how to make review essay

Essay Papers Writing Online

Mastering the art of crafting a review essay – a comprehensive guide for writers.

Writing a review essay can be a challenging task, but with the right approach and structure, you can create a comprehensive and insightful piece of writing that engages your readers. Whether you are reviewing a book, a movie, a restaurant, or any other type of work, a well-written review essay can provide valuable insights and opinions that help your audience make informed decisions.

As you begin the process of writing a review essay, it is important to first understand the purpose of the review and the expectations of your audience. A review essay is not just a summary of the work you are reviewing; it is an analysis and evaluation that considers the strengths and weaknesses of the work, as well as its overall impact and significance.

In order to write a comprehensive review essay, you should start by introducing the work you are reviewing and providing some context for your review. This could include information about the author, director, or creator of the work, as well as the genre or category to which the work belongs. This introduction should also include your thesis statement, which outlines the main point or argument of your review.

Key Elements of a Review Essay

A review essay includes several key elements that are essential for creating a comprehensive and effective review. These elements help the reader gain a clear understanding of the subject matter and provide valuable insights and analysis. Here are some key elements to consider when writing a review essay:

Tips for Choosing a Topic

When selecting a topic for your review essay, consider the following tips:

By following these tips, you can choose a topic that will allow you to write a comprehensive and engaging review essay.

Research Strategies for a Review Essay

When writing a comprehensive review essay, it is crucial to employ effective research strategies to gather relevant information and support your arguments. Here are some key research strategies to consider:

1. Conduct a thorough literature review: Start by exploring existing literature on the topic you are reviewing. Look for scholarly articles, books, and other sources that provide valuable insights and information.

2. Use a variety of sources: It is essential to gather information from diverse sources to ensure a well-rounded review. Consider using academic journals, reputable websites, and other reliable sources.

3. Take notes and organize information: Keep track of important points, quotes, and data as you conduct your research. Organize your notes in a systematic way to facilitate the writing process.

4. Analyze and synthesize the information: Once you have gathered sufficient information, analyze and synthesize the key findings to identify trends, patterns, and varying perspectives on the topic.

5. Evaluate the credibility of sources: Be critical of the sources you use in your review essay. Consider the author’s credentials, publication date, and methodology to determine the credibility of the information.

By following these research strategies, you can produce a comprehensive review essay that is well-informed and impactful.

Structuring Your Review Essay

When structuring your review essay, it is important to organize your thoughts and arguments in a clear and logical manner. Here are some key steps to help you create a well-structured review:

1. Introduction:

Start your review essay with an engaging introduction that provides an overview of the topic and sets the stage for the rest of the review. Clearly state your thesis or main argument in this section.

2. Summary of the Work:

Provide a brief summary of the work you are reviewing, including key points, arguments, and themes. This will give your readers a clear understanding of the work before you delve into your analysis.

3. Critical Analysis:

In this section, analyze the strengths and weaknesses of the work. Discuss any key themes, arguments, or ideas presented by the author and provide evidence to support your analysis.

4. Comparison and Contrast:

Consider how the work you are reviewing compares and contrasts with other works in the field. Discuss similarities and differences and highlight any unique contributions made by the author.

5. Conclusion:

Conclude your review essay by summarizing your main points and reiterating your thesis. Reflect on the significance of the work and its implications for the field.

By following these steps, you can create a well-structured review essay that is engaging and insightful for your readers.

Writing a Strong Thesis Statement

A thesis statement is the central idea of your review essay, providing a concise summary of the main point you will be making. It should be specific, clear, and arguable to engage your readers and guide your writing process. A strong thesis statement sets the tone for the entire essay and informs readers about the focus and perspective of your review.

Analyzing and Evaluating Sources

When writing a comprehensive review essay, it is crucial to thoroughly analyze and evaluate the sources you use. This involves assessing the credibility, relevance, and reliability of each source to ensure that your essay is well-supported and based on sound evidence.

Credibility: Consider the author’s qualifications, the publication date, and the reputation of the source. Look for sources from reputable publishers, academic journals, or experts in the field.

Relevance: Evaluate how well each source contributes to your overall argument and thesis. Make sure the information provided is directly related to the topic you are discussing.

Reliability: Check for bias, misinformation, or inaccuracies in the sources you use. Cross-reference information from multiple sources to verify its accuracy and consistency.

By carefully analyzing and evaluating your sources, you can ensure that your review essay is well-researched and persuasive.

Developing a Coherent Argument

When writing a review essay, it is essential to develop a coherent argument that ties together the various aspects of your analysis. Your argument should be clear, logical, and supported by evidence from the text or material you are reviewing. To develop a coherent argument, consider the following strategies:

By following these steps and developing a coherent argument, you can write a comprehensive review essay that engages your readers and effectively communicates your insights and analysis.

Editing and Proofreading Techniques

Editing and proofreading are crucial steps in the writing process. After completing a comprehensive review essay, it is essential to carefully edit and proofread your work to ensure clarity, correctness, and coherence.

Here are some techniques to help you polish your review essay:

• Read Aloud: Reading your essay aloud can help you identify awkward phrasing, errors, or inconsistencies.
• Use Editing Tools: Utilize spelling and grammar checkers, as well as style guides, to enhance the quality of your writing.
• Take Breaks: Step away from your essay for a while before revisiting it to gain a fresh perspective and catch overlooked mistakes.
• Seek Feedback: Ask a peer or mentor to review your essay and provide constructive criticism.

By incorporating these editing and proofreading techniques , you can elevate the quality of your comprehensive review essay and ensure that your ideas are effectively communicated to your readers.

Related Post

How to master the art of writing expository essays and captivate your audience, convenient and reliable source to purchase college essays online, step-by-step guide to crafting a powerful literary analysis essay, unlock success with a comprehensive business research paper example guide, unlock your writing potential with writers college – transform your passion into profession, “unlocking the secrets of academic success – navigating the world of research papers in college”, master the art of sociological expression – elevate your writing skills in sociology.

How to Write Critical Reviews

When you are asked to write a critical review of a book or article, you will need to identify, summarize, and evaluate the ideas and information the author has presented. In other words, you will be examining another person’s thoughts on a topic from your point of view.

Your stand must go beyond your “gut reaction” to the work and be based on your knowledge (readings, lecture, experience) of the topic as well as on factors such as criteria stated in your assignment or discussed by you and your instructor.

Make your stand clear at the beginning of your review, in your evaluations of specific parts, and in your concluding commentary.

Remember that your goal should be to make a few key points about the book or article, not to discuss everything the author writes.

Understanding the Assignment

To write a good critical review, you will have to engage in the mental processes of analyzing (taking apart) the work–deciding what its major components are and determining how these parts (i.e., paragraphs, sections, or chapters) contribute to the work as a whole.

Analyzing the work will help you focus on how and why the author makes certain points and prevent you from merely summarizing what the author says. Assuming the role of an analytical reader will also help you to determine whether or not the author fulfills the stated purpose of the book or article and enhances your understanding or knowledge of a particular topic.

Be sure to read your assignment thoroughly before you read the article or book. Your instructor may have included specific guidelines for you to follow. Keeping these guidelines in mind as you read the article or book can really help you write your paper!

Also, note where the work connects with what you’ve studied in the course. You can make the most efficient use of your reading and notetaking time if you are an active reader; that is, keep relevant questions in mind and jot down page numbers as well as your responses to ideas that appear to be significant as you read.

Please note: The length of your introduction and overview, the number of points you choose to review, and the length of your conclusion should be proportionate to the page limit stated in your assignment and should reflect the complexity of the material being reviewed as well as the expectations of your reader.

Write the introduction

Below are a few guidelines to help you write the introduction to your critical review.

Introduce your review appropriately

Begin your review with an introduction appropriate to your assignment.

If your assignment asks you to review only one book and not to use outside sources, your introduction will focus on identifying the author, the title, the main topic or issue presented in the book, and the author’s purpose in writing the book.

If your assignment asks you to review the book as it relates to issues or themes discussed in the course, or to review two or more books on the same topic, your introduction must also encompass those expectations.

Explain relationships

For example, before you can review two books on a topic, you must explain to your reader in your introduction how they are related to one another.

Within this shared context (or under this “umbrella”) you can then review comparable aspects of both books, pointing out where the authors agree and differ.

In other words, the more complicated your assignment is, the more your introduction must accomplish.

Finally, the introduction to a book review is always the place for you to establish your position as the reviewer (your thesis about the author’s thesis).

As you write, consider the following questions:

• Is the book a memoir, a treatise, a collection of facts, an extended argument, etc.? Is the article a documentary, a write-up of primary research, a position paper, etc.?
• Who is the author? What does the preface or foreword tell you about the author’s purpose, background, and credentials? What is the author’s approach to the topic (as a journalist? a historian? a researcher?)?
• What is the main topic or problem addressed? How does the work relate to a discipline, to a profession, to a particular audience, or to other works on the topic?
• What is your critical evaluation of the work (your thesis)? Why have you taken that position? What criteria are you basing your position on?

Provide an overview

In your introduction, you will also want to provide an overview. An overview supplies your reader with certain general information not appropriate for including in the introduction but necessary to understanding the body of the review.

Generally, an overview describes your book’s division into chapters, sections, or points of discussion. An overview may also include background information about the topic, about your stand, or about the criteria you will use for evaluation.

The overview and the introduction work together to provide a comprehensive beginning for (a “springboard” into) your review.

• What are the author’s basic premises? What issues are raised, or what themes emerge? What situation (i.e., racism on college campuses) provides a basis for the author’s assertions?
• How informed is my reader? What background information is relevant to the entire book and should be placed here rather than in a body paragraph?

Write the body

The body is the center of your paper, where you draw out your main arguments. Below are some guidelines to help you write it.

Organize using a logical plan

Organize the body of your review according to a logical plan. Here are two options:

• First, summarize, in a series of paragraphs, those major points from the book that you plan to discuss; incorporating each major point into a topic sentence for a paragraph is an effective organizational strategy. Second, discuss and evaluate these points in a following group of paragraphs. (There are two dangers lurking in this pattern–you may allot too many paragraphs to summary and too few to evaluation, or you may re-summarize too many points from the book in your evaluation section.)
• Alternatively, you can summarize and evaluate the major points you have chosen from the book in a point-by-point schema. That means you will discuss and evaluate point one within the same paragraph (or in several if the point is significant and warrants extended discussion) before you summarize and evaluate point two, point three, etc., moving in a logical sequence from point to point to point. Here again, it is effective to use the topic sentence of each paragraph to identify the point from the book that you plan to summarize or evaluate.

Questions to keep in mind as you write

With either organizational pattern, consider the following questions:

• What are the author’s most important points? How do these relate to one another? (Make relationships clear by using transitions: “In contrast,” an equally strong argument,” “moreover,” “a final conclusion,” etc.).
• What types of evidence or information does the author present to support his or her points? Is this evidence convincing, controversial, factual, one-sided, etc.? (Consider the use of primary historical material, case studies, narratives, recent scientific findings, statistics.)
• Where does the author do a good job of conveying factual material as well as personal perspective? Where does the author fail to do so? If solutions to a problem are offered, are they believable, misguided, or promising?
• Which parts of the work (particular arguments, descriptions, chapters, etc.) are most effective and which parts are least effective? Why?
• Where (if at all) does the author convey personal prejudice, support illogical relationships, or present evidence out of its appropriate context?

Keep your opinions distinct and cite your sources

Remember, as you discuss the author’s major points, be sure to distinguish consistently between the author’s opinions and your own.

Keep the summary portions of your discussion concise, remembering that your task as a reviewer is to re-see the author’s work, not to re-tell it.

And, importantly, if you refer to ideas from other books and articles or from lecture and course materials, always document your sources, or else you might wander into the realm of plagiarism.

Include only that material which has relevance for your review and use direct quotations sparingly. The Writing Center has other handouts to help you paraphrase text and introduce quotations.

Write the conclusion

You will want to use the conclusion to state your overall critical evaluation.

You have already discussed the major points the author makes, examined how the author supports arguments, and evaluated the quality or effectiveness of specific aspects of the book or article.

Now you must make an evaluation of the work as a whole, determining such things as whether or not the author achieves the stated or implied purpose and if the work makes a significant contribution to an existing body of knowledge.

Consider the following questions:

• Is the work appropriately subjective or objective according to the author’s purpose?
• How well does the work maintain its stated or implied focus? Does the author present extraneous material? Does the author exclude or ignore relevant information?
• How well has the author achieved the overall purpose of the book or article? What contribution does the work make to an existing body of knowledge or to a specific group of readers? Can you justify the use of this work in a particular course?
• What is the most important final comment you wish to make about the book or article? Do you have any suggestions for the direction of future research in the area? What has reading this work done for you or demonstrated to you?

Academic and Professional Writing

This is an accordion element with a series of buttons that open and close related content panels.

Analysis Papers

Reading Poetry

A Short Guide to Close Reading for Literary Analysis

Using Literary Quotations

Play Reviews

Writing a Rhetorical Précis to Analyze Nonfiction Texts

Incorporating Interview Data

Grant Proposals

Planning and Writing a Grant Proposal: The Basics

Additional Resources for Grants and Proposal Writing

Job Materials and Application Essays

Writing Personal Statements for Ph.D. Programs

• Before you begin: useful tips for writing your essay
• Guided brainstorming exercises
• Get more help with your essay
• Frequently Asked Questions

Resume Writing Tips

CV Writing Tips

Cover Letters

Business Letters

Proposals and Dissertations

Resources for Proposal Writers

Resources for Dissertators

Research Papers

Planning and Writing Research Papers

Quoting and Paraphrasing

Writing Annotated Bibliographies

Creating Poster Presentations

Writing an Abstract for Your Research Paper

Thank-You Notes

Advice for Students Writing Thank-You Notes to Donors

Reading for a Review

Critical Reviews

Writing a Review of Literature

Scientific Reports

Scientific Report Format

Sample Lab Assignment

Writing for the Web

Writing an Effective Blog Post

Writing for Social Media: A Guide for Academics

Home ➔ How to Write an Essay ➔ Review Essay

Review Essay Guide

Review essays are fundamental to academic and professional fields, offering more than just summaries of existing literature. They provide critical analysis, synthesize various viewpoints, and evaluate the contributions of scholarly works to a particular field. In this introductory section, we’ll outline what review essays are, their purpose, and their importance:

• Definition : Review essays are analytical writings that go beyond summarizing existing research. They involve a comprehensive assessment of scholarly works, discussing their strengths, weaknesses, and contributions to a particular field of study.
• Purpose : In academic settings, review essays are crucial for fostering deep engagement with subject matter, developing critical thinking, and enhancing scholarly discourse. Professionally, they can influence policy decisions, guide research directions, and impact industry practices.

We aim to provide a thorough guide on crafting effective review essays. This includes understanding their key elements, exploring various approaches, and offering practical advice for writing, structuring, and refining your work.

This guide will serve as a comprehensive resource, whether you’re a student, researcher, or professional, offering insights into the art of writing impactful review essays.

Key Elements of a Review Essay

When crafting a review essay, understanding its key components is crucial. A well-structured review essay not only showcases the writer’s comprehension of the subject but also provides valuable insights into the field of study. Below are the essential elements that should be included in a review essay:

• The essay should demonstrate a deep understanding of the topic under review. This includes grasping the core issues, problems, or debates that the subject encompasses.
• A critical part of the review essay is briefly summarizing the main arguments and conclusions of the sources under review. This summary should capture the essence of the authors’ viewpoints and findings.
• An effective review essay goes beyond summarizing by critically analyzing the strengths and weaknesses of the reviewed material. This analysis evaluates the arguments’ validity, the evidence’s sufficiency, and the conclusions’ soundness.
• The essay should also discuss how the reviewed works contribute to the broader field of study. This involves analyzing the significance of the research, its impact on existing knowledge, and potential implications for future research.

To further clarify these elements, the following table provides a breakdown of each component and its significance:

By incorporating these elements, a review essay provides a comprehensive, analytical, and insightful look into the subject matter, offering both a summary and a critical evaluation of the existing literature.

Approaches to Writing a Review Essay

Selecting the right approach is pivotal when writing a review essay. The approach you choose should align with your essay’s objective and the nature of the subject matter. Here are some of the common approaches to writing a review essay and guidelines on how to choose the most suitable one:

• State of the Art Review : This approach focuses on the most current research in a given area. It’s ideal when your objective is to offer new perspectives or highlight areas needing further research in rapidly evolving fields.
• Historical Review : A historical review explores the development of a particular field of study over time. This approach suits essays aiming to provide context, trace the evolution of thought, or understand the historical progression of a subject.
• Comparison of Perspectives Review : This method contrasts different viewpoints on a topic. It’s particularly effective when there’s a debate or various perspectives on the subject matter. It helps in illustrating contrasting research and introducing new viewpoints by comparison.
• Synthesis of Two Fields Review : Useful when different fields intersect on a common problem or topic, this approach brings together literature from multiple disciplines, providing a comprehensive view and uncovering insights that might not be apparent within a single field.
• Theoretical Model Building Review : Involves examining literature to develop new theoretical assumptions or models. This is apt for essays that propose new theories or conceptual frameworks based on existing research.

Choosing the Right Approach

The choice of approach largely depends on your essay’s objective and the subject matter’s nature. Consider the following when deciding:

• Purpose of the Essay : Are you aiming to provide a comprehensive overview, challenge existing theories, introduce new perspectives, or trace historical developments? Your purpose will guide the choice of approach.
• Nature of the Subject Matter : Some subjects might be better suited to particular approaches. For instance, rapidly advancing scientific fields might benefit more from a state of the art review.
• Available Literature : The amount and type of literature available on your topic can also influence your approach. A rich historical body of work lends itself to a historical review, while a topic with diverse viewpoints might be better suited for comparing perspectives.
• Your Expertise and Interest : Your academic background and interests can also guide your choice. An area you are more familiar with might lend itself to a more complex approach, like theoretical model building.

By thoughtfully selecting the appropriate approach, your review essay can effectively achieve its objectives and make a meaningful contribution to understanding the topic.

Preparation for Writing

Adequate preparation is crucial for writing a well-organized review essay. This involves thorough reading of the primary sources and engaging critically with the material. Here are key steps and strategies for preparing to write a review essay:

• Reading and Understanding Primary Sources : Begin with a comprehensive reading of your primary sources. This includes not just the main content but also supplementary sections like prefaces, introductions, and conclusions, which often provide valuable insights into the author’s intentions and the scope of the work.
• Engaging in Critical Thinking : As you read, engage in critical thinking. Ask yourself questions about the author’s arguments, the evidence presented, and the overall coherence of the work. This critical engagement will help in forming a deeper understanding of the material.
• Formulating Questions During Reading : Develop questions as you read through the material. These questions can range from inquiries about the author’s perspective to the implications of their arguments. This practice helps identify gaps, contradictions, or areas that need further exploration.
• Read Prefaces and Introductions : These sections often set the tone of the work and provide a roadmap of the content.
• Review Each Chapter : After reading each chapter, take a moment to summarize the major points in your own words.
• Engage with the Author’s Ideas : Imagine having a conversation with the author. This can help in critically analyzing the text and formulating your own viewpoints.

The following table provides a summary of these strategies:

By following these steps, you will be well-prepared to write a review essay that is insightful, well-informed, and critically engaging.

Structuring the Review Essay

The structure of a review essay is fundamental to its effectiveness and clarity. A well-structured essay not only guides the reader through your arguments but also enhances the impact of your analysis. To achieve this, a review essay should be clear, concise, focused, and analytical.

• Clear and Concise Communication : The hallmark of a good review essay is its clarity. Complex ideas should be conveyed in an understandable manner, making the essay accessible to a broad audience. Avoid unnecessary jargon or overly complex sentences. Conciseness is equally important. Your essay should be direct and to the point, providing enough detail to support your arguments without becoming verbose.
• Defining Terms and Providing Evidence : A crucial step in structuring your essay is defining key terms central to your argument. This clarifies your position and ensures your reader is not lost in specialized terminology. Equally important is backing up your claims with appropriate examples and evidence . This could range from quotations and data to specific instances or case studies that illustrate your points.
• Maintaining an Informative and Focused Approach : Your essay should have a clear and narrow focus. This focus allows you to delve deeply into your topic and provide detailed insights. Every part of the essay should serve the purpose of reinforcing your main argument or thesis. This focused approach ensures that your essay remains informative and relevant to your topic.
• Beyond Summarization – Analysis, Synthesis, and Interpretation : A review essay should not merely summarize the existing literature. Instead, it should add to the conversation through analysis, synthesis , and interpretation. Analyze the material to identify patterns, contradictions, or gaps. Synthesize different viewpoints to create a comprehensive understanding of the topic. Interpret the findings in a way that provides new insights or perspectives, thereby contributing to the academic discussion on the subject.

Structuring your review essay with clarity, conciseness, focus, and analytical depth is essential. This approach makes your essay more engaging and informative and demonstrates your ability to critically engage with and contribute to the academic discourse.

Academic Rigor and Documentation

A key aspect of writing a review essay is maintaining academic rigor and ensuring proper documentation. This not only reinforces the credibility of your essay but also upholds the ethical standards of academic writing.

• Utilizing Academic Sources : The backbone of a review essay is the sources it draws upon. Prioritize using academic sources, including peer-reviewed journals, scholarly books, and authoritative research articles. These sources provide reliable, vetted information that forms a strong foundation for your arguments and analyses. Using academic sources enhances your essay’s validity and shows your engagement with the scholarly community.
• The Imperative of Proper Documentation : Accurate and consistent documentation is crucial in a review essay. It serves a dual purpose – preventing plagiarism and directing readers to the original sources. Whether you are paraphrasing or quoting directly , each instance of sourced information must be properly cited according to the appropriate academic style guide (APA, MLA, Chicago, etc.). This practice is not just about avoiding plagiarism; it is about contributing to an ongoing scholarly conversation by acknowledging the work of others.
• Quoting with Precision and Purpose : When it comes to quoting sources, less is often more. Over-reliance on direct quotations can overshadow your own voice and analytical insights. Use quotes sparingly and ensure they are directly relevant to your argument. When you do quote, integrate the quotation seamlessly into your essay, maintaining the flow and coherence of your writing. Paraphrasing is another effective way to reference ideas from your sources while maintaining your unique voice and perspective. Remember that proper citation is non-negotiable regardless of whether you quote directly or paraphrase.

Incorporating these practices in your review essay not only upholds academic integrity but also strengthens your arguments, ensuring that your essay is both credible and ethically sound.

Writing the Review

Writing a review essay involves a series of actionable steps to ensure clarity, depth, and coherence in your work. Here’s a detailed guide to help you navigate through the process:

Step 1: Define Your Thesis or Research Question

Begin by clearly stating the thesis or main research question of your essay. This statement should be concise and articulate the central theme or argument you intend to explore. It will guide your writing process, ensuring that all your analysis and critical discussion are relevant and focused.

Step 2: Organize Your Research

Gather and organize your research materials. Create an outline based on the themes, methodologies, or chronological order of the sources. This outline will help structure your essay and ensure you cover all the necessary points in a logical sequence.

Step 3: Critical Reading and Note-Taking

As you read through your sources, engage in critical thinking. Take notes on key arguments, methodologies, findings, and how these relate to your thesis. Look for patterns, contradictions, and gaps in the literature. This step is crucial for understanding the broader context of your topic and for forming your own perspective.

Step 4: Develop Your Argument

Using your outline and notes, start developing your argument. Ensure each paragraph or section clearly addresses a part of your thesis. Use evidence from your sources to support your points, and explain how this evidence relates to your overall argument.

Step 5: Address Controversies and Debates

Identify and discuss any controversies or major debates present in the literature. Present these objectively, showing how they relate to your thesis. Use these discussions to demonstrate research gaps or pose new questions that could be explored in further studies.

Step 6: Synthesize and Analyze

Go beyond summarizing your sources. Synthesize the information to draw new insights and critically analyze the texts to evaluate their strengths and weaknesses. Your analysis should add to the existing literature by providing a unique perspective or interpretation.

Step 7: Write the Introduction and Conclusion

Craft your introduction to set the context for your essay and present your thesis. Your conclusion should summarize the key points of your analysis and reiterate how they support your thesis. It should also suggest implications, future research directions, or final thoughts on the subject.

Step 8: Review and Refine

Review your essay for clarity and coherence. Check if each section transitions smoothly and contributes to your overall argument. Look for areas that need more development or clarification. Proofread to correct grammatical errors and ensure consistency in style and formatting.

Step 9: Proper Documentation

Throughout your essay, ensure that all sources are properly cited. This includes both in-text citations and a comprehensive bibliography. Proper documentation is crucial to establish credibility and to allow readers to follow up on your sources.

Step 10: Seek Feedback

Before finalizing your essay, consider getting feedback from peers, mentors, or advisors. They can provide valuable insights, point out areas that need improvement, and help refine your argument.

By following these steps, you can systematically approach writing your review essay, ensuring that it is well-researched, coherent, and critically engaging. Each step is designed to build upon the last, culminating in a comprehensive and insightful piece of academic writing.

In this guide, we have explored the essential steps and strategies for writing a successful review essay. To recap, here are the key points to remember:

• Define Your Thesis : Clearly state the central argument or research question of your essay.
• Organize and Analyze Your Research : Gather your sources, create an organized outline, and engage in critical reading and analysis.
• Develop a Coherent Argument : Build your essay around your thesis, using evidence from your research to support your points.
• Address Controversies and Debates : Objectively discuss any debates or controversies in the literature, using them to enrich your analysis.
• Synthesize Information : Go beyond summarizing sources to draw new insights and perspectives.
• Write Clearly and Concisely : Ensure that your essay is well-structured, with clear transitions and a logical flow of ideas.
• Review and Refine : Revise your essay for clarity, coherence, and grammatical accuracy.
• Proper Documentation : Cite your sources correctly to avoid plagiarism and provide references for further reading.
• Seek Feedback : Get input from peers or mentors to refine your argument and writing.

The table below provides a quick reference to these key steps:

We encourage you to apply these guidelines in your own review essay writing. These steps, when followed diligently, can help you craft an insightful and impactful essay.

Further Resources

To deepen your understanding of writing review essays, consider exploring the following resources:

• Books on Academic Writing : Look for books that specifically focus on academic writing skills, including essay structure, argument development, and effective communication.
• Online Writing Workshops : Many universities offer online workshops or webinars on academic writing, which can provide practical tips and interactive guidance.
• Writing Centers : Utilize the resources available at your institution’s writing center. They often offer one-on-one consultations, workshops, and writing guides.
• Scholarly Journals : Read review essays published in academic journals to get a sense of different writing styles and approaches.
• Style Guides : Familiarize yourself with style guides like APA, MLA, or Chicago, which provide detailed instructions on citation and formatting.
• Research Methodology Books : These can help you understand how to analyze and synthesize research effectively.
• Peer-Review Platforms : Engage with platforms where you can submit your work for peer review or review others’ essays to gain different perspectives.

These resources can provide additional guidance and support as you refine your skills in writing review essays. Remember, writing is a skill that improves with practice, so continue to seek out opportunities to learn and grow as a writer.

Was this article helpful?

Review Paper Format: How To Write A Review Article Fast

This guide aims to demystify the review paper format, presenting practical tips to help you accelerate the writing process. 

From understanding the structure to synthesising literature effectively, we’ll explore how to create a compelling review article swiftly, ensuring your work is both impactful and timely.

Whether you’re a seasoned researcher or a budding scholar, these insights will streamline your writing journey.

Research Paper, Review Paper Format

What Is A Review Paper?

Diving into the realm of scholarly communication, you might have stumbled upon a research review article.

This unique genre serves to synthesise existing data, offering a panoramic view of the current state of knowledge on a particular topic. 

Unlike a standard research article that presents original experiments, a review paper delves into published literature, aiming to: 

• clarify, and
• evaluate previous findings.

Imagine you’re tasked to write a review article. The starting point is often a burning research question. Your mission? To scour various journals, piecing together a well-structured narrative that not only summarises key findings but also identifies gaps in existing literature.

This is where the magic of review writing shines – it’s about creating a roadmap for future research, highlighting areas ripe for exploration.

Review articles come in different flavours, with systematic reviews and meta-analyses being the gold standards. The methodology here is meticulous, with a clear protocol for selecting and evaluating studies.

This rigorous approach ensures that your review is more than just an overview; it’s a critical analysis that adds depth to the understanding of the subject.

Crafting a good review requires mastering the art of citation. Every claim or observation you make needs to be backed by relevant literature. This not only lends credibility to your work but also provides a treasure trove of information for readers eager to delve deeper.

Types Of Review Paper

Not all review articles are created equal. Each type has its methodology, purpose, and format, catering to different research needs and questions.

Systematic Review Paper

First up is the systematic review, the crème de la crème of review types. It’s known for its rigorous methodology, involving a detailed plan for:

• identifying,
• selecting, and
• critically appraising relevant research. 

The aim? To answer a specific research question. Systematic reviews often include meta-analyses, where data from multiple studies are statistically combined to provide more robust conclusions. This review type is a cornerstone in evidence-based fields like healthcare.

Literature Review Paper

Then there’s the literature review, a broader type you might encounter.

Here, the goal is to give an overview of the main points and debates on a topic, without the stringent methodological framework of a systematic review.

Literature reviews are great for getting a grasp of the field and identifying where future research might head. Often reading literature review papers can help you to learn about a topic rather quickly.

Narrative Reviews

Narrative reviews allow for a more flexible approach. Authors of narrative reviews draw on existing literature to provide insights or critique a certain area of research.

This is generally done with a less formal structure than systematic reviews. This type is particularly useful for areas where it’s difficult to quantify findings across studies.

Scoping Reviews

Scoping reviews are gaining traction for their ability to map out the existing literature on a broad topic, identifying:

• key concepts,
• theories, and

Unlike systematic reviews, scoping reviews have a more exploratory approach, which can be particularly useful in emerging fields or for topics that haven’t been comprehensively reviewed before.

Each type of review serves a unique purpose and requires a specific skill set. Whether you’re looking to summarise existing findings, synthesise data for evidence-based practice, or explore new research territories, there’s a review type that fits the bill. 

Knowing how to write, read, and interpret these reviews can significantly enhance your understanding of any research area.

What Are The Parts In A Review Paper

A review paper has a pretty set structure, with minor changes here and there to suit the topic covered. The format not only organises your thoughts but also guides your readers through the complexities of your topic.

Title & Abstract

Starting with the title and abstract, you set the stage. The title should be a concise indicator of the content, making it easier for others to quickly tell what your article content is about.

As for the abstract, it should act as a descriptive summary, offering a snapshot of your review’s scope and findings. 

Introduction

The introduction lays the groundwork, presenting the research question that drives your review. It’s here you:

• justify the importance of your review,
• delineating the current state of knowledge and
• highlighting gaps.

This section aims to articulate the significance of the topic and your objective in exploring it.

Methodology

The methodology section is the backbone of systematic reviews and meta-analyses, detailing the research methods employed to select, assess, and synthesise studies. 

This transparency allows readers to gauge the rigour and reproducibility of your review. It’s a testament to the integrity of your work, showing how you’ve minimised bias.

The heart of your review lies in the body, where you:

• analyse, and
• critique existing literature.

This is where you synthesise evidence, draw connections, and present both sides of any argument. Well-structured paragraphs and clear subheadings guide readers through your analysis, offering insights and fostering a deeper understanding of the subject.

Discussion & Conclusion

The discussion or conclusion section is where you weave together the main points, reflecting on what your findings mean for the field.

It’s about connecting the dots, offering a synthesis of evidence that answers your initial research question. This part often hints at future research directions, suggesting areas that need further exploration due to gaps in existing knowledge.

Lastly, the citation list is your nod to the scholarly community, acknowledging the contributions of others. Each citation is a thread in the larger tapestry of academic discourse, enabling readers to delve deeper into the research that has shaped your review.

Tips To Write An Review Article Fast

Writing a review article quickly without sacrificing quality might seem like a tall order, but with the right approach, it’s entirely achievable. 

Clearly Define Your Research Question

Clearly define your research question. A focused question not only narrows down the scope of your literature search but also keeps your review concise and on track.

By honing in on a specific aspect of a broader topic, you can avoid the common pitfall of becoming overwhelmed by the vast expanse of available literature. This specificity allows you to zero in on the most relevant studies, making your review more impactful.

Efficient Literature Searching

Utilise databases specific to your field and employ advanced search techniques like Boolean operators. This can drastically reduce the time you spend sifting through irrelevant articles.

Additionally, leveraging citation chains—looking at who has cited a pivotal paper in your area and who it cites—can uncover valuable sources you might otherwise miss.

Organise Your Findings Systematically

Developing a robust organisation strategy is key. As you gather sources, categorize them based on themes or methodologies. This not only aids in structuring your review but also in identifying areas where research is lacking or abundant.

Tools like citation management software can be invaluable here, helping you keep track of your sources and their key points. We list out some of the best AI tools for academic research here. 

Build An Outline Before Writing

Don’t underestimate the power of a well-structured outline. A clear blueprint of your article can guide your writing process, ensuring that each section flows logically into the next.

This roadmap not only speeds up the writing process by providing a clear direction but also helps maintain coherence, ensuring your review article delivers a compelling narrative that advances understanding in your field.

Start Writing With The Easiest Sections

When it’s time to write, start with sections you find easiest. This might be the methodology or a particular thematic section where you feel most confident.

Getting words on the page can build momentum, making it easier to tackle more challenging sections later.

Remember, your first draft doesn’t have to be perfect; the goal is to start articulating your synthesis of the literature.

Learn How To Write An Article Review

Mastering the review paper format is a crucial step towards efficient academic writing. By adhering to the structured components outlined, you can streamline the creation of a compelling review article.

Embracing these guidelines not only speeds up the writing process but also enhances the clarity and impact of your work, ensuring your contributions to scholarly discourse are both valuable and timely.

Dr Andrew Stapleton has a Masters and PhD in Chemistry from the UK and Australia. He has many years of research experience and has worked as a Postdoctoral Fellow and Associate at a number of Universities. Although having secured funding for his own research, he left academia to help others with his YouTube channel all about the inner workings of academia and how to make it work for you.

Thank you for visiting Academia Insider.

We are here to help you navigate Academia as painlessly as possible. We are supported by our readers and by visiting you are helping us earn a small amount through ads and affiliate revenue - Thank you!

2024 © Academia Insider

• PRO Courses Guides New Tech Help Pro Expert Videos About wikiHow Pro Upgrade Sign In
• EDIT Edit this Article
• EXPLORE Tech Help Pro About Us Random Article Quizzes Request a New Article Community Dashboard This Or That Game Popular Categories Arts and Entertainment Artwork Books Movies Computers and Electronics Computers Phone Skills Technology Hacks Health Men's Health Mental Health Women's Health Relationships Dating Love Relationship Issues Hobbies and Crafts Crafts Drawing Games Education & Communication Communication Skills Personal Development Studying Personal Care and Style Fashion Hair Care Personal Hygiene Youth Personal Care School Stuff Dating All Categories Arts and Entertainment Finance and Business Home and Garden Relationship Quizzes Cars & Other Vehicles Food and Entertaining Personal Care and Style Sports and Fitness Computers and Electronics Health Pets and Animals Travel Education & Communication Hobbies and Crafts Philosophy and Religion Work World Family Life Holidays and Traditions Relationships Youth
• Browse Articles
• Learn Something New
• Quizzes Hot
• This Or That Game
• Train Your Brain
• Explore More
• Support wikiHow
• About wikiHow
• Log in / Sign up
• Education and Communications
• Critical Reviews

How to Write an Article Review (With Examples)

Last Updated: April 24, 2024 Fact Checked

Preparing to Write Your Review

Writing the article review, sample article reviews, expert q&a.

This article was co-authored by Jake Adams . Jake Adams is an academic tutor and the owner of Simplifi EDU, a Santa Monica, California based online tutoring business offering learning resources and online tutors for academic subjects K-College, SAT & ACT prep, and college admissions applications. With over 14 years of professional tutoring experience, Jake is dedicated to providing his clients the very best online tutoring experience and access to a network of excellent undergraduate and graduate-level tutors from top colleges all over the nation. Jake holds a BS in International Business and Marketing from Pepperdine University. There are 12 references cited in this article, which can be found at the bottom of the page. This article has been fact-checked, ensuring the accuracy of any cited facts and confirming the authority of its sources. This article has been viewed 3,116,376 times.

An article review is both a summary and an evaluation of another writer's article. Teachers often assign article reviews to introduce students to the work of experts in the field. Experts also are often asked to review the work of other professionals. Understanding the main points and arguments of the article is essential for an accurate summation. Logical evaluation of the article's main theme, supporting arguments, and implications for further research is an important element of a review . Here are a few guidelines for writing an article review.

Education specialist Alexander Peterman recommends: "In the case of a review, your objective should be to reflect on the effectiveness of what has already been written, rather than writing to inform your audience about a subject."

Article Review 101

• Read the article very closely, and then take time to reflect on your evaluation. Consider whether the article effectively achieves what it set out to.
• Write out a full article review by completing your intro, summary, evaluation, and conclusion. Don't forget to add a title, too!
• Proofread your review for mistakes (like grammar and usage), while also cutting down on needless information.

• Article reviews present more than just an opinion. You will engage with the text to create a response to the scholarly writer's ideas. You will respond to and use ideas, theories, and research from your studies. Your critique of the article will be based on proof and your own thoughtful reasoning.
• An article review only responds to the author's research. It typically does not provide any new research. However, if you are correcting misleading or otherwise incorrect points, some new data may be presented.
• An article review both summarizes and evaluates the article.

• Summarize the article. Focus on the important points, claims, and information.
• Discuss the positive aspects of the article. Think about what the author does well, good points she makes, and insightful observations.
• Identify contradictions, gaps, and inconsistencies in the text. Determine if there is enough data or research included to support the author's claims. Find any unanswered questions left in the article.

• Make note of words or issues you don't understand and questions you have.
• Look up terms or concepts you are unfamiliar with, so you can fully understand the article. Read about concepts in-depth to make sure you understand their full context.

• Pay careful attention to the meaning of the article. Make sure you fully understand the article. The only way to write a good article review is to understand the article.

• With either method, make an outline of the main points made in the article and the supporting research or arguments. It is strictly a restatement of the main points of the article and does not include your opinions.
• After putting the article in your own words, decide which parts of the article you want to discuss in your review. You can focus on the theoretical approach, the content, the presentation or interpretation of evidence, or the style. You will always discuss the main issues of the article, but you can sometimes also focus on certain aspects. This comes in handy if you want to focus the review towards the content of a course.
• Review the summary outline to eliminate unnecessary items. Erase or cross out the less important arguments or supplemental information. Your revised summary can serve as the basis for the summary you provide at the beginning of your review.

• What does the article set out to do?
• What is the theoretical framework or assumptions?
• Are the central concepts clearly defined?
• How adequate is the evidence?
• How does the article fit into the literature and field?
• Does it advance the knowledge of the subject?
• How clear is the author's writing? Don't: include superficial opinions or your personal reaction. Do: pay attention to your biases, so you can overcome them.

• For example, in MLA , a citation may look like: Duvall, John N. "The (Super)Marketplace of Images: Television as Unmediated Mediation in DeLillo's White Noise ." Arizona Quarterly 50.3 (1994): 127-53. Print. [9] X Trustworthy Source Purdue Online Writing Lab Trusted resource for writing and citation guidelines Go to source

• For example: The article, "Condom use will increase the spread of AIDS," was written by Anthony Zimmerman, a Catholic priest.

• Your introduction should only be 10-25% of your review.
• End the introduction with your thesis. Your thesis should address the above issues. For example: Although the author has some good points, his article is biased and contains some misinterpretation of data from others’ analysis of the effectiveness of the condom.

• Use direct quotes from the author sparingly.
• Review the summary you have written. Read over your summary many times to ensure that your words are an accurate description of the author's article.

• Support your critique with evidence from the article or other texts.
• The summary portion is very important for your critique. You must make the author's argument clear in the summary section for your evaluation to make sense.
• Remember, this is not where you say if you liked the article or not. You are assessing the significance and relevance of the article.
• Use a topic sentence and supportive arguments for each opinion. For example, you might address a particular strength in the first sentence of the opinion section, followed by several sentences elaborating on the significance of the point.

• This should only be about 10% of your overall essay.
• For example: This critical review has evaluated the article "Condom use will increase the spread of AIDS" by Anthony Zimmerman. The arguments in the article show the presence of bias, prejudice, argumentative writing without supporting details, and misinformation. These points weaken the author’s arguments and reduce his credibility.

• Make sure you have identified and discussed the 3-4 key issues in the article.

You Might Also Like

• ↑ https://libguides.cmich.edu/writinghelp/articlereview
• ↑ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4548566/
• ↑ Jake Adams. Academic Tutor & Test Prep Specialist. Expert Interview. 24 July 2020.
• ↑ https://guides.library.queensu.ca/introduction-research/writing/critical
• ↑ https://www.iup.edu/writingcenter/writing-resources/organization-and-structure/creating-an-outline.html
• ↑ https://writing.umn.edu/sws/assets/pdf/quicktips/titles.pdf
• ↑ https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/research_and_citation/mla_style/mla_formatting_and_style_guide/mla_works_cited_periodicals.html
• ↑ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4548565/
• ↑ https://writingcenter.uconn.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/593/2014/06/How_to_Summarize_a_Research_Article1.pdf
• ↑ https://www.uis.edu/learning-hub/writing-resources/handouts/learning-hub/how-to-review-a-journal-article
• ↑ https://writingcenter.unc.edu/tips-and-tools/editing-and-proofreading/

About This Article

If you have to write an article review, read through the original article closely, taking notes and highlighting important sections as you read. Next, rewrite the article in your own words, either in a long paragraph or as an outline. Open your article review by citing the article, then write an introduction which states the article’s thesis. Next, summarize the article, followed by your opinion about whether the article was clear, thorough, and useful. Finish with a paragraph that summarizes the main points of the article and your opinions. To learn more about what to include in your personal critique of the article, keep reading the article! Did this summary help you? Yes No

• Send fan mail to authors

Reader Success Stories

Prince Asiedu-Gyan

Apr 22, 2022

Did this article help you?

Sammy James

Sep 12, 2017

Juabin Matey

Aug 30, 2017

Vanita Meghrajani

Jul 21, 2016

Nov 27, 2018

Featured Articles

Trending Articles

Watch Articles

• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• Do Not Sell or Share My Info
• Not Selling Info

wikiHow Tech Help Pro:

Develop the tech skills you need for work and life

Book Reviews

What this handout is about.

This handout will help you write a book review, a report or essay that offers a critical perspective on a text. It offers a process and suggests some strategies for writing book reviews.

What is a review?

A review is a critical evaluation of a text, event, object, or phenomenon. Reviews can consider books, articles, entire genres or fields of literature, architecture, art, fashion, restaurants, policies, exhibitions, performances, and many other forms. This handout will focus on book reviews. For a similar assignment, see our handout on literature reviews .

Above all, a review makes an argument. The most important element of a review is that it is a commentary, not merely a summary. It allows you to enter into dialogue and discussion with the work’s creator and with other audiences. You can offer agreement or disagreement and identify where you find the work exemplary or deficient in its knowledge, judgments, or organization. You should clearly state your opinion of the work in question, and that statement will probably resemble other types of academic writing, with a thesis statement, supporting body paragraphs, and a conclusion.

Typically, reviews are brief. In newspapers and academic journals, they rarely exceed 1000 words, although you may encounter lengthier assignments and extended commentaries. In either case, reviews need to be succinct. While they vary in tone, subject, and style, they share some common features:

• First, a review gives the reader a concise summary of the content. This includes a relevant description of the topic as well as its overall perspective, argument, or purpose.
• Second, and more importantly, a review offers a critical assessment of the content. This involves your reactions to the work under review: what strikes you as noteworthy, whether or not it was effective or persuasive, and how it enhanced your understanding of the issues at hand.
• Finally, in addition to analyzing the work, a review often suggests whether or not the audience would appreciate it.

Becoming an expert reviewer: three short examples

Reviewing can be a daunting task. Someone has asked for your opinion about something that you may feel unqualified to evaluate. Who are you to criticize Toni Morrison’s new book if you’ve never written a novel yourself, much less won a Nobel Prize? The point is that someone—a professor, a journal editor, peers in a study group—wants to know what you think about a particular work. You may not be (or feel like) an expert, but you need to pretend to be one for your particular audience. Nobody expects you to be the intellectual equal of the work’s creator, but your careful observations can provide you with the raw material to make reasoned judgments. Tactfully voicing agreement and disagreement, praise and criticism, is a valuable, challenging skill, and like many forms of writing, reviews require you to provide concrete evidence for your assertions.

Consider the following brief book review written for a history course on medieval Europe by a student who is fascinated with beer:

Judith Bennett’s Ale, Beer, and Brewsters in England: Women’s Work in a Changing World, 1300-1600, investigates how women used to brew and sell the majority of ale drunk in England. Historically, ale and beer (not milk, wine, or water) were important elements of the English diet. Ale brewing was low-skill and low status labor that was complimentary to women’s domestic responsibilities. In the early fifteenth century, brewers began to make ale with hops, and they called this new drink “beer.” This technique allowed brewers to produce their beverages at a lower cost and to sell it more easily, although women generally stopped brewing once the business became more profitable.

The student describes the subject of the book and provides an accurate summary of its contents. But the reader does not learn some key information expected from a review: the author’s argument, the student’s appraisal of the book and its argument, and whether or not the student would recommend the book. As a critical assessment, a book review should focus on opinions, not facts and details. Summary should be kept to a minimum, and specific details should serve to illustrate arguments.

Now consider a review of the same book written by a slightly more opinionated student:

Judith Bennett’s Ale, Beer, and Brewsters in England: Women’s Work in a Changing World, 1300-1600 was a colossal disappointment. I wanted to know about the rituals surrounding drinking in medieval England: the songs, the games, the parties. Bennett provided none of that information. I liked how the book showed ale and beer brewing as an economic activity, but the reader gets lost in the details of prices and wages. I was more interested in the private lives of the women brewsters. The book was divided into eight long chapters, and I can’t imagine why anyone would ever want to read it.

There’s no shortage of judgments in this review! But the student does not display a working knowledge of the book’s argument. The reader has a sense of what the student expected of the book, but no sense of what the author herself set out to prove. Although the student gives several reasons for the negative review, those examples do not clearly relate to each other as part of an overall evaluation—in other words, in support of a specific thesis. This review is indeed an assessment, but not a critical one.

Here is one final review of the same book:

One of feminism’s paradoxes—one that challenges many of its optimistic histories—is how patriarchy remains persistent over time. While Judith Bennett’s Ale, Beer, and Brewsters in England: Women’s Work in a Changing World, 1300-1600 recognizes medieval women as historical actors through their ale brewing, it also shows that female agency had its limits with the advent of beer. I had assumed that those limits were religious and political, but Bennett shows how a “patriarchal equilibrium” shut women out of economic life as well. Her analysis of women’s wages in ale and beer production proves that a change in women’s work does not equate to a change in working women’s status. Contemporary feminists and historians alike should read Bennett’s book and think twice when they crack open their next brewsky.

This student’s review avoids the problems of the previous two examples. It combines balanced opinion and concrete example, a critical assessment based on an explicitly stated rationale, and a recommendation to a potential audience. The reader gets a sense of what the book’s author intended to demonstrate. Moreover, the student refers to an argument about feminist history in general that places the book in a specific genre and that reaches out to a general audience. The example of analyzing wages illustrates an argument, the analysis engages significant intellectual debates, and the reasons for the overall positive review are plainly visible. The review offers criteria, opinions, and support with which the reader can agree or disagree.

Developing an assessment: before you write

There is no definitive method to writing a review, although some critical thinking about the work at hand is necessary before you actually begin writing. Thus, writing a review is a two-step process: developing an argument about the work under consideration, and making that argument as you write an organized and well-supported draft. See our handout on argument .

What follows is a series of questions to focus your thinking as you dig into the work at hand. While the questions specifically consider book reviews, you can easily transpose them to an analysis of performances, exhibitions, and other review subjects. Don’t feel obligated to address each of the questions; some will be more relevant than others to the book in question.

• What is the thesis—or main argument—of the book? If the author wanted you to get one idea from the book, what would it be? How does it compare or contrast to the world you know? What has the book accomplished?
• What exactly is the subject or topic of the book? Does the author cover the subject adequately? Does the author cover all aspects of the subject in a balanced fashion? What is the approach to the subject (topical, analytical, chronological, descriptive)?
• How does the author support their argument? What evidence do they use to prove their point? Do you find that evidence convincing? Why or why not? Does any of the author’s information (or conclusions) conflict with other books you’ve read, courses you’ve taken or just previous assumptions you had of the subject?
• How does the author structure their argument? What are the parts that make up the whole? Does the argument make sense? Does it persuade you? Why or why not?
• How has this book helped you understand the subject? Would you recommend the book to your reader?

Beyond the internal workings of the book, you may also consider some information about the author and the circumstances of the text’s production:

• Who is the author? Nationality, political persuasion, training, intellectual interests, personal history, and historical context may provide crucial details about how a work takes shape. Does it matter, for example, that the biographer was the subject’s best friend? What difference would it make if the author participated in the events they write about?
• What is the book’s genre? Out of what field does it emerge? Does it conform to or depart from the conventions of its genre? These questions can provide a historical or literary standard on which to base your evaluations. If you are reviewing the first book ever written on the subject, it will be important for your readers to know. Keep in mind, though, that naming “firsts”—alongside naming “bests” and “onlys”—can be a risky business unless you’re absolutely certain.

Writing the review

Once you have made your observations and assessments of the work under review, carefully survey your notes and attempt to unify your impressions into a statement that will describe the purpose or thesis of your review. Check out our handout on thesis statements . Then, outline the arguments that support your thesis.

Your arguments should develop the thesis in a logical manner. That logic, unlike more standard academic writing, may initially emphasize the author’s argument while you develop your own in the course of the review. The relative emphasis depends on the nature of the review: if readers may be more interested in the work itself, you may want to make the work and the author more prominent; if you want the review to be about your perspective and opinions, then you may structure the review to privilege your observations over (but never separate from) those of the work under review. What follows is just one of many ways to organize a review.

Introduction

Since most reviews are brief, many writers begin with a catchy quip or anecdote that succinctly delivers their argument. But you can introduce your review differently depending on the argument and audience. The Writing Center’s handout on introductions can help you find an approach that works. In general, you should include:

• The name of the author and the book title and the main theme.
• Relevant details about who the author is and where they stand in the genre or field of inquiry. You could also link the title to the subject to show how the title explains the subject matter.
• The context of the book and/or your review. Placing your review in a framework that makes sense to your audience alerts readers to your “take” on the book. Perhaps you want to situate a book about the Cuban revolution in the context of Cold War rivalries between the United States and the Soviet Union. Another reviewer might want to consider the book in the framework of Latin American social movements. Your choice of context informs your argument.
• The thesis of the book. If you are reviewing fiction, this may be difficult since novels, plays, and short stories rarely have explicit arguments. But identifying the book’s particular novelty, angle, or originality allows you to show what specific contribution the piece is trying to make.
• Your thesis about the book.

Summary of content

This should be brief, as analysis takes priority. In the course of making your assessment, you’ll hopefully be backing up your assertions with concrete evidence from the book, so some summary will be dispersed throughout other parts of the review.

The necessary amount of summary also depends on your audience. Graduate students, beware! If you are writing book reviews for colleagues—to prepare for comprehensive exams, for example—you may want to devote more attention to summarizing the book’s contents. If, on the other hand, your audience has already read the book—such as a class assignment on the same work—you may have more liberty to explore more subtle points and to emphasize your own argument. See our handout on summary for more tips.

Analysis and evaluation of the book

Your analysis and evaluation should be organized into paragraphs that deal with single aspects of your argument. This arrangement can be challenging when your purpose is to consider the book as a whole, but it can help you differentiate elements of your criticism and pair assertions with evidence more clearly. You do not necessarily need to work chronologically through the book as you discuss it. Given the argument you want to make, you can organize your paragraphs more usefully by themes, methods, or other elements of the book. If you find it useful to include comparisons to other books, keep them brief so that the book under review remains in the spotlight. Avoid excessive quotation and give a specific page reference in parentheses when you do quote. Remember that you can state many of the author’s points in your own words.

Sum up or restate your thesis or make the final judgment regarding the book. You should not introduce new evidence for your argument in the conclusion. You can, however, introduce new ideas that go beyond the book if they extend the logic of your own thesis. This paragraph needs to balance the book’s strengths and weaknesses in order to unify your evaluation. Did the body of your review have three negative paragraphs and one favorable one? What do they all add up to? The Writing Center’s handout on conclusions can help you make a final assessment.

Finally, a few general considerations:

• Review the book in front of you, not the book you wish the author had written. You can and should point out shortcomings or failures, but don’t criticize the book for not being something it was never intended to be.
• With any luck, the author of the book worked hard to find the right words to express her ideas. You should attempt to do the same. Precise language allows you to control the tone of your review.
• Never hesitate to challenge an assumption, approach, or argument. Be sure, however, to cite specific examples to back up your assertions carefully.
• Try to present a balanced argument about the value of the book for its audience. You’re entitled—and sometimes obligated—to voice strong agreement or disagreement. But keep in mind that a bad book takes as long to write as a good one, and every author deserves fair treatment. Harsh judgments are difficult to prove and can give readers the sense that you were unfair in your assessment.
• A great place to learn about book reviews is to look at examples. The New York Times Sunday Book Review and The New York Review of Books can show you how professional writers review books.

Works consulted

We consulted these works while writing this handout. This is not a comprehensive list of resources on the handout’s topic, and we encourage you to do your own research to find additional publications. Please do not use this list as a model for the format of your own reference list, as it may not match the citation style you are using. For guidance on formatting citations, please see the UNC Libraries citation tutorial . We revise these tips periodically and welcome feedback.

Drewry, John. 1974. Writing Book Reviews. Boston: Greenwood Press.

Hoge, James. 1987. Literary Reviewing. Charlottesville: University Virginia of Press.

Sova, Dawn, and Harry Teitelbaum. 2002. How to Write Book Reports , 4th ed. Lawrenceville, NY: Thomson/Arco.

Walford, A.J. 1986. Reviews and Reviewing: A Guide. Phoenix: Oryx Press.

You may reproduce it for non-commercial use if you use the entire handout and attribute the source: The Writing Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Make a Gift

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 June 18, 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”

How to Write an Article Review: Tips and Examples

Did you know that article reviews are not just academic exercises but also a valuable skill in today's information age? In a world inundated with content, being able to dissect and evaluate articles critically can help you separate the wheat from the chaff. Whether you're a student aiming to excel in your coursework or a professional looking to stay well-informed, mastering the art of writing article reviews is an invaluable skill.

Short Description

In this article, our research paper writing service experts will start by unraveling the concept of article reviews and discussing the various types. You'll also gain insights into the art of formatting your review effectively. To ensure you're well-prepared, we'll take you through the pre-writing process, offering tips on setting the stage for your review. But it doesn't stop there. You'll find a practical example of an article review to help you grasp the concepts in action. To complete your journey, we'll guide you through the post-writing process, equipping you with essential proofreading techniques to ensure your work shines with clarity and precision!

What Is an Article Review: Grasping the Concept 

A review article is a type of professional paper writing that demands a high level of in-depth analysis and a well-structured presentation of arguments. It is a critical, constructive evaluation of literature in a particular field through summary, classification, analysis, and comparison.

If you write a scientific review, you have to use database searches to portray the research. Your primary goal is to summarize everything and present a clear understanding of the topic you've been working on.

Writing Involves:

• Summarization, classification, analysis, critiques, and comparison.
• The analysis, evaluation, and comparison require the use of theories, ideas, and research relevant to the subject area of the article.
• It is also worth nothing if a review does not introduce new information, but instead presents a response to another writer's work.
• Check out other samples to gain a better understanding of how to review the article.

Types of Review

When it comes to article reviews, there's more than one way to approach the task. Understanding the various types of reviews is like having a versatile toolkit at your disposal. In this section, we'll walk you through the different dimensions of review types, each offering a unique perspective and purpose. Whether you're dissecting a scholarly article, critiquing a piece of literature, or evaluating a product, you'll discover the diverse landscape of article reviews and how to navigate it effectively.

Journal Article Review

Just like other types of reviews, a journal article review assesses the merits and shortcomings of a published work. To illustrate, consider a review of an academic paper on climate change, where the writer meticulously analyzes and interprets the article's significance within the context of environmental science.

Research Article Review

Distinguished by its focus on research methodologies, a research article review scrutinizes the techniques used in a study and evaluates them in light of the subsequent analysis and critique. For instance, when reviewing a research article on the effects of a new drug, the reviewer would delve into the methods employed to gather data and assess their reliability.

Science Article Review

In the realm of scientific literature, a science article review encompasses a wide array of subjects. Scientific publications often provide extensive background information, which can be instrumental in conducting a comprehensive analysis. For example, when reviewing an article about the latest breakthroughs in genetics, the reviewer may draw upon the background knowledge provided to facilitate a more in-depth evaluation of the publication.

Need a Hand From Professionals?

Address to Our Writers and Get Assistance in Any Questions!

Formatting an Article Review

The format of the article should always adhere to the citation style required by your professor. If you're not sure, seek clarification on the preferred format and ask him to clarify several other pointers to complete the formatting of an article review adequately.

How Many Publications Should You Review?

• In what format should you cite your articles (MLA, APA, ASA, Chicago, etc.)?
• What length should your review be?
• Should you include a summary, critique, or personal opinion in your assignment?
• Do you need to call attention to a theme or central idea within the articles?
• Does your instructor require background information?

When you know the answers to these questions, you may start writing your assignment. Below are examples of MLA and APA formats, as those are the two most common citation styles.

Using the APA Format

Articles appear most commonly in academic journals, newspapers, and websites. If you write an article review in the APA format, you will need to write bibliographical entries for the sources you use:

• Web : Author [last name], A.A [first and middle initial]. (Year, Month, Date of Publication). Title. Retrieved from {link}
• Journal : Author [last name], A.A [first and middle initial]. (Publication Year). Publication Title. Periodical Title, Volume(Issue), pp.-pp.
• Newspaper : Author [last name], A.A [first and middle initial]. (Year, Month, Date of Publication). Publication Title. Magazine Title, pp. xx-xx.

Using MLA Format

• Web : Last, First Middle Initial. “Publication Title.” Website Title. Website Publisher, Date Month Year Published. Web. Date Month Year Accessed.
• Newspaper : Last, First M. “Publication Title.” Newspaper Title [City] Date, Month, Year Published: Page(s). Print.
• Journal : Last, First M. “Publication Title.” Journal Title Series Volume. Issue (Year Published): Page(s). Database Name. Web. Date Month Year Accessed.

Enhance your writing effortlessly with EssayPro.com , where you can order an article review or any other writing task. Our team of expert writers specializes in various fields, ensuring your work is not just summarized, but deeply analyzed and professionally presented. Ideal for students and professionals alike, EssayPro offers top-notch writing assistance tailored to your needs. Elevate your writing today with our skilled team at your article review writing service !

The Pre-Writing Process

Facing this task for the first time can really get confusing and can leave you unsure of where to begin. To create a top-notch article review, start with a few preparatory steps. Here are the two main stages from our dissertation services to get you started:

Step 1: Define the right organization for your review. Knowing the future setup of your paper will help you define how you should read the article. Here are the steps to follow:

• Summarize the article — seek out the main points, ideas, claims, and general information presented in the article.
• Define the positive points — identify the strong aspects, ideas, and insightful observations the author has made.
• Find the gaps —- determine whether or not the author has any contradictions, gaps, or inconsistencies in the article and evaluate whether or not he or she used a sufficient amount of arguments and information to support his or her ideas.
• Identify unanswered questions — finally, identify if there are any questions left unanswered after reading the piece.

Step 2: Move on and review the article. Here is a small and simple guide to help you do it right:

• Start off by looking at and assessing the title of the piece, its abstract, introductory part, headings and subheadings, opening sentences in its paragraphs, and its conclusion.
• First, read only the beginning and the ending of the piece (introduction and conclusion). These are the parts where authors include all of their key arguments and points. Therefore, if you start with reading these parts, it will give you a good sense of the author's main points.
• Finally, read the article fully.

These three steps make up most of the prewriting process. After you are done with them, you can move on to writing your own review—and we are going to guide you through the writing process as well.

Outline and Template

As you progress with reading your article, organize your thoughts into coherent sections in an outline. As you read, jot down important facts, contributions, or contradictions. Identify the shortcomings and strengths of your publication. Begin to map your outline accordingly.

If your professor does not want a summary section or a personal critique section, then you must alleviate those parts from your writing. Much like other assignments, an article review must contain an introduction, a body, and a conclusion. Thus, you might consider dividing your outline according to these sections as well as subheadings within the body. If you find yourself troubled with the pre-writing and the brainstorming process for this assignment, seek out a sample outline.

Your custom essay must contain these constituent parts:

• Pre-Title Page - Before diving into your review, start with essential details: article type, publication title, and author names with affiliations (position, department, institution, location, and email). Include corresponding author info if needed.
• Running Head - In APA format, use a concise title (under 40 characters) to ensure consistent formatting.
• Summary Page - Optional but useful. Summarize the article in 800 words, covering background, purpose, results, and methodology, avoiding verbatim text or references.
• Title Page - Include the full title, a 250-word abstract, and 4-6 keywords for discoverability.
• Introduction - Set the stage with an engaging overview of the article.
• Body - Organize your analysis with headings and subheadings.
• Works Cited/References - Properly cite all sources used in your review.
• Optional Suggested Reading Page - If permitted, suggest further readings for in-depth exploration.
• Tables and Figure Legends (if instructed by the professor) - Include visuals when requested by your professor for clarity.

Example of an Article Review

You might wonder why we've dedicated a section of this article to discuss an article review sample. Not everyone may realize it, but examining multiple well-constructed examples of review articles is a crucial step in the writing process. In the following section, our essay writing service experts will explain why.

Looking through relevant article review examples can be beneficial for you in the following ways:

• To get you introduced to the key works of experts in your field.
• To help you identify the key people engaged in a particular field of science.
• To help you define what significant discoveries and advances were made in your field.
• To help you unveil the major gaps within the existing knowledge of your field—which contributes to finding fresh solutions.
• To help you find solid references and arguments for your own review.
• To help you generate some ideas about any further field of research.
• To help you gain a better understanding of the area and become an expert in this specific field.
• To get a clear idea of how to write a good review.

View Our Writer’s Sample Before Crafting Your Own!

Why Have There Been No Great Female Artists?

Steps for Writing an Article Review

Here is a guide with critique paper format on how to write a review paper:

Step 1: Write the Title

First of all, you need to write a title that reflects the main focus of your work. Respectively, the title can be either interrogative, descriptive, or declarative.

Step 2: Cite the Article

Next, create a proper citation for the reviewed article and input it following the title. At this step, the most important thing to keep in mind is the style of citation specified by your instructor in the requirements for the paper. For example, an article citation in the MLA style should look as follows:

Author's last and first name. "The title of the article." Journal's title and issue(publication date): page(s). Print

Abraham John. "The World of Dreams." Virginia Quarterly 60.2(1991): 125-67. Print.

Step 3: Article Identification

After your citation, you need to include the identification of your reviewed article:

• Title of the article
• Title of the journal
• Year of publication

All of this information should be included in the first paragraph of your paper.

The report "Poverty increases school drop-outs" was written by Brian Faith – a Health officer – in 2000.

Step 4: Introduction

Your organization in an assignment like this is of the utmost importance. Before embarking on your writing process, you should outline your assignment or use an article review template to organize your thoughts coherently.

• If you are wondering how to start an article review, begin with an introduction that mentions the article and your thesis for the review.
• Follow up with a summary of the main points of the article.
• Highlight the positive aspects and facts presented in the publication.
• Critique the publication by identifying gaps, contradictions, disparities in the text, and unanswered questions.

Step 5: Summarize the Article

Make a summary of the article by revisiting what the author has written about. Note any relevant facts and findings from the article. Include the author's conclusions in this section.

Step 6: Critique It

Present the strengths and weaknesses you have found in the publication. Highlight the knowledge that the author has contributed to the field. Also, write about any gaps and/or contradictions you have found in the article. Take a standpoint of either supporting or not supporting the author's assertions, but back up your arguments with facts and relevant theories that are pertinent to that area of knowledge. Rubrics and templates can also be used to evaluate and grade the person who wrote the article.

Step 7: Craft a Conclusion

In this section, revisit the critical points of your piece, your findings in the article, and your critique. Also, write about the accuracy, validity, and relevance of the results of the article review. Present a way forward for future research in the field of study. Before submitting your article, keep these pointers in mind:

• As you read the article, highlight the key points. This will help you pinpoint the article's main argument and the evidence that they used to support that argument.
• While you write your review, use evidence from your sources to make a point. This is best done using direct quotations.
• Select quotes and supporting evidence adequately and use direct quotations sparingly. Take time to analyze the article adequately.
• Every time you reference a publication or use a direct quotation, use a parenthetical citation to avoid accidentally plagiarizing your article.
• Re-read your piece a day after you finish writing it. This will help you to spot grammar mistakes and to notice any flaws in your organization.
• Use a spell-checker and get a second opinion on your paper.

The Post-Writing Process: Proofread Your Work

Finally, when all of the parts of your article review are set and ready, you have one last thing to take care of — proofreading. Although students often neglect this step, proofreading is a vital part of the writing process and will help you polish your paper to ensure that there are no mistakes or inconsistencies.

To proofread your paper properly, start by reading it fully and checking the following points:

• Punctuation
• Other mistakes

Afterward, take a moment to check for any unnecessary information in your paper and, if found, consider removing it to streamline your content. Finally, double-check that you've covered at least 3-4 key points in your discussion.

And remember, if you ever need help with proofreading, rewriting your essay, or even want to buy essay , our friendly team is always here to assist you.

Need an Article REVIEW WRITTEN?

Just send us the requirements to your paper and watch one of our writers crafting an original paper for you.

What Is A Review Article?

How to write an article review, how to write an article review in apa format.

Daniel Parker

is a seasoned educational writer focusing on scholarship guidance, research papers, and various forms of academic essays including reflective and narrative essays. His expertise also extends to detailed case studies. A scholar with a background in English Literature and Education, Daniel’s work on EssayPro blog aims to support students in achieving academic excellence and securing scholarships. His hobbies include reading classic literature and participating in academic forums.

is an expert in nursing and healthcare, with a strong background in history, law, and literature. Holding advanced degrees in nursing and public health, his analytical approach and comprehensive knowledge help students navigate complex topics. On EssayPro blog, Adam provides insightful articles on everything from historical analysis to the intricacies of healthcare policies. In his downtime, he enjoys historical documentaries and volunteering at local clinics.

ESSAY SAUCE

FOR STUDENTS : ALL THE INGREDIENTS OF A GOOD ESSAY

Guide: How to write a review essay

Guide details:.

• Subject area(s): Types of essay
• Reading time: 2 minutes
• Price: Free download
• Published: 6 December 2019*
• File format: Text
• Words: 594 (approx)
• Number of pages: 3 (approx)
• Tags: Guides

Text preview of this guide:

This page of the guide has 594 words. Download the full version above.

A review essay examines a piece of writing, a film or some other form of art, but it differs from a literary essay in a couple of key ways. A review essay is evaluative . That means that its purpose is to tell the reader whether the work is good or not and whether the work is recommended. Also, unlike a literary essay, a review essay is not written for someone who is already familiar with the work in question. The audience for a review essay is someone who is wondering whether to spend their time and money on the work reviewed. A review essay may contain more plot summary than a literary essay , but it shouldn’t give away any of the major revelations or the ending.

Read Sample Reviews

Reviews are common in journalism, and examples of reviews of everything from movies to video games to computer software and more can be found online. Reading a few reviews of films and books from major publications such as nationally known magazines or large city newspapers can be a good way to get a sense of what is expected in a review essay.

Characteristics of a Good Review Essay

A good review essay will place the work in some sort of context. For example, a good review about a movie that tells the story of traveling circus people would briefly mention other movies about traveling circus people and how this film compares with those others or how it fits into the overall picture of traveling circus people that film has presented over the years. In a literary essay, this might be the whole point of the paper, but in a review essay, it would only be a paragraph or two. The introduction or the paragraph just after the introduction is a good place for this context.

A review essay is somewhat subjective, but it still needs to have standards and examples to demonstrate its points. It needs to give some reasons that the work is good or bad and it needs to support those reasons. This will help the audience to decide whether to follow the reviewer’s advice.

Thesis Statement

A thesis statement for a review essay should make an evaluation of the film and explain why the writer has made that evaluation. Here’s an example:

“Sideshow on the Road” is a terrible movie about traveling circus people with poor acting, an implausible plot and a boring, talky script.

The body of the review would then expand on these reasons to convince the reader to avoid the film.

The review itself should use specific examples from the work to illustrate the reviewer’s point. For example, the reviewer has complained about the poor acting in the movie. To illustrate this, the reviewer might describe a scene in which a character learns a loved one has died and seems to have no reaction at all. The boring, talky script might be illustrated by explaining that the characters spend a full ten minutes arguing about whether they took a wrong turn.

Review essays may be formal or informal and may be more or less personal. Depending on the style of the review, “I” may or may not be used. More informal reviews may use humor, sarcasm and personal stories to highlight points about the work in question. Formal reviews should avoid these devices. With tone, it’s important to stay consistent. If a formal tone is chosen, it should be maintained throughout the piece, and the same is true for an informal tone.

...(download the rest of the guide above)

Discover more:

Recommended for you.

• How to write a law essay
• How to write a simple essay
• How to write an admission essay

About this guide:

This is a free guide to help you with your studies.

Essay Categories:

• Accounting essays
• Architecture essays
• Business essays
• Computer science essays
• Criminology essays
• Economics essays
• Education essays
• Engineering essays
• English language essays
• Environmental studies essays
• Essay examples
• Finance essays
• Geography essays
• Health essays
• History essays
• Hospitality and tourism essays
• Human rights essays
• Information technology essays
• International relations
• Leadership essays
• Linguistics essays
• Literature essays
• Management essays
• Marketing essays
• Mathematics essays
• Media essays
• Medicine essays
• Military essays
• Miscellaneous essays
• Music Essays
• Nursing essays
• Philosophy essays
• Photography and arts essays
• Politics essays
• Project management essays
• Psychology essays
• Religious studies and theology essays
• Sample essays
• Science essays
• Social work essays
• Sociology essays
• Sports essays
• Types of essay
• Zoology essays

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
• Turk J Urol
• v.39(Suppl 1); 2013 Sep

How to write a review article?

In the medical sciences, the importance of review articles is rising. When clinicians want to update their knowledge and generate guidelines about a topic, they frequently use reviews as a starting point. The value of a review is associated with what has been done, what has been found and how these findings are presented. Before asking ‘how,’ the question of ‘why’ is more important when starting to write a review. The main and fundamental purpose of writing a review is to create a readable synthesis of the best resources available in the literature for an important research question or a current area of research. Although the idea of writing a review is attractive, it is important to spend time identifying the important questions. Good review methods are critical because they provide an unbiased point of view for the reader regarding the current literature. There is a consensus that a review should be written in a systematic fashion, a notion that is usually followed. In a systematic review with a focused question, the research methods must be clearly described. A ‘methodological filter’ is the best method for identifying the best working style for a research question, and this method reduces the workload when surveying the literature. An essential part of the review process is differentiating good research from bad and leaning on the results of the better studies. The ideal way to synthesize studies is to perform a meta-analysis. In conclusion, when writing a review, it is best to clearly focus on fixed ideas, to use a procedural and critical approach to the literature and to express your findings in an attractive way.

The importance of review articles in health sciences is increasing day by day. Clinicians frequently benefit from review articles to update their knowledge in their field of specialization, and use these articles as a starting point for formulating guidelines. [ 1 , 2 ] The institutions which provide financial support for further investigations resort to these reviews to reveal the need for these researches. [ 3 ] As is the case with all other researches, the value of a review article is related to what is achieved, what is found, and the way of communicating this information. A few studies have evaluated the quality of review articles. Murlow evaluated 50 review articles published in 1985, and 1986, and revealed that none of them had complied with clear-cut scientific criteria. [ 4 ] In 1996 an international group that analyzed articles, demonstrated the aspects of review articles, and meta-analyses that had not complied with scientific criteria, and elaborated QUOROM (QUality Of Reporting Of Meta-analyses) statement which focused on meta-analyses of randomized controlled studies. [ 5 ] Later on this guideline was updated, and named as PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses). [ 6 ]

Review articles are divided into 2 categories as narrative, and systematic reviews. Narrative reviews are written in an easily readable format, and allow consideration of the subject matter within a large spectrum. However in a systematic review, a very detailed, and comprehensive literature surveying is performed on the selected topic. [ 7 , 8 ] Since it is a result of a more detailed literature surveying with relatively lesser involvement of author’s bias, systematic reviews are considered as gold standard articles. Systematic reviews can be diivded into qualitative, and quantitative reviews. In both of them detailed literature surveying is performed. However in quantitative reviews, study data are collected, and statistically evaluated (ie. meta-analysis). [ 8 ]

Before inquring for the method of preparation of a review article, it is more logical to investigate the motivation behind writing the review article in question. The fundamental rationale of writing a review article is to make a readable synthesis of the best literature sources on an important research inquiry or a topic. This simple definition of a review article contains the following key elements:

• The question(s) to be dealt with
• Methods used to find out, and select the best quality researches so as to respond to these questions.
• To synthetize available, but quite different researches

For the specification of important questions to be answered, number of literature references to be consulted should be more or less determined. Discussions should be conducted with colleagues in the same area of interest, and time should be reserved for the solution of the problem(s). Though starting to write the review article promptly seems to be very alluring, the time you spend for the determination of important issues won’t be a waste of time. [ 9 ]

The PRISMA statement [ 6 ] elaborated to write a well-designed review articles contains a 27-item checklist ( Table 1 ). It will be reasonable to fulfill the requirements of these items during preparation of a review article or a meta-analysis. Thus preparation of a comprehensible article with a high-quality scientific content can be feasible.

PRISMA statement: A 27-item checklist

Contents and format

Important differences exist between systematic, and non-systematic reviews which especially arise from methodologies used in the description of the literature sources. A non-systematic review means use of articles collected for years with the recommendations of your colleagues, while systematic review is based on struggles to search for, and find the best possible researches which will respond to the questions predetermined at the start of the review.

Though a consensus has been reached about the systematic design of the review articles, studies revealed that most of them had not been written in a systematic format. McAlister et al. analyzed review articles in 6 medical journals, and disclosed that in less than one fourth of the review articles, methods of description, evaluation or synthesis of evidence had been provided, one third of them had focused on a clinical topic, and only half of them had provided quantitative data about the extend of the potential benefits. [ 10 ]

Use of proper methodologies in review articles is important in that readers assume an objective attitude towards updated information. We can confront two problems while we are using data from researches in order to answer certain questions. Firstly, we can be prejudiced during selection of research articles or these articles might be biased. To minimize this risk, methodologies used in our reviews should allow us to define, and use researches with minimal degree of bias. The second problem is that, most of the researches have been performed with small sample sizes. In statistical methods in meta-analyses, available researches are combined to increase the statistical power of the study. The problematic aspect of a non-systematic review is that our tendency to give biased responses to the questions, in other words we apt to select the studies with known or favourite results, rather than the best quality investigations among them.

As is the case with many research articles, general format of a systematic review on a single subject includes sections of Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion ( Table 2 ).

Structure of a systematic review

Preparation of the review article

Steps, and targets of constructing a good review article are listed in Table 3 . To write a good review article the items in Table 3 should be implemented step by step. [ 11 – 13 ]

Steps of a systematic review

The research question

It might be helpful to divide the research question into components. The most prevalently used format for questions related to the treatment is PICO (P - Patient, Problem or Population; I-Intervention; C-appropriate Comparisons, and O-Outcome measures) procedure. For example In female patients (P) with stress urinary incontinence, comparisons (C) between transobturator, and retropubic midurethral tension-free band surgery (I) as for patients’ satisfaction (O).

Finding Studies

In a systematic review on a focused question, methods of investigation used should be clearly specified.

Ideally, research methods, investigated databases, and key words should be described in the final report. Different databases are used dependent on the topic analyzed. In most of the clinical topics, Medline should be surveyed. However searching through Embase and CINAHL can be also appropriate.

While determining appropriate terms for surveying, PICO elements of the issue to be sought may guide the process. Since in general we are interested in more than one outcome, P, and I can be key elements. In this case we should think about synonyms of P, and I elements, and combine them with a conjunction AND.

One method which might alleviate the workload of surveying process is “methodological filter” which aims to find the best investigation method for each research question. A good example of this method can be found in PubMed interface of Medline. The Clinical Queries tool offers empirically developed filters for five different inquiries as guidelines for etiology, diagnosis, treatment, prognosis or clinical prediction.

Evaluation of the Quality of the Study

As an indispensable component of the review process is to discriminate good, and bad quality researches from each other, and the outcomes should be based on better qualified researches, as far as possible. To achieve this goal you should know the best possible evidence for each type of question The first component of the quality is its general planning/design of the study. General planning/design of a cohort study, a case series or normal study demonstrates variations.

A hierarchy of evidence for different research questions is presented in Table 4 . However this hierarchy is only a first step. After you find good quality research articles, you won’t need to read all the rest of other articles which saves you tons of time. [ 14 ]

Determination of levels of evidence based on the type of the research question

Formulating a Synthesis

Rarely all researches arrive at the same conclusion. In this case a solution should be found. However it is risky to make a decision based on the votes of absolute majority. Indeed, a well-performed large scale study, and a weakly designed one are weighed on the same scale. Therefore, ideally a meta-analysis should be performed to solve apparent differences. Ideally, first of all, one should be focused on the largest, and higher quality study, then other studies should be compared with this basic study.

Conclusions

In conclusion, during writing process of a review article, the procedures to be achieved can be indicated as follows: 1) Get rid of fixed ideas, and obsessions from your head, and view the subject from a large perspective. 2) Research articles in the literature should be approached with a methodological, and critical attitude and 3) finally data should be explained in an attractive way.

Reference management. Clean and simple.

Literature review

How to write a literature review in 6 steps

How do you write a good literature review? This step-by-step guide on how to write an excellent literature review covers all aspects of planning and writing literature reviews for academic papers and theses.

How to write a systematic literature review [9 steps]

How do you write a systematic literature review? What types of systematic literature reviews exist and where do you use them? Learn everything you need to know about a systematic literature review in this guide

What is a literature review? [with examples]

Not sure what a literature review is? This guide covers the definition, purpose, and format of a literature review.

Awesome Tips and Ideas on How to Write a Review Essay

How to Write a Fresh Essays Review?

The purpose of article reviews is to offer a critical perspective on a text, usually one that you have read. This can be done by discussing the strengths and weaknesses of the text, as well as offering your own interpretation. In order to write a fresh essays review, you will need to have a good understanding of what the text is about and what its main arguments are. You will also need to be able to express your thoughts clearly and concisely. So now let's answer the question: What is a review essay? Our online essay writing service review writers have prepared detailed instructions for you.

What is a Review Essay?

There are good chances you have heard of review essays before. But what is a review essay exactly? Well, it is a paper that critically analyzes another piece of writing. It can be used to examine a book, article, or other work of art. Review essays are typically shorter than other types of essays that explore and evaluate the work in question.

When writing a review essay, it is important to remember that you are not simply summarizing the work. Instead, you are critically analyzing it and offering your own words interpretations. This means that you will need to take a close look at the structure, argument, and style of the piece you are examining. You will also need to consider how well the work achieves its purpose. In order to write a successful review essay, you will need to provide your readers with a clear and concise evaluation of the assignment. If this sounds too much, don't worry. You will find useful tips on how to write an essay review at the end of this article. By the way you can read the best essay writing service reviews on our website NoCramming, just check it out.

Research article vs Review Article

A research paper is a primary source that provides the methodology and results of the authors' original study. A review article, on the other hand, is a secondary source that is published on previous articles and does not present original research.

In research papers, authors develop a research question, gather data, and carry out an initial report, while in review articles, authors choose a particular subject and then synthesize previous research on that subject.

Research papers report each study step in detail, including an abstract, the premise, underlying research, methods, results, and a conclusion. If there are inconsistencies, the authors make an effort to explain why the results could be in dispute. A review article will also address how the research contributes to the body of knowledge, the consequences of the findings, and ideas for future research. Here, the journal article review analyzes the material that is currently available from published work from a neutral point of view and indicates any issues or research gaps.

Review Essay Format and Structure

As a college student, you will likely be asked to write a review essay at some point. It will be assigned in order to assess your ability to analyze a text, object, or event and express your opinion on it. In order to write a good review essay, you will need first to understand the review essay format.

The outline of your review essay should include an introduction, body paragraphs, and a conclusion.

The Introduction

In the introduction of your review essay, you should provide some background information on the text, object, or event that you are reviewing. This background information should help set up the main idea or theme of your essay. Then, after introducing the topic of your essay, you should state your thesis statement. The clear thesis statement is the most important part of your introduction, as it will express your opinion on the main idea or theme of the text, object, or event that you are reviewing.

The Body Paragraphs

The body paragraphs of your review essay should focus on a different aspect of the text, object, or event that you are reviewing. You should discuss one point that supports your thesis statement in each body paragraph. For example, if you are writing a review of a film, you may want to focus one body paragraph on the film’s cinematography, the other one on its acting, and another one on its plot. Whatever your review essay topics are, the review essay format and structure would be the same. The body paragraphs are a good opportunity to prove your writing skills. Here is a paragraph checklist that you can use to make sure your body paragraphs are well-organized:

• Does each paragraph have a topic sentence?
• Does each paragraph contain evidence to support the topic sentence?
• Does each paragraph flow smoothly from one idea to the next?
• Are all of the body paragraphs relevant to the thesis statement?

The Conclusion

The conclusion of your essay writing should restate your thesis statement and summarize the main points of your essay. You may also want to include a final thought or opinion on the text, object, or event that you are reviewing.

Step by Step Guide on How to Write a Review Essay

If you have been asked to write a review essay, there are a few things that you will need to keep in mind. In this guide, we will take you through the steps of writing review essays, and alternatively, you can check these best dissertation writing services to produce a well-written and successful essay. 

1) Invent a Title for Fresh Essays Review

The first step is to come up with an interesting and catchy title for your fresh essays review. This will be the first thing that your reader sees, so make sure it is attention-grabbing and relevant to the rest of your essay.

2) Write a Summary of the Works You Make a Review On

After choosing your title, you will need to write a brief summary of the works you are reviewing. This is an important part of the review essay format and should include the main points and arguments of each piece, as well as your overall opinion of them.

3) Identify the Articles You Base Your Review On

Next, you will need to identify the articles you base your review on. Article identification is important so that your reader knows which work you are talking about and can follow along with your argument. We suggest checking some review essays examples to see how this is done.

4) Make a Paragraph Checklist

Why is it important to review an essay outline or make a paragraph checklist? Well, it will help you organize your thoughts and arguments in a logical and coherent manner. Plus, it will ensure that you don’t forget to include any key points.

Tips on How to Write a Review Essay

When you are writing a review essay, there are a few things that you will want to keep in mind.

The first step in writing a review essay is to read the text, object, or event that you are being asked to review. This may seem like an obvious first step, but it is important to read the text or view the event with a critical eye. As you read, take note of any initial thoughts or reactions that you have. These can be positive or negative, but they should be your own honest reaction to what you are reading or viewing.

Once you have completed your first reading, you should take some time to reflect on what you have seen or read. This is an important step in the review essay process, as it will allow you to put your thoughts and reactions into perspective. After reflecting on the text, object, or event, you should be able to identify the main idea or theme. This will be the focus of your review essay.

Don’t forget to develop a thesis statement. This should express your opinion on the main idea or theme of the text, object, or event that you are reviewing. Once you have developed a thesis statement, you can begin to outline your essay.

An Objective Approach

The second thing to keep in mind is that a review essay is not necessarily a positive or negative review. It is simply an evaluation of something. This means that you should try to be as objective as possible when you are writing. While reviewing, you may find some aspects that you like or don’t like, but it is important to remember that your job is not to take sides but to simply evaluate.

Finally, when writing a review essay, it is important to make sure your paper flows well. This means that you should have a clear and coherent introduction, body, and conclusion. If your essay feels choppy or disjointed, it will probably be difficult for your reader to follow along.

If you keep these things in mind, you should be able to write a review essay that is both informative and well-written. Make sure that you stick to the review essay format discussed above. With a bit of practice, you will find that writing fresh essays review is not as difficult as it may initially seem.

What are Some Common Mistakes to Avoid When Writing an Article Review Essay?

One common mistake made when writing a review essay is to simply summarize the content of the article being reviewed. While it is important to provide a brief overview of the work, your essay should go beyond a summary page to offer a deep and insightful analysis.

Another mistake is to simply state whether you agree or disagree with the argument being made in the article. It is important to back up your assessment with concrete evidence from the text itself. 

Finally, avoid making personal attacks on the author or their work; instead, focus on offering a well-reasoned and objective evaluation.

Review Essay Topics 2022

If you're looking for some fresh ideas, here are review essay topics for 2022:

• The shifting landscape of online education
• The increasing prevalence of "fake news" and its impact on society
• The rise of populism around the world
• The role of technology in society and its impact on human interaction
• The changing nature of work and its impact on the workforce
• The ongoing debate about climate change and its implications for the future
• The increasing income inequality around the world
• The refugee crisis and its impact on global politics
• The role of social media in our lives and its impact on our relationships
• The rise of artificial intelligence and its implications for the future
• The increasing number of natural disasters around the world and their impact on populations
• The declining state of the environment and its impact on human health
• The consequences of irresponsible human conduct on the environment
• The growing problem of obesity in developed countries
• The declining birth rates in developed countries
• Why is cultural heritage preservation important?
• Gender equality and women's rights in contemporary society
• Is peace education receiving enough attention from society?
• The role of the media in our lives and its impact on our perceptions of reality

Whatever you choose, make sure to pick something that you're passionate about and that you feel would be interesting to explore in depth. If you’d rather have a professional writer craft a perfect essay for you, check out essay service reviews and DoMyEssay review (where you can find the answer to the question " Is essay pro a scam ?") to see which one’s the best fit for your needs. Meanwhile, good luck with your fresh essays review!

All in all, always pay attention to how well the essay flows:

• introduces the subject of the review
• provides an overview of the main points of the review
• discusses the merits of the review
• provides a balanced assessment of the review
• concludes by summarizing the main points of the review

Keep these points in mind as you write your own paper. Remember, your goal is to provide a fair and objective assessment of the work under review. 

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the primary purpose of an article review, what is the key difference between a review essay and a summary, how should i structure a review essay, what are common mistakes to avoid when writing a review essay, still have no idea how to choose the best dissertation writing service.

There is no sure way to pick the best dissertation writing service and never risk disappointment or multiple revisions. Yet, this list of PhD dissertation writing services may be an aid for you in the moment of doubt. So, choose wisely but do not overthink.

You Might Also Be Interested In

When you choose to publish with PLOS, your research makes an impact. Make your work accessible to all, without restrictions, and accelerate scientific discovery with options like preprints and published peer review that make your work more Open.

• PLOS Biology
• PLOS Climate
• PLOS Complex Systems
• PLOS Computational Biology
• PLOS Digital Health
• PLOS Genetics
• PLOS Global Public Health
• PLOS Medicine
• PLOS Mental Health
• PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases
• PLOS Pathogens
• PLOS Sustainability and Transformation
• PLOS Collections

How to Write a Peer Review

When you write a peer review for a manuscript, what should you include in your comments? What should you leave out? And how should the review be formatted?

This guide provides quick tips for writing and organizing your reviewer report.

Review Outline

Use an outline for your reviewer report so it’s easy for the editors and author to follow. This will also help you keep your comments organized.

Think about structuring your review like an inverted pyramid. Put the most important information at the top, followed by details and examples in the center, and any additional points at the very bottom.

Here’s how your outline might look:

1. Summary of the research and your overall impression

In your own words, summarize what the manuscript claims to report. This shows the editor how you interpreted the manuscript and will highlight any major differences in perspective between you and the other reviewers. Give an overview of the manuscript’s strengths and weaknesses. Think about this as your “take-home” message for the editors. End this section with your recommended course of action.

2. Discussion of specific areas for improvement

It’s helpful to divide this section into two parts: one for major issues and one for minor issues. Within each section, you can talk about the biggest issues first or go systematically figure-by-figure or claim-by-claim. Number each item so that your points are easy to follow (this will also make it easier for the authors to respond to each point). Refer to specific lines, pages, sections, or figure and table numbers so the authors (and editors) know exactly what you’re talking about.

Major vs. minor issues

What’s the difference between a major and minor issue? Major issues should consist of the essential points the authors need to address before the manuscript can proceed. Make sure you focus on what is  fundamental for the current study . In other words, it’s not helpful to recommend additional work that would be considered the “next step” in the study. Minor issues are still important but typically will not affect the overall conclusions of the manuscript. Here are some examples of what would might go in the “minor” category:

• Missing references (but depending on what is missing, this could also be a major issue)
• Technical clarifications (e.g., the authors should clarify how a reagent works)
• Data presentation (e.g., the authors should present p-values differently)
• Typos, spelling, grammar, and phrasing issues

3. Any other points

Confidential comments for the editors.

Some journals have a space for reviewers to enter confidential comments about the manuscript. Use this space to mention concerns about the submission that you’d want the editors to consider before sharing your feedback with the authors, such as concerns about ethical guidelines or language quality. Any serious issues should be raised directly and immediately with the journal as well.

This section is also where you will disclose any potentially competing interests, and mention whether you’re willing to look at a revised version of the manuscript.

Do not use this space to critique the manuscript, since comments entered here will not be passed along to the authors.  If you’re not sure what should go in the confidential comments, read the reviewer instructions or check with the journal first before submitting your review. If you are reviewing for a journal that does not offer a space for confidential comments, consider writing to the editorial office directly with your concerns.

Get this outline in a template

Giving Feedback

Giving feedback is hard. Giving effective feedback can be even more challenging. Remember that your ultimate goal is to discuss what the authors would need to do in order to qualify for publication. The point is not to nitpick every piece of the manuscript. Your focus should be on providing constructive and critical feedback that the authors can use to improve their study.

If you’ve ever had your own work reviewed, you already know that it’s not always easy to receive feedback. Follow the golden rule: Write the type of review you’d want to receive if you were the author. Even if you decide not to identify yourself in the review, you should write comments that you would be comfortable signing your name to.

In your comments, use phrases like “ the authors’ discussion of X” instead of “ your discussion of X .” This will depersonalize the feedback and keep the focus on the manuscript instead of the authors.

General guidelines for effective feedback

• Justify your recommendation with concrete evidence and specific examples.
• Be specific so the authors know what they need to do to improve.
• Be thorough. This might be the only time you read the manuscript.
• Be professional and respectful. The authors will be reading these comments too.
• Remember to say what you liked about the manuscript!

Don’t

• Recommend additional experiments or  unnecessary elements that are out of scope for the study or for the journal criteria.
• Tell the authors exactly how to revise their manuscript—you don’t need to do their work for them.
• Use the review to promote your own research or hypotheses.
• Focus on typos and grammar. If the manuscript needs significant editing for language and writing quality, just mention this in your comments.
• Submit your review without proofreading it and checking everything one more time.

Before and After: Sample Reviewer Comments

Keeping in mind the guidelines above, how do you put your thoughts into words? Here are some sample “before” and “after” reviewer comments

✗ Before

“The authors appear to have no idea what they are talking about. I don’t think they have read any of the literature on this topic.”

✓ After

“The study fails to address how the findings relate to previous research in this area. The authors should rewrite their Introduction and Discussion to reference the related literature, especially recently published work such as Darwin et al.”

“The writing is so bad, it is practically unreadable. I could barely bring myself to finish it.”

“While the study appears to be sound, the language is unclear, making it difficult to follow. I advise the authors work with a writing coach or copyeditor to improve the flow and readability of the text.”

“It’s obvious that this type of experiment should have been included. I have no idea why the authors didn’t use it. This is a big mistake.”

“The authors are off to a good start, however, this study requires additional experiments, particularly [type of experiment]. Alternatively, the authors should include more information that clarifies and justifies their choice of methods.”

Suggested Language for Tricky Situations

You might find yourself in a situation where you’re not sure how to explain the problem or provide feedback in a constructive and respectful way. Here is some suggested language for common issues you might experience.

What you think : The manuscript is fatally flawed. What you could say: “The study does not appear to be sound” or “the authors have missed something crucial”.

What you think : You don’t completely understand the manuscript. What you could say : “The authors should clarify the following sections to avoid confusion…”

What you think : The technical details don’t make sense. What you could say : “The technical details should be expanded and clarified to ensure that readers understand exactly what the researchers studied.”

What you think: The writing is terrible. What you could say : “The authors should revise the language to improve readability.”

What you think : The authors have over-interpreted the findings. What you could say : “The authors aim to demonstrate [XYZ], however, the data does not fully support this conclusion. Specifically…”

What does a good review look like?

Check out the peer review examples at F1000 Research to see how other reviewers write up their reports and give constructive feedback to authors.

Time to Submit the Review!

Be sure you turn in your report on time. Need an extension? Tell the journal so that they know what to expect. If you need a lot of extra time, the journal might need to contact other reviewers or notify the author about the delay.

Tip: Building a relationship with an editor

You’ll be more likely to be asked to review again if you provide high-quality feedback and if you turn in the review on time. Especially if it’s your first review for a journal, it’s important to show that you are reliable. Prove yourself once and you’ll get asked to review again!

• Getting started as a reviewer
• Responding to an invitation
• Reading a manuscript
• Writing a peer review

The contents of the Peer Review Center are also available as a live, interactive training session, complete with slides, talking points, and activities. …

The contents of the Writing Center are also available as a live, interactive training session, complete with slides, talking points, and activities. …

There’s a lot to consider when deciding where to submit your work. Learn how to choose a journal that will help your study reach its audience, while reflecting your values as a researcher…

What is a review article?

Learn how to write a review article.

What is a review article? A review article can also be called a literature review, or a review of literature. It is a survey of previously published research on a topic. It should give an overview of current thinking on the topic. And, unlike an original research article, it will not present new experimental results.

Writing a review of literature is to provide a critical evaluation of the data available from existing studies. Review articles can identify potential research areas to explore next, and sometimes they will draw new conclusions from the existing data.

Why write a review article?

To provide a comprehensive foundation on a topic.

To explain the current state of knowledge.

To identify gaps in existing studies for potential future research.

To highlight the main methodologies and research techniques.

Did you know? 

There are some journals that only publish review articles, and others that do not accept them.

Make sure you check the  aims and scope  of the journal you’d like to publish in to find out if it’s the right place for your review article.

How to write a review article

Below are 8 key items to consider when you begin writing your review article.

Check the journal’s aims and scope

Make sure you have read the aims and scope for the journal you are submitting to and follow them closely. Different journals accept different types of articles and not all will accept review articles, so it’s important to check this before you start writing.

Define your scope

Define the scope of your review article and the research question you’ll be answering, making sure your article contributes something new to the field. 

As award-winning author Angus Crake told us, you’ll also need to “define the scope of your review so that it is manageable, not too large or small; it may be necessary to focus on recent advances if the field is well established.” 

Finding sources to evaluate

When finding sources to evaluate, Angus Crake says it’s critical that you “use multiple search engines/databases so you don’t miss any important ones.” 

For finding studies for a systematic review in medical sciences,  read advice from NCBI . 

Writing your title, abstract and keywords

Spend time writing an effective title, abstract and keywords. This will help maximize the visibility of your article online, making sure the right readers find your research. Your title and abstract should be clear, concise, accurate, and informative. 

For more information and guidance on getting these right, read our guide to writing a good abstract and title  and our  researcher’s guide to search engine optimization . 

Introduce the topic

Does a literature review need an introduction? Yes, always start with an overview of the topic and give some context, explaining why a review of the topic is necessary. Gather research to inform your introduction and make it broad enough to reach out to a large audience of non-specialists. This will help maximize its wider relevance and impact. 

Don’t make your introduction too long. Divide the review into sections of a suitable length to allow key points to be identified more easily.

Include critical discussion

Make sure you present a critical discussion, not just a descriptive summary of the topic. If there is contradictory research in your area of focus, make sure to include an element of debate and present both sides of the argument. You can also use your review paper to resolve conflict between contradictory studies.

What researchers say

Angus Crake, researcher

As part of your conclusion, include making suggestions for future research on the topic. Focus on the goal to communicate what you understood and what unknowns still remains.

Use a critical friend

Always perform a final spell and grammar check of your article before submission. 

You may want to ask a critical friend or colleague to give their feedback before you submit. If English is not your first language, think about using a language-polishing service.

Find out more about how  Taylor & Francis Editing Services can help improve your manuscript before you submit.

What is the difference between a research article and a review article?

Before you submit your review article…

Complete this checklist before you submit your review article:

Have you checked the journal’s aims and scope?

Have you defined the scope of your article?

Did you use multiple search engines to find sources to evaluate?

Have you written a descriptive title and abstract using keywords?

Did you start with an overview of the topic?

Have you presented a critical discussion?

Have you included future suggestions for research in your conclusion?

Have you asked a friend to do a final spell and grammar check?

Expert help for your manuscript

Taylor & Francis Editing Services  offers a full range of pre-submission manuscript preparation services to help you improve the quality of your manuscript and submit with confidence.

Related resources

How to edit your paper

Writing a scientific literature review

Get science-backed answers as you write with Paperpal's Research feature

How to Structure an Essay

Essay writing is a fundamental skill, a basic task, that is expected of those who choose to pursue their undergraduate and master’s degrees. It constitutes a key requirement for students to complete a given course credit. However, many students and early career researchers find themselves struggling with the challenge of organizing their thoughts into a coherent, engaging structure. This article is especially for those who see essay writing as a daunting task and face problems in presenting their work in an impactful way.  

Table of Contents

• Writing an essay: basic elements and some key principles  
• Essay structure template 
• Chronological structure 
• Problem-methods-solutions structure 
• Compare and contrast structures 
• Frequently asked questions on essay structure 

Read on as we delve into the basic elements of essay writing, outline key principles for organizing information, and cover some foundational features of writing essays.  

Writing an essay: basic elements and some key principles

Essays are written in a flowing and continuous pattern but with a structure of its own. An introduction, body and conclusion are integral to it. The key is to balance the amount and kind of information to be presented in each part. Various disciplines may have their own conventions or guidelines on the information to be provided in the introduction.  

A clear articulation of the context and background of the study is important, as is the definition of key terms and an outline of specific models or theories used. Readers also need to know the significance of the study and its implications for further research. Most importantly, the thesis or the main proposition should be clearly presented.  

The body of the essay is therefore organized into paragraphs that hold the main ideas and arguments and is presented and analyzed in a logical manner. Ideally, each paragraph of the body focuses on one main point or a distinct topic and must be supported by evidence and analysis. The concluding paragraph should bring back to the reader the key arguments, its significance and food for thought. It is best not to re-state all the points of the essay or introduce a new concept here. 

In other words, certain general guidelines help structure the information in the essay. The information must flow logically with the context or the background information presented in the introductory part of the essay. The arguments are built organically where each paragraph in the body of the essay deals with a different point, yet closely linked to the para preceding and following it. Importantly, when writing essays, early career researchers must be careful in ensuring that each piece of information relates to the main thesis and is a building block to the arguments. 

Essay structure template

• Introduction 
• Provide the context and share significance of the study 
• Clearly articulate the thesis statement 
• Body  
• Paragraph 1 consisting of the first main point, followed by supporting evidence and an analysis of the findings. Transitional words and phrases can be used to move to the next main point. 
• There can be as many paragraphs with the above-mentioned elements as there are points and arguments to support your thesis. 
• Conclusion  
• Bring in key ideas and discuss their significance and relevance 
• Call for action 
• References 

Essay structures

The structure of an essay can be determined by the kind of essay that is required.  

Chronological structure

Also known as the cause-and-effect approach, this is a straightforward way to structure an essay. In such essays, events are discussed sequentially, as they occurred from the earliest to the latest. A chronological structure is useful for discussing a series of events or processes such as historical analyses or narratives of events. The introduction should have the topic sentence. The body of the essay should follow a chorological progression with each para discussing a major aspect of that event with supporting evidence. It ends with a summarizing of the results of the events.  

Problem-methods-solutions structure

Where the essay focuses on a specific problem, the problem-methods-solutions structure can be used to organize the essay. This structure is ideal for essays that address complex issues. It starts with presenting the problem, the context, and thesis statement as introduction to the essay. The major part of the discussion which forms the body of the essay focuses on stating the problem and its significance, the author’s approach or methods adopted to address the problem along with its relevance, and accordingly proposing solution(s) to the identified problem. The concluding part offers a recap of the research problem, methods, and proposed solutions, emphasizing their significance and potential impact. 

Compare and contrast structures

This structure of essay writing is ideally used when two or more key subjects require a comparison of ideas, theories, or phenomena. The three crucial elements, introduction, body, and conclusion, remain the same. The introduction presents the context and the thesis statement. The body of the essay seeks to focus on and highlight differences between the subjects, supported by evidence and analysis. The conclusion is used to summarize the key points of comparison and contrast, offering insights into the significance of the analysis.  

Depending on how the subjects will be discussed, the body of the essay can be organized according to the block method or the alternating method. In the block method, one para discusses one subject and the next para the other subject. In the alternative method, both subjects are discussed in one para based on a particular topic or issue followed by the next para on another issue and so on.  

Frequently asked questions on essay structure

An essay structure serves as a framework for presenting ideas coherently and logically. It comprises three crucial elements: an introduction that communicates the context, topic, and thesis statement; the body focusing on the main points and arguments supported with appropriate evidence followed by its analysis; and a conclusion that ties together the main points and its importance .  

An essay structure well-defined essay structure enhances clarity, coherence, and readability, and is crucial for organizing ideas and arguments to effectively communicate key aspects of a chosen topic. It allows readers to better understand arguments presented and demonstrates the author’s ability to organize and present information systematically. 

Yes, while expert recommend following an essay structure, early career researchers may choose how best to adapt standard essay structures to communicate and share their research in an impactful and engaging way. However, do keep in mind that deviating too far from established structures can hinder comprehension and weaken the overall effectiveness of the essay,  By understanding the basic elements of essay writing and employing appropriate structures such as chronological, problem-methods-solutions, or compare and contrast, researchers can effectively organize their ideas and communicate their findings with clarity and precision. 

Paperpal is a comprehensive AI writing toolkit that helps students and researchers achieve 2x the writing in half the time. It leverages 21+ years of STM experience and insights from millions of research articles to provide in-depth academic writing, language editing, and submission readiness support to help you write better, faster.  

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

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

Related Reads:

Powerful academic phrases to improve your essay writing .

• How to Paraphrase Research Papers Effectively
• How to Use AI to Enhance Your College Essays and Thesis
• How to Cite Social Media Sources in Academic Writing? 

Leveraging Generative AI to Enhance Student Understanding of Complex Research Concepts 

You may also like, leveraging generative ai to enhance student understanding of..., how to write a good hook for essays,..., addressing peer review feedback and mastering manuscript revisions..., how paperpal can boost comprehension and foster interdisciplinary..., what is the importance of a concept paper..., how to write the first draft of a..., mla works cited page: format, template & examples, how to ace grant writing for research funding..., how to write a high-quality conference paper.

• Academic Writing Guides

How to Write a Literature Review? A Beginner’s Guide

Sooner or later in your academic path, you will be required to compose a literature review. So, it’s important to approach this task well-prepared and understand how to write a literature review inside out. 

Are you interested in how to write lit review projects correctly and cover the subject comprehensively, from all angles? This article will explore the concept of review of literature , dwell on how to write a literature review in line with your professor’s expectations, and share a universal literature review template for your usage. 

What Is the Purpose of a Literature Review? 

To understand what should be included in a literature review , you need to understand its purpose and value in a larger work. A well-researched and written lit review usually addresses the following objectives: 

• Inform . The fundamental purpose of any review of literature is to provide the foundation of knowledge on a specific topic or phenomenon. You explore what people have learned about it from prior studies and summarize those findings to inform your readers. 
• Give credit . Another purpose of a lit review is to identify researchers who have contributed to the advancement of research on your chosen literature review topic and have produced the most valuable findings. This way, you pay tribute to those researchers and showcase your knowledge of the most considerable influencers. 
• Identify gaps . By performing a thorough review of literature , you may not only discover what is known about your topic but also find out what it yet to be learned about it. As a result of reviewing the available evidence, you may identify gaps for addressing through your academic inquiry. 
• Identify patterns . Those who know how to write a literature review can also effectively embrace data trends and patterns in the collected dataset. As a result, they can present a more nuanced analysis of the existing knowledge in your literature review and uncover dependencies that inform people’s understanding of certain phenomena and processes.  
• Contextualize research . When you perform lit review writing, you can also create a spot for your own study within the broad field of your academic research interest. This way, you show to your readers that you can effectively navigate the landscape of your academic area. 

These purposes lay the foundation for understanding how to write a literature review that will attain all academic goals. You simply need to use this list as your checklist for structuring an impactful lit review and including all vital data in it. 

How to Write a Literature Review? 

Now, we come to the main topic of this article – how to write a good literature review for dissertation projects, research papers, and other works. Follow the steps we’ve covered below to arrive at a consistent, logical piece of lit review . 

Identify Relevant Sources 

Any literature review writing starts with academic research. You should look for sources that explore your topic from various angles and provide valuable literature review findings to expand your knowledge on the subject. It’s best to look for subject-specific books first and then go through academic databases that publish journal articles. This way, you will start with the evidence of the highest reliability level and move on to expand your literature review dataset conveniently. 

Screen Sources for Quality 

The best solution on how to write a literature review without challenges is to rely on high-quality evidence. Your task is to research extensively in reliable academic databases to find peer-reviewed academic journals and books written by experts in your field. Don’t over-rely on online sources in your literature review, like blogs or opinion pieces, because they rarely possess the needed degree of credibility for an academic review. By choosing only industry-approved sources from qualified professionals, you can build a solid foundation for your writing and impress the audience. 

Determine Data Patterns and Gaps 

How to write a literature review of value for your readers? One of the best approaches is to go beyond mere summarization of what other researchers have found on the subject and to apply critical thinking and data categorization. This way, you will manage to uncover existing patterns and trends and examine those dependencies in your literature review. A systematic, critical approach is always evaluated much higher than a simple outline of what people say on your subject. 

Draft an Outline 

Now, it’s time to compose an outline for a literature review . The outline should include the main concepts you’re planning to cover in the literature review text and should structure the narrative consistently. By means of composing an outline before the actual writing process, you give yourself a hands-on roadmap for composing a logically flowing piece. As a result of using an outline, you will write the literature review faster and will avoid the risk of going off-topic. 

Compose the Review 

With a good and detailed outline, you should have no more problems or concerns about how to write a literature review . The writing process should go quickly and smoothly when you have all your evidence at your fingertips, categorized by themes and requiring only proper summarization in the text. 

We recommend starting with a broad introduction to the topic and concepts related to it. You should give definitions and explain the topic’s features and components that require attention in the research process. After that, you may briefly outline the main sections of your review and then proceed to the exploration of each section in depth. 

At times, your professor will give you a specific structure for review writing – such as the general introduction, coverage of theories, and then coverage of empirical evidence. At times, it may be a review of the data search strategy and a report on the identified resources that follow. In any case, you should follow the tutor’s prompt closely to ensure compliance with the task. 

Make Use of This Generic Literature Review Template 

Looking for a universal, ready-to-use literature review template ? Here is an effective literature review template that everyone can apply with minor tweaks to produce a high-quality review of literature . 

LITERATURE REVIEW TEMPLATE 

Introduction 

• Introduce the topic of your literature review 
• Examine its significance for your academic area 
• Determine the scope of your literature review inquiry 
• Give a brief outline of subtopics and sections included in your literature review 

Body of the literature review

• Describe the subtopic and indicate how it relates to your literature review’s main idea
• Summarize the evidence available about it 
• Compare the available data and voice your opinion 

Conclusion 

• Summarize the main points and findings from your literature review 
• State the main contribution you have managed to achieve 
• Identify the research gaps your literature review has revealed 

Use this literature review template to pump your writing muscle and get ready for new literature review challenges. 

More Pro Tips for Writing a Literature Review 

If you’re still unsure about how to do a literature review with excellence, these pro tips may improve your understanding of this task type. 

• Mind the audience . Understanding how to do a literature review for a research paper often has little to do with how to write literature review for thesis . This difference is explained by the fact that these types of academic work are of different lengths and pursue different scholarly goals. This way, you may need to cover only some basic seminal research in the review of literature for a research paper but will need to dig deeper into theoretical and applied research with deeper analysis and more critical thinking when dealing with a thesis.
• Mind the length . How long should a literature review be ? This is a vital question that you should answer before starting the outlining and writing process. Ask your professor if you’re not sure or apply the rule of thumb, where this section usually takes from 15% to 25% of the entire paper. 
• Mind the structure . It’s important to cover all lit review aspects that your professor wants to see in the paper; otherwise, you risk getting a low grade even if your literature review is comprehensive and interesting. What should a literature review include ? In most cases, you will be required to cover some seminal research works in your literature review to show that you understand who the pioneers in the field are, and what contribution they have made to the topic’s exploration. Next, you should examine relevant theories that inform studies in your subject. At the end of the literature review, you should typically cite a variety of studies of applied nature, thus showing what empirical research is conducted in your academic field.  

With these recommendations at your disposal, you’re sure to become much more proficient in how to do a lit review . If you need more help with a literature review project, welcome to use our professional and quick literature review writing service . Our experts know everything about how to write a literature review , so they will handle your literature review task with ease within the timeframe you set for them.

• Essay Writing Guides

07 Fall 2023 take-home essay topics

By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies and similar tracking technologies described in our privacy policy .

Voice of the Discipline

News and publications.

Access AHA news and publications supporting the work of historians.

Stay up-to-date with the AHA

June 21, 2024

AHA Signs On to CIE Letter Urging HEA-Title VI Funding for FY 2025

The AHA has signed on to a letter from the Coalition for International Education (CIE) to leaders in the US…

June 18, 2024

Welcome to the AHA’s New Website

May 30, 2024

AHA Signs on to ACLS Statement on 2024 Campus Protests

May 23, 2024

AHA Partners with Wiki Education for New Member Benefit

The American Historical Review is the flagship journal of the AHA and the journal of record for the historical discipline in the United States, bringing together scholarship from every major field of historical study.

Perspectives on History is the newsmagazine of the AHA and is the principal source for news and information about the discipline of history. Since 1962, Perspectives has promoted our work by publishing articles and commentary on all aspects of the historical discipline.

History in Focus Podcast

Environmental Crisis and Recovery

Collaborative history + revisiting marion thompson wright, teaching historiography + chilling affects, aha booklets.

The AHA publishes booklets that address a diversity of topics to serve the needs of history students and historians in all professions. Our publications include career advice for history graduates, overviews and syntheses of current historical topics and fields, and guides to teaching and learning in history.

For the Press

The AHA is pleased to provide resources for journalists and press. If you are a member of the media and would like to submit a request for a referral or interview, please email [email protected] . Please provide any pertinent deadlines and we will do our best to accommodate your request. The AHA can find you a historian for any topic, and assists with dozens of inquiries each year.

The AHA encourages the reading of history with periodic reading challenges.

Permission to Use AHA Copyrighted Material

All material published by the American Historical Association in any medium is protected by copyright.

Join the AHA

The AHA brings together historians from all specializations and all work contexts, embracing the breadth and variety of activity in history today.

• Log in/Log out (Opens in new window)
• All content
• Rural Alaska
• Crime & Courts
• Alaska Legislature
• ADN Politics Podcast
• National Opinions
• Letters to the Editor
• Nation/World
• Film and TV
• Outdoors/Adventure
• High School Sports
• UAA Athletics
• National Sports
• Food and Drink
• Visual Stories
• Alaska Journal of Commerce (Opens in new window)
• The Arctic Sounder
• The Bristol Bay Times
• Today's Paper (Opens in new window)
• Legal Notices (Opens in new window)
• Peak 2 Peak Events (Opens in new window)
• Educator of the Year (Opens in new window)
• Celebrating Nurses (Opens in new window)
• Top 40 Under 40 (Opens in new window)
• Alaska Spelling Bee (Opens in new window)
• Alaska Craft Brew Festival
• Best of Alaska
• Spring Career Fair (Opens in new window)
• Achievement in Business
• Youth Summit Awards
• Highland Games VIP Experience Giveaway
• Teacher of the Month
• 2024 Alaska Summer Camps Guide (Opens in new window)
• 2024 Graduation (Opens in new window)
• Alaska Visitors Guide 2024 (Opens in new window)
• 2023 Best of Alaska (Opens in new window)
• Alaska Health Care (Opens in new window)
• Merry Merchant Munch (Opens in new window)
• On the Move AK (Opens in new window)
• Senior Living in Alaska (Opens in new window)
• Youth Summit Awards (Opens in new window)
• Alaska Visitors Guide
• ADN Store (Opens in new window)
• Classifieds (Opens in new window)
• Jobs (Opens in new window)
• Place an Ad (Opens in new window)
• Customer Service
• Sponsored Content

Book review: Intimate and creative, Jennifer Brice’s long-evolving essays present her sharp mind at work

“Another North: Essays in Praise of the World That Is”

“Another North: Essays in Praise of the World That Is,” by Jennifer Brice

By Jennifer Brice; Boreal Books/Red Hen Press, 2024; 240 pages; $17.95.

It used to be said that “essays don’t sell, nobody wants to read them.” That was never really true, and, in the hands of a gifted writer like Jennifer Brice, we can delight in the form defined by essayist and teacher Phillip Lopate as “a record of a mind tracking its thoughts.”

“The great promise of essays,” Lopate wrote, “is the freedom they offer to explore, digress, acknowledge uncertainty; to evade dogmatism and embrace ambivalence and contradiction; to engage in intimate conversation with one’s reader and literary forbears; and to uncover some unexpected truth, preferably via a sparkling prose style.”

Brice, the author of two previous books — ”The Last Settlers,” a work of documentary journalism, and “Unlearning to Fly,” a memoir — has compiled a dozen exemplary essays written over the course of 25 years. They are both intimate and intelligent, and they shine in their use of creative forms and their “sparkling” language.

Born and raised in Fairbanks, Brice has taught English and Creative Writing at East Coast colleges (presently Colgate University) for many years. Now at the start of her sixth decade, with three grown daughters, she’s been willing to look back at her family and personal history, her relationships to others, the person she was and is still becoming, and her influences. Readers will very much feel in conversation with a sharp and inquisitive mind, and Alaska readers may especially find resonance with their own lives.

The first essay, “Another North,” opens as a sleep-deprived “gray-haired professor of English” lands at the Fairbanks airport on winter solstice. The wobbliness she feels about a change in runway signs sets her up for a series of short segments that gather a story that “could begin anywhere” but does begin in 1961, when “the woman who will become our protagonist’s mother,” a newly minted nurse, leaves New York City and drives to Fairbanks for her first job. Then, in 1962, “Carol Ann’s husband of just a few months” is taking off from the Fairbanks airport on his first solo flight. 1964, Carol Ann parks the pram with baby Jennifer outside the Second Avenue Co-op and tells the family husky to “mind the baby” while she shops. Then 1967 and the Fairbanks flood, the start of pipeline construction, a prom, a crush, homesick years at an east coast women’s college, learning to fly “in order to prove something to myself, although it’s not yet clear just what that might be.” In just 12 pages, with specific details, digressions through time and place, and reflections on identity, direction, and love, Brice introduces her mode of thinking about the large and small things that influence a life and leads readers into the expanses of her mind.

The second essay, “Playing Bridge with Robots,” continues with a similarly segmented form and inquiry. Here, Brice toggles between her obsession with the game of bridge — especially playing it on-line with computer-generated partners — and her long friendship with another writer (one who will be recognized by Alaska readers.) At first the back-and-forth play might seem odd, but connections gradually emerge as the friendship slows and founders. “We weren’t doing what I am doing right this minute, which is trying to capture some fugitive truth about her. Or about me and her. Or maybe just about me.”

The remaining essays continue the pattern of employing unusual structures to contain fragments of memory, thought, and reconciliation, along with references to literary works and cultural phenomena. “On Keeping House,” is formatted around a series of possible guides to, literally, homemaking but more expansively to living as a woman.

“Occasional Lapses into Indulgence” examines the author’s complicated relationship with her “fabulist” grandmother and includes excerpts from letters between the two and her grandmother’s correspondence with the writer James Michener and various political figures. (Grandmother Brice felt free to advise them on their clothing.)

“I Am the Space Where I Am” discusses Brice’s move to upstate New York (where a neighbor instructed her on just what she needed to do with her house and yard to fit in) and how she squared her love for her Fairbanks home with her adopted one. “After Alaska,” she writes, “being in New York is a little bit like being on Prozac: the highs are not as high, the lows not as low.”

One of the longest, most creative, and most personally revealing essays, “My Essay on Flowers and How Things End” takes the form of an abecedarian, in which each of the 26 sections begins with a letter of the alphabet, in this case naming a flower. A is for Astroemeria (a showy lily), B for bittersweet, and so on. While each section references a flower, the passages are not about the flowers per se but associated with the author’s life, in particular her relationships with men. Time here is fluid, flowing back and forth across decades to tie together a bouquet of self-discoveries.

Because Brice’s essays were written at different times, with different purposes, and are meant to stand alone, some facts and even scenes reappear throughout the book. In another writer’s hands, these could be repetitive and annoying, but the different contexts in which they’re presented multiply their effect. The family origin myth, central to the entire book, returns with increasing meaning, and only at the end does Brice uncover an astonishing truth about it.

Poignant, funny, introspective, sparkling in its language, “Another North” deserves a place, not just on a shelf of essays, but among the books we turn to for appreciating the gifts and burdens of our lives.

Nancy Lord is a Homer-based writer and former Alaska writer laureate. Her books include "Fishcamp," "Beluga Days," and "Early Warming." Her latest book is "pH: A Novel."

• Health Tech
• Health Insurance
• Medical Devices
• Gene Therapy
• Neuroscience
• H5N1 Bird Flu
• Health Disparities
• Infectious Disease
• Mental Health
• Cardiovascular Disease
• Chronic Disease
• Alzheimer's
• Coercive Care
• The Obesity Revolution
• The War on Recovery
• Adam Feuerstein
• Matthew Herper
• Jennifer Adaeze Okwerekwu
• Ed Silverman
• CRISPR Tracker
• Breakthrough Device Tracker
• Generative AI Tracker
• Obesity Drug Tracker
• 2024 STAT Summit
• Wunderkinds Nomination
• STAT Madness
• STAT Brand Studio

Don't miss out

Subscribe to STAT+ today, for the best life sciences journalism in the industry

Hank Green on his ‘Pissing Out Cancer’ comedy special, ulcerative colitis, and the jokes that got cut

By Brittany Trang June 22, 2024

T here’s a website dedicated to asking how many days it’s been since Hank Green started a new project .

The counter resets often — the multi-hyphenate internet educator and science communicator rose to prominence with his 2007 YouTube project Vlogbrothers , which he founded with his brother, the novelist-turned- tuberculosis-fighter John Green . Free, educational YouTube channels Crash Course , SciShow , and Study Hall followed. Among other things , Green also founded the internet video conference VidCon , became a novelist himself , and became CEO of a socks and coffee subscription company that donates its proceeds to decreasing maternal mortality in Sierra Leone with Partners in Health .

advertisement

But for a few weeks in 2023, the “how many days” ticker paused on “Chemotherapy.”

Last year, Green found out he had Hodgkin’s lymphoma . In his new comedy special “Pissing Out Cancer” on the streaming service Dropout, Green processes what it’s like to be diagnosed with cancer — albeit “the one you want, if you’re going to get it” — at 43 years old. (He’s now in remission.)

Before the special came out on Friday, STAT talked with Green, who is a member of the 2024 STATUS List , about what it’s like to be a science communicator with cancer, how we react to cancer differently than chronic diseases, and what jokes got cut from his show.

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

You’ve been a science communicator for a really long time. What was it like to suddenly be the spokesperson for a health topic that you did not choose to be the spokesperson for?

At first, that’s obviously not what I was thinking about. At first I was thinking about the diagnosis and the treatment and existential anxiety, et cetera. And the way that I imagined it in the first moments when I was thinking about being public with it was only in that negative frame of illness.

I don’t think there was a moment, but there was a transition where I realized that science was happening to me, and that was my job. And when I realized that I could just keep doing a lot of what I do and be like, “Okay, so this is science. I know a fair bit about cancer already. I know a fair bit about cancer treatment already, but I can go a lot deeper.” And as I kept going deeper, just following my curiosity, I was like, “This is all interesting,” and I could just fall into a familiar frame, and that was great, because otherwise I was pretty depressed.

When you disclosed your diagnosis publicly , you were worried about everybody thinking about cancer every time they thought of you in the future. And now you have this special that’s about cancer. Has that idea changed for you over time?

It changed dramatically. If I was afraid of [talking about my diagnosis] and I just tried to hide it, all that would be in people’s heads is, “Hank got diagnosed with cancer.” And instead it was like, “Hank has used his cancer to educate people,” and that feels great. That feels like a positive thing that people are thinking about me, and it also feels like a positive thing that I’m thinking about myself.

The fact that chemo breaks tumor cells down and they exit through your urine — which became the name of the special — was one of the facts I most remember from you communicating about your treatment . Is there anything surprising or funny that you learned that didn’t end up making it into this special?

There’s lots of jokes that eventually didn’t feel fully appropriate. I had a joke about what it was like to have hairless genitals; it didn’t make it to the final one. It’s a funny joke, but it was just too much penis talk for me.

The stuff that didn’t make it into the show is mostly — it’s hard to make pain funny. It’s hard to make fatigue funny. I don’t remember what the joke is, but I had a joke about chronic pain that no one would laugh at. It was constructed as a joke; it had a twist that you didn’t expect, but no one ever laughed at it. So I just dropped it, which I kind of felt bad about because I feel like I’m not telling the full experience, but ultimately, it’s a comedy show.

I only have one joke in the show that people don’t laugh at that I kept in. Which is, “The worst part of getting cancer is that you have to call your mom. Unless your mom’s dead. In which case, the worst part is that you can’t call your mom.” It is constructed as a joke, but no one laughs at it. Which I think is fine, because to me, that’s not as much of a joke as it is an instruction to myself to be grateful for what I have.

Is there any dissonance for you of dealing with the heavy stuff while telling these jokes and people laughing at/with you?

Yeah. My biggest concern is that people who have had harder journeys than me will feel that I’m making light of it. I don’t think I am. And my experience has been, of the people I’ve talked to who are in a harder journey than me, that they love it .

One thing everybody should know about cancer is that no two cancers are the same. No two cancer journeys are the same. But there are these touch points that have a lot of resonance. Everybody knows about the ridiculous ways that they try to make the infusion center a nicer place for you, despite the fact that it’s definitely not going to be your favorite spot. That they’ll be like, “You can have yogurt!” Yeah … no … not really top of my list of concerns right now whether or not I have yogurt.

But I gained a lot from people who talked about their experience when I was first going into it. And so I’m grateful to people who talk about it, and I want to be one of those people.

I love your jokes about hitting your out-of-pocket maximum and how it’s alarming when the American health care system actually works really well. If you could change something about that system, what would you change?

There’s the obvious thing: Universal health care exists in other countries, and so clearly some form of Medicare for all could exist here, and that would be grand. And I think it would save a lot of lives.

I wish that our health care system had more focus on prevention, but I understand that it doesn’t, because also our brains don’t have as much focus on prevention. And it’s hard to get people to take preventive measures against anything.

I wish we treated more diseases like we treat cancer, honestly. The way that my whole community came up to support me … I feel if I had, like, trigeminal neuralgia, that would not be the case — I’d be just as debilitated, but I would not have people showing up for me in the same way.

I don’t know actually why [cancer is treated special]. When I got ulcerative colitis, nobody was like, “Here’s the number of a therapist.” Cancer? Immediately: “Here’s the number of a therapist.”

How was finding out that you had cancer different from finding out you had ulcerative colitis, and how did those two things intertwine with each other?

Oh, there was a lot of intertwining. The ulcerative colitis diagnosis … I didn’t know what UC was, I didn’t know how bad it could be; my doctor also didn’t want to tell me how bad it could be, I think. And that was a very slow thing where we tried this drug, and then two years later we’re on a different drug, and then we’re on that one for eight years, and then we’re on this next one for a year, and then the one after that for four years. UC control has been a very long part of my life and I’ve gotten a lot of colonoscopies and it’s sort of gradually happened, whereas cancer was like [pounds fist into his other hand]. It was very immediate; from “first worry” to “in the infusion center” was less than a month. Which is great.

And it’s f—ing cancer — I knew what cancer was. It’s interesting because ulcerative colitis can be just as dangerous as a cancer diagnosis, and it can be just as life-changing. Ulcerative colitis can be debilitating. It can completely ruin your social life. You’re afraid of leaving the house. You’re afraid of going into any space where you’re not going to have immediate access to a bathroom, afraid of traveling. And for a young person, that’s just like, “Oh, so I’m going to have a whole f—ing different life than I thought I had. Can I get a job? Can I work at my current job if I work on a warehouse floor and I have to go to the bathroom every seven minutes?”

But there [are] various interactions between my UC journey and my cancer journey, one of which is that it is possible that I wouldn’t have gotten cancer if I hadn’t taken mercaptopurine for so long. I was on mercaptopurine for maybe 10 years, which is a medicine with an increased lymphoma risk — says it right on the label. I read that and I was like, “It’s worth it.”

About the Author Reprints

Brittany trang.

Health Tech Reporter

Brittany Trang, Ph.D., is a health tech reporter at STAT. Follow her on Threads , Mastodon , and Bluesky .

chronic disease

STAT encourages you to share your voice. We welcome your commentary, criticism, and expertise on our subscriber-only platform, STAT+ Connect

To submit a correction request, please visit our Contact Us page .

Recommended

Recommended Stories

The FDA needs to embrace phage therapy to help fight antimicrobial resistance

Readers respond to essays on long Covid, hypochondria, and more

STAT Plus: A primer on HELIOS-B, an enormous stock-moving event for Alnylam Pharmaceuticals

STAT Plus: Top FDA official Peter Marks overruled staff, review team to approve Sarepta gene therapy

STAT Plus: Why a big California employer ditched Elevance for some of its health plans

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Guest Essay

Something’s Rotten About the Justices Taking So Long on Trump’s Immunity Case

By Leah Litman

Ms. Litman is a professor at the University of Michigan Law School, a host of the “Strict Scrutiny” podcast and a former clerk to the Supreme Court justice Anthony Kennedy.

For those looking for the hidden hand of politics in what the Supreme Court does, there’s plenty of reason for suspicion on Donald Trump’s as-yet-undecided immunity case given its urgency. There are, of course, explanations that have nothing to do with politics for why a ruling still hasn’t been issued. But the reasons to think something is rotten at the court are impossible to ignore.

On Feb. 28, the justices agreed to hear Mr. Trump’s claim that he is immune from prosecution on charges that he plotted to subvert the 2020 election. The court scheduled oral arguments in the case for the end of April. That eight-week interval is much quicker than the ordinary Supreme Court briefing process, which usually extends for at least 10 weeks . But it’s considerably more drawn out than the schedule the court established earlier this year on a challenge from Colorado after that state took Mr. Trump off its presidential primary ballot. The court agreed to hear arguments on the case a mere month after accepting it and issued its decision less than a month after the argument. Mr. Trump prevailed, 9-0.

Nearly two months have passed since the justices heard lawyers for the former president and for the special counsel’s office argue the immunity case. The court is dominated by conservatives nominated by Republican presidents. Every passing day further delays a potential trial on charges related to Mr. Trump’s efforts to remain in office after losing the 2020 election and his role in the events that led to the storming of the Capitol; indeed, at this point, even if the court rules that Mr. Trump has limited or no immunity, it is unlikely a verdict will be delivered before the election.

The immunity case is not the only big case hanging fire. Some two dozen remain undecided that were argued even before the April 25 oral argument over Mr. Trump’s immunity. A case on gun rights for domestic abusers under a restraining order was argued in November; cases involving the power of federal agencies and a multibillion-dollar settlement for opioid victims were heard in December and January; the court also has yet to decide whether upwind states must cut emissions that affect the air quality in downwind states. That case was argued in February.

The court is a busy place, though the justices are completing decisions at the second slowest rate since the 1946 term, according to a recent article in The Wall Street Journal. The court tries to wrap up its business for the term that began in October by the end of June. It’s not shocking that cases argued later in the term end up being decided later, especially because by the end of April, when the immunity case was heard, the court was still working to finish cases argued months earlier. April was also among the court’s busiest months: The justices heard 10 cases.

But these seemingly mundane, process explanations overlook some of the particulars in the immunity case. Mr. Trump’s lawyers put together a set of arguments that are so outlandish they shouldn’t take much time to dispatch. Among them is the upside-down claim that, because the Constitution specifies that an officer who is convicted in an impeachment proceeding may subsequently face a criminal trial, the Constitution actually requires an impeachment conviction before there is any criminal punishment.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and  log into  your Times account, or  subscribe  for all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?  Log in .

Want all of The Times?  Subscribe .