University Library

  • Research Guides
  • Literature Reviews
  • Books, Encyclopedias, & Media
  • Articles & Databases
  • Methods/Stats/Datasets
  • Annotated Bibliographies
  • APA 6th Edition
  • Majors, Minors, and Careers in Sociology

What is a Literature Review?

The scholarly conversation.

A literature review provides an overview of previous research on a topic that critically evaluates, classifies, and compares what has already been published on a particular topic. It allows the author to synthesize and place into context the research and scholarly literature relevant to the topic. It helps map the different approaches to a given question and reveals patterns. It forms the foundation for the author’s subsequent research and justifies the significance of the new investigation.

A literature review can be a short introductory section of a research article or a report or policy paper that focuses on recent research. Or, in the case of dissertations, theses, and review articles, it can be an extensive review of all relevant research.

  • The format is usually a bibliographic essay; sources are briefly cited within the body of the essay, with full bibliographic citations at the end.
  • The introduction should define the topic and set the context for the literature review. It will include the author's perspective or point of view on the topic, how they have defined the scope of the topic (including what's not included), and how the review will be organized. It can point out overall trends, conflicts in methodology or conclusions, and gaps in the research.
  • In the body of the review, the author should organize the research into major topics and subtopics. These groupings may be by subject, (e.g., globalization of clothing manufacturing), type of research (e.g., case studies), methodology (e.g., qualitative), genre, chronology, or other common characteristics. Within these groups, the author can then discuss the merits of each article and analyze and compare the importance of each article to similar ones.
  • The conclusion will summarize the main findings, make clear how this review of the literature supports (or not) the research to follow, and may point the direction for further research.
  • The list of references will include full citations for all of the items mentioned in the literature review.

Key Questions for a Literature Review

A literature review should try to answer questions such as

  • Who are the key researchers on this topic?
  • What has been the focus of the research efforts so far and what is the current status?
  • How have certain studies built on prior studies? Where are the connections? Are there new interpretations of the research?
  • Have there been any controversies or debate about the research? Is there consensus? Are there any contradictions?
  • Which areas have been identified as needing further research? Have any pathways been suggested?
  • How will your topic uniquely contribute to this body of knowledge?
  • Which methodologies have researchers used and which appear to be the most productive?
  • What sources of information or data were identified that might be useful to you?
  • How does your particular topic fit into the larger context of what has already been done?
  • How has the research that has already been done help frame your current investigation ?

Examples of Literature Reviews

Example of a literature review at the beginning of an article: Forbes, C. C., Blanchard, C. M., Mummery, W. K., & Courneya, K. S. (2015, March). Prevalence and correlates of strength exercise among breast, prostate, and colorectal cancer survivors . Oncology Nursing Forum, 42(2), 118+. Retrieved from http://go.galegroup.com.sonoma.idm.oclc.org/ps/i.do?p=HRCA&sw=w&u=sonomacsu&v=2.1&it=r&id=GALE%7CA422059606&asid=27e45873fddc413ac1bebbc129f7649c Example of a comprehensive review of the literature: Wilson, J. L. (2016). An exploration of bullying behaviours in nursing: a review of the literature.   British Journal Of Nursing ,  25 (6), 303-306. For additional examples, see:

Galvan, J., Galvan, M., & ProQuest. (2017). Writing literature reviews: A guide for students of the social and behavioral sciences (Seventh ed.). [Electronic book]

Pan, M., & Lopez, M. (2008). Preparing literature reviews: Qualitative and quantitative approaches (3rd ed.). Glendale, CA: Pyrczak Pub. [ Q180.55.E9 P36 2008]

Useful Links

  • Write a Literature Review (UCSC)
  • Literature Reviews (Purdue)
  • Literature Reviews: overview (UNC)
  • Review of Literature (UW-Madison)

Evidence Matrix for Literature Reviews

The  Evidence Matrix  can help you  organize your research  before writing your lit review.  Use it to  identify patterns  and commonalities in the articles you have found--similar methodologies ?  common  theoretical frameworks ? It helps you make sure that all your major concepts covered. It also helps you see how your research fits into the context  of the overall topic.

  • Evidence Matrix Special thanks to Dr. Cindy Stearns, SSU Sociology Dept, for permission to use this Matrix as an example.
  • << Previous: Methods/Stats/Datasets
  • Next: Annotated Bibliographies >>
  • Last Updated: Jan 8, 2024 2:58 PM
  • URL: https://libguides.sonoma.edu/sociology

literature review definition in sociology

  • Brandeis Library
  • Research Guides

Doing a Literature Review in Sociology

Introduction, early in the process, during data analysis, getting ready to write, before submitting the paper.

  • Searching: Early in the Process
  • Organizing: Getting Ready to Write

Top Journals & Publishers

Recommended Journals

  • American Journal of Sociology Published by University of Chicago Press, available through JSTOR
  • American Sociological Review Published by the American Sociological Association, available through SAGE Journals database
  • Annual Review of Sociology Published by Annual Reviews, available through Brandeis subscription to the Annual Reviews website
  • Social Forces Published by Oxford University Press, most recent issues (2000-present) available through Project Muse database
  • Social Problems Published by Oxford University Press, available through Brandeis subscription to Oxford University Press website
  • Theory & Society Published by Springer, available through Brandeis's subscription to Springer Standard Collection

Recommended Publishers

Found a good book that we don't own?  Contact  [email protected]  to request a library purchase! 

A literature review helps you figure out what scholars, what studies, and what questions your project is in conversation with. It typically happens in stages throughout the life of your project – it is not something you do once and are then finished with!

This guide explores how to think about and do a literature review at four different stages of a project. On this page, Professor Wendy Cadge suggests how to think about each step. Get specific advice on strategies for searching and organizing on the subsequent pages of this guide.

​Wendy's Process

The first time I do a literature review is when I am thinking about possible research topics and questions and want to know what people have written about these questions and what they have found. I search the topics and questions broadly aiming to get a relatively comprehensive sense of what is known about my topic and whether there is space for another study that is going to contribute meaningfully to the conversation. I am trying to figure out both who is in this conversation (what scholars specifically but also in what fields), what they are talking about, and what is known and not known according to these experts.

The goal here is to figure out whether my study will be new and relevant and whether there is a way to motivate it both empirically and theoretically for the audience I am thinking of. I need this answer to be yes in order to proceed with the process.

As I do this initial literature review I am also refining my research question, asking myself whether it makes sense, how it relates to the ways others have approached my topic, etc. Often questions are too big (they will require thousands of pages to answer) or too small (you don’t need an empirical study to answer them) so I am also trying to get my question to be the right size as I do this first review.

My search strategies are as follows   Google Scholar and Sociological Abstracts with key terms, and focus on books published by major presses and articles in well-known journals. When I get hits I sort them into groups based on what they are - materials by sociologists, by other academics, by journalists, etc. I only read things that are published (no conference papers!) and read books in the top academic presses first (Chicago, UC Berkeley, Princeton, Oxford, Cambridge) and things in well-known sociology journals. (See the box to the left for links to these journals.) Depending on the topic, I may read a lot written by non-sociologists to learn more . I read almost nothing in the popular media on the first go through.

I also don’t “read” everything - I skim books and read article abstracts to get an overview. The goal is to write 5-6 double spaced pages about what is known and what my study might add. I also want to have a set of more specific search terms and author names to search later. Typically I am mostly reviewing the sociology literature to think about how to fit this into a social science frame while also separating out “primary sources” to read later. These other sources about my topic include data (like government reports, statistical information etc.), which will be analyzed later rather than used for sociological framing.

Before I start collecting data I check with various colleagues to make sure my assessment of the literature and the place of my study in it (my 5-6 page document) makes sense and is convincing (i.e., I don’t want to waste my time gathering data to answer a question that people either don’t think is interesting, has already been answered in the literature, or isn’t going to add anything new and significant to the conversation. I don’t want to be the dud at the dinner party who is saying something people already know or doesn’t have anything to say.

Themes typically emerge in the process of analyzing the data that require me to revisit what I think I know about my topic and question from the literature. This is usually the place where I am trying to figure out what my empirical and theoretical arguments are. Often I have ideas about what my theoretical hooks or arguments might be but they come from other literatures, scholars or friends working in different parts of sociology, etc. This is often where I go back to the literature (via Annual Review articles and searches) to see how people have used certain concepts and to see if those concepts might help me articulate what I am finding. I also read the key empirical articles cited in the Annual Review articles to see how what I am finding is similar to and different from what others know and how I can relate to those studies with my data.

Search strategies Google scholar and Sociological Abstracts, Annual review articles, asking people who know the discipline better than I do where to go to learn about concept x or y. At this point I’m looking for ideas as I read that will help me make and articulate whatever arguments might be supported by my data.

By the time I finish this step I have a good sense of what my findings and argument are and how they fit i nto the existing conversation / literature.

If I have done the above two steps well, I probably have an outline by now that lays out what I think my findings are and how I am going to situate them and motivate them in existing literatures. Before I start to write I read through my entire Endnote database and I put citations and notes in the outline that will help me make certain points. If I see holes or don’t feel like the outline is tight enough I do more lit review at this point to help me situate my question as tightly as possible in existing literature. While articles are written in a way that makes it look like you do the lit review, then the data collection and analysis, then articulate the findings, etc. this is actually iterative for me through the whole process.

For more information on EndNote and other citation management software like Zotero, see the Organizing section of this guide .

Search strategies The same as what’s outlined above. Part of the trick here though is knowing when to stop searching and start writing! I try to start writing before I feel like I am finished reading because I will discover as I write what is missing and will go back and fill it in.

I have friends and colleagues read my paper and give me feedback. If this is going to a journal I look at the editorial board and make sure I have engaged with the ideas of any scholars on the editorial board that are relevant as these people are likely to be reviewers . I also always fill in a lot of citations after the article is drafted so I can see it as a whole and see what is and is not needed to make the argument more compelling.

Search strategies This is when I am looking up certain people usually on the web to see if I read relevant publications or am searching for a particular article. If I know I need some citations about a certain topic to support a point, this is also when I find them. This is usually the easiest part of the process.

  • Next: Searching: Early in the Process >>
  • Last Updated: Feb 1, 2024 11:21 AM
  • URL: https://guides.library.brandeis.edu/soclitreviews

Banner

Sociology Research Guide

  • Picking a topic
  • Background research and finding books
  • Advanced searching in databases and Google
  • Finding statistics
  • Evaluating sources
  • Literature Reviews

What is a Lit Review?

How to write a lit review.

  • Video Introduction to Lit Reviews

Main Objectives

Examples of lit reviews, additional resources.

  • SOC1: Morales (Cultural Artifact)
  • SOC4: Ie (Literature Review)

What is a literature review?

green checkmark

  • Either a complete piece of writing unto itself or a section of a larger piece of writing like a book or article
  • A thorough and critical look at the information and perspectives that other experts and scholars have written about a specific topic
  • A way to give historical perspective on an issue and show how other researchers have addressed a problem
  • An analysis of sources based on your own perspective on the topic
  • Based on the most pertinent and significant research conducted in the field, both new and old

Red X

  • A descriptive list or collection of summaries of other research without synthesis or analysis
  • An annotated bibliography
  • A literary review (a brief, critical discussion about the merits and weaknesses of a literary work such as a play, novel or a book of poems)
  • Exhaustive; the objective is not to list as many relevant books, articles, reports as possible
  • To convey to your reader what knowledge and ideas have been established on a topic
  • To explain what the strengths and weaknesses of that knowledge and those ideas might be
  • To learn how others have defined and measured key concepts    
  • To keep the writer/reader up to date with current developments and historical trends in a particular field or discipline
  • To establish context for the argument explored in the rest of a paper
  • To provide evidence that may be used to support your own findings
  • To demonstrate your understanding and your ability to critically evaluate research in the field
  • To suggest previously unused or underused methodologies, designs, and quantitative and qualitative strategies
  • To identify gaps in previous studies and flawed methodologies and/or theoretical approaches in order to avoid replication of mistakes
  • To help the researcher avoid repetition of earlier research
  • To suggest unexplored populations
  • To determine whether past studies agree or disagree and identify strengths and weaknesses on both sides of a controversy in the literature

Cat

  • Choose a topic that is interesting to you; this makes the research and writing process more enjoyable and rewarding.
  • For a literature review, you'll also want to make sure that the topic you choose is one that other researchers have explored before so that you'll be able to find plenty of relevant sources to review.

magnifying glass held up to cat

  • Your research doesn't need to be exhaustive. Pay careful attention to bibliographies. Focus on the most frequently cited literature about your topic and literature from the best known scholars in your field. Ask yourself: "Does this source make a significant contribution to the understanding of my topic?"
  • Reading other literature reviews from your field may help you get ideas for themes to look for in your research. You can usually find some of these through the library databases by adding literature review as a keyword in your search.
  • Start with the most recent publications and work backwards. This way, you ensure you have the most current information, and it becomes easier to identify the most seminal earlier sources by reviewing the material that current researchers are citing.

Labeled "Scientific Cat Types" with cartoon of cat on back ("Nugget"), cat lying iwth legs tucked underneath ("loaf") and cat sprawled out ("noodle")

The organization of your lit review should be determined based on what you'd like to highlight from your research. Here are a few suggestions:

  • Chronology : Discuss literature in chronological order of its writing/publication to demonstrate a change in trends over time or to detail a history of controversy in the field or of developments in the understanding of your topic.  
  • Theme: Group your sources by subject or theme to show the variety of angles from which your topic has been studied. This works well if, for example, your goal is to identify an angle or subtopic that has so far been overlooked by researchers.  
  • Methodology: Grouping your sources by methodology (for example, dividing the literature into qualitative vs. quantitative studies or grouping sources according to the populations studied) is useful for illustrating an overlooked population, an unused or underused methodology, or a flawed experimental technique.

cat lying on laptop as though typing

  • Be selective. Highlight only the most important and relevant points from a source in your review.
  • Use quotes sparingly. Short quotes can help to emphasize a point, but thorough analysis of language from each source is generally unnecessary in a literature review.
  • Synthesize your sources. Your goal is not to make a list of summaries of each source but to show how the sources relate to one another and to your own work.
  • Make sure that your own voice and perspective remains front and center. Don't rely too heavily on summary or paraphrasing. For each source, draw a conclusion about how it relates to your own work or to the other literature on your topic.
  • Be objective. When you identify a disagreement in the literature, be sure to represent both sides. Don't exclude a source simply on the basis that it does not support your own research hypothesis.
  • At the end of your lit review, make suggestions for future research. What subjects, populations, methodologies, or theoretical lenses warrant further exploration? What common flaws or biases did you identify that could be corrected in future studies?

cat lying on laptop, facing screen; text reads "needs moar ciatations"

  • Double check that you've correctly cited each of the sources you've used in the citation style requested by your professor (APA, MLA, etc.) and that your lit review is formatted according to the guidelines for that style.

Your literature review should:

  • Be focused on and organized around your topic.
  • Synthesize your research into a summary of what is and is not known about your topic.
  • Identify any gaps or areas of controversy in the literature related to your topic.
  • Suggest questions that require further research.
  • Have your voice and perspective at the forefront rather than merely summarizing others' work.
  • Cyberbullying: How Physical Intimidation Influences the Way People are Bullied
  • Use of Propofol and Emergence Agitation in Children
  • Eternity and Immortality in Spinoza's 'Ethics'
  • Literature Review Tutorials and Samples - Wilson Library at University of La Verne
  • Literature Reviews: Introduction - University Library at Georgia State
  • Literature Reviews - The Writing Center at UNC Chapel Hill
  • Writing a Literature Review - Boston College Libraries
  • Write a Literature Review - University Library at UC Santa Cruz
  • << Previous: ASA Style
  • Next: Course Pages >>
  • Last Updated: Jan 17, 2024 9:47 AM
  • URL: https://researchguides.elac.edu/Sociology
  • Reserve a study room
  • Library Account
  • Undergraduate Students
  • Graduate Students
  • Faculty & Staff
  • Scholarly Articles
  • Books | Videos | More
  • Data Sources
  • Literature Reviews
  • Digital Sociology

What is a Literature Review?

A literature review is an essential component of every research project. It requires “re-viewing” what credible scholars in the field have said, done, and found in order to help you:

  • Identify what is currently known in your area of interest
  • Establish an empirical/ theoretical/ foundation for your research
  • Identify potential gaps in knowledge that you might fill
  • Develop viable research questions and hypotheses
  • Determine appropriate methodologies
  • Decide upon the scope of your research
  • Demonstrate the importance of your research to the field
  • VCU Libraries Guide: How to Write a Literature Review

Helpful Tools for Literature Reviews

  • Academic Phrasebank Examples of common phrases used in literature reviews and reports of research findings. The items in the Academic Phrasebank are mostly content neutral and generic in nature; in using them, therefore, you are not stealing other people’s ideas and this does not constitute plagiarism.
  • How to Read a Journal Article Tips and tricks to make reading and understanding social science journal articles easier from ICPSR.

As you read, you'll encounter various ideas, disagreements, methods, and perspectives which can be hard to organize in a meaningful way. Because you'll be reading a number of resources, a synthesis matrix helps you record the main points of each source and document how sources relate to each other.

  • Writing a Literature Review & Using a Synthesis Matrix
  • Excel Matrix Customize columns to fit your needs
  • << Previous: Data Sources
  • Next: Digital Sociology >>
  • Last Updated: Feb 13, 2024 10:56 AM
  • URL: https://guides.library.vcu.edu/sociology

Duke University Libraries

  • Getting Started
  • Finding Articles
  • Finding Books
  • Finding Data
  • Literature Reviews
  • Citing Sources
  • Centers, Institutes, and Associations
  • Black Feminists + COVID-19 Reading List

What is a Literature Review?

A literature review is a “critical analysis of a segment of a published body of knowledge through summary, classification, and comparison of prior research studies, reviews of literature, and theoretical articles” (University of Wisconsin Writing Center).

Do not confuse a literature review with an annotated bibliography.

Information for this page is taken from the Thompson Writing Program .

  • The introduction should explain why you are writing the review (“so what/who cares?”) and make some central claims about the current state of the literature (e.g. trends, debates, gaps, etc.).
  • Organize the body of the paper by common denominators among sources, such as methodologies, conclusions, philosophical approaches, or possibly chronology (assuming topical subsections)
  • The conclusion should summarize significant contributions to the field, situate the reviewed literature in the larger context of the discipline, point out flaws or gaps in the research, and/or suggest future areas of study.
  • << Previous: Finding Data
  • Next: Citing Sources >>
  • Last Updated: Feb 2, 2024 2:08 PM
  • URL: https://guides.library.duke.edu/sociology

Duke University Libraries

Services for...

  • Faculty & Instructors
  • Graduate Students
  • Undergraduate Students
  • International Students
  • Patrons with Disabilities

Twitter

  • Harmful Language Statement
  • Re-use & Attribution / Privacy
  • Support the Libraries

Creative Commons License

MERRIMACK COLLEGE MCQUADE LIBRARY

  • Open Educational Resources (OER)
  • Get Started
  • Reference Sources
  • Developing a Research Question
  • Find Books / E-books / DVDs
  • Find Articles
  • Find Images / Art
  • Find Video / Film
  • Database Search Strategies
  • Types of Resources

Writing a Literature Review (University Library, UC Santa Cruz)

"the literature" and "the review" (virginia commonwealth university).

  • Evaluate Sources
  • Cite Sources
  • Annotated Bibliography
  • SOC Websites
  • SOC Organizations
  • Government Resources

Additional Online Resources

  • How to: Literature reviews The Writing Center, University of North Carolina Chapel Hill
  • The Literature Review A basic overview of the literature review process. (Courtesy of Virginia Commonwealth University)
  • The Process: Search, Assess, Summarize, Synthesize Getting Started: Assessing Sources/Creating a Matrix/Writing a Literature Review (Courtesy of Virginia Commonwealth University)
  • Review of Literature The Writing Center @ Univeristy of Wisconsin - Madison
  • Tools for Preparing Literature Reviews George Washington University
  • Write a Literature Review University Library, UC Santa Cruz

Your SOC Librarian

Profile Photo

1. Introduction

Not to be confused with a book review, a  literature review  surveys scholarly articles, books and other sources (e.g. dissertations, conference proceedings) relevant to a particular issue, area of research, or theory, providing a description, summary, and critical evaluation of each work. The purpose is to offer an overview of significant literature published on a topic.

2. Components

Similar to primary research, development of the literature review requires four stages:

  • Problem formulation—which topic or field is being examined and what are its component issues?
  • Literature search—finding materials relevant to the subject being explored
  • Data evaluation—determining which literature makes a significant contribution to the understanding of the topic
  • Analysis and interpretation—discussing the findings and conclusions of pertinent literature

Literature reviews should comprise the following elements:

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

In assessing each piece, consideration should be given to:

  • Provenance—What are the author's credentials? Are the author's arguments supported by evidence (e.g. primary historical material, case studies, narratives, statistics, recent scientific findings)?
  • Objectivity—Is the author's perspective even-handed or prejudicial? Is contrary data considered or is certain pertinent information ignored to prove the author's point?
  • Persuasiveness—Which of the author's theses are most/least convincing?
  • Value—Are the author's arguments and conclusions convincing? Does the work ultimately contribute in any significant way to an understanding of the subject?

  3. Definition and Use/Purpose

A literature review may constitute an essential chapter of a thesis or dissertation, or may be a self-contained review of writings on a subject. In either case, its purpose is to:

  • Place each work in the context of its contribution to the understanding of the subject under review
  • Describe the relationship of each work to the others under consideration
  • Identify new ways to interpret, and shed light on any gaps in, previous research
  • Resolve conflicts amongst seemingly contradictory previous studies
  • Identify areas of prior scholarship to prevent duplication of effort
  • Point the way forward for further research
  • Place one's original work (in the case of theses or dissertations) in the context of existing literature

The literature review itself, however, does not present new  primary  scholarship.

literature review definition in sociology

  • << Previous: Types of Resources
  • Next: Evaluate Sources >>
  • Last Updated: Sep 21, 2023 9:41 AM
  • URL: https://libguides.merrimack.edu/sociology

Inside Southern Logo

  • Research by Subject
  • All Databases (A-Z)
  • Course Reserves
  • Journals by Title
  • A book on the shelf
  • Digital Collections
  • Interlibrary Loan
  • Make Appointment with Librarian
  • Schedule a Class (faculty)
  • Poster Production / Media
  • Online / Distance Services
  • Book a Study Room
  • Special Collections
  • Study Rooms
  • All Policies
  • Support the Library
  • BuleyWise Blog
  • Buley Bulletin
  • Floor Plans
  • Library Directory
  • Library Hours
  • The Director's Page
  • Library Impact Dashboard
  • Beginning Your Research
  • Reference and Statistics
  • Locating Scholarly Articles
  • Online Sources

What is a literature review?

How do i write one, for more information.

The American Sociological Association Style Guide can be found on the first floor at REF HM 569 .A54 2019.

For a brief introduction to ASA, click here .

A literature review is used to show that you have read, evaluated, and comprehended the published research on a particular topic. A literature review is structured to show to your professors that you understand the work that has been done in the past on a topic, and will serve as a jumping off point for whatever research you are conducting.   It can either be a stand-alone document, or a section at the beginning of a research paper, master’s thesis, special project, or report. Writing a literature review will require you to locate published research on a topic, read those materials, and write a description and evaluation of the works.

STEP ONE: What is your topic?

What is your research project? You really can’t begin to write a literature review until you have determined what your own research is about. Determine the problem and the population you are studying.  

STEP TWO: Time to visit the library!

Search SouthernSearch  and relevant online databases, such as SocIndex and JSTOR, to locate previously published research on your subject. This will involve finding books, journal articles, dissertations and theses, and possibly reports from governmental agencies or independent organizations.   

STEP THREE: Read and think!

Read and critically evaluate each item that you have located.   What are the researcher’s credentials? What kind of methodology was used? Do you find the research to be objective? Do you find the conclusions persuasive?   How does the research contribute to your understanding of the issue that you are researching? Are the researchers saying the same things, or are they coming to different conclusions? What are the relationships between the articles? What has been said, and what has not been said? What are some areas for future research?   

STEP FOUR: Start writing!

You may want to sort the materials you have read based on their different themes, theoretical foundations, or varying conclusions. Then, for each article, describe the research that was done and the conclusions of the authors. Discuss how that particular work contributes to the understanding of the subject that you are working on.

Conducting Research Literature Reviews: From the Internet to Paper REF Q 180.55 .M4 F56 2005

Doing a Literature Review: Releasing the Social Science Research Imagination  STACKS H 62 .H2566 1998

Preparing Literature Reviews: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches  STACKS Q 180.55 .E9 P36 2008

  • << Previous: Online Sources
  • Last Updated: Jan 22, 2024 1:30 PM
  • URL: https://libguides.southernct.edu/sociology

Penn State University Libraries

Soc 001: introductory sociology.

  • Literature Reviews: Strategies for Writing
  • Fake News and Evaluating Sources

Literature Reviews

What is a Literature Review? The literature review is a critical look at the existing research that is significant to the work that you are carrying out. This overview identifies prominent research trends in addition to assessing the overall strengths and weaknesses of the existing research.

Purpose of the Literature Review

  • To provide background information about a research topic.
  • To establish the importance of a topic.
  • To demonstrate familiarity with a topic/problem.
  • To “carve out a space” for further work and allow you to position yourself in a scholarly conversation.

Characteristics of an effective literature review In addition to fulfilling the purposes outlined above, an effective literature review provides a critical overview of existing research by

  • Outlining important research trends.
  • Assessing strengths and weaknesses (of individual studies as well the existing research as a whole).
  • Identifying potential gaps in knowledge.
  • Establishing a need for current and/or future research projects.

Steps of the Literature Review Process

1) Planning: identify the focus, type, scope and discipline of the review you intend to write. 2) Reading and Research: collect and read current research on your topic. Select only those sources that are most relevant to your project. 3) Analyzing: summarize, synthesize, critique, and compare your sources in order to assess the field of research as a whole. 4) Drafting: develop a thesis or claim to make about the existing research and decide how to organize your material. 5) Revising: revise and finalize the structural, stylistic, and grammatical issues of your paper.

This process is not always a linear process; depending on the size and scope of your literature review, you may find yourself returning to some of these steps repeatedly as you continue to focus your project.

These steps adapted from the full workshop offered by the Graduate Writing Center at Penn State. 

Literature Review Format

 Introduction

  • Provide an overview of the topic, theme, or issue.
  • Identify your specific area of focus.
  • Describe your methodology and rationale. How did you decide which sources to include and which to exclude? Why? How is your review organized?
  • Briefly discuss the overall trends in the published scholarship in this area.
  •  Establish your reason for writing the review.
  •  Find the best organizational method for your review.
  •  Summarize sources by providing the most relevant information.
  •  Respectfully and objectively critique and evaluate the studies.
  •  Use direct quotations sparingly and only if appropriate.

 Conclusion

  •  Summarize the major findings of the sources that you reviewed, remembering to keep the focus on your topic.
  •  Evaluate the current state of scholarship in this area (ex. flaws or gaps in the research, inconsistencies in findings) 
  •  Identify any areas for further research.
  •  Conclude by making a connection between your topic and some larger area of study such as the discipline. 
  • << Previous: Home
  • Next: Fake News and Evaluating Sources >>
  • Last Updated: Oct 20, 2023 10:48 AM
  • URL: https://guides.libraries.psu.edu/shenangosoc001

News alert: UC Berkeley has announced its next university librarian

Secondary menu

  • Log in to your Library account
  • Hours and Maps
  • Connect from Off Campus
  • UC Berkeley Home

Search form

Sociology: lit reviews.

  • Quick start
  • Get Articles
  • Lit Reviews
  • Sociology 127: Development and Globalization
  • Sociology of Emotions (Soc 190)

Literature Review

In a  literature review you explore research that has come before you and is relevant to your topic. It can help you identify:

  • Core research in the field
  • Experts in the subject area
  • Methodology you may want to use (or avoid)
  • Gaps in the literature -- or where your research would fit in

Helpful approaches:

  • See what literature reviews already exist on your topic! Databases like Oxford Bibliographies Online: Sociology and Sociological Abstracts (limit the document type to literature review) can save you a lot of time. Also don’t forget the Annual Review of Sociology , and the Proquest Dissertations and Theses database; these in-depth pieces usually have comprehensive lists of references.
  • Citation slogging (aka "snowballing") -- work your way back through citations (or footnotes) to key articles
  • Forward citation -- see who has cited key articles using  Google Scholar  and  Web of Science Cited Reference Search  . ​

Writing Guidelines:

  • Start with Writing for Sociology  from the UC Berkeley Sociology Department—it’s packed with great content!
  • A great overview of the entire process from the Writing Center at the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill
  • A piece from the blog Everyday Sociology on “ How (and Why) to Write a Literature Review ”

Systematic Reviews

Systematic reviews are not the same as literature reviews; instead, they can be considered an extremely rigorous subset of literature reviews.  Generally, systematic reviews take a team of professionals and one to two years to complete, and they usually can't be done for avenues of research which are newly being explored (there needs to be an established body of literature to examine).  This makes them very helpful resources if they exist for your topic of interest!

You may wish to peruse UCSF's  Systematic Review Guide  for information.

If you do decide to do a systematic review, UC Berkeley licenses  Covidence , a tool to help you. In Covidence, you can  import citations ,  screen titles and abstracts ,  upload references ,  screen full text ,  create forms for critical appraisal ,  perform risk of bias tables ,  complete data extraction , and  export a PRISMA flowchart  summarizing your review process. As an institutional member, our users have priority access to Covidence support.   To access Covidence using the UC Berkeley institutional account ,  start at this page  and follow the instructions.

Great brief overview, from NCSU

Synthesizing the literature

Now That You Have All Those Articles, How Do You Synthesize Them?

Unlike the annotated bibliography, the literature review does not just summarize each article or book. Instead, they synthesize. Some researchers find it helpful to develop a framework, making a column for each element that they want to compare. The elements vary depending on the research, making it easier to understand the relationships between  all  the articles and how they relate to your research. Here's  one example !

How To Organize and Cite Your Research

Citation management tools  help you manage your research, collect and cite sources, and create bibliographies in a variety of citation styles.  Each one has its strengths and weaknesses, but any are easier than doing it by hand! The Library offers   workshops  on Endnote, Zotero, and Refworks. I'm also happy to help arrange a small group workshop, or one on one help with Zotero. 

For more information on the various tools available, and more on Zotero, see the "Managing Citations" tab in this guide!

Find Dissertations

Dissertations and Theses (Dissertation Abstracts) Full Text : indexes dissertations from over 1,000 North American, and selected European, graduate schools and universities from 1861 to the present. Full text for most of the dissertations added since 1997.

UC Berkeley dissertations : Search UC Library Search  by author. Also helpful to see dissertations written in your department which you can do by doing a subject search:

  • subject:  university of california berkeley dept of psychology dissertations
  • subject:  dissertations academic ucb psychology

Recent UC Berkeley dissertations are freely available online to anyone, anywhere with access to the internet. Also see  Find Dissertations and Theses  for other specialized sources.

  • << Previous: Data
  • Next: Citations >>
  • Last Updated: Jan 30, 2024 2:39 PM
  • URL: https://guides.lib.berkeley.edu/soc
  • 2.1 Approaches to Sociological Research
  • Introduction
  • 1.1 What Is Sociology?
  • 1.2 The History of Sociology
  • 1.3 Theoretical Perspectives in Sociology
  • 1.4 Why Study Sociology?
  • Section Summary
  • Section Quiz
  • Short Answer
  • Further Research
  • 2.2 Research Methods
  • 2.3 Ethical Concerns
  • 3.1 What Is Culture?
  • 3.2 Elements of Culture
  • 3.3 High, Low, Pop, Sub, Counter-culture and Cultural Change
  • 3.4 Theoretical Perspectives on Culture
  • 4.1 Types of Societies
  • 4.2 Theoretical Perspectives on Society
  • 4.3 Social Constructions of Reality
  • 5.1 Theories of Self-Development
  • 5.2 Why Socialization Matters
  • 5.3 Agents of Socialization
  • 5.4 Socialization Across the Life Course
  • 6.1 Types of Groups
  • 6.2 Group Size and Structure
  • 6.3 Formal Organizations
  • 7.1 Deviance and Control
  • 7.2 Theoretical Perspectives on Deviance and Crime
  • 7.3 Crime and the Law
  • 8.1 Technology Today
  • 8.2 Media and Technology in Society
  • 8.3 Global Implications of Media and Technology
  • 8.4 Theoretical Perspectives on Media and Technology
  • 9.1 What Is Social Stratification?
  • 9.2 Social Stratification and Mobility in the United States
  • 9.3 Global Stratification and Inequality
  • 9.4 Theoretical Perspectives on Social Stratification
  • 10.1 Global Stratification and Classification
  • 10.2 Global Wealth and Poverty
  • 10.3 Theoretical Perspectives on Global Stratification
  • 11.1 Racial, Ethnic, and Minority Groups
  • 11.2 Theoretical Perspectives on Race and Ethnicity
  • 11.3 Prejudice, Discrimination, and Racism
  • 11.4 Intergroup Relationships
  • 11.5 Race and Ethnicity in the United States
  • 12.1 Sex, Gender, Identity, and Expression
  • 12.2 Gender and Gender Inequality
  • 12.3 Sexuality
  • 13.1 Who Are the Elderly? Aging in Society
  • 13.2 The Process of Aging
  • 13.3 Challenges Facing the Elderly
  • 13.4 Theoretical Perspectives on Aging
  • 14.1 What Is Marriage? What Is a Family?
  • 14.2 Variations in Family Life
  • 14.3 Challenges Families Face
  • 15.1 The Sociological Approach to Religion
  • 15.2 World Religions
  • 15.3 Religion in the United States
  • 16.1 Education around the World
  • 16.2 Theoretical Perspectives on Education
  • 16.3 Issues in Education
  • 17.1 Power and Authority
  • 17.2 Forms of Government
  • 17.3 Politics in the United States
  • 17.4 Theoretical Perspectives on Government and Power
  • Introduction to Work and the Economy
  • 18.1 Economic Systems
  • 18.2 Globalization and the Economy
  • 18.3 Work in the United States
  • 19.1 The Social Construction of Health
  • 19.2 Global Health
  • 19.3 Health in the United States
  • 19.4 Comparative Health and Medicine
  • 19.5 Theoretical Perspectives on Health and Medicine
  • 20.1 Demography and Population
  • 20.2 Urbanization
  • 20.3 The Environment and Society
  • Introduction to Social Movements and Social Change
  • 21.1 Collective Behavior
  • 21.2 Social Movements
  • 21.3 Social Change

Learning Objectives

By the end of this section, you should be able to:

  • Define and describe the scientific method.
  • Explain how the scientific method is used in sociological research.
  • Describe the function and importance of an interpretive framework.
  • Describe the differences in accuracy, reliability and validity in a research study.

When sociologists apply the sociological perspective and begin to ask questions, no topic is off limits. Every aspect of human behavior is a source of possible investigation. Sociologists question the world that humans have created and live in. They notice patterns of behavior as people move through that world. Using sociological methods and systematic research within the framework of the scientific method and a scholarly interpretive perspective, sociologists have discovered social patterns in the workplace that have transformed industries, in families that have enlightened family members, and in education that have aided structural changes in classrooms.

Sociologists often begin the research process by asking a question about how or why things happen in this world. It might be a unique question about a new trend or an old question about a common aspect of life. Once the question is formed, the sociologist proceeds through an in-depth process to answer it. In deciding how to design that process, the researcher may adopt a scientific approach or an interpretive framework. The following sections describe these approaches to knowledge.

The Scientific Method

Sociologists make use of tried and true methods of research, such as experiments, surveys, and field research. But humans and their social interactions are so diverse that these interactions can seem impossible to chart or explain. It might seem that science is about discoveries and chemical reactions or about proving ideas right or wrong rather than about exploring the nuances of human behavior.

However, this is exactly why scientific models work for studying human behavior. A scientific process of research establishes parameters that help make sure results are objective and accurate. Scientific methods provide limitations and boundaries that focus a study and organize its results.

The scientific method involves developing and testing theories about the social world based on empirical evidence. It is defined by its commitment to systematic observation of the empirical world and strives to be objective, critical, skeptical, and logical. It involves a series of six prescribed steps that have been established over centuries of scientific scholarship.

Sociological research does not reduce knowledge to right or wrong facts. Results of studies tend to provide people with insights they did not have before—explanations of human behaviors and social practices and access to knowledge of other cultures, rituals and beliefs, or trends and attitudes.

In general, sociologists tackle questions about the role of social characteristics in outcomes or results. For example, how do different communities fare in terms of psychological well-being, community cohesiveness, range of vocation, wealth, crime rates, and so on? Are communities functioning smoothly? Sociologists often look between the cracks to discover obstacles to meeting basic human needs. They might also study environmental influences and patterns of behavior that lead to crime, substance abuse, divorce, poverty, unplanned pregnancies, or illness. And, because sociological studies are not all focused on negative behaviors or challenging situations, social researchers might study vacation trends, healthy eating habits, neighborhood organizations, higher education patterns, games, parks, and exercise habits.

Sociologists can use the scientific method not only to collect but also to interpret and analyze data. They deliberately apply scientific logic and objectivity. They are interested in—but not attached to—the results. They work outside of their own political or social agendas. This does not mean researchers do not have their own personalities, complete with preferences and opinions. But sociologists deliberately use the scientific method to maintain as much objectivity, focus, and consistency as possible in collecting and analyzing data in research studies.

With its systematic approach, the scientific method has proven useful in shaping sociological studies. The scientific method provides a systematic, organized series of steps that help ensure objectivity and consistency in exploring a social problem. They provide the means for accuracy, reliability, and validity. In the end, the scientific method provides a shared basis for discussion and analysis (Merton 1963). Typically, the scientific method has 6 steps which are described below.

Step 1: Ask a Question or Find a Research Topic

The first step of the scientific method is to ask a question, select a problem, and identify the specific area of interest. The topic should be narrow enough to study within a geographic location and time frame. “Are societies capable of sustained happiness?” would be too vague. The question should also be broad enough to have universal merit. “What do personal hygiene habits reveal about the values of students at XYZ High School?” would be too narrow. Sociologists strive to frame questions that examine well-defined patterns and relationships.

In a hygiene study, for instance, hygiene could be defined as “personal habits to maintain physical appearance (as opposed to health),” and a researcher might ask, “How do differing personal hygiene habits reflect the cultural value placed on appearance?”

Step 2: Review the Literature/Research Existing Sources

The next step researchers undertake is to conduct background research through a literature review , which is a review of any existing similar or related studies. A visit to the library, a thorough online search, and a survey of academic journals will uncover existing research about the topic of study. This step helps researchers gain a broad understanding of work previously conducted, identify gaps in understanding of the topic, and position their own research to build on prior knowledge. Researchers—including student researchers—are responsible for correctly citing existing sources they use in a study or that inform their work. While it is fine to borrow previously published material (as long as it enhances a unique viewpoint), it must be referenced properly and never plagiarized.

To study crime, a researcher might also sort through existing data from the court system, police database, prison information, interviews with criminals, guards, wardens, etc. It’s important to examine this information in addition to existing research to determine how these resources might be used to fill holes in existing knowledge. Reviewing existing sources educates researchers and helps refine and improve a research study design.

Step 3: Formulate a Hypothesis

A hypothesis is an explanation for a phenomenon based on a conjecture about the relationship between the phenomenon and one or more causal factors. In sociology, the hypothesis will often predict how one form of human behavior influences another. For example, a hypothesis might be in the form of an “if, then statement.” Let’s relate this to our topic of crime: If unemployment increases, then the crime rate will increase.

In scientific research, we formulate hypotheses to include an independent variables (IV) , which are the cause of the change, and a dependent variable (DV) , which is the effect , or thing that is changed. In the example above, unemployment is the independent variable and the crime rate is the dependent variable.

In a sociological study, the researcher would establish one form of human behavior as the independent variable and observe the influence it has on a dependent variable. How does gender (the independent variable) affect rate of income (the dependent variable)? How does one’s religion (the independent variable) affect family size (the dependent variable)? How is social class (the dependent variable) affected by level of education (the independent variable)?

Taking an example from Table 12.1, a researcher might hypothesize that teaching children proper hygiene (the independent variable) will boost their sense of self-esteem (the dependent variable). Note, however, this hypothesis can also work the other way around. A sociologist might predict that increasing a child’s sense of self-esteem (the independent variable) will increase or improve habits of hygiene (now the dependent variable). Identifying the independent and dependent variables is very important. As the hygiene example shows, simply identifying related two topics or variables is not enough. Their prospective relationship must be part of the hypothesis.

Step 4: Design and Conduct a Study

Researchers design studies to maximize reliability , which refers to how likely research results are to be replicated if the study is reproduced. Reliability increases the likelihood that what happens to one person will happen to all people in a group or what will happen in one situation will happen in another. Cooking is a science. When you follow a recipe and measure ingredients with a cooking tool, such as a measuring cup, the same results is obtained as long as the cook follows the same recipe and uses the same type of tool. The measuring cup introduces accuracy into the process. If a person uses a less accurate tool, such as their hand, to measure ingredients rather than a cup, the same result may not be replicated. Accurate tools and methods increase reliability.

Researchers also strive for validity , which refers to how well the study measures what it was designed to measure. To produce reliable and valid results, sociologists develop an operational definition , that is, they define each concept, or variable, in terms of the physical or concrete steps it takes to objectively measure it. The operational definition identifies an observable condition of the concept. By operationalizing the concept, all researchers can collect data in a systematic or replicable manner. Moreover, researchers can determine whether the experiment or method validly represent the phenomenon they intended to study.

A study asking how tutoring improves grades, for instance, might define “tutoring” as “one-on-one assistance by an expert in the field, hired by an educational institution.” However, one researcher might define a “good” grade as a C or better, while another uses a B+ as a starting point for “good.” For the results to be replicated and gain acceptance within the broader scientific community, researchers would have to use a standard operational definition. These definitions set limits and establish cut-off points that ensure consistency and replicability in a study.

We will explore research methods in greater detail in the next section of this chapter.

Step 5: Draw Conclusions

After constructing the research design, sociologists collect, tabulate or categorize, and analyze data to formulate conclusions. If the analysis supports the hypothesis, researchers can discuss the implications of the results for the theory or policy solution that they were addressing. If the analysis does not support the hypothesis, researchers may consider repeating the experiment or think of ways to improve their procedure.

However, even when results contradict a sociologist’s prediction of a study’s outcome, these results still contribute to sociological understanding. Sociologists analyze general patterns in response to a study, but they are equally interested in exceptions to patterns. In a study of education, a researcher might predict that high school dropouts have a hard time finding rewarding careers. While many assume that the higher the education, the higher the salary and degree of career happiness, there are certainly exceptions. People with little education have had stunning careers, and people with advanced degrees have had trouble finding work. A sociologist prepares a hypothesis knowing that results may substantiate or contradict it.

Sociologists carefully keep in mind how operational definitions and research designs impact the results as they draw conclusions. Consider the concept of “increase of crime,” which might be defined as the percent increase in crime from last week to this week, as in the study of Swedish crime discussed above. Yet the data used to evaluate “increase of crime” might be limited by many factors: who commits the crime, where the crimes are committed, or what type of crime is committed. If the data is gathered for “crimes committed in Houston, Texas in zip code 77021,” then it may not be generalizable to crimes committed in rural areas outside of major cities like Houston. If data is collected about vandalism, it may not be generalizable to assault.

Step 6: Report Results

Researchers report their results at conferences and in academic journals. These results are then subjected to the scrutiny of other sociologists in the field. Before the conclusions of a study become widely accepted, the studies are often repeated in the same or different environments. In this way, sociological theories and knowledge develops as the relationships between social phenomenon are established in broader contexts and different circumstances.

Interpretive Framework

While many sociologists rely on empirical data and the scientific method as a research approach, others operate from an interpretive framework . While systematic, this approach doesn’t follow the hypothesis-testing model that seeks to find generalizable results. Instead, an interpretive framework, sometimes referred to as an interpretive perspective , seeks to understand social worlds from the point of view of participants, which leads to in-depth knowledge or understanding about the human experience.

Interpretive research is generally more descriptive or narrative in its findings. Rather than formulating a hypothesis and method for testing it, an interpretive researcher will develop approaches to explore the topic at hand that may involve a significant amount of direct observation or interaction with subjects including storytelling. This type of researcher learns through the process and sometimes adjusts the research methods or processes midway to optimize findings as they evolve.

Critical Sociology

Critical sociology focuses on deconstruction of existing sociological research and theory. Informed by the work of Karl Marx, scholars known collectively as the Frankfurt School proposed that social science, as much as any academic pursuit, is embedded in the system of power constituted by the set of class, caste, race, gender, and other relationships that exist in the society. Consequently, it cannot be treated as purely objective. Critical sociologists view theories, methods, and the conclusions as serving one of two purposes: they can either legitimate and rationalize systems of social power and oppression or liberate humans from inequality and restriction on human freedom. Deconstruction can involve data collection, but the analysis of this data is not empirical or positivist.

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This book may not be used in the training of large language models or otherwise be ingested into large language models or generative AI offerings without OpenStax's permission.

Want to cite, share, or modify this book? This book uses the Creative Commons Attribution License and you must attribute OpenStax.

Access for free at https://openstax.org/books/introduction-sociology-3e/pages/1-introduction
  • Authors: Tonja R. Conerly, Kathleen Holmes, Asha Lal Tamang
  • Publisher/website: OpenStax
  • Book title: Introduction to Sociology 3e
  • Publication date: Jun 3, 2021
  • Location: Houston, Texas
  • Book URL: https://openstax.org/books/introduction-sociology-3e/pages/1-introduction
  • Section URL: https://openstax.org/books/introduction-sociology-3e/pages/2-1-approaches-to-sociological-research

© Jan 18, 2024 OpenStax. Textbook content produced by OpenStax is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License . The OpenStax name, OpenStax logo, OpenStax book covers, OpenStax CNX name, and OpenStax CNX logo are not subject to the Creative Commons license and may not be reproduced without the prior and express written consent of Rice University.

Banner

Research in Sociology

  • Choosing a Topic
  • Evaluating Sources
  • Locating Print and eBooks
  • Searching for Articles
  • Government Documents
  • Surveys and Polls
  • Citations/Annotated Bibliography

How to use Scientific Articles in a Literature Review

Video explanations of a literature review, what is a literature review, types of literature reviews.

  • Ten Simple Rules for Writing a Literature Review

"A literature review is an account of what has been published on a topic by accredited scholars and researchers. Occasionally you will be asked to write one as a separate assignment, ..., but more often it is part of the introduction to an essay, research report, or thesis. 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. (n.d). The literature review: A few tips on conducting it. Retrieved from  http://www.writing.utoronto.ca/advice/specific-types-of-writing/literature-review

What are the goals of creating a Literature Review?

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

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

What kinds of literature reviews are written?

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 . San Diego, CA: Plural Publishing.

Meta-analysis - "Meta-analysis is a method of reviewing resarch 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 occured in different studies." (p. 197)

-Roberts, M.C. & Ilardi, S.S. (2003). Handbook of Research Methods in Clinical Psychology . Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub.

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. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2006.03721.x

From University of Connecticut Library

Traditional or Narrative

  • Provides background for understanding current knowledge
  • Critiques, summarizes and draws conclusions from a body of knowledge
  • Identifies gaps or inconsistencies to be filled or corrected through further research and study
  • Helps to refine the topic and research question
  • Carries the flaw of becoming less useful as more information becomes available
  • Identifies, appraises and synthesizes available evidence in order to answer a specified research question
  • Applies a more rigorous approach that details the time frame of selected literature and method of critique and analysis
  • Uses explicit and well-defined methods in order to minimize bias and increase reliability
  • Includes as comprehensive an amount of studies as possible that includes both published and unpublished findings, such as "grey literature"

Meta-Analysis

  • Systematically locates, appraises and synthesizes data from a large body of findings using statistical analysis and techniques
  • Similar to a systematic review in that it integrates the findings of a large body of knowledge
  • Attempts to correct flaws of traditional or narrative reviews by allowing researchers to synthesize a greater amount of studies
  • Integrates and draws conclusions on research findings and seeks to detect broad patterns and relationships between studies

Meta-Synthesis

  • Attempts to bring together, juxtapose, re-analyze and combine findings from multiple qualitiative studies using non-statistical techniques
  • Seeks to discover or provide new interpretations, conceptions or theoretical developments
  • Combines multiple studies to identify common key themes and elements
  • May use findings from phenomenological, grounded theory or ethnographic studies

Borenstein, M.H., Viggins, L.V. & Julian, P.T. (2009). Introduction to Meta-Analysis. Hoboken, N.J.: Wiley

Cronin, P., Ryan, F. & Coughlan, M. (2008). Undertaking a literature review: A step-by-step approach . British Journal of Nursing, 17 (1), 38-43.

Glasziou, P. (2001). Systematic Reviews in Health Care : A Practical Guide. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Mays, C., Popay, N. & Jennie (2007).  Synthesising Qualitative and Quantitative Health Research : A Guide to Methods . Great Britain: Open University Press.

From Bow Valley College Library

  • << Previous: Citations/Annotated Bibliography
  • Next: RefWorks >>
  • Last Updated: Feb 6, 2024 1:10 PM
  • URL: https://lewisu.libguides.com/sociology

Logo for British Columbia/Yukon Open Authoring Platform

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

The Research Proposal

83 Components of the Literature Review

Krathwohl (2005) suggests and describes a variety of components to include in a research proposal.  The following sections present these components in a suggested template for you to follow in the preparation of your research proposal.

Introduction

The introduction sets the tone for what follows in your research proposal – treat it as the initial pitch of your idea.  After reading the introduction your reader should:

  • Understand what it is you want to do;
  • Have a sense of your passion for the topic;
  • Be excited about the study´s possible outcomes.

As you begin writing your research proposal it is helpful to think of the introduction as a narrative of what it is you want to do, written in one to three paragraphs.  Within those one to three paragraphs, it is important to briefly answer the following questions:

  • What is the central research problem?
  • How is the topic of your research proposal related to the problem?
  • What methods will you utilize to analyze the research problem?
  • Why is it important to undertake this research? What is the significance of your proposed research?  Why are the outcomes of your proposed research important, and to whom or to what are they important?

Note : You may be asked by your instructor to include an abstract with your research proposal.  In such cases, an abstract should provide an overview of what it is you plan to study, your main research question, a brief explanation of your methods to answer the research question, and your expected findings. All of this information must be carefully crafted in 150 to 250 words.  A word of advice is to save the writing of your abstract until the very end of your research proposal preparation.  If you are asked to provide an abstract, you should include 5-7 key words that are of most relevance to your study. List these in order of relevance.

Background and significance

The purpose of this section is to explain the context of your proposal and to describe, in detail, why it is important to undertake this research. Assume that the person or people who will read your research proposal know nothing or very little about the research problem.  While you do not need to include all knowledge you have learned about your topic in this section, it is important to ensure that you include the most relevant material that will help to explain the goals of your research.

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

  • State the research problem and provide a more thorough explanation about the purpose of the study than what you stated in the introduction.
  • Present the rationale for the proposed research study. Clearly indicate why this research is worth doing.  Answer the “so what?” question.
  • Describe the major issues or problems to be addressed by your research. Do not forget to explain how and in what ways your proposed research builds upon previous related research.
  • Explain how you plan to go about conducting your research.
  • Clearly identify the key or most relevant sources of research you intend to use and explain how they will contribute to your analysis of the topic.
  • Set the boundaries of your proposed research, in order to provide a clear focus. Where appropriate, state not only what you will study, but what will be excluded from your study.
  • Provide clear definitions of key concepts and terms. As key concepts and terms often have numerous definitions, make sure you state which definition you will be utilizing in your research.

Literature Review

This is the most time-consuming aspect in the preparation of your research proposal and it is a key component of the research proposal. As described in Chapter 5 , the literature review provides the background to your study and demonstrates the significance of the proposed research. Specifically, it is a review and synthesis of prior research that is related to the problem you are setting forth to investigate.  Essentially, your goal in the literature review is to place your research study within the larger whole of what has been studied in the past, while demonstrating to your reader that your work is original, innovative, and adds to the larger whole.

As the literature review is information dense, it is essential that this section be intelligently structured to enable your reader to grasp the key arguments underpinning your study. However, this can be easier to state and harder to do, simply due to the fact there is usually a plethora of related research to sift through. Consequently, a good strategy for writing the literature review is to break the literature into conceptual categories or themes, rather than attempting to describe various groups of literature you reviewed.  Chapter V, “ The Literature Review ,” describes a variety of methods to help you organize the themes.

Here are some suggestions on how to approach the writing of your literature review:

  • Think about what questions other researchers have asked, what methods they used, what they found, and what they recommended based upon their findings.
  • Do not be afraid to challenge previous related research findings and/or conclusions.
  • Assess what you believe to be missing from previous research and explain how your research fills in this gap and/or extends previous research

It is important to note that a significant challenge related to undertaking a literature review is knowing when to stop.  As such, it is important to know how to know when you have uncovered the key conceptual categories underlying your research topic.  Generally, when you start to see repetition in the conclusions or recommendations, you can have confidence that you have covered all of the significant conceptual categories in your literature review.  However, it is also important to acknowledge that researchers often find themselves returning to the literature as they collect and analyze their data.  For example, an unexpected finding may develop as one collects and/or analyzes the data and it is important to take the time to step back and review the literature again, to ensure that no other researchers have found a similar finding.  This may include looking to research outside your field.

This situation occurred with one of the authors of this textbook´s research related to community resilience.  During the interviews, the researchers heard many participants discuss individual resilience factors and how they believed these individual factors helped make the community more resilient, overall.  Sheppard and Williams (2016) had not discovered these individual factors in their original literature review on community and environmental resilience. However, when they returned to the literature to search for individual resilience factors, they discovered a small body of literature in the child and youth psychology field. Consequently, Sheppard and Williams had to go back and add a new section to their literature review on individual resilience factors. Interestingly, their research appeared to be the first research to link individual resilience factors with community resilience factors.

Research design and methods

The objective of this section of the research proposal is to convince the reader that your overall research design and methods of analysis will enable you to solve the research problem you have identified and also enable you to accurately and effectively interpret the results of your research. Consequently, it is critical that the research design and methods section is well-written, clear, and logically organized.  This demonstrates to your reader that you know what you are going to do and how you are going to do it.  Overall, you want to leave your reader feeling confident that you have what it takes to get this research study completed in a timely fashion.

Essentially, this section of the research proposal should be clearly tied to the specific objectives of your study; however, it is also important to draw upon and include examples from the literature review that relate to your design and intended methods.  In other words, you must clearly demonstrate how your study utilizes and builds upon past studies, as it relates to the research design and intended methods.  For example, what methods have been used by other researchers in similar studies?

While it is important to consider the methods that other researchers have employed, it is equally important, if not more so, to consider what methods have not been employed but could be.  Remember, the methods section is not simply a list of tasks to be undertaken. It is also an argument as to why and how the tasks you have outlined will help you investigate the research problem and answer your research question(s).

Tips for writing the research design and methods section:

  • Specify the methodological approaches you intend to employ to obtain information and the techniques you will use to analyze the data.
  • Specify the research operations you will undertake and he way you will interpret the results of those operations in relation to the research problem.
  • Go beyond stating what you hope to achieve through the methods you have chosen. State how you will actually do the methods (i.e. coding interview text, running regression analysis, etc.).
  • Anticipate and acknowledge any potential barriers you may encounter when undertaking your research and describe how you will address these barriers.
  • Explain where you believe you will find challenges related to data collection, including access to participants and information.

Preliminary suppositions and implications

The purpose of this section is to argue how and in what ways you anticipate that your research will refine, revise, or extend existing knowledge in the area of your study. Depending upon the aims and objectives of your study, you should also discuss how your anticipated findings may impact future research.  For example, is it possible that your research may lead to a new policy, new theoretical understanding, or a new method for analyzing data?  How might your study influence future studies?  What might your study mean for future practitioners working in the field?  Who or what may benefit from your study?  How might your study contribute to social, economic, environmental issues?  While it is important to think about and discuss possibilities such as these, it is equally important to be realistic in stating your anticipated findings.  In other words, you do not want to delve into idle speculation.  Rather, the purpose here is to reflect upon gaps in the current body of literature and to describe how and in what ways you anticipate your research will begin to fill in some or all of those gaps.

The conclusion reiterates the importance and significance of your research proposal and it provides a brief summary of the entire proposed study.  Essentially, this section should only be one or two paragraphs in length. Here is a potential outline for your conclusion:

  • Discuss why the study should be done. Specifically discuss how you expect your study will advance existing knowledge and how your study is unique.
  • Explain the specific purpose of the study and the research questions that the study will answer.
  • Explain why the research design and methods chosen for this study are appropriate, and why other design and methods were not chosen.
  • State the potential implications you expect to emerge from your proposed study,
  • Provide a sense of how your study fits within the broader scholarship currently in existence related to the research problem.

As with any scholarly research paper, you must cite the sources you used in composing your research proposal.  In a research proposal, this can take two forms: a reference list or a bibliography.  A reference list does what the name suggests, it lists the literature you referenced in the body of your research proposal.  All references in the reference list, must appear in the body of the research proposal.  Remember, it is not acceptable to say “as cited in …”  As a researcher you must always go to the original source and check it for yourself.  Many errors are made in referencing, even by top researchers, and so it is important not to perpetuate an error made by someone else. While this can be time consuming, it is the proper way to undertake a literature review.

In contrast, a bibliography , is a list of everything you used or cited in your research proposal, with additional citations to any key sources relevant to understanding the research problem.  In other words, sources cited in your bibliography may not necessarily appear in the body of your research proposal.  Make sure you check with your instructor to see which of the two you are expected to produce.

Overall, your list of citations should be a testament to the fact that you have done a sufficient level of preliminary research to ensure that your project will complement, but not duplicate, previous research efforts. For social sciences, the reference list or bibliography should be prepared in American Psychological Association (APA) referencing format. Usually, the reference list (or bibliography) is not included in the word count of the research proposal. Again, make sure you check with your instructor to confirm.

An Introduction to Research Methods in Sociology by Valerie A. Sheppard is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Have a language expert improve your writing

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

  • Knowledge Base

Methodology

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

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

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

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

There are five key steps to writing a literature review:

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

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

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

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

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

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

literature review definition in sociology

Try for free

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 25, 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.

Sociology Group: Welcome to Social Sciences Blog

How to write Literature Review: Explained with Examples

There is hardly any topic left in this time and age that has not been researched, discussed, or written. Therefore, while computing any academic paper (such as term paper, dissertation , etc.), you will encounter multiple works along the same line. When you read these already published works and use them to further your research, that is when and where a literature review is needed. Writing a literature review is an essential part of academic writing. You cannot claim ideas to be your original ideas when they already exist out there. Therefore, to give due credit to those people and the work who inspired you and/or helped you complete your research is the aim of a literature review. Thus, a review of existing literature allows you to tell your audience the pretext and the context of your work and place it in the current dialogue.

Guide for writing the Literature Review

This article will talk about different types of literature reviews and how to write one. We will allocate necessary examples whenever it is necessary for better understanding.

Types of Literature Review

Narrative Literature Review

A narrative literature review is the most traditional literature review. Here the aim is to summarize and critique the body of literature you’re studying. A narrative review can also be used to establish conclusions and identify gaps in the border study. To perform a narrative review, you should have an exact research question or hypothesis to know exactly what you’re looking for.

Systematic Literature Review

Compared to other forms of literature, the systematic literature review is the more stringent one. It has a well-defined strategy that can be further divided into two types: Meta-analysis and meta-synthesis. 

Meta-analysis: In a meta-analysis review, you combine the results of multiple research on the same topic and then statistically analyze them. It identifies links and patterns and reaches a cohesive conclusion.

Meta-Synthesis: Opposing to meta-analysis, the meta-synthesis approach is based on procedures that are not statistical. This method combines analyses and interprets the results of several qualitative research projects. It is often used when conducting inductive research.

Argumentative Literature Review

As the name suggests, an argumentative review is done to either support or contradict an argument. It is done to reflect on an already existing assumption or a philosophical dilemma once again. However, there is a drawback of this approach in that it is mostly prejudiced in nature since the reviewer has already taken aside.

Integrative Literature Review

An integrative review examines and evaluates secondary sources. It aims to produce new frameworks and perspectives. The integrative literature review will be your only alternative if your research does not entail primary data collecting and analysis.

Theoretical Literature Review

Theoretical review is concerned with a body of knowledge accumulated in relation to a topic, concept, theory, or phenomenon. Theoretical literature reviews are useful for determining what ideas already exist, their relationships, and the extent to which existing theories have been studied and for generating new hypotheses to test.

Guide for writing the Literature Review

We cannot elaborate on all the various kinds of literature reviews in one article. Therefore we will focus on the narrative literature review and how to do it. Nonetheless, all the kinds of literature reviews are somewhat similar and follow the same outline.

Literature Review Examples

Follow the steps listed below to write a splendid literature review:

  • Start your Reading and Make Notes
  • Plan your Review
  • Write the Literature Review
  • Recheck and Submit 

1.  Read and Make Notes

To be able to write a review, one needs to be well-read. Reading is the first step in the process of writing a literature review. You know what to read since you already know that topic and the themes you want to work on. Read around the various subtopics, examples, and contexts to build a holistic understanding of your topic. As you keep reading and researching, ensure that you maintain a record. A human brain can’t remember all that it reads. Therefore, it is imperative to make notes while reading for an extensive project like a literature review. We recommend that the best way to keep track of all the reading you have done is via maintaining an annotated bibliography.

An annotated bibliography is where you methodologically make notes. You keep a record of the author, publisher, year of publication, page numbers, main argument, examples or sub-arguments, conclusion, and keywords.

A few resources from where you can read and research:

Few sites where you can maintain an annotated bibliography:

  • Google Docs OR Word Document
  • Google Sheets OR Excel
  • Physically in a notebook or placards

2.  Planning

This is the step where you determine which type of review you want to take up for your academic work. You should make a rough outline in this stage, signifying what you wish to cover in your review and how. The review can be either a single body or divided thematically or topically that is absolutely up to you. The purpose of the literature review should be clear- informing the reader about the pre-existing work that has already been done and how it helps your study.

Let us take the example that you are writing a dissertation on “How capital influences the process of Food Experimentation” .

As said above, in this article we will take up the example of Narrative Literature Review , which means that the following things need to be highlighted when you write the review:

  • The summary or the main argument
  • How to help you in your study
  • Where are the research gaps

3.  Writing the Literature Review

      A Literature Review should have the following components:

  • A title (subtitle optional)

The Main Body

  • Bibliography

Title and Subtitle

The literature review should have the same title as your main project. The title should reflect what your project is about in the least numbers possible. Use a subtitle if necessary to make your title more reflective.

Keywords are essential while writing a review of the literature. Since it is a vast body of literature, citing the keywords initially gives the reader a sense of idea about what they are about to read. Keywords are those concepts, theories, and/or ideas recurring throughout your literature review and your research project. Restrict your keywords to 6 to 8 only so that you do not overwhelm the reader.

For example, the keywords for your literature review can be:

Food Experimentation, Social capital, Cultural capital, Economic capital

The main body is where you write the central portion of your review. You can either write a free-flowing body or divide it into themes and topics. Reiterating the main point once again, the aim is to produce a review that conveys how the existing piece of literature helps further your study. You can either explain each resource separately or try to club them together if they have the same argument. You have to elucidate the main argument of reading and its relevance to your study, no matter which method you choose. In the end, you should be able to find a research gap and use it to facilitate your academic work, such as term papers or dissertations.

If you plan to write a review where each paragraph talks about one essential reading that helped you, then you can write it in this manner:

Start your paragraph by writing a general or broad statement about food and its relationship with different capitals. Then cite the major work with proper reference. After that, state its main argument. You can even write multiple viewpoints if necessary. After this, explain how this reading has helped you formulate your argument.

You can extend upon these lines, taking them as your frame:

Talking about food cannot be done without talking about money. The economic condition of a person is one of the biggest factors in food consumption. The classical work of Pierre Bourdieu, Cultural Reproduction and Social Reproduction will be applied to study the impact of three types of Capital on food experimentation. Economic capital allocates the money, social capital allows the people to access various foods, and cultural capital informs a class of people more about emerging food practices than some other less unaware classes.

The last paragraph or the last few lines of your review should be reserved for elaborating on the research gap in the realm of your research topic. You also explain how you aim to fill this gap or contribute to the discipline in the long run through your project.

Make sure to cite and reference as you go properly. Literature review, in its essence, is secondary writing taken from other sources; therefore, not referencing your work will lead to large amounts of plagiarism.

4.  Last Checks

The last step is to leave your work for a while. Take a breather and refresh your mind. Revisit your review again after this break, and then look at it from three perspectives to get the perfect version to submit. For the first perspective, put yourself in the shoes of an editor. Search and cull out grammatical mistakes and/or spelling errors. For the second revision, be yourself again and see if you’ve missed something or misinterpreted something. Lastly, look at the review from the reader’s point of view and eliminate any unnecessary jargon that does not add to your review’s quality. Once you have looked at your literature review from every possible angle, submit it and take a breath of relief.

Learn: How to Write Coursework?

literature review definition in sociology

Hello! Eiti is a budding sociologist whose passion lies in reading, researching, and writing. She thrives on coffee, to-do lists, deadlines, and organization. Eiti's primary interest areas encompass food, gender, and academia.

University of Texas

  • University of Texas Libraries

Literature Reviews

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

What is a Literature Review?

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

A literature review should: 

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

From  S age Research Methods

Purpose of a Literature Review

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

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

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

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

Limitations of a Literature Review

Some of the limitations of a literature review are:

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

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

Meryl Brodsky : Communication and Information Studies

Hannah Chapman Tripp : Biology, Neuroscience

Carolyn Cunningham : Human Development & Family Sciences, Psychology, Sociology

Larayne Dallas : Engineering

Janelle Hedstrom : Special Education, Curriculum & Instruction, Ed Leadership & Policy ​

Susan Macicak : Linguistics

Imelda Vetter : Dell Medical School

For help in other subject areas, please see the guide to library specialists by subject .

Periodically, UT Libraries runs a workshop covering the basics and library support for literature reviews. While we try to offer these once per academic year, we find providing the recording to be helpful to community members who have missed the session. Following is the most recent recording of the workshop, Conducting a Literature Review. To view the recording, a UT login is required.

  • October 26, 2022 recording
  • Last Updated: Oct 26, 2022 2:49 PM
  • URL: https://guides.lib.utexas.edu/literaturereviews

Creative Commons License

Library Homepage

Research Methods and Design

  • Action Research
  • Case Study Design

Literature Review

  • Quantitative Research Methods
  • Qualitative Research Methods
  • Mixed Methods Study
  • Indigenous Research and Ethics This link opens in a new window
  • Identifying Empirical Research Articles This link opens in a new window
  • Research Ethics and Quality
  • Data Literacy
  • Get Help with Writing Assignments

A literature review is a discussion of the literature (aka. the "research" or "scholarship") surrounding a certain topic. A good literature review doesn't simply summarize the existing material, but provides thoughtful synthesis and analysis. The purpose of a literature review is to orient your own work within an existing body of knowledge. A literature review may be written as a standalone piece or be included in a larger body of work.

You can read more about literature reviews, what they entail, and how to write one, using the resources below. 

Am I the only one struggling to write a literature review?

Dr. Zina O'Leary explains the misconceptions and struggles students often have with writing a literature review. She also provides step-by-step guidance on writing a persuasive literature review.

An Introduction to Literature Reviews

Dr. Eric Jensen, Professor of Sociology at the University of Warwick, and Dr. Charles Laurie, Director of Research at Verisk Maplecroft, explain how to write a literature review, and why researchers need to do so. Literature reviews can be stand-alone research or part of a larger project. They communicate the state of academic knowledge on a given topic, specifically detailing what is still unknown.

This is the first video in a whole series about literature reviews. You can find the rest of the series in our SAGE database, Research Methods:

Videos

Videos covering research methods and statistics

Identify Themes and Gaps in Literature (with real examples) | Scribbr

Finding connections between sources is key to organizing the arguments and structure of a good literature review. In this video, you'll learn how to identify themes, debates, and gaps between sources, using examples from real papers.

4 Tips for Writing a Literature Review's Intro, Body, and Conclusion | Scribbr

While each review will be unique in its structure--based on both the existing body of both literature and the overall goals of your own paper, dissertation, or research--this video from Scribbr does a good job simplifying the goals of writing a literature review for those who are new to the process. In this video, you’ll learn what to include in each section, as well as 4 tips for the main body illustrated with an example.

Cover Art

  • Literature Review This chapter in SAGE's Encyclopedia of Research Design describes the types of literature reviews and scientific standards for conducting literature reviews.
  • UNC Writing Center: Literature Reviews This handout from the Writing Center at UNC will explain what literature reviews are and offer insights into the form and construction of literature reviews in the humanities, social sciences, and sciences.
  • Purdue OWL: Writing a Literature Review The overview of literature reviews comes from Purdue's Online Writing Lab. It explains the basic why, what, and how of writing a literature review.

Organizational Tools for Literature Reviews

One of the most daunting aspects of writing a literature review is organizing your research. There are a variety of strategies that you can use to help you in this task. We've highlighted just a few ways writers keep track of all that information! You can use a combination of these tools or come up with your own organizational process. The key is choosing something that works with your own learning style.

Citation Managers

Citation managers are great tools, in general, for organizing research, but can be especially helpful when writing a literature review. You can keep all of your research in one place, take notes, and organize your materials into different folders or categories. Read more about citations managers here:

  • Manage Citations & Sources

Concept Mapping

Some writers use concept mapping (sometimes called flow or bubble charts or "mind maps") to help them visualize the ways in which the research they found connects.

literature review definition in sociology

There is no right or wrong way to make a concept map. There are a variety of online tools that can help you create a concept map or you can simply put pen to paper. To read more about concept mapping, take a look at the following help guides:

  • Using Concept Maps From Williams College's guide, Literature Review: A Self-guided Tutorial

Synthesis Matrix

A synthesis matrix is is a chart you can use to help you organize your research into thematic categories. By organizing your research into a matrix, like the examples below, can help you visualize the ways in which your sources connect. 

  • Walden University Writing Center: Literature Review Matrix Find a variety of literature review matrix examples and templates from Walden University.
  • Writing A Literature Review and Using a Synthesis Matrix An example synthesis matrix created by NC State University Writing and Speaking Tutorial Service Tutors. If you would like a copy of this synthesis matrix in a different format, like a Word document, please ask a librarian. CC-BY-SA 3.0
  • << Previous: Case Study Design
  • Next: Quantitative Research Methods >>
  • Last Updated: Feb 6, 2024 9:20 AM

CityU Home - CityU Catalog

Creative Commons License

  • Search Menu
  • Advance articles
  • Author Guidelines
  • Submission Site
  • Open Access
  • Call for Papers
  • About Work, Aging and Retirement
  • Editorial Board
  • Advertising and Corporate Services
  • Journals Career Network
  • Self-Archiving Policy
  • Dispatch Dates
  • Journals on Oxford Academic
  • Books on Oxford Academic

Issue Cover

Article Contents

The social identity approach, age-related constructs, conceptual model on age, social identity and identification, and work outcomes, literature review of empirical research on age and age-related constructs, social identity and identification, and work outcomes.

  • < Previous

Age, Social Identity and Identification, and Work Outcomes: A Conceptual Model, Literature Review, and Future Research Directions

  • Article contents
  • Figures & tables
  • Supplementary Data

Hannes Zacher, Lisa Esser, Clarissa Bohlmann, Cort W Rudolph, Age, Social Identity and Identification, and Work Outcomes: A Conceptual Model, Literature Review, and Future Research Directions, Work, Aging and Retirement , Volume 5, Issue 1, January 2019, Pages 24–43, https://doi.org/10.1093/workar/way005

  • Permissions Icon Permissions

The goals of this article are to present a conceptual model of age, social identity and identification, and work outcomes, to review empirical studies that focus on the intersection of these three topic areas, and to outline directions for future research. We first provide an overview of the social identity approach, including central elements of social identity and self-categorization theories. Second, we explain age-related concepts that are relevant to the social identity approach. Third, we outline the conditional direct and indirect effects proposed by our model. Fourth, we review 27 empirical studies on age, social identity and identification, and work outcomes that we identified in a literature search. We conclude with a discussion that summarizes possible directions for future research, including conceptual and methodological considerations. Overall, our conceptual model and literature review suggest that the social identity approach offers an important lens through which to study age and work.

Most empirical research in the growing field of age in the work context is based on lifespan developmental theories, such as the model of selection, optimization, and compensation ( Baltes & Baltes, 1990 ), socioemotional selectivity theory ( Carstensen, 1991 ), or the lifespan theory of control ( Schulz & Heckhausen, 1996 ; see Rudolph, 2016 , for a review). However, over the past decade, work and organizational psychologists have additionally started to apply the social identity approach, which originates from the field of social psychology, to gain a better understanding of the role of age in the work context (e.g., Desmette & Gaillard, 2008 ; Hesketh, Griffin, Dawis, & Bayl-Smith, 2015 ; Lyons & Schweitzer, 2016 ). This trend is consistent with an increasing number of studies conducted by gerontologists and lifespan developmental psychologists, who have used the social identity approach to examine experiences and behavior of older adults outside of the work context, for instance in retirement and in aged care facilities (e.g., Gleibs et al., 2011 ; Haslam et al., 2010 ; Steffens, Cruwys, C. Haslam, Jetten, & S. A. Haslam, 2016 ; Weiss & Lang, 2009 ).

The social identity approach integrates its two precursors, social identity theory ( Tajfel & Turner, 1979 ) and self-categorization theory ( Turner, Hogg, Oakes, Reicher, & Wetherell, 1987 ). Its most basic proposition is that individuals psychologically internalize their social group memberships (e.g., “I am an employee of company X,” “I am an older worker”), and that these social identities and associated social identification processes influence their cognition, affect, motivation, and behavior in important ways ( Hornsey, 2008 ). In the field of social psychology, the social identity approach is today one of the most influential approaches to study group processes and intergroup relations ( Abrams & Hogg, 2017 ). Furthermore, since Ashforth and Mael (1989) introduced the social identity approach to the organizational context, it has become an important theoretical framework to understand various work and organizational topics ( Haslam, 2004 ; Hogg & Terry, 2000 ), including motivation and job performance ( Haslam, Powell, & Turner, 2000 ), leadership ( Hogg, 2001 ), as well as creativity and innovation ( Hirst, Van Dick, & Van Knippenberg, 2009 ). Generally, empirical research shows that social identification with a work group, team, or organization is associated with important work outcomes, including productivity, job attitudes, and occupational well-being ( Lee, Park, & Koo, 2015 ; Ng, 2015 ; Riketta, 2005 ; Steffens, Haslam, Schuh, Jetten, & van Dick, 2017 ).

While some researchers have begun to apply the social identity approach to study the role of age in the work context, this research unfortunately remains fragmented and in need of integration. The goals of this paper, therefore, are (a) to introduce an integrative conceptual model of age, social identity and identification, and work outcomes; (b) to review empirical studies that simultaneously investigated concepts related to age, social identity and identification, and work; and (c) to outline possible directions for future research. Our review of empirical studies does not focus on research that has examined age, social identity, and social identification outside of the work context (e.g., among retirees, in aged care facilities); research that has examined social identity, identification, and work but not age or age-related concepts; or research on age and work but not social identity or identification. However, we refer to research in these areas to support the development of our conceptual model and to derive ideas for future research.

To achieve our goals, we first outline the background and central elements of the social identity approach and its precursor theories. Second, we explain relevant age-related concepts. Third, we present and explain our conceptual model of associations among age, social identity and identification, and work outcomes. Fourth, we review the empirical literature on age, social identity and identification, and work. Finally, we critically discuss the results of our literature review and outline potential directions for future research in this area. Overall, by examining the interplay between constructs related to age, social identity and identification, and work, we contribute to the literatures on work and organizational psychology, social psychology, social identity and self-categorization theories, as well as age and lifespan development.

The social identity approach is based on and integrates two influential theories on group processes and intergroup relations, social identity theory and self-categorization theory ( Hornsey, 2008 ). Social identity theory attempts to explain intra- and intergroup experiences and behaviors based on how the members of a social group (e.g., older workers, employees of organization X) perceive themselves in relation to other groups (e.g., younger workers, employees of organization Y; Tajfel & Turner, 1979 ). The theory suggests that, depending on the situation, people’s experiences, behaviors, and interactions can be classified as more or less interpersonal or intergroup. In interpersonal situations, people define themselves and another person with whom they interact completely in terms of their individual characteristics, such as their abilities, skills, and personality (i.e., personal identity), and act and interact based on their individual goals and expected outcomes. In contrast, in intergroup situations, people define themselves and others based on their membership in a specific social group (i.e., social identity, such as age group, team, organization), and act and interact in accordance with their group’s goals and expected outcomes, as well as perceived group status differences, the perceived legitimacy and stability of those differences, and the perceived permeability of group boundaries ( Ellemers, Haslam, Platow, & van Knippenberg, 2002 ; Tajfel & Turner, 1979 ; Turner, 1999 ). Importantly, it is rare that situations can be classified as completely interpersonal or intergroup, but this distinction is helpful to illustrate the processes stipulated by social identity theory ( Hornsey, 2008 ). Another central proposition of social identity theory is that people are intrinsically motivated to achieve or maintain a positive social identity and use certain strategies (e.g., social mobility, social comparison, social competition) to obtain positive distinctiveness ( Tajfel & Turner, 1979 ).

The terms social identity and social identification are often used interchangeably in the literature. This practice goes back to Tajfel’s (1978) early definition of social identity as “that part of an individual’s self-concept which derives from his knowledge of his membership in a social group (or groups) together with the value and emotional significance attached to that membership” (p. 63, italics added; see also Turner & Oakes, 1986 ). However, social identity theorists have argued that it is useful to separate these cognitive and affective aspects in order to distinguish social identity and social identification ( Ellemers, Spears, & Doosje, 2002 ; Sluss & Ashforth, 2007 ). We, therefore, adopt a definition of social identity as the nature or content of a person’s perceived membership in a social group (e.g., social identity derived from belonging to the group of older workers or from being an employee of company X; Ellemers, Spears, et al., 2002 ). Accordingly, an age-related social identity involves whether or not a worker identifies with the group of younger, middle-aged, or older workers. A work-related social identity entails whether or not a worker identifies with a work-related group, such as a team or organization. Importantly, such age- and work-related forms of social identity are sometimes called “cognitive social identification” and measured with items such as “I think of myself as a late-career worker” ( Bayl-Smith & Griffin, 2014 ; Desmette & Gaillard, 2008 ; Gaillard & Desmette, 2008 ).

Every person has several, partly overlapping social identities, some of which are more clearly defined and personally meaningful than others ( Ellemers, Spears, et al., 2002 ). For instance, a social identity based upon one’s membership in the group of psychology professors might be personally more important and less ambiguous than a social identity derived from belonging to a certain age group. Social identification refers to the strength of a person’s psychological association with a social group or, in other words, the extent to which a person defines him- or herself in terms of a social group (Ellemers, Spears, et al., 2002 ; Sluss & Ashforth, 2007 ). Thus, adopting a certain social identity is a precondition for the emergence of different levels of social identification with the respective group. For instance, a person may generally think of him- or herself as an older worker (i.e., social identity) but not consider this social identity to be particularly self-defining (i.e., low social identification; Sluss & Ashforth, 2007 ). Age-related social identification thus describes the extent to which a worker identifies with a certain age group (i.e., younger, middle-aged, or older workers). Work-related social identification refers to the extent to which a worker identifies with his or her work group, team, or organization. Importantly, such age- and work-related forms of social identification are sometimes called “affective social identification” and measured with items such as “Generally, I am happy to be a late-career worker” or “I value being a member of my age group” ( Bayl-Smith & Griffin, 2014 ; Macdonald & Levy, 2016 ). In this article, we consider both the question of whether or not someone generally identifies with a specific social group (i.e., social identity as a member of a certain age or work-related group) and the extent to which such social identities are important to people’s self-definition (i.e., social identification with an age or work group).

Self-categorization theory is a more general theory of individual and group processes that explains the conditions under which people perceive themselves and others as a group, and the consequences of such perceptions, for instance group cohesion, social influence, and collective action ( Turner et al., 1987 ). The theory was developed to further elucidate the cognitive process of social categorization proposed by social identity theory, that is, why and when people categorize themselves and others into certain social groups ( Turner, 1999 ). Moreover, self-categorization theory suggests that people categorize their “selves” at different levels of abstraction ( Turner, 1985 ). For instance, people can categorize the self in terms of a personal identity (“I”) or in terms of a social identity (i.e., “we” as “ingroup” members compared to “them” as “outgroup members”), which can be an age group, work group, team, organization, nationality or, at the most abstract level, humanity ( Bain, 2014 ; Turner et al., 1987 ).

Tajfel and Turner (1979) observed that social categorization processes lead people to cognitively minimize differences among ingroup members, and to maximize differences between ingroup and outgroup members, a process called accentuation. Prototypical members are representative for a given social group, and people evaluate themselves and others more positively if they perceive themselves or are perceived as prototypical for a valued social group ( Turner, 1985 ). For instance, research has shown that leader prototypicality has positive effects on follower identification with their leader ( Steffens, Schuh, Haslam, Perez, & Van Dick, 2015 ). Finally, research suggests that people assess the worth of different social groups and their members through a process of social comparison, which can result in ingroup favoritism (i.e., favoring members of one’s own group over members of other groups) and outgroup derogation (i.e., when another group is perceived as threatening to members of one’s own group; Ellemers, Haslam, et al., 2002 ).

There are a number of important social–psychological theoretical frameworks that are based on the social identity approach. For instance, the common ingroup identity model suggests that intergroup bias can be reduced by changing group members’ perceptions of “us” and “them” to “we” ( Gaertner, Dovidio, Anastasio, Bachman, & Rust, 1993 ). Furthermore, optimal distinctiveness theory proposes that people strive to balance opposing motives for social differentiation and inclusiveness ( Brewer, 1993 ). Finally, based on the intergroup functions of stereotypes, the stereotype content model suggests that two primary content dimensions of stereotypes are competence and (interpersonal) warmth (e.g., older people are often stereotyped as low in competence and high in warmth; Fiske, Cuddy, Glick, & Xu, 2002 ).

In this section, we explain commonly investigated age-related constructs that, in addition to the social identity approach, will be important for the development of our conceptual model. The gerontology and lifespan developmental literatures most frequently conceptualize age in terms of chronological age, or the time that has passed since a person’s birth ( Schwall, 2012 ). As chronological age is a continuous variable, there is no clear cutoff value at which someone can be considered an “older worker” ( Bohlmann, Rudolph, & Zacher, 2018 ). Nevertheless, policy makers and organizations often set such cutoffs to assign certain benefits (e.g., memberships, discounts). The labels “younger worker” and “older worker” are typically used by researchers in a relative sense and for descriptive purposes only. It is important to distinguish between, on the one hand, age differences that are detected in cross-sectional, between-person research designs and, on the other hand, aging (or age-related changes), which can only be detected using longitudinal designs. Effects of aging on work outcomes have to be further distinguished from birth cohort and historical time period effects ( Hofer & Sliwinski, 2006 ; Kosloski, 1986 ).

Scholars have suggested that there are alternative ways to conceptualize age, including functional age (e.g., health status), career age (e.g., job and organizational tenure), and psychological or subjective age (e.g., how old a person feels; Cleveland & Hanscom, 2017 ; Kooij, De Lange, Jansen, & Dikkers, 2008 ). In addition, the notion of “successful aging at work” refers to the maintenance or growth in important work outcomes over time, compared to average age-related trajectories in these outcomes ( Kooij, 2015 ; Zacher, 2015 ). Finally, age stereotypes are favorable or unfavorable generalized beliefs about different age groups ( Hassell & Perrewe, 1995 ; Posthuma & Campion, 2009 ). For instance, common stereotypes about older workers are that they are less able to learn new things compared to younger workers, but that they are more dependable than younger workers. A comprehensive, meta-analytic evaluation of six common age stereotypes (i.e., older workers are less motivated, less willing to participate in training and career development, more resistant and less willing to change, less trusting, less healthy, and more vulnerable to work–family imbalance) found that only one of these stereotypes (i.e., older workers are less willing to participate in training and career development) was somewhat consistent with empirical evidence ( Ng & Feldman, 2012 ). A related concept based directly on the social identity approach are age-related meta-stereotypes, which refer to beliefs about how other people think about one’s age group ( Bal et al., 2015 ; Finkelstein, King & Voyles, 2015 ). For instance, a meta-stereotype may suggest that an older worker believes that other people at his or her workplace think that older workers are performing less well than younger workers.

The concepts of age stereotypes and age meta-stereotypes connect the literature on age and aging with the social identity approach and are, therefore, important for the development of our conceptual model and our review of the empirical literature. At the same time, we acknowledge that the social identity approach is not the only possible explanation for the existence of negative age stereotypes and age discrimination (or ageism). In particular, researchers have argued that negative stereotypes about and discrimination against older people may also have an evolutionary basis (see North & Fiske, 2012 , for a review of theories). The rationale of the evolutionary explanation for ageism is that older people, as compared to younger people, are more likely to be perceived as unfit in a Darwinian sense (e.g., weak, frail, unhealthy, ineffective), which leads to more positive attitudes about younger compared to older people. Consistent with this explanation, a number of large-scale empirical studies provide support for a persistent negative bias against older people. For instance, a study conducted in the United States showed that all age groups held more negative attitudes about older adults than children ( Axt, Ebersole, & Nosek, 2014 ). A meta-analysis by North and Fiske (2015) found negative attitudes about older adults in both Eastern and Western societies. Finally, findings of a study that analyzed thousands of proverbs and fairy tales from Turkish folklore suggested that age stereotypes of older adults in a pre-industrial society are similar to those of contemporary industrial societies ( Marcus & Sabuncu, 2015 ). Overall, these findings suggest that the social identity approach is not the only explanation for the existence of age stereotypes and age discrimination, but that evolutionary explanations should be taken into account as well.

In this section, we integrate theorizing based on the social identity approach, the evolutionary explanation for ageism, the literature on age and lifespan development, and work. Our conceptual model on the interplay among constructs related to age, social identity and identification, and work outcomes is shown in Figure 1 . In the following, we further describe the relations among the constructs included in the model and justify our eight propositions.

Conceptual model and propositions (P) on the interplay between age, social identity and identification, and work outcomes.

Conceptual model and propositions (P) on the interplay between age, social identity and identification, and work outcomes.

Propositions 1–4: Chronological Age, Psychological Age, and Age- and Work-Related Social Identity and Identification

We argue that the relationship between workers’ chronological age and their age-related social identity (i.e., a sense of belonging to the group of younger, middle-aged, or older workers; Desmette & Gaillard, 2008 ) is positive, whereas the association between chronological age and social identification with one’s age group should be negative (see Figure 1 ). First, with increasing chronological age, workers will be more likely to socially identify with an older as compared to a younger age group (see also Zacher & Rudolph, 2018 ). Workers monitor their own age-related characteristics (e.g., the way they look), their behavior, and interactions with their social environment. Subsequently, based on their observations of these characteristics, they categorize themselves into an age group that appears to provide the best fit with their own characteristics and perceptions. For example, a 30-year-old should be more likely to identify with the group of younger workers than a 60-year-old, whereas a 60-year-old should be more likely to identify with the group of older workers than a 30-year-old. Please note that this reasoning regarding average age-related trends does not preclude the possibility that some 30-year-olds identify as older workers and some 60-year-olds as younger workers.

Second, among younger workers, we expect age-related social identification (i.e., the extent to which these workers identify with their age group) to be generally stronger than among middle-aged and older workers. In other words, we expect a negative association between chronological age and age-related social identification. This assumption is based on an integration of the social identity approach with the evolutionary explanation for ageism ( Marcus & Sabuncu, 2015 ; North & Fiske, 2012 ), which implies that as workers get older, they should be increasingly less likely to experience high levels of age-related social identification (or an “ingroup” effect) due to a deeply rooted and generally negative bias against old age and older people (we thank an anonymous reviewer for suggesting this explanation).

Proposition 1: Workers’ chronological age is positively related to their age-related social identity and negatively related to their age-related social identification.

We argue that the relationships of chronological age with age-related social identity and identification are not perfect and may be influenced by additional psychological characteristics. For instance, in the lifespan psychology literature, Weiss and Freund (2012) showed that older adults distanced themselves from members of the same age group after being presented with negative age-related information, and perceived themselves as more similar to the group of middle-aged adults as compared to their own age group (see also Weiss & Lang, 2012 ). In our model, we focus on the moderating role of psychological age (see Figure 1 ). We propose that workers who feel younger than their chronological age should be more likely to socially identify with a relatively younger as compared to a relatively older age group. In contrast, workers who feel older than their chronological age should be more likely to socially identify with relatively older age groups. We further argue that, as workers get older, those who feel younger than their chronological age should be more likely to experience relatively high levels of age-related social identification compared to those who feel older than their chronological age.

Proposition 2: Psychological age moderates the positive (negative) relationship between workers’ chronological age and their age-related social identity (age-related social identification), such that the relationship is stronger for workers who feel older than their chronological age and weaker for workers who feel younger than their chronological age.

In addition to age-related social identity and identification, we expect that chronological age relates positively to work-related social identity and identification (see Figure 1 ). Work-related social identity and identification describe whether and to what extent a worker identifies with his or her work group, team, or organization ( Haslam, van Knippenberg, Platow, & Ellemers, 2002 ). The lifespan developmental theory of socioemotional selectivity ( Carstensen, Isaacowitz, & Charles, 1999 ) suggests that, as people age and experience their time left in life as “running out,” their goal priorities shift from instrumental and knowledge-related goals to more meaningful and emotionally relevant goals. Accordingly, based on socioemotional selectivity theory, we argue that older workers are more likely than younger workers to identify, and to experience high levels of social identification with work-related social groups to satisfy age-related needs for meaningful social relationships and positive emotional experiences. In support of this assumption, Ng and Feldman (2010) demonstrated meta-analytically that chronological age is positively related to organizational identification ( ρ = .20) and other job attitudes (note that this literature has not clearly distinguished work-related social identity and identification).

Proposition 3: Chronological age is positively related to the likelihood that and to the extent to which a worker identifies with a work-related group (i.e., work-related social identity and social identification, respectively).

We further expect that the relationships of chronological age with work-related social identity and identification are stronger among workers who feel older than their chronological age compared to workers who feel younger than their chronological age (see Figure 1 ). The reason for this assumption is again based on socioemotional selectivity theory ( Carstensen et al., 1999 ): workers who feel older than their chronological age are more likely to perceive their future time in the occupational context to be “running out” and to prioritize socioemotional goals, such as identifying (and identifying more strongly) with their team or organization.

Proposition 4: Psychological age moderates the positive relationships of chronological age with work-related social identity and identification, such that the relationships are stronger for workers who feel older than their chronological age and weaker for workers who feel younger than their chronological age.

Propositions 5 and 6: Age-Related Social Identity and Identification, Age (Meta-)Stereotypes, and Work Outcomes

Our next set of propositions relates to the relationships of age-related social identity and identification with work outcomes, age stereotypes and meta-stereotypes as moderators of these associations, and the conditional indirect effects of chronological age on work outcomes via age-related social identity and identification (see Figure 1 ). We propose that the relationships of age-related social identity and identification with favorable work outcomes (e.g., job satisfaction, job performance, occupational well-being) are positive when age (meta-)stereotypes are positive. In other words, when older workers are generally seen in favorable terms in the work context (e.g., more reliable, experienced) and think that others perceive them positively, social identity and high levels of identification as an “older worker” are more likely to result in positive work outcomes. In contrast, when negative age (meta-)stereotypes (e.g., unable to learn, lower performance) prevail in the work context, social identity and identification as an “older worker” are more likely to lead to unfavorable outcomes. Importantly, we expect that these effects may also occur with regard to the interplay of age-related social identity and identification with positive and negative age (meta-)stereotypes about younger and middle-aged workers. Providing some support for our assumptions, research in the gerontology literature conducted by Knight, C. Haslam, and S. A. Haslam (2010) showed positive effects of empowerment on older aged care residents’ social identifications and well-being in the context of moving into a new care facility.

Proposition 5: Age (meta-)stereotypes moderate the relationships of age-related social identity and identification with favorable work outcomes (independent of chronological age), such that the relationships are positive for workers who perceive positive age (meta-) stereotypes and negative for workers who perceive negative age (meta-)stereotypes.

The combination of Propositions 1, 2, and 5 also suggests a conditional indirect effects (or moderated mediation) model. Specifically, there is a positive relationship between chronological age and age-related social identity when workers feel relatively older. In contrast, this relationship is zero when workers feel relatively younger. Moreover, there is a negative relationship between chronological age and age-related social identification when workers feel relatively older, whereas this relationship is zero when workers feel relatively younger. The relationships of age-related social identity and identification with favorable work outcomes are positive when workers perceive positive age (meta-)stereotypes and negative when workers perceive negative age (meta-)stereotypes. Thus, the indirect effects of chronological age on favorable work outcomes via age-related social identity would be positive when workers feel relatively older and when workers perceive positive age (meta-)stereotypes. In contrast, the indirect effects via age-related social identity would be negative when workers feel relatively older and when workers perceive negative age (meta-)stereotypes. The indirect effects via age-related social identity would be zero when workers feel relatively younger.

In addition, when age-related social identification is considered as a mediator, the indirect effects of chronological age on favorable work outcomes would be negative when workers feel relatively older and when workers perceive positive age (meta-)stereotypes. In contrast, the indirect effects via age-related social identification would be positive when workers feel relatively older and when workers perceive negative age (meta-)stereotypes. Again, the indirect effects via age-related social identification would be zero when workers feel relatively younger.

Proposition 6: The indirect effects of chronological age on favorable work outcomes through age-related social identity and identification are moderated by psychological age and age (meta-)stereotypes. Specifically, the indirect effects via age-related social identity (age-related social identification) are positive (negative) when workers feel older than their chronological age and perceive positive age (meta-)stereotypes. The indirect effects via age-related social identity (age-related social identification) are negative (positive) when workers feel older than their chronological age and perceive negative age (meta-)stereotypes. For both mediators, the indirect effects are zero when workers feel younger than their chronological age.

Propositions 7 and 8: Chronological Age, Work-Related Social Identity and Identification, and Work Outcomes

The effects of different forms of work-related social identification on important work outcomes are well established (note, however, that this literature has not clearly conceptually and empirically differentiated between work-related social identity and identification). We acknowledge that some research has found that over-identification in some situations may have negative effects on employee well-being ( Avanzi, van Dick, Fraccaroli, & Sarchielli, 2012 ). However, meta-analyses have shown that work-related social identification generally has positive effects on employee attitudes, behaviors, and health. In an early meta-analysis ( K = 96 studies), Riketta (2005) reported strong positive associations between organizational identification and employee attitudes, including affective organizational commitment ( ρ xy = .78), job involvement ( ρ xy = .61), job satisfaction ( ρ xy = .54), and turnover intentions ( ρ xy = −.48). More recently, based on K = 118 independent samples, Ng (2015) additionally found meta-analytic relationships between organizational identification and employee performance, including task performance ( ρ xy = .38), organizational citizenship behavior ( ρ xy = .47), and turnover behavior ( ρ xy = −.20). Similarly, another comprehensive meta-analysis ( K = 114 studies) reported positive associations between organizational identification and various job attitudes ( ρ xy = .49; including job involvement, job satisfaction, and affective commitment) and performance-related behaviors ( ρ xy = .35; including in-role and extra-role performance; Lee et al., 2015 ).

Two meta-analyses have examined associations between work-related social identification and employee health ( Ng & Allen, 2018 ; Steffens, Haslam, et al., 2017 ). Based on K = 58 independent samples, Steffens, Haslam, and colleagues (2017) found positive associations of health with both workgroup and organizational identification (both ρ xy s = .21). More recently, based on K = 27 independent samples, Ng and Allen (2018) reported an association between organizational identification and health of ρ xy = .31. Consistent with the theoretical and empirical literature on the benefits of social identification in the work context (see also Haslam et al., 2000 , 2002 ; Hogg & Terry, 2000 ), we expect generally positive relationships of work-related social identity and identification with important work outcomes (see Figure 1 ). The meta-analyses described above have provided support for positive relationships between work-related social identification and work outcomes. Similar associations can be expected for work-related social identity, as having a work-related social identity should be more beneficial with regard to work outcomes than not having such a social identity. Therefore, we do not offer an explicit proposition regarding the effects of work-related social identity and identification on work outcomes.

The combination of Propositions 3 and 4 with research on the effects of work-related social identification suggests a moderated mediation model (see Figure 1 ). Specifically, the relationships of chronological age with work-related social identity and identification are positive for workers who feel relatively older and zero for workers who feel relatively younger than their chronological age. Thus, the indirect effects on work outcomes should be positive only when workers feel relatively older and zero when workers feel relatively younger than their chronological age.

Proposition 7: The indirect effects of chronological age on work outcomes through work-related social identity and identification are moderated by psychological age. Specifically, the indirect effects are positive when workers feel older than their chronological age and zero when workers feel younger than their chronological age.

Our last proposition concerns the moderating effects of work-related social identity and identification on the direct relationships between chronological age and work outcomes (see Figure 1 ). Research on successful aging suggests that personal and work-related resources may impact associations between age and favorable work outcomes, such that high resources result in positive associations and low resources result in negative associations ( Zacher, 2015 ). In other words, resources may buffer negative relationships between age and favorable work outcomes and further boost positive relationships between age and favorable work outcomes. Work-related social identity and identification are important psychological resources for employees ( Haslam et al., 2000 ), and socioemotional selectivity theory ( Carstensen et al., 1999 ) suggests that it should be particularly important for older workers. Therefore, when a work-related social identity exists and when work-related social identification is high, relationships between age and favorable work outcomes should be more positive. In contrast, when no work-related social identity exists and when work-related social identification is low, these relationships should be negative. Providing some support for this proposition, a study in the gerontology literature by Gleibs and colleagues (2011) showed that social group memberships can counteract the negative effects of social isolation on older adults’ well-being in a long-term care setting, particularly among men.

Proposition 8: Work-related social identity and identification moderate the relationships between chronological age and favorable work outcomes. Specifically, the relationships are positive for workers who identify with a work-related social group and who have high work-related social identification. In contrast, the relationships are negative for workers who do not identify with a work-related social group and who have low work-related social identification.

In the next two sections, we describe the methods and results of our literature review of empirical studies on the interplay among age and age-related constructs, social identity and identification, and work outcomes. For each study, we discuss how it relates to our conceptual model. Subsequently, in the “Discussion” section, we evaluate the extent to which previous research has tested our model, what remains to be investigated, and how our model could be extended based on the existing evidence.

Inclusion criteria

Prior to conducting our literature search, we set four inclusion criteria. First, we decided to include all empirical articles published since 1979, the year in which Tajfel and Turner (1979) introduced social identity theory. Second, we included only empirical (quantitative and qualitative) studies that simultaneously examined constructs from each of three content areas: age, social identity and identification, and work. Third, we included only published and peer-reviewed publications. We did not include conference abstracts, dissertations, and unpublished manuscripts. Finally, we included only studies published in English language.

Literature search

To identify relevant studies, we searched the title, abstract, and keywords of articles in two large and wide-used databases, Web of Science Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI) and PsycINFO. Our search terms are listed in Table 1 for each of the three content areas (i.e., age, social identity and identification, and work). Importantly, we searched such that articles had to include at least one of the search terms in each of the three areas. This means that we excluded articles that include search terms from only two out of three areas (e.g., no relation to the work context). In Web of Science SSCI, our search yielded 405 results. In PsycINFO, our search yielded 308 results. We screened the titles and abstracts to identify studies that met our inclusion criteria, and we also conducted backward (i.e., searching the references of relevant articles we identified) and forward searches (i.e., searching articles that cite relevant articles we identified). The backward and forward searches did not yield additional articles beyond our literature search. Our search resulted in a final set of 27 articles (see Table 2 ).

Search Terms in Each of Three Content Areas Used in the Literature Search

Note. Including an asterisk (*) at the end of a search terms means that all words that begin with this search term are included in the results. For example, searching for “age*” includes terms such as “ageism,” “age bias,” and age discrimination.”

Summary of Studies on Age, Social Identity and Identification, and Work Outcomes (in Alphabetical Order)

We organize the presentation of the results of our literature review according to the propositions of our conceptual model. We first review studies that examine research questions, constructs, and relationships that map onto our Propositions 1–4 regarding chronological age, psychological age, and age- and work-related social identity and identification. Subsequently, we review studies related to our Propositions 5 and 6 as well as Propositions 7 and 8, respectively. Summaries of the samples, designs, and main findings of all 27 studies, as well as their relevance to our conceptual model, are provided in Table 2 .

Propositions 1–4: Chronological age, psychological age, and age- and work-related social identity and identification

According to Proposition 1, chronological age is positively related to age-related social identity and negatively related to age-related social identification. Three studies we identified in our literature search examined associations between chronological age and age-related social identity and identification. However, the studies did not clearly distinguish between the concepts of social identity and identification. First, using a sample of taxi drivers between 21 and 70 years, Bal and colleagues (2015) found that chronological age was positively related to a measure of social identification with the group of older adults ( r xy = .34). Second, Bayl-Smith and Griffin (2014) showed that chronological age was positively related to measures of both cognitive social identification (e.g., “I think of myself as a late-career worker”; r xy = .28) and affective social identification (e.g., “Generally, I am happy to be a late-career worker”; r xy = .31). Third, Gaillard and Desmette (2008) similarly reported that age was positively related to cognitive social identification ( r xy = .31) and affective social identification ( r xy = .24). Overall, results of these studies are only partially consistent with Proposition 1, as they suggest moderate and positive associations of chronological age with both age-related social identity (or cognitive social identification) and affective social identification (note that the measures focused on the group of older workers and not people’s age group more generally).

Two studies focused on a restricted age range by examining only older adults. First, Armenta, Stroebe, Scheibe, Postmes, and Van Yperen (2017) conducted three experimental studies with older adults between 50 and 75 years who responded to a job application scenario. They reported three weak and nonsignificant correlations between chronological age and age-related social identification (e.g., “I identify with the group of older adults”; r xy s = .10, .15, and .10, respectively). Second, in a sample of workers between 50 and 59 years, Desmette and Gaillard (2008) found a nonsignificant correlation between age and cognitive social identification as an older worker ( r xy = .09) and a weak positive correlation between age and affective social identification as an older worker ( r xy = .11). In addition, three studies that assessed chronological age and age-related social identity and identification did not report the corresponding correlations ( Cheung & Wu, 2014 ; Iweins, Desmette, Yzerbyt, & Stinglhamber, 2013 ; Kraak, Lunardo, Herrbach, & Durrieu, 2017 ). Interestingly, a study by Macdonald and Levy (2016) is the only study that used an “age-neutral” measure of age-related social identification (e.g., “I value being a member of my age group”). In contrast to the negative association advanced in Proposition 1, this measure was not significantly related to age. Finally, a qualitative study by Angouri (2012) that used semi-structured interviews suggested that people associate chronological age with more substantial attributes such as “experience” and “expertise,” which help them position themselves and others into different age groups.

Proposition 2 states that psychological age moderates the relationships of chronological age with age-related social identity and identification, such that the relationships are stronger for workers who feel older than their chronological age and weaker for workers who feel younger than their chronological age. We identified only one study in our literature review that focused on a research question that was somewhat related to this proposition. Specifically, using a large sample of workers and retirees between 58 and 70 years, Teuscher (2010) showed that older participants’ positive attitude toward aging (i.e., a construct similar to psychological age) was positively related to their retiree social identity. However, as the age range was restricted to older workers and retirees, this study did not explicitly examine the association between chronological age and age-related social identification.

According to Proposition 3, chronological age is positively related to the likelihood of having a work-related social identity and to the extent to which workers identify with a work-related social group, such as teams or organizations (i.e., work-related social identification). As noted in the theory development section, a meta-analysis has found support for a positive relationship between age and organizational identification ( Ng & Feldman, 2010 ). Interestingly, we did not retrieve this meta-analysis in our literature search, because it did not mention “identity” and related terms in the title, abstract, and keywords, and because it was not cited by the articles identified in our literature search.

We identified two primary studies that supported our proposition. First, using a large sample of teachers, Avanzi, Cortini, and Crocetti (2012) showed that chronological age was positively associated with organizational identification which, in turn, was associated with organizational citizenship behavior. Second, Hatak, Harms, and Fink (2015) found that age was positively related to job identification. However, two other studies did not support or had a somewhat different focus than our proposition. Bergmann, Schmidt, Schreyer, and Torgler (2016) reported a U-shaped relationship between age and organizational identification in a large sample of consumers of professional football and basketball organizations. Ramaci and colleagues (2017) found that the difference between students’ professional work-related identity and their social identity (operationalized in this study as the way people think others see them) was greater the older the students were. In contrast to our model, this study focused on age as a moderator of the relationship between professional and social identity, and not on age as a predictor of different social identities.

Finally, Proposition 4 suggests that psychological age moderates the positive relationships of chronological age with work-related social identity and identification, such that the relationships are stronger for workers who feel older than their chronological age and weaker for workers who feel younger than their chronological age. We only found one study that investigated a somewhat relevant research question. Specifically, Gioaba and Krings (2017) conducted an experiment in which they simulated a hiring situation. They found that older applicants who used impression management strategies to contradict common stereotypes about older workers were perceived as more hirable. It may be that the use of impression management strategies by older workers is related to the notion of psychological age (e.g., “do age,” or how old a person thinks they are behaving; Kastenbaum, Derbin, Sabatini, Artt, 1972 ). Consistent with our Proposition 4, older workers’ expressions of “do age” might be particularly important for others’ perceptions of older workers’ work-related identification and commitment.

In sum, empirical evidence is mixed for Proposition 1, that chronological age is positively related to an age-related social identity and negatively related to age-related social identification. Three studies found positive relationships of chronological age with both age-related social identity and identification. However, it is important to note that these relationships were only found in studies that consider the entire working age range (e.g., 16–65 years) and that do not focus on older or younger workers only. More research is also clearly needed to investigate the validity of Proposition 2 regarding the interactive effect of chronological and psychological age on age-related social identity and identification. The studies retrieved in our literature search that focused directly on the relationship between chronological age and work-related social identification provided support for Proposition 3, which suggests a positive association between these constructs, and were consistent with a meta-analysis on age and organizational identification ( Ng & Feldman, 2010 ). Notably, these studies did not distinguish between work-related social identity and identification, presumably because the authors assumed that workers are generally identified with their team or organization, and that age can be used to explain variance in the extent to which workers identify with these groups. Finally, Proposition 4 on the moderating effect of psychological age on the relationships of chronological age with work-related social identity and identification also requires further research.

Propositions 5 and 6: Age-related social identity and identification, age (meta-)stereotypes, and work outcomes

Proposition 5 states that age (meta-)stereotypes moderate the relationships of age-related social identity and identification with work outcomes, such that the relationships are positive for workers who perceive positive age (meta-)stereotypes and negative for workers who perceive negative age (meta-)stereotypes. Interestingly, 15 out of the 27 studies identified in our literature search addressed a research question, constructs, and/or relationships that were to some extent relevant with regard to Proposition 5. We first describe studies that generally provide some support or contradict our proposition, followed by a review of studies that only included relevant main effects of age-related social identity or identification and age (meta-)stereotypes on work outcomes and neglected the proposed interactive effects. It is important to note that all studies reviewed did not clearly conceptually or empirically distinguish between age-related social identity and identification as outlined in our theory section.

Two studies provided general support for Proposition 5. First, Cheung and Wu (2014) showed that relationships of age-related cognitive and affective identification as an older worker with indicators of successful aging at work (e.g., adaptability and health, positive relationships, occupational growth) were moderated by a positive perception of aging. A positive perception of aging is conceptually similar to the notion of positive age stereotypes in Proposition 5. In the study, successful aging was more likely to occur when an employee identified as an older worker and had positive attitudes toward aging. Second, Marcus and Fritzsche (2014) conducted an experimental study with psychology students and showed that a dual identity recategorization intervention worsened evaluations of an ingroup target (i.e., younger adult) compared to a control group, particularly among participants with low age stereotypes. In contrast, the intervention had no effect on evaluations of an older target compared to the control group. As the study focuses on interactions between age-related social identification (manipulated through an intervention) and age stereotypes in predicting work outcomes, it is also generally consistent with our Proposition 5.

Two additional studies provided mixed or inconsistent findings with regard to Proposition 5. First, using a sample of workers between 45 and 70 years, Bayl-Smith and Griffin (2014) found that the negative relationship between perceived age discrimination and work engagement was stronger when cognitive identification as an older worker was high and affective identification as an older worker was low, and nonsignificant when affective identification was high. Thus, this study provides mixed evidence with regard to our Proposition 5, because cognitive and affective identification had differential moderating effects. Second, in their study of taxi drivers, Bal and colleagues (2015) found that negative age meta-stereotypes, but not negative age stereotypes, were related to fewer perceived opportunities until retirement and a stronger intention to retire. Moreover, identification with the group of older adults moderated the relationships of both age stereotypes and age meta-stereotypes with occupational future time perspective, such that the relationships were stronger when workers had a lower self-categorization as an older person compared to a higher self-categorization. Thus, these findings contradict our Proposition 5, which suggests that social identification as an older worker positively predicts work outcomes for workers who perceive positive age (meta-)stereotypes and negatively predicts work outcomes for workers who perceive negative age stereotypes.

Four studies did not examine whether the interaction between age-related social identity and identification and age stereotypes (or age discrimination) predicted employee outcomes, which would be a direct test of our Proposition 5. Instead, these studies reported only the main effects of age stereotypes or discrimination and/or age-related social identification on work outcomes, or the relationship between these two predictor variables. First, Armenta and colleagues (2017) found that age discrimination was not significantly related to identification with the group of older adults. In contrast, this study showed that high age discrimination predicted a younger subjective age which, in turn, was associated with improved subjective health. Second, Macdonald and Levy (2016) investigated associations between a neutral measure of age group identity (e.g., “I value being a member of my age group”), perceived age discrimination, work centrality, and various work outcomes (i.e., job satisfaction, commitment, and engagement). Results showed that age group identity and work centrality were positively related to the work outcomes, whereas perceived age discrimination was negatively related to these variables. Third, Madera, King, and Hebl (2012) focused on direct relationships between age-related social identification, age (meta-)stereotypes, and work outcomes, but not on the interaction between these variables as proposed by our conceptual model. Specifically, this study investigated whether expressing or suppressing one’s age group identity (in addition to other identities related to race/ethnicity, gender, religion, sexual orientation, and disability) at work relates to perceived discrimination, job satisfaction, and turnover intentions. The researchers found that the expression of social group identities was negatively related to perceived discrimination, but not turnover intentions. Moreover, suppressing a group identity was positively related to perceived discrimination and turnover intentions, and negatively related to job satisfaction. Finally, Oliveira and Cabral-Cardoso (2017) showed that age diversity beliefs moderated the positive relationship between negative age meta-stereotypes and stereotype threat (i.e., the worry of confirming a negative stereotype about one’s social group; Kalokerinos, Von Hippel, & Zacher, 2014 ), such that the relationship was stronger when age diversity beliefs were low. In contrast to this study, our model does not assume a direct relationship between age-related social identification (which is similar to age-based stereotype threat) and age meta-stereotypes.

Three studies examined associations of age-related social identity with work outcomes, but did not consider age (meta-)stereotypes as a moderator. First, Desmette and Gaillard (2008) found a positive association between age-related cognitive identification and retirement intentions. Similarly, Gaillard and Desmette (2008) reported that cognitive identification with older workers was positively related to early exit intentions among older workers. Third, Topa and Alcover (2015) also focused on direct effects of age-related social identity on work outcomes, and not on the interaction between social identity and age (meta-)stereotypes as proposed by our model. Specifically, this study showed that an older worker identity positively predicted both full retirement of older workers and retirement satisfaction of retirees.

Two further studies used a social identity approach to examine relationships between age (meta-)stereotypes and work outcomes, but did not include age-related social identity or identification as moderator variables. First, Farnum and Wiener (2016) showed that age stereotypes predicted mock jurors’ verdicts in a simulated age discrimination case. Second, an experimental study by Kroon, van Selm, ter Hoeven, and Vliegenthart (2016) focused only on the direct effect of age stereotypes on work outcomes, and not on the interaction between age-related social identity or identification and age stereotypes in predicting work outcomes. The researchers found that a newspaper article that portrayed older workers in a stereotypical manner consistent with the stereotype content model (i.e., low competence, high warmth) resulted in negative employability perceptions and reduced intentions to hire an older worker.

Two articles that we retrieved in our literature search focused on interactions between age-related social identification and other variables that are not explicitly part of our conceptual model. First, Kraak and colleagues (2017) focused on the interaction between age-related social identification and psychological contract breach in predicting perceptions of psychological contract violation. Specifically, they found that strongly identifying with the group of older workers increased the positive relationship between the job content and social atmosphere dimensions of psychological contract breach and violation. In contrast, for the organizational policies dimension of contract breach, the positive relationship with violation was decreased for people who scored low on older worker identification. Second, two studies reported by Iweins and colleagues (2013) focused on the interaction between age-related and work-related social identification, which is not part of our conceptual model. The researchers found that intergenerational contact and an organizational multi-age perspective positively predict a dual identity (i.e., the interaction between age and organizational identity) which, in turn, positively predicted favorable older worker stereotypes and negatively predicted intentions to quit.

Finally, Proposition 6 suggested a moderated mediation model on the indirect effects of chronological age on work outcomes through age-related social identity and identification, and specifies how these indirect effects are moderated by psychological age and age (meta-)stereotypes. We did not find a study that has tested such conditional indirect effects. In sum, our literature review provided mixed support for our Proposition 5 on the interactive effects of age-related social identity and identification and age (meta-)stereotypes on work outcomes. While two articles provided general support for the proposition, two other articles yielded mixed or contradictory evidence. In addition, four studies included relevant variables, but did not examine the interaction effect. Thus, further research that directly tests Propositions 5 and 6 is needed.

Propositions 7 and 8: Chronological age, work-related social identity and identification, and work outcomes

Proposition 7 suggests a moderated mediation model on the indirect effects of chronological age on work outcomes through work-related social identity and identification, and specifies how these indirect effects are moderated by psychological age. We did not identify a study that has tested such conditional indirect effects. According to Proposition 8, work-related social identity or identification moderate the direct relationships between chronological age and work outcomes, such that the relationships are positive for workers with a work-related social identity or high work-related social identification and negative for workers with no work-related identity or low work-related social identification. We identified two relevant studies in our literature search. Again, these studies did not clearly distinguish between social identity and identification. First, in a qualitative study with a semi-structured interview method, Hennekam and Herrbach (2015) found mixed support for Proposition 8. Specifically, they showed that human resource practices designed for older workers were perceived as a stigma, but older workers also expressed a desire that organizations accommodate their needs in a sensitive way. Second, contrary to Proposition 8, Hatak and colleagues (2015) found that the negative relationship between job identification and entrepreneurial intention was stronger among older compared to younger workers. Thus, job identification was not a resource for older workers with regard to the development of entrepreneurial intentions. Overall, these findings suggest that much more research is needed to examine the role of work-related social identity and identification for successful aging at work.

Additional studies

We identified three additional studies that adopted a social identity framework, but focused on team- or organizational-level relationships, as opposed to individual-level relationships and, thus, are difficult to integrate with our conceptual model. First, Kunze and Bruch (2010) showed that high levels of transformational leadership buffered the negative relationship between age-based faultlines (i.e., multiple subgroup memberships within diverse teams) and teams’ “productive energy.” Second, Liebermann, Wegge, Jungmann, and Schmidt (2013) found that age diversity in teams was negatively related to younger and older, but not middle-aged, employees’ health. Furthermore, age stereotypes strengthened the negative effect of age diversity among younger workers, but weakened the effect among older workers. Third, Kunze, Böhm, and Bruch (2013) reported that the age diversity of organizations was positively related to an “age discrimination climate” which, in turn, was negatively related to company performance. Moreover, diversity-friendly human resource practices buffered, and top managers’ negative age stereotypes boosted, the effect of age diversity on age discrimination climate. In sum, while these team- and organizational-level studies do not seem directly relevant to our conceptual at first, they may suggest interesting avenues for future theoretical extension.

To summarize and contextualize our review, we next (re)consider support for the propositions derived from our conceptual model. Then, we take a broader view on this literature, and subsequently consider how the social identity approach is applied more generally in other areas of inquiry related to age (e.g., gerontology). Finally, with these three discussions in mind, we offer a consideration of various directions for future research in this area.

Support for Propositions

In our conceptual model, Propositions 1 through 4 relate chronological age directly, and psychological age conditionally, to age- and work-related social identity and identification. Our review found only some support for the proposed positive relationship between chronological age and age-related social identity, whereas no support was found for the proposed negative relationship between age and age-related social identification that was based on an evolutionary explanation for ageism (Proposition 1). With regard to the latter finding, further research is needed that directly investigates the social identity approach and the evolutionary explanation for ageism as alternative potential causes of relationships between workers’ chronological age and their age-related social identity and identification ( Iweins et al., 2013 ; North & Fiske, 2012 ). Evidence for the assumed positive relationship between chronological age and work-related social identification was stronger (Proposition 3). Moreover, results of our review were less supportive of the proposed conditional effect of psychological age on the relationships between chronological age and age-related social identity and identification (Proposition 2), as well as between chronological age and work-related social identity and identification (Proposition 4). This lack of support was not attributable to necessarily mixed findings within this literature, but rather to a lack of empirical studies that have considered these effects and, thus, hinders our ability to make confident judgements about the nature of such relationships.

Proposition 5 states that the relationships of age-related social identity and identification with work outcomes are conditional upon age (meta-)stereotypes. Our review offered mixed support for these proposed interactive effects. Although some results run contrary to expectations (e.g., Bal et al., 2015 ), a number of studies simply did not examine the interaction between social identity and identification and age (meta-)stereotypes (e.g., Macdonald & Levy, 2016 ). Propositions 6 and 7, which suggest relatively complex moderated mediation models, remain to be tested in future research. Finally, mixed support was found for Proposition 8, which suggests that relationships between chronological age and work outcomes are moderated by work-related social identity and identification. Unlike the mixed support observed for other propositions, this lack of support was due to both mixed findings (e.g., Hennekam & Herrbach, 2015 ) and a relative lack of empirical studies that have considered these conditional effects.

In general, support for the propositions offered by our conceptual model is mixed. However, we do gain important insights into social identity and identification from the application of this model to the literature reviewed here. Indeed, considering the evidence, stronger support was garnered for main-effect propositions (i.e., Propositions 1 and 3) than conditional (i.e., moderation) propositions (i.e., Propositions 2, 4, 5, 8). Moreover, no studies to date have tested our full conceptual model (i.e., the indirect relationship of chronological age on work outcomes through age- and work-related social identification; Propositions 6 and 7).

Broader Observations

Thinking beyond support for our conceptual model, the empirical studies focusing on age, social identity and identification, and work reviewed here highlight various nuances of the social identity approach applied to the study of working. For example, this research suggests that, under certain circumstances, the expression or suppression as well as the strength of social identities has relationships with important work outcomes, including job satisfaction and turnover intentions (e.g., Madera et al., 2012 ). Beyond these simple main effects, studies identifying incremental relationships of age-related social identity and identification are likewise informative, as the evidence presented serves to rule out other plausible explanations for such findings (i.e., the possibility of competing psychological mechanisms that would otherwise explain such relationships; see Ng, 2015 ). Finally, in line with the social identity literature (Ellemers, Spears, et al., 2002 ; Sluss & Ashforth, 2007 ), we have distinguished between social identity (e.g., identification as an older worker) and social identification (e.g., the extent to which one identifies with the group of older workers). A number of studies we reviewed have differentiated between cognitive and affective social identification, which are similar to our conceptualization of social identity and social identification, respectively. The studies we reviewed hint at the possibility that different outcomes can be expected on the basis of which form of identification is present. Although important, research concerning different forms of identification has thus far only narrowly conceptualized these forms in terms of cognitive and affective identification. As suggested by Van Dick, Wagner, Stellmacher, Christ, and Tissington (2005) , there are multiple other forms that identification could take in work contexts (i.e., evaluative and behavioral), across various personal (i.e., career identity) and social (i.e., team, organizational, occupational) foci. These additional forms of identification and their intersection with age and personal and social foci have yet to be fully explored within this literature.

Comparison of Research Areas

The overarching goal of this paper was to review research on age, social identity, and identification within the work context. However, research concerning these constructs also occurs outside of the work context. Research on social identity and age conducted outside of the work context differs from research conducted within the work context in a number of ways. First, studies conducted by gerontologists and lifespan developmental psychologists have more often adopted experimental, longitudinal, or intervention designs (e.g., C. Haslam et al., 2010 ), whereas work and organizational psychologists have largely relied on cross-sectional, self-report survey methodologies. For instance, a study by Steffens, Cruwys, and colleagues (2016) used archival longitudinal data from the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing to investigate the effects of the number of social group memberships held after retirement on retirees’ quality of life and mortality risk 6 years later. Results showed that the number of groups retirees identified with positively predicted their quality of life and negatively predicted their mortality risk. Moreover, number of social groups after retirement was more important for these outcomes than the number of social groups before retirement. Thus, researchers in the field of work and organizational psychology would benefit from broadening their methodological repertoire by conducting experimental, intervention, and longitudinal studies on age, social identity and identification, and work.

Second, research outside the work context has mainly focused on cognitive functioning, health, and well-being as outcomes (e.g., Haslam et al., 2012 ), whereas research within the work context focused mainly on job and retirement-related attitudes and intentions assessed using self-report questionnaires and single-source designs. Work and organizational psychology research on age, social identity, and identification would benefit from including additional and more objective outcomes such as test performance in laboratory tasks, more objective indicators of physical and mental health, and peer- or supervisor-ratings of job performance.

Finally, gerontological research in particular has considered social identity and identification in relatively older populations (e.g., Haslam, Cruwys, & Haslam, 2014 , study N = 3,413 people between 50 and 99 years), and among those requiring long-term care assistance (e.g., Knight et al., 2010 ), whereas lifespan and work and aging research has focused on relatively younger and presumably healthier subsets of the aging population. Importantly, studies that focus on a single age group (e.g., only younger adults, only older adults) are limited in that they do not allow comparisons between relatively younger and relatively older adults/workers ( Zacher, 2013 ). They cannot answer the question whether the findings might generalize to other age groups as well or differ from other age groups. Thus, to gain a better understanding of the role of age-related differences in social identity and identification, and to make more generalizable claims from research findings, it is important that researchers sample participants across the entire (working) lifespan.

Directions for Future Research

The preceding review highlights a number of important areas in which future research can expand the application of social identity and identification research to the study of age in the work context. Please see Table 3 for a summary of our nine recommendations for future research. Thus far, research has arguably considered a rather narrow range of work outcomes (e.g., job satisfaction, retirement intentions). Future work would be well served to adopt a broader array of work outcomes that move beyond attitudes and behavioral intentions. For example, more research concerning links of age-related social identity and identification with different forms of occupational well-being (e.g., physical and mental health) is needed, as is research concerning relationships of social identity and identification with various forms of work performance outcomes (e.g., task, citizenship, counterproductive performance).

Summary of Recommendations for Future Research

Research has also generally established main-effect links between age-related social identity and identification and work outcomes (e.g., Madera et al., 2012 ). However, it is somewhat more rare to consider the boundary conditions for such effects (see Kraak et al., 2017 ). While important, the limited scope of main-effect inferences can be augmented by more directly considering both individual differences (e.g., personality) and contextual moderators (e.g., age stereotypes, climate for successful aging) in future studies. More recent models of successful aging at work have made explicit calls for the specification of moderators of age-related outcomes ( Kooij, 2015 ; Zacher, 2015 ; Zacher & Yang, 2016 ). Thus, bridging these two disparate theories and associated literatures via the specification of such conditional age-related social identity and identification effects is necessary and important for future studies.

Related to this, the process of age-related social identification is rarely studied. To this end, it would be important to consider age-relevant mediators of the influence of age-related social identification on work outcomes at the between-person level of analysis. At the within-person level, it would likewise be important to study how age-related social identification unfolds over time, and potentially consider reciprocal and reinforcing relationships between age-related social identification and work outcomes. Moreover, it would be interesting to examine whether age as a social category becomes more salient in defining oneself with increasing age. For instance, researchers could investigate whether older workers are more likely to activate age-related identification processes more frequently or more intensively than middle-aged or younger workers (we thank an anonymous reviewer for suggesting this idea). Additionally, research considering different forms of age-related social identity and identification (e.g., cognitive, affective) points to differential relationships between such forms and work outcomes. It might further be important to distinguish between measures assessing social identification with one’s age group in general (i.e., without mentioning specific age groups) and social identification with specific age groups (e.g., older workers). The relative predictive validity of these different forms has yet to be studied extensively. Future research could consider how these various and multiple forms of identification work together, and whether differential predictions noted in the literature reviewed here can be replicated with a broader range of important work outcomes.

Future research could also address the complex relationship between people’s personal and social identities ( Tajfel & Turner, 1979 ) within the context of age and work. This research may draw upon Ibarra’s research on working identity ( Ibarra, 2003 ) and identity transitions ( Ibarra & Barbulescu, 2010 ), which has been particularly influential in the organizational sciences literature. Specifically, Ibarra and Barbulescu (2010) argued that personal stories (i.e., one’s self-narrative) can help people reconstruct their personal identities during work role transitions. As people age in the work context, they experience a number of personal and work role transitions that they need to adapt to ( Nicholson, 1984 ). It may be interesting to supplement Ibarra and colleagues’ perspective with the social identity approach, by investigating the role of both personal and social identities and identification for successful aging and development within and outside of the work context.

Some more discrete criticisms of this research likewise speak to the need for enhanced programs of research concerning social identity and identification in the literature on age in the work context. Thus far, only survey designs have been employed in research concerning age-based social identities and work outcomes. Accordingly, the adoption of experimental, longitudinal, and/or intervention designs that are present in the general aging and social identity and identification literature should be considered by future research ( Bohlmann et al., 2018 ). As most research has adopted survey methodologies, it should not be surprising that most existing research relies on cross-sectional (i.e., single time-point) methodologies. Accordingly, the vast majority of this research can speak only to how static forms of identification operate with respect to work outcomes. Given that social identities and different forms of social identification are likely to be dynamic and malleable, even across a relatively narrow span of time, future research must consider more intensive longitudinal and short-term diary or experience sampling methodologies to study the variability inherent in such dynamic effects. Likewise, thus far, research concerning age and social identity and identification in the work context has treated identity and identification solely as a predictor variable. As alluded to previously, additional research is needed to quantify possibly reciprocal and/or cyclical relationships between social identities, identification, and work outcomes, within person and over time.

Most of the propositions offered within our conceptual model did not receive conclusive support. This lack of support was not because of contradictory or conflicting evidence per se. Rather, the lack of support for such propositions was because primary studies have infrequently hypothesized or tested for conditional effects of psychological age on associations between chronological age and social identity and identification (i.e., Propositions 2 and 4), of age (meta-) stereotypes on associations of social identity and identification with work outcomes (i.e., Proposition 5), or of work-related social identity and identification on the relationship between chronological age and work outcomes (i.e., Proposition 8). Given that many of the studies we reviewed have this data already collected, this work should serve as a call for the reanalysis of archival data to more completely flesh out these proposed links in our conceptual model. We suspect that a clearer picture of these effects would emerge if such efforts were undertaken.

Finally, our review informs an overarching critique of the social identity approach applied to understanding age and aging in the work context. These criticisms must be addressed as enhanced theories of age and social identity and identification are advanced in future research. First, the inconsistent conceptualization and operationalization of age-related social identity and identification across studies reviewed here (e.g., identification with older workers/one’s age group vs. affective/cognitive forms) makes it difficult to draw certain parallels across these studies with respect to general life and work outcomes. This variation in conceptualizing and operationalizing social identity and identification is, in part, the fault of theory for incompletely defining such social identity and identification structures, which is thus translated differently across these various streams of research. All research in this area is thus rather incremental to existing theories of social identity and identification, or simply builds upon past research instead of challenging prevailing thinking about the processes predicted to be at play. Thus, it is imperative to build a more comprehensive, overarching framework to understand these phenomena and build connections between theories. A selection of limited outcomes is also studied in this literature, making the scope of consideration relatively narrow at this point in time (e.g., focusing on exclusively cognitive functioning/health/well-being or behavioral intentions). An important first step to addressing these issues is to (re)consider overarching definitions of social identity and identification as specifically applied to the study of age in the work context. Such definitions would have to consider numerous existing conceptualizations and operationalizations (e.g., cognitive/affective/behavioral/evaluative forms of identification, single vs. multigroup identification, and the various personal vs. social foci in which such identification occurs; see Van Dick et al., 2005 ), and would go a long way to aiding the development of a comprehensive framework to guide future research in this area.

In this article, we developed a new conceptual model of age, social identity and identification, and work outcomes to summarize and integrate existing empirical studies and to provide guidance for future research. Our literature review suggests that age and social identity and identification are important considerations for the study of a variety of common work outcomes. However, it is also clear that more work in terms of both advancing theory and building a solid empirical foundation is necessary in order to make a stronger case for the importance of social identity and identification. We hope that our work serves to inspire future researchers to investigate the myriad implications of age-related social identity and identification at work. To advance research on age, social identity and identification, and work, it is essential to design and conduct rigorous, replicable, and robust empirical investigations that explore the specific tenets and limits of our conceptual model.

Abrams , D. , & Hogg , M. A . ( 2017 ). Twenty years of group processes and intergroup relations research: A review of past progress and future prospects . Group Processes & Intergroup Relations , 20 , 561 – 569 . doi: 10.1177/1368430217709536

Google Scholar

Angouri , J . ( 2012 ). “The older I get the less I trust people”: Constructing age identities in the workplace . Pragmatics , 22 , 255 – 277 . doi: 10.1075/prag.22.2.04ang

Armenta , B. M. , Stroebe , K. , Scheibe , S. , Postmes , T. , & Van Yperen , N. W . ( 2017 ). Feeling younger and identifying with older adults: Testing two routes to maintaining well-being in the face of age discrimination . PLoS One , 12 , e0187805 . doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0187805

Ashforth , B. E. , & Mael , F . ( 1989 ). Social identity theory and the organization . Academy of Management Review , 14 , 20 – 39 . doi: 10.5465/AMR.1989.4278999

Avanzi , L. , Cortini , M. , & Crocetti , E . ( 2012 ). When age matters: The role of teacher aging on job identity and organizational citizenship behaviours . Revue Internationale de Psychologie Sociale , 25 , 179 – 210 .

Avanzi , L. , van Dick , R. , Fraccaroli , F. , & Sarchielli , G . ( 2012 ). The downside of organizational identification: Relations between identification, workaholism and well-being . Work & Stress , 26 , 289 – 307 . doi: 10.1080/02678373.2012.712291

Axt , J. R. , Ebersole , C. R. , & Nosek , B. A . ( 2014 ). The rules of implicit evaluation by race, religion, and age . Psychological Science , 25 , 1804 – 1815 . doi: 10.1177/0956797614543801

Bain , P. G . ( 2014 ). The structure and content of the human category, and its implications for understanding dehumanization . In P. G. Bain, J. Vaes, & J.-P. Leyens (Eds.), Humanness and dehumanization (pp. 227 – 255 ). New York : Routledge .

Google Preview

Bal , P. M. , de Lange , A. H. , Van der Heijden , B. I. , Zacher , H. , Oderkerk , F. A. , & Otten , S . ( 2015 ). Young at heart, old at work? Relations between age, (meta-)stereotypes, self-categorization, and retirement attitudes . Journal of Vocational Behavior , 91 , 35 – 45 . doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2015.09.002

Baltes , P. B. , & Baltes , M. M . ( 1990 ). Psychological perspectives on successful aging: The model of selective optimization with compensation . In P. B. Baltes, & M. M. Baltes (Eds.), Successful aging: Perspectives from the behavioral sciences (pp. 1 – 34 ). New York : Cambridge University Press .

Bayl-Smith , P. H. , & Griffin , B . ( 2014 ). Age discrimination in the workplace: Identifying as a late‐career worker and its relationship with engagement and intended retirement age . Journal of Applied Social Psychology , 44 , 588 – 599 . doi: 10.1111/jasp.12251

Bergmann , A. , Schmidt , S. L. , Schreyer , D. , & Torgler , B . ( 2016 ). Age and organizational identification: Empirical findings from professional sports . Applied Economics Letters , 23 , 718 – 722 . doi: 10.1080/13504851.2015.1102837

Bohlmann , C. , Rudolph , C. W. , & Zacher , H. ( 2018 ). Methodological recommendations to move research on work and aging forward . Work, Aging and Retirement . doi:10.1093/workar/wax023

Brewer , M. B . ( 1993 ). The role of distinctiveness in social identity and group behaviour . In M. A. Hogg & D. Abrams (Eds.), Group motivation: Social psychological perspectives (pp. 1 – 16 ). Hertfordshire, England : Harvester Wheatsheaf .

Carstensen , L. L. ( 1991 ). Selectivity theory: Social activity in life-span context . In K. W. Schaie & M. P. Lawton (Eds.), Annual review of gerontology and geriatrics (Vol. 11, pp. 195–217) . New York, NY : Springer .

Carstensen , L. L. , Isaacowitz , D. M. , & Charles , S. T . ( 1999 ). Taking time seriously: A theory of socioemotional selectivity . American Psychologist , 54 , 165 – 181 . doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.54.3.165

Cheung , F. , & Wu , A. M. S . ( 2014 ). Social identification, perception of aging, and successful aging in the workplace . Journal of Career Development , 41 , 218 – 236 . doi:10.1177/0894845313486353

Cleveland , J. N. , & Hanscom , M . ( 2017 ). What is old at work? Moving past chronological age . In E. Parry & J. McCarthy (Eds.), The Palgrave handbook of age diversity and work (pp. 17 – 46 ). London : Palgrave Macmillan .

Desmette , D. , & Gaillard , M . ( 2008 ). When a “worker” becomes an “older worker”: The effects of age-related social identity on attitudes towards retirement and work . Career Development International , 13 , 168 – 185 . doi: 10.1108/13620430810860567

Ellemers , N. , Haslam , S. A. , Platow , M. J. , & van Knippenberg , D . ( 2002 ). Social identity at work: Developments, debates, directions . In S. A. Haslam, D. van Knippenberg, M. J. Platow, & N. Ellemers (Eds.), Social identity at work: Developing theory for organizational practice (pp. 3 – 26 ). New York : Psychology Press .

Ellemers , N. , Spears , R. , & Doosje , B . ( 2002 ). Self and social identity . Annual Review of Psychology , 53 , 161 – 186 . doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135228

Farnum , K. S. , & Wiener , R. L . ( 2016 ). Stereotype content model, causal models, and allegations of age discrimination: Should the law change ? Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy , 16 , 100 – 124 . doi: 10.1111/asap.12112

Finkelstein , L. M. , King , E. B. , & Voyles , E. C . ( 2015 ). Age metastereotyping and cross-age workplace interactions: A meta view of age stereotypes at work . Work, Aging and Retirement , 1 , 26 – 40 . doi: 10.1093/workar/wau002

Fiske , S. T. , Cuddy , A. J. , Glick , P. , & Xu , J . ( 2002 ). A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: Competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 82 , 878 – 902 . doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.82.6.878

Gaertner , S. L. , Dovidio , J. F. , Anastasio , P. A. , Bachman , B. A. , & Rust , M. C . ( 1993 ). The common ingroup identity model: Recategorization and the reduction of intergroup bias . European Review of Social Psychology , 4 , 1 – 26 . doi: 10.1080/14792779343000004

Gaillard , M. , & Desmette , D . ( 2008 ). Intergroup predictors of older workers’ attitudes towards work and early exit . European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology , 17 , 450 – 481 . doi: 10.1080/13594320801908564

Gioaba , I. , & Krings , F . ( 2017 ). Impression management in the job interview: An effective way of mitigating discrimination against older applicants ? Frontiers in Psychology , 8 , 770 . doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00770

Gleibs , I. H. , Haslam , C. , Jones , J. M. , Haslam , S. A. , McNeil , J. , & Connolly , H . ( 2011 ). No country for old men? The role of a Gentlemen’s Club in promoting social engagement and psychological well-being in residential care . Aging and Mental Health , 15 , 456 – 466 . doi: 10.1080/13607863.2010.536137

Haslam , C. , Cruwys , T. , & Haslam , S. A . ( 2014 ). “The we’s have it”: Evidence for the distinctive benefits of group engagement in enhancing cognitive health in aging . Social Science & Medicine , 129 , 57 – 66 . doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.08.037

Haslam , C. , Haslam , S. A. , Jetten , J. , Bevins , A. , Ravenscroft , S. , & Tonks , J . ( 2010 ). The social treatment: Benefits of group reminiscence and group activity for the cognitive performance and well-being of older adults in residential care . Psychology and Aging , 25 , 157 – 167 . doi: 10.1037/a0018256

Haslam , C. , Morton , T. A. , Haslam , S. A. , Varnes , L. , Graham , R. , & Gamaz , L . ( 2012 ). “When the age is in, the wit is out”: Age-related self-categorization and deficit expectations reduce performance on clinical tests used in dementia assessment . Psychology and Aging , 27 , 778 – 784 . doi: 10.1037/a0027754

Haslam , S. A . ( 2004 ). Psychology in organizations: The social identity approach . London, UK : Sage .

Haslam , S. A. , Powell , C. , & Turner , J . ( 2000 ). Social identity, self‐categorization, and work motivation: Rethinking the contribution of the group to positive and sustainable organisational outcomes . Applied Psychology: An International Review , 49 , 319 – 339 . doi: 10.1111/1464-0597.00018

Haslam , S. A. , van Knippenberg , D. , Platow , M. J. , & Ellemers , N . ( 2002 ). Social identity at work: Developing theory for organizational practice . New York : Psychology Press .

Hassell , B. L. , & Perrewe , P. L . ( 1995 ). An examination of beliefs about older workers: Do stereotypes still exist ? Journal of Organizational Behavior , 16 , 457 – 468 . doi: 10.1002/job.4030160506

Hatak , I. , Harms , R. , & Fink , M . ( 2015 ). Age, job identification, and entrepreneurial intention . Journal of Managerial Psychology , 30 , 38 – 53 . doi: 10.1108/JMP-07-2014-0213

Hennekam , S. , & Herrbach , O . ( 2015 ). The influence of age-awareness versus general HRM practices on the retirement decision of older workers . Personnel Review , 44 , 3 – 21 . doi: 10.1108/PR-01-2014-0031

Hesketh , B. , Griffin , B. , Dawis , R. , & Bayl-Smith , P . ( 2015 ). Extensions to the dynamic aspects of the retirement transition and adjustment framework (RTAF): Adjustment behaviors, work styles, and identity . Work, Aging and Retirement , 1 , 79 – 91 . doi: 10.1093/workar/wau004

Hirst , G. , Van Dick , R. , & Van Knippenberg , D . ( 2009 ). A social identity perspective on leadership and employee creativity . Journal of Organizational Behavior , 30 , 963 – 982 . doi: 10.1002/job.600

Hofer , S. M. , & Sliwinski , M. J . ( 2006 ). Design and analysis of longitudinal studies on aging . In J. E. Birren & K. W. Schaie (Eds.), Handbook of the psychology of aging (6th ed., pp. 15 – 37 ). Amsterdam, the Netherlands : Elsevier .

Hogg , M. A . ( 2001 ). A social identity theory of leadership . Personality and Social Psychology Review , 5 , 184 – 200 . doi: 10.1207/S15327957PSPR0503_1

Hogg , M. A. , & Terry , D. J . ( 2000 ). Social identity and self-categorization processes in organizational contexts . Academy of Management Review , 25 , 121 – 140 . doi: 10.5465/AMR.2000.2791606

Hornsey , M. J . ( 2008 ). Social identity theory and self‐categorization theory: A historical review . Social and Personality Psychology Compass , 2 , 204 – 222 . doi: 10.1111/j.1751-9004.2007.00066

Ibarra , H . ( 2003 ). Working identity: Unconventional strategies for reinventing your career . Boston, MA : Harvard Business School Press .

Ibarra , H. , & Barbulescu , R . ( 2010 ). Identity as narrative: Prevalence, effectiveness, and consequences of narrative identity work in macro work role transitions . Academy of Management Review , 35 , 135 – 154 . doi: 10.5465/AMR.2010.45577925

Iweins , C. , Desmette , D. , Yzerbyt , V. , & Stinglhamber , F . ( 2013 ). Ageism at work: The impact of intergenerational contact and organizational multi-age perspective . European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology , 22 , 331 – 346 . doi: 10.1080/1359432X.2012.748656

Kalokerinos , E. K. , Von Hippel , C. , & Zacher , H . ( 2014 ). Is stereotype threat a useful construct for organizational psychology research and practice ? Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice , 7 , 381 – 402 . doi: 10.1111/iops.12167

Kastenbaum , R. , Derbin , V. , Sabatini , P. , & Artt , S . ( 1972 ). “The ages of me”: Toward personal and interpersonal definitions of functional aging . The International Journal of Aging and Human Development , 3 , 197 – 211 . doi: 10.2190/TUJR-WTXK-866Q-8QU7

Knight , C. , Haslam , S. A. , & Haslam , C . ( 2010 ). In home or at home? Evidence that collective decision making enhances older adults’ social identification, well-being and use of communal space when moving to a new care facility . Aging and Society , 30 , 1393 – 1418 . doi: 10.1017/S0144686X10000656

Kooij , D. T. A. M . ( 2015 ). Successful aging at work: The active role of employees . Work, Aging and Retirement , 1 , 309 – 319 . doi: 10.1093/workar/wav018

Kooij , D. T. A. M. , De Lange , A. H. , Jansen , P. G. W. , & Dikkers , J. S. E . ( 2008 ). Older workers’ motivation to continue to work: Five meanings of age . Journal of Managerial Psychology , 23 , 364 – 394 . doi: 10.1108/02683940810869015

Kosloski , K . ( 1986 ). Isolating age, period, and cohort effects in developmental research: A critical review . Research on Aging , 8 , 460 – 479 . doi: 10.1177/0164027586008004002

Kraak , J. M. , Lunardo , R. , Herrbach , O. , & Durrieu , F . ( 2017 ). Promises to employees matter, self-identity too: Effects of psychological contract breach and older worker identity on violation and turnover intentions . Journal of Business Research , 70 , 108 – 117 . doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.06.015

Kroon , A. C. , van Selm , M. , ter Hoeven , C. L. , & Vliegenthart , R . ( 2016 ). Poles apart: The processing and consequences of mixed media stereotypes of older workers . Journal of Communication , 66 , 811 – 833 . doi: 10.1111/jcom.12249

Kunze , F. , Böhm , S. A. , & Bruch , H . ( 2013 ). Organizational performance consequences of age diversity: Inspecting the role of diversity-friendly HR policies and top managers’ negative age stereotypes . Journal of Management Studies , 50 , 413 – 442 . doi: 10.1111/joms.12016

Kunze , F. , & Bruch , H . ( 2010 ). Age-based faultlines and perceived productive energy: The moderation of transformational leadership . Small Group Research , 41 , 593 – 620 . doi: 10.1177/1046496410366307

Lee , E. S. , Park , T. Y. , & Koo , B . ( 2015 ). Identifying organizational identification as a basis for attitudes and behaviors: A meta-analytic review . Psychological Bulletin , 141 , 1049 – 1080 . doi: 10.1037/bul0000012

Liebermann , S. C. , Wegge , J. , Jungmann , F. , & Schmidt , K. H . ( 2013 ). Age diversity and individual team member health: The moderating role of age and age stereotypes . Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology , 86 , 184 – 202 . doi: 10.1111/joop.12016

Lyons , S. T. , & Schweitzer , L . ( 2016 ). A qualitative exploration of generational identity: Making sense of young and old in the context of today’s workplace . Work, Aging and Retirement , 3 , 209 – 224 . doi: 10.1093/workar/waw024

Macdonald , J. L. , & Levy , S. R . ( 2016 ). Ageism in the workplace: The role of psychosocial factors in predicting job satisfaction, commitment, and engagement . Journal of Social Issues , 72 , 169 – 190 . doi: 10.1111/josi.12161

Madera , J. M. , King , E. B. , & Hebl , M. R . ( 2012 ). Bringing social identity to work: The influence of manifestation and suppression on perceived discrimination, job satisfaction, and turnover intentions . Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology , 18 , 165 – 170 . doi: 10.1037/a0027724

Marcus , J. , & Fritzsche , B. A . ( 2014 ). One too many categories: An experimental test on the effectiveness of a dual-identity recategorization intervention on age-based bias . Current Psychology , 33 , 578 – 599 . doi: 10.1007/s12144-014-9230-9

Marcus , J. , & Sabuncu , N . ( 2015 ). “Old oxen cannot plow”: Stereotype themes of older adults in Turkish folklore . The Gerontologist , 56 , 1007 – 1022 . doi: 10.1093/geront/gnv108

Ng , T. W. H . ( 2015 ). The incremental validity of organizational commitment, organizational trust, and organizational identification . Journal of Vocational Behavior , 88 , 154 – 163 . doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2015.03.003

Ng , T. W. H. , & Allen , T. D . ( 2018 ). Organizational attachment and health . Journal of Vocational Behavior, 107, 1–14 . doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2018.03.003

Ng , T. W. H. , & Feldman , D. C . ( 2010 ). The relationship of age with job attitudes: A meta-analysis . Personnel Psychology , 63 , 667 – 718 . doi: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.2010.01184.x

Ng , T. W. H. , & Feldman , D. C . ( 2012 ). Evaluating six common stereotypes about older workers with meta-analytical data . Personnel Psychology , 65 , 821 – 858 . doi: 10.1111/peps.12003

Nicholson , N . ( 1984 ). A theory of work role transitions . Administrative Science Quarterly , 29 , 172 – 191 . doi: 10.2307/2393172

North , M. S. , & Fiske , S. T . ( 2012 ). An inconvenienced youth? Ageism and its potential intergenerational roots . Psychological Bulletin , 138 , 982 – 997 . doi:10.1037/a0027843

North , M. S. , & Fiske , S. T . ( 2015 ). Modern attitudes toward older adults in the aging world: A cross-cultural meta-analysis . Psychological Bulletin , 141 , 993 – 1021 . doi: 10.1037/a0039469

Oliveira , E. , & Cabral-Cardoso , C . ( 2017 ). Older workers’ representation and age-based stereotype threats in the workplace . Journal of Managerial Psychology , 32 , 254 – 268 . doi:10.1108/JMP-03-2016-0085

Posthuma , R. A. , & Campion , M. A . ( 2009 ). Age stereotypes in the workplace: Common stereotypes, moderators, and future research directions . Journal of Management , 35 , 158 – 188 . doi: 10.1177/0149206308318617

Ramaci , T. , Pellerone , M. , Ledda , C. , Presti , G. , Squatrito , V. , & Rapisarda , V . ( 2017 ). Gender stereotypes in occupational choice: A cross-sectional study on a group of Italian adolescents . Psychology Research and Behavior Management , 10 , 109 – 116 . doi: 10.2147/PRBM.S134132

Riketta , M . ( 2005 ). Organizational identification: A meta-analysis . Journal of Vocational Behavior , 66 , 358 – 384 . doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2004.05.005

Rudolph , C. W . ( 2016 ). Lifespan developmental perspectives on working: A literature review of motivational theories . Work, Aging and Retirement , 2 , 130 – 158 . doi: 10.1093/workar/waw012

Schulz , R. , & Heckhausen , J . ( 1996 ). A life span model of successful aging . American Psychologist , 51 , 702 – 714 . doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.51.7.702

Schwall , A. R . ( 2012 ). Defining age and using age-relevant constructs . In J. W. Hedge & W. C. Borman (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of work and aging (pp. 169 – 186 ). New York : Oxford University Press .

Sluss , D. M. , & Ashforth , B. E . ( 2007 ). Relational identity and identification: Defining ourselves through work relationships . Academy of Management Review , 32 , 9 – 32 . doi: 10.5465/AMR.2007.23463672

Steffens , N. K. , Cruwys , T. , Haslam , C. , Jetten , J. , & Haslam , S. A . ( 2016 ). Social group memberships in retirement are associated with reduced risk of premature death: Evidence from a longitudinal cohort study . BMJ Open , 6 , 1 – 8 . doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015–010164

Steffens , N. K. , Haslam , S. A. , Schuh , S. C. , Jetten , J. , & van Dick , R . ( 2017 ). A meta-analytic review of social identification and health in organizational contexts . Personality and Social Psychology Review , 21, 303–335. doi: 10.1177/1088868316656701

Steffens , N. K. , Schuh , S. C. , Haslam , S. A. , Perez , A. , & Van Dick , R . ( 2015 ). ‘Of the group’ and ‘for the group’: How followership is shaped by leaders’ prototypicality and group identification . European Journal of Social Psychology , 45 , 180 – 190 . doi: 10.1002/ejsp.2088

Tajfel , H . ( 1978 ). Social categorization, social identity and social comparison . In H. Tajfel (Ed.), Differentiation between social groups: Studies in the social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 61 – 76 ). London, UK : Academic press .

Tajfel , H. , & Turner , J. C . ( 1979 ). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict . In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33 – 47 ). Monterey, CA : Brooks/Cole .

Teuscher , U . ( 2010 ). Change and persistence of personal identities after the transition to retirement . The International Journal of Aging & Human Development , 70 , 89 – 106 . doi:10.2190/AG.70.1.d

Topa , G. , & Alcover , C. M . ( 2015 ). Psychosocial factors in retirement intentions and adjustment: A multi-sample study . Career Development International , 20 , 384 – 408 . doi: 10.1108/CDI-09-2014-0129

Turner , J. C . ( 1985 ). Social categorization and the self-concept: A social cognitive theory of group behavior . In E. J. Lawler (Ed.), Advances in group processes: Theory and research (pp. 77 – 122 ). Greenwich, CT : JAI Press .

Turner , J. C . ( 1999 ). Some current issues in research on social identity and self-categorization theories . In N. Ellemers, R. Spears, & B. Doosje (Eds.), Social identity (pp. 6 – 34 ). Oxford, UK : Blackwell .

Turner , J. C. , Hogg , M. A. , Oakes , P. J. , Reicher , S. D. , & Wetherell , M. S . ( 1987 ). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory . Oxford, UK : Blackwell .

Turner , J. C. , & Oakes , P. J . ( 1986 ). The significance of the social identity concept for social psychology with reference to individualism, interactionism and social influence . British Journal of Social Psychology , 25 , 237 – 252 . doi: 10.1111/j.2044–8309.1986.tb00732.x

Van Dick , R. , Wagner , U. , Stellmacher , J. , Christ , O. , & Tissington , P. A . ( 2005 ). To be (long) or not to be (long): Social identification in organizational contexts . Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs , 131 , 189 – 218 . doi: 10.3200/MONO.131.3.189-218

Weiss , D. , & Freund , A . ( 2012 ). Still young at heart: Negative age-related information motivates distancing from same-aged people . Psychology and Aging , 27 , 173 – 180 . doi: 10.1037/a0024819

Weiss , D. , & Lang , F. R . ( 2009 ). Thinking about my generation: Adaptive effects of a dual identity in later adulthood . Psychology and Aging , 24 , 729 – 734 . doi: 10.1037/a0016339

Weiss , D. , & Lang , F. R . ( 2012 ). “They” are old but “I” feel younger: Age-group dissociation as a self-protective strategy in old age . Psychology and Aging , 27 , 153 – 163 . doi: 10.1037/a0024887

Zacher , H . ( 2013 ). Older job seekers’ job search intensity: The interplay of proactive personality, age, and occupational future time perspective . Ageing & Society , 33 , 1139 – 1166 . doi: 10.1017/S0144686X12000451

Zacher , H . ( 2015 ). Successful aging at work . Work, Aging and Retirement , 1 , 4 – 25 . doi: 10.1093/workar/wau006

Zacher , H. , & Rudolph , C. W. ( 2018 ). Just a mirage: On the incremental predictive validity of subjective age . Work, Aging and Retirement . doi:10.1093/workar/wax031

Zacher , H. , & Yang , J . ( 2016 ). Organizational climate for successful aging . Frontiers in Psychology , 7 , 1007 . doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01007

Email alerts

Citing articles via.

  • Recommend to your Library

Affiliations

  • Online ISSN 2054-4650
  • Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
  • About Oxford Academic
  • Publish journals with us
  • University press partners
  • What we publish
  • New features  
  • Open access
  • Institutional account management
  • Rights and permissions
  • Get help with access
  • Accessibility
  • Advertising
  • Media enquiries
  • Oxford University Press
  • Oxford Languages
  • University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

  • Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
  • Cookie settings
  • Cookie policy
  • Privacy policy
  • Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Sociology 101 - Lesson Keywords

IMAGES

  1. 15 Literature Review Examples (2024)

    literature review definition in sociology

  2. Literature review for sociology

    literature review definition in sociology

  3. Literature Review For Qualitative Research

    literature review definition in sociology

  4. 👍 Scope and significance of sociology. Sociology: Definition

    literature review definition in sociology

  5. Tips for a Good Literature Review Sociology

    literature review definition in sociology

  6. topics for sociology literature review

    literature review definition in sociology

VIDEO

  1. #Sociology #Research #literature

  2. What is Literature Review?

  3. philosophical And Sociological foundation of education very important question for B.ED first years

  4. what is literature review Full detail

  5. #Sociology #Research |Steps in social research| Literature Review

  6. 3_session2 Importance of literature review, types of literature review, Reference management tool

COMMENTS

  1. Literature Reviews

    A literature review can be a short introductory section of a research article or a report or policy paper that focuses on recent research. Or, in the case of dissertations, theses, and review articles, it can be an extensive review of all relevant research.

  2. Doing a Literature Review in Sociology

    Overview - Doing a Literature Review in Sociology - Research Guides at Brandeis University Doing a Literature Review in Sociology Advice from a sociologist and a librarian about how to do a literature review. Introduction A literature review helps you figure out what scholars, what studies, and what questions your project is in conversation with.

  3. PDF LITERATURE REVIEWS

    comprehensive overview ten practical tips OVERVIEW WHAT IS A LITERATURE REVIEW? PURPOSES OF A LITERATURE REVIEW orient your reader by defining key concepts (theoretical) and/or providing relevant background (empirical) "motivate" your research, i.e. demonstrating the relevance of your project

  4. PDF The Critical Literature Review

    The Critical Literature Review Q: What is a literature review? Stated most simply, it is an overview of published and unpublished materials which help answer two fundamental questions: 1. What are the current theoretical or policy issues and debates related to your topic? 2. What is the current state of knowledge about these issues and problems?

  5. Research Guides: Sociology Research Guide: Literature Reviews

    A descriptive list or collection of summaries of other research without synthesis or analysis An annotated bibliography A literary review (a brief, critical discussion about the merits and weaknesses of a literary work such as a play, novel or a book of poems)

  6. Literature Reviews

    Demonstrate the importance of your research to the field. Academic Phrasebank. Examples of common phrases used in literature reviews and reports of research findings. The items in the Academic Phrasebank are mostly content neutral and generic in nature; in using them, therefore, you are not stealing other people's ideas and this does not ...

  7. The Literature Review

    A literature review is a survey of everything that has been written about a particular topic, theory, or research question. The word "literature" means "sources of information". The literature will inform you about the research that has already been conducted on your chosen subject.

  8. Literature Reviews

    Sociology Library resources for sociological research What is a Literature Review? A literature review is a "critical analysis of a segment of a published body of knowledge through summary, classification, and comparison of prior research studies, reviews of literature, and theoretical articles" (University of Wisconsin Writing Center).

  9. Literature Review

    3. Definition and Use/Purpose. A literature review may constitute an essential chapter of a thesis or dissertation, or may be a self-contained review of writings on a subject. In either case, its purpose is to: Place each work in the context of its contribution to the understanding of the subject under review.

  10. Writing a Literature Review

    A literature review is used to show that you have read, evaluated, and comprehended the published research on a particular topic. A literature review is structured to show to your professors that you understand the work that has been done in the past on a topic, and will serve as a jumping off point for whatever research you are conducting.

  11. SOC 001: Introductory Sociology

    Introduction Provide an overview of the topic, theme, or issue. Identify your specific area of focus. Describe your methodology and rationale. How did you decide which sources to include and which to exclude? Why? How is your review organized? Briefly discuss the overall trends in the published scholarship in this area.

  12. Lit Reviews

    Sociology: Lit Reviews Literature Review In a literature review you explore research that has come before you and is relevant to your topic. It can help you identify: Core research in the field Experts in the subject area Methodology you may want to use (or avoid) Gaps in the literature -- or where your research would fit in Helpful approaches:

  13. 2.1 Approaches to Sociological Research

    Step 2: Review the Literature/Research Existing Sources. The next step researchers undertake is to conduct background research through a literature review, which is a review of any existing similar or related studies. A visit to the library, a thorough online search, and a survey of academic journals will uncover existing research about the ...

  14. Research Guides: Research in Sociology: Literature Reviews

    Literature Reviews - Research in Sociology - Research Guides at Lewis University Research in Sociology How to use Scientific Articles in a Literature Review Ten Simple Rules for Writing a Literature Review Video Explanations of a Literature Review Literature Reviews An Overview for Graduate Students

  15. Writing a literature review

    A formal literature review is an evidence-based, in-depth analysis of a subject. There are many reasons for writing one and these will influence the length and style of your review, but in essence a literature review is a critical appraisal of the current collective knowledge on a subject. Rather than just being an exhaustive list of all that ...

  16. Components of the Literature Review

    Literature Review. This is the most time-consuming aspect in the preparation of your research proposal and it is a key component of the research proposal. As described in Chapter 5, the literature review provides the background to your study and demonstrates the significance of the proposed research. Specifically, it is a review and synthesis ...

  17. How to Write a Literature Review

    Examples of literature reviews. Step 1 - Search for relevant literature. Step 2 - Evaluate and select sources. Step 3 - Identify themes, debates, and gaps. Step 4 - Outline your literature review's structure. Step 5 - Write your literature review.

  18. How to write Literature Review: Explained with Examples

    Theoretical review is concerned with a body of knowledge accumulated in relation to a topic, concept, theory, or phenomenon. Theoretical literature reviews are useful for determining what ideas already exist, their relationships, and the extent to which existing theories have been studied and for generating new hypotheses to test.

  19. What is a literature review?

    A literature or narrative review is a comprehensive review and analysis of the published literature on a specific topic or research question. The literature that is reviewed contains: books, articles, academic articles, conference proceedings, association papers, and dissertations.

  20. Literature Review

    Literature Review. A literature review is a discussion of the literature (aka. the "research" or "scholarship") surrounding a certain topic. A good literature review doesn't simply summarize the existing material, but provides thoughtful synthesis and analysis. The purpose of a literature review is to orient your own work within an existing ...

  21. Literature review as a research methodology: An ...

    As mentioned previously, there are a number of existing guidelines for literature reviews. Depending on the methodology needed to achieve the purpose of the review, all types can be helpful and appropriate to reach a specific goal (for examples, please see Table 1).These approaches can be qualitative, quantitative, or have a mixed design depending on the phase of the review.

  22. Sociology of literature

    The sociology of literature is a subfield of the sociology of culture. It studies the social production of literature and its social implications. ... The Sociology of Literature: Theoretical Approaches, Keele: Sociological Review Monographs. Alan Sinfield, (1992) Faultlines: Cultural Materialism and the Politics of Dissident Reading, Oxford: ...

  23. Age, Social Identity and Identification, and Work Outcomes: A

    We, therefore, adopt a definition of social identity as the nature or content of a person's perceived membership in a ... In sum, our literature review provided mixed support for our Proposition 5 on the interactive effects of age-related social identity and identification and age (meta-)stereotypes on work outcomes. While two articles ...

  24. Sociology 101

    Sociology document from North Carolina School of Science and Mathematics, 11 pages, Sociology 101 Lesson Objectives and Core Concepts Chapter 1 - Sociological Perspectives Learning Objectives Define key terms related to the discipline of sociology. Compare the major sociological theories. Have experience conducting sociological res