Writing a Literature Review

Chapter

Abstract

Literature reviews occupy an important corner of the world of scientific activity, yet most scientists do not receive training in how to write them. In the early days of psychological research, many people did their research based on intuitions and personal insights, and one did not have to spend much time in background reading simply because there was not much to read. As our field’s knowledge base expands month by month, however, it becomes increasingly important to be able to master the amount of information already published. New ideas increasingly have to build on previously published works.

References

  1. Archer, J. (2000). Sex differences in aggression between heterosexual partners: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 651–680.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baumeister, R. F. (1990). Suicide as escape from self. Psychological Review, 97, 90–113.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baumeister, R. F. (2000). Gender differences in erotic plasticity: The female sex drive as socially flexible and responsive. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 347–374.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baumeister, R. F., Catanese, K. R., & Vohs, K. D. (2001). Is there a gender difference in strength of sex drive? Theoretical views, conceptual distinctions, and a review of relevant evidence. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5, 242–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Baumeister, R. F., DeWall, C. N., & Vohs, K. D. (2009). Social rejection, control, numbness, and emotion: How not to be fooled by Gerber and Wheeler (2009). Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4, 489–494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 497–529.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1997). Writing narrative literature reviews. Review of General Psychology, 1, 311–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bem, D. J. (1995). Writing a review article for Psychological Bulletin. Psychological Bulletin, 118, 172–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Blackhart, G. C., Nelson, B. C., Knowles, M. L., & Baumeister, R. F. (2009). Rejection elicits emotional reactions but neither causes immediate distress nor lowers self-esteem: A meta-analytic review of 192 studies on social exclusion. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 13, 269–309.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cohen, J. (1977). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York: Academic.Google Scholar
  11. Cooper, H. (1990). Meta-analysis and the integrative research review. In C. Hendrick & M. Clark (Eds.), Research methods in personality and social psychology (pp. 142–163). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  12. Cooper, H., & Hedges, L. V. (1994). The handbook of research synthesis. New York: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
  13. Darley, J. M., & Gross, P. (1983). A hypothesis-confirming bias in labeling effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 20–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. DePaulo, B. M., Charlton, K., Cooper, H., Lindsay, J. J., & Muhlenbruck, L. (1997). The accuracy-confidence correlation in the detection of deception. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 1, 346–357.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hedges, L. V., & Olkin, I. (1985). Statistical methods for meta-analysis. Orlando, FL: Academic.Google Scholar
  16. Kerr, N. L. (1998). HARKing: Hypothesizing after the results are known. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2, 196–217.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kunda, Z. (1990). The case for motivated reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 480–498.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lord, C. G., Ross, L., & Lepper, M. R. (1979). Biased assimilation and attitude polarization: The effects of prior theories on subsequently considered evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 2098–2109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Oliver, M. B., & Hyde, J. S. (1993). Gender differences in sexuality: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 29–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Rosenthal, R. (1983). Assessing the statistical and social importance of the effects of psychotherapy. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 51, 4–13.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Rosenthal, R. (1991). Meta-analytic procedures for social research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  22. Sternberg, R. J. (1991). Editorial. Psychological Bulletin, 109, 3–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Wolf, F. M. (1986). Meta-analysis: Quantitative methods for research synthesis. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyCase Western Reserve UniversityClevelandUSA

Personalised recommendations