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

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

upload-your-document-ai-proofreader

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.

Literature review guide

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

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

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

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

Download Word doc Download Google doc

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

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

Make a list of keywords

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

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

Search for relevant sources

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

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

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

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

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

For each publication, ask yourself:

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

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

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

Take notes and cite your sources

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

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

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 February 15, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/dissertation/literature-review/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

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, what is your plagiarism score.

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

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

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

What are Literature Reviews?

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

Goals of Literature Reviews

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

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

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

What kinds of sources require a Literature Review?

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

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

Types of Literature Reviews

What kinds of literature reviews are written?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Literature Reviews in the Health Sciences

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

Creative Commons

How to write a literature review introduction (+ examples)

Photo of Master Academia

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

Why you need an introduction for a literature review

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Academic literature review paper

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

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

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

Regular literature review section in an academic article or essay

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

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

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

In some cases, you might include:

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

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

Introduction to a literature review chapter in thesis or dissertation

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

literature review introduction pdf

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

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

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

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

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

literature review introduction pdf

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

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

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

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

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

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

Examples 3-5: Effective introductions to literature review chapters

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

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

Master’s thesis literature review introduction

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

literature review introduction pdf

PhD thesis literature review chapter introduction

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

literature review introduction pdf

PhD thesis literature review introduction

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

literature review introduction pdf

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

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

Get new content delivered directly to your inbox!

Subscribe and receive Master Academia's quarterly newsletter.

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

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

literature review introduction pdf

Theoretical vs. conceptual frameworks: Simple definitions and an overview of key differences

literature review introduction pdf

37 creative ways to get motivation to study

Featured blog post image for How to prepare your viva opening speech

How to prepare your viva opening speech

literature review introduction pdf

Minor revisions: Sample peer review comments and examples

Purdue Online Writing Lab Purdue OWL® College of Liberal Arts

Writing a Literature Review

OWL logo

Welcome to the Purdue OWL

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

What are the parts of a lit review?

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

Introduction:

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

Conclusion:

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

How should I organize my lit review?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

MINI REVIEW article

The brief introduction to organizational citizenship behaviors and counterproductive work behaviors: a literature review.

Qianqian Fan,

  • 1 Faculty of Business and Communications, INTI International University, Nilai, Negeri Sembilan, Malaysia
  • 2 International Education College, Hebei Finance University, Baoding, China
  • 3 Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Quantity Surveying, INTI International University, Nilai, Negeri Sembilan, Malaysia

This paper presents a literature review on the topic of organizational performance. The study conceptualizes the overall performance of the organization as comprising of organizational citizenship behaviors (OCB) and counterproductive work behaviors (CWB). While there are numerous research studies on OCB, not many have focused on how OCB and CWB affect organizational performance simultaneously. The paper provides an explanation of the OCB and CWB concepts, followed by the primary research and focus of the study. The article presents a comprehensive framework for understanding the meanings of OCB and CWB, along with an internal hierarchy. This framework will serve as a beneficial resource for working managers, academics, and researchers, who seek to optimize economic productivity through improved understanding and management of OCB and CWB.

Introduction

Employees play a direct or indirect role in numerous factors that affect the operational results of an organization, by “shaping the organizational, social, and psychological context that serves as the catalyst for task activities and processes.” This behavior is referred to by some scholars as Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) or Counterproductive Work Behavior (CWB), both of which have been the subject of numerous psychological and management studies ( Shah et al., 2022 ). According to these scholars, OCB is associated with an ethical organizational working environment and corporate sustainability performance ( Fein et al., 2023 ). In contrast, CWB represents intentionally destructive conduct aimed at harming an organization’s legitimate interests ( Lee, 2020 ). In previous research, many scholars have explained employee behaviors using Blau’s (1964) social exchange theory and the theory of Person-Organization Fit (POF) ( Kristof-Brown et al., 2005 ). The former elucidates the interaction among attitudes, perceptions, and behaviors, interpreting employee behaviors as a two-way communication between the individual and the organization ( Yıldız et al., 2015 ). The latter serves as a predictor of certain positive behaviors (e.g., OCB) and negative behaviors (e.g., CWB). In studying constructive workplace behaviors, researchers have distinguished between OCB and CCB (Compulsory Citizenship Behaviors). They have also identified the differential effects of various antecedents, including equity sensitivity, Chinese tradition, and job stress ( Yildiz et al., 2023 ). In research on destructive deviant workplace behaviors, these behaviors have been labeled with various terms that share similar meanings, such as counterproductive workplace behaviors (CWB) ( Yıldız et al., 2015 ). Furthermore, Yıldız and Alpkan (2015) proposed a comprehensive model to analyze these destructive deviant workplace behaviors. They also introduced individual and organizational antecedents of negative behaviors, including POF, careerism, participative decision-making, and alienation. Current findings suggest that the more positive an employee’s perceptions are of OCB, the less likely they are to engage in negative behavior. Most recent research in this field supports these findings ( Hossein and Somayeh, 2018 ; Jiang et al., 2022 ; Fein et al., 2023 ). These behaviors are shaped by the intent and direction of targeted actions ( Neuhoff, 2020 ).

The definition of OCB and CWB

The concept of OCB was formally recognized by Organ (1988) , who introduced it as a variable that could enhance organizational effectiveness ( Yow, 2017 ). It should be noted that while there is a concept similar to OCB, its nature is distinct: Compulsory Citizenship Behaviors (CCBs). CCBs refer to involuntary extra-role behaviors that arise under external pressure, not from the individual’s genuine goodwill. According to existing literature, various positive organizational and managerial factors can positively influence OCB. However, these factors may inadvertently pressurize employees, compelling them to display what appears to be OCB, but is in fact imposed. Such behaviors are termed as CCBs ( Yildiz et al., 2023 ). In another study, Yildiz et al. (2022) examined the CCBs, anger, and moral disengagement levels of nurses during the COVID-19 pandemic. They found that when nurses are subjected to CCBs, they might harbor feelings of resentment toward the organization. This can drain employees’ positive energy and resources, and potentially compromise their moral decision-making mechanisms. In essence, imposing extra behaviors upon employees without their genuine willingness can be more detrimental than beneficial to organizations.

Another concept, akin to OCB and gaining traction in recent organizational behavior studies, is Constructive Deviant Workplace Behaviors (CDWB). While both are similar in that they exceed typical role expectations, OCB has a more passive nature, necessitating employees’ adherence to organizational and managerial norms and rules. In contrast, constructive deviance demands proactive actions from employees that may contravene norms. This suggests that employees exhibiting constructive deviance tend to be more risk-prone than their peers ( Yildiz et al., 2015 ).

The above comparison helps clarify the characteristics of OCB. According to existing literature, OCB has been defined from a variety of perspectives ( Suprapty Hidar et al., 2023 ). However, after reviewing these definitions, most scholars agree that OCB represents behaviors demonstrated by employees which, although not required for their current task or role, contribute to the organization’s operations and growth ( Al-Ahmadi and Mahran, 2021 ). Examples of OCB in the workplace may include assisting coworkers and initiating improvement measures. Consequently, understanding why employees engage in OCB is both necessary and insightful. Educators have positive perceptions of organizational citizenship, with behaviors including suggesting improvements for the university, voluntarily assisting new lecturers, and dedicating their personal time to enhance the performance of their students and the university ( Khalid et al., 2021 ; Bastian and Widodo, 2022 ).

On the other hand, CWB refers to actions that can be detrimental to an organization or its members. This type of behavior has garnered increasing attention from scholars and managers due to its potential negative impacts on businesses ( Reizer et al., 2020 ). Some scholars adopts the psychological contract theory to explain the relationship between workplace ostracism and employees’ CWB in the tourism industry of China, found that understanding the effects for employees who are working in a cultural context that attributes high value on relationships and implicit psychological contracts ( Li and Khattak, 2023 ). It is important to emphasize the defining characteristics of CWB: it is goal-oriented, as employees intentionally partake in harmful behavior ( Akbari et al., 2022 ). As such, the repercussions of this behavior can significantly affect a wide range of stakeholders, including employees, coworkers, customers, and others.

Reasons for research OCB and CWB

Why are scholars so interested in studying OCB and CWB? There are two primary reasons. First, both OCB and CWB fall under a broad definition of work performance that extends beyond assigned tasks ( Neale, 2019 ). When assessing an employee’s performance, managers take these behaviors into account. Second, both OCB and CWB influence individual and organizational effectiveness and productivity ( Susnienė et al., 2021 ). OCB is typically associated with positive outcomes such as improving coworker/managerial activities, efficient utilization of resources, employee retainment, while CWB is generally linked to negative outcomes like theft; destruction of property; sabotage; misuse of information, time and resources ( Shah et al., 2022 ). At present, much interest has recently been paid to employee extra-role work behaviors (i.e., OCB, CWB) that are outside the technical core (i.e., task performance) but “shape the organizational, social, and psychological context that catalyzes task activities and processes” ( Macias et al., 2023 ).

Some researchers have sought to more comprehensively explain the origins of OCB and its impact on organizational development. Some hypothesize that OCB leads to improved organizational performance and outcomes ( Romi et al., 2019 ). Numerous studies have tied perceptions of unfair treatment to CWB actions, such as Siswanti et al.'s (2020) study, which employed organizational fairness theory and leader-member exchange theory to elucidate the connection. Just like Fein et al. (2023) study, who found that both OCB and CWB can be consequent behaviors following perceptions of distributive organizational injustice perceived as inequity.

According to Liu et al. (2023) , employees’ turnover intention is positively related to their subsequent CWB, and permanent workers are less likely to engage in CWB compared to temporary workers because of the former’s higher organizational affective commitment. As Talaeipashiri (2016) stated, aggression may occur within the organization and could be targeted at certain individuals or the organization as a whole. Thus, we can conclude that organizational CWBs refer to actions directed at the organization itself, such as theft or use of violence, whereas interpersonal CWBs refer to actions directed at individuals within the organization, such as rudeness toward coworkers.

Impact on the organization

Due to the importance of employee performance, OCB is crucial to an organization. Previous research has shown that organizations benefit from employee contributions that go above and beyond the formal job requirements, also known as OCB ( Organ, 2018 ). Scholars strive to explain the positive effects of OCB from a broader research perspective ( Vagner et al., 2022 ). For instance, OCB presents commitments that reasonable in nature and when totaled after some time and people, may upgrade the execution by greasing up the building the mental texture of the association, decreasing erosion, and/or expanding productivity ( Guntuku et al., 2020 ). Furthermore, some scholar’s studies have highlighted the relationship between OCB and employee, they found that OCB has a significant and negative impact on intention to leave. When an employee has performed better OCB, it will lead to a lower intention to leave the organization ( Abror et al., 2020 ).

The majority of CWBs involve proactive actions that intentionally or voluntarily harm an organization and its stakeholders, such as clients, colleagues, and supervisors ( Liu et al., 2023 ). CWBs specifically include intentionally failing to perform work duties properly, engaging in workplace deviance, or engaging in behaviors that violate organizational policies and procedures ( Mert, 2023 ). The most critical aspect of CWB is that they must be intentional and purposeful, not accidental ( Kraak et al., 2023 ). Thus, when a worker chooses and engages in such harmful behavior, they do so with a conscious intent.

Actually, CWB are generally assimilated to “arbitrary behaviors performed by employees that overshadow the accepted norms of the organization and might then inflict pernicious shocks on the body of the organization and lead to extensive economic and psychological losses” ( Akbari et al., 2022 ). It can be seen as a mechanism for employees to engage in deliberate behavior to restore perceived fairness in their transactions with the organization (“I am not paid enough, so I will work less”). According to researcher’s study, CWB is prevalent in the workplace and is regarded as one of the most pressing challenges encountering current organizations, costing them billions annually ( Macias et al., 2023 ).

Behavioral manifestations of OCB

OCBs are defined as “individual behavior that is discretionary, not directly or explicitly recognized by the formal reward system and promotes the effective functioning of the organization as a whole” ( Organ, 1988 ; Fein et al., 2023 ). A multitude of strategic Human Resource Management issues—such as talent management, employee engagement, organizational climate, organizational effectiveness, turnover intentions, and organizational commitment—are intricately connected with human behavior-related psychological issues ( Ren et al., 2023 ). Among all of these antecedents HRM practices play the most vital and challenging role in enhancing employees OCB ( Sultana and Johari, 2023 ). As a result, organizations are keen to maintain industrial harmony through the identification of sociable behavioral skills, underscoring the practical relevance of this research.

Simultaneously, the growing interest in the study of OCB indicates that even positive behaviors can lead to negative outcomes. Several studies suggest that organizational citizenship behavior can be time-consuming ( Reizer et al., 2020 ), potentially distracting workers from their core tasks and leading to employee burnout ( Klotz et al., 2018 ). Specifically, some researchers have proposed that attachment acts as a personality regulator in the relationship between OCB and Work-Family Facilitation (WFF) ( Reizer et al., 2020 ). Numerous studies show that attachment orientation can illuminate how individuals connect with others and foster healthy interpersonal relationships ( Gazder and Stanton, 2023 ). These orientations, which consider fundamental personality tendencies, provide a theoretical foundation and a set of empirically validated data in the social and personality domains, and personality traits have a significant impact on direct and indirect organizational citizenship behaviors for the environment ( Szostek, 2021 ).

In general, OCB is a crucial factor for organizational development ( Somech and Ohayon, 2019 ), contributing to the creation of a psychosocial work environment that supports the organization’s core activities ( Organ and Ryan, 1995 ). Regarding the direction and typology of OCB, several models have been developed since the construct’s inception ( Turner and Connelly, 2021 ).

In Organ’s (1988) research, he identified five different types of behavior to exemplify organizational citizenship behavior: altruism, conscientiousness, sportsmanship, courtesy, and civic virtue ( Atatsi et al., 2021 ).

Altruism entails discretionary assistance provided to peers or colleagues concerning job-related tasks, such as helping newcomers and freely dedicating time to others. While typically directed at individuals, it enhances group efficiency by improving individual performance ( Dipaola and Hoy, 2005 ). In essence, altruism is “a motivational state with the ultimate goal of increasing another’s welfare” ( Ma et al., 2018 ).

Conscientiousness

Conscientiousness alludes to behavior that surpasses the minimal expected levels, like efficient time use and exceeding base expectations, thereby enhancing both personal and group efficiency ( DiPaola and Hoy, 2005 ). Notably, conscientiousness is among the Big Five personality traits, epitomizing diligence and self-discipline. It has been identified as a consistent predictor of academic achievement ( Icekson et al., 2020 ). Additionally, Abbas and Raja (2019) found conscientiousness to be the most influential predictor of problem-solving coping in response to stressors.

Sportsmanship

Sportsmanship is an individual’s capacity to endure suboptimal situations without complaints ( Lan, 2018 ), such as refraining from unnecessary grievances, thereby enhancing productive organizational time ( Dipaola and Hoy, 2005 ). Despite its importance, sportsmanship has garnered limited attention in academic literature. Organ’s definition appears narrower than the broader implications of the term. For instance, “good sports” not only tolerate inconveniences but also maintain positivity despite setbacks, do not take offense easily, sacrifice personal interests for collective good, and handle rejection gracefully ( Podsakoff et al., 2000 ). Puspitasari et al. (2023) suggest that sportsmanship enables teachers to tolerate imperfect organizational conditions without dissent. High sportsmanship fosters a positive climate, promoting collaboration and creating a harmonious work environment.

Courtesy is characterized as polite and thoughtful actions toward colleagues. Employees exhibiting courtesy consciously evade causing issues for others, thereby reducing managerial burdens and amplifying organizational performance ( Faajir et al., 2021 ). Such behavior is proactive, preventing issues rather than addressing existing problems ( Magdalena, 2014 ). Examples include giving advance notices and reminders, which helps avert issues and ensures productive time utilization ( Dipaola and Hoy, 2005 ). In essence, courtesy fosters positive relations among peers, crafting a conducive and amiable work setting ( Oamen, 2023 ).

Civic virtue

Civic virtue encompasses behaviors emphasizing participation in overarching organizational issues, like committee work and voluntary attendance at events, bolstering the organization’s interests ( Dipaola and Hoy, 2005 ). Robbins and Judge (2015) equate civic virtue with responsible behavior, which includes following organizational changes, suggesting improvements, and safeguarding organizational resources. Civic virtue implies that organizations empower employees to enhance their work quality ( Puspitasari et al., 2023 ). Broadly, it signifies an employee’s inclination to represent and elevate their organization’s image positively ( Oamen, 2023 ).

Contemporary literature explores other distinctions within OCB, although many of these dimensions are still applicable. In the early 1990s, researchers began differentiating between Organizational Citizenship Behavior—Individual (OCBI) and Organizational Citizenship Behavior—Organizational (OCBO) ( Smith et al., 1983 ). OCBIs involve helping behaviors directed toward other individuals (e.g., assisting a sick coworker), while OCBOs encompass actions directed at the entire organization, such as participating in a voluntary company fundraiser. Proponents of this perspective argue that OCBI and OCBO are distinct variables with unique antecedents and motivators and that they are associated with job satisfaction in different ways ( El-Kassar et al., 2021 ; Rahman and Karim, 2022 ).

Behavioral manifestations of CWB

The means and likelihood of employee retaliation-based behaviors as reactions to poor leadership and management have been noted extensively as behavioral manifestations of Counterproductive Work Behaviors (CWB) ( Fein et al., 2023 ). Individual CWBs refer to actions directed against individuals within the organization, while organizational CWBs refer to actions against the organization as a whole. The study of deviant workplace behavior by Robinson and Bennett (1995) provides evidence for this interpretation.

Several researchers have examined the connections between CWB and occupational stressors. Some researcher found that perceived increases in workload were positively related to increased exhaustion after work, psychosomatic symptoms, and to spillover effects at home, even after controlling for negative affect ( Rodríguez, 2019 ). The same as Lenz et al. (2023) study, whose research suggests that when exposed to stressors, individuals take longer breaks, or work slower than necessary (i.e., show CWB) as a strategy to avoid further resource loss. The work stress/mood/CWB model developed by Fox et al. (2001) suggests that CWB is an instinctive emotional response to workplace stressors. According to Spector and Jex (1998) , workplace stressors are understood to pose threats to health and to lead to negative emotional responses such as anger and anxiety. Furthermore, some scholars argue that job insecurity is associated with CWB behavior. Many organizations face restructuring and downsizing, especially in today’s uncertain and volatile economic climate, which can heighten employee anxiety and stress ( Pu et al., 2023 ).

Here is a comprehensive explanation of the five components of CWB. Mistreatment of others is considered individual counterproductive behavior (CWB), whereas deviant behavior, destructive behavior, withdrawal behavior, and theft are classified as organizational counterproductive behaviors (CWB).

Abuse against others

Abuse against others within an organization involves an individual’s behavior that is harmful to their coworkers ( Bal, 2021 ). These behaviors can inflict physical harm, such as humiliation, contempt, insulting remarks, or intimidation, or psychological harm, such as neglect and hindering effective work. Simultaneously, it should be stressed that since direct and overt physical violence is rare within organizations, many researchers focus on non-violent behaviors. The concept of abuse in this context is closely related to notions of incivility, emotional abuse, workplace bullying, and psychological siege, as outlined in the relevant literature. In other words, within the context and scope of CWB research, the study focuses on individuals who engage in these actions ( To and Huang, 2022 ).

Production deviance

The component of production deviance includes behaviors such as not deliberately and properly performing the tasks in the job description of the employee, making mistakes, performing poorly, slowing down and obeying the instructions ( Bal, 2021 ). A summation of items reflecting “interpersonal and organizational deviance” should indicate the participation levels of each form of deviance ( Fleming et al., 2022 ). Early work in CWB focused on what was characterized as employee deviance, falling into categories of product deviance, property deviance, political divisions, and personal aggression; while deviance has been characterized as “violating behaviors,” which are those that benefit self, those that benefit the organization in an unethical manner, or destruction to exact revenge ( Allen, 2023 ).

Sabotage involves the intentional and deliberate destruction (such as arson or property damage) or damage of organizational assets (like equipment) by employees in an effort to reduce productivity ( Spector et al., 2006 ; Kim and Jo, 2022 ). This vandalism can be traced back to the machine destruction during the workers’ movement following the Industrial Revolution, and can be seen as an extension or derivation of that act. In some studies, destructive behavior is interpreted from a broader perspective and is considered as negative behaviors based on employees’ personal interests, such as damaging organizational functions, disrupting or altering organizational order, creating and spreading negative rumors within the organization, slowing production, or harming customers and employees ( Skarlicki et al., 2008 ; Szostek, 2022 ). Several factors contributing to the emergence of destructive behavior include anger or hostility, responses to unfairness, the desire for personal gain, resistance to organizational change, and the need for approval from coworkers ( Wiseman and Stillwell, 2022 ).

Withdrawal includes reduce the working time below the minimum necessary to achieve the goals (for example, extending breaks, unjustified dismissals). Different from other forms of CWB, the employees engaged in withdrawal were characterized by a lower level of emotional exhaustion ( Szostek et al., 2020 ). Withdrawal is behavior where an employee attempts to avoid a situation rather than harming the organization and its members thus, this type of behavior is used as a passive way to influence the organization by withholding effort usually used to produce for the organization. At the same time, looking at the description of production deviance there is a noticeable similarity between the categories, but as previously stated, withdrawal is more passive in that it involves withdrawing effort systematically ( Van der Westhuizen, 2019 ).

Employees commit theft with the intention to harm organizations or individuals ( Sackett et al., 2006 ). It is a form of instrumental aggression (mainly toward the organization) motivated by the will to: obtain approval, help colleagues, equalize conditions and protect oneself in case of harmful actions of superiors ( Szostek, 2022 ). Many employees may view theft from the organization as non-aggressive due to financial needs, dissatisfaction with the job, or a sense of being treated unfairly ( Bal, 2021 ). In these instances, employees do not intend to use or sell the stolen items but aim to harm the organization’s economic interests.

The influencing factors of OCB and CWB

An individual’s inherent and immutable personality has a more stable and lasting impact on OCB/CWB ( Aspan et al., 2019 ). Previous research has elaborated on why intrinsic motivation theory can influence employees’ propensity to engage in civic behavior. Intrinsic motivation refers to the internal factor of employee self-satisfaction ( Runge et al., 2020 ; Schattke and Marion-Jetten, 2022 ). Since OCBs are less likely to be formally rewarded than prescribed work behaviors, they are most likely to be driven by internal incentive channels ( Dermawan and Handayani, 2019 ; Ren et al., 2022 ).

Personality traits can influence how individuals perceive and respond to diverse motivations ( Clark, 2010 ; Reizer et al., 2020 ). According to Neale’s (2019) study, the findings suggest that that the intentionality behind job crafting behaviors is predicted differentially by individual needs as well as personality traits (the dark triad and conscientiousness). Bright job crafting is more associated with engagement in OCBs while dark job crafting is more associated with engagement in CWBs. Related research demonstrates that organizational commitment is the most influential factor affecting OCB. High organizational commitment is related to high OCB and employee performance, low absence rates, and fewer delays ( Nurjanah et al., 2020 ).

Furthermore, it is believed that organizational commitment is positively related to perceived organizational support. When employees feel respected and supported for their roles, organizational commitment increases ( Lambert et al., 2017 ). This bond can be strengthened in numerous ways. Leadership has a significant effect on the perception of organizational support ( Wang et al., 2021 ). Specifically, Delegach et al. (2017) found that transformational leadership is positively associated with organizational commitment, whereas transactional leadership is positively associated with commitments to safety and the organization’s mission. Given the strong emphasis on transformational leadership practices in encouraging OCBs, these findings are intriguing. It’s possible that organizational commitment may increase if transactional leaders are better equipped to instill organizational values in employees.

Some scholars believe that job autonomy may have positive effects on organizational performance. Job autonomy is defined as the extent to which the job offers employees the freedom to make choices about what, when, and how they perform their work. Greater job autonomy reduces limitations from other job factors and improves individuals’ job performance ( Matteson et al., 2021 ). These contradictory findings and a contingency perspective suggest that the relationships between job autonomy, OCB, and organizational performance may depend on organizational circumstances ( Park, 2018 ).

From the comprehensive literature review, we observe various research perspectives and conclusions on deviant behaviors. In studying constructive and destructive deviant workplace behaviors, scholars have refined a general classification of workplace deviance. Using precise definitions of terms, they have analyzed antecedent factors, constructed various models or frameworks, and proposed feasible measures. This literature review aids in further summarizing the relevant content concerning OCB and CWB.

In this paper, previous scholars’ conclusions shed light on the propositions. In general, this paper provides a succinct overview of previous research on deviant behaviors, with a particular focus on OCB and CWB as well as their various aspects. It discusses personality, organizational commitment and job autonomy, three concepts intrinsically related to OCB/CWB, and how they function. This section underscores the impact that CWB and OCB have on organizational performance. Each aspect of CWB and OCB is also detailed within this study for relevance. The literature review offered above allows us to envision an optimal portrayal of organizational performance, and this theoretical framework can be beneficial in terms of practitioners and researchers. Within organizations, employees should exert additional effort and be open to adopting new work methods, while leaders should provide comprehensive support, effectively implement employees’ suggestions, set high standards, and commit more resources and energy to work-related matters rather than traditional management and rigid control. Given sufficient trust, employees are more likely to engage in cooperative behaviors, such as assisting coworkers and performing actions that benefit the group. Consequently, the costs associated with hiring, selecting, and integrating new coworkers should be reduced. Although this is not an empirical paper, the compilation of previous research findings constitutes a significant contribution to guiding managerial actions in organizations. This paper can serve as a guide for organizations seeking to improve their employees’ organizational performance and curtail the occurrence of negative behaviors.

The limitations of this paper are manifold. While the primary focus was on OCB and CWB, the intricate relationships among OCB, CWB, and deviant workplace behaviors were not fully explored. Moreover, the study centered on just three determinants: personality, organizational commitment, and job autonomy, assessing their influence on OCB/CWB. Future studies might consider a broader range of individual, task, and organizational antecedents and delve into potential indirect effects, such as moderator impacts, on OCB and CWB. Furthermore, this research did not narrow down to specific industries or professions, suggesting that subsequent research, when tailored to distinct sectors or job roles, might yield recommendations with heightened relevance and applicability.

Author contributions

All authors listed have made a substantial, direct, and intellectual contribution to the work and approved it for publication.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Abbas, M., and Raja, U. (2019). Challenge-hindrance stressors and job outcomes: the moderating role of conscientiousness. J. Bus. Psychol. 34, 189–201. doi: 10.1007/s10869-018-9535-z

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Abror, A., Patrisia, D., Syahrizal, S., Sarianti, R., and Dastgir, S. (2020). Self-efficacy, employee engagement, remuneration and employee loyalty in higher education: the role of satisfaction and OCB. Int. J. Adv. Sci. Technol. 29, 5456–5470.

Google Scholar

Akbari, M., Omrane, A., Nikookar-Gohari, H., and Ranji, E. (2022). The impact of transformational leadership on CWBs: the moderating effect of management level in a developing country. Trans. Corporat. Rev. , 1–22. doi: 10.1080/19186444.2022.2118492

Al-Ahmadi, A. T., and Mahran, S. M. (2021). Organizational citizenship behavior and job satisfaction from the nurses’ perspective. Evid. Based Nurs. Res. 4, 9–54. doi: 10.47104/ebnrojs3.v4i1.230

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Allen, K. (2023). Igniting counterproductive work behavior (CWB): the role of personality. Florida Atlantic University. Available at: https://medium.com/@arifwicaksanaa/pengertian-use-case-a7e576e1b6bf

Aspan, H., Wahyuni, E. S., Effendy, S., Bahri, S., Rambe, M. F., and Saksono, F. B. (2019). The moderating effect of personality on organizational citizenship behavior: the case of university lecturers. Int. J. Recent Technol. Engin. 8, 412–416.

Atatsi, E. A., Stoffers, J., and Kil, A. (2021). Work tenure and organizational citizenship behaviors. Sustainability 13, 1–14. doi: 10.3390/su132413762

Bal, T. (2021). The examination of perceived organizational support (POS), organizational cynicism and counter productive work behavior (CWB) in public employees: intergroup gap analysis. Sosyal Guvence 9, 321–357. doi: 10.21441/sosyalguvence.948483

Bastian, A., and Widodo, W. (2022). How innovative behavior affects lecturers’ task performance: a mediation perspective. Emerg. Sci. J. 6, 123–136. doi: 10.28991/ESJ-2022-SIED-09

Blau, P. (1964). Exchange and Power in Social Life . Wiley, New York, NY: USA.

Clark, M. A. (2010). Why do employees behave badly? An examination of the effects of mood, personality, and job demands on counterproductive work behavior . Wayne State University.

Delegach, M., Kark, R., Katz-Navon, T., and Van Dijk, D. (2017). A focus on commitment: the roles of transformational and transactional leadership and self-regulatory focus in fostering organizational and safety commitment. Eur. J. Work Organ. Psy. 26, 724–740. doi: 10.1080/1359432X.2017.1345884

Dermawan, R., and Handayani, W. (2019). Factors triggering organizational citizenship behavior, failure and success: a case study of a higher education institution. Human. Soc. Sci. Rev. 7, 156–163. doi: 10.18510/hssr.2019.7119

Dipaola, M. F., and Hoy, W. K. (2005). School characteristics that foster organizational citizenship behavior. J. School Lead. 15, 387–406. doi: 10.1177/105268460501500402

DiPaola, M. F., and Hoy, W. K. (2005). Organizational citizenship of faculty and achievement of high school students. High Sch. J. 88, 35–44. doi: 10.1353/hsj.2005.0002

El-Kassar, A. N., Yunis, M., Alsagheer, A., Tarhini, A., and Ishizaka, A. (2021). Effect of corporate ethics and social responsibility on OCB: the role of employee identification and perceived CSR significance. Int. Stud. Manag. Organ. 51, 218–236. doi: 10.1080/00208825.2021.1959880

Faajir, A., Lubem Asenge, E., and Ikyanyon, D. D. (2021). Effect of altruism and courtesy on the growth of listed deposit money banks (DMBS) in Nigeria. J. Entrepreneurship Innov. 1, 79–92.

Fein, E. C., Tziner, A., and Vasiliu, C. (2023). Perceptions of ethical climate and organizational justice as antecedents to employee performance: the mediating role of employees’ attributions of leader effectiveness. Eur. Manag. J. 41, 114–124. doi: 10.1016/j.emj.2021.11.003

Fleming, A. C., O’Brien, K., Steele, S., and Scherr, K. (2022). An investigation of the nature and consequences of counterproductive work behavior. Hum. Perform. 35, 178–192. doi: 10.1080/08959285.2022.2102635

Fox, S., Spector, P. E., and Miles, D. (2001). Counterproductive work behavior (CWB) in response to job stressors and organizational justice: some mediator and moderator tests for autonomy and emotions. J. Vocat. Behav. 59, 291–309. doi: 10.1006/jvbe.2001.1803

Gazder, T., and Stanton, S. C. E. (2023). Longitudinal associations between mindfulness and change in attachment orientations in couples: the role of relationship preoccupation and empathy. J. Soc. Pers. Relat. 40, 1398–1421. doi: 10.1177/02654075221139654

Guntuku, R. K., Nanak, G., and Technical, I. (2020). OCB at workplace: contribution for organizational excellence. South Asian J. Market. Manage. Res. 10, 11–21. doi: 10.5958/2249-877X.2020.00010.7

Hossein, D., and Somayeh, K. (2018). Organizational citizenship behaviors and counterproductive work behaviors: A study of Tehran University of medical sciences staff. Rev. Public Admin. Manage. 6, 215–224. doi: 10.4172/2315-7844.1000247

Icekson, T., Kaplan, O., and Slobodin, O. (2020). Does optimism predict academic performance? Exploring the moderating roles of conscientiousness and gender. Stud. High. Educ. 45, 635–647. doi: 10.1080/03075079.2018.1564257

Jiang, L., Lawrence, A., and Xu, X. (2022). Does a stick work? A meta-analytic examination of curvilinear relationships between job insecurity and employee workplace behaviors. J. Organ. Behav. 43, 1410–1445. doi: 10.1002/job.2652

Khalid, S. A., Rahman, N. A., Darus, N. A., and Shahruddin, S. (2021). Lecturers’ organizational citizenship behaviours during COVID19 pandemic. Asian J. Univers. Educ. 17, 215–226. doi: 10.24191/ajue.v17i2.13401

Kim, S. M., and Jo, S. J. (2022). An examination of the effects of job insecurity on counterproductive work behavior through organizational cynicism: moderating roles of perceived organizational support and quality of leader-member exchange. Psychol. Rep. 00332941221129135. doi: 10.1177/00332941221129135

Klotz, A. C., Bolino, M. C., Song, H., and Stornelli, J. (2018). Examining the nature, causes, and consequences of profiles of organizational citizenship behavior. J. Organ. Behav. 39, 629–647. doi: 10.1002/job.2259

Kraak, J. M., Griep, Y., Lunardo, R., and Altman, Y. (2023). The effects of host country language proficiency on the relationship between psychological contract breach, violation, and work behaviors: a moderated mediation model. Eur. Manag. J. doi: 10.1016/j.emj.2023.04.001

Kristof-brown, A. L., Zimmerman, R. D., and Johnson, E. C. (2005). Consequences of individuals’ fit at work: a meta-analysis of person-job, person-organization, person-group, and person-supervisor fit. Pers. Psychol. 58, 281–342. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.2005.00672.x

Lambert, E. G., Qureshi, H., Klahm, C., Smith, B., and Frank, J. (2017). The effects of perceptions of organizational structure on job involvement, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment among Indian police officers. Int. J. Offender Ther. Comp. Criminol. 61, 1892–1911. doi: 10.1177/0306624X16635782

Lan, J. (2018). Past, present or future?: the effects of temporal focus on employees’ discretionary behaviors. Open Access Theses and Dissertations.

Lee, S. H. (2020). Achieving corporate sustainability performance: the influence of corporate ethical value, and leader-member exchange on employee behaviors and organizational performance. Fashion Textiles 7, 1–17. doi: 10.1186/s40691-020-00213-w

Lenz, L., Hattke, F., Kalucza, J., and Redlbacher, F. (2023). Virtual work as a job demand? Work behaviors of public servants during COVID-19. Public Perform. Manag. Rev. , 1–31. doi: 10.1080/15309576.2023.2217552

Li, H., and Khattak, S. I. (2023). Towards a parsimonious model of faculty motivation, engagement, and work performance: a case study of a Chinese university. Work 75, 899–915. doi: 10.3233/WOR-211394

Liu, X., Lu, W., Liu, S., and Qin, C. (2023). Hatred out of love or love can be all-inclusive? Moderating effects of employee status and organizational affective commitment on the relationship between turnover intention and CWB. Front. Psychol. 13, 1–13. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.993169

Ma, E., Qu, H., Wei, X., and Hsiao, A. (2018). Conceptualization and operationalization of an altruistic and egoistic continuum of organizational citizenship behavior motivations. J. Hosp. Tour. Res. 42, 740–771. doi: 10.1177/1096348015619412

Macias, T. A., Chapman, M., and Rai, P. (2023). Supervisor interactional injustice and employee counterproductive work behaviour and organisational citizenship behaviours: the mediating role of distrust. Int. J. Organ. Anal. doi: 10.1108/IJOA-10-2022-3447 [Epub ahead of print].

Magdalena, S. M. (2014). The effects of organizational citizenship behavior in the academic environment. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 127, 738–742. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.346

Matteson, M. L., Ming, Y., and Silva, D. E. (2021). The relationship between work conditions and perceptions of organizational justice among library employees. Libr. Inf. Sci. Res. 43:101093. doi: 10.1016/j.lisr.2021.101093

Mert, M. (2023). The mediator role of burnout in the effect of personality on counterproductive work behaviors. Uluslararası Ekonomi İşletme Politika Dergisi 7, 152–171. doi: 10.29216/ueip.1250774

Neale, C. A. (2019). The relationship between OCB, CWB, job crafting, values, and personality: the dark side of job crafting . Raleigh, United States: North Carolina State University.

Neuhoff, E. (2020). Beyond the good soldier: A structural equation model examining the relationships between procedural justice, leadership, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment on extra-role work behavior . Southern Illinois University, Carbondale.

Nurjanah, S., Pebianti, V., and Handaru, A. W. (2020). The influence of transformational leadership, job satisfaction, and organizational commitments on Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) in the inspectorate general of the Ministry of Education and Culture. Cogent Bus. Manag. 7:1793521. doi: 10.1080/23311975.2020.1793521

Oamen, T. E. (2023). The impact of firm based organizational citizenship behavior on continuance and normative commitment among pharmaceutical executives: an SEM approach. J. Econ. Manage. 45, 47–67. doi: 10.22367/jem.2023.45.04

Organ, D. W. (1988). Organizational citizenship behavior: The good soldier syndrome . Lexington books/DC heath and com.

Organ, D. W. (2018). Organizational citizenship behavior: Recent trends and developments. Annu. Rev. Organ. Psychol. Organ. Behav. 80, 295–306.

Organ, D. W., and Ryan, K. (1995). A meta‐analytic review of attitudinal and dispositional predictors of organizational citizenship behavior. Pers. Psychol. 48, 775–802.

Park, R. (2018). The roles of OCB and automation in the relationship between job autonomy and organizational performance: a moderated mediation model. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 29, 1139–1156. doi: 10.1080/09585192.2016.1180315

Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Paine, J. B., and Bachrach, D. G. (2000). Organizational citizenship behaviors: a critical review of the theoretical and empirical literature and suggestions for future research. J. Manag. 26, 513–563. doi: 10.1177/014920630002600307

Puspitasari, V., Hidayati, T., and Rahmawati, R. (2023). Analyzing the effect of sportsmanship and civic virtue behaviors on teacher performance: moderating role of affective commitment. J. Madani Soc. 2, 9–16. doi: 10.56225/jmsc.v2i1.173

Pu, W., Roth, P. L., Thatcher, J. B., Nittrouer, C. L., and Hebl, M. (2023). Post-traumatic stress disorder and hiring: the role of social media disclosures on stigma and hiring assessments of veterans. Pers. Psychol. 76, 41–75. doi: 10.1111/peps.12520

Rahman, M. H. A., and Karim, D. N. (2022). Organizational justice and organizational citizenship behavior: the mediating role of work engagement. Heliyon 8, e09450–e09413. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e09450

Reizer, A., Koslowsky, M., and Friedman, B. (2020). OCB-work-family facilitation: is it positive for all attachment orientations? Front. Psychol. 10, 1–14. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02900

Ren, S., Cooke, F. L., Stahl, G. K., Fan, D., and Timming, A. R. (2023). Advancing the sustainability agenda through strategic human resource management: insights and suggestions for future research. Hum. Resour. Manag. 62, 251–265. doi: 10.1002/hrm.22169

Ren, S., Tang, G., and Kim, A. (2022). OCB-E among Chinese employees of different contract types. Empl. Relat. Int. J. 44, 609–628.

Robbins, S. P., and Judge, T. A. (2015). Organizational Behavior (16th ed.). Pearson Education, Inc.

Robinson, S. L., and Bennett, R. J. (1995). A typology of deviant workplace behaviors: A multidimensional scaling study. Acad. Manage. J. 38, 555–572.

Rodríguez, J. F. (2019). Perceptions of leadership and climate in the stressor-strain process: influences on employee appraisals and reactions. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.

Romi, M. V., Ahman, E., Disman, S., Suryadi, E., and Riswanto, A. (2019). Islamic work ethics-based organizational citizenship behavior to improve the job satisfaction and organizational commitment of higher education lecturers in Indonesia. Int. J. Higher Educ. 9, 78–84. doi: 10.5430/ijhe.v9n2p78

Runge, J. M., Lang, J. W. B., Zettler, I., and Lievens, F. (2020). Predicting counterproductive work behavior: do implicit motives have incremental validity beyond explicit traits? J. Res. Pers. 89:104019. doi: 10.1016/j.jrp.2020.104019

Sackett, P. R., Berry, C. M., Wiemann, S. A., and Laczo, R. M. (2006). Citizenship and counterproductive behavior: clarifying relations between the two domains. Hum. Perform. 19, 441–464. doi: 10.1207/s15327043hup1904_7

Schattke, K., and Marion-Jetten, A. S. (2022). Distinguishing the explicit power motives. Z. Psychol. 230, 290–299. doi: 10.1027/2151-2604/a000481

Shah, S. I., Shahjehan, A., and Afsar, B. (2022). Leading Machiavellians on the road to better organizational behavior. Pers. Rev. 51, 1604–1626. doi: 10.1108/PR-04-2020-0304

Siswanti, Y., Tjahjono, H. K., Hartono, A., and Prajogo, W. (2020). Cross level analysis of organizational justice climate to counterproductive work behavior: leader-member exchange as mediation. Syst. Rev. Pharm. 11, 85–94. doi: 10.31838/srp.2020.11.14

Skarlicki, D. P., van Jaarsveld, D. D., and Walker, D. D. (2008). Getting even for customer mistreatment: the role of moral identity in the relationship between customer interpersonal injustice and employee sabotage. J. Appl. Psychol. 93, 1335–1347. doi: 10.1037/a0012704

Smith, C. A. O. D. W. N. J. P., Organ, D. W., and Near, J. P. (1983). Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature and antecedents. J. Appl. Psychol. 68:653.

Somech, A., and Ohayon, B. E. (2019). The trickle-down effect of OCB in schools: the link between leader OCB and team OCB. J. Educ. Adm. 58, 629–643. doi: 10.1108/JEA-03-2019-0056

Spector, P. E., Fox, S., Penney, L. M., Bruursema, K., Goh, A., and Kessler, S. (2006). The dimensionality of counterproductivity: Are all counterproductive behaviors created equal? J. Vocat. Behav. 68, 446–460.

Spector, P. E., and Jex, S. M. (1998). Development of four self-report measures of job stressors and strain: interpersonal conflict at work scale, organizational constraints scale, quantitative workload inventory, and physical symptoms inventory. J. Occup. Health Psychol. 3:356.

Sultana, S., and Johari, H. (2023). HRM practices, impersonal trust and service oriented OCB: an empirical evidence from Bangladesh. Asia Pacific J. Bus. Admin. 15, 1–24. doi: 10.1108/APJBA-05-2021-0197

Suprapty Hidar, R., Sultan, S., and Mashita Diapati, M. (2023). The effect of psychological empowerment on job satisfaction auditors with OCB as a moderating variable. Int. J. Econ. Finance Manage. Sci. 11, 69–75. doi: 10.11648/j.ijefm.20231102.14

Susnienė, D., Purvinis, O., Zostautiene, D., and Koczy, L. T. (2021). Modelling OCB and CWB by combined fuzzy signature model. Econ. Res. 34, 1546–1565. doi: 10.1080/1331677X.2020.1844581

Szostek, D. (2021). Employee behaviors toward using and saving energy at work. the impact of personality traits. Energies 14:3404. doi: 10.3390/en14123404

Szostek, D. (2022). Central European version of counterproductive work behavior checklist (CWB-CPL). Econ. Soc. 15, 74–94. doi: 10.14254/2071-789X.2022/15-2/5

Szostek, D., Balcerzak, A. P., and Rogalska, E. (2020). The relationship between personality, organizational and interpersonal counterproductive work challenges in industry 4.0. Acta Montan. Slovaca 25, 577–592. doi: 10.46544/AMS.v25i4.11

Talaeipashiri, A. (2016). Testing a need satisfaction approach to organizational citizenship behaviours and counterproductive work behaviours. Electronic Theses and Dissertations.

To, W. M., and Huang, G. (2022). Effects of equity, perceived organizational support and job satisfaction on organizational commitment in Macao’s gaming industry. Manag. Decis. 60, 2433–2454. doi: 10.1108/MD-11-2021-1447

Turner, M. R., and Connelly, S. (2021). Helping in the eyes of the beholder: The impact of OCB type and fluctuation in OCB on coworker perceptions and evaluations of helpful employees. J. Theor. Soc. Psychol. 5, 269–282.

Vagner, B., Blix, L. H., Ortegren, M., and Sorensen, K. (2022). Upward feedback falling on deaf ears: the effect on provider organizational citizenship and counterproductive work behaviors in the audit profession. Manag. Audit. J. 37, 17–38. doi: 10.1108/MAJ-09-2020-2845

Van der Westhuizen, J. (2019). The influence of HEXACO personality factors and job demands on counterproductive work behaviour (Doctoral dissertation, Stellenbosch: Stellenbosch University).

Wang, Y., Lin, J., Osman, Z., Farooq, M., and Raju, V. (2021). Transformational leadership and employee performance in international commercial banking industry in Malaysia: the role of self-efficacy as a mediator under BRI. J. Chin. Hum. Resour. Manag. 12, 25–36. doi: 10.47297/wspchrmWSP2040-800503.20211202

Wiseman, J., and Stillwell, A. (2022). Organizational justice: typology. Encyclopedia (Basel, 2021) 2, 1287–1295. doi: 10.3390/encyclopedia2030086

Yıldız, B., and Alpkan, L. (2015). A theoretical model on the proposed predictors of destructive deviant workplace behaviors and the mediator role of alienation. Procedia. Soc. Behav. Sci. 210, 330–338. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.11.373

Yildiz, B., Alpkan, L., Ates, H., and Sezen, B. (2015). Determinants of constructive deviance: the mediator role of psychological ownership. Int. Bus. Res. 8, 107–121. doi: 10.5539/ibr.v8n4p107

Yıldız, B., Alpkan, L., Sezen, B., and Yıldız, H. (2015). A proposed conceptual model of destructive deviance: the mediator role of moral disengagement. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 207, 414–423. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.10.111

Yildiz, B., Kaptan, Z., Yildiz, T., Elibol, E., Yildiz, H., and Ozbilgin, M. (2023). A systematic review and meta-analytic synthesis of the relationship between compulsory citizenship behaviors and its theoretical correlates. Front. Psychol. 14, 1–21. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1120209

Yildiz, B., Yildiz, H., and Ozbilgin, M. (2022). How do compulsory citizenship behaviors affect moral disengagement in organizations? Significance of anger toward the organization during the COVID-19 pandemic. Front. Psychol. 13, 1–16. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1038860

Yow, M. C. (2017). Employee interpretations of organizational citizenship behavior in tertiary sector organizations: A generic qualitative study. Available at: http://search.proquest.com/openview/e15d93700ac88c3f64bb3949c60a4155/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y

Keywords: organizational performance, organizational citizenship behavior, counterproductive work behavior, economic productivity, influencing factors

Citation: Fan Q, Wider W and Chan CK (2023) The brief introduction to organizational citizenship behaviors and counterproductive work behaviors: a literature review. Front. Psychol . 14:1181930. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1181930

Received: 08 March 2023; Accepted: 29 August 2023; Published: 13 September 2023.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2023 Fan, Wider and Chan. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Walton Wider, [email protected]

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Log in using your username and password

  • Search More Search for this keyword Advanced search
  • Latest content
  • For authors
  • Browse by collection
  • BMJ Journals More You are viewing from: Google Indexer

You are here

  • Volume 14, Issue 2
  • Informal coercion in inpatient mental healthcare: a scoping review protocol
  • Article Text
  • Article info
  • Citation Tools
  • Rapid Responses
  • Article metrics

Download PDF

  • http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2804-3366 Vincent Billé 1 , 2 ,
  • http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0852-6683 Clara Lessard-Deschênes 1 , 2 ,
  • http://orcid.org/0009-0005-6033-105X Sophie Sergerie-Richard 1 , 2 ,
  • Marie Désilets 3 ,
  • Julie Tansey 4 ,
  • http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7764-6286 Marie-Hélène Goulet 1 , 2
  • 1 Faculté des Sciences Infirmières , Université de Montréal , Montréal , Québec , Canada
  • 2 Centre de recherche de l'Institut universitaire en sante mentale de Montréal , Montréal , Québec , Canada
  • 3 Institut universitaire en santé mentale de Montréal , Montréal , Québec , Canada
  • 4 Association Vox Québec , Saint-Mathieu-de-Beloeil , Québec , Canada
  • Correspondence to Vincent Billé; vincent.bille{at}umontreal.ca

Introduction Comprehending informal coercion, which encompasses a wide range of phenomena characterised by subtle and non-legalised pressures, can be complex. Its use is underestimated within the continuum of coercion in mental health, although its application may have a negative impact on the persons involved. A better understanding of informal coercion is crucial for improving mental healthcare and informing future research. This scoping review aims to explore the nature, extent and consequences of informal coercion in mental health hospitalisation to clarify this phenomenon, establish its boundaries more clearly and identify knowledge gaps.

Methods and analysis Following the methodological framework from the Joanna Briggs Institute, this scoping review will encompass 10 key steps. Literature searches will be conducted in electronic databases, including CINAHL, PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, PsycINFO, and ProQuest Dissertation and Theses. Then, a search in grey literature sources (Open Grey, Grey Guide), psychiatric and mental health journals, government agencies and among the references of selected studies will be conducted. The research will include all literature focusing on informal coercion with inpatients aged 18 and above. Data will be extracted and analysed descriptively, mapping the available knowledge and identifying thematic patterns. The quality of included studies will be assessed using appropriate appraisal tools. An exploratory search was conducted in November 2023 and will be updated in December 2023 when the selection of relevant evidence will begin.

Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval is not required as this study involves the analysis of existing published literature. The findings will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed publication and presentations at relevant conferences. They will be shared with people living with mental disorders and professionals working in mental healthcare.

  • mental health
  • adult psychiatry
  • nursing care
  • systematic review

This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See:  http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ .

https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2023-079549

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request permissions.

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

STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS OF THIS STUDY

The involvement of a person with lived experience from the early stages of this scoping review is expected to enhance the preciseness and relevance of the search strategy and the depth of the findings.

To enhance the inclusivity of all relevant findings of this scoping review, outcomes will be presented from an exhaustive exploration of academic databases, specialised publications and grey literature sources.

By critically appraising the literature and assessing the quality of included studies, this review will pinpoint knowledge gaps and guide future research priorities in the field of informal coercion.

Limiting the review to English and French publications may result in the exclusion of relevant studies published in other languages.

Due to the heterogeneity of included studies, data synthesis may be challenging, and comparisons across different contexts may be limited.

Introduction

Coercion, referring to the act of compelling an individual to do or not do something during their psychiatric treatment, remains widespread in mental health inpatient care. 1 Coercion in mental health can take various forms, ranging from informal coercion, which includes unregulated and implicit pressures based on the caregiver–patient relationship, to formal coercion, which encompasses legally mandated restraints such as seclusion, mechanical restraint and involuntary treatment. 2 3 Studies on the patients’ subjective experience of coercion (perceived coercion) revealed that coercion can occur during voluntary and involuntary care, resulting from more subtle forms of coercion, including the sense of being compelled to adhere to one treatment over another. 4

Particular attention has been given to formal coercion in recent years, with numerous studies revealing its deleterious consequences and focusing on the effectiveness of programmes aimed at reducing its use. 5–7 This has had an impact on the legislative framework surrounding formal coercive measures, promoting policies aimed at minimising their use. 8 This increased focus may have affected the continuum of coercion within adult psychiatric hospital services. For instance, in a Dutch study from 2016, a significant reduction in the use of seclusion was accompanied by an increase in forced medication, suggesting the substitution of one measure for the other. 9 Hotzy and Jaeger 10 and Andersson et al 11 have highlighted the use of informal coercion as a means to avoid resorting to formal coercion in mental health hospital care.

Informal coercion is a broad phenomenon that can refer to any form of pressure exerted by one person on another with the aim of influencing them during mental healthcare. 3 While reviewing the literature on the topic, diverse terminologies are employed to denote informal coercion, including terms such as ‘soft/er coercion’, ‘subtle coercion’, ‘informal coercion’, ‘treatment pressure’ or ‘covert coercion’. It manifests in a wide range of ways, from persuasion to manipulation, threats, deception and even displays of force. 10 12–14 Despite its estimated prevalence ranging from 29% to 59% in mental healthcare settings, 10 the use of informal coercion appears to be underestimated by mental health professionals 15 and can be a point of tension among them, 16 possibly due to the less tangible and formalised nature of this form of coercion. Underestimation may also be related to the caregiver’s perspective on coercion; the more they approve of coercion, the more likely they are to underestimate the level of informal coercion being exerted. 17 Moreover, its use can have negative consequences on the identity of individuals hospitalised in mental healthcare and on the therapeutic relationship. 12 It can also touch on issues of integrating human rights in care. 3 Furthermore, some studies indicate that informal coercion is not only exercised by mental health professionals but also by the relatives of individuals hospitalised in mental healthcare. 13 18

Understanding informal coercion, which encompasses a wide range of phenomena, can be complex within the continuum of coercion in mental health. Research has been conducted on knowledge syntheses regarding this phenomenon in PROSPERO, Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Evidence Synthesis, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, CINAHL, Epistemonikos, Open Science Framework and Figshare 19 as of July 2023. Despite the interest shown in Hem et al ’s 20 systematic review on ethical challenges related to the use of coercion in mental health, including its informal form, their results offer a limited representation of this specific form; among the 22 selected studies, only 2 specifically focused on informal coercion. Beames and Onwumere’s 21 systematic review reports that risk factors related to informal forms of coercion remain lacking in the literature. The systematic review conducted by Hotzy and Jaeger 10 specifically focuses on the clinical relevance of informal coercion, but it is limited to examining qualitative and quantitative studies published between 2000 and 2016. Yeeles 22 scoping review is limited to publications on informal coercion in community mental healthcare published until June 2014. Lastly, Allison and Flemming’s 12 qualitative synthesis on ‘soft’ coercion has an exclusion criterion to qualitative writings from the UK and Ireland. Therefore, given these highly heterogeneous results and to provide a more comprehensive, clearer and up-to-date picture of informal coercion in mental health hospital care, conducting a scoping review appears necessary. To this end, a scoping review method will be employed to gain a better understanding and representation of the phenomenon of informal coercion, including its characteristics, factors and consequences. The aim of this review will be to establish the breadth of knowledge on informal coercion in psychiatric inpatient care to clarify this phenomenon, better delineate its boundaries and identify knowledge gaps to guide further research.

The main research question is: What is the nature and extent of knowledge regarding informal coercion during mental health inpatient care? The subquestions are: (a) What are the definitions and characteristics of this phenomenon? and (b) What are the causes, associated factors, manifestations and consequences of this phenomenon?

This scoping review will be conducted following the methodological framework by Peters et al derived from the updated guidelines of the JBI. 19 A scoping review generally aims to provide an overview and mapping of the literature on a specific topic, as well as to clarify the phenomenon and highlight the gaps in knowledge to guide future research. A scoping review can thus facilitate a comprehensive understanding of a phenomenon by identifying the different types of literature available on the topic and the key characteristics and factors associated with the phenomenon. 19 These objectives are consistent with the main goal of this literature synthesis, which is exploratory in nature. The synthesis seeks to systematically provide a broad overview of the phenomenon of informal coercion within the context of psychiatric inpatient care.

The methodological framework consists of nine key steps for the successful completion of a scoping review: (a) defining and adjusting the objectives and questions; (b) developing inclusion criteria; (c) describing the study’s plan; (d) searching for relevant evidence; (e) selecting the relevant evidence; (f) extracting data from the selected evidence; (g) analysing the extracted data; (h) presenting the results and (i) synthesising the evidence. 19 To enhance the relevance of this scoping review and value the experiential knowledge of individuals with mental health disorders, a 10th step has been added to this research process: the involvement of a mental health peer supporter with lived experience in psychiatry from the beginning of the project and throughout each stage of the study. 23 The engagement has been structured and planned, incorporating the following elements: (1) The person with lived experience was chosen for her qualities, extensive experience and representation of a diverse group as the executive director of an association for individuals affected by mental health disorders; (2) Early meeting before the beginning of the project allowing the person with lived experience to contribute fully and building a clear and mutually agreed on purpose for her engagement in this scoping review; (3) The person with lived experience has been and will continue to be involved in every phase of the project, from refining the research question to dissemination; (4) Emphasis is placed on incorporating all feedback from the person with lived experience, acknowledging her deep involvement and considering her proposals as equally valid. This includes adding the perspective of witnessing coercion as a form to be considered in informal coercion and being attentive to populations studied in selected articles, with a focus on those often excluded from current evidence; (5) During the data collection phase, regular meetings between reviewers and the person with lived experience will be scheduled to discuss the relevance of literature selected; (6) The peer support worker will participate in discussions to refine themes and contribute insights. Additionally, collaborative efforts will involve explaining the analytical theme development process to ensure a comprehensive understanding, thereby facilitating meaningful consultation regarding the lived experience perspective in the analysis; (7) For the results, ongoing dialogue, and collaborative discussions within the research team, including regular meetings and reflective sessions, will capture diverse perspectives and (8) To support dissemination, the peer support worker expressed interest in reviewing and editing the protocol and future manuscripts, as well as communicating the findings to members of her association. To ensure comprehensive reporting of essential elements in the final scoping review, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines will be followed. 24 For the design of this protocol, the PRISMA-Protocols checklist was followed 25 ( online supplemental additional file 1 ), and the protocol was registered on the Open Science Framework ( https://osf.io/p7k6u ). The selection of data sources for this exploratory examination will begin in December 2023. This scoping review is expected to be completed by November 2024.

Supplemental material

Inclusion criteria.

The inclusion criteria were formulated using the format recommended by JBI: population, concept, context and type of evidence sources. 19

In this review, studies focusing on adult individuals aged 18 years and older will be included. This includes individuals receiving or having received inpatient psychiatric care, their relatives (family and close associates), and mental health professionals (such as nurses, psychiatrists, psychologists, caregivers). This scoping review will explore the multifaceted nature of informal coercion, considering diverse perspectives by incorporating all relevant stakeholders. It aims to capture the complex and nuanced variations in the understanding and experience of informal coercion. Studies involving minors will be included only if most of the participants were over 18 years old. Papers specifically addressing geriatric psychiatry, intellectual disabilities, eating disorders, child psychiatry, neurodegenerative disorders, cognitive disorders, perinatal psychiatry, forensic psychiatry and somatic comorbidities will be excluded due to the specificities associated with these specialties.

This synthesis will focus on literature addressing informal coercion in mental health, which refers to the use of subtle and non-legalised pressures and constraints on individuals receiving care to influence their actions or decisions during treatment, whether the care is voluntary or not. 11 15–18 Informal coercion encompasses a wide range of techniques, including persuasion, negotiation, interpersonal leverage, inducement, restrictions, blackmail, deception, threats, witnessing coercion and/or displays of force. Articles predominantly focusing on formal coercion will be excluded.

This review will consider literature focusing on inpatient hospitalisations in mental health services. Publications primarily targeting psychiatric outpatient care, home-based hospitalisations and/or somatic care services will be excluded.

Types of evidence sources

All existing literature on the concept of interest will be considered, without limitations on publication years. This may include primary studies (quantitative, qualitative, mixed methods), knowledge syntheses (systematic reviews, meta-analyses, etc), conference abstracts, opinion pieces, theoretical articles and grey literature (theses, etc). Only articles in English and French will be included to ensure valid translation of the literature and feasibility.

Search strategy

For this scoping review, the electronic databases CINAHL, PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, PsycINFO, and ProQuest Dissertation and Theses will be used to ensure a comprehensive overview of the literature on the topic of interest. In partnership with a specialised mental health librarian, a search term plan was developed based on the main concepts of the research question, ‘informal coercion’ and ‘mental health and psychiatry’ ( table 1 ). Using subject headings and keywords from this plan, a search strategy was developed and tested on PubMed in November 2023 ( table 2 ). The search strategy, including all keywords and subject headings, will be adapted for each included database. An exploratory search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and CINAHL was also conducted in November 2023 ( online supplemental additional file 2 ) and will be updated when the selection of relevant evidence begins, which is scheduled for December 2023. There will be no restrictions on publication years. Additional searches will be conducted in grey literature sources (Open Grey, Grey Guide), psychiatry and mental health journals, government agencies and among the references lists of the included publications (snowballing). No language restrictions will be applied to provide a searchable list of articles in non-English or non-French languages for readers. Only articles available in full text will be included to not miss any relevant information. The literature search will be conducted iteratively, meaning that the search strategy may be adjusted gradually as evidence is discovered and a better understanding of the subject matter is gained.

  • View inline

Main concepts and their associated lists of subject headings and keywords

Example of a pilot search

Selection of evidence sources

After the literature search, all identified records will be gathered and imported into the Covidence software, and duplicates will be removed. The two primary reviewers will independently screen the literature during a pilot test using a random sample of 25 selected titles/abstracts to compare their selection and confirm the accuracy and clarity of the eligibility criteria. 19 Once inter-rater agreement reaches 75% or higher, the first stage of selection can proceed. During this initial selection, titles and abstracts will be independently reviewed by the two primary reviewers to assess their eligibility based on the inclusion criteria. Potentially relevant articles and those without abstracts will be directly included for full-text review. A second selection will be conducted by the two primary reviewers based on the examination of the full-text literature selected in the previous stage. In case of disagreements in the article selection, a third reviewer may be consulted. Reasons for excluding articles will be documented. A full report of the selection process results will be presented in a PRISMA-ScR flow diagram. 24

Data extraction

The data will be extracted from the articles by the two primary reviewers using the data extraction form proposed by JBI and adapted to the purpose and research questions of this scoping review. 19 This form will be presented as a table and will include the following categories, where applicable: authors; year of publication; country of origin; type of literature; aim/objectives; perspective/theoretical framework; methodology; target population; care context; sample size; measurement of informal coercion (scale, questionnaire, interview, etc); employed definition of informal coercion; presented forms of informal coercion; factors and causes of informal coercion; consequences of informal coercion; key findings relevant to the topic of interest based on the research questions; proposals for reducing informal coercion; strengths and limitations of the literature; identified knowledge gaps for the topic of interest. The data extraction form will be individually tested by the two primary reviewers on a set of common articles. They will then compare their categories and verify the relevance of the extracted data until inter-rater agreement is reached. The data extraction process will then be conducted independently by the two primary reviewers. Regular meetings will be scheduled between the two reviewers to discuss the relevance of the chosen categories for extraction. In case of disagreements during the data extraction, a third reviewer may be consulted. If necessary, the authors of the included articles will be contacted to request any missing or additional data.

Data analysis and presentation of results

Given the diverse nature of the selected literature, data analysis will be conducted in a descriptive manner to map the breadth of knowledge and address the aims and research questions of this study. 19 To begin with, a description of the included literature, highlighting their key characteristics and the main data extracted that address the aims and research questions of this study (various manifestations of informal coercion, definitions, causes, factors, consequences associated with it, etc), will be conducted. 26 Following data extraction, the data will be analysed using content analysis methods inspired by Miles and Huberman, 27 involving three stages (using QDA Miner software): (1) condensation of data; (2) presentation of data to identify similarities and differences and (3) formulation and validation of conclusions, with a focus on recognising themes and subthemes. The results will be presented in tables and graphs accompanied by a narrative summary. Frequent meetings among the authors of this review will be conducted to refine the themes. To determine knowledge gaps, a critical appraisal and evaluation of the quality of the literature will be applied using the following tools: the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool, 28 the checklist for systematic reviews and research synthesis 29 and the Authority, Accuracy, Coverage, Objectivity, Date, Significance checklist for grey literature. 30 Finally, conclusions will be presented taking into consideration the current state of knowledge on the subject as well as any potential research gaps.

Patient and public involvement

A person (JT) who is, among other things, a certified peer support worker and a patient partner in mental health, was involved in the development of this review protocol and will also be involved in the data analysis and the dissemination of the results.

Ethics and dissemination

No ethics approval is required for this review. The outcomes of this scoping review will be submitted to a scientific journal for publication. Furthermore, the results will be showcased at global conferences focusing on mental health and shared with persons living with a mental disorder and clinicians working in mental healthcare.

Ethics statements

Patient consent for publication.

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge the contribution of Maria Pilar Ramírez-García, RN Ph.D., Associate professor at the Faculty of Nursing, Université de Montréal, for her guidance during the initial design of this protocol. The authors would also like to express their gratitude to Dr. Sashi Sashidharan and Dr. Eric O. Noorthoorn, the reviewers of the manuscript, for their valuable comments.

  • Goulet MH ,
  • Lessard-Deschênes C ,
  • Clavien C ,
  • Kaiser S , et al
  • Pariseau-Legault P ,
  • Vallée-Ouimet S ,
  • Jacob JD , et al
  • Bachelard M ,
  • Amoussou JR , et al
  • Morandi S ,
  • Mendez Rubio M , et al
  • Parliamentary Assembly, Council of Europe
  • Noorthoorn EO ,
  • Janssen WA , et al
  • Andersson U ,
  • Fathollahi J ,
  • Allison R ,
  • García-Cabeza I ,
  • Calcedo A ,
  • Mendoza OM , et al
  • Szmukler G ,
  • Appelbaum PS
  • Rabenschlag F ,
  • Schori D , et al
  • Valenti E ,
  • Calcedo-Barba A , et al
  • Elmer T , et al
  • Potthoff S ,
  • Hempeler C , et al
  • Peters MD ,
  • Godfrey C ,
  • McInerney P , et al
  • Gjerberg E ,
  • Husum TL , et al
  • McCarron TL ,
  • Clement F ,
  • Rasiah J , et al
  • Tricco AC ,
  • Zarin W , et al
  • Shamseer L ,
  • Clarke M , et al
  • Pollock D ,
  • Peters MDJ ,
  • Khalil H , et al
  • Huberman AM
  • Fàbregues S ,
  • Bartlett G , et al
  • Aromataris E ,
  • Fernandez R ,
  • Godfrey CM , et al

Supplementary materials

Supplementary data.

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

  • Data supplement 1
  • Data supplement 2

Contributors VB designed and wrote the initial version of the scoping review protocol. MD, M-HG, CL-D, SS-R and JT offered guidance during the design of the protocol, critically reviewed and helped refine the protocol. All authors contributed to the final version of the manuscript.

Funding Funding for publication fees for this article was obtained in January 2024 through a dissemination grant from both the Research Center and the Foundation of the Institut Universitaire en Santé Mentale de Montréal.

Competing interests None declared.

Patient and public involvement Patients and/or the public were involved in the design, or conduct, or reporting, or dissemination plans of this research. Refer to the Methods section for further details.

Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

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

Read the full text or download the PDF:

IMAGES

  1. 50 Smart Literature Review Templates (APA) ᐅ TemplateLab

    literature review introduction pdf

  2. Good literature review sample. Bad, Better, Best Examples of Literature

    literature review introduction pdf

  3. how to write a literature review introduction example

    literature review introduction pdf

  4. FREE 5+ Sample Literature Review Templates in PDF

    literature review introduction pdf

  5. (PDF) CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Introduction

    literature review introduction pdf

  6. 50 Smart Literature Review Templates (APA) ᐅ TemplateLab

    literature review introduction pdf

VIDEO

  1. Part 2 Writing the Review of Literature

  2. Write Your Literature Review FAST

  3. Writing a Literature Review

  4. Literature Review 101

  5. Literature Review Introdn video ARM

  6. Mistake to Avoid in LITERATURE REVIEW INTRODUCTION

COMMENTS

  1. PDF INTRODUCTION TO LITERATURE REVIEWS

    Introduction Your introduction should clearly explain the overall research topic and the depth of the information to be presented; it often also explains the types of sources that will be used. If your literature review is part of a larger research proposal or project, its introduction can be combined with the introduction of your paper. Body

  2. PDF How to Write a Literature Review

    A literature review is a review or discussion of the current published material available on a particular topic. It attempts to synthesizeand evaluatethe material and information according to the research question(s), thesis, and central theme(s).

  3. PDF Conducting Your Literature Review

    A literature reviewis an overview of the available research for a specific scientific topic. Literature reviews summarize existing research to answer a review question, provide the context for new research, or identify important gaps in the existing body of literature.

  4. PDF CHAPTER 3 Conducting a Literature Review

    Introduction With a research question in hand, you are ready to conduct a literature review. This chapter provides the information needed to write a quality academic literature review.

  5. (PDF) Introduction to Research & Literature Review

    Introduction to Research & Literature Review DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.13666.91842 Authors: Umer Hameed University of Liverpool Abstract In the realm of academia, research stands as a vital pillar...

  6. PDF What is a Literature Review?

    Introduction The process of undertaking a literature review is an integral part of doing research. While this may be considered to be its primary function, the literature review is also an important tool that serves to inform and develop practice and invite dis-cussion in academic work.

  7. PDF LITERATURE REVIEWS

    1. EXPLAIN KEY TERMS & CONCEPTS ¡ examine your research questions: do they contain any terms that need to be explained?(e.g. identity, discourse, culture, ideology, gender, narrative, collective memory) ¡ be aware that key definitions and background should be provided in the introduction to orient your reader to the topic. the literature review is the place to provide more extended ...

  8. PDF Undertaking a literature review: a step'by-step approacii

    A literature review is an objective, thorough summary and critical analysis of the relevant available research and non- Patricia Cronin, Frances Ryan and Michael Coughian are Lecturers, School of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Dublin, Trinity College, Dublin Accepted for publication: November 2007

  9. (PDF) Writing a Literature Review Research Paper: A step-by-step approach

    ... Analysing literature gives an overview of the "WHs": WHat has been reported in a particular feld or topic, WHo the key writers are, WHat are the prevailing theories and hypotheses, WHat...

  10. How to Write a Literature Review

    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 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5

  11. PDF R es ea rc h -b a sed Wh e r e d o e s t h e liter a tur e wr itin g

    In a research article, proposal, or thesis, a literature review typically introduces the author's specific research question by first introducing the topic and its significance and also by telling the story of what has been done in the field or in related fields in relation to that topic.

  12. PDF Sample Chapter: Writing the Literature Review: A Practical Guide

    Sue's example illustrates that carrying out a comprehensive literature review is a required step in any research project. First, a researcher cannot conduct the study. 1. without gaining a deep understanding of the research topic and learning from the work of other scholars and researchers in the field (Creswell, 2018).

  13. Writing a literature review

    When writing a literature review it is important to start with a brief introduction, followed by the text broken up into subsections and conclude with a summary to bring everything together. A summary table including title, author, publication date and key findings is a useful feature to present in your review (see Table 1 for an example).

  14. PDF University of Washington Psychology Writing Center http://www.psych.uw

    The Introduction of a research article includes a condensed literature review. Its purpose is to describe what is known Its purpose is to describe what is known about the area of study, with the goal of giving the context and rationale for the study itself.

  15. Introduction

    "A literature review is an account of what has been published on a topic by accredited scholars and researchers. In writing the literature review, your purpose is to convey to your reader what knowledge and ideas have been established on a topic, and what their strengths and weaknesses are.

  16. How to write a literature review introduction (+ examples)

    The introduction to a literature review serves as your reader's guide through your academic work and thought process. Explore the significance of literature review introductions in review papers, academic papers, essays, theses, and dissertations.

  17. Writing a Literature Review

    A literature review is a document or section of a document that collects key sources on a topic and discusses those sources in conversation with each other (also called synthesis ). The lit review is an important genre in many disciplines, not just literature (i.e., the study of works of literature such as novels and plays).

  18. PDF Outline for a Literature Review Introduction

    Introduction Define the context (referencing the topic of the review) Explain the purpose/reasons for reviewing the literature Identify the sequence of your review (what general information in what order) Clarify the scope of your review (what you will incorporate and what you will not (specify if an element falls outside of your scope).

  19. PDF A Literature Review

    A literature review is a compilation, classification, and evaluation of what other researchers have written on a particular topic. A literature review normally forms part of a research thesis but it can also stand alone as a self-contained review of writings on a subject. In either case, its purpose is to: Place each work in the context of its ...

  20. PDF ExamplEs of good litEraturE rEviEw introductions

    ExamplE 1 This review will examine the literature available on the main approaches towards measuring rural deprivation, with the view that literature overemphasises material deprivation at the expense of social deprivation. The review is comprised of two parts.

  21. (PDF) Literature Review as a Research Methodology: An overview and

    PDF | On Apr 2, 2021, Chnar Mustafa Moahmmed and others published Literature Review as a Research Methodology: An overview and guidelines | Find, read and cite all the research you need on ...

  22. PDF Sociology Sociology Literature Literature Review/ASA Review/ASA

    The introduction of the literature review should: 1. Introduce the topic 2. Identify overall trends in what has been published on the topic 3. Include a thesis statement stating the overall purpose and the factors discussed throughout the literature review This thesis statement clearly states the main topic

  23. Rapid reviews methods series: guidance on rapid qualitative evidence

    Setting the review question and topic refinement. Rapid reviews summarise information from multiple research studies to produce evidence for 'the public, researchers, policymakers and funders in a systematic, resource-efficient manner'.16 Involvement of knowledge users is critical.3 Given time constraints, individual knowledge users could be asked only to feedback on very specific ...

  24. (PDF) Literature Review Literature review Introduction

    Literature Review Literature review Introduction Authors: Emma Rossiter University of Worcester Discover the world's research Content uploaded by Emma Rossiter Author content Content may be...

  25. Frontiers

    Citation: Fan Q, Wider W and Chan CK (2023) The brief introduction to organizational citizenship behaviors and counterproductive work behaviors: a literature review. Front. Psychol. 14:1181930. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1181930. Received: 08 March 2023; Accepted: 29 August 2023; Published: 13 September 2023.

  26. Informal coercion in inpatient mental healthcare: a scoping review

    Introduction Comprehending informal coercion, which encompasses a wide range of phenomena characterised by subtle and non-legalised pressures, can be complex. Its use is underestimated within the continuum of coercion in mental health, although its application may have a negative impact on the persons involved. A better understanding of informal coercion is crucial for improving mental ...

  27. Full article: DIETERICH's disease of both the third and the fourth

    Introduction. Dieterich's disease or avascular osteonecrosis of the metacarpal head is a rare disease. It occurs in both adults and children, with more than 50% of reported cases in the literature aged under 20 years old [Citation 1].Usually chronic pain, stiffness, and limitation in activities of daily life or sports activities lead the patient to consult at the outpatient clinic.

  28. (PDF) Introduction and Literature Review

    for undergraduate and graduate students as well as researchers. References application of two methods. These methods are the priority list method and xii Preface and listed in Chapter 4 with...