic?  
• What is the problem with what has been said or done?
• What will you offer to solve the problem?  (The answer to this is your thesis statement.)
• How does your solution address necessary change?

Writing an Introduction

The job of an introduction is to preview what you are going to say so the audience knows what is coming.  A good introduction starts out generally and works towards a specific statement of what you intend to discuss in your writing. 

The introduction explains the focus and establishes the importance of the subject. It discusses what kind of work has been done on the topic and identifies any controversies within the field or any recent research which has raised questions about earlier assumptions. It may provide background or history, and it indicates why the topic is important, interesting, problematic, or relevant in some way.  It concludes with a purpose or thesis statement. In a stand-alone literature review, this statement will sum up and evaluate the state of the art in this field of research; in a review that is an introduction or preparatory to a larger work, such as the Culminating Project, it will suggest how the review findings will lead to the research the writer proposes to undertake.

In a literature review, an introduction may contain the following:

• A concise definition of a topic under consideration (this may be a descriptive or argumentative thesis, or proposal), as well as the scope of the related literature being investigated. (Example: If the topic under consideration is ‘women’s wartime diaries’, the scope of the review may be limited to published or unpublished works, works in English, works from a particular location, time period, or conflict, etc.)  
• The introduction should also note what topics are being included and what are intentional exclusions. (Example: “This review will not explore the diaries of adolescent girls.”)
• A final sentence should signal the list of key topics that will be used to discuss the selected sources.

Many theories have been proposed to explain what motivates human behavior. Although the literature covers a wide variety of such theories, this review will focus on five major themes which emerge repeatedly throughout the literature reviewed. These themes are incorporation of the self-concept into traditional theories of motivation, the influence of rewards on motivation, the increasing importance of internal forces of motivation, autonomy and self-control as sources of motivation, and narcissism as an essential component of motivation. Although the literature presents these themes in a variety of contexts, this paper will primarily focus on their application to self-motivation.

Let's break that apart.

• << Previous: Paraphrasing, Summary, or Direct Quotation?
• Next: Conclusions >>
• Last Updated: Feb 12, 2024 9:02 AM
• URL: https://azhin.org/cummings/basiclitreview

© 2015 - 2024

Literature Review Guide: Examples of Literature Reviews

• What is a Literature Review?
• How to start?
• Picking your research question and searching
• Search strategies and Databases
• How to organise the review
• Examples of Literature Reviews
• Library summary

All good quality journal articles will include a small Literature Review after the Introduction paragraph.  It may not be called a Literature Review but gives you an idea of how one is created in miniature.

Sample Literature Reviews as part of a articles or Theses

• Hackett, G and Melia, D . The hotel as the holiday/stay destination:trends and innovations. Presented at TRIC Conference, Belfast, Ireland- June 2012 and EuroCHRIE Conference

Links to sample Literature Reviews from other libraries

• Sample literature reviews from University of West Florida

Irish Theses

• Phillips, Martin (2015) European airline performance: a data envelopment analysis with extrapolations based on model outputs. Master of Business Studies thesis, Dublin City University.
• The customers’ perception of servicescape’s influence on their behaviours, in the food retail industry : Dublin Business School 2015
• Coughlan, Ray (2015) What was the role of leadership in the transformation of a failing Irish Insurance business. Masters thesis, Dublin, National College of Ireland.
• << Previous: How to organise the review
• Next: Library summary >>
• Last Updated: Aug 28, 2024 5:05 PM
• URL: https://ait.libguides.com/literaturereview

• Literature review example analysis
• Information and services
• Student support
• Study skills and learning advice
• Study skills and learning advice overview
• Assignment writing
• How to write a literature review

This example shows how a literature review from a PhD thesis can be analysed for its structure, purpose and content.

Three sections of the thesis are analysed to show the:

• relationship between the introduction and the literature review
• structure and purpose of dedicated literature review chapters
• inclusion of literature review in other chapters of the thesis.

Access the thesis

Co-witnesses and the effects of discussion on eyewitness memory by Helen M Paterson

Overview of thesis (introduction)

This introductory section is less than two pages long.

The first paragraph:

• states the overall objective of the thesis
• defines the introduced term
• provides broad motivation for interest in the area
• introduces the sections of the thesis that will address the overall objective.

The other paragraphs describe the content and purpose of each section of the thesis.

Literature review

The literature review is made of up of two chapters.

Chapter 1: Literature review of relevant research

The overall goals of this chapter are to firstly establish the significance of the general field of study, and then identify a place where a new contribution could be made.

The bulk of the chapter critically evaluates the methodologies used in this field to identify the appropriate approach for investigating the research questions.

Chapter 2: Theoretical explanations of memory conformity

Chapter 5, Study 3: Co-Witness Contamination

This chapter has the following structure:

• Introduction
• Discussion.

The introduction introduces the particular study to be reported on, and includes a three-and-a-half page literature review.

The literature review in this chapter:

• links back to the relevant general findings of the earlier literature review chapters
• briefly reviews the broad motivation for this study
• identifies that two previously used methodologies in this field will be compared to resolve questions about the findings of previous studies which had only used a single methodology
• uses previous literature to generate specific hypotheses to test
• reviews additional literature to provide a justification for a second objective to be investigated in the study reported on in this chapter.

Learning Advisers

Our advisers can help undergraduate and postgraduate students in all programs clarify ideas from workshops, help you develop skills and give feedback on assignments.

How a Learning Adviser can help

An official website of the United States government

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

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

• Publications
• Account settings

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

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• PLoS Comput Biol
• v.9(7); 2013 Jul

Ten Simple Rules for Writing a Literature Review

Marco pautasso.

1 Centre for Functional and Evolutionary Ecology (CEFE), CNRS, Montpellier, France

2 Centre for Biodiversity Synthesis and Analysis (CESAB), FRB, Aix-en-Provence, France

Literature reviews are in great demand in most scientific fields. Their need stems from the ever-increasing output of scientific publications [1] . For example, compared to 1991, in 2008 three, eight, and forty times more papers were indexed in Web of Science on malaria, obesity, and biodiversity, respectively [2] . Given such mountains of papers, scientists cannot be expected to examine in detail every single new paper relevant to their interests [3] . Thus, it is both advantageous and necessary to rely on regular summaries of the recent literature. Although recognition for scientists mainly comes from primary research, timely literature reviews can lead to new synthetic insights and are often widely read [4] . For such summaries to be useful, however, they need to be compiled in a professional way [5] .

When starting from scratch, reviewing the literature can require a titanic amount of work. That is why researchers who have spent their career working on a certain research issue are in a perfect position to review that literature. Some graduate schools are now offering courses in reviewing the literature, given that most research students start their project by producing an overview of what has already been done on their research issue [6] . However, it is likely that most scientists have not thought in detail about how to approach and carry out a literature review.

Reviewing the literature requires the ability to juggle multiple tasks, from finding and evaluating relevant material to synthesising information from various sources, from critical thinking to paraphrasing, evaluating, and citation skills [7] . In this contribution, I share ten simple rules I learned working on about 25 literature reviews as a PhD and postdoctoral student. Ideas and insights also come from discussions with coauthors and colleagues, as well as feedback from reviewers and editors.

Rule 1: Define a Topic and Audience

How to choose which topic to review? There are so many issues in contemporary science that you could spend a lifetime of attending conferences and reading the literature just pondering what to review. On the one hand, if you take several years to choose, several other people may have had the same idea in the meantime. On the other hand, only a well-considered topic is likely to lead to a brilliant literature review [8] . The topic must at least be:

• interesting to you (ideally, you should have come across a series of recent papers related to your line of work that call for a critical summary),
• an important aspect of the field (so that many readers will be interested in the review and there will be enough material to write it), and
• a well-defined issue (otherwise you could potentially include thousands of publications, which would make the review unhelpful).

Ideas for potential reviews may come from papers providing lists of key research questions to be answered [9] , but also from serendipitous moments during desultory reading and discussions. In addition to choosing your topic, you should also select a target audience. In many cases, the topic (e.g., web services in computational biology) will automatically define an audience (e.g., computational biologists), but that same topic may also be of interest to neighbouring fields (e.g., computer science, biology, etc.).

Rule 2: Search and Re-search the Literature

After having chosen your topic and audience, start by checking the literature and downloading relevant papers. Five pieces of advice here:

• keep track of the search items you use (so that your search can be replicated [10] ),
• keep a list of papers whose pdfs you cannot access immediately (so as to retrieve them later with alternative strategies),
• use a paper management system (e.g., Mendeley, Papers, Qiqqa, Sente),
• define early in the process some criteria for exclusion of irrelevant papers (these criteria can then be described in the review to help define its scope), and
• do not just look for research papers in the area you wish to review, but also seek previous reviews.

The chances are high that someone will already have published a literature review ( Figure 1 ), if not exactly on the issue you are planning to tackle, at least on a related topic. If there are already a few or several reviews of the literature on your issue, my advice is not to give up, but to carry on with your own literature review,

The bottom-right situation (many literature reviews but few research papers) is not just a theoretical situation; it applies, for example, to the study of the impacts of climate change on plant diseases, where there appear to be more literature reviews than research studies [33] .

• discussing in your review the approaches, limitations, and conclusions of past reviews,
• trying to find a new angle that has not been covered adequately in the previous reviews, and
• incorporating new material that has inevitably accumulated since their appearance.

When searching the literature for pertinent papers and reviews, the usual rules apply:

• be thorough,
• use different keywords and database sources (e.g., DBLP, Google Scholar, ISI Proceedings, JSTOR Search, Medline, Scopus, Web of Science), and
• look at who has cited past relevant papers and book chapters.

Rule 3: Take Notes While Reading

If you read the papers first, and only afterwards start writing the review, you will need a very good memory to remember who wrote what, and what your impressions and associations were while reading each single paper. My advice is, while reading, to start writing down interesting pieces of information, insights about how to organize the review, and thoughts on what to write. This way, by the time you have read the literature you selected, you will already have a rough draft of the review.

Of course, this draft will still need much rewriting, restructuring, and rethinking to obtain a text with a coherent argument [11] , but you will have avoided the danger posed by staring at a blank document. Be careful when taking notes to use quotation marks if you are provisionally copying verbatim from the literature. It is advisable then to reformulate such quotes with your own words in the final draft. It is important to be careful in noting the references already at this stage, so as to avoid misattributions. Using referencing software from the very beginning of your endeavour will save you time.

Rule 4: Choose the Type of Review You Wish to Write

After having taken notes while reading the literature, you will have a rough idea of the amount of material available for the review. This is probably a good time to decide whether to go for a mini- or a full review. Some journals are now favouring the publication of rather short reviews focusing on the last few years, with a limit on the number of words and citations. A mini-review is not necessarily a minor review: it may well attract more attention from busy readers, although it will inevitably simplify some issues and leave out some relevant material due to space limitations. A full review will have the advantage of more freedom to cover in detail the complexities of a particular scientific development, but may then be left in the pile of the very important papers “to be read” by readers with little time to spare for major monographs.

There is probably a continuum between mini- and full reviews. The same point applies to the dichotomy of descriptive vs. integrative reviews. While descriptive reviews focus on the methodology, findings, and interpretation of each reviewed study, integrative reviews attempt to find common ideas and concepts from the reviewed material [12] . A similar distinction exists between narrative and systematic reviews: while narrative reviews are qualitative, systematic reviews attempt to test a hypothesis based on the published evidence, which is gathered using a predefined protocol to reduce bias [13] , [14] . When systematic reviews analyse quantitative results in a quantitative way, they become meta-analyses. The choice between different review types will have to be made on a case-by-case basis, depending not just on the nature of the material found and the preferences of the target journal(s), but also on the time available to write the review and the number of coauthors [15] .

Rule 5: Keep the Review Focused, but Make It of Broad Interest

Whether your plan is to write a mini- or a full review, it is good advice to keep it focused 16 , 17 . Including material just for the sake of it can easily lead to reviews that are trying to do too many things at once. The need to keep a review focused can be problematic for interdisciplinary reviews, where the aim is to bridge the gap between fields [18] . If you are writing a review on, for example, how epidemiological approaches are used in modelling the spread of ideas, you may be inclined to include material from both parent fields, epidemiology and the study of cultural diffusion. This may be necessary to some extent, but in this case a focused review would only deal in detail with those studies at the interface between epidemiology and the spread of ideas.

While focus is an important feature of a successful review, this requirement has to be balanced with the need to make the review relevant to a broad audience. This square may be circled by discussing the wider implications of the reviewed topic for other disciplines.

Rule 6: Be Critical and Consistent

Reviewing the literature is not stamp collecting. A good review does not just summarize the literature, but discusses it critically, identifies methodological problems, and points out research gaps [19] . After having read a review of the literature, a reader should have a rough idea of:

• the major achievements in the reviewed field,
• the main areas of debate, and
• the outstanding research questions.

It is challenging to achieve a successful review on all these fronts. A solution can be to involve a set of complementary coauthors: some people are excellent at mapping what has been achieved, some others are very good at identifying dark clouds on the horizon, and some have instead a knack at predicting where solutions are going to come from. If your journal club has exactly this sort of team, then you should definitely write a review of the literature! In addition to critical thinking, a literature review needs consistency, for example in the choice of passive vs. active voice and present vs. past tense.

Rule 7: Find a Logical Structure

Like a well-baked cake, a good review has a number of telling features: it is worth the reader's time, timely, systematic, well written, focused, and critical. It also needs a good structure. With reviews, the usual subdivision of research papers into introduction, methods, results, and discussion does not work or is rarely used. However, a general introduction of the context and, toward the end, a recapitulation of the main points covered and take-home messages make sense also in the case of reviews. For systematic reviews, there is a trend towards including information about how the literature was searched (database, keywords, time limits) [20] .

How can you organize the flow of the main body of the review so that the reader will be drawn into and guided through it? It is generally helpful to draw a conceptual scheme of the review, e.g., with mind-mapping techniques. Such diagrams can help recognize a logical way to order and link the various sections of a review [21] . This is the case not just at the writing stage, but also for readers if the diagram is included in the review as a figure. A careful selection of diagrams and figures relevant to the reviewed topic can be very helpful to structure the text too [22] .

Rule 8: Make Use of Feedback

Reviews of the literature are normally peer-reviewed in the same way as research papers, and rightly so [23] . As a rule, incorporating feedback from reviewers greatly helps improve a review draft. Having read the review with a fresh mind, reviewers may spot inaccuracies, inconsistencies, and ambiguities that had not been noticed by the writers due to rereading the typescript too many times. It is however advisable to reread the draft one more time before submission, as a last-minute correction of typos, leaps, and muddled sentences may enable the reviewers to focus on providing advice on the content rather than the form.

Feedback is vital to writing a good review, and should be sought from a variety of colleagues, so as to obtain a diversity of views on the draft. This may lead in some cases to conflicting views on the merits of the paper, and on how to improve it, but such a situation is better than the absence of feedback. A diversity of feedback perspectives on a literature review can help identify where the consensus view stands in the landscape of the current scientific understanding of an issue [24] .

Rule 9: Include Your Own Relevant Research, but Be Objective

In many cases, reviewers of the literature will have published studies relevant to the review they are writing. This could create a conflict of interest: how can reviewers report objectively on their own work [25] ? Some scientists may be overly enthusiastic about what they have published, and thus risk giving too much importance to their own findings in the review. However, bias could also occur in the other direction: some scientists may be unduly dismissive of their own achievements, so that they will tend to downplay their contribution (if any) to a field when reviewing it.

In general, a review of the literature should neither be a public relations brochure nor an exercise in competitive self-denial. If a reviewer is up to the job of producing a well-organized and methodical review, which flows well and provides a service to the readership, then it should be possible to be objective in reviewing one's own relevant findings. In reviews written by multiple authors, this may be achieved by assigning the review of the results of a coauthor to different coauthors.

Rule 10: Be Up-to-Date, but Do Not Forget Older Studies

Given the progressive acceleration in the publication of scientific papers, today's reviews of the literature need awareness not just of the overall direction and achievements of a field of inquiry, but also of the latest studies, so as not to become out-of-date before they have been published. Ideally, a literature review should not identify as a major research gap an issue that has just been addressed in a series of papers in press (the same applies, of course, to older, overlooked studies (“sleeping beauties” [26] )). This implies that literature reviewers would do well to keep an eye on electronic lists of papers in press, given that it can take months before these appear in scientific databases. Some reviews declare that they have scanned the literature up to a certain point in time, but given that peer review can be a rather lengthy process, a full search for newly appeared literature at the revision stage may be worthwhile. Assessing the contribution of papers that have just appeared is particularly challenging, because there is little perspective with which to gauge their significance and impact on further research and society.

Inevitably, new papers on the reviewed topic (including independently written literature reviews) will appear from all quarters after the review has been published, so that there may soon be the need for an updated review. But this is the nature of science [27] – [32] . I wish everybody good luck with writing a review of the literature.

Acknowledgments

Many thanks to M. Barbosa, K. Dehnen-Schmutz, T. Döring, D. Fontaneto, M. Garbelotto, O. Holdenrieder, M. Jeger, D. Lonsdale, A. MacLeod, P. Mills, M. Moslonka-Lefebvre, G. Stancanelli, P. Weisberg, and X. Xu for insights and discussions, and to P. Bourne, T. Matoni, and D. Smith for helpful comments on a previous draft.

Funding Statement

This work was funded by the French Foundation for Research on Biodiversity (FRB) through its Centre for Synthesis and Analysis of Biodiversity data (CESAB), as part of the NETSEED research project. The funders had no role in the preparation of the manuscript.

• Writing well

How to write a literature review

• Starting well
• How to write an annotated bibliography
• How to write a case study response
• How to write a critique
• How to write an empirical article
• How to write an essay
• How to write a reflective task
• How to write a report
• Finishing well

Structure of a literature review

Determine your purpose.

Work out what you need to address in the literature review. What are you being asked to do in your literature review? What are you searching the literature to discover? Check your assignment question and your criteria sheet to know what to focus on.

Do an extensive search of the literature

Find out what has been written on the topic.

What kind of literature?

Select appropriate source material: Use a variety of academic or scholarly sources that are relevant, current and authoritative. An extensive review of relevant material will include — books, journal articles, reports, government documents, conference proceedings and web resources. The Library would be the best place to search for your sources.

How many resources?

The number of sources that you will be required to review will depend on what the literature review is for and how advanced you are in your studies. It could be from five sources at first year undergraduate level to more than fifty for a thesis. Your lecturer will advise you on these details.

Note the bibliographical details of your sources

Keep a note of the publication title, date, authors’ names, page numbers and publishers. These details will save you time later.

Read the literature

• Critically read each source, look for the arguments presented rather than for facts.
• Take notes as you read and start to organise your review around themes and ideas.
• Consider using a table, matrix or concept map to identify how the different sources relate to each other.

Analyse the literature you have found

In order for your writing to reflect strong critical analysis, you need to evaluate the sources. For each source you are reviewing ask yourself these questions:

• What are the key terms and concepts?
• How relevant is this article to my specific topic?
• What are the major relationships, trends and patterns?
• How has the author structured the arguments?
• How authoritative and credible is this source?
• What are the differences and similarities between the sources?
• Are there any gaps in the literature that require further study?

Write the review

• Start by writing your thesis statement. This is an important introductory sentence that will tell your reader what the topic is and the overall perspective or argument you will be presenting.
• Like essays, a literature review must have an introduction, a body and a conclusion.

Introduction

Your introduction should give an outline of:

• why you are writing a review, and why the topic is important
• the scope of the review — what aspects of the topic will be discussed
• the criteria used for your literature selection (e.g. type of sources used, date range)
• the organisational pattern of the review.

Body paragraphs

Each body paragraph should deal with a different theme that is relevant to your topic. You will need to synthesise several of your reviewed readings into each paragraph, so that there is a clear connection between the various sources. You will need to critically analyse each source for how they contribute to the themes you are researching.

The body could include paragraphs on:

• historical background
• methodologies
• previous studies on the topic
• mainstream versus alternative viewpoints
• principal questions being asked
• general conclusions that are being drawn.

Your conclusion should give a summary of:

• the main agreements and disagreements in the literature
• any gaps or areas for further research
• your overall perspective on the topic.
• outlined the purpose and scope?
• identified appropriate and credible (academic/scholarly) literature?
• recorded the bibliographical details of the sources?
• analysed and critiqued your readings?
• identified gaps in the literature and research?
• explored methodologies / theories / hypotheses / models?
• discussed the varying viewpoints?
• written an introduction, body and conclusion?
• checked punctuation and spelling?

Further information

• HiQ: Managing weekly readings
• HiQ: Notetaking
• HiQ: Structuring your assignment
• RMIT University: Literature review - Overview

Global links and information

• Referencing and using sources
• Background and development
• Changes to QUT cite|write
• Need more help?
• Current students
• Current staff
• TEQSA Provider ID: PRV12079 (Australian University)
• CRICOS No. 00213J
• ABN 83 791 724 622
• Last modified: 28-May-2024
• Accessibility
• Right to Information
• Feedback and suggestions

Acknowledgement of Traditional Owners

QUT acknowledges the Traditional Owners of the lands where QUT now stands.

WTO / Education / 39 Best Literature Review Examples (Guide with Samples)

39 Best Literature Review Examples (Guide with Samples)

A literature review is a compilation of current knowledge on a particular topic derived from the critical evaluation of different scholarly sources such as books, articles, and publications, which is then presented in an organized manner to relate to a specific research problem being investigated.

It highlights the methods, relevant theories, and gaps in existing research on a particular subject. It can be both a summary and synthesis of information on a specific topic. A summary reiterates key information from scholarly sources, while synthesis is a new interpretation or combination of new and old material. 

As a synthesis, it can outline the intellectual progression of knowledge in a particular field or topic, which might involve stating key debates throughout the advancement period.  

Literature Review Examples

Purpose of Literature Review

Literature reviews have different purposes in scholarly articles, research papers , and books, depending on the discipline at hand. First and foremost, reviews are generally meant to showcase the extensive research carried out by an author on a particular topic and their findings, which will form the foundation of the research. It then summarizes the information to show the author’s familiarity with the topic in question.

The review also demonstrates the relationship between the topic being investigated and other topics that were under consideration. Finally, it outlines the gaps in the previous works of other scholars, which create areas of research.

Literature reviews provide a new interpretation of previous scholarly publications and aim to resolve conflicting studies done in the past. In addition, identifying existing gaps in a particular research area illustrates the starting point of the research.

Literature Review vs. Academic Research Paper

A research paper presents new ideas, arguments, and approaches toward a particular topic. The conclusions of a research paper will be based on the analysis and interpretation of raw data collected by the author and an original study. On the other hand, a literature review is based on the findings of other publications. Thus, the review highlights the author’s understanding of a topic based on the previously conducted research. It is part of a research paper.

Where, When, and Why

The need for a literature review in a publication will vary from one situation to the other and the field/discipline of research. These two factors determine what is expected from the lit review. For example, a scientific review will be more analytical on the methods and results of previous research. In contrast, a philosophical review will be more argumentative, highlighting the discrepancies and correspondences between scholars.

It can either be part of a publication or a stand-alone document. As part of a research publication, it is often placed after the introduction to the topic outlining knowledge about a particular topic and critical sources that formed the foundation of the research. As an individual document, it is prepared by students as part of course study to aid the students in familiarizing themselves with different topics in their field of study.

Lit reviews also guide students to help them synthesize theoretical methodologies and frameworks to adopt in academic research . As a publication, literature reviews are used to document existing information about a topic for readers (other scholars) to go through for whatever reasons they may have. Published studies are essentially helpful to new scholars getting into any field of research.

Types of Literature Review

Before looking into how to write a literature review, it is vital to understand the different types. The type will usually depend on the objective approach of the author.

Common types are:  

Argumentative review

An argumentative review is adopted when the research paper or publication is meant to take a contrarian viewpoint on a particular subject. The review analyses an existing argument, philosophical problem, assumption, or conclusion outlined in different studies with an objective to either support or oppose the argument. 

Integrative review

An integrative review integrates secondary data to develop new perspectives and frameworks on a topic. This is more prevalent in research that does not involve primary data. In addition, integrative reviews are more familiar with social sciences.       

Historical review

Historical reviews are used when scholars or authors place a particular idea, concept, theory, or research in a historical context. It examines the idea, theory, or issue from the first time it was discussed and outlines its evolution throughout a given period.  

Methodological review

Methodological reviews look at how a specific theory, concept, results, or findings were developed. Therefore, methodological reviews will analyze the different methods used by different scholars to arrive at conclusions or knowledge about the topic being investigated.

Some of the methods scholars use in different disciplines to obtain information are interviewing, sampling, practical experiments/data collection, research approaches, critical thinking, social experiments, etc.

Methodological reviews are hence used to discuss tested methods of research and ethics that a researcher should be aware of before undertaking their investigations.  

Systematic review

A systematic review is a more detailed and comprehensive review compared to other types of lit reviews. It highlights any existing research evidence associated with a clearly defined research problem or question. The evidence is collected, analyzed, and reported in a summarized but detailed manner. Systematic reviews are popularly presented as a cause-and-effect structure.

Theoretical review

A theoretical review delves into the different theories regarding a particular issue, challenge, concept, or theory. It identifies their inadequacy in explaining the issue or concept at hand. The review then identifies the relationships between the identified theories, and the degree of research done and poses novel hypotheses to be investigated.

Organization of a Literature Review

How an author organizes a literature review will depend on what they aim to achieve. As a consequence, there are multiple ways of organizing it which are discussed below:

Chronological 

A chronological format outlines knowledge on a particular topic based on when the scholarly source of information was published. Starting with the earliest followed up to the most recent chronological order. This format should be used if there is a clear chronological order in the development of the information; therefore, it will not be applicable in some cases. Instead, key turning points, patterns, and events that impacted the direction of the knowledge should be outlined.  

By publication

It can be organized in the scholarly publications reviewed by the author, scholar, or student. The by-publication format should only improve the review and facilitate what the author aims to accomplish. 

Scholars or students can adopt a dominant trend in research, such as history, developmental stages, steps involved in a process, etc.

Methodological

A methodological format is based on the methods used by the researcher. Thus, the order of contents in the lit review will depend on the method they will use to carry out their research, knowledge obtained from the first method appears first, and the rest of the information follows in the same order according to the methods used by the author.  

Literature reviews organized in a thematic format revolve around the subject being investigated in no order. It is, therefore, ordinarily up to the researcher or author to determine how they intend to outline the information. A thematic format will crossover from one period and publication to another, but can sometimes incorporate a chronological order.

Theoretical

Literature reviews organized in a theoretical format have their contents organized in an abstract framework established by the author to discuss different concepts, theories, and concepts and how they relate to the research at hand.

Additional sections

Depending on the objective, other sections do not fit under conventional lit review formats that one may need to add. Below are some of the sections that authors or students can include in the lit review:

• Current situation: The review can have information about the current state of things regarding the topic at hand to facilitate further understanding.
• History: Researchers can summarize the subject under investigation, literature, or concept if the review is not already in chronological format.
• Selection methods: Lit reviews are known to outline the methods or criteria used in selecting the way to present information and scholarly sources referenced in the review.
• Standards: it can also include the standards used in choosing the format to present information in the review and the scholarly literature used in the research.
• Further questions for research: The review can include questions emanating from the review and how the researcher will further explore their research to address the queries raised.

Literature Review Samples

Considerations Before Writing a Literature Review

Preparation is essential when it comes to writing. The objective should be to come up with a review that satisfactorily explores the topic being discussed. The following considerations are steps towards that if incorporated into the writing process:

Authors should seek clarification from mentors or supervisors before commencing the writing process. First, determine what is expected from the lit review. The type and number of sources to be used, the assignment (summarize, synthesize, or critique), and the type of information provided should be clear.

Find models

You should review literature from other authors in the same discipline and evaluate how those authors presented their lit reviews. Previous lit reviews can be used as guides that point authors in the right direction when writing their lit reviews.

Narrow your topic

It is always advantageous to narrow down the research topic to a specific area of research; that way, the number of sources can also be reduced. Even though conducting research will usually involve extensive research on all available materials about a particular topic, having a well-defined topic simplifies the task at hand.

Current sources

Determine if the research project or discipline ought to be based on the most recent findings or information. It is common for knowledge to become obsolete, especially in disciplines where discoveries and new inventions are made fast. If the lit review should be based on current knowledge, limit the sources to the most recent literature. Some disciplines will typically have a limit on how old the sources should be.  

How to Write a Literature Review (Expert Guide)

Once all pre-writing considerations have been taken into account, it is time to write the document. At this point, you should already be aware of what you wish to accomplish with the literature review, and the steps to writing an exemplary lit review are mentioned below:

Problem formulation

First and foremost, clearly define the topic (research area) to be investigated. For students, this will sometimes be given as an assignment. However, the research could be an academic project, which means that the author has to come up with the problem and define it themselves.

Search for relevant studies

Once the problem is clearly expressed, you should search for studies related to the topic, concept, theory, or idea and questions surrounding the topic. Most stand-alone lit reviews will generally attempt to answer a more concentrated question. On the internet, literature can be searched using keywords related to the research area. In addition to keywords, include vital variables such as synonyms and associated terms. The inclusion of Boolean operators and, or not, is also used to narrow down results to more specific publications.

Familiar sources for publications are:

• Google Scholar
• Library catalogue
• Econ lit (economics)
• Project Muse (humanities and social sciences)
• Inspec (physics, engineering, and computer science )
• Medline (life sciences and biomedicine)

Before selecting relevant studies, go through their abstract and determine if they fit the scope needed in the investigation. Use a list to note down any chosen works. Select landmark sources in the discipline.

Evaluation of sources/data

The next step is the evaluation stage . Evaluation involves a lot of reading. Evaluation can be done in two stages; overall skimming and thorough reading. During the second stage of this step, be critical, ask questions, and take many notes.

Some of the questions authors or researchers should ask themselves are:

• What is the author’s objective? What problem, concept, or theory are they putting across?
• What are the main concepts?
• What are the methodologies used by the author to arrive at the results and conclusions?
• What are the strengths and weaknesses of the results and conclusions?

Use credible sources. Most cited sources are preferred as they indicate their influence in the field. Also, keep track of the citations to be later incorporated.

Identify themes, debates, and gaps

While reading the sources, identify key patterns, themes, debates/arguments, and gaps in each literature. These elements help tie the literature to the topic under investigation. Look for consistent patterns, themes, questions, challenges, methods, and inconsistencies in the same. Consistencies present critical information for consideration, while inconsistencies present opportunities for research areas.

Outline the structure

Formatting is part and parcel of a well-written work. Selecting the structure should start by creating an outline with all the information that will go into the lit review, then consider the different types of structures and select the most suitable. Next, take the basic structure of the introduction, body, and conclusion into consideration and start work from there. 

Analysis and interpretation 

Lastly, perform an in-depth analysis and interpretation of the information obtained from the scholarly research and put it into writing. The summarized, synthesized, and critically evaluated information is then written down in well-structured paragraphs that follow the chosen structure. Transition words are used to draw comparisons, connections, and contrasts.

Format 

Ordinarily, a literature review will have three key components: introduction, body, and conclusion. These components should appear in the document in the following order:

Introduction

An introduction should inform the reader which topic is being studied. It gives the reader an overall idea of the purpose and focus of the document. The introduction lets the reader know beforehand the key things that will be highlighted in the document. Therefore, the introduction should be brief and precise.

The next item is the body, where the primary purpose of the lit review is fulfilled. The body should take critical information from all the sources used and comprehensively present them. This is where the author reports the extensive analysis and interpretation results that they gathered from all the sources they reviewed. The body should be categorized into themes, ideas, and concepts within the main topic.

Lastly, a summary of what the lit review entails should be provided as a conclusion. The critical points obtained from examining the sources should be written down and linked to the primary subject of the review. Key points are those that have the most outstanding contribution to the research.

Studies used should be screened based on provenance (author’s credentials or credibility), methodology, objectivity, persuasiveness, and value related to the topic at hand.

Guidelines for Writing a Literature Review

To improve the delivery of information, there are certain elements that authors can incorporate. They are:

Use evidence

The lit review’s findings, interpretations, and general contents should be based on actual evidence or credible literature. Using citations is evidence of authentic information.

Be selective

There will always be a lot of information available from the reviewed sources. Authors should therefore be selective and discuss the key points that focus on the topic. Not all information must be included in the review.  

Word-for-word quotes are acceptable . This is even more so if a critical point or author-specific terminology or knowledge cannot be paraphrased. Quotes should, however, be used sparingly.

Summarize and synthesize

The information obtained from the sources should be summarized, and the author should use it to synthesize new arguments, concepts, or ideas related to their research.

Keep your voice

The literature review should reflect the author’s voice as it is a review of other people’s works. This can be done by starting and ending the paragraphs with an original voice, ideas, and wordings.

Use caution while paraphrasing

Any paraphrased information should be conveyed accurately and in the author’s words. A citation must always be done, even when paraphrasing has been done.

Proofread before submitting or publishing. Go through the document a few times and make the necessary changes. The review should be within the applicable guidelines. Check for language and any other errors and edit accordingly.

Do’s and Don’ts for a Literature Review 

Every researcher wants to introduce their readers to a particular topic in an informative and engaging manner. Below are tips that can be used to this effect.

The following things should be opted by the researcher when writing a lit review:

• Find a focus: Authors should take a direction, idea, concept, or argument and stick to it. The information conveyed should then be made to align with the chosen point of focus. Thus, the review is not simply a list of analyzed sources, but a detailed summary of how different sources have a focal point (intertwined).
• Well-chosen sources: The quality of the information will, to a great extent, be determined by the quality of sources used. Therefore, take time to select suitable sources and more value will be added to the review.
• Create an annotated bibliography: Creating an annotated bibliography is recommended as one reads their sources. The bibliography keeps track of sources and takes notes. This information can be used when writing the final lit review.
• Synthesize research: Information obtained from the relevant studies should be combined to come up with new or original ideas. You should present a new domain based on previous sources’ knowledge, not just restating the information.
• Argumentative approach: Well-written literature reviews will often argue to support an author’s stance on a particular topic. The author can choose to address how the author’s work is filling a particular gap or support one of the scholar’s arguments and perception towards a particular topic. However, this argumentative approach will not work in all situations; it is usually discipline-specific. 
• Convey it to the reader: It should let the reader know the document’s main idea, concept, or argument. This can be done by including a simple statement that compels the reader to think precisely and know what to expect.
• Break out your disciplinary box: The research will often be multi-disciplinary. Literature reviews should then collect interdisciplinary information from multiple sources as they add novel dynamics to the topic under investigation. It should be noted that this does not imply that the researcher should substitute the literature from the topic’s discipline with that from other disciplines. This is usually an improvement strategy that adds substance to the review.
• Look for repeated patterns: Be attentive to pick out repeated ideas, findings, and concepts from different scholars as they will often illustrate agreed research dead-end or a scholarly conclusion.
• Don’t just review for content: When reviewing the literature, examine the content and other writing and presentation techniques. Look out for unique ways information has been presented, methods used, consistent citations, and non-textual elements such as graphs, and figures used to present information. In addition, the researcher identifies theories used to predict, explain, or understand phenomena within the discipline.
• Search Web of Science and Google Scholar: Conduct citation tracking about the leading scholars already identified in the search process. Scholars cited by multiple scholars outside the principal discipline will generally indicate that there are no new publications on the topic.

The following don’ts should be avoided:

• Do not select studies that are not directly related to the topic being investigated.
• Avoid rushing when identifying and selecting sources to use to research the problem.
• Avoid the use of secondary analytical sources. Instead, opt to use sources with primary research studies or data. Secondary analytical sources will often cite primary analytical sources; research should refer to them instead.
• Do not accept other scholarly findings, theories, or interpretations without critically examining and critiquing them.
• Researchers should not outline the search procedures used to identify scholarly sources for reviewing purposes.
• Avoid including isolated statistical findings without illustrating how they were arrived at using chi-squared or meta-analytic methods.
• Do not review studies that only validate the assumptions, stances, and concepts of your thesis; consider contradicting works with alternative and conflicting stances.

Frequently Asked Questions

It is written by researchers, authors, and students who must study literature to gather knowledge on a particular topic they are interested in.

It should be placed right after the introduction of the dissertation. It places the research in a scholarly context by summarizing existing knowledge on the particular topic.

Researchers and authors are not limited in terms of how many sources they can review. Students will usually have a given number of sources to review as an assignment. However, the number of sources referenced in a lit review will vary from one topic or discipline to the other. Some topics have a vast catalog of available sources, while others have minimal sources, especially emerging issues. It is, however, advised that each key point discussed should have at least 2-3 references/sources. For example, a 10-page lit review will have an average of 30 references.

About This Article

Was this helpful?

Great! Tell us more about your experience

Not up to par help us fix it, keep reading.

Charts , Graphics

Free 24-hour military time charts – printable.

Education , Statements

36 strong thesis statement examples and templates.

Free Tournament Bracket Templates – Fillable PDFs

Charts , Personal

Free printable body mass index (bmi) charts | calculate bmi, thank you for your feedback.

Your Voice, Our Progress. Your feedback matters a lot to us.

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

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 27 August 2024

Investigating viewer engagement in esports through motivation and attitudes toward metaverse and NFTs

• Hyeon Jo   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-7442-4736 1 &
• Seung-A. Shin 2  

Scientific Reports volume  14 , Article number:  19934 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

Metrics details

• Environmental social sciences
• Mathematics and computing

As the esports industry continues its rapid growth, new opportunities such as the metaverse and non-fungible tokens (NFTs) are emerging, driven by the inherently digital nature of esports. To better understand viewer engagement in this evolving landscape, this study investigates viewer behavior in the context of watching esports. A survey was conducted on a sample of 312 esports viewers in South Korea, and the data was subsequently analyzed using structural equation modeling. The study's findings indicate that hedonic motivation is significantly correlated with attitudes toward esports and the utilization of esports in the metaverse. Furthermore, perceived enjoyment was found to significantly positively influence attitudes toward esports, the metaverse expansion of esports, and the use of esports via NFTs. Notably, attitudes toward esports showed a significant relationship with continuance intention. Both subjective norms and perceived behavioral control were also found to significantly influence continuance intention.

Similar content being viewed by others

Exploring the impact of beauty vloggers’ credible attributes, parasocial interaction, and trust on consumer purchase intention in influencer marketing

Exploring the effects of audience and strategies used by beauty vloggers on behavioural intention towards endorsed brands

Exploring e-sports fans’ motivation for watching live streams based on self-determination theory

Introduction.

Over the past few years, esports, known as competitive video gaming, has experienced enormous growth, attracting a global audience of more than 500 million people and generating a projected revenue of $1.5 billion by 2023 1 . Esports has also become a lucrative industry, with professional teams, players, and tournaments attracting significant sponsorships and investments 2 . As esports has grown, significant interest has been sparked in the potential for its expansion into cyberspace, with various stakeholders seeking to monetize this burgeoning industry 3 . The expansion of esports bears significant implications for the industry, leading to increased revenue streams, growth opportunities, and an expanded esports ecosystem 4 , 5 .

Two emerging technologies that are reshaping the esports landscape are the metaverse and non-fungible tokens (NFTs) 6 . The metaverse, a fully immersive and interactive virtual space, has already been utilized for live esports events, offering a novel experience to fans 7 , 8 . For instance, Riot Games hosted the League of Legends World Championship in a virtual venue within the metaverse, allowing fans to interact and engage with the event in a dynamic, digital environment 9 . Similarly, the Fortnite World Cup used the metaverse to create a virtual stadium experience, where fans could watch the tournament live, interact with one another, and even participate in parallel in-game events 10 . While virtual reality (VR) creates isolated, immersive experiences through headsets, the metaverse encompasses a broader, interconnected virtual universe where users can engage in social interactions, economic activities, and content creation 11 . Virtual stadiums in esports exemplify this metaverse concept by allowing users to interact with each other, participate in events, and engage in communal activities, thus going beyond the solitary experience of VR to offer a socially immersive environment. This connectivity and shared experience highlight how virtual stadiums qualify as part of the metaverse.

In the case of NFTs, the esports industry is witnessing a revolutionary change in how digital assets are perceived and monetized 12 . NFTs, stored on blockchain technology, offer unique ownership of digital items. Specifically, the incorporation of NFTs in esports extends to in-game assets 13 , 14 , 15 . A notable example includes Dapper Labs’ NBA Top Shot, where fans can buy, sell, and trade officially licensed NBA collectible highlights as NFTs 16 . Another instance is the collaboration between F1 Delta Time and Animoca Brands, where players purchase, collect, and use NFTs of cars, drivers, and components in the game 17 . Additionally, in the popular game Axie Infinity, players can buy, breed, and trade digital creatures called Axies as NFTs. Each Axie is unique, and some rare breeds have been sold for significant amounts, highlighting the potential for NFTs to create economic value within esports games 18 , 19 . By creating scarcity and exclusivity through NFTs, esports organizations and players may be able to generate new revenue streams and enhance fan engagement. This development presents a range of specific opportunities and challenges across legal, regulatory, and ethical domains. Legally, NFTs provide a clear framework for digital ownership of in-game assets, potentially enhancing intellectual property rights and creating new licensing opportunities 20 . However, they also pose questions regarding the management of these digital rights 21 . From a regulatory standpoint, classifying NFTs as securities or commodities offers a chance for clearer governance and taxation guidelines, yet also introduces ambiguity that necessitates careful consideration 22 . Ethically, while the high energy consumption of blockchain technology, the basis for NFTs, is a notable concern 23 , it also paves the way for the development of more sustainable blockchain solutions. Additionally, integrating NFTs into online games raises ethical considerations around game addiction and microtransactions 21 . The market volatility and potential for speculative bubbles in NFT markets underline the importance of effective risk management strategies 24 . Despite these challenges, the foray of esports into domains such as the metaverse and NFTs calls for an empirical exploration of viewers' attitudes and intentions, providing valuable insights for managers and marketers in the industry.

We employ the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) in our study to predict and explain the continuance intention of esports viewers, particularly as it relates to emerging technologies like the metaverse and NFTs. TPB is ideal for this context as it encompasses three critical factors: attitudes toward the behavior, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control. These components are particularly relevant for understanding esports viewership, where decisions to continue watching are significantly influenced not only by individual attitudes towards esports, particularly in new formats like the metaverse and NFTs, but also by social influences and the perceived ease or difficulty of accessing these platforms. The adoption of TPB allows us to comprehensively assess how these factors collectively shape viewers' intentions in the rapidly evolving landscape of esports entertainment.

Esports, fundamentally seen as entertainment mediums, are driven by the enjoyment and pleasure viewers derive from watching competitive gaming. Thus, it is conceptually logical to consider hedonic motivation and perceived enjoyment as antecedents of attitude toward esports, as well as toward its expansion into the metaverse and utilization via NFTs. Hedonic motivation, defined as the pursuit of pleasure, fun, and enjoyment, inherently influences an individual’s attitude toward esports, shaping their perception of the game’s entertainment value and overall attractiveness 25 . Similarly, perceived enjoyment, which gauges the degree of pleasure or delight experienced while watching esports, significantly shapes their attitude towards its extension into the metaverse or via NFTs. The greater the pleasure derived from esports, the more likely viewers are to possess a positive attitude towards its utilization in new digital domains.

Understanding viewer behavior, particularly their motivations, attitudes, and intentions, is crucial for sports managers to design strategies that drive engagement and foster brand loyalty 26 . The primary variables investigated in this study—including hedonic motivation, perceived enjoyment, attitudes toward esports, the metaverse, and NFTs, subjective norms, perceived behavioral control, and continuance intention—offer a comprehensive view of viewer behavior. They encompass both intrinsic and extrinsic motivations that guide viewers' decisions and actions, shaping their overall engagement with esports and its associated virtual spaces. Insights into these variables can enable marketers to develop targeted campaigns that appeal to viewers' pursuit of pleasure, fostering positive attitudes toward esports and its sustained use. A nuanced understanding of attitudes toward esports, the metaverse, and NFTs can aid in leveraging these innovative platforms for enhancing viewer engagement and participation. Additionally, insights into viewers' continuance intention provide valuable information about their likelihood of participating in extended activities related to esports in a virtual environment.

This study aims to bridge a gap by examining esports fans' attitudes and intentions towards emerging technologies like the metaverse and NFTs. It delves into esports viewers' perceptions and intentions regarding the expansion of esports into virtual spaces, providing insights crucial for the industry's growth in these domains. While previous research has often focused on the intention to engage with esports 25 , 27 or the potential of virtual spaces 28 , 29 , this study takes a unique approach by empirically analyzing viewers' intentions to use technologies such as the metaverse and NFTs. Additionally, unlike existing studies that predominantly utilize technology acceptance and usage models 25 , 30 , this research applies a general behavioral theory model to explain esports viewers' behavior. This shift in theoretical approach allows for a broader understanding of the motivational factors in esports viewing. A key aspect of this study is the emphasis on the role of pleasure in viewing motivation. It explores the relationship between hedonic motivation and perceived enjoyment, concepts linked to the pleasure and satisfaction derived from engaging in activities like esports viewing 30 , 31 , 32 , thus providing deeper insights into why viewers engage in esports and how they interact with these new technologies.

The research questions/objectives of this study are as follows: First, how do hedonic motivation and perceived enjoyment influence attitudes towards esports, its expansion into the metaverse, and utilization via NFTs? Second, how do these attitudes impact the continuance intention to view esports? Third, to what extent do subjective norms and perceived behavioral control contribute to the continuance intention of esports viewers? These objectives aim to unravel the complex interplay between viewer motivations, attitudes, and behavioral intentions in the context of emerging digital trends in the esports industry. This study seeks to provide a comprehensive understanding of how these factors interact, ultimately offering insights that can inform strategies for enhancing viewer engagement and sustaining the growth of esports in the evolving digital landscape.

Literature review

In recent years, there has been a growing interest in the study of esports, and various researchers have attempted to investigate the factors influencing esports consumption behavior. Jang and Byon 30 studied the relationship between media consumption of esports events and esports gameplay, revealing that intention to play esports is influenced by effort expectancy, hedonic motivation, and price value. Additionally, Jang et al. 33 conducted research on the relationship between recreational gameplay and event broadcast, exploring the mediating impact of esports content live streaming. Their study found that the intention of esports content live streaming consumption played a full mediation role in this relationship. In another study, Jang and Byon 32 investigated the moderating effects of genre on the relationship between elements in the UTAUT model and gameplay intention. They identified imagination, physical enactment, and sports simulation as three types of genres and found that the imagination group was statistically different when compared to the physical enactment and sport simulation groups. Additionally, Jang et al. 25 conducted a study on the determinants of intention to play esports by applying the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) model. They found that the interaction between gender and genre moderates the relationship between drivers and esports gameplay intention.

Some studies have suggested motivations for esports spectators or compared them with traditional sports. Zhou et al. 34 conducted a study on the motivation of online spectators in esports and proposed various scales to measure it. They identified skill improvement and vicarious sensation as unique motives in the context of esports, while also noting that entertainment, competition excitement, friends bonding, competitive nature, and dramatic nature align with the motives of traditional sports fans. Using the theory of reasoned action, Xiao 35 investigated the antecedents of esports viewership and found that aesthetics, drama, and escapism influence attitudes, while subjective norms affect behavioral intentions via attitudes. Comparing consumption motives between esports and traditional sports, Lee and Schoenstedt 36 discovered that competition, peer pressure, and skill are significantly related to gameplay. Pizzo et al. 37 compared the spectator motives between esports and traditional sports, suggesting excitement, entertainment, and enjoyment of aggression as motives.

To summarize the above studies, although there have been many studies on the behavior of visitors to esports, few studies have explained the expansion of esports into a virtual space. In addition, several studies have commonly verified hedonic motivation and pleasure as determinants involved in esports. Therefore, this study explains the intention of using esports in a virtual space based on representative preceding factors of esports users.

Esports on metaverse and NFTs

The metaverse refers to a virtual space that is a fully immersive and interactive environment 38 . One potential application of the metaverse in the esports industry is as a platform for live events 39 . Esports tournaments are currently held in physical venues such as stadiums and convention centers, but the metaverse could provide a virtual space for fans to attend events from anywhere in the world. A virtual arena could be created in the metaverse, where fans could watch matches and interact with each other. Another potential application of the metaverse in esports is as a platform for advertising and sponsorships 40 . In-game advertising is already a common feature in many esports titles, but the metaverse could provide an even more immersive advertising experience. Brands could create virtual storefronts or sponsor virtual events, creating a more personalized experience for fans. The metaverse could also provide opportunities for esports teams and organizations to monetize their content 41 . As platforms like Twitch and YouTube have expanded, esports teams and organizations have been able to generate revenue from advertising and sponsorships. The metaverse could provide additional opportunities for teams and organizations to monetize their content, such as selling virtual merchandise or creating virtual events.

The concept of NFTs has recently garnered significant attention in the esports industry, offering revolutionary prospects for content monetization 42 . As distinctive digital assets stored on a blockchain, NFTs have the potential to represent a diverse array of items, from artistic creations to virtual game elements 43 . Their use in esports paves the way for the creation and exchange of unique, rare, and valuable items, free from concerns of duplication, forgery, or fraud 44 . A key application of NFTs in esports is the monetization of in-game assets 45 . Esports games often feature items such as skins, weapons, or characters that players can earn or purchase 46 . NFTs offer a means for players to genuinely own these items and facilitate the creation of rare and unique items that could command high prices. Moreover, esports matches produce extensive data, including highlights, player statistics, and outcomes 47 . NFTs can capture and commodify unique moments in these matches, such as a pivotal play or a championship triumph, selling them as collectibles whose value may appreciate over time. Additionally, NFTs in esports create fan engagement and community-building opportunities. Fans can engage in creating and trading NFTs, fostering a sense of ownership and community around their favorite teams or titles. NFTs can also serve as incentives for fan participation in activities like social media campaigns or event attendance 13 .

The TPB is a widely-used psychological model that aims to explain and predict human behavior 48 . It was first introduced by Ajzen in 1985 as an extension of the Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA). The constructs of TPB include three determinants of behavior: attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control. Attitudes refer to an individual's evaluation of a particular behavior, whether positive or negative. Subjective norms are the social norms and expectations that an individual perceives from their social environment regarding their behavior. Perceived behavioral control relates to an individual's confidence in their capability to execute a behavior effectively. These three determinants, along with behavioral intention, are assumed to predict the actual behavior of an individual.

TPB has been applied to esports in explaining participation behaviors 49 , 50 , 51 . Given that TPB is a robust theory that explains human behavior and has been verified by numerous researchers in the context of esports, this study presents a research model centered on TPB.

Research model

Hedonic motivation.

Hedonic motivation is defined as the enjoyment experienced while participating in esports 30 . It has proven to be the prevailing predictor of esports intention 25 , 30 . Hedonic motivation leads to a positive attitude in online shopping 52 and social media 53 contexts. Consumers of esports are typically fans who choose to play esports games depending on their preferences. People who watch esports for pleasure will want to enjoy the game through more diverse media. They may also expect to encounter esports in metaverse and NFTs, which have something in common with virtual spaces. Accordingly, when viewers experience a higher level of hedonic motivation, they would form a more favorable attitude toward esports, expansion on metaverse, and utilization via NFT. These discussions led to the following hypothesis:

H1a: Hedonic motivation has a positive impact on attitude toward esports.

H1b: Hedonic motivation has a positive impact on attitude toward the expansion on the metaverse.

H1c: Hedonic motivation has a positive impact on attitude toward the utilization via the NFTs.

Perceived enjoyment

Perceived enjoyment can be justified as the degree to which watching esports is deemed to be entertaining, outside of any performance implications 54 . It is the proximal antecedent of attitude 55 , 56 , 57 . This paper distinguishes perceived pleasure from hedonic motivation, drawing upon existing theoretical frameworks. Hedonic motivation refers to the anticipatory pleasure derived from the expectation of engaging in esports viewing 30 , a concept rooted in the desire for enjoyment and entertainment 58 . In contrast, enjoyment pertains to the actual experiential pleasure obtained during or after the viewing 59 , reflecting the real-time emotional response to the activity 60 . These distinctions are critical as they can influence attitude formation towards esports differently. While hedonic motivation influences the initial decision to engage with esports 61 , perceived enjoyment impacts the continued engagement and satisfaction post-experience 62 . Thus, the paper treats these constructs separately, recognizing their unique contributions to the esports viewing experience. Users who have gained greater enjoyment through esports may want more diverse media. They would develop a more positive attitude toward esports, the expansion of esports in the metaverse, and the utilization of esports through NFTs. Therefore, perceived enjoyment is hypothesized to have an impact on attitudes toward esports, the expansion of esports in the metaverse, and the utilization of esports through NFTs.

H2a: Perceived enjoyment has a positive impact on attitude toward esports.

H2b: Perceived enjoyment has a positive impact on attitude toward the expansion on the metaverse.

H2c: Perceived enjoyment has a positive impact on attitude toward utilization of esports through the NFT.

Attitude refers to the positive or negative evaluation or feelings an individual holds toward performing a particular activity 48 . This study seeks to capture viewers' responses accurately by assessing attitudes toward esports, the expansion of esports in the metaverse, and the utilization of esports through NFTs. The objective is to obtain a comprehensive understanding of viewers' perceptions and evaluations in these three domains. Continuance is described as an individual's sustained motivation to put forth effort in line with a deliberate plan 63 . This paper defines continuance intention as the extent to which viewers plan to continue using esports in the future or recommend it to others. In various fields, attitude has been extensively proven to be a critical precursor to behavioral intention 64 , 65 , 66 . Viewers who hold a positive attitude toward esports are more inclined to continue their usage and participate in its expanded presence on the metaverse. Similarly, viewers who exhibit a favorable attitude toward the utilization of esports through NFTs are likely to persist in using esports. Based on these observations, this study proposes the following hypotheses:

H3: Attitude to esports has a positive impact on continuance intention.

H4: Attitude to the expansion on the metaverse has a positive impact on continuance intention.

H5: Attitude to the utilization of esports through the NFT has a positive impact on continuance intention.

Subjective norms

According to Ajzen 67 , subjective norms refer to an individual's perception of social pressure to either engage or not engage in a behavior. The relationship between subjective norms and behavioral intention has been extensively examined in research 64 , 68 , 69 . When viewers' neighbors support and agree to watch the sport more, they may want to continue it more. Thus, this study proposes that subjective norms drive continuance intention.

H6: Subjective norms have a positive impact on continuance intention.

Perceived behavioral control

Perceived behavioral control is the degree to which an individual believes that they have the ability to perform a particular behavior with ease or difficulty 48 . Its influence on the intention to continue performing a behavior has been widely studied and found to be positively significant 70 . When viewers have more time and resources to use the sport, they try to watch it more consistently. Hence, this study suggests the following hypothesis.

H7: Perceived behavioral control has a positive impact on continuance intention.

Figure  1 illustrates the research model employed in this paper. The study proposes that hedonic motivation and perceived enjoyment have a significant impact on attitudes toward esports, attitudes toward expansion on the metaverse, and attitudes toward utilization through NFTs. These three types of attitudes, in turn, influence continuance intention. Moreover, subjective norms and perceived behavioral control are posited to exert an influence on continuance intention. To maintain brevity, this study uses the abbreviations "attitude to esports" for "attitude toward esports," "attitude to metaverse" for "attitude toward the expansion of esports in the metaverse", and "attitude to NFT" for "attitude toward the utilization of esports through NFTs".

Research framework.

Empirical methodology

This research was performed in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki.

Instrument development

To ensure the research model's factors' validity, this paper sourced survey questions from existing literature, specifically media and human behavior, and modified them to fit the esports case. The author created the questionnaire, which was then translated from English to Korean by a Korean expert fluent in English. The response results were translated back into English, and the two English versions were adjusted for minor differences by the author. Academic and industry professionals in the social sciences refined the questionnaire for content validity. A pilot survey was conducted to check the measures' validity and reliability and ensure a logical arrangement of questions. Feedback from the preliminary review and pilot study was essential in clarifying the final questionnaire. All items were measured on a seven-point Likert scale ranging from "strongly disagree" to "strongly agree." Table 1 presents all the constructs' measurement items.

Data collection

The study used an online survey to collect empirical data and test the theoretical framework. The survey was conducted through a market research institute in Korea with professional expertise in data collection. Before disseminating the main survey in June 2022, the institute implemented a set of screening questions to ensure the participants had relevant experience or awareness related to the study's focus. These screening questions included: "Have you ever experienced e-sports?", "What sports have you watched or attended?", "Do you have knowledge about metaverse", and "Do you have knowledge about NFTs?" Only those respondents who provided affirmative and relevant answers to these screening questions were directed to the main survey. This process ensured that the participants were adequately qualified and representative of the target population interested in esports, the metaverse, and NFTs, thereby enhancing the validity and reliability of the study outcomes. Participants were informed about the study's purpose and academic publication before agreeing to participate. After removing incomplete responses, the study analyzed a total of 312 responses. Among the final sample, 275 (88.1%) were male and 37 (11.9%) were female. The age group with the highest frequency was those in their 40 s with 115 (36.9%), followed by those in their 30 s with 110 (35.3%). Most of the respondents had a bachelor's degree (242, 77.6%). Most of the respondents earned between 2.5 million won and 5.0 million won per year. Table 2 describes the sample's demographic characteristics.

Ethical approval

The research subject is unspecified, and the information collected through the research does not contain sensitive information in accordance with Article 23 of the Personal Information Protection Act of Korea and is exempted from IRB of HJ Institute of Technology and Management.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Consent to participate

Consent to participate was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Research results

In this study, the theoretical framework was analyzed using the SmartPLS method, which is widely used in the social science field due to its robustness and less restriction on data distribution and sample size 75 , 76 . The analysis and interpretation were divided into two stages, assessing the reliability and validity of the measurement model and the structural model.

Common method bias (CMB)

CMB is a potential issue in data collection where the same method used can lead to an artificial inflation in the association among variables. To evaluate if this study was affected by common method bias, we adhered to the guidelines provided by Podsakoff et al. 77 . These guidelines suggest that we can control for the impact of an unmeasured latent method factor by introducing an unmeasured latent variable in our model that impacts all the items alongside their substantive construct. The quality of fit indices of the model was then compared both with and without this method factor. In our revised model, the substantive constructs were permitted to correlate with the method factor. If the model with the method factor showed a better fit and if a considerable amount of variance in the items could be explained by the method factor, it would signify the presence of common method bias. However, our analysis results suggested that our data was not impacted by CMB, thereby indicating the reliability and validity of the study's measures.

Measurement model

Confirmatory factor analysis was used to assess reliability, convergent validity, and discriminant validity. Composite reliability and Cronbach's alpha were used to assess scale reliability, with results indicating good internal consistency 78 . Convergent validity was found to be acceptable, with factor loadings ranging from 0.669 to 0.934, and all statistically significant at the p = 0.05 level, supporting the presence of convergent validity 79 . Also, the average variance extracted (AVE) was well over 0.5, presenting a satisfactory level of convergent validity 80 . Table 3 describes the test results of reliability and validity.

Table 4 shows the test results of Fornell and Larcker 80 criterion. Overall, diagonal matrix values are greater than those of the same row and column, thus satisfying the adequate level of discriminant validity.

Testing of hypotheses

The study used partial least squares structural equation modeling to evaluate the proposed relationships among the constructs, and the bootstrap resampling method was employed with 5000 resamples to determine the significance of the path coefficients in the theoretical framework. The findings of the analysis are illustrated in Fig.  2 .

The path coefficients of the research model.

Table 5 presents the results of the hypothesis testing for this study. Overall, the theoretical model accounted for approximately 71.2 percent of the variation in continuance intention.

The finding that hedonic motivation significantly correlates with attitudes toward esports and the utilization of esports in the metaverse, but not with the utilization of esports via NFTs, offers several notable implications. Hedonic motivation, or the pursuit of pleasure, is known to drive individuals' engagement in leisure activities 81 . This finding suggests that the enjoyment derived from esports significantly influences how viewers perceive esports and its manifestation in the metaverse. For esports managers and marketers, this emphasizes the importance of heightening the entertainment value of esports content and its metaverse extensions to boost positive attitudes and engagement. However, the non-significant relationship with attitudes toward NFTs may indicate that viewers perceive NFTs as more of a financial endeavor than a source of pleasure 82 . Hence, when marketing NFT-related esports initiatives, the focus might need to shift toward presenting NFTs as valuable investments or exclusive perks rather than purely entertainment-based offerings. Future research might delve deeper into the nuanced perceptions of NFTs in esports to yield further insights.

The findings reveal that perceived enjoyment significantly positively influences attitudes toward esports, the metaverse expansion of esports, and the use of esports via NFTs. This is consistent with previous research that highlights enjoyment as a critical factor in fostering positive attitudes in online gaming contexts 55 , 56 , 57 . This could be due to viewers deriving greater pleasure from esports, which in turn cultivates a positive attitude towards esports and its commercialization in virtual space. Intriguingly, perceived enjoyment plays a different role from that of hedonic motivation. This study sought to discern and validate the distinction between motivation and experience. The results empirically highlight that the experience obtained plays a more crucial role than the motivation of viewers in shaping attitudes. For marketers, these results emphasize the need to create enjoyable esports experiences, whether in traditional formats, metaverse expansions, or NFT-based platforms. Strategies could include immersive storytelling, interactive features, or community-building initiatives.

The results reveal that attitudes toward esports significantly influence continuance intention, which aligns with previous research 64 , 65 , 83 , suggesting that positive attitudes towards a behavior enhance the intention to perform that behavior. This implies that viewers with a positive attitude towards esports are more likely to continue viewing. Therefore, marketers should aim to reinforce these positive attitudes through various strategies, such as improving the quality of broadcasts, creating engaging content, and building vibrant esports communities.

On the other hand, attitudes toward the expansion of esports into the metaverse and the utilization of esports through NFTs do not significantly impact continuance intention. The finding that attitude towards the metaverse has a negligible and non-significant impact on continuance intention in esports challenges some prevailing assumptions about the influence of new technologies on viewer behavior. This divergence from previous research, such as Hsu and Lin 84 ’s study, which found a positive relationship between attitudes towards innovative technologies and continuance intention, is notable. It suggests that viewers who primarily seek pure enjoyment from esports may harbor reservations about its commercialization in the metaverse. Although statistically insignificant, this slight negative correlation could indicate subtle discomfort or skepticism among these viewers towards the commercial integration of the metaverse in esports. It implies that for some fans, the essence of esports lies in its entertainment value, and the commercial aspects, especially on novel platforms like the metaverse, might not align with their reasons for continued engagement.

Similarly, the finding that attitude towards NFTs does not significantly affect continuance intention in esports viewing offers another interesting perspective. Contrasting with the anticipated impacts suggested in the literature 27 , where new technological phenomena were expected to significantly influence user engagement behaviors, the influence of NFTs on continuance intention can be interpreted similarly to that of the metaverse. This suggests that some viewers might have reservations about the commercialization aspect represented by NFTs, potentially neutralizing their intention to continue using or engaging with esports platforms. This ambivalence among a segment of the audience could be a contributing factor to the statistically insignificant result observed. Additionally, it may suggest that NFTs, being relatively less known than the metaverse, elicit a lesser degree of resistance or skepticism among viewers. Therefore, it appears that while both NFTs and the metaverse are emerging technologies in the esports context, their relative familiarity to viewers might influence their attitudes and, subsequently, their intentions to continue engaging with esports.

The study confirmed that subjective norms impact continuance intention, aligning with previous research 64 , 68 , 69 . The significant effect of subjective norms on continuance intention, observed in this study, suggests that these social influences play a crucial role in the viewer's decision to persist in engaging with esports content. The more supportive the individuals perceive these significant others to be towards their esports viewing behavior, the more likely they are to continue doing so. This finding could be due to the communal nature of esports, where social interactions, discussions, and shared experiences significantly enhance the overall enjoyment of the activity. These factors contribute to an environment that fosters continued engagement. Furthermore, this finding aligns with the TPB, which postulates that subjective norms, along with attitudes and perceived behavioral control, are key determinants of an individual's behavioral intentions. In the context of this study, it underlines the importance of considering social influences when designing strategies to retain esports viewers and promote sustained engagement.

Perceived behavioral control was found to significantly influence continuance intention, aligning with existing studies 70 . This finding is also in line with the TPB, which posits that perceived behavioral control is a key determinant of an individual's intention to perform a particular behavior. In the esports environment, this translates to the viewers' belief in their ability to access and navigate esports content, understand game mechanics, follow competitions, and participate in associated communities. When viewers perceive a high level of control over these factors, they are more likely to continue their engagement with esports. From a practical standpoint, these findings suggest that strategies aimed at enhancing viewers' perceived behavioral control could significantly improve continuance intention. For instance, providing comprehensive resources to help viewers understand games, facilitating easy access to esports content, and ensuring the user interface is intuitive and user-friendly, can enhance viewers' perceptions of control. Moreover, efforts to reduce potential barriers to esports engagement, such as high-cost equipment or limited internet access, may also increase perceived behavioral control. This would involve strategies such as providing options for low-bandwidth streaming or making esports content accessible across a variety of devices.

Finally, our study aligns closely with the findings of Yadav et al. 85 and Yadav et al. 86 , which both emphasize the significant role of blockchain technology in influencing spectator behavior in the esports and sports industries. Yadav et al. 85 utilized a TPB and machine learning approach to analyze netizens' behaviors towards a blockchain-based esports framework, finding a generally positive attitude among users. Similarly, their 2023 study further explored blockchain's potential in sports through social media analytics, underlining the positive sentiment of users towards blockchain adoption in sports. Our research complements these findings by examining how the underlying technology of blockchain, particularly through NFTs, affects spectator adoption behavior in esports. We observe a parallel trend where the technological advancement represented by NFTs in esports also generates significant interest and positive attitudes among spectators, resonating with the optimistic perspectives found in the previous works 85 , 86 . This demonstrates a broader pattern of blockchain technology's growing influence in digital sports consumption and fan engagement.

Theoretical contributions

This research contributes to sport management and marketing literature by integrating the TPB with the concept of hedonic motivation and perceived enjoyment in the context of esports viewership. While TPB has been widely used in various fields, its application in the esports sector is limited 87 . By focusing on esports viewership—a vital component of the esports industry—this study brings new insights to the table. The significant relationships found between hedonic motivation and attitudes towards esports and the utilization of esports in the metaverse highlight the importance of pleasure in driving esports consumption, complementing previous studies that emphasize instrumental factors in predicting esports viewership 27 . It reinforces the notion that esports, like traditional sports, provides not just competitive excitement but also hedonic enjoyment to its viewers.

The second contribution of this study lies in its exploration of new variables—attitudes toward the metaverse expansion and NFT utilization. Prior research in sport management has focused predominantly on conventional platforms and methods of engagement 88 , and our understanding of emerging phenomena like metaverses and NFTs is still in its infancy. The non-significant relationships found between attitudes towards metaverse and NFTs and continuance intention highlight the gap between viewers' interest in these new concepts and their intention to continue viewing esports. This novel finding calls for more research to understand how to bridge this gap and effectively utilize these emerging platforms in the esports industry.

Thirdly, the study demonstrates that subjective norms and perceived behavioral control are significant predictors of continuance intention in the esports context. It echoes previous findings in TPB-based research in sport management 88 , 89 , reinforcing the relevance and applicability of TPB in this emerging sector. This finding also suggests that interpersonal influences and perceived control over behavior are essential considerations for esports marketers. However, unlike previous studies that predominantly focused on participation in sports 90 , this study expands the application of these constructs to viewing behavior in the esports context.

Lastly, the current research asserts the importance of continuance intention in the esports context. Most studies on sport viewership focus on initial adoption, with little attention to continued engagement 8 . This research fills this gap by exploring factors that contribute to continuance intention, offering theoretical insights on how to maintain and increase engagement in the esports industry. Scholars are encouraged to delve deeper into this area, which is crucial for the sustainability and growth of the esports sector.

Practical implications

The first key practical implication drawn from this research centers on the significance of hedonic motivation in driving viewers' attitudes towards esports and the metaverse. It suggests that esports marketers should aim to enhance the pleasure and enjoyment viewers derive from their esports consumption experience. For example, they can create immersive and engaging content, offer interactive features, and build online communities that allow viewers to share their esports experiences 91 . In addition, the development of the metaverse as a new venue for esports presents exciting opportunities for enhancing viewers' hedonic experiences. By offering unique and immersive viewing experiences that traditional platforms cannot provide, metaverse service providers can attract and retain more viewers.

Secondly, the study's findings highlight the need for marketers and industry practitioners to better understand and address the gap between viewers' interest in emerging phenomena like the metaverse and NFTs and their intention to continue viewing esports. For instance, developers can conduct user research to identify potential barriers and enhance the user interface and user experience of these new platforms. Marketers, on the other hand, can invest in educational campaigns to demystify these concepts and help viewers understand the value they bring to their esports viewing experience 92 .

Thirdly, the significant influence of subjective norms and perceived behavioral control on continuance intention implies that marketers should consider these factors in their marketing strategies. They could leverage influencers or esports celebrities to create positive subjective norms around esports viewing, thereby influencing viewers' continuance intention. In addition, providing viewers with easy access to esports content and flexible viewing options can enhance their perceived behavioral control, thus fostering their continuance intention. For instance, marketers could craft an environment that allows users to conveniently access esports through straightforward app operations and encourage sharing recommendations with others 93 .

Lastly, the non-significant relationships between attitudes towards the metaverse and NFTs and continuance intention suggest that these new concepts alone may not be sufficient to drive continuance intention. Marketers and developers should therefore consider integrating these new platforms with other established elements that viewers value in their esports consumption experience. For example, they can leverage NFTs to offer exclusive content or rewards in existing popular esports titles, or use the metaverse to host esports events that also feature real-world celebrities or esports personalities. This way, they can drive continuance intention not just through the novelty of these new platforms, but also through the value they add to the overall esports viewing experience.

Limitations and future research directions

This study, while offering insights into the impact of attitudes towards the metaverse and NFTs on continuance intention in esports, is subject to certain limitations that present avenues for future research. The reliance on self-reported measures introduces potential biases, suggesting the need for future studies to adopt experimental designs for a more robust establishment of causality. Additionally, our research did not delve deeply into the nuanced contextual factors that could influence continuance intention, such as individual differences, situational contexts, and cultural backgrounds. Therefore, future research should consider these contextual elements to gain a more comprehensive understanding of esports viewers' behaviors. An exploration of other relevant factors like perceived enjoyment, satisfaction, and loyalty could also provide a more rounded perspective on what drives continuance intention in esports viewing. Moreover, the cross-sectional nature of our study design limits our ability to infer causal relationships over time. Future studies should consider longitudinal designs to better understand how attitudes towards emerging technologies like the metaverse and NFTs, and their perceived complexities and unfamiliarities, evolve and influence viewer behavior over time. Given the nascent state of research in this area, there is also an opportunity for future studies to investigate the significant impacts of metaverse and NFTs, comparing esports with other contexts to ascertain the uniqueness of its viewer base. Such research could help to clarify whether the results observed in our study are specific to the esports context or are indicative of broader trends in digital entertainment consumption.

This study delves into the complex world of esports viewership, shedding light on the pivotal roles of hedonic motivation, perceived enjoyment, and viewers' attitudes towards both esports and emerging technologies such as the metaverse and NFTs. This research marks a significant step in understanding how these factors collectively influence the continuance intention of viewers, a crucial aspect for sustaining interest in this dynamic field. By methodically examining these elements, the study makes a substantial contribution to our comprehension of the evolving nature of esports viewership in the context of rapid technological advancements.

The findings of this research not only enhance academic understanding in the field of esports but also offer valuable insights for practitioners within the industry. They undersline the importance of aligning esports offerings with viewer motivations and preferences, particularly in the context of new and evolving digital platforms. The study highlights the need for esports entities to innovate continually and adapt to emerging trends in technology to maintain viewer engagement and interest.

Furthermore, this study paves the way for future research, opening avenues to explore the ever-changing interplay between technology and viewer preferences in esports. It calls for a deeper investigation into how emerging technologies can be leveraged to enhance viewer experience and engagement, and how these technologies will shape the future of esports. As the industry continues to grow and evolve, the findings of this study will undoubtedly be a valuable resource for both academics and practitioners in the domain of esports.

Data availability

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Newzoo. Newzoo’s Global Esports & Live Streaming Market Report 2021 . https://newzoo.com/insights/trend-reports/newzoos-globalesports-live-streaming-market-report-2021-free-version/ (2021).

Dilek, S. E. E-Sport events within tourism paradigm: A conceptual discussion. Int. J. Contemp. Tour. Res. 3 , 12–22 (2019).

Article   Google Scholar  

Karhulahti, V.-M. Reconsidering Esport: Economics and executive ownership. Phys. Cult. Sport. Stud. Res. 74 , 43–53. https://doi.org/10.1515/pcssr-2017-0010 (2017).

Carrillo Vera, J. A. & Aguado Terrón, J. M. The eSports ecosystem: Stakeholders and trends in a new show business. Catalan J. Commun. Cult. Stud. 11 , 3–22 (2019).

Newman, J. I., Xue, H., Watanabe, N. M., Yan, G. & McLeod, C. M. Gaming gone viral: An analysis of the emerging esports narrative economy. Commun. Sport 10 , 241–270. https://doi.org/10.1177/2167479520961036 (2022).

Mancini, V., Marazzi, T. & Postiglione, A. Sport as a global business: Esports, Crypto, NFT and metaverse. Market 4 , 8–144 (2023).

Google Scholar  

Chohan, R. & Schmidt-Devlin, E. Sports fandom in the metaverse: Marketing implications and research agenda. Mark. Lett. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11002-023-09702-6 (2023).

Pizzo, A. D. et al. Esports scholarship review: Synthesis, contributions, and future research. J. Sport Manag. 36 , 228–239. https://doi.org/10.1123/jsm.2021-0228 (2022).

Kokkinakis, A. V., Cowling, P. I., Drachen, A. & Wade, A. R. Exploring the relationship between video game expertise and fluid intelligence. PLoS One 12 , e0186621. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0186621 (2017).

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Klee, M. Fortnite Gave Its Fans the Tools to Build a Whole Universe . https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/fortnite-metaverse-fortnite-creative-uefn-1234933770/ (2023).

zebpay. Metaverse vs. Virtual Reality: Understanding the Key Differences . https://zebpay.com/in/blog/metaver-vs-virtual-reality#:~:text=The%20metaverse%20represents%20a%20vast,users%20from%20the%20physical%20world (2023).

Muthe, K. B., Sharma, K. & Sri, K. E. N. In 2020 Second International Conference on Blockchain Computing and Applications (BCCA). 73–77 (IEEE).

Belk, R., Humayun, M. & Brouard, M. Money, possessions, and ownership in the Metaverse: NFTs, cryptocurrencies, Web3 and Wild Markets. J. Bus. Res. 153 , 198–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.08.031 (2022).

Reay, E. & Wanick, V. In Reinventing Fashion Retailing: Digitalising, Gamifying, Entrepreneuring (eds. Eirini, B. & Vanissa, W.) 73–90 (Springer International Publishing, 2023).

Vidal-Tomás, D. The new crypto niche: NFTs, play-to-earn, and metaverse tokens. Finance Res. Lett. 47 , 102742. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2022.102742 (2022).

Zaucha, T. & Agur, C. Newly minted: Non-fungible tokens and the commodification of fandom. New Media Soc. 14614448221080481 (2022).

Friedmann, D. International Law and Economics Conference 137–189 (Springer).

Reback, S. Axie Infinity Plot Sells for $2.5M . https://www.coindesk.com/business/2021/11/26/axie-infinity-plot-sells-for-25m/ (2021).

Yeo-Teh, N. S. L. & Tang, B. L. Letter to Editor: NLP systems such as ChatGPT cannot be listed as an author because these cannot fulfill widely adopted authorship criteria. Account. Res. (2023).

Raman, R. & Raj, B. E. In Enabling Blockchain Technology for Secure Networking and Communications 89–108 (IGI Global, 2021).

Cooke, O. & Young, D. NFTS: Opportunities and Challenges in the Esports, Streaming, And Gaming Sectors . https://www.penningtonslaw.com/news-publications/latest-news/2023/nfts-opportunities-and-challenges-in-the-esports-streaming-and-gaming-sectors (2023).

Bao, H. & Roubaud, D. Non-fungible token: A systematic review and research agenda. J. Risk Financ. Manag. 15 , 215 (2022).

Rashida, S. Y., Sabaei, M., Ebadzadeh, M. M. & Rahmani, A. M. An intelligent approach for predicting resource usage by combining decomposition techniques with NFTS network. Cluster Comput. 23 , 3435–3460 (2020).

Wang, Y., Horky, F., Baals, L. J., Lucey, B. M. & Vigne, S. A. Bubbles all the way down? Detecting and date-stamping bubble behaviours in NFT and DeFi markets. J. Chin. Econ. Bus. Stud. 20 , 415–436 (2022).

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Jang, W., Byon, K. K., Williams, A. & Pedersen, P. M. Augmenting the formation of esports gameplay intention: Interaction effects of genre and gender. Sport Bus. Manag. Int. J. 11 , 620–646 (2021).

Munnukka, J., Karjaluoto, H., Mahlamäki, T. & Hokkanen, V. 1051–1064 (Springer International Publishing).

Hamari, J. & Sjöblom, M. What is eSports and why do people watch it?. Internet Res. 27 , 211–232 (2017).

Ba, S. & Shen, T. Sub aesthetics: Consumption traps of livestreamed eating shows (Chibo) in the metaverse and avoidance strategies. Metaverse 3 , 10 (2022).

Cai, L., Huang, Z., Feng, Q., Chang, X. & Yan, K. Co-transformation of digital health and eSport in Metaverse: Moderating effects of digital personality on mental health in multiplayer online battle arena (MOBA). Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 20 , 760 (2023).

Jang, W. & Byon, K. K. Antecedents and consequence associated with esports gameplay. Int. J. Sports Market. Spons. 21 , 1–22 (2020).

CAS   Google Scholar  

Qian, T. Y., Wang, J. J., Zhang, J. J. & Lu, L. Z. It is in the game: Dimensions of esports online spectator motivation and development of a scale. Eur. Sport Manag. Q. 20 , 458–479 (2020).

Jang, W. & Byon, K. K. Antecedents of esports gameplay intention: Genre as a moderator. Comput. Hum. Behav. 109 , 106336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106336 (2020).

Jang, W. W., Byon, K. K., Baker, T. A. III. & Tsuji, Y. Mediating effect of esports content live streaming in the relationship between esports recreational gameplay and esports event broadcast. Sport Bus. Manag. Int. J. 11 , 89–108 (2021).

Zhou, R. et al. Measuring e-service quality and its importance to customer satisfaction and loyalty: An empirical study in a telecom setting. Electron. Commer. Res. 19 , 477–499 (2019).

Xiao, M. Factors influencing eSports viewership: An approach based on the theory of reasoned action. Commun. Sport 8 , 92–122 (2020).

Lee, D. & Schoenstedt, L. J. Comparison of eSports and traditional sports consumption motives. ICHPER-SD J. Res. 6 , 39–44 (2011).

Pizzo, A. et al. eSport vs sport: A comparison of spectator motives. Faculty/Researcher Works (2018).

Han, D.-I. D., Bergs, Y. & Moorhouse, N. Virtual reality consumer experience escapes: Preparing for the metaverse. Virtual Real. 1–16 (2022).

Kim, H.-M. & Kim, S. The show must go on: Why Korea lost its first-mover advantage in Esports and how it can become a major player again. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 179 , 121649 (2022).

Baker, B. J. Impact analysis of a virtual stadium: Measuring sport in the metaverse. J. Appl. Sport Manag. 14 , 7 (2022).

Smith, A. C. & Skinner, J. Sport management and COVID-19: Trends and legacies. Eur. Sport Manag. Q. 22 , 1–10 (2022).

Baker, B., Pizzo, A. & Su, Y. Non-fungible tokens: A research primer and implications for sport management. Sports Innov. J. 3 , 1–15 (2022).

Park, A., Kietzmann, J., Pitt, L. & Dabirian, A. The evolution of nonfungible tokens: Complexity and novelty of NFT use-cases. IT Prof. 24 , 9–14 (2022).

Wilson, K. B., Karg, A. & Ghaderi, H. Prospecting non-fungible tokens in the digital economy: Stakeholders and ecosystem, risk and opportunity. Bus. Horiz. 65 , 657–670 (2022).

Delfabbro, P., Delic, A. & King, D. L. Understanding the mechanics and consumer risks associated with play-to-earn (P2E) gaming. J. Behav. Addict. 11 , 716–726 (2022).

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Nielsen, R. K. L. & Grabarczyk, P. Are Loot Boxes Gambling?: Random reward mechanisms in video games. Trans. Digit. Games Res. Assoc. 4 , 171–207 (2019).

Block, F. et al. In Proceedings of the 2018 ACM International Conference on Interactive Experiences for TV and Online Video. 29–41.

Ajzen, I. In Action Control 11–39 (Springer, 1985).

Chung, P.-K., Ou, K.-L., Wong, M. Y. C., Lau, K.-L. & Leung, K.-M. Investigation of Hong Kong students’ Esports participation intentions using the theory of planned behavior approach: A structural equation model. Hum. Behav. Emerg. Technol. 2022 , 1–19 (2022).

Leung, K.-M., Wong, M.-Y.-C., Ou, K.-L., Chung, P.-K. & Lau, K.-L. Assessing Esports participation intention: The development and psychometric properties of the theory of planned behavior-based Esports intention questionnaire (TPB-Esport-Q). Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 18 , 12653 (2021).

Wong, M. Y. C., Chung, P.-K., Ou, K. & Leung, K.-M. Perception of Hong Kong teenagers and young adults on esports participation: A qualitative study using theory of planned behavior. Front. Psychol. 12 , 650000 (2021).

Anand, T., Ramachandran, J., Sambasivan, M. & Batra, G. Impact of hedonic motivation on consumer satisfaction towards online shopping: Evidence from Malaysia. E-Serv. J. 11 , 56–88 (2019).

Chung, C. & Austria, K. Social media gratification and attitude toward social media marketing messages: A study of the effect of social media marketing messages on online shopping value. Proc. Northeast Bus. Econ. Assoc. (2010).

Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P. & Warshaw, P. R. Extrinsic and intrinsic motivation to use computers in the workplace. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 22 , 1111–1132. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1992.tb00945.x (1992).

Nguyen, Q. N., Ta, A. & Prybutok, V. An integrated model of voice-user interface continuance intention: The gender effect. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Interact. 35 , 1362–1377 (2019).

Dickinger, A., Arami, M. & Meyer, D. The role of perceived enjoyment and social norm in the adoption of technology with network externalities. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 17 , 4–11 (2008).

van der Heijden, H. User acceptance of hedonic information systems. MIS Q. 28 , 695–704. https://doi.org/10.2307/25148660 (2004).

Hirschman, E. C. & Holbrook, M. B. Hedonic consumption: Emerging concepts, methods and propositions. J. Market. 46 , 92–101 (1982).

Yin, C., Huang, Y., Kim, D. & Kim, K. The effect of esports content attributes on viewing flow and well-being: A focus on the moderating effect of esports involvement. Sustainability 15 , 12207 (2023).

Babin, B. J., Darden, W. R. & Griffin, M. Work and/or fun: Measuring hedonic and utilitarian shopping value. J. Consum. Res. 20 , 644–656 (1994).

Rietz, J. & Hallmann, K. A systematic review on spectator behavior in esports: Why do people watch?. Int. J. Sports Market. Spons. 24 , 38–55. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSMS-12-2021-0241 (2023).

Chen, A., Lu, Y. & Wang, B. Enhancing perceived enjoyment in social games through social and gaming factors. Inf. Technol. People 29 , 99–119 (2016).

Eagly, A. H. & Chaiken, S. The Psychology of Attitudes (Harcourt, 1993).

Song, H. G. & Jo, H. Understanding the continuance intention of omnichannel: Combining TAM and TPB. Sustainability 15 , 3039 (2023).

Jo, H. Determinants of continuance intention towards e-learning during COVID-19: An extended expectation-confirmation model. Asia Pac. J. Educ. 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/02188791.2022.2140645 (2022).

Jo, H. What drives university students to practice social distancing? Evidence from South Korea and Vietnam. Asia Pac. Viewpoint https://doi.org/10.1111/apv.12351 (2022).

Ajzen, I. Understanding Attitudes and Predictiing Social Behavior (Englewood Cliffs, 1980).

Tran, H. T. T., Nguyen, N. T. & Tang, T. T. Influences of subjective norms on teachers’ intention to use social media in working. Contemp. Educ. Technol. 15 , ep400 (2023).

Perez-Aranda, J., Gonzalez Robles, E. M. & Urbistondo, P. A. Sport-related physical activity in tourism: An analysis of antecedents of sport based applications use. Inf. Technol. Tour. 23 , 97–120 (2021).

Kim, B. An empirical investigation of mobile data service continuance: Incorporating the theory of planned behavior into the expectation–confirmation model. Expert Syst. Appl. 37 , 7033–7039 (2010).

Salehan, M., Kim, D. J. & Kim, C. Use of online social networking services from a theoretical perspective of the motivation-participation-performance framework. J. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 18 , 1 (2017).

Ramayah, T. & Ignatius, J. Impact of perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use and perceived enjoyment on intention to shop online. ICFAI J. Syst. Manag. IJSM. 3 , 36–51 (2005).

Ajzen, I. The theory of planned behavior. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 50 , 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T (1991).

Bhattacherjee, A. Understanding information systems continuance: An expectation-confirmation model. MIS Q. 25 , 351–370. https://doi.org/10.2307/3250921 (2001).

Chin, W. W., Marcolin, B. L. & Newsted, P. R. A partial least squares latent variable modeling approach for measuring interaction effects: Results from a Monte Carlo simulation study and an electronic-mail emotion/adoption study. Inf. Syst. Res. 14 , 189–217 (2003).

Hair, J. F., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M. & Mena, J. A. An assessment of the use of partial least squares structural equation modeling in marketing research. J. Acad. Market. Sci. 40 , 414–433. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-011-0261-6 (2012).

Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, M., Scott, B., Lee, J.-Y. & Podsakoff, N. P. Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J. Appl. Psychol. 885 , 10.1037 (2003).

Nunnally, J. C. Psychometric Theory , 2nd ed. (Mcgraw Hill Book Company, 1978).

Hoque, A. & Awang, Z. Does gender difference play moderating role in the relationship between entrepreneurial marketing and Bangladeshi SME performance?. Accounting 5 , 35–52 (2019).

Fornell, C. & Larcker, D. F. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement Error. J. Market. Res. 18 , 39–50. https://doi.org/10.2307/3151312 (1981).

Vorderer, P., Klimmt, C. & Ritterfeld, U. Enjoyment: At the heart of media entertainment. Commun. Theory 14 , 388–408 (2004).

Belk, R. You are what you can access: Sharing and collaborative consumption online. J. Bus. Res. 67 , 1595–1600 (2014).

Jo, H. Antecedents of continuance intention of social networking services (SNS): Utilitarian, hedonic, and social contexts. Mob. Inf. Syst. 2022 , 7904124. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/7904124 (2022).

Hsu, C.-L. & Lin, J.C.-C. Effect of perceived value and social influences on mobile app stickiness and in-app purchase intention. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 108 , 42–53 (2016).

Yadav, J., Misra, M., Rana, N. P., Singh, K. & Goundar, S. Netizens’ behavior towards a blockchain-based esports framework: A TPB and machine learning integrated approach. Int. J. Sports Market. Spons. 23 , 665–683. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSMS-06-2021-0130 (2022).

Yadav, J., Misra, M., Rana, N. P., Singh, K. & Goundar, S. In Distributed Computing to Blockchain (eds Rajiv, P., Sam, G., & Shahnaz, F.) 405–414 (Academic Press, 2023).

Hwang, K. & Zhang, Q. Influence of parasocial relationship between digital celebrities and their followers on followers’ purchase and electronic word-of-mouth intentions, and persuasion knowledge. Comput. Hum. Behav. 87 , 155–173 (2018).

Filo, K., Funk, D. C. & Alexandris, K. Exploring the role of brand trust in the relationship between brand associations and brand loyalty in sport and fitness. Int. J. Sport Manag. Market. 3 , 39–57 (2008).

Funk, D. C., Filo, K., Beaton, A. A. & Pritchard, M. Measuring the motives of sport event attendance: Bridging the academic-practitioner divide to understanding behavior. Sport Market. Q. 18 , 126 (2009).

Downward, P. & Rasciute, S. Does sport make you happy? An analysis of the well-being derived from sports participation. Int. Rev. Appl. Econ. 25 , 331–348 (2011).

Dirin, A., Nieminen, M., Laine, T. H., Nieminen, L. & Ghalebani, L. Emotional contagion in collaborative virtual reality learning experiences: An eSports approach. Educ. Inf. Technol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11769-7 (2023).

Nagorsky, E. & Wiemeyer, J. The structure of performance and training in esports. PLoS One 15 , e0237584. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0237584 (2020).

Reitman, J., Anderson-Coto, M., Wu, M., Lee, J. S. & Steinkuehler, C. Esports research: A literature review. Games Cult. 15 , 155541201984089. https://doi.org/10.1177/1555412019840892 (2019).

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

HJ Institute of Technology and Management, 71 Jungdong-Ro 39, Bucheon-si, Gyeonggi-do, 14721, Republic of Korea

Department of Physical Education, Kookmin University, 77, Jeongneung-Ro, Seongbuk-Gu, Seoul, 02707, Republic of Korea

Seung-A. Shin

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

H.J. wrote the original manuscript of this study. S.S. was responsible for the revision of the article.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Seung-A. Shin .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

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

Rights and permissions

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

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Jo, H., Shin, SA. Investigating viewer engagement in esports through motivation and attitudes toward metaverse and NFTs. Sci Rep 14 , 19934 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-70847-z

Download citation

Received : 27 September 2023

Accepted : 21 August 2024

Published : 27 August 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-70847-z

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

• Behavioral intention
• Non-fungible tokens
• Theory of planned behavior

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines . If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Quick links

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

Sign up for the Nature Briefing: Anthropocene newsletter — what matters in anthropocene research, free to your inbox weekly.