ࡱ> bdaa jbjbA]A] $.+?+?.......~& & & & 2 ~A R R R R R R R R  , R) .R R R R R ..R R  R ..R .R B$f....R H .. F '|*& v`  $ 0A h ,   .~~$~~How is a literature review different from an annotated bibliography? A literature review is written in the style of an expository essay; it comprises an introduction, body and conclusion, and it is organized around a controlling idea or thesis. An annotated bibliography is simply an alphabetized list of sources accompanied by comments. Moreover, while a single source appears just once in an annotated bibliography, it may be referred to numerous times in a literature review, depending upon its importance in the field or relationship to other sources. Finally, a literature review includes its own intext citations and bibliography or works cited list. How is a literature review different from a traditional research paper? A literature review may stand alone and be assigned or published as a discrete entity. Or it may constitute one section of a larger research paper or one chapterusually the firstof a thesis. Whereas the main body of a research paper focuses on the subject of your research, the literature review focuses on your sources. Put another way, in the research paper you use expert sources to support the discussion of your thesis; in a literature review, you discuss the sources themselves. How is a literature review structured? Like any expository essay, a literature review should have an introduction, body, and conclusion. The introduction should contain your research question, an explanation of its significance, and any other background information setting the context of your research. The body paragraphs contain your summative, comparative, and evaluative comments on the sources you've found. These comments may pertain to historical background & early research findings recent developments areas of controversy among experts areas of agreement dominant views or leading authorities varying approaches to or perspectives on the subject qualitative comparisons and evaluations etc. The conclusion summarizes major issues in the literature; it also establishes where your own research fits in and what directions you see for future research. How is a literature review organized? While covering the range of matters listed above, a literature reviewlike any expository essayshould still have a single organizing principle expressed in a thesis statement. Some common ones are these: Chronological "A review of the literature of the past fifty years shows research on the motivation behind terrorist acts shifting focus from the psychological to the political and now the religious." Thematic "While a review of the literature suggests some concensus among researchers regarding the psychological state of most terrorists immediately preceding the commission of a terrorist act, there appears to be little agreement regarding the psychological profile of potential terrorists." Methodological "In the effort to understand political extremism, researchers have taken various approaches. Some have surveyed vast libraries of historical literature; others have sifted through stores of church and government data; still others have used the ethnographer's tools of first-hand interview and observation." Qualitative "The very concept of religious fanaticism suggests bias, and, while a few serious researchers in the area manage to maintain objectivity, a review of the literature reveals bias in many studies, especially those quoted most often in the popular media." Note: A literature review is about the existing literature on your subject and provides background for your own research findings or commentary. However, it is NOT primarily about you or your relationship to the literature. Therefore, a literature review should NOT be organized as a narrative of your own research process. A literature review that says essentially "First I found this source, then I found this one ...." is NOT acceptable. E P \ !"H# O[s[\ѡ} h~zZh~zZh~zZh~zZCJOJQJaJh~zZh~zZ6OJQJaJ h~zZh~zZ5B* OJQJphGt!h~zZh~zZB*OJQJaJph333h~zZh~zZ>*OJQJaJh~zZh~zZCJOJQJaJh~zZh~zZOJQJaJ$h~zZh~zZ5B* CJOJQJphGt!E K L U } !"H & F 1$7$8$H$]gd~zZ 1$7$8$H$gd~zZ  OP[\]^Ykd$$Ifl0L4 la$1$7$8$H$Ifgd~zZ ":p~zZ/ =!"#$%$$If!vh5L#vL:V l0L,54<@< NormalCJaJmH sH tH DAD Default Paragraph FontRi@R  Table Normal4 l4a (k(No List.!z z!EKL U}!"H  O P [ \ ] ^ 00P000P0000P0p`ƀ0P0z 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0`ƀ0p`0p`0p`0p`0p`0p`000000 0t` 0p`0p`0p`EK U}!H O [ \ 0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@ 0@ 0@ 0@ 0@ 0@ 0@ 0@ 0@[J[J[J[J[J[J  ;@ ?B  I8o Z` % ^ b  'U`}:::::::::Lh hh^h`hH.  [ \ @^ ^ `H^ ^ P @UnknownGTimes New Roman5Symbol3 ArialQM Georgia-BoldGeorgia7 VerdanaUMVerdana-ItalicVerdana qhzFzF.q !>4GQ@YCHow is a literature review different from an annotated bibliography Galya Ruffer Galya Ruffer  Oh+'0_$ <H h t 'DHow is a literature review different from an annotated bibliographyGalya RufferNormalGalya Ruffer1Microsoft Word 11.3.8@Ik@G @.q G]PICT]d XXMSWDGGtt , /Georgia/ t-@.(H-)ho-#)Iw-F)e -)i-F))s-)= -F)a -#)fl-@i))i-F),t-)0e-)Br-#);a-@i)Ftu-)r-#)<e-)C r-)Ye-@i)Gv-F)Ei-#)+e-F)Cw-)f -#)d-F)Ni-@i)+f-F)1f-)0er-#)~e-@i)Cn-@)St-#)2 fr-@)om-) -F)a-@)Gn-@)T -F)a-@i)Gn-F)Sno-#)t-F)/a-#)Gt-)/e-F)Bd-@i)O -(Ibi-#)tbli-)og-)ra-#)p-)Mh-@)Ty-F)E?1-0)B , #Verdana# d-(A l-()i-)terature-(# -)#review-(( -)#is-)O -)#written-@Q( -)$in-)Z -()#t-)(he-){ -)#st-()[yl-)Xe-)< -)#of-()` -)#an-){ -)# expository-((, -)#essay;-( -()#i-)t (@ comprises an -((@i-)ntro-()d-)?uctio-()n-)@,-)$ -)#body-() a-)`nd-)} -)#c-()4o-)>nclu-()s-)5ion,-) -()#a-)=nd-)} -()#i-)t-)' -()#i-)s-)4 -)# organized-@Q(@2 -(around a control-((*l-)i-()ng-) idea-) -)#or-()h -)#thesi-()s-)5.-)$ -)#A-()Dn-)@ -()#a-)= nnotated bi-(( b-)?liogra-((fp-)?hy-)z -)#is-()O s-)Xim-()|p-)?ly (3an al-()p-)? habetized-(3 -()#l-)is-()Ot -)Lof-)` -)#sources-((3 -)# accompanied-(3  -)#by-()y -)$comment-((3,s-)5. Moreov-(3e-);r,-()O -(while a -((ss-)5in-()Zg-)?le-)W -)#source-(( -)#appears-( -)#just-() -)#onc-()e-)= in-)} -)#a-()<n-)@ annot-(( a-)=ted-) -()#b-)?i-()b-)?liograph-((3y-)<,-)$ -()#i-)t (&may be referred to-(& -)"numerous-((& -)# times in a-(&  -)#l-()i-)terature-(&  -)#review,-((&R -)#dependin-((&@g -(upon -(( i-)ts-)[ -()#i-)mportanc-((e-)= in-)} -()#t-)(he-){ -)#fiel-()d-)? or-) -)#relat-()i-) onship to-(  -)#other-((  -)#sources.-( -(Fin-()a-)=ll-()6y-)<,-)$ -)#a-@Q)< -)$ literature-( -)$rev) iew includes-((  -)$its-)v -()#o-)>wn-) -)#inte-()x-)<t-)' -)#c-()4i-)ta-()ct-)(ions-) -()#a-)=nd (bi-()Yb-)?liograph-((y-)< or-) -)#wo-)r-)*ks-()o -)#cited li-((s-)5t.)-()K [+-*P( GGtt/ t-@*H-)ho-#)Iw-F)e -)i-F))s-)= -F)a -#)fl-@i))i-F),t-)0e-)Br-#);a-@i)Ftu-)r-#)<e-)C r-)Ye-@i)Gv-F)Ei-#)+e-F)Cw-)f -#)d-F)Ni-@i)+f-F)1f-)0er-#)~e-@i)Cn-@)St-#)2 fr-@)om-) -@i)a -#)ht-)/r-)<a-)Dd-#)Mit-F)Yio-)wn-#)Pa-F)Fl -( r-)<e-)As-);ea-#)r-@i)=ch-) pap-)e-#)Ar?.--X)~ , #Verdana# d-( A l-()i-)terature-( # -)#review-((  -)#may-) -)#st-()[a-)=nd-)} -()#a-)=lone-) -)#a-()<n-)@d-)> -)#be-()z -)#ass-()i-)gned-) -)#or-()h -)#p-()>u-)@bli-()ts-)5hed-) -)#as-()p -)#a (  discrete enti-(( Yt-)(y.-)_ -)#Or-()z it-)g may-) -)#cons-()t-)(i-()t-)(ute-) -)#one section of a-(( 5 -)$larger-(  -)# research ( zpaper or one chapter( z)dusuall-(( zy-)< the-) -()#f-)$irs-()zt-)()d of a thesi-(( z s-)5.-)$ -)#Whereas-(( z -)#the-) -)#m-()aa-)=in ( %body of a research paper focuses on t-(( ]h-)@e-)< -)#subject-(( f -)#of-)` -)#your-() -)# research,-(  -)#the-@Q) -( m,literature review focuses on your sources. P-(( m u-)@t-)' -)#ano-()t-)(her-) -)#way,-@Q) -)$in-)Z -()#t-)(he-){ -( research paper yo( |u use expert sources to support-((  -)$the-) -)#d-()>i-)sc-()hu-)@ssion-) -)#of-@Q)` -( ` your thesis;-(( `E -)$in-)Z -()#a -)`l-()i-)terature-( ` -)#review,-(( `  -)#you-) -)#discus-(( ` s-)5 the-) -)#sources-@Q( `s -)$ themselves.)-(( ` [+-*P(  GGtt/ t-@*H-)ho-#)Iw-F)e -)i-F))s-)= -F)a -#)fl-@i))i-F),t-)0e-)Br-#);a-@i)Ftu-)r-#)<e-)C r-)Ye-@i)Gv-F)Ei-#)+e-F)Cw-)f -F)s-#)=t-F)/r-@)>uct-#)ur-)e-#)Bd-)N?/-.{)@ # d-( Like any expository-((  -)$essay,-( " -)#a-()< l-)? iterature-( r -)#review-((  -)#should-( K -)#h-()?a-)=ve-)w -)#an-@Q){ -(Hintrodu-((HTc-)5tion-(),-)% body-((H, -)Iand-) -)#conc-()l-)usi)o-()=n-)@.)-()$ (-'f( -*zThe )introduc-((;dt-)(ion 1DJ# ) s-()Wh-)@ould-) -)#cont-()a-)=in your-(; & -)#research-((;  -)#question-((; ,-)% an explana-((;6t-)(ion (of its -(( s-)5ig-()Yn-)@ific-()a-)=nce,-) -()#a-)=nd-)} -)#any-() o-)ather-) -)#backg-(( r-),ound-) -)#i-()n-)@ formation-(, -)#s-()4e-)=tt-()Ni-)ng-)} -()#t-)(he-){ -(.context of your research.)-((. (-'f( -*zThe )body 1*0 ) paragrap-((!h-)@s-)4 -)#conta-((!Oi-)n-)? -)#your-() -)#su-()sm-)bmative, compara-((! t-)(i-()v-)<e,-)` -)#and-@Q) -(evaluat-((^i-)ve-)w -)#commen-((t-)(s-)4 -)#on-()| -)#t)'he sources you've found. These -((bc-)5omments ( may pertai-(( n-)@ to)-() 333333-(1.,Arial-@)d #-)2historic-((a-)=l-) -)#bac-()k-)<grou-()n-)@d-)> -)#&-()I -)#early-) -)#research-((  -)#findi-()n-)@gs)-()r -(2.,Arial-@)d #-)2recent developments(-'f( -(3.-@)d #-)2areas of controver-(s-)3y-(); -)#among-(  -)#experts)-((  -(4.-@)d #-)2areas of agreemen-(6t(-'f)& -(s5.-@)d #-)2domina-((sn-)@t-)' -()#v-)<iews-) -)#or-()h -)#leading-(s -)#a-()<u-)@thori-()t-)(ies)-() -(6.-@)d #-)2varying -((a-)= pproaches to-( -)#o)=r perspectives on the s-(( u-)@bject)-() -(g7.-@)d #-)2qua-()l-)ita-()~t-)(ive-) -)#compari-((gFs-)5ons-) -)#and-() -)#eva-()l-)ua-(){t-)(ion-()s(-'f)5 -(8.-@)d #-)2etc.(-'f) -(ZThe ) conclusion 1ci (Z -()#s-)5u-()?m-)bmarizes-(ZT -)#major-((Z  -)#issu-()e-)=s-)4 -)#in-@Q)Z -)$the-) -)#l-()i-) terature;-(ZU -()#it -)galso (establi-((5s-)5hes-) -)#where-((p -)#your-) -)#own-() -)#rese-)a-);rch-() -)#fi-()>t-)(s-)4 -)#in-()Z a-)`nd-)} -)#wh-()a-)=t-)' -)#direc-()t-)(ions-) -)#you-@Q) -(Msee for future [(M re--)}s-)0ea--)mr-)(ch.,-+@)  !!!! !!! !!! !!! !!! !!! !!! !!! !!!  !! !  !! !  !! !  !! !  !! ! !!! !!! !!! !!! !!! ՜.+,0@ hp  'Northwestern UniversityG DHow is a literature review different from an annotated bibliography Title !"#$%&'(*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXZ[\]^_`cRoot Entry F%JeData 1Table WordDocument$.SummaryInformation()_DocumentSummaryInformation8YCompObjXObjectPool%J%J FMicrosoft Word DocumentNB6WWord.Document.8