review vs essay

Literature Review vs. Essay.

It is easy to get confused about the difference between literature reviews and essays because these two writing structures can be based on the same research.  However, the main difference is on where the emphasis is placed.

The purpose of an essay is to use what is known about a subject to prove an argument or point of view.  Not all of the knowledge of a topic may be used in an essay, but only what is relevant to the argument.  In an essay, mentioning the people who discovered or developed the knowledge is generally only for referencing purposes.

On the other hand, a literature review is designed to be a critical analysis of all the knowledge that has been discovered about a subject.  Its purpose is to examine all that others have already discovered about the subject and the researchers working on the subject are considered to be key.

At a sentence level, one way to emphasise a particular aspect of a subject is to place that aspect at the beginning of sentences and paragraphs.

In an essay, where the focus is on the knowledge itself, it is put to the front of sentences.  For example:

Playing computer and video games have risen dramatically in popularity.  It is estimated that three billion hours of gaming are played globally each week.  The major reason for this is because players are able to tap into a high level of emotional satisfaction that is difficult to experience in everyday life (McGonigal, 2011).

However, in literature reviews what is considered to be more important are the authors and researchers who found or developed the information.  Therefore they appear at the beginning of sentences.

  Jane McGonigal (2011) estimates that three billion hours of gaming are played globally every week.  Her research suggests that the major reason for this is because players are able to tap into a high level of emotional satisfaction that is difficult to experience in everyday life.

This is not to say that both kinds of sentences can be used in both types of writing.  However, the overall trend for essays is to emphasise the information, whereas for literature reviews the trend is to emphasise the authors.

For more on the differences between the structure of essays and the structure of literature reviews ,  check out QUT Cite|Write

Related Posts

New libguide for online maps, the bain/o’gorman collection, need help with information research and literacy skills, 66 comments.

I just wanted to say thanks for this! It’s a brilliant little concise guide which helped me instantly. Thank you!

Thank you for your help!

Our pleasure 🙂

Excellent article. Very interesting to read. I really love to read such a nice article. Thanks! keep rocking.

Likewise!! Really helpful and so clearly put..much appreciated 🙂

Great Article, Shared !!

Thank you 🙂

Thank you for your help! I understand what has been said here but when I re-read my literature review, it sounds just like an essay. Does anyone have any more tips?

Have you looked at our Literature Review checklist ? You might like to compare the checklist to your own work.

Cheers, Megan

To me a literature review is about stating what other researchers think of the topic. So, mostly I just restate what they said and put that in a nice form. Still, it’s indeed really hard to draw a clear line between the two, well, between any type of papers. For example, this literature essay on Beowulf is said to be an essay. But shouldn’t an essay have a thesis statement, some ideas to prove? Well, this one doesn’t have them. It looks like a narrative essay still it doesn’t tell a personal story. So, in the end I just cannot clearly define it.

Thanks for your comment! You can take a look at our page for Writing an Essay for some examples of different essay styles.

Helped like a charm, thank you very much!!

Glad you found it useful Devin 🙂

Thank you, Jennifer, I also confused on this difference between literature reviews and essays. You define is very well I’m so glad. Before I will write essays and a research paper on a daily basis meantime I found a written research paper on literature . Here are lots of research papers I see I have shared one, and I hope that this would add value to the readers.

Thanks Julie! We are happy that our post was able to help you! And thank you for sharing the other research papers with us.

Thank you for an interesting post!

Hi Robert! Thank you for your comment, we are happy you found it interesting 😀

Thank you, only until know do i know and i looked at ur web first and im happy that i did

i am doing research on cultural discrimination and cultural value .but after many articles read link not comes in mind how to do review .kindly help to do some kind trick and tips as i do start and remove my confusion many thanks shazia

Have you looked at our Literature Review checklist? You might like to compare the checklist to your own work. https://www.citewrite.qut.edu.au/write/litreview.jsp

If you’re studying at a university, get in touch with your librarian who might also be able to provide you with some useful information or meet with you on an individual basis.

This is indeed a great one so far so good.

Regards, Smith

Thanks Smith, we’re glad you liked it 🙂

I just wanted to say thanks for this! It’s a brilliant little concise guide which helped me instantly. Thank you!

Glad to hear it 🙂

So well written. Thank you so much for this valuable little comparison between these two, it helped immensely!

I do not even understand how I finished up here, however I assumed this post was once great. I don’t recognise who you’re but definitely you are going to a well-known blogger in the event you aren’t already. Cheers!

Thank you for the differentiation, its helpful.

Thanks Judy. We’re glad you found it helpful.

Awesome blog article! Brief but enough! Milions of thanks！

Thanks Alice. We’re glad you found it helpful.

of course,thank you for sharing this as we could be able to be assisted.

Hi, I like what you have written as this is a problem I see time and time again. One of the issues is that students are often guided differently by teachers and subject on how to write and structure a lit review, and instead produce argument essays. I don’t think this areas is flagged up enough.

Thank you for your help! I understand what has been said here

Thanks Robi, that’s good to hear 🙂

Thanks for sharing . love this.

Thank you so much for sharing this, really helpful.

Great points! Thank you

Thank You! This will be helpful in writing my research paper.

I admire this article for the well-researched content and excellent wording. I got so involved in this material that I couldn’t stop reading. I am impressed with your work and skill. Thank you so much.

We’re so pleased you found it helpful 🙂

I just wanted to say thanks for this! It’s a brilliant little concise guide which helped me instantly.

Thank you for sharing this wonderful post!!! I definitely enjoy every it and I have also bookmarked you to check out new stuff of your blog I must read the blog! UCF MBA Program | University of Central Florida

Thanks for sharing this importent information.

This is my first time i visit here and I found so many interesting stuff in your blog especially it’s discussion, thank you.

Great articles and great layout. Your blog post deserves all of the positive feedback it’s been getting.

Hey what a brilliant post I have come across and believe me I have been searching out for this similar kind of post for past a week and hardly came across this. Thank you very much and will look for more postings from you.

Awesome article! I want people to know just how good this information is in your article. It’s interesting, compelling content. Your views are much like my own concerning this subject.

I really impressed after read this because of some quality work and informative thoughts . I just wanna say thanks for the writer and wish you all the best for coming!.

Thanks, we’re glad it helped.

Thanks for posting this info. I just want to let you know that I just check out your site and I find it very interesting and informative. I can’t wait to read lots of your posts.

Thanks for sharing this . This was really helpful.

The main difference between an essay and this kind of literature review is that an essay focuses on a topic, and uses the literature as a support for the arguments? Anyways, thanks for helping me out with this.

Thank you for sharing an amazing article. Your Website Is Great

nice blog post.continue blogging.

Great post, and great website. Thanks for the information!

I am genuinely thankful to the holder of this web page who has shared this wonderful paragraph at at this place

Good Post, I am a big believer in writing comments on sites to let the blog writers know that they’ve added some thing advantageous to the world wide web!

Really nice and interesting post. I was looking for this kind of information and enjoyed reading this one.

A literature review is a critical evaluation of existing research on a particular topic. It can be used to identify gaps in existing knowledge, assess a particular idea or concept, and to provide a framework for further research.

Interesting read, sharing with my friends. Another great piece of content.

Ah this explained the differences quite well, a thanks from an RMIT student!

Just a quick note of appreciation for this! It’s an excellent, brief guide that immediately assisted me. I’m grateful!

I appreciate the effort you put into providing valuable resources and recommendations to your readers.

Home » Education » Difference Between Literature Review and Essay

Difference Between Literature Review and Essay

Main difference – literature review vs essay.

Literature review and essays are two types of writing that students are required to write. An essay is usually a brief piece of writing on a particular topic. However, a literature review is a part of a research study where the researcher/students are required to read, analyse and evaluate the works of different authors and create a report. Writing a literature review is fairly complex than writing an essay . This is the main difference between literature review and essay.

This article describes,

1. What is an Essay?      – Features, Types, Structure

2. What is a Literature Review      – Features, Preparation, Structure

3. Difference Between Literature Review and Essay

What is an Essay

An essay is a short piece of writing on a particular topic. This writing describes, analyses and evaluates the given topic. Essays are often a combination of facts and figures, opinions and ideas of the writer. There are various types of essays such as narrative essays, descriptive essays, argumentative essays , persuasive essays, expository essays , etc. The content and the purpose of an essay depends on the type of the essay. For example, if you are writing a persuasive essay , your aim is to persuade your readers to agree with you and understand your point; the content of the essay will contain strong arguments and facts. On the contrary, if you are writing a narrative essay , narrating a story and retaining the attention of your readers will be your main argument. 

An essay basically has three sections known as introduction, body and conclusion; all three of these sections are equally important. Introduction grabs the attention of the readers and gives a brief idea about what the whole essay is going to be about. It is the body of the essay that builds arguments, analyses an issue or elaborates on a concept. The conclusion briefly summarises the essay and expresses writer’s opinion of the topic.

What is a Literature Review

Literature review is an essential part of a research study. This is an evaluative report of information found in the literature related to a selected are of study. Thus, literature review is the starting point of research since it makes the researcher summarise, evaluate and compare the most significant and relevant information and sources in the relevant field. It also helps the researcher identify the gaps, inconsistencies as well as contradictions in the literature.

So in order to write a literature review, you have to read research articles, books, and journals regarding your specific topic. Then decide what information is most relevant to the topic. Then you can summarize, analyze and compare this information. This systematic analysis will also help you to find research gaps in the field.

A  Good Literature Review should:

• Compare and Contrast different views of authors
• Note areas where the authors are in disagreement
• Group authors with similar views to gather
• Highlight gaps in the research area
• Explain how the study is going to relate to previous research

The structure of a literature review is similar to the structure of an essay or an article. However, the end of the literature review always contains the list of sources, written in an accepted citation style.

Definition:

Literature Review is an evaluative report of information found in the literature related to the researcher’s selected area of study.

Essay is a short piece of writing on a particular topic.

Literature Review consists of summaries, comparison, evaluation and analysis of the works of different writers.

Essay mostly contains writer’s ideas, opinions, along with facts and figures to strengthen the writer’s views.

Complexity:

Literature Review is more complex than an essay.

Essays can be even written by primary students.

Image Courtesy: PEXELS

About the Author: Hasa

Hasanthi is a seasoned content writer and editor with over 8 years of experience. Armed with a BA degree in English and a knack for digital marketing, she explores her passions for literature, history, culture, and food through her engaging and informative writing.

​You May Also Like These

How to Write Critical Reviews

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

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

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

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

Understanding the Assignment

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

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

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

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

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

Write the introduction

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

Introduce your review appropriately

Begin your review with an introduction appropriate to your assignment.

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

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

Explain relationships

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

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

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

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

As you write, consider the following questions:

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

Provide an overview

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

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

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

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

Write the body

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

Organize using a logical plan

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

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

Questions to keep in mind as you write

With either organizational pattern, consider the following questions:

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

Keep your opinions distinct and cite your sources

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

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

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

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

Write the conclusion

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

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

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

Consider the following questions:

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

Academic and Professional Writing

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

Analysis Papers

Reading Poetry

A Short Guide to Close Reading for Literary Analysis

Using Literary Quotations

Play Reviews

Writing a Rhetorical Précis to Analyze Nonfiction Texts

Incorporating Interview Data

Grant Proposals

Planning and Writing a Grant Proposal: The Basics

Additional Resources for Grants and Proposal Writing

Job Materials and Application Essays

Writing Personal Statements for Ph.D. Programs

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

Resume Writing Tips

CV Writing Tips

Cover Letters

Business Letters

Proposals and Dissertations

Resources for Proposal Writers

Resources for Dissertators

Research Papers

Planning and Writing Research Papers

Quoting and Paraphrasing

Writing Annotated Bibliographies

Creating Poster Presentations

Writing an Abstract for Your Research Paper

Thank-You Notes

Advice for Students Writing Thank-You Notes to Donors

Reading for a Review

Critical Reviews

Writing a Review of Literature

Scientific Reports

Scientific Report Format

Sample Lab Assignment

Writing for the Web

Writing an Effective Blog Post

Writing for Social Media: A Guide for Academics

Literature Reviews

What this handout is about.

This handout will explain what literature reviews are and offer insights into the form and construction of literature reviews in the humanities, social sciences, and sciences.

Introduction

OK. You’ve got to write a literature review. You dust off a novel and a book of poetry, settle down in your chair, and get ready to issue a “thumbs up” or “thumbs down” as you leaf through the pages. “Literature review” done. Right?

Wrong! The “literature” of a literature review refers to any collection of materials on a topic, not necessarily the great literary texts of the world. “Literature” could be anything from a set of government pamphlets on British colonial methods in Africa to scholarly articles on the treatment of a torn ACL. And a review does not necessarily mean that your reader wants you to give your personal opinion on whether or not you liked these sources.

What is a literature review, then?

A literature review discusses published information in a particular subject area, and sometimes information in a particular subject area within a certain time period.

A literature review can be just a simple summary of the sources, but it usually has an organizational pattern and combines both summary and synthesis. A summary is a recap of the important information of the source, but a synthesis is a re-organization, or a reshuffling, of that information. It might give a new interpretation of old material or combine new with old interpretations. Or it might trace the intellectual progression of the field, including major debates. And depending on the situation, the literature review may evaluate the sources and advise the reader on the most pertinent or relevant.

But how is a literature review different from an academic research paper?

The main focus of an academic research paper is to develop a new argument, and a research paper is likely to contain a literature review as one of its parts. In a research paper, you use the literature as a foundation and as support for a new insight that you contribute. The focus of a literature review, however, is to summarize and synthesize the arguments and ideas of others without adding new contributions.

Why do we write literature reviews?

Literature reviews provide you with a handy guide to a particular topic. If you have limited time to conduct research, literature reviews can give you an overview or act as a stepping stone. For professionals, they are useful reports that keep them up to date with what is current in the field. For scholars, the depth and breadth of the literature review emphasizes the credibility of the writer in his or her field. Literature reviews also provide a solid background for a research paper’s investigation. Comprehensive knowledge of the literature of the field is essential to most research papers.

Who writes these things, anyway?

Literature reviews are written occasionally in the humanities, but mostly in the sciences and social sciences; in experiment and lab reports, they constitute a section of the paper. Sometimes a literature review is written as a paper in itself.

Let’s get to it! What should I do before writing the literature review?

If your assignment is not very specific, seek clarification from your instructor:

• Roughly how many sources should you include?
• What types of sources (books, journal articles, websites)?
• Should you summarize, synthesize, or critique your sources by discussing a common theme or issue?
• Should you evaluate your sources?
• Should you provide subheadings and other background information, such as definitions and/or a history?

Find models

Look for other literature reviews in your area of interest or in the discipline and read them to get a sense of the types of themes you might want to look for in your own research or ways to organize your final review. You can simply put the word “review” in your search engine along with your other topic terms to find articles of this type on the Internet or in an electronic database. The bibliography or reference section of sources you’ve already read are also excellent entry points into your own research.

Narrow your topic

There are hundreds or even thousands of articles and books on most areas of study. The narrower your topic, the easier it will be to limit the number of sources you need to read in order to get a good survey of the material. Your instructor will probably not expect you to read everything that’s out there on the topic, but you’ll make your job easier if you first limit your scope.

Keep in mind that UNC Libraries have research guides and to databases relevant to many fields of study. You can reach out to the subject librarian for a consultation: https://library.unc.edu/support/consultations/ .

And don’t forget to tap into your professor’s (or other professors’) knowledge in the field. Ask your professor questions such as: “If you had to read only one book from the 90’s on topic X, what would it be?” Questions such as this help you to find and determine quickly the most seminal pieces in the field.

Consider whether your sources are current

Some disciplines require that you use information that is as current as possible. In the sciences, for instance, treatments for medical problems are constantly changing according to the latest studies. Information even two years old could be obsolete. However, if you are writing a review in the humanities, history, or social sciences, a survey of the history of the literature may be what is needed, because what is important is how perspectives have changed through the years or within a certain time period. Try sorting through some other current bibliographies or literature reviews in the field to get a sense of what your discipline expects. You can also use this method to consider what is currently of interest to scholars in this field and what is not.

Strategies for writing the literature review

Find a focus.

A literature review, like a term paper, is usually organized around ideas, not the sources themselves as an annotated bibliography would be organized. This means that you will not just simply list your sources and go into detail about each one of them, one at a time. No. As you read widely but selectively in your topic area, consider instead what themes or issues connect your sources together. Do they present one or different solutions? Is there an aspect of the field that is missing? How well do they present the material and do they portray it according to an appropriate theory? Do they reveal a trend in the field? A raging debate? Pick one of these themes to focus the organization of your review.

Convey it to your reader

A literature review may not have a traditional thesis statement (one that makes an argument), but you do need to tell readers what to expect. Try writing a simple statement that lets the reader know what is your main organizing principle. Here are a couple of examples:

The current trend in treatment for congestive heart failure combines surgery and medicine. More and more cultural studies scholars are accepting popular media as a subject worthy of academic consideration.

Consider organization

You’ve got a focus, and you’ve stated it clearly and directly. Now what is the most effective way of presenting the information? What are the most important topics, subtopics, etc., that your review needs to include? And in what order should you present them? Develop an organization for your review at both a global and local level:

First, cover the basic categories

Just like most academic papers, literature reviews also must contain at least three basic elements: an introduction or background information section; the body of the review containing the discussion of sources; and, finally, a conclusion and/or recommendations section to end the paper. The following provides a brief description of the content of each:

• Introduction: Gives a quick idea of the topic of the literature review, such as the central theme or organizational pattern.
• Body: Contains your discussion of sources and is organized either chronologically, thematically, or methodologically (see below for more information on each).
• Conclusions/Recommendations: Discuss what you have drawn from reviewing literature so far. Where might the discussion proceed?

Organizing the body

Once you have the basic categories in place, then you must consider how you will present the sources themselves within the body of your paper. Create an organizational method to focus this section even further.

To help you come up with an overall organizational framework for your review, consider the following scenario:

You’ve decided to focus your literature review on materials dealing with sperm whales. This is because you’ve just finished reading Moby Dick, and you wonder if that whale’s portrayal is really real. You start with some articles about the physiology of sperm whales in biology journals written in the 1980’s. But these articles refer to some British biological studies performed on whales in the early 18th century. So you check those out. Then you look up a book written in 1968 with information on how sperm whales have been portrayed in other forms of art, such as in Alaskan poetry, in French painting, or on whale bone, as the whale hunters in the late 19th century used to do. This makes you wonder about American whaling methods during the time portrayed in Moby Dick, so you find some academic articles published in the last five years on how accurately Herman Melville portrayed the whaling scene in his novel.

Now consider some typical ways of organizing the sources into a review:

• Chronological: If your review follows the chronological method, you could write about the materials above according to when they were published. For instance, first you would talk about the British biological studies of the 18th century, then about Moby Dick, published in 1851, then the book on sperm whales in other art (1968), and finally the biology articles (1980s) and the recent articles on American whaling of the 19th century. But there is relatively no continuity among subjects here. And notice that even though the sources on sperm whales in other art and on American whaling are written recently, they are about other subjects/objects that were created much earlier. Thus, the review loses its chronological focus.
• By publication: Order your sources by publication chronology, then, only if the order demonstrates a more important trend. For instance, you could order a review of literature on biological studies of sperm whales if the progression revealed a change in dissection practices of the researchers who wrote and/or conducted the studies.
• By trend: A better way to organize the above sources chronologically is to examine the sources under another trend, such as the history of whaling. Then your review would have subsections according to eras within this period. For instance, the review might examine whaling from pre-1600-1699, 1700-1799, and 1800-1899. Under this method, you would combine the recent studies on American whaling in the 19th century with Moby Dick itself in the 1800-1899 category, even though the authors wrote a century apart.
• Thematic: Thematic reviews of literature are organized around a topic or issue, rather than the progression of time. However, progression of time may still be an important factor in a thematic review. For instance, the sperm whale review could focus on the development of the harpoon for whale hunting. While the study focuses on one topic, harpoon technology, it will still be organized chronologically. The only difference here between a “chronological” and a “thematic” approach is what is emphasized the most: the development of the harpoon or the harpoon technology.But more authentic thematic reviews tend to break away from chronological order. For instance, a thematic review of material on sperm whales might examine how they are portrayed as “evil” in cultural documents. The subsections might include how they are personified, how their proportions are exaggerated, and their behaviors misunderstood. A review organized in this manner would shift between time periods within each section according to the point made.
• Methodological: A methodological approach differs from the two above in that the focusing factor usually does not have to do with the content of the material. Instead, it focuses on the “methods” of the researcher or writer. For the sperm whale project, one methodological approach would be to look at cultural differences between the portrayal of whales in American, British, and French art work. Or the review might focus on the economic impact of whaling on a community. A methodological scope will influence either the types of documents in the review or the way in which these documents are discussed. Once you’ve decided on the organizational method for the body of the review, the sections you need to include in the paper should be easy to figure out. They should arise out of your organizational strategy. In other words, a chronological review would have subsections for each vital time period. A thematic review would have subtopics based upon factors that relate to the theme or issue.

Sometimes, though, you might need to add additional sections that are necessary for your study, but do not fit in the organizational strategy of the body. What other sections you include in the body is up to you. Put in only what is necessary. Here are a few other sections you might want to consider:

• Current Situation: Information necessary to understand the topic or focus of the literature review.
• History: The chronological progression of the field, the literature, or an idea that is necessary to understand the literature review, if the body of the literature review is not already a chronology.
• Methods and/or Standards: The criteria you used to select the sources in your literature review or the way in which you present your information. For instance, you might explain that your review includes only peer-reviewed articles and journals.

Questions for Further Research: What questions about the field has the review sparked? How will you further your research as a result of the review?

Begin composing

Once you’ve settled on a general pattern of organization, you’re ready to write each section. There are a few guidelines you should follow during the writing stage as well. Here is a sample paragraph from a literature review about sexism and language to illuminate the following discussion:

However, other studies have shown that even gender-neutral antecedents are more likely to produce masculine images than feminine ones (Gastil, 1990). Hamilton (1988) asked students to complete sentences that required them to fill in pronouns that agreed with gender-neutral antecedents such as “writer,” “pedestrian,” and “persons.” The students were asked to describe any image they had when writing the sentence. Hamilton found that people imagined 3.3 men to each woman in the masculine “generic” condition and 1.5 men per woman in the unbiased condition. Thus, while ambient sexism accounted for some of the masculine bias, sexist language amplified the effect. (Source: Erika Falk and Jordan Mills, “Why Sexist Language Affects Persuasion: The Role of Homophily, Intended Audience, and Offense,” Women and Language19:2).

Use evidence

In the example above, the writers refer to several other sources when making their point. A literature review in this sense is just like any other academic research paper. Your interpretation of the available sources must be backed up with evidence to show that what you are saying is valid.

Be selective

Select only the most important points in each source to highlight in the review. The type of information you choose to mention should relate directly to the review’s focus, whether it is thematic, methodological, or chronological.

Use quotes sparingly

Falk and Mills do not use any direct quotes. That is because the survey nature of the literature review does not allow for in-depth discussion or detailed quotes from the text. Some short quotes here and there are okay, though, if you want to emphasize a point, or if what the author said just cannot be rewritten in your own words. Notice that Falk and Mills do quote certain terms that were coined by the author, not common knowledge, or taken directly from the study. But if you find yourself wanting to put in more quotes, check with your instructor.

Summarize and synthesize

Remember to summarize and synthesize your sources within each paragraph as well as throughout the review. The authors here recapitulate important features of Hamilton’s study, but then synthesize it by rephrasing the study’s significance and relating it to their own work.

Keep your own voice

While the literature review presents others’ ideas, your voice (the writer’s) should remain front and center. Notice that Falk and Mills weave references to other sources into their own text, but they still maintain their own voice by starting and ending the paragraph with their own ideas and their own words. The sources support what Falk and Mills are saying.

Use caution when paraphrasing

When paraphrasing a source that is not your own, be sure to represent the author’s information or opinions accurately and in your own words. In the preceding example, Falk and Mills either directly refer in the text to the author of their source, such as Hamilton, or they provide ample notation in the text when the ideas they are mentioning are not their own, for example, Gastil’s. For more information, please see our handout on plagiarism .

Revise, revise, revise

Draft in hand? Now you’re ready to revise. Spending a lot of time revising is a wise idea, because your main objective is to present the material, not the argument. So check over your review again to make sure it follows the assignment and/or your outline. Then, just as you would for most other academic forms of writing, rewrite or rework the language of your review so that you’ve presented your information in the most concise manner possible. Be sure to use terminology familiar to your audience; get rid of unnecessary jargon or slang. Finally, double check that you’ve documented your sources and formatted the review appropriately for your discipline. For tips on the revising and editing process, see our handout on revising drafts .

Works consulted

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

Anson, Chris M., and Robert A. Schwegler. 2010. The Longman Handbook for Writers and Readers , 6th ed. New York: Longman.

Jones, Robert, Patrick Bizzaro, and Cynthia Selfe. 1997. The Harcourt Brace Guide to Writing in the Disciplines . New York: Harcourt Brace.

Lamb, Sandra E. 1998. How to Write It: A Complete Guide to Everything You’ll Ever Write . Berkeley: Ten Speed Press.

Rosen, Leonard J., and Laurence Behrens. 2003. The Allyn & Bacon Handbook , 5th ed. New York: Longman.

Troyka, Lynn Quittman, and Doug Hesse. 2016. Simon and Schuster Handbook for Writers , 11th ed. London: Pearson.

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

Make a Gift

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

The Literature Review

30 Understanding the Difference Between a Literature Review and an Essay

So now that you know what a literature review is and how to write it, it is important to understand how a literature review is different from an essay. First of all, it is necessary to point out that many students struggle with understanding the difference between a literature review and an essay.  This is particularly so because a student can use the exact same resources to create a literature review or an essay; however, what is different about the two is where the emphasis in the writing is placed (Thomas 2012).

A discussed previously, a literature review focuses on everything that has been written about a particular topic, theory, or research.  It is focused on the research and the researchers who have undertaken research on your topic. In contrast, an essay focuses on proving a point.  It does not need to provide an extensive coverage of all of the material on the topic. In fact, the writer chooses only those sources that prove the point. Most professors will expect to see you discuss a few different perspectives from the materials that run contrary to the point you are trying to make. For example, suppose you want to write an essay about the negative effects of shiftwork on nurses.  You would gather material to show that shiftwork negatively affects nurses, and the various ways it affects nurses. Now in this case, you might find the odd research paper that states shiftwork has no effect – although, I doubt it, because it has been extensively documented to have a negative affect. However, the point is that with an essay you are focused on providing information on your topic and proving your point.

Understanding the difference between a literature review and an annotated bibliography

There is a third type of academic writing that can also confuse students who are attempting to write a literature review … and that is an annotated bibliography.  An annotated bibliography provides all of the reference details of a bibliography, but it goes one step further and provides a short (approximately 150 words) description of the reference.  An annotated bibliography is not to be confused with a bibliography. A bibliography is a list of journal articles, books, and other resources that someone has utilized in writing. The bibliography, provides a list of all resources that someone used to write a research paper and, unlike a reference list, includes references that may not appear in the body of the paper.  No doubt you have had to create many bibliographies in your academic studies. Here is a link to a website where you can learn more about annotated bibliographies and also to see a sample of an annotated bibliography: Annotated Bibliographies

An Introduction to Research Methods in Sociology Copyright © 2019 by Valerie A. Sheppard is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Literature reviews: Stand-alone review

• Reviewing for research
• Stand-alone review
• Scoping and planning
• Screening and appraising
• The process of reviewing
• Planning a search strategy

On these pages:

“Simple [stand-alone] literature review - A written document that critically reviews the relevant literature on a research topic, presenting a logical case that establishes a thesis delineating what is currently known about the subject.” Lawrence Machi & Brenda McEvoy , The Literature Review: Six Steps to Success

Literature reviews do not have to be part of a larger research project. Sometimes you are asked to undertake a stand-alone (sometimes referred to as 'simple') literature review as an separate assignment. In such cases, the review should summarise, synthesise and evaluate existing knowledge on a specific topic and come to a conclusion about current understanding.

Structure of a stand-alone literature review

A stand-alone review has a similar structure to a standard essay:

• Introduction - Show how the topic of your review fits in with the wider field, indicate how you conducted the review (details about specific search strategies are not needed, more an overview of the process) and summarise your main findings about the literature.
• Main body - Analyse the literature, identifying themes, gaps in understanding and areas of disagreement.
• Conclusion  - Summarise the main points and how they relate to each other. Restate your main findings in a bit more detail than you did in the introduction. Give any implications for the wider field.

Essay vs stand-alone literature review

The main different between an essay and a literature review is that an essay is focused on answering a question through a series of arguments supported by the literature; whereas, in a stand-alone literature review the focus is on the literature itself —what it tells you, but also its reliability and quality.

Another important difference is that with an essay you have more freedom about choosing literature that supports the argument you are making.

With a literature review, it is far more important to make sure you are representing all aspects of the topic.

This is not to say you are not making your own argument - it is just that your argument is about what you think the literature shows.

• << Previous: Reviewing for research
• Next: Systematic reviews >>
• Last Updated: Nov 3, 2023 3:13 PM
• URL: https://libguides.hull.ac.uk/literaturereviews
• Login to LibApps
• Library websites Privacy Policy
• University of Hull privacy policy & cookies
• Website terms and conditions
• Accessibility
• Report a problem

Purdue Online Writing Lab Purdue OWL® College of Liberal Arts

Writing a Literature Review

Welcome to the Purdue OWL

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

What are the parts of a lit review?

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

Introduction:

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

Conclusion:

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

How should I organize my lit review?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

IOE Writing Centre

• Writing a Critical Review

Writing a Critique

A critique (or critical review) is not to be mistaken for a literature review. A 'critical review', or 'critique', is a complete type of text (or genre), discussing one particular article or book in detail.  In some instances, you may be asked to write a critique of two or three articles (e.g. a comparative critical review). In contrast, a 'literature review', which also needs to be 'critical', is a part of a larger type of text, such as a chapter of your dissertation.

Most importantly: Read your article / book as many times as possible, as this will make the critical review much easier.

1. Read and take notes 2. Organising your writing 3. Summary 4. Evaluation 5. Linguistic features of a critical review 6. Summary language 7. Evaluation language 8. Conclusion language 9. Example extracts from a critical review 10. Further resources

Read and Take Notes

To improve your reading confidence and efficiency, visit our pages on reading.

Further reading: Read Confidently

After you are familiar with the text, make notes on some of the following questions. Choose the questions which seem suitable:

• What kind of article is it (for example does it present data or does it present purely theoretical arguments)?
• What is the main area under discussion?
• What are the main findings?
• What are the stated limitations?
• Where does the author's data and evidence come from? Are they appropriate / sufficient?
• What are the main issues raised by the author?
• What questions are raised?
• How well are these questions addressed?
• What are the major points/interpretations made by the author in terms of the issues raised?
• Is the text balanced? Is it fair / biased?
• Does the author contradict herself?
• How does all this relate to other literature on this topic?
• How does all this relate to your own experience, ideas and views?
• What else has this author written? Do these build / complement this text?
• (Optional) Has anyone else reviewed this article? What did they say? Do I agree with them?

^ Back to top

Organising your writing

You first need to summarise the text that you have read. One reason to summarise the text is that the reader may not have read the text. In your summary, you will

• focus on points within the article that you think are interesting
• summarise the author(s) main ideas or argument
• explain how these ideas / argument have been constructed. (For example, is the author basing her arguments on data that they have collected? Are the main ideas / argument purely theoretical?)

In your summary you might answer the following questions:     Why is this topic important?     Where can this text be located? For example, does it address policy studies?     What other prominent authors also write about this?

Evaluation is the most important part in a critical review.

Use the literature to support your views. You may also use your knowledge of conducting research, and your own experience. Evaluation can be explicit or implicit.

Explicit evaluation

Explicit evaluation involves stating directly (explicitly) how you intend to evaluate the text. e.g. "I will review this article by focusing on the following questions. First, I will examine the extent to which the authors contribute to current thought on Second Language Acquisition (SLA) pedagogy. After that, I will analyse whether the authors' propositions are feasible within overseas SLA classrooms."

Implicit evaluation

Implicit evaluation is less direct. The following section on Linguistic Features of Writing a Critical Review contains language that evaluates the text. A difficult part of evaluation of a published text (and a professional author) is how to do this as a student. There is nothing wrong with making your position as a student explicit and incorporating it into your evaluation. Examples of how you might do this can be found in the section on Linguistic Features of Writing a Critical Review. You need to remember to locate and analyse the author's argument when you are writing your critical review. For example, you need to locate the authors' view of classroom pedagogy as presented in the book / article and not present a critique of views of classroom pedagogy in general.

Linguistic features of a critical review

The following examples come from published critical reviews. Some of them have been adapted for student use.

Summary language

•     This article / book is divided into two / three parts. First...
•     While the title might suggest...
•     The tone appears to be...
•     Title is the first / second volume in the series Title, edited by...The books / articles in this series address...
•     The second / third claim is based on...
•     The author challenges the notion that...
•     The author tries to find a more middle ground / make more modest claims...
•     The article / book begins with a short historical overview of...
•     Numerous authors have recently suggested that...(see Author, Year; Author, Year). Author would also be once such author. With his / her argument that...
•     To refer to title as a...is not to say that it is...
•     This book / article is aimed at... This intended readership...
•     The author's book / article examines the...To do this, the author first...
•     The author develops / suggests a theoretical / pedagogical model to…
•     This book / article positions itself firmly within the field of...
•     The author in a series of subtle arguments, indicates that he / she...
•     The argument is therefore...
•     The author asks "..."
•     With a purely critical / postmodern take on...
•     Topic, as the author points out, can be viewed as...
•     In this recent contribution to the field of...this British author...
•     As a leading author in the field of...
•     This book / article nicely contributes to the field of...and complements other work by this author...
•     The second / third part of...provides / questions / asks the reader...
•     Title is intended to encourage students / researchers to...
•     The approach taken by the author provides the opportunity to examine...in a qualitative / quantitative research framework that nicely complements...
•     The author notes / claims that state support / a focus on pedagogy / the adoption of...remains vital if...
•     According to Author (Year) teaching towards examinations is not as effective as it is in other areas of the curriculum. This is because, as Author (Year) claims that examinations have undue status within the curriculum.
•     According to Author (Year)…is not as effective in some areas of the curriculum / syllabus as others. Therefore the author believes that this is a reason for some school's…

Evaluation language

•     This argument is not entirely convincing, as...furthermore it commodifies / rationalises the...
•     Over the last five / ten years the view of...has increasingly been viewed as 'complicated' (see Author, Year; Author, Year).
•     However, through trying to integrate...with...the author...
•     There are difficulties with such a position.
•     Inevitably, several crucial questions are left unanswered / glossed over by this insightful / timely / interesting / stimulating book / article. Why should...
•     It might have been more relevant for the author to have written this book / article as...
•     This article / book is not without disappointment from those who would view...as...
•     This chosen framework enlightens / clouds...
•     This analysis intends to be...but falls a little short as...
•     The authors rightly conclude that if...
•     A detailed, well-written and rigorous account of...
•     As a Korean student I feel that this article / book very clearly illustrates...
•     The beginning of...provides an informative overview into...
•     The tables / figures do little to help / greatly help the reader...
•     The reaction by scholars who take a...approach might not be so favourable (e.g. Author, Year).
•     This explanation has a few weaknesses that other researchers have pointed out (see Author, Year; Author, Year). The first is...
•     On the other hand, the author wisely suggests / proposes that...By combining these two dimensions...
•     The author's brief introduction to...may leave the intended reader confused as it fails to properly...
•     Despite my inability to...I was greatly interested in...
•     Even where this reader / I disagree(s), the author's effort to...
•     The author thus combines...with...to argue...which seems quite improbable for a number of reasons. First...
•     Perhaps this aversion to...would explain the author's reluctance to...
•     As a second language student from ...I find it slightly ironic that such an anglo-centric view is...
•     The reader is rewarded with...
•     Less convincing is the broad-sweeping generalisation that...
•     There is no denying the author's subject knowledge nor his / her...
•     The author's prose is dense and littered with unnecessary jargon...
•     The author's critique of...might seem harsh but is well supported within the literature (see Author, Year; Author, Year; Author, Year). Aligning herself with the author, Author (Year) states that...
•     As it stands, the central focus of Title is well / poorly supported by its empirical findings...
•     Given the hesitation to generalise to...the limitation of...does not seem problematic...
•     For instance, the term...is never properly defined and the reader left to guess as to whether...
•     Furthermore, to label...as...inadvertently misguides...
•     In addition, this research proves to be timely / especially significant to... as recent government policy / proposals has / have been enacted to...
•     On this well researched / documented basis the author emphasises / proposes that...
•     Nonetheless, other research / scholarship / data tend to counter / contradict this possible trend / assumption...(see Author, Year; Author, Year).
•     Without entering into detail of the..., it should be stated that Title should be read by...others will see little value in...
•     As experimental conditions were not used in the study the word 'significant' misleads the reader.
•     The article / book becomes repetitious in its assertion that...
•     The thread of the author's argument becomes lost in an overuse of empirical data...
•     Almost every argument presented in the final section is largely derivative, providing little to say about...
•     She / he does not seem to take into consideration; however, that there are fundamental differences in the conditions of…
•     As Author (Year) points out, however, it seems to be necessary to look at…
•     This suggest that having low…does not necessarily indicate that…is ineffective.
•     Therefore, the suggestion made by Author (Year)…is difficult to support.
•     When considering all the data presented…it is not clear that the low scores of some students, indeed, reflects…

Conclusion language

•     Overall this article / book is an analytical look at...which within the field of...is often overlooked.
•     Despite its problems, Title offers valuable theoretical insights / interesting examples / a contribution to pedagogy and a starting point for students / researchers of...with an interest in...
•     This detailed and rigorously argued...
•     This first / second volume / book / article by...with an interest in...is highly informative...

Example extracts from a critical review

Writing critically.

If you have been told your writing is not critical enough, it probably means that your writing treats the knowledge claims as if they are true, well supported, and applicable in the context you are writing about. This may not always be the case.

In these two examples, the extracts refer to the same section of text. In each example, the section that refers to a source has been highlighted in bold. The note below the example then explains how the writer has used the source material.    

There is a strong positive effect on students, both educationally and emotionally, when the instructors try to learn to say students' names without making pronunciation errors (Kiang, 2004).

Use of source material in example a: 

This is a simple paraphrase with no critical comment. It looks like the writer agrees with Kiang. (This is not a good example for critical writing, as the writer has not made any critical comment).        

Kiang (2004) gives various examples to support his claim that "the positive emotional and educational impact on students is clear" (p.210) when instructors try to pronounce students' names in the correct way. He quotes one student, Nguyet, as saying that he "felt surprised and happy" (p.211) when the tutor said his name clearly . The emotional effect claimed by Kiang is illustrated in quotes such as these, although the educational impact is supported more indirectly through the chapter. Overall, he provides more examples of students being negatively affected by incorrect pronunciation, and it is difficult to find examples within the text of a positive educational impact as such.

Use of source material in example b: 

The writer describes Kiang's (2004) claim and the examples which he uses to try to support it. The writer then comments that the examples do not seem balanced and may not be enough to support the claims fully. This is a better example of writing which expresses criticality.

^Back to top

Further resources

You may also be interested in our page on criticality, which covers criticality in general, and includes more critical reading questions.

Further reading: Read and Write Critically

We recommend that you do not search for other university guidelines on critical reviews. This is because the expectations may be different at other institutions. Ask your tutor for more guidance or examples if you have further questions.

IOE Writing Centre Online

Self-access resources from the Academic Writing Centre at the UCL Institute of Education.

Anonymous Suggestions Box

Information for Staff

Academic Writing Centre

Academic Writing Centre, UCL Institute of Education [email protected] Twitter:   @AWC_IOE Skype:   awc.ioe

Have a language expert improve your writing

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

• Knowledge Base
• The four main types of essay | Quick guide with examples

The Four Main Types of Essay | Quick Guide with Examples

Published on September 4, 2020 by Jack Caulfield . Revised on July 23, 2023.

An essay is a focused piece of writing designed to inform or persuade. There are many different types of essay, but they are often defined in four categories: argumentative, expository, narrative, and descriptive essays.

Argumentative and expository essays are focused on conveying information and making clear points, while narrative and descriptive essays are about exercising creativity and writing in an interesting way. At university level, argumentative essays are the most common type. 

In high school and college, you will also often have to write textual analysis essays, which test your skills in close reading and interpretation.

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

Table of contents

Argumentative essays, expository essays, narrative essays, descriptive essays, textual analysis essays, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about types of essays.

An argumentative essay presents an extended, evidence-based argument. It requires a strong thesis statement —a clearly defined stance on your topic. Your aim is to convince the reader of your thesis using evidence (such as quotations ) and analysis.

Argumentative essays test your ability to research and present your own position on a topic. This is the most common type of essay at college level—most papers you write will involve some kind of argumentation.

The essay is divided into an introduction, body, and conclusion:

• The introduction provides your topic and thesis statement
• The body presents your evidence and arguments
• The conclusion summarizes your argument and emphasizes its importance

The example below is a paragraph from the body of an argumentative essay about the effects of the internet on education. Mouse over it to learn more.

A common frustration for teachers is students’ use of Wikipedia as a source in their writing. Its prevalence among students is not exaggerated; a survey found that the vast majority of the students surveyed used Wikipedia (Head & Eisenberg, 2010). An article in The Guardian stresses a common objection to its use: “a reliance on Wikipedia can discourage students from engaging with genuine academic writing” (Coomer, 2013). Teachers are clearly not mistaken in viewing Wikipedia usage as ubiquitous among their students; but the claim that it discourages engagement with academic sources requires further investigation. This point is treated as self-evident by many teachers, but Wikipedia itself explicitly encourages students to look into other sources. Its articles often provide references to academic publications and include warning notes where citations are missing; the site’s own guidelines for research make clear that it should be used as a starting point, emphasizing that users should always “read the references and check whether they really do support what the article says” (“Wikipedia:Researching with Wikipedia,” 2020). Indeed, for many students, Wikipedia is their first encounter with the concepts of citation and referencing. The use of Wikipedia therefore has a positive side that merits deeper consideration than it often receives.

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

An expository essay provides a clear, focused explanation of a topic. It doesn’t require an original argument, just a balanced and well-organized view of the topic.

Expository essays test your familiarity with a topic and your ability to organize and convey information. They are commonly assigned at high school or in exam questions at college level.

The introduction of an expository essay states your topic and provides some general background, the body presents the details, and the conclusion summarizes the information presented.

A typical body paragraph from an expository essay about the invention of the printing press is shown below. Mouse over it to learn more.

The invention of the printing press in 1440 changed this situation dramatically. Johannes Gutenberg, who had worked as a goldsmith, used his knowledge of metals in the design of the press. He made his type from an alloy of lead, tin, and antimony, whose durability allowed for the reliable production of high-quality books. This new technology allowed texts to be reproduced and disseminated on a much larger scale than was previously possible. The Gutenberg Bible appeared in the 1450s, and a large number of printing presses sprang up across the continent in the following decades. Gutenberg’s invention rapidly transformed cultural production in Europe; among other things, it would lead to the Protestant Reformation.

A narrative essay is one that tells a story. This is usually a story about a personal experience you had, but it may also be an imaginative exploration of something you have not experienced.

Narrative essays test your ability to build up a narrative in an engaging, well-structured way. They are much more personal and creative than other kinds of academic writing . Writing a personal statement for an application requires the same skills as a narrative essay.

A narrative essay isn’t strictly divided into introduction, body, and conclusion, but it should still begin by setting up the narrative and finish by expressing the point of the story—what you learned from your experience, or why it made an impression on you.

Mouse over the example below, a short narrative essay responding to the prompt “Write about an experience where you learned something about yourself,” to explore its structure.

Since elementary school, I have always favored subjects like science and math over the humanities. My instinct was always to think of these subjects as more solid and serious than classes like English. If there was no right answer, I thought, why bother? But recently I had an experience that taught me my academic interests are more flexible than I had thought: I took my first philosophy class.

Before I entered the classroom, I was skeptical. I waited outside with the other students and wondered what exactly philosophy would involve—I really had no idea. I imagined something pretty abstract: long, stilted conversations pondering the meaning of life. But what I got was something quite different.

A young man in jeans, Mr. Jones—“but you can call me Rob”—was far from the white-haired, buttoned-up old man I had half-expected. And rather than pulling us into pedantic arguments about obscure philosophical points, Rob engaged us on our level. To talk free will, we looked at our own choices. To talk ethics, we looked at dilemmas we had faced ourselves. By the end of class, I’d discovered that questions with no right answer can turn out to be the most interesting ones.

The experience has taught me to look at things a little more “philosophically”—and not just because it was a philosophy class! I learned that if I let go of my preconceptions, I can actually get a lot out of subjects I was previously dismissive of. The class taught me—in more ways than one—to look at things with an open mind.

A descriptive essay provides a detailed sensory description of something. Like narrative essays, they allow you to be more creative than most academic writing, but they are more tightly focused than narrative essays. You might describe a specific place or object, rather than telling a whole story.

Descriptive essays test your ability to use language creatively, making striking word choices to convey a memorable picture of what you’re describing.

A descriptive essay can be quite loosely structured, though it should usually begin by introducing the object of your description and end by drawing an overall picture of it. The important thing is to use careful word choices and figurative language to create an original description of your object.

Mouse over the example below, a response to the prompt “Describe a place you love to spend time in,” to learn more about descriptive essays.

On Sunday afternoons I like to spend my time in the garden behind my house. The garden is narrow but long, a corridor of green extending from the back of the house, and I sit on a lawn chair at the far end to read and relax. I am in my small peaceful paradise: the shade of the tree, the feel of the grass on my feet, the gentle activity of the fish in the pond beside me.

My cat crosses the garden nimbly and leaps onto the fence to survey it from above. From his perch he can watch over his little kingdom and keep an eye on the neighbours. He does this until the barking of next door’s dog scares him from his post and he bolts for the cat flap to govern from the safety of the kitchen.

With that, I am left alone with the fish, whose whole world is the pond by my feet. The fish explore the pond every day as if for the first time, prodding and inspecting every stone. I sometimes feel the same about sitting here in the garden; I know the place better than anyone, but whenever I return I still feel compelled to pay attention to all its details and novelties—a new bird perched in the tree, the growth of the grass, and the movement of the insects it shelters…

Sitting out in the garden, I feel serene. I feel at home. And yet I always feel there is more to discover. The bounds of my garden may be small, but there is a whole world contained within it, and it is one I will never get tired of inhabiting.

Receive feedback on language, structure, and formatting

Professional editors proofread and edit your paper by focusing on:

• Academic style
• Vague sentences
• Style consistency

See an example

Though every essay type tests your writing skills, some essays also test your ability to read carefully and critically. In a textual analysis essay, you don’t just present information on a topic, but closely analyze a text to explain how it achieves certain effects.

Rhetorical analysis

A rhetorical analysis looks at a persuasive text (e.g. a speech, an essay, a political cartoon) in terms of the rhetorical devices it uses, and evaluates their effectiveness.

The goal is not to state whether you agree with the author’s argument but to look at how they have constructed it.

The introduction of a rhetorical analysis presents the text, some background information, and your thesis statement; the body comprises the analysis itself; and the conclusion wraps up your analysis of the text, emphasizing its relevance to broader concerns.

The example below is from a rhetorical analysis of Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” speech . Mouse over it to learn more.

King’s speech is infused with prophetic language throughout. Even before the famous “dream” part of the speech, King’s language consistently strikes a prophetic tone. He refers to the Lincoln Memorial as a “hallowed spot” and speaks of rising “from the dark and desolate valley of segregation” to “make justice a reality for all of God’s children.” The assumption of this prophetic voice constitutes the text’s strongest ethical appeal; after linking himself with political figures like Lincoln and the Founding Fathers, King’s ethos adopts a distinctly religious tone, recalling Biblical prophets and preachers of change from across history. This adds significant force to his words; standing before an audience of hundreds of thousands, he states not just what the future should be, but what it will be: “The whirlwinds of revolt will continue to shake the foundations of our nation until the bright day of justice emerges.” This warning is almost apocalyptic in tone, though it concludes with the positive image of the “bright day of justice.” The power of King’s rhetoric thus stems not only from the pathos of his vision of a brighter future, but from the ethos of the prophetic voice he adopts in expressing this vision.

Literary analysis

A literary analysis essay presents a close reading of a work of literature—e.g. a poem or novel—to explore the choices made by the author and how they help to convey the text’s theme. It is not simply a book report or a review, but an in-depth interpretation of the text.

Literary analysis looks at things like setting, characters, themes, and figurative language. The goal is to closely analyze what the author conveys and how.

The introduction of a literary analysis essay presents the text and background, and provides your thesis statement; the body consists of close readings of the text with quotations and analysis in support of your argument; and the conclusion emphasizes what your approach tells us about the text.

Mouse over the example below, the introduction to a literary analysis essay on Frankenstein , to learn more.

Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein is often read as a crude cautionary tale about the dangers of scientific advancement unrestrained by ethical considerations. In this reading, protagonist Victor Frankenstein is a stable representation of the callous ambition of modern science throughout the novel. This essay, however, argues that far from providing a stable image of the character, Shelley uses shifting narrative perspectives to portray Frankenstein in an increasingly negative light as the novel goes on. While he initially appears to be a naive but sympathetic idealist, after the creature’s narrative Frankenstein begins to resemble—even in his own telling—the thoughtlessly cruel figure the creature represents him as. This essay begins by exploring the positive portrayal of Frankenstein in the first volume, then moves on to the creature’s perception of him, and finally discusses the third volume’s narrative shift toward viewing Frankenstein as the creature views him.

If you want to know more about AI tools , college essays , or fallacies make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples or go directly to our tools!

• Ad hominem fallacy
• Post hoc fallacy
• Appeal to authority fallacy
• False cause fallacy
• Sunk cost fallacy

College essays

• Choosing Essay Topic
• Write a College Essay
• Write a Diversity Essay
• College Essay Format & Structure
• Comparing and Contrasting in an Essay

 (AI) Tools

• Grammar Checker
• Paraphrasing Tool
• Text Summarizer
• AI Detector
• Plagiarism Checker
• Citation Generator

At high school and in composition classes at university, you’ll often be told to write a specific type of essay , but you might also just be given prompts.

Look for keywords in these prompts that suggest a certain approach: The word “explain” suggests you should write an expository essay , while the word “describe” implies a descriptive essay . An argumentative essay might be prompted with the word “assess” or “argue.”

The vast majority of essays written at university are some sort of argumentative essay . Almost all academic writing involves building up an argument, though other types of essay might be assigned in composition classes.

Essays can present arguments about all kinds of different topics. For example:

• In a literary analysis essay, you might make an argument for a specific interpretation of a text
• In a history essay, you might present an argument for the importance of a particular event
• In a politics essay, you might argue for the validity of a certain political theory

An argumentative essay tends to be a longer essay involving independent research, and aims to make an original argument about a topic. Its thesis statement makes a contentious claim that must be supported in an objective, evidence-based way.

An expository essay also aims to be objective, but it doesn’t have to make an original argument. Rather, it aims to explain something (e.g., a process or idea) in a clear, concise way. Expository essays are often shorter assignments and rely less on research.

The key difference is that a narrative essay is designed to tell a complete story, while a descriptive essay is meant to convey an intense description of a particular place, object, or concept.

Narrative and descriptive essays both allow you to write more personally and creatively than other kinds of essays , and similar writing skills can apply to both.

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.

Caulfield, J. (2023, July 23). The Four Main Types of Essay | Quick Guide with Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved April 2, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/academic-essay/essay-types/

Is this article helpful?

Jack Caulfield

Other students also liked, how to write an argumentative essay | examples & tips, how to write an expository essay, how to write an essay outline | guidelines & examples, unlimited academic ai-proofreading.

✔ Document error-free in 5minutes ✔ Unlimited document corrections ✔ Specialized in correcting academic texts

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Assignments

• Annotated Bibliography
• Analyzing a Scholarly Journal Article
• Group Presentations
• Dealing with Nervousness
• Using Visual Aids
• Grading Someone Else's Paper
• Types of Structured Group Activities
• Group Project Survival Skills
• Leading a Class Discussion
• Multiple Book Review Essay
• Reviewing Collected Works
• Writing a Case Analysis Paper
• Writing a Case Study
• About Informed Consent
• Writing Field Notes
• Writing a Policy Memo
• Writing a Reflective Paper
• Writing a Research Proposal
• Generative AI and Writing
• Acknowledgments

A multiple book review essay involves assessing the quality of two or more books that cover the same overall subject area [e.g., analysis of the European debt crisis] or that are related to each other in a particular way [e.g., applying grounded theory methods to study student access to education]. The review is written in the form of a short scholarly paper [essay] rather than as a descriptive book review. The purpose is to compare and contrast the works under review, to identify key themes and critical issues, and to evaluate each writer's contributions to understanding the overarching topics common to each book. Professors assign reviews of multiple books to help students gain experience critically evaluating the ways in which different researchers examine and interpret issues related to a specific research problem.

Erwin, R. W. “Reviewing Books for Scholarly Journals.” In Writing and Publishing for Academic Authors . Joseph M. Moxley and Todd Taylor. 2 nd edition. (Lanham, MD: Roman and Littlefield, 1997), pp. 83-90.

How to Approach Writing Your Review

Developing an Assessment Strategy

An important first step in approaching how to write a review of two or more books is to identify and think critically about the research problem that ties each of the books together. This information is usually summarized in the preface or introductory chapter of each book. The challenge is to develop an argument about each book you are reviewing and then clearly compare, contrast, and ultimately synthesize your analysis into an well organized and well supported essay.

Think of a multiple book review essay as a type of compare and contrast paper similar to what you may have written for a general issue-oriented composition class . As you read through each book, write down questions concerning what you want to know about each book and answer them as you read [remember to note the page numbers from the book you got the information from so you can refer back it later!]. Which questions to ask yourself will depend upon the type of books you are reviewing and how the books are related to each other.

Here are a series of questions to focus your thinking:

• What is the thesis—or main argument—of each book? If the author wanted you to get one idea from the book, what would it be? How does it compare or contrast to the world you know? What has the book accomplished?
• What exactly is the subject or topic of each book? Does the author cover the subject adequately? Does the author cover all aspects of the subject in a balanced fashion? Can you detect any biases? What is the approach to the subject [topical, historical, analytical, chronological, descriptive]?
• How does the author of each book support his or her argument? What evidence [i.e., sources cited and data collection] does each author use to prove their point? Do you find that evidence convincing? Why or why not? Does any of the author's information [or conclusions] conflict with other books you've read, courses you've taken, or just previous assumptions you had about the research problem under study?
• How does the author structure their argument? What are the parts that make up the whole? Does the argument make sense to you? Does it persuade you? Why or why not? Were there any questions left unanswered? Were limitations to the study effectively addressed?
• How has each book helped you understand the subject? Would you recommend the books to others? Why or why not? In what ways have the books collectively expanded your understanding of the research problem?

Beyond the content of the book, you may also consider some information about each author and the circumstances of the text's production:

• Who is the author? Nationality, political persuasion, education, intellectual interests, personal history, and historical context may provide crucial details about how a work takes shape. Does it matter, for example, that the author is affiliated with a particular organization? What difference would it make if the author participated in the events he or she writes about? What other topics has the author written about? Does this work build on prior research or does it seem to represent a new area of research?
• What is each book's genre? Out of what discipline do they emerge? Do they conform to or depart from the conventions of its genre? These questions can provide a historical or other contextual standard upon which to base your evaluations. If you are reviewing a book described as the first book ever written on the subject, it will be important for your readers to know this. Keep in mind, though, that declarative statements about being the “first,” the "best," or the "only" book of its kind can be a risky unless you're absolutely certain because your professor [presumably] has a much better understanding of the overall research literature.

Bazerman, Charles. Comparing and Synthesizing Sources. The Informed Writer: Using Sources in the Disciplines. Writing@CSU. Colorado State University; Comparing and Contrasting. The Writing Center. University of North Carolina; Comparison and Contrast Essays. Writing Support Centre. University of Western Ontario; Hartley, James. “Reading and Writing Book Reviews Across the Disciplines.” Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 57 (July 2006): 1194-1207; Walk, Kerry. How to Write a Compare-and-Contrast Paper. Writing Center. Princeton Writing Program; Rhetorical Strategies: Comparison and Contrast. The Reading/Writing Center. Hunter College; Visvis, Vikki and Jerry Plotnick; Writing a Compare/Contrast Essay. The Comparative Essay. The Lab Report. University College Writing Centre. University of Toronto; Writing a Compare/Contrast Essay. CLRC Writing Center. Santa Barbara City College.

Structure and Writing Style

I.  Bibliographic Information

Provide the essential information about each book using the writing style asked for by your professor [e.g., APA, MLA, Chicago, etc.]. Depending on how your professor wants you to organize your review, the bibliographic information represents the heading of your review. In general, they would be arranged alphabetically by title and look like this:

Racing the Storm: Racial Implications and Lessons Learned from Hurricane Katrina . Hillary Potter, ed. (Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2007. 320 pp) The Sociology of Katrina: Perspectives on a Modern Catastrophe . David L. Brunsma, David Overfelt, and J. Steven Picou, eds. (Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 2007. 288 pp.) Through the Eye of Katrina: Social Justice in the United States . Kristin A. Bates and Richelle S. Swan, eds. (Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press, 2007. 440 pp.) Reviewed by [your full name]

II.  Thesis Statement

The thesis statement of an essay that compares and contrasts multiple works should contain an idea or claim that unites the discussion of each text under review . It should include the argument that will be advanced in support of the claims being made. To begin, ask yourself: What is the overarching subject or issue that ties together all of the books? Why is it important? In most scholarly works, the author(s) will state the purpose of their book in the preface or in an introductory chapter. Look for common themes or points of divergence among the books.

If you cannot find an adequate statement in the author's own words or if you find that the thesis statement is not well-developed, then you will have to compose your own introductory thesis statement that does cover all the material. The comparative thesis statement will vary in length depending on the number and complexity of the books under review. Regardless of length, it must be succinct, accurate, unbiased, and clear.

If you find it difficult to discern the overall aims and objectives of each book [and, be sure to point this out in your review if you believe it to be a deficiency], you may arrive at an understanding of the purpose by asking yourself a the following questions:

• Scan the table of contents because it can help you understand how the book is organized and will aid in determining the author's main ideas and how they are developed [e.g., chronologically, topically, historically, etc.].
• Why did the authors write on this subject rather than on some other subject?
• From what point of view is each work written?
• Were the authors trying to provide information, to explain something technical, or to convince the reader of a belief’s validity by dramatizing it in action?
• What is the general field or genre, and how does each book fit into it? If necessary, review related literature from other books and journal articles to familiarize yourself with the field.
• Who is the intended audience for each book? Is it the same or are the books intended for difference sets of readers?
• What is each author's style? Is it formal or informal? You can evaluate the quality of the writing style by noting some of the following standards: coherence, clarity, originality, forcefulness, accurate use of technical words, conciseness, fullness of development, and fluidity.
• How did the books affect you? Were any prior assumptions you had on the subject that were changed, abandoned, or reinforced after reading the books? How are the books related to your own personal beliefs or assumptions? What personal experiences have you had that relate to the subject?
• How well has each book achieved the goal(s) set forth in the preface, introduction, and/or foreword?
• Would you recommend this book to others? Why or why not?

A useful strategy to help organize your thoughts is to create a table with a column for each book and rows for each question. Enter your answer to each book in the chart. When completed, you'll have an easy guide to how each author has addressed the questions.

NOTE:   Your thesis statement underpins the purpose of your review and helps the reader understand how the books are related. However, while a book review essay should evaluate books about the same topic [e.g., hurricane Katrina recovery], there may not be an overarching issue that ties the books together. If this is the case, then the thesis could, for example, center around the diversity of issues scholars have chosen to examine a topic or the fractured nature of scholarship on the subject.

ANOTHER NOTE :   Your thesis statement should include the rationale for why the key points you highlight or compare and contrast among the books being reviewed were deliberate and meaningful and not random. Explain their significance.

III.  Methods of Organizing the Essay

Organization is critical to writing an essay that compares and contrasts multiple works because you will most likely be discussing a variety of evidence and you must be certain that the logic and narrative flow of your paper can be understood by the reader. Here are some general guidelines to consider:

• If your professor asks you to choose the books to review, identify works that are closely related in some way so they can be easily compared or contrasted.
• Compare according to a single organizing idea [e.g., analysis of how each author assessed the effectiveness of post-Katrina recovery efforts].
• Choose a method of development [see below] that works well with your organizing idea.
• Use specific and relevant examples to support your analysis.
• Use transitional words or phrases to help the reader understand the similarities and differences in your subject.
• Conclude your paper by restating your thesis, summarizing the main points, and giving the reader a final "so what" answer to the major similarities and/or differences that you discussed [i.e., why are they important?

There are two general methods of organizing your multiple book review essay. If you believe one work extends another, you'll probably use the block method; if you find that two or more works are essentially engaged in a debate or examine a topic from different perspectives, the point-by-point method will help draw attention to the conflict. However, the point-by-point method can come off as a rhetorical ping-pong match. You can avoid this effect by grouping more than one point together, thereby cutting down on the number of times you alternate from one work to another. No matter which method you choose, you do not need to give equal time to similarities and differences. In fact, your paper will be more interesting if you state your main argument(s) as quickly as possible. For example, a book review essay evaluating three research studies that examine different interpretations of conflict resolution among nations in the Middle East might have as few as two or three sentences in the introduction regarding similarities and only a paragraph or two to set up the contrast between the author’s positions. The rest of the essay, whether organized by block method or point-by-point, will be your analysis of the key differences among the books.

The Block Method Present all the information about A, and then present parallel information about B. This pattern tends to work better for shorter book review essays, and those with few sub-topics. The method looks like this:

I. Introduction     A. Briefly introduce the significance of the overall subject matter     B. Thesis Statement         --First supporting point         --Second supporting point         --Third supporting point II. First book     A. Summary of book         --Relationship of work to first point         --Relationship of work to second point         --Relationship of work to third point III. Second book     A. Summary of book         --Relationship of work to first point         --Relationship of work to second point         --Relationship of work to third point IV. Third book     A. Summary of book         --Relationship of work to first point         --Relationship of work to second point         --Relationship of work to third point V. Conclusion     A. Restate thesis     B. Briefly summarize how you proved your argument The Point-by-Point Method Present one point about A, and then go to the parallel point about B. Move to the next point, and do the same thing. This pattern tends to work better for long book review essays and those with many sub-topics. The method looks like this:

I. Introduction     A. Briefly introduce significance of overall subject matter     B. Thesis statement II. Brief explanation of first book III. Brief explanation of second book IV. First comparative point     A. Relation of point to first book     B. Relation of point to second book V. Second comparative point     A. Relation of point to first book     B. Relation of point to second book VI. Third comparative point     A. Relation of point to first book     B. Relation of point to second book VII. Conclusion     A. Restate thesis     B. Briefly summarize how your proved your argument

IV.  Critically Evaluate the Contents

Regardless of whether you choose the block method or the point-by-point method, critical comments should form the bulk of your book review essay . State whether or not you feel the author's treatment of the subject matter is appropriate for the intended audience. Ask yourself:

• Has the objectives of each author(s) been achieved?
• What contribution do the books make to the field of study or discipline?
• Is the treatment of the subject matter objective?
• Are there facts and evidence that have been omitted, either in one of the books or collectively?
• What kinds of data, if any, are used to support each author's thesis statement?
• Can the same data be interpreted to alternate ends?
• Is the writing style clear and effective?
• Do the books raise important or provocative issues or topics for discussion and further research?
• What has been left out?

Support your evaluation with evidence from the text of each book and, when possible, in relation to other sources. If relevant, make note of each book's format, such as, layout, binding, typography, etc. Are there maps, illustrations? Do they aid in understanding the research problem? This is particular important in books that contain a lot of non-textual elements, such as tables, charts, pictures, and illustrations.

NOTE:   It is important to carefully distinguish your views from those of the authors, so that you don’t confuse your reader.

V.  Examine the Front Matter and Back Matter

Front matter refers to anything before the first chapter of the book. Back matter refers to any information included after the final chapter of the book . Front matter is most often numbered separately from the rest of the text in lower case Roman numerals [i.e. i-xi ]. Critical commentary about front or back matter is generally only necessary if you believe there is something that diminishes the overall quality of the work [e.g., the indexing is poor] or there is something that is particularly helpful in understanding the book's contents [e.g., foreword places the book in an important context].

The following front matter may be included in a book and may be considered for evaluation when reviewing its overall quality:

• Table of contents -- is it clear? Is it detailed or general? Does it reflect the true contents of the book?
• Author biography -- also found as back matter, the biography of author(s) can be useful in determining the authority of the writer and whether the book builds on prior research or represents new research. In scholarly reviews, noting the author's affiliation can be a factor in helping the reader determine the overall validity of the work [i.e., are they associated with a research center devoted to studying the research problem under investigation].
• Foreword -- the purpose of a foreword is to introduce the reader to the author as well as the book itself, and to help establish credibility for both. A foreword may not contribute any additional information about the book's subject matter, but it serves as a means of validating the book's existence. Later editions of a book sometimes have a new foreword prepended [appearing before an older foreword, if there was one], which may be included to explain in how the latest edition differs from previous ones.
• Acknowledgements -- scholarly studies in the social sciences often take many years to write, so authors frequently acknowledge the help and support of others in getting their research published. This can be as innocuous as acknowledging the author's family or the publisher. However, an author may acknowledge prominent scholars or subject experts, staff at key research centers, or people who curate important archival collections. In these particular cases, it may be worth noting these sources of support in your review.
• Preface -- generally describes the genesis, purpose, limitations, and scope of the book and may include acknowledgments of indebtedness to people who have helped the author complete the study. Is the preface helpful in understanding the study? Does it provide an effective framework for understanding what's to follow?
• Chronology -- also may be found as back matter, a chronology is generally included to highlight key events related to the subject of the book. Do the entries contribute to the overall work? Is it detailed or very general?
• List of non-textual elements -- a book that contains a lot of charts, photographs, maps, etc. will often list these items after the table of contents in order that they appear in the text. Is it useful?

The following back matter may be included in a book and may be considered for evaluation when reviewing the overall quality of the book:

• Afterword -- this is a short, reflective piece written by the author that takes the form of a concluding section, final commentary, or closing statement. It is worth mentioning in a review if it contributes information about the purpose of the book, gives a call to action, or asks the reader to consider key points made in the book.
• Appendix -- is the supplementary material in the appendix or appendices well organized? Do they relate to the contents or appear superfluous? Does it contain any essential information that would have been more appropriately integrated into the text?
• Index -- is the index thorough and accurate? Are elements used, such as, bold or italic fonts to help identify specific places in the book?
• Glossary of Terms -- are the definitions clearly written? Is the glossary comprehensive or are key terms missing? Are any terms or concepts mentioned in the text not included?
• Footnotes/Endnotes -- examine any footnotes or endnotes as you read from chapter to chapter. Do they provide important additional information? Do they clarify or extend points made in the body of the text?
• Bibliography/References/Further Readings -- review any bibliography, list of references to sources, and/or further readings the author may have included. What kinds of sources appear [e.g., primary or secondary, recent or old, scholarly or popular, etc.]? How does the author make use of them? Be sure to note important omissions of sources that you believe should have been utilized.

NOTE:   Typically, multiple book review essays do not compare and contrast the quality of the back and front matter unless the books share a common deficiency [e.g., poor indexing], the front or back matter is particularly important in supplementing the primary content of the books, or one book stands out in regards to the quality of information presented in the front or back matter.

VI.  Summarize and Comment

Your conclusion should synthesize the key similarities and differences among the books and their collective contributions to understanding of the research problem. Avoid re-stating your assessment word for word; your goal is to provide a sense of closure and to leave the reader with a final perspective about the overall topic under review and whether you believe each book has effectively contributed to the overall research literature on the subject. Do not introduce new information in the conclusion. If you've compared the books to any other studies or used other sources in writing the review, be sure to cite them at the end of your book review essay.

Bazerman, Charles. Comparing and Synthesizing Sources. The Informed Writer: Using Sources in the Disciplines. Writing@CSU. Colorado State University; Comparing and Contrasting. The Writing Center. University of North Carolina; Comparison and Contrast Essays. Writing Support Centre. University of Western Ontario; Rhetorical Strategies: Comparison and Contrast. The Reading/Writing Center. Hunter College; Hartley, James. “Reading and Writing Book Reviews Across the Disciplines.” Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 57 (July 2006): 1194-1207; Hooker, Fran and Kate James. Apples to Oranges: Writing a Compare and Contrast Paper. The Writing Center. Webster University; Oinas, Päivi and Samuli Leppälä. “Views on Book Reviews.” Regional Studies 47 (2013): 1785-1789; Visvis, Vikki and Jerry Plotnick. The Comparative Essay. The Lab Report. University College Writing Centre. University of Toronto; Writing a Compare/Contrast Essay. CLRC Writing Center. Santa Barbara City College.

• << Previous: Writing a Book Review
• Next: Reviewing Collected Works >>
• Last Updated: Mar 6, 2024 1:00 PM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide/assignments

Film Writing: Essays vs Reviews

• Facebook Data not found. Please check your user ID. Twitter You currently have access to a subset of Twitter API v2 endpoints and limited v1.1 endpoints (e.g. media post, oauth) only. If you need access to this endpoint, you may need a different access level. You can learn more here: https://developer.twitter.com/en/portal/product Youtube 1.1K

Interview With Liam Neeson Star of IN THE LAND OF SAINTS AND SINNERS

KUNG FU PANDA 4: Enough Wit For One More Kick

BEFORE I CHANGE MY MIND Director Trevor Anderson Talks Putting a Twist on the Coming-of-Age  Genre 

LATE NIGHT WITH THE DEVIL: Heeeeeere’s Satan!

SXSW 2024: Interview With Editor Lucas Harger

Horrific Inquiry: THE OMEN (1976)

BOTTLE CONDITIONED: An Unfiltered Look

Why Animated Films Should Be Included In The Best Picture Category

Zero-Waste Set Design: Redefining Sustainability In The Entertainment Industry

“I’m Not Interested In Playing Easy To Like Characters” Interview With Jonas Chernick, Star & Writer Of THE BURNING SEASON

SOCIETY OF THE SNOW: Cinematic Reflections On Resilience

SXSW Film Festival 2024: AN ARMY OF WOMEN & WE WERE DANGEROUS

Sam is 25 years old from the West Midlands region…

In any sector where publishing one’s writing, there are various types into which one can subvert their writing style. The four most basic are expository, narrative, descriptive and persuasive. When it comes to writing for film and media, though, all four of these sorts can be used. For example, both descriptive and persuasive writing could be used in a review or essay in which the reader’s objective is to convince their audience based on what has been written.

Although film essays and film reviews take the form of a number of writing styles, there are often misconceptions between the two. Reviews often generally talk to the entire audience who have not seen a film and write in the first-person, whereas the film essay targets an academic audience and has a more specific process with a set of rules.

Having briefly outlined the difference between film essays and film reviews, this article will now elaborate on each writing style by answering the following questions – Why do they differ? What are their approaches? How long should they be? Who are the target readers? What is to be included in the main body? What style of language should be used? How do they use exterior sources? What are the results and how should they conclude?

Film Essays

How do essays work.

Although it can often depend on the subject area, writing essays is a fundamental task for any forthcoming assignments during college and higher education studies. It is represented as an assessment tool that exemplifies not only your academic writing skills, but further evaluation on critical thinking within your subject. The essay follows a simple structure – a beginning, middle and end, but how they are delivered is entirely down to the writer and the reader’s critical interpretation.

The essay is required to go into more depth about a certain topic, but how it is written is specific. Regarding film and media, the essay needs to critically analyse relevant elements from a film (or group of them), which serve as examples when arguing the essay’s question. These examples could be chosen based on one’s own ideas, which are simply formulated into an argument. For instance, one might want to write an essay about Quentin Tarantino and his repeated use of violence. The response to writing it would simply be to use scene examples and analyse them to structure that argument.

How could film academics approach essays?

It is firstly important to point out that when writing essays, there is no right or wrong answer. In the medium of film, especially, because we go into the films with different expectations and have various opinions. However, there is a right and wrong answer as to how the academic takes their approach to their work. Unlike reviews, you cannot write about how you feel and what you think in an essay.

Considering this, there are questions that the writer needs to ask themselves when approaching essays – what evidence am I showing? Why is the content relevant? How am I going to support these claims from ideas I’ve gathered? The writer originates their ideas from indications in films, but the execution of the written analysis must be at an academic style. Also, the ideas are usually meant to be timely in connection to why the idea is important now, which is what the second question indicated. You are voicing your interpretation of an idea, but the paper contents are practically like a report and critique of your observations.

For example, one may write an analysis about differences between dreams and reality in Christopher Nolan’s Inception . One would not illustrate their own opinion in an essay, but would look at relevant aspects to further examine the point. These may include analysis of mise-en-scéne, props, figural expressions from characters and how the camera shots are created. Using evidence from the film, and analysing it, the academic writer can then justify their arguments.

How long should the essay be?

Film essays require not only analysis of relevant scenes relating to the essay question or hypothesis, they are also dependent on research and literature relating to the topic. In this sense, the writer needs the required space to fit in both the literature, whether using quotes or paraphrased sentences, and one’s own analysis. This can often be difficult due to a word limit (which can vary from 1000 words or more), but the key to a good film essay is that it is only establishes the most important points, using both the literature and scenes or characters used for analysis.

Who are the essay’s target readers?

The essay is aimed at an academic reader. In particular regards to the academic, the key individuals could either be lecturers within the industry or individuals working in a research faculty. The film essay could also be a useful resource for people, such as students, who are either required to write about a related subject or will use the essay’s research in their work towards an independent project (such as a Master’s or PhD thesis). Of course, anyone can choose to read the essays but their target readers are primarily academics or learning ones.

What is to be included in the essay’s main body?

The idea of a main body in an essay format is for each paragraph to serve as a mini-answer to the question, but not one which finalises it. Each section must be a valid explanation from analysis that contributes to your final answer, which comes in the conclusion. This could either be factual information (which could surprise the reader) or a justifiable example. The purpose of the paragraph must be necessary, too, in order to help support the argument claim.

For example, an essay question may ask – “to what extent does Alfred Hitchc*ck display the auteur theory and male gaze in his films?” In this one, both of these theories must be researched, applied to Hitchc*ck , then textually analysis must be done of the relevant films. Those concerning the male gaze being films such as Rear Window and Vertigo , while sequences from North by Northwest , Psycho and The Birds may be more applicable to the auteur theory. Scenes analysed, therefore, support the essay claim based on the title and justify the arguments. This strategy is to be repeated in the main body before drawing up your summarised conclusion.

What style of language should be used in the essay?

When writing essays in general, there are boundaries concerning style of written language. Although the reader knows that the author is writing in their own voice from their own idea, they are not speaking the voice of opinion. The reader must be on an equal level to the writer. So, how does the essay formulate its written style without it being too opinionated?

The fact that they target academics already suggests a specific tool must be used. In addition to writing expressively in an analytical style, we must use referencing. It is a clear mention to an academic’s former research and a side note to how your work applies, which clearly differs from reviews. From that argument elaborated from somebody else’s work, you then create your own ideas and assumptions. However, first-person terms such as “I think…”, “my” or generally “I” should be avoided. Follow this guideline from Cite This For Me  for help with referencing.

Instead of speaking in first-person, the idea at academic level is to use a sentence structure such as – “According to Laura Mulvey , the male gaze is defined as…” before continuing with a direct or paraphrased quote. An in-text reference is to be included, too, for two reasons – to clarify the quoted source and to avoid plagiarism.

How should we use exterior sources for the essay?

When writing at academic level, there are still rules to follow concerning how authors use other academic sources. Now, whether it is at essay level or mere film review standards, editors and academics still expect to see certain regulations. An essay is heavily reliant on researched literature to support one’s own claims.

Laura Mulvey is a renowned example of a film theorist whose work on the male gaze shaped film and media studies, namely through her essay titled here .

Some of these literature sources can be implemented in an essay and can serve to underpin and support one’s own claims. For instance, some may want to write about Immanuel Kant’s philosophy on morality in relation to a drama film or Charles Darwin/Francis Galton’s theory of evolution and eugenics when discussing early science-fiction cinema. The writer is not to copy the academic’s work, but to instead utilise it in arguing their own original ideas.

What are the results and how should you conclude your essay?

It is particularly important to ensure that your results are the answers to your essay title, whether it is a question or not. The answers are all divided into several sections within the main body, but the summarised response comes at the very end in the conclusion. For example, an essay arguing about 3D cinema being the future or a financial gimmick should be concluded with a finalised summary of your findings. At the same time, there should still be room available either for readers to reflect on or for academics to elaborate further on the research.

Film Reviews

How do reviews work.

As opposed to essays, film reviews are heavily reliant on critical reception. They are written reports about a film and are from the viewpoint of the writer. The majority of reviews are published around the time of the film’s release, sometimes just before the premiere or during its theatrical run in the cinemas.

The film review critiques a film based on its featured elements, which could be acting, production aspects (such as lighting, cinematography or visual effects), narrative structure, screenwriting or directing. Its purpose is to weigh the ups and downs but, like an essay, to draw a conclusion as to whether the film is considered good, average or bad. To make it more interesting and engaging for the readers, reviews often appear in the form of star ratings with 1 being the lowest and 5 being the highest.

To learn more about critiquing the different elements of film, read this article on film analysis.

How could writers approach reviews?

The review is mainly from a biased, one-sided viewpoint and the idea is that relevant points discussed are meant to persuade the readers. It is not strictly forceful that people must go and see a film or not, but the implication is that expectations may change whether for good or bad. The reviewer’s words are intended to be reliable to other people who have yet to see the film, despite us knowing that all opinions differ. The question remains – if all our opinions differ, why do readers engage with another’s writing? It could be out of curiosity on whether a film they’ve wanted to see is good, or perhaps they hope the film will be bad.

Similar to an essay, it is crucial for the writer to know enough details about the film before writing the review. Apart from that, for reviews, writers gather the specifics from their own thoughts whereas academics base their writing more on factual information. It is fairer to the film for the writer to eventually draw up a reasonable decision about the film after watching it.

What about while actually watching a film? Some writers collect their thoughts afterwards when writing the review, but others may work easier by taking quick notes during the screening. This is entirely down to preference and memory skills, but both do prove to be viable strategies when approaching reviews throughout the film viewing. Taking notes may actually be useful, though, because key elements can easily be missed during a first-time viewing. Watching the film for a second time may be an option if note-taking is not the writer’s approach.

How long should reviews be?

A review is usually expected to be approximately 700-1000 words. It is written at this length because each of the aspects discussed within the review (acting, production, narrative, directing) are more concise, particularly as the points are made clearer for the reader. Also, as reviews are a personal account, it may seem boring to read page after page of a review when the reader’s opinion may differ. The length could distract from the reader’s enjoyment, particularly as it is from only the writer’s opinion. So, whether the writer enjoyed the film or not, keeping the written piece brief and straight to the point is the key to an exceptional film review.

Who are the review’s target readers?

As opposed to the essay, the review’s target audience is everybody . The entire purpose of the review is for its content to be persuasive and reliable enough for an audience to base its decision on. Readers can see published reviews in one of two ways – either in print or online (usually as part of a magazine or one’s personal blog). Both of these are popular mediums of publishing film reviews and as they are easily reachable to people now, the general public can access any of these sources and read reviews from there.

What is to be included in the review’s main body?

Similar to an essay, a review’s main body should include paragraphs featuring mini-responses to the eventual conclusion. A review needs to look for and discuss the following aspects – actors, structure, music, mise-en-scéne and possible connections with the audience (especially if any moral messages are included or the film raised controversy). Each of these characteristics could be summarised in a single paragraph, but as long as it meets a reasonable length and has concise language.

It may also be vital to highlight that the biggest fault of many reviews, especially these days, is their overwhelming use of spoilers. Anything like that should not be in the review at all. From a plot point to a character twist, it unfairly ruins the expectations and often excitement for the reader, but also the regard of the writer. It defeats the purpose, so no spoilers are to be included. Only include information that the reader already knows or should be thinking about during the expectation phase. However, spoilers can be included in the essay as their readers are expected to know all about the film as it centres more on analysis.

Reviewers instead analyse their points about a film and formulate their opinion through a valid argument. Furthermore, the review is a written discussion about a film and should not be written simply as first-person sentences. For example, comments like “ The Dark Knight Rises  was a good film but could have been better”, “I liked The Hangover because it was funny” and “I didn’t like The Exorcist because it was scary” are not enough. Why could The Dark Knight Rises have been better? Why was The Hangover funny? Why was The Exorcist too scary? These points need valid justification. They don’t have to be proof of anything, but could be aspects which may elicit further argument.

What style of language should be used in the review?

To elaborate from the previous point, the written language of a film review should be subject to the writer speaking in their own voice and creating their own interpretation. Reviews are written from a personal point-of-view but in a written form of expression. The writing aims to sell the opinion to persuade the reader but, depending on the publishing site, the reviewer can use first-person terms. Particularly if it is a personal blog that centres only on the opinions and thoughts of that writer, using first-person vocabulary such as “I” and “my” can be used.

However, if the review is going to be among the work of other reviewers as part of a specific business, whether online or print, then first-person can be dismissed. It is meant to be written as personal regardless, but, particularly if for a magazine, the idea is to pen the review professionally within a balanced structure.

How should we use exterior sources for the review?

Using literature as a supportive tool is not so relevant in writing film reviews because, as repeatedly stated, they are more centred on publishing from a personal perspective. They do not need to back up one’s idea or claim as a review is subject to individual opinion. The review does require valid reasoning in its claims, but only the academic essay uses resources to support theirs.

What are the results and how should you conclude your review?

Again like the essay, the results of the review are the findings you have gathered from the main body of your writing. The reviewer condenses their thoughts by drawing up a fair summary of whether a film should be seen or not. It should always conclude with a sense of excitement for the reader or, if a film is disappointing, a sense of dignity.

However, there are rules to consider when writing the conclusion of a review. The most fundamental problem of review conclusions is when the writer addresses the film with a personal attack. Opinions differ, of course, and it is understandable that a writer would want to express theirs but boundaries are crucial. A misstep like this could lead to controversial consequences, reflecting badly on the writer’s career. The review should conclude with the reader regenerating their own expectations based on what they have read. Therefore, the reviewer should be as expressive in writing the review as they should be equally generous to the reader.

So, which of these two film writing formats is easier to use – an essay or a review? It is a simple question that is difficult to answer as it is usually dependent on the writer’s preference. Although reviews are considered easier, as one can begin their writing by voicing their opinion, it is still a style that shouldn’t be compared to writing an essay. There is a similar process to doing them each properly, but the approach and eventual presentations of each are different from one another.

To put it simply, reviews are a journalistic style of writing for a general audience, whereas essays are more academic for scholars and researchers in higher education faculties. I have not declared which is the most useful or most creative format to use in relation to cinema, but instead raised the compare-and-contrasting points between writing film essays and film reviews. Therefore, clarifying for readers that despite being commonly misinterpreted as similar, they are different and there are different writing tools to use.

What is your preferred style of film writing? Did you find this guide useful?

Does content like this matter to you?

Become a Member and support film journalism. Unlock access to all of Film Inquiry`s great articles. Join a community of like-minded readers who are passionate about cinema - get access to our private members Network, give back to independent filmmakers, and more.

Sam is 25 years old from the West Midlands region of the UK, who has a passion for the world of cinema and publishing. He is currently studying a postgraduate degree in Film & Television: Research and Production at the University of Birmingham. He is currently working in theatre and academic support.

Slamdance Film Festival 2024: Interview with writer/director Omar S. Kamara for AFRICAN GIANTS

A Beginner’s Guide to National Cinema Theory

READY OR NOT & The Bloody Remains Of The Final Girl Trope

No Sympathy For The Shooter: Contrasting TARGETS (1968) & JOKER (2019) In An Era Of Mass Shootings

• Write for Us
• Become a Patron
• Comment Policy
• Terms & Conditions
• Staff Login

© 2023 Film Inquiry. All Rights Reserved.

• Customer Reviews
• Extended Essays
• IB Internal Assessment
• Theory of Knowledge
• Literature Review
• Dissertations
• Essay Writing
• Research Writing
• Assignment Help
• Capstone Projects
• College Application
• Online Class

Book Review vs Book Report: Here’s How They Compare

by  Antony W

April 19, 2023

In this post, we do a front to back comparison on book review vs book report.

In particular, we’ll look at the differences between the two so that you can easily tell them apart and have an easy time writing.

Let’s get started.

Key Takeaways

• A book review and a book report have aspects that easily overlap. For example, they both give a summary of a book to help readers determine the value of a book.

What is a Book Review?

A book review is an assessment of a literary work, typically written by a critic or reviewer.

It aims to provide a detailed analysis of the book's content, quality, and style, and may take various forms such as opinion pieces, scholarly reviews, or summary reviews.

Book reviews can be found in a variety of outlets, including newspapers, magazines, online directories, academic journals, and websites.

They serve as valuable resources for readers seeking to make informed decisions about what to read, and for authors seeking feedback on their work.

In both high school and college, teachers often assign book reviews as a way to assess students' ability to analyze the complexities of scholarly texts and synthesize research to demonstrate their understanding of the book's content.

You have the responsibility to read the book and provide a thorough and critical evaluation of its significance.

The length of your review will vary, ranging from a few paragraphs to an average of 2,000 words, depending on the instructor's guidelines or the complexity of the book.

It is important to remember that a book review reflects your personal opinion and taste, and what you think about a particular work of literature may differ from someone else's perspective.

What is a Book Report?

A book report is a comprehensive summary of a book's key elements, including its title, setting, plot, characters, and author.

It should also indicate the publication year and genre.

When writing a book report, it's important to focus on the most important points and key ideas addressed by the author.

Including relevant quotations from the book can also support your general observations, as long as you properly cite them.

In addition to summarizing the book's content, a good book report should also include your personal response to the material.

You may also need to evaluate the book's strengths and weaknesses to help potential readers decide whether to read it.

Book Review vs Book Report: What are the Differences?

It's common for students to conflate book reports with book reviews, which can result in poor grades if not properly understood.

Although there are similarities between the two, it's essential to differentiate their purposes and formats.

The following table provides a concise overview of the key differences between a book review and a book report.

Structure of a Book Review

A book review requires a sophisticated and elaborate structure, involving an in-depth examination of the book's elements to assist potential readers in making an informed decision about whether to read it or not.

Typically, book reviews range between 500 and 2,000 words, although the length can vary depending on the book.

The Structure of a Book Report

In contrast, a book report has a more straightforward structure and only provides a basic summary of the book's content.

Due to its simplicity, book reports are usually shorter, spanning between 200 and 500 words.

Writing a Book Review

When writing a book review, the focus should be on shedding new light on the book for the target audience and providing reasons to read or not read it.

While it is acceptable to discuss the plot, climax, biography, and characters of the story, the review should primarily focus on the author's intent, symbols, and thematic elements.

It should also evaluate the relevance of the story to its historical context and the author's effectiveness in covering the subject matter.

While it is optional to discuss the tone of the author and look at whether it is sympathetic or biased, it is not necessary.

In addition to discussing the strengths and weaknesses of the book, the review should help potential readers determine the value of the book.

Writing a Book Report

A book report typically includes biographical information about the author, such as their place of birth, education, residence, and family.

This information helps readers understand the author's perspective in writing the book.

The report should also include a summary of the book, covering important details such as the main characters, setting, plot, and climax.

While it is uncommon, some instructors may ask students to identify and discuss relevant symbols and themes in the book report, which can help readers understand the book better.

Get Help with Book Review Writing

Despite having a clear understanding of the distinction between a book review and a book report, completing the assignment can still be a challenging task.

If you find yourself struggling with a book review project, there's no need to worry.

Our team of book review writers is available to assist you in completing the task within the shortest possible time.

Simply reach out to us, and our team of professional writers and editors will guide you in the right direction.

About the author 

Antony W is a professional writer and coach at Help for Assessment. He spends countless hours every day researching and writing great content filled with expert advice on how to write engaging essays, research papers, and assignments.

Stanley vs. Yeti: Which Insulated Cup Is Better?

Here's what I think after using both the Stanley cup and Yeti tumbler for over a year.

We've been independently researching and testing products for over 120 years. If you buy through our links, we may earn a commission. Learn more about our review process.

Since I've had the opportunity to use both of these over a period of time, I can honestly share how these vacuum-insulated stainless steel tumblers stack up against each other.

How we test Stanley and Yeti

In the Good Housekeeping Institute Kitchen Appliances and Innovation Lab, we test all types of products related to eating and drinking, including the best water bottles , the best insulated water bottles , the best Stanley cup dupes and more.

I've been using the popular 40-ounce Stanley cup for more than a year now and continue to switch between the original and the newer model, known as the Quencher H2.0 Flowstate Tumbler, which won one of our Kitchen Gear Awards for its innovation and high consumer survey results. I've also been using the Yeti tumbler, a.k.a. the Yeti Rambler 35-ounce Straw Mug for about a year.

When we test Stanley cups and water bottles in the Lab, we evaluate how well they retain temperature over 24 hours, how leak-proof they are, how durable they are, how easy they are to use and drink from and how easy they are to clean. We also send a handful home with consumer testers to see how they hold up in real life.

Here's how the Stanley cup and Yeti tumbler compare.

The Stanley cup

Stanley quencher h2.0 flowstate insulated tumbler, 40 oz.

The Stanley cup has a tall, slim profile with a tapered base that easily fits into most cupholders. The oversized plastic handle allows you to pass your hand through and get a good, comfortable grip on the cup itself, which feels nice and balanced in the hand. It also has an opaque plastic lid that you can drink out of like a cup or use with the provided straw.

The H2.0 version, which is the version sold now, has a silicone gasket built into the removable inner piece on the lid that help prevents splashing and big leaks; note that it still leaks when knocked on its side and should be held upright. The lid screws on and off the cup easily. All parts are dishwasher safe — just make sure to take apart all of the lid's pieces to get a good clean because mold can develop on the silicone if not cleaned and dried properly.

The 40-ounce size is the one I use, but it also comes in a comparable 30-ounce. You can get a larger 64-ounce size too, but it doesn't have a tapered base and looks more like a jug. The 20-ounce and 14-ounce sizes look similar to the 40-ounce, but they don't have a handle.

The Yeti tumbler

Yeti rambler 35 oz straw mug.

The Yeti Rambler tumbler with built-in handle comes in three sizes that all look quite similar: 25 ounces, 35 ounces and 42 ounces. They each have tapered bases that fit in traditional cupholders. The 35-ounce version is the one we reach for most often. It feels heavy and durable with a smaller, harder handle than the Stanley.

The Yeti handle feels like it's designed to be held onto versus sliding your hand through and hugging the mug; it's a little small and felt snug around our hands. The tumbler has a clear lid that seals on by pushing on it. It offers one way to drink unless you buy a corresponding MagSlider Lid , which screws onto the cup and helps prevent leaking when closed properly. (In our Lab tests, the lid with straw leaked a little when knocked over, but stopped after 20 seconds.) Yeti also makes a 20-ounce and 30-ounce tumbler that features their Stronghold Lid that screws onto the tumblers for a more secure fit that does still leak a little when turned upside down.

The Yeti tumbler, like the brand's popular Rambler water bottles, have an uncoated stainless steel base and rim that we found helps with the cup's durability and longevity: We've run them through the dishwasher endless times and haven't experienced any chipping of the cup's colored areas like we have on other cups that are completely coated. (The Stanley cup's rim is uncoated but its base is coated. The base has slightly scratched over time.)

Stanley vs. Yeti: Which is better?

When directly compared, the 40-ounce Stanley cup feels lighter and slimmer than the all of the Yeti tumblers with a built-in handle. I think its lid is easier to put on and take off than the Yeti, but more involved to clean. I prefer the larger, softer Stanley cup handle, but can understand how the Yeti's handle can be appealing to people who like holding their cups by the handle versus wrapping their hand around the cup.

When we tested Stanley water bottles and Yeti water bottles side by side, they both offered the similar temperature retention over 24 hours — the Stanley kept water cooler by only one degree than the Yeti.

They're also comparable in terms of price. The 40-ounce Stanley cup costs $40 while the $42-ounce Yeti tumbler costs $45 and the 35-ounce costs $42.

So what's the bottom line? In truth, I think it's hard to suggest that one is better than the other. Both brands make highly durable and well-designed products that last a long time and have performed well in our Lab tests.

Ultimately, the main difference between the two come down to design. Stanley tends to make tumblers and water bottles in more color options and styles than Yeti, but both offer a wide variety to choose from.

Why trust Good Housekeeping?

Nicole Papantoniou is the director of the Good Housekeeping Institute's Kitchen Appliances and Innovation Lab, where she oversees all testing and content related to kitchen tools, gadgets and appliances. She's an avid Stanley cup and Stanley cup dupe user and has used both the Stanley cup and Yeti tumbler extensively.

Nicole (she/her) is the director of the Good Housekeeping Institute 's Kitchen Appliances and Innovation Lab, where she has overseen content and testing related to kitchen and cooking appliances, tools and gear since 2019. She’s an experienced product tester and recipe creator, trained in classic culinary arts and culinary nutrition. She has worked in test kitchens for small kitchen appliance brands and national magazines, including Family Circle and Ladies’ Home Journal .

@media(max-width: 64rem){.css-o9j0dn:before{margin-bottom:0.5rem;margin-right:0.625rem;color:#ffffff;width:1.25rem;bottom:-0.2rem;height:1.25rem;content:'_';display:inline-block;position:relative;line-height:1;background-repeat:no-repeat;}.loaded .css-o9j0dn:before{background-image:url(/_assets/design-tokens/goodhousekeeping/static/images/Clover.5c7a1a0.svg);}}@media(min-width: 48rem){.loaded .css-o9j0dn:before{background-image:url(/_assets/design-tokens/goodhousekeeping/static/images/Clover.5c7a1a0.svg);}} Home Products

The Best Outdoor Furniture at Walmart of 2024

9 Best Adjustable Beds of 2024

The Best Cool Office Gadgets

The Best Dethatchers

The Best Pool Heaters

The Best Security Cameras

The Best Degreasers

The Best Weighted Blankets

The Best Smart Bird Feeders

Spring Cleaning Shortcuts From a Cleaning Expert

Quiz: Find Your Family’s Next Era