sample of research literature review

• UWF Libraries

Literature Review: Conducting & Writing

• Sample Literature Reviews
• Steps for Conducting a Lit Review
• Finding "The Literature"
• Organizing/Writing
• APA Style This link opens in a new window
• Chicago: Notes Bibliography This link opens in a new window
• MLA Style This link opens in a new window

Sample Lit Reviews from Communication Arts

Have an exemplary literature review.

• Literature Review Sample 1
• Literature Review Sample 2
• Literature Review Sample 3

Have you written a stellar literature review you care to share for teaching purposes?

Are you an instructor who has received an exemplary literature review and have permission from the student to post?

Please contact Britt McGowan at [email protected] for inclusion in this guide. All disciplines welcome and encouraged.

• << Previous: MLA Style
• Next: Get Help! >>
• Last Updated: Mar 22, 2024 9:37 AM
• URL: https://libguides.uwf.edu/litreview

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 This material may not be published, reproduced, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission.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.

Get science-backed answers as you write with Paperpal's Research feature

What is a Literature Review? How to Write It (with Examples)

A literature review is a critical analysis and synthesis of existing research on a particular topic. It provides an overview of the current state of knowledge, identifies gaps, and highlights key findings in the literature. 1 The purpose of a literature review is to situate your own research within the context of existing scholarship, demonstrating your understanding of the topic and showing how your work contributes to the ongoing conversation in the field. Learning how to write a literature review is a critical tool for successful research. Your ability to summarize and synthesize prior research pertaining to a certain topic demonstrates your grasp on the topic of study, and assists in the learning process. 

Table of Contents

• What is the purpose of literature review? 
• a. Habitat Loss and Species Extinction: 
• b. Range Shifts and Phenological Changes: 
• c. Ocean Acidification and Coral Reefs: 
• d. Adaptive Strategies and Conservation Efforts: 
• How to write a good literature review 
• Choose a Topic and Define the Research Question: 
• Decide on the Scope of Your Review: 
• Select Databases for Searches: 
• Conduct Searches and Keep Track: 
• Review the Literature: 
• Organize and Write Your Literature Review: 
• Frequently asked questions 

What is a literature review?

A well-conducted literature review demonstrates the researcher’s familiarity with the existing literature, establishes the context for their own research, and contributes to scholarly conversations on the topic. One of the purposes of a literature review is also to help researchers avoid duplicating previous work and ensure that their research is informed by and builds upon the existing body of knowledge.

What is the purpose of literature review?

A literature review serves several important purposes within academic and research contexts. Here are some key objectives and functions of a literature review: 2  

• Contextualizing the Research Problem: The literature review provides a background and context for the research problem under investigation. It helps to situate the study within the existing body of knowledge. 
• Identifying Gaps in Knowledge: By identifying gaps, contradictions, or areas requiring further research, the researcher can shape the research question and justify the significance of the study. This is crucial for ensuring that the new research contributes something novel to the field. 
• Understanding Theoretical and Conceptual Frameworks: Literature reviews help researchers gain an understanding of the theoretical and conceptual frameworks used in previous studies. This aids in the development of a theoretical framework for the current research. 
• Providing Methodological Insights: Another purpose of literature reviews is that it allows researchers to learn about the methodologies employed in previous studies. This can help in choosing appropriate research methods for the current study and avoiding pitfalls that others may have encountered. 
• Establishing Credibility: A well-conducted literature review demonstrates the researcher’s familiarity with existing scholarship, establishing their credibility and expertise in the field. It also helps in building a solid foundation for the new research. 
• Informing Hypotheses or Research Questions: The literature review guides the formulation of hypotheses or research questions by highlighting relevant findings and areas of uncertainty in existing literature. 

Literature review example

Let’s delve deeper with a literature review example: Let’s say your literature review is about the impact of climate change on biodiversity. You might format your literature review into sections such as the effects of climate change on habitat loss and species extinction, phenological changes, and marine biodiversity. Each section would then summarize and analyze relevant studies in those areas, highlighting key findings and identifying gaps in the research. The review would conclude by emphasizing the need for further research on specific aspects of the relationship between climate change and biodiversity. The following literature review template provides a glimpse into the recommended literature review structure and content, demonstrating how research findings are organized around specific themes within a broader topic. 

Literature Review on Climate Change Impacts on Biodiversity:

Climate change is a global phenomenon with far-reaching consequences, including significant impacts on biodiversity. This literature review synthesizes key findings from various studies: 

a. Habitat Loss and Species Extinction:

Climate change-induced alterations in temperature and precipitation patterns contribute to habitat loss, affecting numerous species (Thomas et al., 2004). The review discusses how these changes increase the risk of extinction, particularly for species with specific habitat requirements. 

b. Range Shifts and Phenological Changes:

Observations of range shifts and changes in the timing of biological events (phenology) are documented in response to changing climatic conditions (Parmesan & Yohe, 2003). These shifts affect ecosystems and may lead to mismatches between species and their resources. 

c. Ocean Acidification and Coral Reefs:

The review explores the impact of climate change on marine biodiversity, emphasizing ocean acidification’s threat to coral reefs (Hoegh-Guldberg et al., 2007). Changes in pH levels negatively affect coral calcification, disrupting the delicate balance of marine ecosystems. 

d. Adaptive Strategies and Conservation Efforts:

Recognizing the urgency of the situation, the literature review discusses various adaptive strategies adopted by species and conservation efforts aimed at mitigating the impacts of climate change on biodiversity (Hannah et al., 2007). It emphasizes the importance of interdisciplinary approaches for effective conservation planning. 

How to write a good literature review

Writing a literature review involves summarizing and synthesizing existing research on a particular topic. A good literature review format should include the following elements. 

Introduction: The introduction sets the stage for your literature review, providing context and introducing the main focus of your review. 

• Opening Statement: Begin with a general statement about the broader topic and its significance in the field. 
• Scope and Purpose: Clearly define the scope of your literature review. Explain the specific research question or objective you aim to address. 
• Organizational Framework: Briefly outline the structure of your literature review, indicating how you will categorize and discuss the existing research. 
• Significance of the Study: Highlight why your literature review is important and how it contributes to the understanding of the chosen topic. 
• Thesis Statement: Conclude the introduction with a concise thesis statement that outlines the main argument or perspective you will develop in the body of the literature review. 

Body: The body of the literature review is where you provide a comprehensive analysis of existing literature, grouping studies based on themes, methodologies, or other relevant criteria. 

• Organize by Theme or Concept: Group studies that share common themes, concepts, or methodologies. Discuss each theme or concept in detail, summarizing key findings and identifying gaps or areas of disagreement. 
• Critical Analysis: Evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of each study. Discuss the methodologies used, the quality of evidence, and the overall contribution of each work to the understanding of the topic. 
• Synthesis of Findings: Synthesize the information from different studies to highlight trends, patterns, or areas of consensus in the literature. 
• Identification of Gaps: Discuss any gaps or limitations in the existing research and explain how your review contributes to filling these gaps. 
• Transition between Sections: Provide smooth transitions between different themes or concepts to maintain the flow of your literature review. 

Conclusion: The conclusion of your literature review should summarize the main findings, highlight the contributions of the review, and suggest avenues for future research. 

• Summary of Key Findings: Recap the main findings from the literature and restate how they contribute to your research question or objective. 
• Contributions to the Field: Discuss the overall contribution of your literature review to the existing knowledge in the field. 
• Implications and Applications: Explore the practical implications of the findings and suggest how they might impact future research or practice. 
• Recommendations for Future Research: Identify areas that require further investigation and propose potential directions for future research in the field. 
• Final Thoughts: Conclude with a final reflection on the importance of your literature review and its relevance to the broader academic community. 

Conducting a literature review

Conducting a literature review is an essential step in research that involves reviewing and analyzing existing literature on a specific topic. It’s important to know how to do a literature review effectively, so here are the steps to follow: 1  

Choose a Topic and Define the Research Question:

• Select a topic that is relevant to your field of study. 
• Clearly define your research question or objective. Determine what specific aspect of the topic do you want to explore? 

Decide on the Scope of Your Review:

• Determine the timeframe for your literature review. Are you focusing on recent developments, or do you want a historical overview? 
• Consider the geographical scope. Is your review global, or are you focusing on a specific region? 
• Define the inclusion and exclusion criteria. What types of sources will you include? Are there specific types of studies or publications you will exclude? 

Select Databases for Searches:

• Identify relevant databases for your field. Examples include PubMed, IEEE Xplore, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. 
• Consider searching in library catalogs, institutional repositories, and specialized databases related to your topic. 

Conduct Searches and Keep Track:

• Develop a systematic search strategy using keywords, Boolean operators (AND, OR, NOT), and other search techniques. 
• Record and document your search strategy for transparency and replicability. 
• Keep track of the articles, including publication details, abstracts, and links. Use citation management tools like EndNote, Zotero, or Mendeley to organize your references. 

Review the Literature:

• Evaluate the relevance and quality of each source. Consider the methodology, sample size, and results of studies. 
• Organize the literature by themes or key concepts. Identify patterns, trends, and gaps in the existing research. 
• Summarize key findings and arguments from each source. Compare and contrast different perspectives. 
• Identify areas where there is a consensus in the literature and where there are conflicting opinions. 
• Provide critical analysis and synthesis of the literature. What are the strengths and weaknesses of existing research? 

Organize and Write Your Literature Review:

• Literature review outline should be based on themes, chronological order, or methodological approaches. 
• Write a clear and coherent narrative that synthesizes the information gathered. 
• Use proper citations for each source and ensure consistency in your citation style (APA, MLA, Chicago, etc.). 
• Conclude your literature review by summarizing key findings, identifying gaps, and suggesting areas for future research. 

The literature review sample and detailed advice on writing and conducting a review will help you produce a well-structured report. But remember that a literature review is an ongoing process, and it may be necessary to revisit and update it as your research progresses. 

Frequently asked questions

A literature review is a critical and comprehensive analysis of existing literature (published and unpublished works) on a specific topic or research question and provides a synthesis of the current state of knowledge in a particular field. A well-conducted literature review is crucial for researchers to build upon existing knowledge, avoid duplication of efforts, and contribute to the advancement of their field. It also helps researchers situate their work within a broader context and facilitates the development of a sound theoretical and conceptual framework for their studies.

Literature review is a crucial component of research writing, providing a solid background for a research paper’s investigation. The aim is to keep professionals up to date by providing an understanding of ongoing developments within a specific field, including research methods, and experimental techniques used in that field, and present that knowledge in the form of a written report. Also, the depth and breadth of the literature review emphasizes the credibility of the scholar in his or her field.  

Before writing a literature review, it’s essential to undertake several preparatory steps to ensure that your review is well-researched, organized, and focused. This includes choosing a topic of general interest to you and doing exploratory research on that topic, writing an annotated bibliography, and noting major points, especially those that relate to the position you have taken on the topic. 

Literature reviews and academic research papers are essential components of scholarly work but serve different purposes within the academic realm. 3 A literature review aims to provide a foundation for understanding the current state of research on a particular topic, identify gaps or controversies, and lay the groundwork for future research. Therefore, it draws heavily from existing academic sources, including books, journal articles, and other scholarly publications. In contrast, an academic research paper aims to present new knowledge, contribute to the academic discourse, and advance the understanding of a specific research question. Therefore, it involves a mix of existing literature (in the introduction and literature review sections) and original data or findings obtained through research methods. 

Literature reviews are essential components of academic and research papers, and various strategies can be employed to conduct them effectively. If you want to know how to write a literature review for a research paper, here are four common approaches that are often used by researchers.  Chronological Review: This strategy involves organizing the literature based on the chronological order of publication. It helps to trace the development of a topic over time, showing how ideas, theories, and research have evolved.  Thematic Review: Thematic reviews focus on identifying and analyzing themes or topics that cut across different studies. Instead of organizing the literature chronologically, it is grouped by key themes or concepts, allowing for a comprehensive exploration of various aspects of the topic.  Methodological Review: This strategy involves organizing the literature based on the research methods employed in different studies. It helps to highlight the strengths and weaknesses of various methodologies and allows the reader to evaluate the reliability and validity of the research findings.  Theoretical Review: A theoretical review examines the literature based on the theoretical frameworks used in different studies. This approach helps to identify the key theories that have been applied to the topic and assess their contributions to the understanding of the subject.  It’s important to note that these strategies are not mutually exclusive, and a literature review may combine elements of more than one approach. The choice of strategy depends on the research question, the nature of the literature available, and the goals of the review. Additionally, other strategies, such as integrative reviews or systematic reviews, may be employed depending on the specific requirements of the research.

The literature review format can vary depending on the specific publication guidelines. However, there are some common elements and structures that are often followed. Here is a general guideline for the format of a literature review:  Introduction:   Provide an overview of the topic.  Define the scope and purpose of the literature review.  State the research question or objective.  Body:   Organize the literature by themes, concepts, or chronology.  Critically analyze and evaluate each source.  Discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the studies.  Highlight any methodological limitations or biases.  Identify patterns, connections, or contradictions in the existing research.  Conclusion:   Summarize the key points discussed in the literature review.  Highlight the research gap.  Address the research question or objective stated in the introduction.  Highlight the contributions of the review and suggest directions for future research.

Both annotated bibliographies and literature reviews involve the examination of scholarly sources. While annotated bibliographies focus on individual sources with brief annotations, literature reviews provide a more in-depth, integrated, and comprehensive analysis of existing literature on a specific topic. The key differences are as follows: 

References 

• Denney, A. S., & Tewksbury, R. (2013). How to write a literature review.  Journal of criminal justice education ,  24 (2), 218-234. 
• Pan, M. L. (2016).  Preparing literature reviews: Qualitative and quantitative approaches . Taylor & Francis. 
• Cantero, C. (2019). How to write a literature review.  San José State University Writing Center . 

Paperpal is an AI writing assistant that help academics write better, faster with real-time suggestions for in-depth language and grammar correction. Trained on millions of research manuscripts enhanced by professional academic editors, Paperpal delivers human precision at machine speed.  

Try it for free or upgrade to  Paperpal Prime , which unlocks unlimited access to premium features like academic translation, paraphrasing, contextual synonyms, consistency checks and more. It’s like always having a professional academic editor by your side! Go beyond limitations and experience the future of academic writing.  Get Paperpal Prime now at just US$19 a month!

Related Reads:

• Empirical Research: A Comprehensive Guide for Academics 
• How to Write a Scientific Paper in 10 Steps 
• Life Sciences Papers: 9 Tips for Authors Writing in Biological Sciences
• What is an Argumentative Essay? How to Write It (With Examples)

6 Tips for Post-Doc Researchers to Take Their Career to the Next Level

Self-plagiarism in research: what it is and how to avoid it, you may also like, how paperpal’s research feature helps you develop and..., how paperpal is enhancing academic productivity and accelerating..., how to write a successful book chapter for..., academic editing: how to self-edit academic text with..., 4 ways paperpal encourages responsible writing with ai, what are scholarly sources and where can you..., how to write a hypothesis types and examples , measuring academic success: definition & strategies for excellence, what is academic writing: tips for students, why traditional editorial process needs an upgrade.

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, automatically generate references for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Dissertation
• What is a Literature Review? | Guide, Template, & Examples

What is a Literature Review? | Guide, Template, & Examples

Published on 22 February 2022 by Shona McCombes . Revised on 7 June 2022.

What is a literature review? A literature review is a survey of scholarly sources on a specific topic. It provides an overview of current knowledge, allowing you to identify relevant theories, methods, and gaps in the existing research.

There are five key steps to writing a literature review:

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

A good literature review doesn’t just summarise sources – it analyses, synthesises, and critically evaluates to give a clear picture of the state of knowledge on the subject.

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

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

Table of contents

Why write a literature review, examples of literature reviews, step 1: search for relevant literature, step 2: evaluate and select sources, step 3: identify themes, debates and gaps, step 4: outline your literature review’s structure, step 5: write your literature review, frequently asked questions about literature reviews, introduction.

• Quick Run-through
• Step 1 & 2

When you write a dissertation or thesis, you will have to conduct a literature review to situate your research within existing knowledge. The literature review gives you a chance to:

• Demonstrate your familiarity with the topic and scholarly context
• Develop a theoretical framework and methodology for your research
• Position yourself in relation to other researchers and theorists
• Show how your dissertation addresses a gap or contributes to a debate

You might also have to write a literature review as a stand-alone assignment. In this case, the purpose is to evaluate the current state of research and demonstrate your knowledge of scholarly debates around a topic.

The content will look slightly different in each case, but the process of conducting a literature review follows the same steps. We’ve written a step-by-step guide that you can follow below.

The only proofreading tool specialized in correcting academic writing

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

Correct my document today

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

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

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

Download Word doc Download Google doc

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

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

If you are writing a literature review as a stand-alone assignment, you will have to choose a focus and develop a central question to direct your search. Unlike a dissertation research question, this question has to be answerable without collecting original data. You should be able to answer it based only on a review of existing publications.

Make a list of keywords

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

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

Search for relevant sources

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

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

You can use boolean operators to help narrow down your search:

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

To identify the most important publications on your topic, take note of recurring citations. If the same authors, books or articles keep appearing in your reading, make sure to seek them out.

You probably won’t be able to read absolutely everything that has been written on the topic – you’ll have to evaluate which sources are most relevant to your questions.

For each publication, ask yourself:

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

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

You can find out how many times an article has been cited on Google Scholar – a high citation count means the article has been influential in the field, and should certainly be included in your literature review.

The scope of your review will depend on your topic and discipline: in the sciences you usually only review recent literature, but in the humanities you might take a long historical perspective (for example, to trace how a concept has changed in meaning over time).

Remember that you can use our template to summarise and evaluate sources you’re thinking about using!

Take notes and cite your sources

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

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

You can use our free APA Reference Generator for quick, correct, consistent citations.

To begin organising your literature review’s argument and structure, you need to understand the connections and relationships between the sources you’ve read. Based on your reading and notes, you can look for:

• Trends and patterns (in theory, method or results): do certain approaches become more or less popular over time?
• Themes: what questions or concepts recur across the literature?
• Debates, conflicts and contradictions: where do sources disagree?
• Pivotal publications: are there any influential theories or studies that changed the direction of the field?
• Gaps: what is missing from the literature? Are there weaknesses that need to be addressed?

This step will help you work out the structure of your literature review and (if applicable) show how your own research will contribute to existing knowledge.

• Most research has focused on young women.
• There is an increasing interest in the visual aspects of social media.
• But there is still a lack of robust research on highly-visual platforms like Instagram and Snapchat – this is a gap that you could address in your own research.

There are various approaches to organising the body of a literature review. You should have a rough idea of your strategy before you start writing.

Depending on the length of your literature review, you can combine several of these strategies (for example, your overall structure might be thematic, but each theme is discussed chronologically).

Chronological

The simplest approach is to trace the development of the topic over time. However, if you choose this strategy, be careful to avoid simply listing and summarising sources in order.

Try to analyse patterns, turning points and key debates that have shaped the direction of the field. Give your interpretation of how and why certain developments occurred.

If you have found some recurring central themes, you can organise your literature review into subsections that address different aspects of the topic.

For example, if you are reviewing literature about inequalities in migrant health outcomes, key themes might include healthcare policy, language barriers, cultural attitudes, legal status, and economic access.

Methodological

If you draw your sources from different disciplines or fields that use a variety of research methods , you might want to compare the results and conclusions that emerge from different approaches. For example:

• Look at what results have emerged in qualitative versus quantitative research
• Discuss how the topic has been approached by empirical versus theoretical scholarship
• Divide the literature into sociological, historical, and cultural sources

Theoretical

A literature review is often the foundation for a theoretical framework . You can use it to discuss various theories, models, and definitions of key concepts.

You might argue for the relevance of a specific theoretical approach, or combine various theoretical concepts to create a framework for your research.

Like any other academic text, your literature review should have an introduction , a main body, and a conclusion . What you include in each depends on the objective of your literature review.

The introduction should clearly establish the focus and purpose of the literature review.

If you are writing the literature review as part of your dissertation or thesis, reiterate your central problem or research question and give a brief summary of the scholarly context. You can emphasise the timeliness of the topic (“many recent studies have focused on the problem of x”) or highlight a gap in the literature (“while there has been much research on x, few researchers have taken y into consideration”).

Depending on the length of your literature review, you might want to divide the body into subsections. You can use a subheading for each theme, time period, or methodological approach.

As you write, make sure to follow these tips:

• Summarise and synthesise: give an overview of the main points of each source and combine them into a coherent whole.
• Analyse and interpret: don’t just paraphrase other researchers – add your own interpretations, 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 transitions and topic sentences to draw connections, comparisons and contrasts.

In the conclusion, you should summarise the key findings you have taken from the literature and emphasise their significance.

If the literature review is part of your dissertation or thesis, reiterate how your research addresses gaps and contributes new knowledge, or discuss how you have drawn on existing theories and methods to build a framework for your research. This can lead directly into your methodology section.

A literature review is a survey of scholarly sources (such as books, journal articles, and theses) related to a specific topic or research question .

It is often written as part of a dissertation , thesis, research paper , or proposal .

There are several reasons to conduct a literature review at the beginning of a research project:

• To familiarise yourself with the current state of knowledge on your topic
• To ensure that you’re not just repeating what others have already done
• To identify gaps in knowledge and unresolved problems that your research can address
• To develop your theoretical framework and methodology
• To provide an overview of the key findings and debates on the topic

Writing the literature review shows your reader how your work relates to existing research and what new insights it will contribute.

The literature review usually comes near the beginning of your  dissertation . After the introduction , it grounds your research in a scholarly field and leads directly to your theoretical framework or methodology .

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 Reference Generator.

McCombes, S. (2022, June 07). What is a Literature Review? | Guide, Template, & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved 6 May 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/thesis-dissertation/literature-review/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, how to write a dissertation proposal | a step-by-step guide, what is a theoretical framework | a step-by-step guide, what is a research methodology | steps & tips.

How To Write An A-Grade Literature Review

3 straightforward steps (with examples) + free template.

By: Derek Jansen (MBA) | Expert Reviewed By: Dr. Eunice Rautenbach | October 2019

Quality research is about building onto the existing work of others , “standing on the shoulders of giants”, as Newton put it. The literature review chapter of your dissertation, thesis or research project is where you synthesise this prior work and lay the theoretical foundation for your own research.

Long story short, this chapter is a pretty big deal, which is why you want to make sure you get it right . In this post, I’ll show you exactly how to write a literature review in three straightforward steps, so you can conquer this vital chapter (the smart way).

Overview: The Literature Review Process

• Understanding the “ why “
• Finding the relevant literature
• Cataloguing and synthesising the information
• Outlining & writing up your literature review
• Example of a literature review

But first, the “why”…

Before we unpack how to write the literature review chapter, we’ve got to look at the why . To put it bluntly, if you don’t understand the function and purpose of the literature review process, there’s no way you can pull it off well. So, what exactly is the purpose of the literature review?

Well, there are (at least) four core functions:

• For you to gain an understanding (and demonstrate this understanding) of where the research is at currently, what the key arguments and disagreements are.
• For you to identify the gap(s) in the literature and then use this as justification for your own research topic.
• To help you build a conceptual framework for empirical testing (if applicable to your research topic).
• To inform your methodological choices and help you source tried and tested questionnaires (for interviews ) and measurement instruments (for surveys ).

Most students understand the first point but don’t give any thought to the rest. To get the most from the literature review process, you must keep all four points front of mind as you review the literature (more on this shortly), or you’ll land up with a wonky foundation.

Okay – with the why out the way, let’s move on to the how . As mentioned above, writing your literature review is a process, which I’ll break down into three steps:

• Finding the most suitable literature
• Understanding , distilling and organising the literature
• Planning and writing up your literature review chapter

Importantly, you must complete steps one and two before you start writing up your chapter. I know it’s very tempting, but don’t try to kill two birds with one stone and write as you read. You’ll invariably end up wasting huge amounts of time re-writing and re-shaping, or you’ll just land up with a disjointed, hard-to-digest mess . Instead, you need to read first and distil the information, then plan and execute the writing.

Step 1: Find the relevant literature

Naturally, the first step in the literature review journey is to hunt down the existing research that’s relevant to your topic. While you probably already have a decent base of this from your research proposal , you need to expand on this substantially in the dissertation or thesis itself.

Essentially, you need to be looking for any existing literature that potentially helps you answer your research question (or develop it, if that’s not yet pinned down). There are numerous ways to find relevant literature, but I’ll cover my top four tactics here. I’d suggest combining all four methods to ensure that nothing slips past you:

Method 1 – Google Scholar Scrubbing

Google’s academic search engine, Google Scholar , is a great starting point as it provides a good high-level view of the relevant journal articles for whatever keyword you throw at it. Most valuably, it tells you how many times each article has been cited, which gives you an idea of how credible (or at least, popular) it is. Some articles will be free to access, while others will require an account, which brings us to the next method.

Method 2 – University Database Scrounging

Generally, universities provide students with access to an online library, which provides access to many (but not all) of the major journals.

So, if you find an article using Google Scholar that requires paid access (which is quite likely), search for that article in your university’s database – if it’s listed there, you’ll have access. Note that, generally, the search engine capabilities of these databases are poor, so make sure you search for the exact article name, or you might not find it.

Method 3 – Journal Article Snowballing

At the end of every academic journal article, you’ll find a list of references. As with any academic writing, these references are the building blocks of the article, so if the article is relevant to your topic, there’s a good chance a portion of the referenced works will be too. Do a quick scan of the titles and see what seems relevant, then search for the relevant ones in your university’s database.

Method 4 – Dissertation Scavenging

Similar to Method 3 above, you can leverage other students’ dissertations. All you have to do is skim through literature review chapters of existing dissertations related to your topic and you’ll find a gold mine of potential literature. Usually, your university will provide you with access to previous students’ dissertations, but you can also find a much larger selection in the following databases:

• Open Access Theses & Dissertations
• Stanford SearchWorks

Keep in mind that dissertations and theses are not as academically sound as published, peer-reviewed journal articles (because they’re written by students, not professionals), so be sure to check the credibility of any sources you find using this method. You can do this by assessing the citation count of any given article in Google Scholar. If you need help with assessing the credibility of any article, or with finding relevant research in general, you can chat with one of our Research Specialists .

Alright – with a good base of literature firmly under your belt, it’s time to move onto the next step.

Need a helping hand?

Step 2: Log, catalogue and synthesise

Once you’ve built a little treasure trove of articles, it’s time to get reading and start digesting the information – what does it all mean?

While I present steps one and two (hunting and digesting) as sequential, in reality, it’s more of a back-and-forth tango – you’ll read a little , then have an idea, spot a new citation, or a new potential variable, and then go back to searching for articles. This is perfectly natural – through the reading process, your thoughts will develop , new avenues might crop up, and directional adjustments might arise. This is, after all, one of the main purposes of the literature review process (i.e. to familiarise yourself with the current state of research in your field).

As you’re working through your treasure chest, it’s essential that you simultaneously start organising the information. There are three aspects to this:

• Logging reference information
• Building an organised catalogue
• Distilling and synthesising the information

I’ll discuss each of these below:

2.1 – Log the reference information

As you read each article, you should add it to your reference management software. I usually recommend Mendeley for this purpose (see the Mendeley 101 video below), but you can use whichever software you’re comfortable with. Most importantly, make sure you load EVERY article you read into your reference manager, even if it doesn’t seem very relevant at the time.

2.2 – Build an organised catalogue

In the beginning, you might feel confident that you can remember who said what, where, and what their main arguments were. Trust me, you won’t. If you do a thorough review of the relevant literature (as you must!), you’re going to read many, many articles, and it’s simply impossible to remember who said what, when, and in what context . Also, without the bird’s eye view that a catalogue provides, you’ll miss connections between various articles, and have no view of how the research developed over time. Simply put, it’s essential to build your own catalogue of the literature.

I would suggest using Excel to build your catalogue, as it allows you to run filters, colour code and sort – all very useful when your list grows large (which it will). How you lay your spreadsheet out is up to you, but I’d suggest you have the following columns (at minimum):

• Author, date, title – Start with three columns containing this core information. This will make it easy for you to search for titles with certain words, order research by date, or group by author.
• Categories or keywords – You can either create multiple columns, one for each category/theme and then tick the relevant categories, or you can have one column with keywords.
• Key arguments/points – Use this column to succinctly convey the essence of the article, the key arguments and implications thereof for your research.
• Context – Note the socioeconomic context in which the research was undertaken. For example, US-based, respondents aged 25-35, lower- income, etc. This will be useful for making an argument about gaps in the research.
• Methodology – Note which methodology was used and why. Also, note any issues you feel arise due to the methodology. Again, you can use this to make an argument about gaps in the research.
• Quotations – Note down any quoteworthy lines you feel might be useful later.
• Notes – Make notes about anything not already covered. For example, linkages to or disagreements with other theories, questions raised but unanswered, shortcomings or limitations, and so forth.

If you’d like, you can try out our free catalog template here (see screenshot below).

2.3 – Digest and synthesise

Most importantly, as you work through the literature and build your catalogue, you need to synthesise all the information in your own mind – how does it all fit together? Look for links between the various articles and try to develop a bigger picture view of the state of the research. Some important questions to ask yourself are:

• What answers does the existing research provide to my own research questions ?
• Which points do the researchers agree (and disagree) on?
• How has the research developed over time?
• Where do the gaps in the current research lie?

To help you develop a big-picture view and synthesise all the information, you might find mind mapping software such as Freemind useful. Alternatively, if you’re a fan of physical note-taking, investing in a large whiteboard might work for you.

Step 3: Outline and write it up!

Once you’re satisfied that you have digested and distilled all the relevant literature in your mind, it’s time to put pen to paper (or rather, fingers to keyboard). There are two steps here – outlining and writing:

3.1 – Draw up your outline

Having spent so much time reading, it might be tempting to just start writing up without a clear structure in mind. However, it’s critically important to decide on your structure and develop a detailed outline before you write anything. Your literature review chapter needs to present a clear, logical and an easy to follow narrative – and that requires some planning. Don’t try to wing it!

Naturally, you won’t always follow the plan to the letter, but without a detailed outline, you’re more than likely going to end up with a disjointed pile of waffle , and then you’re going to spend a far greater amount of time re-writing, hacking and patching. The adage, “measure twice, cut once” is very suitable here.

In terms of structure, the first decision you’ll have to make is whether you’ll lay out your review thematically (into themes) or chronologically (by date/period). The right choice depends on your topic, research objectives and research questions, which we discuss in this article .

Once that’s decided, you need to draw up an outline of your entire chapter in bullet point format. Try to get as detailed as possible, so that you know exactly what you’ll cover where, how each section will connect to the next, and how your entire argument will develop throughout the chapter. Also, at this stage, it’s a good idea to allocate rough word count limits for each section, so that you can identify word count problems before you’ve spent weeks or months writing!

PS – check out our free literature review chapter template…

3.2 – Get writing

With a detailed outline at your side, it’s time to start writing up (finally!). At this stage, it’s common to feel a bit of writer’s block and find yourself procrastinating under the pressure of finally having to put something on paper. To help with this, remember that the objective of the first draft is not perfection – it’s simply to get your thoughts out of your head and onto paper, after which you can refine them. The structure might change a little, the word count allocations might shift and shuffle, and you might add or remove a section – that’s all okay. Don’t worry about all this on your first draft – just get your thoughts down on paper.

Once you’ve got a full first draft (however rough it may be), step away from it for a day or two (longer if you can) and then come back at it with fresh eyes. Pay particular attention to the flow and narrative – does it fall fit together and flow from one section to another smoothly? Now’s the time to try to improve the linkage from each section to the next, tighten up the writing to be more concise, trim down word count and sand it down into a more digestible read.

Once you’ve done that, give your writing to a friend or colleague who is not a subject matter expert and ask them if they understand the overall discussion. The best way to assess this is to ask them to explain the chapter back to you. This technique will give you a strong indication of which points were clearly communicated and which weren’t. If you’re working with Grad Coach, this is a good time to have your Research Specialist review your chapter.

Finally, tighten it up and send it off to your supervisor for comment. Some might argue that you should be sending your work to your supervisor sooner than this (indeed your university might formally require this), but in my experience, supervisors are extremely short on time (and often patience), so, the more refined your chapter is, the less time they’ll waste on addressing basic issues (which you know about already) and the more time they’ll spend on valuable feedback that will increase your mark-earning potential.

Literature Review Example

In the video below, we unpack an actual literature review so that you can see how all the core components come together in reality.

Let’s Recap

In this post, we’ve covered how to research and write up a high-quality literature review chapter. Let’s do a quick recap of the key takeaways:

• It is essential to understand the WHY of the literature review before you read or write anything. Make sure you understand the 4 core functions of the process.
• The first step is to hunt down the relevant literature . You can do this using Google Scholar, your university database, the snowballing technique and by reviewing other dissertations and theses.
• Next, you need to log all the articles in your reference manager , build your own catalogue of literature and synthesise all the research.
• Following that, you need to develop a detailed outline of your entire chapter – the more detail the better. Don’t start writing without a clear outline (on paper, not in your head!)
• Write up your first draft in rough form – don’t aim for perfection. Remember, done beats perfect.
• Refine your second draft and get a layman’s perspective on it . Then tighten it up and submit it to your supervisor.

Psst… there’s more!

This post is an extract from our bestselling short course, Literature Review Bootcamp . If you want to work smart, you don't want to miss this .

You Might Also Like:

38 Comments

Thank you very much. This page is an eye opener and easy to comprehend.

This is awesome!

I wish I come across GradCoach earlier enough.

But all the same I’ll make use of this opportunity to the fullest.

Thank you for this good job.

Keep it up!

You’re welcome, Yinka. Thank you for the kind words. All the best writing your literature review.

Thank you for a very useful literature review session. Although I am doing most of the steps…it being my first masters an Mphil is a self study and one not sure you are on the right track. I have an amazing supervisor but one also knows they are super busy. So not wanting to bother on the minutae. Thank you.

You’re most welcome, Renee. Good luck with your literature review 🙂

This has been really helpful. Will make full use of it. 🙂

Thank you Gradcoach.

Really agreed. Admirable effort

thank you for this beautiful well explained recap.

Thank you so much for your guide of video and other instructions for the dissertation writing.

It is instrumental. It encouraged me to write a dissertation now.

Thank you the video was great – from someone that knows nothing thankyou

an amazing and very constructive way of presetting a topic, very useful, thanks for the effort,

It is timely

It is very good video of guidance for writing a research proposal and a dissertation. Since I have been watching and reading instructions, I have started my research proposal to write. I appreciate to Mr Jansen hugely.

I learn a lot from your videos. Very comprehensive and detailed.

Thank you for sharing your knowledge. As a research student, you learn better with your learning tips in research

I was really stuck in reading and gathering information but after watching these things are cleared thanks, it is so helpful.

Really helpful, Thank you for the effort in showing such information

This is super helpful thank you very much.

Thank you for this whole literature writing review.You have simplified the process.

I’m so glad I found GradCoach. Excellent information, Clear explanation, and Easy to follow, Many thanks Derek!

You’re welcome, Maithe. Good luck writing your literature review 🙂

Thank you Coach, you have greatly enriched and improved my knowledge

Great piece, so enriching and it is going to help me a great lot in my project and thesis, thanks so much

This is THE BEST site for ANYONE doing a masters or doctorate! Thank you for the sound advice and templates. You rock!

Thanks, Stephanie 🙂

This is mind blowing, the detailed explanation and simplicity is perfect.

I am doing two papers on my final year thesis, and I must stay I feel very confident to face both headlong after reading this article.

thank you so much.

if anyone is to get a paper done on time and in the best way possible, GRADCOACH is certainly the go to area!

This is very good video which is well explained with detailed explanation

Thank you excellent piece of work and great mentoring

Thanks, it was useful

Thank you very much. the video and the information were very helpful.

Good morning scholar. I’m delighted coming to know you even before the commencement of my dissertation which hopefully is expected in not more than six months from now. I would love to engage my study under your guidance from the beginning to the end. I love to know how to do good job

Thank you so much Derek for such useful information on writing up a good literature review. I am at a stage where I need to start writing my one. My proposal was accepted late last year but I honestly did not know where to start

Like the name of your YouTube implies you are GRAD (great,resource person, about dissertation). In short you are smart enough in coaching research work.

This is a very well thought out webpage. Very informative and a great read.

Very timely.

I appreciate.

Very comprehensive and eye opener for me as beginner in postgraduate study. Well explained and easy to understand. Appreciate and good reference in guiding me in my research journey. Thank you

Thank you. I requested to download the free literature review template, however, your website wouldn’t allow me to complete the request or complete a download. May I request that you email me the free template? Thank you.

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• Print Friendly

The Sheridan Libraries

• Write a Literature Review
• Sheridan Libraries
• Find This link opens in a new window
• Evaluate This link opens in a new window

What Will You Do Differently?

Please help your librarians by filling out this two-minute survey of today's class session..

Professor, this one's for you .

Introduction

Literature reviews take time. here is some general information to know before you start.  .

•  VIDEO -- This video is a great overview of the entire process.  (2020; North Carolina State University Libraries) --The transcript is included --This is for everyone; ignore the mention of "graduate students" --9.5 minutes, and every second is important  
• OVERVIEW -- Read this page from Purdue's OWL. It's not long, and gives some tips to fill in what you just learned from the video.  
• NOT A RESEARCH ARTICLE -- A literature review follows a different style, format, and structure from a research article.  

Steps to Completing a Literature Review

• Next: Find >>
• Last Updated: Sep 26, 2023 10:25 AM
• URL: https://guides.library.jhu.edu/lit-review

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• CAREER FEATURE
• 04 December 2020
• Correction 09 December 2020

How to write a superb literature review

Andy Tay is a freelance writer based in Singapore.

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Literature reviews are important resources for scientists. They provide historical context for a field while offering opinions on its future trajectory. Creating them can provide inspiration for one’s own research, as well as some practice in writing. But few scientists are trained in how to write a review — or in what constitutes an excellent one. Even picking the appropriate software to use can be an involved decision (see ‘Tools and techniques’). So Nature asked editors and working scientists with well-cited reviews for their tips.

Access options

Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals

Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription

24,99 € / 30 days

cancel any time

Subscribe to this journal

Receive 51 print issues and online access

185,98 € per year

only 3,65 € per issue

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-03422-x

Interviews have been edited for length and clarity.

Updates & Corrections

Correction 09 December 2020 : An earlier version of the tables in this article included some incorrect details about the programs Zotero, Endnote and Manubot. These have now been corrected.

Hsing, I.-M., Xu, Y. & Zhao, W. Electroanalysis 19 , 755–768 (2007).

Article   Google Scholar  

Ledesma, H. A. et al. Nature Nanotechnol. 14 , 645–657 (2019).

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Brahlek, M., Koirala, N., Bansal, N. & Oh, S. Solid State Commun. 215–216 , 54–62 (2015).

Choi, Y. & Lee, S. Y. Nature Rev. Chem . https://doi.org/10.1038/s41570-020-00221-w (2020).

Download references

Related Articles

• Research management

How I fled bombed Aleppo to continue my career in science

Career Feature 08 MAY 24

Illuminating ‘the ugly side of science’: fresh incentives for reporting negative results

Hunger on campus: why US PhD students are fighting over food

Career Feature 03 MAY 24

Japan can embrace open science — but flexible approaches are key

Correspondence 07 MAY 24

US funders to tighten oversight of controversial ‘gain of function’ research

News 07 MAY 24

France’s research mega-campus faces leadership crisis

News 03 MAY 24

Mount Etna’s spectacular smoke rings and more — April’s best science images

Plagiarism in peer-review reports could be the ‘tip of the iceberg’

Nature Index 01 MAY 24

Southeast University Future Technology Institute Recruitment Notice

Professor openings in mechanical engineering, control science and engineering, and integrating emerging interdisciplinary majors

Nanjing, Jiangsu (CN)

Southeast University

Staff Scientist

A Staff Scientist position is available in the laboratory of Drs. Elliot and Glassberg to study translational aspects of lung injury, repair and fibro

Maywood, Illinois

Loyola University Chicago - Department of Medicine

W3-Professorship (with tenure) in Inorganic Chemistry

The Institute of Inorganic Chemistry in the Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences at the University of Bonn invites applications for a W3-Pro...

53113, Zentrum (DE)

Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität

Principal Investigator Positions at the Chinese Institutes for Medical Research, Beijing

Studies of mechanisms of human diseases, drug discovery, biomedical engineering, public health and relevant interdisciplinary fields.

Beijing, China

The Chinese Institutes for Medical Research (CIMR), Beijing

Research Associate - Neural Development Disorders

Houston, Texas (US)

Baylor College of Medicine (BCM)

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

15 Literature Review Examples

Literature reviews are a necessary step in a research process and often required when writing your research proposal . They involve gathering, analyzing, and evaluating existing knowledge about a topic in order to find gaps in the literature where future studies will be needed.

Ideally, once you have completed your literature review, you will be able to identify how your research project can build upon and extend existing knowledge in your area of study.

Generally, for my undergraduate research students, I recommend a narrative review, where themes can be generated in order for the students to develop sufficient understanding of the topic so they can build upon the themes using unique methods or novel research questions.

If you’re in the process of writing a literature review, I have developed a literature review template for you to use – it’s a huge time-saver and walks you through how to write a literature review step-by-step:

Get your time-saving templates here to write your own literature review.

Literature Review Examples

For the following types of literature review, I present an explanation and overview of the type, followed by links to some real-life literature reviews on the topics.

1. Narrative Review Examples

Also known as a traditional literature review, the narrative review provides a broad overview of the studies done on a particular topic.

It often includes both qualitative and quantitative studies and may cover a wide range of years.

The narrative review’s purpose is to identify commonalities, gaps, and contradictions in the literature .

I recommend to my students that they should gather their studies together, take notes on each study, then try to group them by themes that form the basis for the review (see my step-by-step instructions at the end of the article).

Example Study

Title: Communication in healthcare: a narrative review of the literature and practical recommendations

Citation: Vermeir, P., Vandijck, D., Degroote, S., Peleman, R., Verhaeghe, R., Mortier, E., … & Vogelaers, D. (2015). Communication in healthcare: a narrative review of the literature and practical recommendations. International journal of clinical practice , 69 (11), 1257-1267.

Source: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/ijcp.12686  

Overview: This narrative review analyzed themes emerging from 69 articles about communication in healthcare contexts. Five key themes were found in the literature: poor communication can lead to various negative outcomes, discontinuity of care, compromise of patient safety, patient dissatisfaction, and inefficient use of resources. After presenting the key themes, the authors recommend that practitioners need to approach healthcare communication in a more structured way, such as by ensuring there is a clear understanding of who is in charge of ensuring effective communication in clinical settings.

Other Examples

• Burnout in United States Healthcare Professionals: A Narrative Review (Reith, 2018) – read here
• Examining the Presence, Consequences, and Reduction of Implicit Bias in Health Care: A Narrative Review (Zestcott, Blair & Stone, 2016) – read here
• A Narrative Review of School-Based Physical Activity for Enhancing Cognition and Learning (Mavilidi et al., 2018) – read here
• A narrative review on burnout experienced by medical students and residents (Dyrbye & Shanafelt, 2015) – read here

2. Systematic Review Examples

This type of literature review is more structured and rigorous than a narrative review. It involves a detailed and comprehensive plan and search strategy derived from a set of specified research questions.

The key way you’d know a systematic review compared to a narrative review is in the methodology: the systematic review will likely have a very clear criteria for how the studies were collected, and clear explanations of exclusion/inclusion criteria. 

The goal is to gather the maximum amount of valid literature on the topic, filter out invalid or low-quality reviews, and minimize bias. Ideally, this will provide more reliable findings, leading to higher-quality conclusions and recommendations for further research.

You may note from the examples below that the ‘method’ sections in systematic reviews tend to be much more explicit, often noting rigid inclusion/exclusion criteria and exact keywords used in searches.

Title: The importance of food naturalness for consumers: Results of a systematic review  

Citation: Roman, S., Sánchez-Siles, L. M., & Siegrist, M. (2017). The importance of food naturalness for consumers: Results of a systematic review. Trends in food science & technology , 67 , 44-57.

Source: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S092422441730122X  

Overview: This systematic review included 72 studies of food naturalness to explore trends in the literature about its importance for consumers. Keywords used in the data search included: food, naturalness, natural content, and natural ingredients. Studies were included if they examined consumers’ preference for food naturalness and contained empirical data. The authors found that the literature lacks clarity about how naturalness is defined and measured, but also found that food consumption is significantly influenced by perceived naturalness of goods.

• A systematic review of research on online teaching and learning from 2009 to 2018 (Martin, Sun & Westine, 2020) – read here
• Where Is Current Research on Blockchain Technology? (Yli-Huumo et al., 2016) – read here
• Universities—industry collaboration: A systematic review (Ankrah & Al-Tabbaa, 2015) – read here
• Internet of Things Applications: A Systematic Review (Asghari, Rahmani & Javadi, 2019) – read here

3. Meta-analysis

This is a type of systematic review that uses statistical methods to combine and summarize the results of several studies.

Due to its robust methodology, a meta-analysis is often considered the ‘gold standard’ of secondary research , as it provides a more precise estimate of a treatment effect than any individual study contributing to the pooled analysis.

Furthermore, by aggregating data from a range of studies, a meta-analysis can identify patterns, disagreements, or other interesting relationships that may have been hidden in individual studies.

This helps to enhance the generalizability of findings, making the conclusions drawn from a meta-analysis particularly powerful and informative for policy and practice.

Title: Cholesterol and Alzheimer’s Disease Risk: A Meta-Meta-Analysis

Citation: Sáiz-Vazquez, O., Puente-Martínez, A., Ubillos-Landa, S., Pacheco-Bonrostro, J., & Santabárbara, J. (2020). Cholesterol and Alzheimer’s disease risk: a meta-meta-analysis. Brain sciences, 10(6), 386.

Source: https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci10060386  

O verview: This study examines the relationship between cholesterol and Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Researchers conducted a systematic search of meta-analyses and reviewed several databases, collecting 100 primary studies and five meta-analyses to analyze the connection between cholesterol and Alzheimer’s disease. They find that the literature compellingly demonstrates that low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels significantly influence the development of Alzheimer’s disease.

• The power of feedback revisited: A meta-analysis of educational feedback research (Wisniewski, Zierer & Hattie, 2020) – read here
• How Much Does Education Improve Intelligence? A Meta-Analysis (Ritchie & Tucker-Drob, 2018) – read here
• A meta-analysis of factors related to recycling (Geiger et al., 2019) – read here
• Stress management interventions for police officers and recruits (Patterson, Chung & Swan, 2014) – read here

Other Types of Reviews

• Scoping Review: This type of review is used to map the key concepts underpinning a research area and the main sources and types of evidence available. It can be undertaken as stand-alone projects in their own right, or as a precursor to a systematic review.
• Rapid Review: This type of review accelerates the systematic review process in order to produce information in a timely manner. This is achieved by simplifying or omitting stages of the systematic review process.
• Integrative Review: This review method is more inclusive than others, allowing for the simultaneous inclusion of experimental and non-experimental research. The goal is to more comprehensively understand a particular phenomenon.
• Critical Review: This is similar to a narrative review but requires a robust understanding of both the subject and the existing literature. In a critical review, the reviewer not only summarizes the existing literature, but also evaluates its strengths and weaknesses. This is common in the social sciences and humanities .
• State-of-the-Art Review: This considers the current level of advancement in a field or topic and makes recommendations for future research directions. This type of review is common in technological and scientific fields but can be applied to any discipline.

How to Write a Narrative Review (Tips for Undergrad Students)

Most undergraduate students conducting a capstone research project will be writing narrative reviews. Below is a five-step process for conducting a simple review of the literature for your project.

• Search for Relevant Literature: Use scholarly databases related to your field of study, provided by your university library, along with appropriate search terms to identify key scholarly articles that have been published on your topic.
• Evaluate and Select Sources: Filter the source list by selecting studies that are directly relevant and of sufficient quality, considering factors like credibility , objectivity, accuracy, and validity.
• Analyze and Synthesize: Review each source and summarize the main arguments  in one paragraph (or more, for postgrad). Keep these summaries in a table.
• Identify Themes: With all studies summarized, group studies that share common themes, such as studies that have similar findings or methodologies.
• Write the Review: Write your review based upon the themes or subtopics you have identified. Give a thorough overview of each theme, integrating source data, and conclude with a summary of the current state of knowledge then suggestions for future research based upon your evaluation of what is lacking in the literature.

Literature reviews don’t have to be as scary as they seem. Yes, they are difficult and require a strong degree of comprehension of academic studies. But it can be feasibly done through following a structured approach to data collection and analysis. With my undergraduate research students (who tend to conduct small-scale qualitative studies ), I encourage them to conduct a narrative literature review whereby they can identify key themes in the literature. Within each theme, students can critique key studies and their strengths and limitations , in order to get a lay of the land and come to a point where they can identify ways to contribute new insights to the existing academic conversation on their topic.

Ankrah, S., & Omar, A. T. (2015). Universities–industry collaboration: A systematic review. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 31(3), 387-408.

Asghari, P., Rahmani, A. M., & Javadi, H. H. S. (2019). Internet of Things applications: A systematic review. Computer Networks , 148 , 241-261.

Dyrbye, L., & Shanafelt, T. (2016). A narrative review on burnout experienced by medical students and residents. Medical education , 50 (1), 132-149.

Geiger, J. L., Steg, L., Van Der Werff, E., & Ünal, A. B. (2019). A meta-analysis of factors related to recycling. Journal of environmental psychology , 64 , 78-97.

Martin, F., Sun, T., & Westine, C. D. (2020). A systematic review of research on online teaching and learning from 2009 to 2018. Computers & education , 159 , 104009.

Mavilidi, M. F., Ruiter, M., Schmidt, M., Okely, A. D., Loyens, S., Chandler, P., & Paas, F. (2018). A narrative review of school-based physical activity for enhancing cognition and learning: The importance of relevancy and integration. Frontiers in psychology , 2079.

Patterson, G. T., Chung, I. W., & Swan, P. W. (2014). Stress management interventions for police officers and recruits: A meta-analysis. Journal of experimental criminology , 10 , 487-513.

Reith, T. P. (2018). Burnout in United States healthcare professionals: a narrative review. Cureus , 10 (12).

Ritchie, S. J., & Tucker-Drob, E. M. (2018). How much does education improve intelligence? A meta-analysis. Psychological science , 29 (8), 1358-1369.

Roman, S., Sánchez-Siles, L. M., & Siegrist, M. (2017). The importance of food naturalness for consumers: Results of a systematic review. Trends in food science & technology , 67 , 44-57.

Sáiz-Vazquez, O., Puente-Martínez, A., Ubillos-Landa, S., Pacheco-Bonrostro, J., & Santabárbara, J. (2020). Cholesterol and Alzheimer’s disease risk: a meta-meta-analysis. Brain sciences, 10(6), 386.

Vermeir, P., Vandijck, D., Degroote, S., Peleman, R., Verhaeghe, R., Mortier, E., … & Vogelaers, D. (2015). Communication in healthcare: a narrative review of the literature and practical recommendations. International journal of clinical practice , 69 (11), 1257-1267.

Wisniewski, B., Zierer, K., & Hattie, J. (2020). The power of feedback revisited: A meta-analysis of educational feedback research. Frontiers in Psychology , 10 , 3087.

Yli-Huumo, J., Ko, D., Choi, S., Park, S., & Smolander, K. (2016). Where is current research on blockchain technology?—a systematic review. PloS one , 11 (10), e0163477.

Zestcott, C. A., Blair, I. V., & Stone, J. (2016). Examining the presence, consequences, and reduction of implicit bias in health care: a narrative review. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations , 19 (4), 528-542

Chris Drew (PhD)

Dr. Chris Drew is the founder of the Helpful Professor. He holds a PhD in education and has published over 20 articles in scholarly journals. He is the former editor of the Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education. [Image Descriptor: Photo of Chris]

• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ Social-Emotional Learning (Definition, Examples, Pros & Cons)
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ What is Educational Psychology?
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ What is IQ? (Intelligence Quotient)
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 5 Top Tips for Succeeding at University

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Harvey Cushing/John Hay Whitney Medical Library

• Collections
• Research Help

YSN Doctoral Programs: Steps in Conducting a Literature Review

• Biomedical Databases
• Global (Public Health) Databases
• Soc. Sci., History, and Law Databases
• Grey Literature
• Trials Registers
• Data and Statistics
• Public Policy
• Google Tips
• Recommended Books
• Steps in Conducting a Literature Review

What is a literature review?

A literature review is an integrated analysis -- not just a summary-- of scholarly writings and other relevant evidence related directly to your research question.  That is, it represents a synthesis of the evidence that provides background information on your topic and shows a association between the evidence and your research question.

A literature review may be a stand alone work or the introduction to a larger research paper, depending on the assignment.  Rely heavily on the guidelines your instructor has given you.

Why is it important?

A literature review is important because it:

• Explains the background of research on a topic.
• Demonstrates why a topic is significant to a subject area.
• Discovers relationships between research studies/ideas.
• Identifies major themes, concepts, and researchers on a topic.
• Identifies critical gaps and points of disagreement.
• Discusses further research questions that logically come out of the previous studies.

APA7 Style resources

APA Style Blog - for those harder to find answers

1. Choose a topic. Define your research question.

Your literature review should be guided by your central research question.  The literature represents background and research developments related to a specific research question, interpreted and analyzed by you in a synthesized way.

• Make sure your research question is not too broad or too narrow.  Is it manageable?
• Begin writing down terms that are related to your question. These will be useful for searches later.
• If you have the opportunity, discuss your topic with your professor and your class mates.

2. Decide on the scope of your review

How many studies do you need to look at? How comprehensive should it be? How many years should it cover? 

• This may depend on your assignment.  How many sources does the assignment require?

3. Select the databases you will use to conduct your searches.

Make a list of the databases you will search. 

Where to find databases:

• use the tabs on this guide
• Find other databases in the Nursing Information Resources web page
• More on the Medical Library web page
• ... and more on the Yale University Library web page

4. Conduct your searches to find the evidence. Keep track of your searches.

• Use the key words in your question, as well as synonyms for those words, as terms in your search. Use the database tutorials for help.
• Save the searches in the databases. This saves time when you want to redo, or modify, the searches. It is also helpful to use as a guide is the searches are not finding any useful results.
• Review the abstracts of research studies carefully. This will save you time.
• Use the bibliographies and references of research studies you find to locate others.
• Check with your professor, or a subject expert in the field, if you are missing any key works in the field.
• Ask your librarian for help at any time.
• Use a citation manager, such as EndNote as the repository for your citations. See the EndNote tutorials for help.

Review the literature

Some questions to help you analyze the research:

• What was the research question of the study you are reviewing? What were the authors trying to discover?
• Was the research funded by a source that could influence the findings?
• What were the research methodologies? Analyze its literature review, the samples and variables used, the results, and the conclusions.
• Does the research seem to be complete? Could it have been conducted more soundly? What further questions does it raise?
• If there are conflicting studies, why do you think that is?
• How are the authors viewed in the field? Has this study been cited? If so, how has it been analyzed?

Tips: 

• Review the abstracts carefully.  
• Keep careful notes so that you may track your thought processes during the research process.
• Create a matrix of the studies for easy analysis, and synthesis, across all of the studies.
• << Previous: Recommended Books
• Last Updated: Jan 4, 2024 10:52 AM
• URL: https://guides.library.yale.edu/YSNDoctoral

Reference management. Clean and simple.

What is a literature review? [with examples]

What is a literature review?

The purpose of a literature review, how to write a literature review, the format of a literature review, general formatting rules, the length of a literature review, literature review examples, frequently asked questions about literature reviews, related articles.

A literature review is an assessment of the sources in a chosen topic of research.

In a literature review, you’re expected to report on the existing scholarly conversation, without adding new contributions.

If you are currently writing one, you've come to the right place. In the following paragraphs, we will explain:

• the objective of a literature review
• how to write a literature review
• the basic format of a literature review

Tip: It’s not always mandatory to add a literature review in a paper. Theses and dissertations often include them, whereas research papers may not. Make sure to consult with your instructor for exact requirements.

The four main objectives of a literature review are:

• Studying the references of your research area
• Summarizing the main arguments
• Identifying current gaps, stances, and issues
• Presenting all of the above in a text

Ultimately, the main goal of a literature review is to provide the researcher with sufficient knowledge about the topic in question so that they can eventually make an intervention.

The format of a literature review is fairly standard. It includes an:

• introduction that briefly introduces the main topic
• body that includes the main discussion of the key arguments
• conclusion that highlights the gaps and issues of the literature

➡️ Take a look at our guide on how to write a literature review to learn more about how to structure a literature review.

First of all, a literature review should have its own labeled section. You should indicate clearly in the table of contents where the literature can be found, and you should label this section as “Literature Review.”

➡️ For more information on writing a thesis, visit our guide on how to structure a thesis .

There is no set amount of words for a literature review, so the length depends on the research. If you are working with a large amount of sources, it will be long. If your paper does not depend entirely on references, it will be short.

Take a look at these three theses featuring great literature reviews:

• School-Based Speech-Language Pathologist's Perceptions of Sensory Food Aversions in Children [ PDF , see page 20]
• Who's Writing What We Read: Authorship in Criminological Research [ PDF , see page 4]
• A Phenomenological Study of the Lived Experience of Online Instructors of Theological Reflection at Christian Institutions Accredited by the Association of Theological Schools [ PDF , see page 56]

Literature reviews are most commonly found in theses and dissertations. However, you find them in research papers as well.

There is no set amount of words for a literature review, so the length depends on the research. If you are working with a large amount of sources, then it will be long. If your paper does not depend entirely on references, then it will be short.

No. A literature review should have its own independent section. You should indicate clearly in the table of contents where the literature review can be found, and label this section as “Literature Review.”

The main goal of a literature review is to provide the researcher with sufficient knowledge about the topic in question so that they can eventually make an intervention.

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

• USC Libraries
• Research Guides

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper

• 5. The Literature Review
• Purpose of Guide
• Design Flaws to Avoid
• Independent and Dependent Variables
• Glossary of Research Terms
• Reading Research Effectively
• Narrowing a Topic Idea
• Broadening a Topic Idea
• Extending the Timeliness of a Topic Idea
• Academic Writing Style
• Applying Critical Thinking
• Choosing a Title
• Making an Outline
• Paragraph Development
• Research Process Video Series
• Executive Summary
• The C.A.R.S. Model
• Background Information
• The Research Problem/Question
• Theoretical Framework
• Citation Tracking
• Content Alert Services
• Evaluating Sources
• Primary Sources
• Secondary Sources
• Tiertiary Sources
• Scholarly vs. Popular Publications
• Qualitative Methods
• Quantitative Methods
• Insiderness
• Using Non-Textual Elements
• Limitations of the Study
• Common Grammar Mistakes
• Writing Concisely
• Avoiding Plagiarism
• Footnotes or Endnotes?
• Further Readings
• Generative AI and Writing
• USC Libraries Tutorials and Other Guides
• Bibliography

A literature review surveys prior research published in books, scholarly articles, and any other sources relevant to a particular issue, area of research, or theory, and by so doing, provides a description, summary, and critical evaluation of these works in relation to the research problem being investigated. Literature reviews are designed to provide an overview of sources you have used in researching a particular topic and to demonstrate to your readers how your research fits within existing scholarship about the topic.

Fink, Arlene. Conducting Research Literature Reviews: From the Internet to Paper . Fourth edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, 2014.

Importance of a Good Literature Review

A literature review may consist of simply a summary of key sources, but in the social sciences, a literature review usually has an organizational pattern and combines both summary and synthesis, often within specific conceptual categories . 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 in a way that informs how you are planning to investigate a research problem. The analytical features of a literature review might:

• Give a new interpretation of old material or combine new with old interpretations,
• Trace the intellectual progression of the field, including major debates,
• Depending on the situation, evaluate the sources and advise the reader on the most pertinent or relevant research, or
• Usually in the conclusion of a literature review, identify where gaps exist in how a problem has been researched to date.

Given this, the purpose of a literature review is to:

• Place each work in the context of its contribution to understanding the research problem being studied.
• Describe the relationship of each work to the others under consideration.
• Identify new ways to interpret prior research.
• Reveal any gaps that exist in the literature.
• Resolve conflicts amongst seemingly contradictory previous studies.
• Identify areas of prior scholarship to prevent duplication of effort.
• Point the way in fulfilling a need for additional research.
• Locate your own research within the context of existing literature [very important].

Fink, Arlene. Conducting Research Literature Reviews: From the Internet to Paper. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2005; Hart, Chris. Doing a Literature Review: Releasing the Social Science Research Imagination . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1998; Jesson, Jill. Doing Your Literature Review: Traditional and Systematic Techniques . Los Angeles, CA: SAGE, 2011; Knopf, Jeffrey W. "Doing a Literature Review." PS: Political Science and Politics 39 (January 2006): 127-132; Ridley, Diana. The Literature Review: A Step-by-Step Guide for Students . 2nd ed. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE, 2012.

Types of Literature Reviews

It is important to think of knowledge in a given field as consisting of three layers. First, there are the primary studies that researchers conduct and publish. Second are the reviews of those studies that summarize and offer new interpretations built from and often extending beyond the primary studies. Third, there are the perceptions, conclusions, opinion, and interpretations that are shared informally among scholars that become part of the body of epistemological traditions within the field.

In composing a literature review, it is important to note that it is often this third layer of knowledge that is cited as "true" even though it often has only a loose relationship to the primary studies and secondary literature reviews. Given this, while literature reviews are designed to provide an overview and synthesis of pertinent sources you have explored, there are a number of approaches you could adopt depending upon the type of analysis underpinning your study.

Argumentative Review This form examines literature selectively in order to support or refute an argument, deeply embedded assumption, or philosophical problem already established in the literature. The purpose is to develop a body of literature that establishes a contrarian viewpoint. Given the value-laden nature of some social science research [e.g., educational reform; immigration control], argumentative approaches to analyzing the literature can be a legitimate and important form of discourse. However, note that they can also introduce problems of bias when they are used to make summary claims of the sort found in systematic reviews [see below].

Integrative Review Considered a form of research that reviews, critiques, and synthesizes representative literature on a topic in an integrated way such that new frameworks and perspectives on the topic are generated. The body of literature includes all studies that address related or identical hypotheses or research problems. A well-done integrative review meets the same standards as primary research in regard to clarity, rigor, and replication. This is the most common form of review in the social sciences.

Historical Review Few things rest in isolation from historical precedent. Historical literature reviews focus on examining research throughout a period of time, often starting with the first time an issue, concept, theory, phenomena emerged in the literature, then tracing its evolution within the scholarship of a discipline. The purpose is to place research in a historical context to show familiarity with state-of-the-art developments and to identify the likely directions for future research.

Methodological Review A review does not always focus on what someone said [findings], but how they came about saying what they say [method of analysis]. Reviewing methods of analysis provides a framework of understanding at different levels [i.e. those of theory, substantive fields, research approaches, and data collection and analysis techniques], how researchers draw upon a wide variety of knowledge ranging from the conceptual level to practical documents for use in fieldwork in the areas of ontological and epistemological consideration, quantitative and qualitative integration, sampling, interviewing, data collection, and data analysis. This approach helps highlight ethical issues which you should be aware of and consider as you go through your own study.

Systematic Review This form consists of an overview of existing evidence pertinent to a clearly formulated research question, which uses pre-specified and standardized methods to identify and critically appraise relevant research, and to collect, report, and analyze data from the studies that are included in the review. The goal is to deliberately document, critically evaluate, and summarize scientifically all of the research about a clearly defined research problem . Typically it focuses on a very specific empirical question, often posed in a cause-and-effect form, such as "To what extent does A contribute to B?" This type of literature review is primarily applied to examining prior research studies in clinical medicine and allied health fields, but it is increasingly being used in the social sciences.

Theoretical Review The purpose of this form is to examine the corpus of theory that has accumulated in regard to an issue, concept, theory, phenomena. The theoretical literature review helps to establish what theories already exist, the relationships between them, to what degree the existing theories have been investigated, and to develop new hypotheses to be tested. Often this form is used to help establish a lack of appropriate theories or reveal that current theories are inadequate for explaining new or emerging research problems. The unit of analysis can focus on a theoretical concept or a whole theory or framework.

NOTE : Most often the literature review will incorporate some combination of types. For example, a review that examines literature supporting or refuting an argument, assumption, or philosophical problem related to the research problem will also need to include writing supported by sources that establish the history of these arguments in the literature.

Baumeister, Roy F. and Mark R. Leary. "Writing Narrative Literature Reviews."  Review of General Psychology 1 (September 1997): 311-320; Mark R. Fink, Arlene. Conducting Research Literature Reviews: From the Internet to Paper . 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2005; Hart, Chris. Doing a Literature Review: Releasing the Social Science Research Imagination . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1998; Kennedy, Mary M. "Defining a Literature." Educational Researcher 36 (April 2007): 139-147; Petticrew, Mark and Helen Roberts. Systematic Reviews in the Social Sciences: A Practical Guide . Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers, 2006; Torracro, Richard. "Writing Integrative Literature Reviews: Guidelines and Examples." Human Resource Development Review 4 (September 2005): 356-367; Rocco, Tonette S. and Maria S. Plakhotnik. "Literature Reviews, Conceptual Frameworks, and Theoretical Frameworks: Terms, Functions, and Distinctions." Human Ressource Development Review 8 (March 2008): 120-130; Sutton, Anthea. Systematic Approaches to a Successful Literature Review . Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications, 2016.

Structure and Writing Style

I.  Thinking About Your Literature Review

The structure of a literature review should include the following in support of understanding the research problem :

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

The critical evaluation of each work should consider :

• Provenance -- what are the author's credentials? Are the author's arguments supported by evidence [e.g. primary historical material, case studies, narratives, statistics, recent scientific findings]?
• Methodology -- were the techniques used to identify, gather, and analyze the data appropriate to addressing the research problem? Was the sample size appropriate? Were the results effectively interpreted and reported?
• Objectivity -- is the author's perspective even-handed or prejudicial? Is contrary data considered or is certain pertinent information ignored to prove the author's point?
• Persuasiveness -- which of the author's theses are most convincing or least convincing?
• Validity -- are the author's arguments and conclusions convincing? Does the work ultimately contribute in any significant way to an understanding of the subject?

II.  Development of the Literature Review

Four Basic Stages of Writing 1.  Problem formulation -- which topic or field is being examined and what are its component issues? 2.  Literature search -- finding materials relevant to the subject being explored. 3.  Data evaluation -- determining which literature makes a significant contribution to the understanding of the topic. 4.  Analysis and interpretation -- discussing the findings and conclusions of pertinent literature.

Consider the following issues before writing the literature review: Clarify If your assignment is not specific about what form your literature review should take, seek clarification from your professor by asking these questions: 1.  Roughly how many sources would be appropriate to include? 2.  What types of sources should I review (books, journal articles, websites; scholarly versus popular sources)? 3.  Should I summarize, synthesize, or critique sources by discussing a common theme or issue? 4.  Should I evaluate the sources in any way beyond evaluating how they relate to understanding the research problem? 5.  Should I provide subheadings and other background information, such as definitions and/or a history? Find Models Use the exercise of reviewing the literature to examine how authors in your discipline or area of interest have composed their literature review sections. Read them to get a sense of the types of themes you might want to look for in your own research or to identify ways to organize your final review. The bibliography or reference section of sources you've already read, such as required readings in the course syllabus, are also excellent entry points into your own research. Narrow the Topic The narrower your topic, the easier it will be to limit the number of sources you need to read in order to obtain a good survey of relevant resources. Your professor will probably not expect you to read everything that's available about the topic, but you'll make the act of reviewing easier if you first limit scope of the research problem. A good strategy is to begin by searching the USC Libraries Catalog for recent books about the topic and review the table of contents for chapters that focuses on specific issues. You can also review the indexes of books to find references to specific issues that can serve as the focus of your research. For example, a book surveying the history of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict may include a chapter on the role Egypt has played in mediating the conflict, or look in the index for the pages where Egypt is mentioned in the text. Consider Whether Your Sources are Current Some disciplines require that you use information that is as current as possible. This is particularly true in disciplines in medicine and the sciences where research conducted becomes obsolete very quickly as new discoveries are made. However, when writing a review in the social sciences, a survey of the history of the literature may be required. In other words, a complete understanding the research problem requires you to deliberately examine how knowledge and perspectives have changed over time. Sort through 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 explore what is considered by scholars to be a "hot topic" and what is not.

III.  Ways to Organize Your Literature Review

Chronology of Events If your review follows the chronological method, you could write about the materials according to when they were published. This approach should only be followed if a clear path of research building on previous research can be identified and that these trends follow a clear chronological order of development. For example, a literature review that focuses on continuing research about the emergence of German economic power after the fall of the Soviet Union. 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 environmental studies of brown fields if the progression revealed, for example, a change in the soil collection practices of the researchers who wrote and/or conducted the studies. Thematic [“conceptual categories”] A thematic literature review is the most common approach to summarizing prior research in the social and behavioral sciences. Thematic reviews are organized around a topic or issue, rather than the progression of time, although the progression of time may still be incorporated into a thematic review. For example, a review of the Internet’s impact on American presidential politics could focus on the development of online political satire. While the study focuses on one topic, the Internet’s impact on American presidential politics, it would still be organized chronologically reflecting technological developments in media. The difference in this example between a "chronological" and a "thematic" approach is what is emphasized the most: themes related to the role of the Internet in presidential politics. Note that more authentic thematic reviews tend to break away from chronological order. A review organized in this manner would shift between time periods within each section according to the point being made. Methodological A methodological approach focuses on the methods utilized by the researcher. For the Internet in American presidential politics project, one methodological approach would be to look at cultural differences between the portrayal of American presidents on American, British, and French websites. Or the review might focus on the fundraising impact of the Internet on a particular political party. A methodological scope will influence either the types of documents in the review or the way in which these documents are discussed.

Other Sections of Your Literature Review Once you've decided on the organizational method for your literature review, the sections you need to include in the paper should be easy to figure out because they arise from 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. However, sometimes you may 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. However, only include what is necessary for the reader to locate your study within the larger scholarship about the research problem.

Here are examples of other sections, usually in the form of a single paragraph, you may need to include depending on the type of review you write:

• Current Situation : Information necessary to understand the current topic or focus of the literature review.
• Sources Used : Describes the methods and resources [e.g., databases] you used to identify the literature you reviewed.
• History : The chronological progression of the field, the research literature, or an idea that is necessary to understand the literature review, if the body of the literature review is not already a chronology.
• Selection Methods : Criteria you used to select (and perhaps exclude) sources in your literature review. For instance, you might explain that your review includes only peer-reviewed [i.e., scholarly] sources.
• Standards : Description of the way in which you present your information.
• 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?

IV.  Writing Your Literature Review

Once you've settled on how to organize your literature review, you're ready to write each section. When writing your review, keep in mind these issues.

Use Evidence A literature review section is, in this sense, just like any other academic research paper. Your interpretation of the available sources must be backed up with evidence [citations] that demonstrates 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 research problem, whether it is thematic, methodological, or chronological. Related items that provide additional information, but that are not key to understanding the research problem, can be included in a list of further readings . Use Quotes Sparingly Some short quotes are appropriate if you want to emphasize a point, or if what an author stated cannot be easily paraphrased. Sometimes you may need to quote certain terminology that was coined by the author, is not common knowledge, or taken directly from the study. Do not use extensive quotes as a substitute for using your own words in reviewing the literature. Summarize and Synthesize Remember to summarize and synthesize your sources within each thematic paragraph as well as throughout the review. Recapitulate important features of a research study, but then synthesize it by rephrasing the study's significance and relating it to your own work and the work of others. Keep Your Own Voice While the literature review presents others' ideas, your voice [the writer's] should remain front and center. For example, weave references to other sources into what you are writing but maintain your own voice by starting and ending the paragraph with your own ideas and wording. 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. Even when paraphrasing an author’s work, you still must provide a citation to that work.

V.  Common Mistakes to Avoid

These are the most common mistakes made in reviewing social science research literature.

• Sources in your literature review do not clearly relate to the research problem;
• You do not take sufficient time to define and identify the most relevant sources to use in the literature review related to the research problem;
• Relies exclusively on secondary analytical sources rather than including relevant primary research studies or data;
• Uncritically accepts another researcher's findings and interpretations as valid, rather than examining critically all aspects of the research design and analysis;
• Does not describe the search procedures that were used in identifying the literature to review;
• Reports isolated statistical results rather than synthesizing them in chi-squared or meta-analytic methods; and,
• Only includes research that validates assumptions and does not consider contrary findings and alternative interpretations found in the literature.

Cook, Kathleen E. and Elise Murowchick. “Do Literature Review Skills Transfer from One Course to Another?” Psychology Learning and Teaching 13 (March 2014): 3-11; Fink, Arlene. Conducting Research Literature Reviews: From the Internet to Paper . 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2005; Hart, Chris. Doing a Literature Review: Releasing the Social Science Research Imagination . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1998; Jesson, Jill. Doing Your Literature Review: Traditional and Systematic Techniques . London: SAGE, 2011; Literature Review Handout. Online Writing Center. Liberty University; Literature Reviews. The Writing Center. University of North Carolina; Onwuegbuzie, Anthony J. and Rebecca Frels. Seven Steps to a Comprehensive Literature Review: A Multimodal and Cultural Approach . Los Angeles, CA: SAGE, 2016; Ridley, Diana. The Literature Review: A Step-by-Step Guide for Students . 2nd ed. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE, 2012; Randolph, Justus J. “A Guide to Writing the Dissertation Literature Review." Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation. vol. 14, June 2009; Sutton, Anthea. Systematic Approaches to a Successful Literature Review . Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications, 2016; Taylor, Dena. The Literature Review: A Few Tips On Conducting It. University College Writing Centre. University of Toronto; Writing a Literature Review. Academic Skills Centre. University of Canberra.

Writing Tip

Break Out of Your Disciplinary Box!

Thinking interdisciplinarily about a research problem can be a rewarding exercise in applying new ideas, theories, or concepts to an old problem. For example, what might cultural anthropologists say about the continuing conflict in the Middle East? In what ways might geographers view the need for better distribution of social service agencies in large cities than how social workers might study the issue? You don’t want to substitute a thorough review of core research literature in your discipline for studies conducted in other fields of study. However, particularly in the social sciences, thinking about research problems from multiple vectors is a key strategy for finding new solutions to a problem or gaining a new perspective. Consult with a librarian about identifying research databases in other disciplines; almost every field of study has at least one comprehensive database devoted to indexing its research literature.

Frodeman, Robert. The Oxford Handbook of Interdisciplinarity . New York: Oxford University Press, 2010.

Another Writing Tip

Don't Just Review for Content!

While conducting a review of the literature, maximize the time you devote to writing this part of your paper by thinking broadly about what you should be looking for and evaluating. Review not just what scholars are saying, but how are they saying it. Some questions to ask:

• How are they organizing their ideas?
• What methods have they used to study the problem?
• What theories have been used to explain, predict, or understand their research problem?
• What sources have they cited to support their conclusions?
• How have they used non-textual elements [e.g., charts, graphs, figures, etc.] to illustrate key points?

When you begin to write your literature review section, you'll be glad you dug deeper into how the research was designed and constructed because it establishes a means for developing more substantial analysis and interpretation of the research problem.

Hart, Chris. Doing a Literature Review: Releasing the Social Science Research Imagination . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1 998.

Yet Another Writing Tip

When Do I Know I Can Stop Looking and Move On?

Here are several strategies you can utilize to assess whether you've thoroughly reviewed the literature:

• Look for repeating patterns in the research findings . If the same thing is being said, just by different people, then this likely demonstrates that the research problem has hit a conceptual dead end. At this point consider: Does your study extend current research?  Does it forge a new path? Or, does is merely add more of the same thing being said?
• Look at sources the authors cite to in their work . If you begin to see the same researchers cited again and again, then this is often an indication that no new ideas have been generated to address the research problem.
• Search Google Scholar to identify who has subsequently cited leading scholars already identified in your literature review [see next sub-tab]. This is called citation tracking and there are a number of sources that can help you identify who has cited whom, particularly scholars from outside of your discipline. Here again, if the same authors are being cited again and again, this may indicate no new literature has been written on the topic.

Onwuegbuzie, Anthony J. and Rebecca Frels. Seven Steps to a Comprehensive Literature Review: A Multimodal and Cultural Approach . Los Angeles, CA: Sage, 2016; Sutton, Anthea. Systematic Approaches to a Successful Literature Review . Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications, 2016.

• << Previous: Theoretical Framework
• Next: Citation Tracking >>
• Last Updated: May 9, 2024 11:05 AM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide

Literature Review

• Steps for Conducting a Lit Review
• Finding "The Literature"
• Organizing/Writing
• Sample Literature Reviews
• FAMU Writing Center

Sample Lit Reviews from Communication Arts

• Literature Review Sample 1
• Literature Review Sample 2
• Literature Review Sample 3
• << Previous: MLA Style
• Next: FAMU Writing Center >>
• Last Updated: Oct 20, 2022 11:24 AM
• URL: https://library.famu.edu/literaturereview

• Open access
• Published: 11 May 2024

Effectiveness of simulation-based interventions on empathy enhancement among nursing students: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis

• Mi-Kyoung Cho 1 &
• Mi Young Kim 2  

BMC Nursing volume  23 , Article number:  319 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

Metrics details

This study aimed to secure and analyze evidence regarding the enhancement of nursing students’ empathy through simulation-based interventions. It comprehensively analyzed self-reported emotions and reactions as primary outcomes, along with the results reported by nursing students who experienced simulation-based interventions, including empathy.

This systematic literature review and meta-analysis investigated the effects of simulation-based interventions on enhancing empathy among nursing students. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were used for the systematic review and meta-analysis. The following details were considered: population, nursing students; intervention, simulation-based interventions targeting empathy enhancement; comparators, control groups without intervention or those undergoing general non-simulation-based classes; and outcomes, self-reported empathy.

In the systematic review of 28 studies, it was found that the use of simulation-based interventions among nursing students led to an increase in empathy, albeit with a small effect size. This was demonstrated through a pooled, random-effects meta-analysis, yielding an effect size (Hedge’s g) of 0.35 (95% CI: 0.14, 0.57, p  = 0.001). The results of meta-regression and subgroup analysis significantly increased in empathy for studies published after 2019 (Hedge’s g = 0.52, 95% CI: 0.31 to 0.73, p  < 0.001), quasi-experimental research design (Hedge’s g = 0.51, 95% CI: 0.27 to 0.74, p  < 0.001), more than 60 participants (Hedge’s g = 0.31, 95% CI: 0.02 to 0.59, p  = 0.034), and simulation-based interventions in nursing education (Hedge’s g = 0.43, 95% CI: 0.22 to 0.65, p  < 0.001).

Conclusions

Considering factors such as variations in sample size, research approaches, and the effects of independent studies on empathy, this systematic literature review and meta-analysis suggests that simulation-based education can significantly improve nursing students’ overall empathy skills.

Peer Review reports

In modern society, concerns are growing regarding empathy deficits, which lead to issues such as indifference and apathy in workplace relationships—aggravating even in common social situations [ 1 ]. Empathy is a complex concept comprising an affective component of feeling and recognizing emotions from others’ perspectives and a cognitive component of understanding others’ emotions [ 2 ]. Highly empathetic professionals in health-related fields foster a high level of communication with patients, leading to positive outcomes in patient care, such as better self-care, higher patient satisfaction, and faster recovery times [ 3 , 4 ]. Although empathy is essential for healthcare workers, studies have demonstrated that it is not taught sufficiently during training in numerous fields, including medicine, nursing, dentistry, and pharmacy [ 5 , 6 ].

Empathy plays a crucial role in healthcare, as evidenced by its strong correlation with the quality of care provided to patients. When patients perceive that nurses empathize with them, they tend to feel they are receiving care tailored to their needs [ 7 ]. Therefore, improving empathy is necessary for enhancing the quality of nursing care. Efforts have been made to develop programs that foster empathy through education and training [ 8 ]. Adequate levels of empathy are essential for nursing students as they are future nurses. However, research has indicated that nursing students have lower levels of empathy than other healthcare workers do [ 9 , 10 ].

Empathy is defined as the ability to place oneself in the same position as another person and to understand and accept their position and perspective [ 11 ]. Training that enhances empathy includes simulation-based learning that recreates realistic clinical situations [ 12 ]. Additionally, healthcare can be simulated in various ways, including virtual patients, manikins, role-playing, gaming, and simulating hypothetical or disease situations [ 13 ]. Simulations in healthcare most often allow students to function in the role for which they are training, though there is evidence students’ empathy increases when they function in the role of patients because they are encouraged to understand patients’ perspectives, emotions, and experiences [ 14 ]. Whether students function in professional or patient roles during simulation, post-simulation debriefing helps students translate their simulation experiences. Post-simulation debriefing sessions have been shown to help students learn how to translate their simulation experiences into appropriate empathetic behaviors and attitudes toward patients in the real world [ 14 ]. Previous systematic reviews have included studies focusing on specific simulation methods, such as role-play or virtually simulated patients, dementia-specific virtual reality scenarios, clinical simulations with dramatization, and simulation equipment for older-adult-specific scenarios [ 15 ]. Since its emergence, improving empathy in healthcare has been the subject of several studies and meta-analyses [ 16 ]. Through a meta-analysis and effectiveness evaluation study on various simulation-based programs aimed at nursing students, both future and current medical professionals, we investigated the elements of simulation that contribute to empathy enhancement. Our study identified key elements crucial for designing effective simulation education programs, which can be reflected upon in practice. By analyzing the components of simulation-based education that impact empathy enhancement, we can identify crucial elements to enhance empathy when implementing this approach.

Simulation is becoming more prevalent as an educational approach for instilling empathy in pre-service health professional students [ 17 ]. As these various forms of simulation are applied to improve empathy, a systematic review and analysis of nursing students are needed to determine their effectiveness and the factors that should be considered. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses can consider differences in sample sizes, variations in research approaches, and the effects of interventions in independent studies while integrating the results of the included studies. Therefore, a systematic review and meta-analysis will enable an assessment of the overall effectiveness of simulation-based education in improving empathy among nursing students. This study aims to provide a foundation for simulation-based interventions by conducting a systematic literature review and meta-analysis to examine their effectiveness in improving empathy among nursing students.

Study design

This systematic literature review and meta-analysis followed the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, and Study Design (PICO-SD) framework to determine the effectiveness of simulation-based interventions in improving empathy among nursing students.

Eligibility criteria and outcome variables

This study was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines [ 18 ]. This was prepared by referring to the PRISMA 2020 checklist ( https://prisma-statement.org/PRISMAStatement/Checklist.aspx , accessed May 16, 2023). In line with this study’s purpose, a systematic literature search was conducted. The inclusion criteria were as follows: the study population (P) included nursing students who received simulation training; the intervention (I) included nursing education using simulation to promote empathy; the control I group comprised those who did not receive the simulation intervention as a comparison group; and for outcomes (O), the primary outcome was empathy, while the secondary outcomes wereempathic communication, interpersonal relationships, and competency. The first post-intervention value was used to calculate the effect size. The study design (SD) involved randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-experimental studies that included manuscripts published in English or Korean from May 1971 to April 2023. Only studies that reported means, standard deviations, and concrete sample sizes were included to merge the effect sizes for the primary and secondary outcomes. The exclusion criteria were as follows: studies that included students other than nursing students, interventions that were not simulations, measured variables that were not graphically represented such that effect sizes could not be merged, studies that only presented p-values or the number of participants in each group, studies with mean and standard deviation not available, and duplicate studies. Quasi-experimental studies with a single-group pretest-posttest design were excluded.

Search strategies

Data were retrieved from eight electronic databases or e-journals, specifically PubMed, Cochrane, EMBASE, CINAHL, World of Science, SCOPUS, PQDT, and Research Information Sharing Service (RISS), for articles published in English and Korean from May 1971 to April 2023. The search protocol was registered in the PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (registration no. CRD42023423747, available at https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero ) on May 16, 2023. The search formula used was Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) and text words from titles and abstracts, and the search was conducted from April 24, 2023, to June 3, 2023. The terms used in the search were (“Simulation Training”[MeSH Terms] OR “simulate*”[All Fields]) OR (“psychodrama”[MeSH Terms] OR “psychodrama*”[All Fields] OR “role-play*”[All Fields]) for interventions, and (“Empathy”[MeSH Terms] OR “empath*”[All Fields] OR “Emotional Intelligence”[MeSH Terms] OR “Emotional Intelligence”[All Fields]) for results. The data collection process for the articles included in the analysis was based on a systematic review. A literature search was conducted by two authors (MYK and MKC) with the guidance of a meta-analysis expert.

Quality assessment

The quality of the selected articles was independently assessed by two authors (MYK and MKC) using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) checklist (Checklist for Randomized Controlled Trials, Checklist for Quasi-Experimental Studies [ 19 , 20 , 21 ]. In the initial quality assessment, no discrepancies were observed across most items. However, divergence arose regarding the clarity of blinding of outcome assessors to study participants. Upon thorough discussion, we agreed that a score would be assigned only if the methodology section of a study explicitly stated that outcome assessors were blinded to treatment assignment. The JBI RCT Checklist comprises the following 13 items: randomization, allocation concealment, pre-homogeneity verification, blinding (participants, interventors, and assessors), identical conditions other than experimental treatment, description of dropouts, analysis based on randomization, equivalence of outcome measures, appropriateness of outcome variable measures and statistical analysis methods, and appropriateness of the study design [ 19 ]. The JBI Quasi-Experimental Studies Checklist comprises the following nine items: certainty of cause and effect, pre-homogeneity verification, exposure to the same environment outside of the intervention, presence or absence of a control group, pre- and post-intervention effect measures, description of dropouts, equivalence of outcome measures, appropriateness of outcome variable measures, and statistical analysis methods [ 20 ]. The checklist scored “yes” as 1 and “unclear,” “no,” and “not applicable” as 0 for each item. Discrepancies in the quality assessment of the studies were resolved through consultation with a meta-analysis expert and discussions between the two authors (MYK and MKC) (Table  1 ).

Selection process

The two authors (MYK and MKC) shared the search formula, searched for data independently, and shared the bibliographic information of the articles retrieved from domestic and foreign core electronic databases and journals in an Excel file. Duplicate articles were removed by sorting by title and author using the Microsoft Excel filtering function. Based on this search strategy, relevant articles were identified through titles and abstracts, after which the full texts of the selected articles were reviewed.

Data analysis and statistical methods

The article characteristics were presented as frequencies, means, and standard deviations, and statistical analyses of effect size pooling methods were performed Z-test and p-value using MIX 2.0 Pro Ver. 2.0.1.6 (BiostatXL, Mountain View, CA, USA). As the effect sizes were continuous variables, and the number of participants in each study was small, Hedge’s g, 95% confidence intervals (CI), and the weight of each effect size were obtained using the inverse of variance [ 22 ]. The overall effect (Hedges’ g) was calculated using a pooled, random-effects model to account for between-participant variations in individual studies and heterogeneity among studies. The effect sizes indicated by Hedge’s g values of 0.15, 0.40, and 0.75 were classified as small, medium, and large effects, respectively [ 23 ]. The studies’ heterogeneity was assessed by calculating Higgin’s I 2 value, which represented the true variance or variance ratio across studies to the total observed variance. It was interpreted as heterogeneous if I 2 was greater than 50%. Subgroup and meta-regression analyses were performed to identify the sources of heterogeneity. Publication bias in the selected studies was tested using funnel plots, Begg’s test, Egger’s regression test, and the trim-and-fill method with a correction for Hedge’s g [ 24 ].

Study selection

This study followed the PRISMA guidelines during the study selection process, as illustrated in Fig.  1 . A total of 1,265 articles were retrieved from each database in Step 1. Furthermore, 578 articles were extracted by excluding duplicate studies (686) and one retracted article in Step 2, and 81 articles were extracted by excluding studies that did not fulfill the inclusion and exclusion criteria in Step 3. Finally, after a thorough review and full-text reading, 25 articles meeting our search criteria were identified for inclusion. Notably, Layton’s (1979) study was distinguished by its comparison of experimental and control groups across four distinct simulation interventions. Given the unique structure of this study, each simulation intervention was treated as a separate unit of analysis, thereby extending the total number of analyzed studies to 28. In this study, the participants of the studies included in the meta-analysis were undergraduate nursing students, and a total of 2,598 participated. The data extraction form was compiled by extracting the author, year of publication, presence or absence of IRB, number of participants, research design, experimental group’s intervention type, intervention session, session time, control group’s intervention, post-test measurement time, delayed measurement, and outcome variables. The primary variable, empathy score, and the secondary variables, empathic communication, interpersonal relationships, and competency were coded as the mean, standard deviation, and number of samples of the first post-test or the difference value of the post-pretest for both the experimental and control groups after the intervention.

PRISMA flow diagram

Study characteristics

The analysis included 28 studies, with 15 published in 2019 or later, 23 with IRB reviews before the study. The research design for simulation-based interventions included 14 RCTs: 13 with 60 or more participants, 13 simulated-based learning, 15 role-plays, and 21 studies with usual or no interventions for the control group. Simulation-based learning encompasses a variety of structured activities designed to mirror real or potential scenarios in educational settings, facilitating practice and skill development. These activities enable participants to augment their understanding, expertise, and mindset, while also providing opportunities to analyze and address realistic situations within a simulated environment [ 25 ]. Role-playing entails the enactment of specific roles within defined contexts. For instance, it may encompass a situated teaching program where patients portray themselves and articulate their experiences within a psychiatric nursing practice setting, or a role-playing training regimen conducted within an operating room situation. The intervention time or session was more than 1 h, the outcome was measured immediately after the intervention, the outcome was followed up, pre-briefing was conducted, and debriefing was conducted in study ID: 24, 11, 12, 26, 10, 6, and 14 studies. The majority of the control group adheres to a Traditional curriculum. This curriculum typically includes conventional empathic skill training through lectures, seminars, individual presentations at meetings, discussions, and similar formats. In contrast, for the experimental group, simulation involves a sequence of processes (such as orientation, pre-briefing, SP simulation performance, debriefing, and feedback). Typically, this process occurs once rather than being repeated. The impact is evaluated following the completion of this singular series of processes. The predominant empathy scale utilized was The Jefferson Scale of Empathy-Health Profession-Student (JSE-HP-S), with various other assessment tools also employed to measure empathy.

The primary outcome was empathy, which was assessed in all 28 studies. Empathic communication, interpersonal relationships, and competency were measured in study ID: 5, 6, and 9 studies, respectively (Appendix 1 ). When the sample size is small, Cohen’s d may exaggerate the effect size of an individual study. Therefore, the adjusted effect size, referred to as Hedge’s g [ 25 ], was provided along with 95% Confidence Intervals. Hedge’s g was calculated by entering the mean, standard deviation, and number of samples of each study’s experimental and control groups into the Mix Pro 2.0 program.

Risk of bias in studies

The average quality assessment score for RCTs was 8.18 (SD 0.75, range: 7–9), and the average quality assessment score for quasi-experimental studies was 8.00 (SD 1.11, range: 6–9). Among the internal validity assessment items for the RCT studies, “Q2. Was the allocation to treatment groups concealed?” for bias related to selection and allocation, and “Q5. Were those delivering the treatment blinded to the treatment assignment?” for bias related to administration of intervention or exposure, and “Were outcome assessors blind to treatment assignment?” for bias related to the assessment, detection, and measurement of the outcome were not reported in any study. Furthermore, “Q4. Were participants blinded to the treatment assignments?” was reported in only one study, and “Q12. Was an appropriate statistical analysis used?” was used to measure the validity of the statistical conclusions in three studies. Most items (Q1-5, Q7-9) that assess the quality of quasi-experimental studies have been reported. “Q6. Was the follow-up complete, and if not, were the differences between groups in terms of their follow-up adequately described and analyzed?” were reported in only seven studies (Table  1 ).

Effect of simulation-based intervention on empathy

Layton’s (1979) study was distinguished by its comparison of experimental and control groups across four distinct simulation interventions. Each simulation intervention was treated as a separate unit of analysis, thereby extending the total number of analyzed studies to 28. The effect sizes were pooled using a random-effects model and presented as Hedge’s g, 95% CI, weight, and a synthesis forest plot (Fig.  2 ). Using a simulation-based intervention among nursing students significantly increased empathy, with a total effect size of Hedge’s g = 0.35, which was a small effect based on Brydges’ criteria for interpreting effect sizes. The effect sizes indicated by Hedge’s g values of 0.15, 0.40, and 0.75 were classified as small, medium, and large effects, respectively [ 26 ]. The heterogeneity test revealed a Higgins I 2 value of 84.8%, indicating a high degree of heterogeneity among merged studies. Therefore, subgroup and meta-regression analyses were conducted for exploratory and descriptive heterogeneity analyses.

The effect of simulation-based intervention on empathy. Notes. ES: Effect size; CI: Confidence interval. Superscripts a, b, c, and d were Layton’s (1979) study divided by intervention

In the subgroup analyses, a significant increase in empathy was reported in the studies published after 2019 (Hedge’s g = 0.52, 95% CI:0.31, 0.73), IRB-approved studies (Hedge’s g = 0.39, 95% CI:0.15, 0.62), quasi-experimental studies (Hedge’s g = 0.51, 95% CI:0.27, 0.74), simulation-based interventions (Hedge’s g = 0.43, 95% CI:0.22, 0.65), and studies with no control group intervention or with usual interventions (Hedge’s g = 0.30, 95% CI:0.08, 0.53). The same was reported in studies with the intervention time per session not reported or less than 1 h (Hedge’s g = 0.42, 95% CI:0.20, 0.63), studies measuring the outcome right after the intervention (Hedge’s g = 0.38, 95% CI:0.16, 0.60), studies adopting no follow-up measurements for verifying the intervention’s long-term effects (Hedge’s g = 0.45, 95% CI:0.22, 0.68), and studies performing debriefing after simulation (Hedge’s g = 0.48, 95% CI:0.18, 0.78), compared to the studies that did not. Additionally, the effect sizes for the number of participants, pre-briefing, and quality assessment score were statistically significant (Table  2 ).

Univariate meta-regression analysis was performed to determine the potential impact of study heterogeneity on effect size, which revealed that the following variables had statistically significant effects—specifically, year of publication, IRB-approved studies, the number of participants, study design, intervention type, control group intervention, and intervention time per session (Table  3 ). The exclusion sensitivity test excluded one study from each of the 28 studies and compared the merged effect size to the original effect size to determine the impact of the estimated effect size [ 24 ]. Examining the magnitude and statistical significance of the combined effect sizes of the simulation-based interventions indicated that Hedge’s g was small, ranging from 0.31 to 42, the 95% CI (0.10 to 0.23, 0.52 to 0.61) did not include zero, and all were statistically significant. The effect size was not significantly different from that of Hedge’s g (0.35), including all 28 studies, and all studies were statistically significant. Therefore, the meta-analysis was considered robust (Table  4 ).

Effect of an intervention program on secondary outcomes

Secondary outcomes were empathic communication, interpersonal relationships, and competency, all of which were statistically significant. After the program, empathic communication with Hedge’s g = 1.35 (95% CI:0.25, 2.45), interpersonal relationship with Hedge’s g = 0.52 (95% CI:0.21, 0.84), and competency with Hedge’s g = 0.75 (95% CI:0.24, 1.26), indicating medium to large effect sizes (Table  5 ).

Publication bias

Funnel plot analysis was conducted to assess publication bias, which revealed that the individual effect sizes (blue circles) of the 28 included studies were skewed to the right, indicating some degree of publication bias (Fig.  3 ). For further analysis of publication bias, using the trim-and-fill method, the number of articles that should be added to the study was identified as nine [ 27 ]. The corrected effect size of the 37 articles was 0.04 (95%CI: -0.19, 0.26). The effect size of empathy was smaller after correction than before, but the difference was not statistically significant after correction. Moreover, the results of different methods used to detect publication bias differed. Nonetheless, the results obtained using the trim-and-fill method, which is particularly effective in illustrating publication bias in continuous variables, indicated publication bias in this study (Appendix 2 ).

Funnel plot of simulation-based interventions for empathy. Notes. Precision = 1/standard error, 0.05; limit line = 95% confidence limit

A random-effects on the results of 28 studies was performed to quantify the influence of simulation on empathy among undergraduate nursing students. The impact of the simulation-based program on empathy showed a small effect size, specifically with an effect size of 0.35. Despite variance within studies and heterogeneity in effects between studies, it was observed that the vast majority of nursing students agree that simulation increases empathy and that empathy is greater after simulation than before. The high I2 indicates significant heterogeneity, which consequently reduces the precision of summary estimates.

This aligns with previous primary research, indicating that to empathize with others beyond oneself, it’s essential to understand the other person’s perspective or position. Moreover, research suggests that such empathy can be cultivated through education [ 28 ]. This finding is also consistent with a previous study reporting that learning could improve empathy and a meta-analysis finding that empathy training improved empathy [ 17 , 29 , 30 ]. This study corroborates earlier primary research findings suggesting that empathy training ought to incorporate real-life experiences via imagination and simulations, with a focus on understanding the unobservable mental processes of others [ 31 ].

Based on a meta-regression analysis evaluating empathy [ 17 ], the factors influencing improvements in empathy are discussed below. Initially, upon scrutinizing the content of recent simulations (since 2019), they delineate as follows: Publication years after 2019 had a more significant impact on empathy than publication years before 2019. The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly influenced prelicensure nursing education, resulting in extensive disruptions that potentially affect the learning and engagement outcomes of nursing students [ 31 ]. These results reflect the diversification and sophistication of simulation education. This is because, reportedly, nursing schools in Korea have been educating and evaluating core nursing skills designated by the Korean Accreditation Board of Nursing Education as curricular and extracurricular programs to improve the clinical performance of nursing students, with an increasing number of simulation classes based on clinical scenarios similar to the clinical environment since the 2000s [ 32 ]. Since 2019, simulations have been conducted systematically and actively. Thus, the impact on empathy was significantly greater after 2019.

The causes of heterogeneity in characteristics are as follows: The effect on empathy was notably stronger with IRB approval, implying that undergoing an IRB review may signal a scientifically and ethically robust study design. Ensuring scientifically sound design and impact evaluation is crucial, even with the same program. Concerning study design, empathy’s impact was more pronounced in quasi-experimental studies compared to randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Rigorous designs, as seen in certain RCTs with multiple controls, might lead to conservative estimates of simulation effects on empathy due to tight control. Conversely, quasi-experimental studies conducted in natural learning environments suggest empathy impacts may stem from factors beyond simulation. However, further validation through research is needed. Moreover, empathy’s impact was significantly higher with 60 or more participants, likely due to increased effect power. Hence, repeated studies with sufficient participant numbers are essential for evaluating empathy improvements.

By program type, scenario-based simulations had a more significant impact on empathy than role-playing, which is in line with a previous study suggesting that role-play is usually based on a simple situation [ 33 ]. By contrast, the simulation was based on a structured scenario that allowed participants to indirectly experience the care recipient’s condition, thereby matching another person’s mind with their mental state. Moreover, role-playing has been found to contribute to empathy, as reported in a previous study in which nursing students’ critical thinking and emotional intelligence increased significantly after learning digital storytelling problem-based learning through role-playing, and a case study containing the care recipient’s disease experience and overall clinical situation [ 34 ]. More elaborate settings, assumptions, and preparations for the situation are needed to enable students to experience what being in the situation feels like rather than merely playing a role, which is expected to allow students to be more immersed cognitively and emotionally engaged with the target situation.

The intervention duration was significantly longer for four weeks or more than four weeks than for non-reported or less than four weeks, suggesting that the intervention should be at least four weeks in line with the idea that empathy is formed through continuous and steady learning [ 1 ]. This finding indicates that empathy cannot be improved through a short period of experience or training. Instead, empathy, as a process of integrating experiences and existing perceptions, is formed over time.

Other variables whose effects on empathy were not statistically significant were as follows: There were no significant differences in the time per intervention session, whether the outcome measurement time was immediate or delayed, outcome follow-up, prebriefing, debriefing, or quality score. In typical simulation training, prebriefing and debriefing are considered essential and reflective. Nevertheless, this study found no significant effect of pre-or debriefing on empathy, suggesting that the simulation context in which empathy is provided is essential, considering the nature of empathy. However, further studies on this topic are required. Furthermore, in this study, empathy was assessed using a variety of measurement tools. We also recommend that future analyses take into account the specific measurement tools employed.

The findings of this study affirm that simulation-based education, when employed across diverse clinical contexts such as women’s health, operating room scenarios, psychiatric nursing, and geriatric nursing, constitutes a fundamental approach for fostering empathy among nursing students. Among the myriad approaches aimed at enhancing empathy among medical students, the implementation of “patient simulation”—involving students in a curriculum that mirrors real patient encounters—has been noted as effective [ 35 ]. Furthermore, previous studies examining the relationship between proficiency and person-centered care competence have consistently demonstrated a positive correlation between empathy and competence in delivering person-centered care [ 36 , 37 ].

In this study, we conducted a meta-analysis of research exploring the impact of simulation-based education on empathy. Our findings indicate that simulation-based training across diverse scenarios can indeed enhance empathy levels. Specifically, focusing on immersive simulations conducted for a minimum duration of four weeks, spanning a range of authentic clinical contexts, proved to be particularly effective. Moreover, our study underscores the holistic nature of empathy, revealing its interconnectedness with other nursing competencies. As such, further research in this domain is warranted to deepen our understanding and refine instructional methodologies.

Data availability

The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Abbreviations

Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, and Study Design

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses

Study Design

Randomized Controlled Trials

Research Information Sharing Service

Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews

Medical Subject Headings

Joanna Briggs Institute

Jefferson Scale of Empathy-Health Profession-Student

Shin HJ, Cho MO. Influence of critical thinking disposition and empathy ability on self- leadership of nursing students. J Korean Assn Learn Cent Curric Instr. 2023;23(2):115–27. https://doi.org/10.22251/jlcci.2023.23.2.115 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Hatfield E, Rapson R. Emotional contagion and empathy. In: The Corsini Encyclopedia of Psychology and Behavioral Science. 2009. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9780262012973.003.0003 .

Hojat M, Louis DZ, Markham FW, Wender R, Rabinowitz C, Gonnella JS. Physicians’ empathy and clinical outcomes for diabetic patients. Acad Med. 2011;86(3):359–64. https://doi.org/10.1097/acm.0b013e3182086fe1 .

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Menendez ME, Chen NC, Mudgal CS, Jupiter JB, Ring D. Physician empathy as a driver of hand surgery patient satisfaction. J Hand Surg Am (Am Ed). 2015;40(9):1860–e51862. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhsa.2015.06.105 .

Nunes P, Williams S, Sa B, Stevenson K. A study of empathy decline in students from five health disciplines during their first year of training. Int J Med Educ. 2011;2:12–7. https://doi.org/10.5116/ijme.4d47.ddb0 .

Ferri P, Guerra E, Marcheselli L, Cunico L, Di Lorenzo R. Empathy and burnout: an analytic cross-sectional study among nurses and nursing students. Acta Biomed. 2015;86(Supplemento 2):104–15.

PubMed   Google Scholar  

Ryu HR, Bang KS. A validation study of the Korean version of the Jefferson empathy scale for health professionals for Korean nurses. J Korean Acad Nurs. 2016;46(2):207–14. https://doi.org/10.4040/jkan.2016.46.2.207 .

Ozcan CT, Oflaz F, Sutcu Cicek H. Empathy: the effects of undergraduate nursing education in Turkey. Int Nurs Rev. 2010;57(4):493–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1466-7657.2010.00832.x .

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Williams B, Brown T, Boyle M, McKenna L, Palermo C, Etherington J, Williams B, Brown T, Boyle M, McKenna L, Palermo C, Etherington J. Levels of empathy in undergraduate emergency health, nursing, and midwifery students: a longitudinal study. Adv Medical Educ Pract. 2014;5:299–306. https://doi.org/10.2147/AMEP.S66681 .

Williams B, Brown T, McKenna L, Boyle MJ, Palermo C, Nestel D, Brightwell R, McCall L, Russo V. Empathy levels among health professional students: a cross-sectional study at two universities in Australia. Adv Med Educ Pract. 2014;5:107–13. https://doi.org/10.2147/AMEP.S5756 .

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Roger D, Hudson C. The role of emotion control and emotional rumination in stress management training. Int J Stress Manag. 1995;2:119–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01740298 .

Bas-Sarmiento P, Fernández-Gutiérrez M, Baena-Baños M, Correro-Bermejo A, Soler-Martins PS, de la Torre-Moyano S. Empathy training in health sciences: a systematic review. Nurse Educ Pract. 2020;44:102739. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2020.102739 . Article Unsp 102739.

Harris KB, McCarty D, Wilson JA, Nealy KL, Waghel R, Coleman M, Battise D, Boland C. The use of a disease state simulation assignment increased students’ empathy and comfort with diabetes nutrition counseling. Curr Pharm Teach Learn. 2018;10(9):1272–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cptl.2018.06.017 .

Bearman M, Palermo C, Allen LM, Williams B. Learning empathy through simulation: a systematic literature review. Simul Healthc. 2015;10(5):308–19. https://doi.org/10.1097/sih.0000000000000113 .

Eost-Telling C, Kingston P, Taylor L, Emmerson L. Ageing simulation in health and social care education: a mixed methods systematic review. J Adv Nurs. 2021;77(1):23–46. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.14577 .

Brunero S, Cowan D, Chaniang S, Lamont S. Empathy education in post-graduate nurses: an integrative review. Nurse Educ Today. 2022;112:105338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2022.105338 .

Bearman M, et al. Learning empathy through simulation: a systematic literature review. Simul Healthc. 2015;105:308–19. https://doi.org/10.1097/SIH.0000000000000113 .

Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. PRISMA group preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Br Med J. 2009;339:b2535. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.b2535 .

JBI. 2020 ( https://jbi.global/critical-appraisal-tools accessed on 16 May 2023).

Barker TH, Stone JC, Sears K, Klugar M, Tufanaru C, Leonardi-Bee J, Aromataris E, Munn Z. The revised JBI critical appraisal tool for the assessment of risk of bias for randomized controlled trials. JBI Evid Synth. 2023;21(3):494506. https://doi.org/10.11124/JBIES-22-00430 .

Tufanaru C, Munn Z, Aromataris E, Campbell J, Hopp L. Chapter 3: Systematic reviews of effectiveness. In: Aromataris E, Munn Z, editors. JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis. JBI, 2020. https://synthesismanual.jbi.global ( https://jbi.global/critical-appraisal-tools accessed on 16 May 2023).

Borenstein M, Hedges LV, Higgins JPT, Rothstein HR. Introduction to meta-analysis. West Sussex, UK: Wiley; 2009.

Book   Google Scholar  

Sterne JA, Egger M, Moher D. Addressing Reporting Biases. In Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions: 2nd ed. Higgins JP, Green S. Eds.; Version 5.1.0 (Updated March 2011); The Cochrane Collaboration: London, UK. 2011.

Pilcher J, et al. Simulation-based learning: it’s not just for NRP. Neonatal Netw. 2012;31(5):281–8. https://doi.org/10.1891/0730-0832.31.5.281 .

Brydges CR. Effect size guidelines, sample size calculations, and statistical power in gerontology. Innov Aging. 2019;3(4):igz036.

Bown MJ, Sutton AJ. Quality control in systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2010;40(5):669–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejvs.2010.07.011 .

Duval S, Tweedie R. Trim and fill: a simple funnel-plot–based method of testing and adjusting for publication bias in meta‐analysis. Biometrics. 2000;56:455–63. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0006-341X.2000.00455.x .

Jeong JO, Kim S. The effect of an empathy education program on nursing students’ empathy ability, interpersonal ability, and caring. J Korean Acad Soc Nurs Educ. 2019;25(3):344–56. https://doi.org/10.5977/jkasne.2019.25.3.344 .

Levett-Jones T, Cant R, Lapkin S. A systematic review of the effectiveness of empathy education for undergraduate nursing students. Nurse Educ Today. 2019;75:80–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2019.01.006 .

Patel S, Pelletier-Bui A, Smith S, Roberts MB, Kilgannon H, Trzeciak S, Roberts BW. Curricula for empathy and compassion training in medical education: a systematic review. PLoS ONE. 2019;14:e0221412. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0221412 .

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Yeo H. Predictors of empathy for nursing students. J Korea Acad-Indust coop Soc. 2017;18(1):177–84. https://doi.org/10.5762/KAIS.2017.18.1.177 .

Martin B, Kaminski-Ozturk N, O’Hara C, Smiley R. Examining the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on burnout and stress among U.S. nurses. J Nurs Regul. 2023;14(1):4–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2155-8256(23)00063-7 .

Kim SY. The effect of subjective happiness, ethical sensitivity, Empathy ability on personality in nursing students. J Digit Converg. 2022;4737–45. https://doi.org/10.14400/JDC.2022.20.4.737 .

Kim KM. Effects of grit, empathy, and awareness of the nursing profession on clinical performance of nursing students. J Korean Assn Learn Cent Curric. 2022;22(16):47–58. https://doi.org/10.22251/jlcci.2022.22.16.47 .

Chang HK, Do YJ. Problem-based learning using digital storytelling: examining intelligence, critical thinking disposition, clinical competence, and metacognition. J Korean Assn Learn Cent Curric. 2021;21(8):853–66. https://doi.org/10.22251/jlcci.2021.21.8.853 .

Chen JT, LaLopa J, Dang DK. Impact of patient empathy modeling on pharmacy students caring for the underserved. Am J Pharm Educ. 2008;72(2):40. https://doi.org/10.5688/aj720240 .

Park E, Choi J. Attributes associated with person-centered care competence among undergraduate nursing students. Res Nurs Health. 2020;43(5):511–9. https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.22062 .

Download references

Acknowledgements

Not applicable.

This study was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Korean Government (MSIT) (No. 2022R1F1A1076248).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Nursing Science, Chungbuk National University, 1 Chungdae-ro, Seowon-gu, Cheongju, Korea

Mi-Kyoung Cho

College of Nursing, Hanyang University, 222 Wangsimni-ro, Seongdong-gu, Seoul, South Korea

Mi Young Kim

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

M.‑K.C. and M.Y.K.; data curation, M.‑K.C.; formal analysis, M.‑K.C.; investigation, M.Y.K.; methodology, M.‑K.C. and M.Y.K.; writing—M.‑K.C. and M.Y.K. All authors read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript. All authors reviewed the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mi Young Kim .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

Not applicable. This paper constitutes a literature review and does not involve human subjects; therefore, it is exempt from Institutional Review Board (IRB) review.

Consent for publication

Competing interests.

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary Material 1

Rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Cho, MK., Kim, M.Y. Effectiveness of simulation-based interventions on empathy enhancement among nursing students: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. BMC Nurs 23 , 319 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-024-01944-7

Download citation

Received : 21 January 2024

Accepted : 17 April 2024

Published : 11 May 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-024-01944-7

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Simulation-based interventions
• Nursing students
• meta-analysis

BMC Nursing

ISSN: 1472-6955

• General enquiries: [email protected]

Loneliness in Emerging Adulthood: A Scoping Review

• Open access
• Published: 09 May 2024

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Emma M. Kirwan   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-8536-023X 1 , 2 ,
• Annette Burns 3 ,
• Páraic S. O’Súilleabháin 1 , 2 ,
• Sarah Summerville 1 ,
• Máire McGeehan 1 , 2 ,
• Jennifer McMahon 1 , 2 ,
• Ashweeja Gowda 4 &
• Ann-Marie Creaven 1 , 2  

11 Altmetric

Loneliness is prevalent during emerging adulthood (approximately 18–25 years) and is an important issue given it has been linked to poorer physical and mental health outcomes. This preregistered scoping review aimed to provide an overview of the literature on loneliness in emerging adulthood, including the (a) conceptualization and measurement of loneliness, (b) loneliness theories used, (c) risk factors and outcomes examined, (d) sex-gender differences observed, and (e) characteristics of emerging adult samples previously researched. Following the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) guidelines, seven electronic databases were searched for articles focused on loneliness published from 2016 to 2021, where the mean age of participants was ≥ 18 and ≤ 25 years. Of the 4068 papers screened, 201 articles were included in the final review. Findings suggest the need for a clearer consensus in the literature regarding the conceptualization of loneliness for emerging adults and more qualitative work exploring emerging adults’ subjective experiences of loneliness. Results highlight an over-reliance on cross-sectional studies. Over two thirds of articles described their sample as university students and the median percentage of females was 63.30%. Therefore, fewer cross-sectional studies using convenience samples and more population-based, longitudinal research is needed to understand the factors predicting loneliness over time, and the downstream impact of loneliness for emerging adults.

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Introduction

Loneliness is commonly defined as the unpleasant feeling that accompanies the experience of perceiving the quantity or quality of one’s social relationships as inadequate (Perlman & Peplau, 1981 ). While loneliness is common across the lifespan, it is particularly prevalent in young, or emerging adults (Barreto et al., 2021 ; Hawkley et al., 2022 ). Prevalence estimates from the United Kingdom suggest up to 31% of emerging adults experience loneliness at least some of the time, and 5–7% feel lonely often (Matthews et al., 2019 ). In the United States, about 24% of emerging adults report feeling lonely “a lot of the day” (Witters, 2023 ), and almost one in three (32.6%) emerging adults in India report high levels of loneliness (Banerjee & Kohli, 2022 ). Emerging adult loneliness has been independently associated with indictors of poorer physical and mental health, including hypertension, anxiety and depressive symptoms, alcohol problems, and long-term mental illness (Christiansen et al., 2021 ). Therefore, loneliness is an important issue in emerging adulthood and good quality research is a key step in offsetting this potential harm. However, the literature is lacking a review that summarizes important aspects of the research in emerging adulthood, including how loneliness is conceptualized and measured, which loneliness theories are used, which risk factors and outcomes of loneliness have been examined, if there are sex-gender differences in loneliness, and the characteristics of emerging adults previously included in research in this area. This information is needed to provide a basis for rigorous loneliness research for this group. Therefore, this scoping review addresses this gap.

Loneliness in Emerging Adulthood

The transition from adolescence to full-fledged adulthood in developed countries is longer and more challenging to define than in previous points in history. This is primarily due to engaging in traditional markers of adulthood such as marriage and parenthood at later ages, and the widespread uptake of education beyond secondary school (Arnett, 2024 ). Arnett’s theory of emerging adulthood ( 2000 , 2024 ) describes a distinct life-stage, from late teens through mid-to-late twenties. When age ranges are needed to describe emerging adulthood, ages 18–25 years are considered a conservative estimate, as few 18–25-year-olds have entered stable adulthood (Arnett, 2024 ). However, the specific age of the beginning and end of this life stage is variable, and critics have noted that the concept of emerging adulthood is heavily influenced by cultural, socioeconomic, and educational factors (Shanahan & Longest, 2009 ). Culture plays an important role in variation in the length and content of emerging adulthood, and the markers of established adulthood (Arnett, 2024 ). For instance, in keeping with the Chinese tradition of collectivism, a key marker of adulthood for Chinese emerging adults is the ability to financially support their parents, whereas this is not typically endorsed in the United States (Nelson & Luster, 2015 ).

Despite these critiques, there is general agreement that the prolonged entry into adulthood has resulted in significant developmental challenges (Côté, 2014 ). Typical features of emerging adulthood include identity exploration and greater self-focus, which may lead to instability in emerging adults’ social networks (Arnett & Mitra, 2020 ). Major social transitions occurring during young, or emerging, adulthood include moving out of the parental home, or beginning university or employment (Arnett, 2024 ). An age-normative perspective suggests that the timing of ongoing physical and psychological changes, unique societal expectations, and key social transitions places emerging adults at increased risk of loneliness (Qualter et al., 2015 ). Given the vulnerability to loneliness in this age group, robust research is needed to understand loneliness in emerging adulthood.

Recognizing that emerging adults are at particular risk for loneliness emphasizes the need to consider factors associated with loneliness in this group. However, the research priorities in relation to examining risk factors and outcomes of loneliness in emerging adulthood are unclear. One existing scoping review explored the literature on loneliness in youth (aged 15–24 years; Adib & Sabharwal, 2023 ); however, the review was limited in scope with a specific focus on social support and relationship factors like parenting bonds, both of which were inversely associated with loneliness. The extent to which other factors that may be associated with loneliness, for example mental health issues and technology use (Matthews et al., 2019 ), are focused on in the literature with emerging adults have not been reviewed. Additionally, gender differences in loneliness are important for understanding who is most vulnerable to loneliness. While one comprehensive meta-analysis suggested that young adult males were lonelier than females (Maes et al., 2019 ), this study considered a much wider age range (21–40 years) as young adulthood. Therefore, summarizing sex-gender differences in emerging adulthood merits consideration. Finally, persistent sampling bias issues mean that loneliness research generalized to emerging adults may be based on convenience samples of university undergraduates which may not represent diverse groups (Nielsen et al., 2017 ). It is unclear to what extent specific groups who disproportionately experience loneliness, such as migrants and people with poor health (Barreto et al., 2023 ), are focused on in the literature. Understanding who we study when we study emerging adults is of importance; therefore, a summary of the characteristics of emerging adults included in loneliness research is needed to support robust research in this area.

A key aspect of understanding loneliness in emerging adulthood is a clear conceptualization and distinction from related concepts. Loneliness is a subjective and emotional experience that is related to, but distinct from social isolation, which is the objective count of social contacts (Wigfield et al., 2022 ). Across all ages, loneliness is only weakly associated with measures of social contact (Luhmann & Hawkley, 2016 ). In other words, it is not the mere absence of social contact that impacts lonely individuals, but rather the perceived discrepancy between one’s desired and actual social relationships (Perlman & Peplau, 1981 ). Loneliness is also distinct from solitude in that loneliness is an unwanted experience, whereas solitude, or being alone, is a conscious choice that is often described as positive (Weinstein et al., 2023 ). The fact that loneliness and related concepts have been conflated or confused underscores the importance of a clear conceptual understanding of loneliness (Wigfield et al., 2022 ). Defining and measuring constructs of interest are a foundational part of rigorous research (Flake & Fried, 2020 ), yet no review has summarized how loneliness has been conceptualized and measured in research with emerging adults.

While loneliness has often been considered unidimensional, there has long been a conceptualization of loneliness as multidimensional. For example, Weiss’ ( 1973 ) interactionist approach proposed that relationship-specific types of loneliness arise as the result of deficits in two types of social needs; the need for close attachment figures (emotional loneliness) and the need for a meaningful social network (social loneliness). Social and emotional loneliness are distinct, but correlated, states that arise from different events in a person’s life; emotional loneliness might occur as the result of a romantic relationship breakup, whereas social loneliness can occur after moving to a new town. Recent research demonstrated distinct developmental trajectories for social and emotional loneliness across emerging adulthood (von Soest et al., 2020 ) and midlife (Manoli et al., 2022 ). Emotional loneliness levels moderately increase across emerging adulthood, whereas social loneliness substantially decreases throughout emerging adulthood (von Soest et al., 2020 ), suggesting that multidimensional conceptualizations of loneliness warrant consideration.

The complex nature of loneliness means that several other theories have conceptualized loneliness. Prominent approaches include the cognitive discrepancy model (Peplau & Perlman, 1982 ), the evolutionary theory (Cacioppo et al., 2006 ), the psychodynamic theory (Reichmann, 1959 ), and the existential approach (Moustakas, 1961 ). Although theoretical approaches to loneliness may overlap in their definitions, they can differ in proposed causes of loneliness. For example, the cognitive discrepancy model considers the influence of personality, cultural, and situational factors and proposes that loneliness is caused by a person appraising a deficiency in their social relationships (Peplau & Perlman, 1982 ). The evolutionary theory of loneliness suggests that loneliness arises as a signal of social pain to motivate reconnection and is transient for most individuals (Cacioppo et al., 2006 ; Spithoven et al., 2019 ). Other theories, such as the socio-cognitive model, focus on the mechanisms through which loneliness persists and impacts health (Cacioppo & Hawkley, 2009 ). However, no review has summarized how loneliness has been conceptualized and what theories of loneliness have been used in the emerging adult literature.

Current Study

Although there has been an acceleration of research on loneliness in emerging adulthood and recognition that loneliness is an important issue for young people’s health, there is no existing scoping review summarizing key aspects of this literature. The goal of this preregistered scoping review was to provide a descriptive overview of the existing literature on loneliness in emerging adulthood to inform future research. This review was guided by the following research question: What is known from the available literature about loneliness in emerging adults? The research sub-questions included how has loneliness been conceptualized and measured in research in emerging adults (Research Question 1)?, what loneliness theories have been used in research on loneliness in emerging adulthood (Research Question 2)?, what risk factors and outcomes for loneliness have been previously examined in emerging adulthood (Research Question 3)?, what is the evidence on sex-gender differences in loneliness in emerging adults (Research Question 4)?, and what are the characteristics of emerging adults included in previous loneliness research (Research Question 5)?.

Given the focus on loneliness in emerging adulthood, a topic with increasing and disparate literature, a scoping review, rather than a systematic review, was considered most appropriate (Munn et al., 2018 ). This scoping review was informed by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) framework for scoping reviews (Peters et al., 2015 ) and Arksey and O’Malley’s ( 2005 ) seminal work. The reporting of results was guided by Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR; Tricco et al., 2018 ). This review was preregistered on Open Science Framework ( https://osf.io/c7ke9 ). To complete a feasible review, some amendments to the protocol were necessary and are outlined below (labelled as Amendment to Protocol 1–4).

Identifying Relevant Studies

Following preliminary searches of two databases (PsycInfo and Medline) to become familiar with key terms, the following electronic databases were searched in June 2021; Scopus, PubMed, PsycArticles, PsycInfo, Medline, ScienceDirect, and Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts (ASSIA). The search was updated in April 2022 to source articles published until the end of 2021. The search terms describe the concepts loneliness and young, or emerging, adults (see Table  1 ). The search was tailored to the specific requirements of each electronic database (see Supplementary Material 1 for example of a database search).

Initially, the search included peer-reviewed journal articles published between the years 2000–2021. Given that Arnett’s ( 2000 ) seminal work on emerging adulthood was published in the year 2000, it was expected to yield more research on the target population after this year. Using this year limit, 313 articles were eligible for inclusion in the review. However, following discussion among the authors, a consensus was reached that given the large volume of relevant literature, a year limit of 2016–2021 was sufficient for a feasible narrative summary of the recent literature on loneliness in emerging adulthood (Amendment to Protocol 1). The increase in research interest on loneliness in emerging adulthood in 2016 is shown in Fig.  1 .

The number of articles eligible for inclusion by year of publication. Note Solid vertical line indicates the cut off from 2016 to 2021 following Amendment to Protocol 1

Grey literature in the form of difficult-to-locate studies or reports by organizations interested in youth mental health (e.g., Jigsaw, SpunOut. i.e., National Youth Council of Ireland) were searched for by posting general requests (in October 2021) for relevant information on Twitter and mentioning relevant youth and research network organizations (“@organization”) in such tweets to encourage reposting (Adams et al., 2016 ). Additionally, a large loneliness research network placed a request for literature in their newsletter distributed to experts in the field (in December 2021). No additional eligible articles that had not already been identified were located.

The study protocol outlined the aim for an additional search for reports by relevant organizations interested in youth mental health by identifying organization websites using a search engine like Google. After a preliminary search for this type of grey literature, consensus was reached that following grey literature search strategies outlined by others (i.e., Adams et al., 2016 ) was a satisfactory search for grey literature (Amendment to Protocol 2). Grey literature was a complementary part of the search strategy and considering the large volume of identified peer-reviewed articles, peer-reviewed literature was prioritized in this review. This decision was also influenced by the consideration that when using search engines like Google, even if the search engine search was replicable, other researchers may not retrieve the same results on replication, as Google indexes websites based on several predictors: geographical location, previous search history, popularity, and so on (Bates, 2011 ).

Study Selection

Research where loneliness was a key focus of the work was included. This was determined by the inclusion of loneliness in an aim, objective, research question, or hypothesis. Quantitative studies that reported on loneliness under a broader term were included; for example, studies measuring or reporting on the construct of loneliness but describing it in the aims or objectives under broader terms like “psychological well-being”, “mental health”, or similar. Following preliminary screening, additional inclusion criteria outlined that where it was difficult to determine if loneliness was a key focus of quantitative research, articles must have reported analysis beyond the prevalence of loneliness to be included. With regards to qualitative research, if it was unclear if loneliness was a key focus of the work, articles must have discussed loneliness as a key concept in the introduction to be included (Amendment to Protocol 3).

To identify the types of available evidence in the area (Munn et al., 2018 ), qualitative, quantitative, mixed-methods, systematic reviews, and meta-synthesis articles were included.

Articles where the age of participants was ≥ 18 and ≤ 25 years were included. Articles that included a wider age range but reported a mean age ≥ 18 and ≤ 25 years were included. Following preliminary screening, further clarification was added to the inclusion criteria detailing where studies were longitudinal in design, included studies must report loneliness for age ≥ 18 and ≤ 25 years at least one time point (Amendment to Protocol 4).

Included research articles were not limited by population groups, specific life-events, specific samples, setting, or geographical location.

Included articles were not limited by measure of loneliness.

Included articles were published in English (the researchers’ only language).

Narrative reviews and loneliness scale development articles were excluded, as well as editorials, commentaries, opinion pieces, dissertations, and book chapters (labelled as “wrong article type or study design” in Fig.  2 ). Figure  2 summarizes the study selection process. In total, 8,863 articles were retrieved from the electronic database search. EndNote X9 software was used to manage references and facilitate duplicate record removal. Following duplicate record removal, 4,068 articles were screened by title and abstract on Rayyan ( https://rayyan.ai/ , Ouzzani et al., 2016 ). Fifty percent of titles and abstracts were blindly screened by a second reviewer (SS), inter-rater agreement was 98.00%. After title and abstract screening, 754 articles were included for full text screening. During full-text screening, EK contacted authors via ResearchGate to request their full-text articles and 13 of these requests were unsuccessful. Second reviewers (SS, MMG, AG) screened 50% of full-text articles. Inter-rater agreement for full-text articles was 94.19%. All disagreements were resolved through discussion; a further reviewer (AMC) was consulted on six (0.79%) decisions during full text screening.

PRISMA flow chart of the study selection

Data Charting

Data charting was conducted for all included articles by one reviewer (EK) by entering information into Microsoft Excel tables. The data charting form was pre-piloted on a random selection of articles and was refined to ensure all relevant information was extracted. A proportion of data charting (10%) was checked by a second reviewer (MMcG) for accuracy. The data charting form included (a) bibliographic information, (b) key study and subject matter information, (c) the conceptualization and measurement of loneliness, (d) the loneliness theories included, (e) the examined predictors and outcomes for loneliness, (f) sex-gender differences, and (g) characteristics of emerging adult samples included. The detailed list of information for which data were charted can be found in Supplementary Material 2.

Summarizing, and Reporting the Findings

Given that the aim of this review was to provide a descriptive summary of the available literature on loneliness in emerging adulthood, the quality of included studies was not assessed. All findings were included in the narrative review. Checks were completed to ensure the findings of the included systematic review were not duplicated in the results. Tables and narrative summaries were generated for each research sub-question to present a descriptive overview of the research on loneliness in emerging adulthood (Peters et al., 2015 ).

Study Context and Characteristics

After eligibility screening, 201 articles were included in the final scoping review. The publication year of included articles ranged from 2016 to 2021 (see Fig.  1 ). A small number of articles identified in the original search that were published online in 2020 or 2021 but were assigned to a journal issue in 2022 (e.g., Arslan et al., 2022 ; Hopmeyer et al., 2022 ) were retained. Research on loneliness in emerging adulthood represents a growing area of research, with almost half (47.26%) of the included articles published in 2020 and 2021.

The sample sizes within original research articles ranged from 4 to 71,988. Studies using quantitative analysis had sample sizes ranging from 35 to 71,988. Qualitative and mixed-method studies conducting qualitative analysis had sample sizes ranging from 4 to 686. The sole included systematic review and meta-analysis (Buecker et al., 2021 ) included data from 124,855 participants.

Included original articles were conducted in 44 countries across five continents. Thirteen (6.47%) articles included samples from more than one country. Almost half (49.25%) of the articles included samples from Western countries where English is the primary language. The breakdown of how many articles included samples from each country are as follows: USA ( k  = 66, 32.84%), China ( k  = 21, 10.45%), UK ( k  = 18, 8.96%), Turkey ( k  = 12, 5.97%), Poland ( k  = 11, 5.47%), Australia ( k  = 9, 4.48%), Germany ( k  = 5, 2.49%), Denmark ( k  = 4, 1.99%). The Netherlands, South Korea, Canada, Hungary, South Africa, and Spain were each included in three (1.49%) articles. Singapore, Greece, Republic of Ireland, Israel, and Bangladesh were each included in two (1.00%) articles. Finland, Italy, Northern Ireland, Norway, Slovakia, Austria, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Japan, Sweden, Thailand, Malaysia, and Nigeria were each included in one (0.50%) article. Included original research articles had a general community or university setting (including online surveys) ( k  = 186, 92.54%), or were conducted in a clinical or laboratory setting (e.g., an outpatient clinic) ( k  = 13, 6.47%).

Study Design

Included articles were quantitative ( k  = 190, 94.53%), mixed method ( k  = 8, 3.98%), qualitative ( k  = 1, 0.50%), systematic review and meta-analyses ( k  = 1, 0.50%), and qualitative protocol ( k  = 1, 0.50%) studies. The following study designs were included; cross-sectional ( k  = 151, 75.12%), longitudinal ( k  = 44, 21.89%), and experimental ( k  = 4, 1.99%).

Covid-19 Related Studies

Thirty (14.93%) articles explored loneliness in relation to the Covid-19 pandemic. Most studies ( k  = 23) explored the prevalence of loneliness or the association of loneliness with factors such as life satisfaction, mental health, quality of life during pandemic restrictions, or in the broader context of Covid-19 pandemic. For example, one study compared the reported prevalence of mental health issues and loneliness in emerging adults in the UK and China during the pandemic (Liu et al., 2021 ), reporting higher loneliness levels in the UK. Some studies ( k  = 3) examined specific Covid-19 related factors, such as “Covid-19 worry” (Mayorga et al., 2021 ) and “Coronavirus anxiety” (Arslan et al., 2022 ), in relation to loneliness. Merolla et al. ( 2021 ) used experience sampling and nightly diary surveys to examine how pandemic related anxiety and depressive symptoms manifested in daily perceptions of loneliness; Covid-19 related anxiety was independently associated with greater loneliness. Other studies ( k  = 2) focused on emerging adults’ relocations during the pandemic (Conrad et al., 2021 ; Fanari & Segrin, 2021 ). For example, a longitudinal examination of the extent to which the stressor of forced re-entry from studying abroad during the Covid-19 pandemic was predictive of loneliness in U.S. emerging adults (Fanari & Segrin, 2021 ). Lastly, one study conducted during the Covid-19 pandemic evaluated two interventions for depression and loneliness (Cruwys et al., 2021 ).

Research Question 1: Conceptualization and Measurement of Loneliness

Over half ( k  = 112; 55.72%) of the articles included an explicit definition of loneliness, while another five (2.49%) articles did not formally define loneliness beyond describing it as “perceived social isolation”. Although there was some variation in the way loneliness was defined, for example, describing loneliness as thwarted belongingness (Chu et al., 2016 ), or as the response to the absence of a relationship (Andangsari & Dhowi, 2016 ), loneliness was mostly defined as an emotionally unpleasant subjective experience that occurs when a person perceives their social relationships to be inadequate (Perlman & Peplau, 1981 ). While most ( k  = 187, 93.03%) articles did not explicitly articulate multiple dimensions of loneliness, 14 (6.97%) articles considered a multidimensional conceptualization of loneliness referring to: social and emotional loneliness ( k  = 6, 2.98%); social, romantic, and family loneliness ( k  = 6, 2.98%); isolation, relational connectedness, and collective connectedness ( k  = 1, 0.50%); romantic loneliness ( k  = 1, 0.50%).

In total, this scoping review identified 16 measures of loneliness in included articles. The University of California Los Angeles (UCLA; Russell et al., 1980 ) Loneliness scale was the most employed measure with 161 (80.10%) included articles using a version of this scale. Twelve (5.97%) studies employed a single-item direct measure of loneliness, such as “How lonely did you feel in the past week?”. See Supplementary Material 3 for a full summary of measures of loneliness in included articles.

Most qualitative or mixed-method studies employed semi-structured interviews to explore loneliness ( k  = 4). Others used open ended survey responses ( k  = 2), free association task ( k  = 1), or group discussions and reflective journal responses ( k  = 1).

Research Question 2: Loneliness Theories

Of the 201 included articles, 29 (14.43%) articles explicitly referenced a loneliness theory in their introduction. While it is possible that some articles implicitly used loneliness theory, articles were considered to have explicitly stated use of loneliness theory if a loneliness theory was referenced in the introduction or aims of the article. Some articles referred to more than one loneliness theory. Seven loneliness theories (see Table  2 for summary) were clearly articulated in loneliness research on emerging adults.

Research Question 3: Risk Factors and Outcomes

A wide range of risk factors and outcomes were examined in association with loneliness in quantitative or mixed-method studies (see Supplementary Material 4 for detail). Most articles examining factors associated with loneliness were cross-sectional in design; longitudinal studies mostly examined loneliness risk factors ( k  = 25, 12.44%), outcomes were examined in 13 (6.47%) longitudinal studies. Of the longitudinal research examining predictors of loneliness, family and social relationship factors, such as perceived social support, were the most studied risk factors ( k  = 7). Whereas mental health outcomes, like depression, were the most examined loneliness outcomes in longitudinal studies ( k  = 6).

Only two longitudinal studies examined within- and between-person variances in loneliness development and the risk and outcome factors associated with changes; one explored the interindividual differences in loneliness development and mental health outcomes in emerging adulthood (Hutten et al., 2021 ). Another examined longitudinal within- and between-person associations of substance use, social influences, and loneliness among emerging adults who use drugs (Bonar et al., 2022 ).

Research Question 4: Sex-Gender Differences in Loneliness

In total, 48 (23.88%) studies explored sex-gender differences in loneliness; 40 reported no statistically significant ( p  > 0.05) difference between male and female loneliness scores, whereas there were eight reports of a significant ( p  < 0.05) sex-gender difference. Of those that reported significant sex-gender differences, six studies reported higher female loneliness scores and two studies reported higher male loneliness scores. Most studies ( k  = 4) reporting significant sex-gender differences measured loneliness using the 20-item UCLA Loneliness Scale (Russell et al., 1980 ), others ( k  = 2) used the Social and Emotional Loneliness Scale for Adults (SELSA; DiTommaso & Spinner, 1993 ), one used the Loneliness in Context Questionnaire for College Students (Asher & Weeks, 2014 ), and one used a direct single-item measure. See Table  3 for a complete summary of results.

Research Question 5: Characteristics of Emerging Adult Samples Included in Loneliness Research

The minimum mean age of included studies was 18.00 years, the maximum mean age was 24.78 years. The gender split of included studies ranged from 0% female to 100% female. The median percentage of females in included samples was 63.30%. Over two thirds ( k  = 137, 68.16%) of articles described their sample as either all or mostly (> 80% of sample) university students. The remaining articles included: general community samples ( k  = 24, 11.94%), specific samples (e.g., inflammatory bowel disease patients, see Supplementary Material 5 for full details of articles including specific emerging adult samples) ( k  = 20, 9.95%), population representative samples ( k  = 11, 5.47%), high school students ( k  = 6, 2.94%). Some articles ( k  = 3, 1.49%) did not report information on their sample or sample information was not applicable.

Despite an increase of research interest in loneliness in younger age groups and recognition that loneliness is an important issue for emerging adults’ health (Christiansen et al., 2021 ), there was no existing scoping review summarizing the key aspects of this literature. Reviews can reduce research waste by identifying priority research questions and key gaps in the literature, mapping existing methodological approaches, and clarifying terms and concepts used in the literature (Khalil et al., 2022 ). Therefore, a scoping review was most appropriate to provide an overview of the literature and identify priorities for future research on loneliness in emerging adulthood.

Three key issues are apparent from this review. First, there was a lack of clear conceptualization of loneliness and prioritization of unidimensional conceptualizations of loneliness in emerging adults, which may be related to the measure of loneliness used. Second, despite the volume of research identified, there was a lack of qualitative research exploring the subjective experience of loneliness. This suggests that the relevance of existing conceptualizations of loneliness for emerging adults who have experienced it remains unclear. Third, while a range of risk factors and outcomes for loneliness have been examined in the literature, research tends to be cross-sectional in design and based on convenience samples of university students. Some additional considerations are noted. Relatively few articles explicitly articulated the use of loneliness theory in their research. Relatively few articles reported on sex-gender differences in loneliness; those that did reported mixed results. Finally, loneliness in emerging adulthood is a growing area of research, with some of this growth due to a focus on loneliness in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic.

Definitions of loneliness in included articles tended to align with Perlman and Peplau’s ( 1981 ) widely used definition. Definitions acknowledged both the affective (i.e., the negative emotional experience) and cognitive (i.e., the discrepancy between one’s actual and desired social relations) components of loneliness. A few articles did not explain what is meant by loneliness beyond describing it as perceived social isolation, which does not account for the more complex affective and cognitive aspects of loneliness. While there may be general agreement that loneliness is a subjective emotional experience, the finding that just over half of all articles included a formal definition of loneliness leaves open the possibility that the conceptualization is implicit, poorly understood, or even that loneliness is akin to separate constructs like chosen solitude or objective social isolation. The distinction between concepts like social isolation and loneliness is critical given that across age groups, loneliness is only weakly associated with objective measures of contact with friends and family (Luhmann & Hawkley, 2016 ). A lack of clear definition of loneliness and conflation with other distinct, but related, terms contribute to conceptual confusion which can have practical implications; for example, policy responses designed for lonely people often aim to increase their social connections, therefore reducing social isolation rather than focusing on reducing experiences of subjective loneliness (Wigfield et al., 2022 ).

Other loneliness distinctions potentially relevant for understanding loneliness in emerging adulthood include a multi-dimensional conceptualization of social and emotional loneliness (von Soest et al., 2020 ). These facets are proposed to differentially develop depending on the type of social relationship a person perceives to be inadequate (Weiss, 1973 ). In addition, existential loneliness was described in recent qualitative work as occurring particularly during young adulthood for some individuals (McKenna-Plumley et al., 2023 ). A lack of transparent reporting on the conceptualization of loneliness has important implications for its measurement (Flake & Fried, 2020 ). The finding that few included articles considered different aspects of loneliness, and most did not explicitly discuss whether loneliness was unidimensional or multidimensional, suggests that a unidimensional conceptualization of loneliness is implicit. This is reflected in the frequent use of the UCLA Loneliness Scale (Russell et al., 1980 ), originally designed as a unidimensional measure. Although the UCLA includes items considered to align with social (11 items) and emotional (7 items) loneliness (Maes et al., 2022 ), there is no agreed multi-factorial structure of this measure, and using UCLA subscales may not be the best way of measuring multidimensional loneliness; given studies that report the same number of factors differ in terms of the items that are allocated to which factors and the interpretation of the factors (Maes et al., 2022 ). Additionally, although single-item loneliness measures have shown adequate reliability (Mund et al., 2022 ) and may be useful as brief screening measures in large-scale surveys (Reinwarth et al., 2023 ), few articles reported the use of direct single-item loneliness measures; perhaps because of concerns of potential socially desirable responding. Loneliness measurement is central to the validity of studies examining the risk factors and consequences of the experience in emerging adults (Flake & Fried, 2020 ). Therefore, future research should clearly report the conceptualization and measurement of loneliness.

One approach to achieving consensus on conceptualizations of loneliness in emerging adulthood is through more inductive and exploratory qualitative methods. The only qualitative study eligible for inclusion here focused on young adults living in London’s most deprived areas who described loneliness as being linked to feeling excluded, social media, sadness, and low self-worth (Fardghassemi & Joffe, 2021 ). While this study gives an insight into loneliness in this demographic, the experiences of loneliness for emerging adults more broadly are lacking in the literature. Further, there is a lack of qualitative research exploring the complexities of the life stage more generally (Schwab & Syed, 2015 ). Loneliness is an inherently subjective experience. Qualitative methods allow individuals to describe their experience in their own words and are ideally suited for examining how relevant existing conceptualizations of loneliness are for emerging adults. Exploring the meaning of loneliness for those who have experienced it should be a key research priority; a gap which has been addressed among early adolescents (Verity et al., 2021 ). Although the major features of emerging adulthood may vary between cultures, it is a distinct developmental period of the lifespan (Arnett, 2024 ). To assume emerging adults share the same social roles, developmental tasks, and societal expectations as adolescents underestimates the increased independence, self-focus, and instability (Arnett et al., 2014 ) that may be central to loneliness during this stage. Therefore, qualitative research focused on understanding loneliness within the complexities of the life-stage of emerging adulthood is needed.

Of the articles that explicitly considered loneliness theory, most considered approaches that typically focus on individual level characteristics that may increase a person’s risk for loneliness. For example, the evolutionary theory of loneliness (Cacioppo et al., 2006 ), suggests that younger age groups, due to ongoing development of brain regions associated with cognitive control, may be more sensitive to their social environment and more prone to loneliness beyond the typical features of emerging adulthood (Wong et al., 2018 ). However, societal, and cultural factors are also likely to contribute to loneliness by influencing a person’s social norms (van Staden & Coetzee, 2010 ). The cognitive discrepancy theory emphasizes the role of individual attributes, as well as wider cultural norms in how a person perceives their social relationships (Peplau & Perlman, 1982 ). Theories of loneliness are not mutually exclusive; developing a causal understanding of loneliness in emerging adulthood likely requires the integration of theory. For example, McHugh Power et al. ( 2018 ) synthesized model of loneliness considers both interindividual factors, such as the role of culture in shaping social norms about emerging adults’ social lives, and intraindividual factors, such as changes in the brain regions responsible for social processes, in the development of loneliness. Further, loneliness can be explored within broader theoretical frameworks not specific to loneliness. Developmental approaches can inform research on specific life events and developmental tasks during a particular life stage that may increase a person’s risk of loneliness. For example, employing Erikson’s ( 1968 ) psychosocial theory in research exploring the link between identity formation and loneliness in adolescents and emerging adults (Lindekilde et al., 2018 ).

An age-normative life span perspective suggests that different factors drive loneliness at different ages (Luhmann & Hawkley, 2016 ). For example, peer relations may be more strongly associated with loneliness during adolescence and emerging adulthood, where friendships are their primary social connections, as opposed to older age groups (Qualter et al., 2015 ). This aligns with the finding that family and social relationship factors, such as perceived social support from peers, were the most examined risk factors for loneliness in emerging adulthood in longitudinal studies. Perhaps unsurprisingly, aspects of mental health were the most examined outcomes of loneliness. It is also plausible that poorer mental health predicts or has a reciprocal relationship with loneliness during emerging adulthood; emerging adults with depressive symptoms may withdraw from their social relationships or perceive more social rejection (Achterbergh et al., 2020 ). Despite examining a range of loneliness risk factors and outcomes, included studies were mostly cross-sectional and conducted in Western countries with convenience samples comprising university students. Therefore, the third key issue with this literature highlights the persistent sampling bias and lack of representation and diversity in the field (Nielsen et al., 2017 ).

Sex-gender differences are also important for understanding who is vulnerable to loneliness. Most studies reported no significant difference. A small number reported a significant difference, mostly reporting higher loneliness among females. Gender differences in loneliness have been hypothesized to emerge in adolescence, where females may be more at risk of adolescent-onset internalizing problems (Martel, 2013 ). However, a meta-analysis reported a significant, but small, effect of gender on loneliness in young adulthood, finding greater loneliness in males (Maes et al., 2019 ). The variation of findings in studies examining sex-gender differences have long been attributed to differences in how loneliness is assessed (Borys & Perlman, 1985 ). Given that few a-priori hypotheses on gender differences in loneliness have been proposed (Maes et al., 2019 ), future research should report analysis examining sex-gender differences to determine whether sex-gender represents a vulnerability factor for loneliness.

Finally, the findings suggest that loneliness in emerging adulthood is a fast-growing area of research; almost half of all included articles were published in the years 2020 and 2021. Some of this growth was due to the Covid-19 pandemic making the issue of loneliness in younger age groups even more salient than before (Holt-Lunstad, 2021 ). Although not all who are socially isolated are lonely (Luhmann & Hawkley, 2016 ), this increased focus on loneliness is unsurprising considering that response measures aimed at mitigating the spread of Covid-19, like social distancing orders, and remote work and education, resulted in less social contact and greater social isolation. One systematic review comparing loneliness before and during the Covid-19 pandemic found an increase in loneliness in younger participant groups (Ernst et al., 2022 ). However, this increase was from studies including only university student samples; how the pandemic has impacted loneliness during emerging adulthood more generally remains unclear. The theory of emerging adulthood describes a range of developmental transitions to achieve adulthood, such as moving out of the parental home (Arnett, 2024 ). For some emerging adults, Covid-19 measures may have halted or even reversed steps towards adulthood, resulting in increased loneliness. For example, emerging adults forced to relocate from college campuses to live with parents and guardians experienced greater loneliness than those who did not relocate (Conrad et al., 2021 ). Life events that impact the achievement of normative social transitions and result in some emerging adults feeling out of sync may be important to consider in the development of loneliness during emerging adulthood.

Strengths and Limitations

The strengths of this review included preregistration of the protocol on Open Science Framework and rigorous methodology following well-established scoping review guidelines (Peters et al., 2015 ). One potential limitation is the inclusion criteria that articles needed to report a mean age of 18–25 years. This age range is sometimes extended to age 29; however, 18–25 years is appropriate when conservative age ranges are required to describe emerging adulthood (Arnett, 2024 ). Although a large volume of articles was included, the year limit and lack of grey literature means that there is a possibility that relevant research was not included in this review. While articles were not excluded based on geographical location, included articles were limited to those published in or translated to the English language only, potentially influencing this review’s results.

Future Research

Based on these findings, future studies should provide a clear conceptualization of loneliness, including articulation of loneliness as a uni- or multi-dimensional construct. Studies should specify the theoretical approach (if any) that is informing the research. To generate a clearer understanding of sex-gender differences, these should be reported.

Regarding broad research priorities for loneliness, given the skew towards cross-sectional convenience samples of Western, educated emerging adults, longitudinal research that is population-based or focuses on under-studied cohorts should be prioritized. The current literature does not adequately explore the emergence of specific forms of loneliness, the predictors of loneliness development, and the long-term outcomes of emerging adult loneliness. Developmental trends, the stability of loneliness, and the factors associated with interindividual differences in loneliness during emerging adulthood appear to have also been neglected. Previous research underscores the importance of identifying the characteristics of emerging adults more likely to develop loneliness and the factors that, when changed, correspond to changes in loneliness (Mund et al., 2020 ). Therefore, longitudinal research should seek to identify emerging adults most at risk of developing sustained or intensely felt loneliness in response to common life events, like finishing school. Also, identifying emerging adults who are at risk of loneliness due to developmental transitions being halted or reversed is a consideration for future longitudinal research. Given potential cultural differences in the markers of adulthood and developmental tasks of emerging adulthood (Nelson & Luster, 2015 ), research should consider cultural norms in the relationship between social transitions and loneliness during this life stage.

The high prevalence of loneliness during emerging adulthood indicates that loneliness is an issue of importance requiring good quality research. However, no review has provided an overview of key aspects of the literature on loneliness in emerging adulthood. This scoping review provided a descriptive summary of 201 articles on loneliness in emerging adulthood and serves as an initial step highlighting issues with the current research and identifying priorities for future research. Specifically, findings suggest the need for a clearer consensus in the literature regarding the conceptualization of loneliness during emerging adulthood. Second, this review highlights the need for more qualitative work exploring young people’s subjective experiences of loneliness, which is key for understanding the complexities of loneliness during emerging adulthood. Finally, the results indicate that this literature needs fewer cross-sectional studies using convenience samples and more population-based, longitudinal research to understand the factors predicting loneliness over time, and the downstream impact of loneliness for emerging adults.

Data Availability

All data collected for this study were obtained from published peer-review literature. Data extracted to inform this review are available on reasonable request from the corresponding author.

Articles included in the scoping review are marked with (•)

•Aakvaag, H. F., Strøm, I. F., & Thoresen, S. (2018). But were you drunk? Intoxication during sexual assault in Norway. European Journal of Psychotraumatology, 9 (1), 1539059. https://doi.org/10.1080/20008198.2018.1539059

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Achterbergh, L., Pitman, A., Birken, M., Pearce, E., Sno, H., & Johnson, S. (2020). The experience of loneliness among young people with depression: A qualitative meta-synthesis of the literature. BMC Psychiatry, 20 , 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-020-02818-3

Article   Google Scholar  

•Adamczyk, K. (2016). An investigation of loneliness and perceived social support among single and partnered young adults. Current Psychology, 35 , 674–689. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-015-9337-7

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

•Adamczyk, K. (2017). Voluntary and involuntary singlehood and young adults’ mental health: An investigation of mediating role of romantic loneliness. Current Psychology, 36 (4), 888–904. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-016-9478-3

•Adamczyk, K. (2018). Direct and indirect effects of relationship status through unmet need to belong and fear of being single on young adults’ romantic loneliness. Personality and Individual Differences, 124 , 124–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2017.12.011

Adams, J., Hillier-Brown, F. C., Moore, H. J., Lake, A. A., Araujo-Soares, V., White, M., & Summerbell, C. (2016). Searching and synthesising ‘grey literature’ and ‘grey information’ in public health: Critical reflections on three case studies. Systematic Reviews, 5 (1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-016-0337-y

•Akdoğan, R. (2017). A model proposal on the relationships between loneliness, insecure attachment, and inferiority feelings. Personality and Individual Differences, 111 , 19–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2017.01.048

•Akdoğan, R., & Çimşir, E. (2019). Linking inferiority feelings to subjective happiness: Self-concealment and loneliness as serial mediators. Personality and Individual Differences, 149 , 14–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2019.05.028

•Akhter, M. S., Islam, M. H., & Momen, M. N. (2020). Problematic internet use among university students of Bangladesh: The predictive role of age, gender, and loneliness. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 30 (8), 1082–1093. https://doi.org/10.1080/10911359.2020.1784346

•Al Omari, O., Al Sabei, S., Al Rawajfah, O., Abu Sharour, L., Al-Hashmi, I., Al Qadire, M., & Khalaf, A. (2021). Prevalence and predictors of loneliness among youth during the time of COVID-19: A multinational study. Journal of the American Psychiatric Nurses Association . https://doi.org/10.1177/10783903211017640

•Alvarez-Jimenez, M., Rice, S., D’Alfonso, S., Leicester, S., Bendall, S., Pryor, I., Russon, P., McEnery, C., Santesteban-Echarri, O., Da Costa, G., Gilbertson, T., Valentine, L., Solves, L., Ratheesh, A., McGorry, P. D., & Gleeson, J. (2020). A novel multimodal digital service (moderated online social therapy+) for help-seeking young people experiencing mental ill-health: pilot evaluation within a national youth e-mental health service. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 22 (8), e17155. https://doi.org/10.2196/17155

•Andangsari, E. W., & Dhowi, B. (2016). Two typology types of loneliness and problematic internet use (PIU): An Evidence of Indonesian measurement. Advanced Science Letters, 22 (5–6), 1711–1714. https://doi.org/10.1166/asl.2016.6740

•Andic, S., & Batigün, A. D. (2021). Development of internet addiction scale based on DSM-5 diagnostic criteria: An evaluation in terms of internet gaming disorder. Turkish Journal of Psychiatry, 32 (1), 33. https://doi.org/10.5080/u23194

•Aparicio-Martínez, P., Ruiz-Rubio, M., Perea-Moreno, A. J., Martínez-Jiménez, M. P., Pagliari, C., Redel-Macías, M. D., & Vaquero-Abellán, M. (2020). Gender differences in the addiction to social networks in the Southern Spanish university students. Telematics and Informatics, 46 , 101304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2019.101304

Arksey, H., & O’Malley, L. (2005). Scoping studies: Towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8 (1), 19–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/1364557032000119616

Arnett, J. J. (2000). Emerging adulthood: A theory of development from the late teens through the twenties. American Psychologist, 55 (5), 469. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.5.469

Arnett, J. J. (2024). Emerging adulthood: The winding road from the late teens through the twenties (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press.

Book   Google Scholar  

Arnett, J. J., & Mitra, D. (2020). Are the features of emerging adulthood developmentally distinctive? A comparison of ages 18–60 in the United States. Emerging Adulthood, 8 (5), 412–419. https://doi.org/10.1177/2167696818810073

Arnett, J. J., Žukauskienė, R., & Sugimura, K. (2014). The new life stage of emerging adulthood at ages 18–29 years: Implications for mental health. The Lancet Psychiatry, 1 (7), 569–576. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2215-0366(14)00080-7

•Arroyo, A., Segrin, C., & Curran, T. M. (2016). Maternal care and control as mediators in the relationship between mothers’ and adult children’s psychosocial problems. Journal of Family Communication, 16 (3), 216–228. https://doi.org/10.1080/15267431.2016.1170684

•Arslan, G., Yıldırım, M., & Aytaç, M. (2022). Subjective vitality and loneliness explain how coronavirus anxiety increases rumination among college students. Death Studies, 46 (5), 1042–1051. https://doi.org/10.1080/07481187.2020.1824204

Asher, S. R., & Weeks, M. S. (2014). Loneliness and belongingness in the college years. In R. J. Coplan & J. C. Bowker (Eds.), The handbook of solitude: Psychological perspectives on social isolation, social withdrawal, and being alone (pp. 283–301). Wiley.

Google Scholar  

•Babad, S., Zwilling, A., Carson, K. W., Fairchild, V., & Nikulina, V. (2022). Childhood environmental instability and social-emotional outcomes in emerging adults. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 37 (7–8), NP3875–NP3904. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260520948147

•Badcock, J. C., Barkus, E., Cohen, A. S., Bucks, R., & Badcock, D. R. (2016). Loneliness and schizotypy are distinct constructs, separate from general psychopathology. Frontiers in Psychology, 7 , 1018. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01018

•Balter, L. J., Raymond, J. E., Aldred, S., Drayson, M. T., van Zanten, J. J. V., Higgs, S., & Bosch, J. A. (2019). Loneliness in healthy young adults predicts inflammatory responsiveness to a mild immune challenge in vivo. Brain, Behavior, and Immunity, 82 , 298–301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbi.2019.08.196

Banerjee, A., & Kohli, N. (2022). Prevalence of loneliness among young adults during COVID-19 lockdown in India. Journal of Positive School Psychology, 6 , 7797–7805.

•Barnett, M. D., Moore, J. M., & Edzards, S. M. (2020). Body image satisfaction and loneliness among young adult and older adult age cohorts. Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics, 89 , 104088. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.archger.2020.104088

•Barnett, M. D., Smith, L. N., Sandlin, A. M., & Coldiron, A. M. (2023). Loneliness and off-topic verbosity among young adults and older adults. Psychological Reports, 126 (2), 641–655. https://doi.org/10.1177/00332941211058045

Barreto, M., Qualter, P., & Doyle, D. (2023). Loneliness inequalities evidence review . Wales Centre for Public Policy. https://www.wcpp.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/WCPP-REPORT-Loneliness-Inequalities-Evidence-Review.pdf

Barreto, M., Victor, C., Hammond, C., Eccles, A., Richins, M. T., & Qualter, P. (2021). Loneliness around the world: Age, gender, and cultural differences in loneliness. Personality and Individual Differences, 169 , 110066. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2020.110066

Bates, E. M. (2011). Is Google hiding my news? Onlintese-Medford, 35 , 64.

BBC Loneliness Experiment. (2018). Who feels lonely? The results of the world’s largest loneliness study. https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/2yzhfv4DvqVp5nZyxBD8G23/who‐feels‐lonely‐the‐results‐of‐the‐world‐s‐largest‐loneliness‐study

•Beckmeyer, J. J., & Cromwell, S. (2019). Romantic relationship status and emerging adult well-being: Accounting for romantic relationship interest. Emerging Adulthood, 7 (4), 304–308. https://doi.org/10.1177/2167696818772653

•Bernhold, Q. S., & Giles, H. (2020). The role of grandchildren’s own age-related communication and accommodation from grandparents in predicting grandchildren’s well-being. The International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 91 (2), 149–181. https://doi.org/10.1177/0091415019852775

•Berryman, C., Ferguson, C. J., & Negy, C. (2018). Social media use and mental health among young adults. Psychiatric Quarterly, 89 , 307–314. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11126-017-9535-6

•Besse, R., Whitaker, W. K., & Brannon, L. A. (2022). Reducing loneliness: The impact of mindfulness, social cognitions, and coping. Psychological Reports, 125 (3), 1289–1304. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033294121997779

Binte Mohammad Adib, N. A., & Sabharwal, J. K. (2023). Experience of loneliness on well-being among young individuals: A systematic scoping review. Current Psychology . https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-023-04445-z

•Błachnio, A., Przepiorka, A., Boruch, W., & Bałakier, E. (2016). Self-presentation styles, privacy, and loneliness as predictors of Facebook use in young people. Personality and Individual Differences, 94 , 26–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.12.051

•Blachnio, A., Przepiórka, A., Wolonciej, M., Mahmoud, A. B., Holdos, J., & Yafi, E. (2018). Loneliness, friendship, and Facebook intrusion. A study in Poland, Slovakia, Syria, Malaysia, and Ecuador. Studia Psychologica, 60 (3), 183–194. https://doi.org/10.21909/sp.2018.03.761

•Bonar, E. E., Walton, M. A., Carter, P. M., Lin, L. A., Coughlin, L. N., & Goldstick, J. E. (2022). Longitudinal within-and between-person associations of substance use, social influences, and loneliness among adolescents and emerging adults who use drugs. Addiction Research & Theory, 30 (4), 262–267. https://doi.org/10.1080/16066359.2021.2009466

•Borawski, D. (2018). The loneliness of the zero-sum game loser. The balance of social exchange and belief in a zero-sum game as predictors of loneliness. Personality and Individual Differences, 135 , 270–276. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2018.07.037

Borys, S., & Perlman, D. (1985). Gender differences in loneliness. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 11 , 63–74. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167285111006

•Bowker, J. C., Bowker, M. H., Santo, J. B., Ojo, A. A., Etkin, R. G., & Raja, R. (2019). Severe social withdrawal: Cultural variation in past hikikomori experiences of university students in Nigeria, Singapore, and the United States. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 180 (4–5), 217–230. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221325.2019.1633618

•Brown, E. G., Creaven, A. M., & Gallagher, S. (2019). Loneliness and cardiovascular reactivity to acute stress in younger adults. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 135 , 121–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2018.07.471

•Brown, S., Fite, P. J., Stone, K., & Bortolato, M. (2016). Accounting for the associations between child maltreatment and internalizing problems: The role of alexithymia. Child Abuse & Neglect, 52 , 20–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2015.12.008

•Bruehlman-Senecal, E., Hook, C. J., Pfeifer, J. H., FitzGerald, C., Davis, B., Delucchi, K. L., Haritatos, J., & Ramo, D. E. (2020). Smartphone app to address loneliness among college students: Pilot randomized controlled trial. JMIR Mental Health, 7 (10), e21496. https://doi.org/10.2196/21496

•Buchanan, C. M., & McDougall, P. (2021). Predicting psychosocial maladjustment in emerging adulthood from high school experiences of peer victimization. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 36 (3–4), NP1810–NP1832. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260518756115

•Buckley, C. Y., Whittle, J. C., Verity, L., Qualter, P., & Burn, J. M. (2018). The effect of childhood eye disorders on social relationships during school years and psychological functioning as young adults. The British and Irish Orthoptic Journal, 14 (1), 35. https://doi.org/10.22599/bioj.111

•Buecker, S., Mund, M., Chwastek, S., Sostmann, M., & Luhmann, M. (2021). Is loneliness in emerging adults increasing over time? A preregistered cross-temporal meta-analysis and systematic review. Psychological Bulletin, 147 (8), 787. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000332

•Burger, C., & Bachmann, L. (2021). Perpetration and victimization in offline and cyber contexts: A variable-and person-oriented examination of associations and differences regarding domain-specific self-esteem and school adjustment. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18 (19), 10429. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph181910429

•Burke, T. J., Ruppel, E. K., & Dinsmore, D. R. (2016). Moving away and reaching out: Young adults’ relational maintenance and psychosocial well-being during the transition to college. Journal of Family Communication, 16 (2), 180–187. https://doi.org/10.1080/15267431.2016.1146724

Cacioppo, J. T., & Hawkley, L. C. (2009). Perceived social isolation and cognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 13 (10), 447–454. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2009.06.005

Cacioppo, J. T., Hawkley, L. C., & Berntson, G. G. (2003). The anatomy of loneliness. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 12 (3), 71–74. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.01232

Cacioppo, J. T., Hawkley, L. C., Ernst, J. M., Burleson, M., Berntson, G. G., Nouriani, B., & Spiegel, D. (2006). Loneliness within a nomological net: An evolutionary perspective. Journal of Research in Personality, 40 (6), 1054–1085. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2005.11.007

•Cai, L. B., Xu, F. R., Cheng, Q. Z., Zhan, J., Xie, T., Ye, Y. L., Xiong, S. Z., McCarthy, K., & He, Q. Q. (2017). Social smoking and mental health among Chinese male college students. American Journal of Health Promotion, 31 (3), 226–231. https://doi.org/10.4278/ajhp.141001-QUAN-494

•Chang, E. C. (2018). Relationship between loneliness and symptoms of anxiety and depression in African American men and women: Evidence for gender as a moderator. Personality and Individual Differences, 120 , 138–143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2017.08.035

•Chang, E. C., Chang, O. D., Martos, T., Sallay, V., Zettler, I., Steca, P., D’Addario, M., Boniwell, I., Pop, A., Tarragona, M., Slemp, G. R., Shin, J. E., de la Fuente, A., & Cardeñoso, O. (2019). The positive role of hope on the relationship between loneliness and unhappy conditions in Hungarian young adults: How pathways thinking matters! The Journal of Positive Psychology, 14 (6), 724–733. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2018.1545042

•Chang, E. C., Liu, J., Yi, S., Jiang, X., Li, Q., Wang, R., Tian, W., Gao, X., Li, M., Lucas, A. G., & Chang, O. D. (2020). Loneliness, social problem solving, and negative affective symptoms: Negative problem orientation as a key mechanism. Personality and Individual Differences, 167 , 110235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2020.110235

•Chang, E. C., Wan, L., Li, P., Guo, Y., He, J., Gu, Y., Wang, Y., Li, X., Zhang, Z., Sun, Y., Batterbee, C. N., Chang, O. D., Lucas, A. G., & Hirsch, J. K. (2017). Loneliness and suicidal risk in young adults: Does believing in a changeable future help minimize suicidal risk among the lonely? The Journal of Psychology, 151 (5), 453–463. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.2017.1314928

•Chen, Y. W., Wengler, K., He, X., & Canli, T. (2022). Individual differences in cerebral perfusion as a function of age and loneliness. Experimental Aging Research, 48 (1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/0361073X.2021.1929748

•Christiansen, J., Qualter, P., Friis, K., Pedersen, S. S., Lund, R., Andersen, C. M., Bekker-Jeppesen, M., & Lasgaard, M. (2021). Associations of loneliness and social isolation with physical and mental health among adolescents and young adults. Perspectives in Public Health, 141 (4), 226–236. https://doi.org/10.1177/17579139211016077

•Chu, C., Hom, M. A., Rogers, M. L., Ringer, F. B., Hames, J. L., Suh, S., & Joiner, T. E. (2016). Is insomnia lonely? Exploring thwarted belongingness as an explanatory link between insomnia and suicidal ideation in a sample of South Korean university students. Journal of Clinical Sleep Medicine, 12 (5), 647–652. https://doi.org/10.5664/jcsm.5784

•Conrad, R. C., Koire, A., Pinder-Amaker, S., & Liu, C. H. (2021). College student mental health risks during the COVID-19 pandemic: Implications of campus relocation. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 136 , 117–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2021.01.054

Côté, J. E. (2014). The dangerous myth of emerging adulthood: An evidence-based critique of a flawed developmental theory. Applied Developmental Science, 18 (4), 177–188. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888691.2014.954451

•Creaven, A. M., Kirwan, E., Burns, A., & O’Súilleabháin, P. S. (2021). Protocol for a qualitative study: Exploring loneliness and social isolation in emerging adulthood (ELSIE). International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 20 , 16094069211028682. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940692110286

•Cruwys, T., Haslam, C., Rathbone, J. A., Williams, E., & Haslam, S. A. (2021). Groups 4 health protects against unanticipated threats to mental health: Evaluating two interventions during COVID-19 lockdown among young people with a history of depression and loneliness. Journal of Affective Disorders, 295 , 316–322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2021.08.029

•Cudo, A., Kopiś, N., & Zabielska-Mendyk, E. (2019). Personal distress as a mediator between self-esteem, self-efficacy, loneliness and problematic video gaming in female and male emerging adult gamers. PLoS ONE, 14 (12), e0226213. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0226213

•Curran, T., Janovec, A., & Olsen, K. (2021). Making others laugh is the best medicine: Humor orientation, health outcomes, and the moderating role of cognitive flexibility. Health Communication, 36 (4), 468–475. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2019.1700438

•D’Agostino, A. E., Kattan, D., & Canli, T. (2019). An fMRI study of loneliness in younger and older adults. Social Neuroscience, 14 (2), 136–148. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470919.2018.1445027

•Dalton, F., & Cassidy, T. (2021). Problematic Internet usage, personality, loneliness, and psychological well-being in emerging adulthood. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 21 (1), 509–519. https://doi.org/10.1111/asap.12224

•De la Fuente, A., Chang, E. C., Cardeñoso, O., & Chang, O. D. (2018). How loneliness is associated with depressive symptoms in Spanish college students: Examining specific coping strategies as mediators. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 21 , E54. https://doi.org/10.1017/sjp.2018.56

•Dembińska, A., Kłosowska, J., & Ochnik, D. (2022). Ability to initiate relationships and sense of loneliness mediate the relationship between low self-esteem and excessive internet use. Current Psychology, 41 (9), 6577–6583. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-020-01138-9

•Diehl, K., Jansen, C., Ishchanova, K., & Hilger-Kolb, J. (2018). Loneliness at universities: Determinants of emotional and social loneliness among students. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 15 (9), 1865. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15091865

•Dissing, A. S., Hulvej Rod, N., Gerds, T. A., & Lund, R. (2021). Smartphone interactions and mental well-being in young adults: A longitudinal study based on objective high-resolution smartphone data. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 49 (3), 325–332. https://doi.org/10.1177/1403494820920418

•Ditcheva, M., Vrshek-Schallhorn, S., & Batista, A. (2018). People who need people: Trait loneliness influences positive affect as a function of interpersonal context. Biological Psychology, 136 , 181–188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsycho.2018.05.014

DiTommaso, E., & Spinner, B. (1993). The development and initial validation of the Social and Emotional Loneliness Scale for Adults (SELSA). Personality and Individual Differences, 14 (1), 127–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(93)90182-3

•Dong, H., Wang, M., Zheng, H., Zhang, J., & Dong, G. H. (2021). The functional connectivity between the prefrontal cortex and supplementary motor area moderates the relationship between internet gaming disorder and loneliness. Progress in Neuro-Psychopharmacology and Biological Psychiatry, 108 , 110154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pnpbp.2020.110154

•Drake, E. C., Sladek, M. R., & Doane, L. D. (2016). Daily cortisol activity, loneliness, and coping efficacy in late adolescence: A longitudinal study of the transition to college. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 40 (4), 334–345. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165025415581914

•Enez Darcin, A., Kose, S., Noyan, C. O., Nurmedov, S., Yılmaz, O., & Dilbaz, N. (2016). Smartphone addiction and its relationship with social anxiety and loneliness. Behaviour & Information Technology, 35 (7), 520–525. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2016.1158319

•Engeland, C. G., Hugo, F. N., Hilgert, J. B., Nascimento, G. G., Junges, R., Lim, H. J., Marucha, P. T., & Bosch, J. A. (2016). Psychological distress and salivary secretory immunity. Brain, Behavior, and Immunity, 52 , 11–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbi.2015.08.017

Erikson, E. H. (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis . W.W. Norton Company.

Ernst, M., Niederer, D., Werner, A. M., Czaja, S. J., Mikton, C., Ong, A. D., Rosen, T., Brähler, E., & Beutel, M. E. (2022). Loneliness before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review with meta-analysis. The American psychologist, 77 (5), 660–677. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0001005

•Essau, C. A., & de la Torre-Luque, A. (2021). Adolescent psychopathological profiles and the outcome of the COVID-19 pandemic: Longitudinal findings from the UK Millennium Cohort Study. Progress in Neuro-Psychopharmacology and Biological Psychiatry, 110 , 110330. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pnpbp.2021.110330

•Etkin, R. G., Bowker, J. C., & Scalco, M. D. (2016). Associations between subtypes of social withdrawal and emotional eating during emerging adulthood. Personality and Individual Differences, 97 , 239–244. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.03.059

•Evans, S., Alkan, E., Bhangoo, J. K., Tenenbaum, H., & Ng-Knight, T. (2021). Effects of the COVID-19 lockdown on mental health, wellbeing, sleep, and alcohol use in a UK student sample. Psychiatry Research, 298 , 113819. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2021.113819

•Fanari, A., & Segrin, C. (2021). Longitudinal effects of US students’ reentry shock on psychological health after returning home during the COVID-19 global pandemic. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 82 , 298–310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2021.04.013

•Fang, J., Wang, X., Wen, Z., & Huang, J. (2020). Cybervictimization and loneliness among Chinese college students: A moderated mediation model of rumination and online social support. Children and Youth Services Review, 115 , 105085. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105085

•Fardghassemi, S., & Joffe, H. (2021). Young adults’ experience of loneliness in London’s most deprived areas. Frontiers in Psychology, 12 , 660791. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.660791

•Fernandes, B., Uzun, B., Aydin, C., Tan-Mansukhani, R., Vallejo, A., Saldaña-Gutierrez, A., Nanda Biswas, U., & Essau, C. A. (2021). Internet use during COVID-19 lockdown among young people in low- and middle-income countries: Role of psychological wellbeing. Addictive Behaviors Reports, 14 , 100379. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.abrep.2021.100379

Flake, J. K., & Fried, E. I. (2020). Measurement schmeasurement: Questionable measurement practices and how to avoid them. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 3 (4), 456–465. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515245920952393

•Flett, G. L., Goldstein, A. L., Pechenkov, I. G., Nepon, T., & Wekerle, C. (2016). Antecedents, correlates, and consequences of feeling like you don’t matter: Associations with maltreatment, loneliness, social anxiety, and the five-factor model. Personality and Individual Differences, 92 , 52–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.12.014

•Fransson, M., Granqvist, P., Marciszko, C., Hagekull, B., & Bohlin, G. (2016). Is middle childhood attachment related to social functioning in young adulthood? Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 57 (2), 108–116. https://doi.org/10.1111/sjop.12276

•Fumagalli, E., Dolmatzian, M. B., & Shrum, L. J. (2021). Centennials, FOMO, and loneliness: An investigation of the impact of social networking and messaging/VoIP apps usage during the initial stage of the coronavirus pandemic. Frontiers in Psychology, 12 , 620739. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.620739

•Gan, S. W., Ong, L. S., Lee, C. H., & Lin, Y. S. (2020). Perceived social support and life satisfaction of Malaysian Chinese young adults: The mediating effect of loneliness. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 181 (6), 458–469. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221325.2020.1803196

•Gonzalez Avilés, T., Finn, C., & Neyer, F. J. (2021). Patterns of romantic relationship experiences and psychosocial adjustment from adolescence to young adulthood. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 50 , 550–562. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-020-01350-7

•Harriger, J. A., Joseph, N. T., & Trammell, J. (2021). Detrimental associations of cumulative trauma, COVID-19 infection indicators, avoidance, and loneliness with sleep and negative emotionality in emerging adulthood during the pandemic. Emerging Adulthood, 9 (5), 479–491. https://doi.org/10.1177/21676968211022594

Hawkley, L. C., Buecker, S., Kaiser, T., & Luhmann, M. (2022). Loneliness from young adulthood to old age: Explaining age differences in loneliness. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 46 (1), 39–49. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165025420971048

•Ho, A. H. Y., Ma, S. H. X., Tan, M. K. B., & Bajpai, R. C. (2021). A Randomized waitlist-controlled trial of an intergenerational arts and heritage-based intervention in Singapore: Project ARTISAN. Frontiers in Psychology, 12 , 730709. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.730709

•Hoffman, Y. S. G., Grossman, E. S., Bergman, Y. S., & Bodner, E. (2021). The link between social anxiety and intimate loneliness is stronger for older adults than for younger adults. Aging & Mental Health, 25 (7), 1246–1253. https://doi.org/10.1080/13607863.2020.1774741

•Holmes, L. M., Popova, L., & Ling, P. M. (2016). State of transition: Marijuana use among young adults in the San Francisco Bay Area. Preventive Medicine, 90 , 11–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2016.06.025

Holt-Lunstad, J. (2021). A pandemic of social isolation? World Psychiatry, 20 (1), 55. https://doi.org/10.1002/wps.20839

•Hom, M. A., Hames, J. L., Bodell, L. P., Buchman-Schmitt, J. M., Chu, C., Rogers, M. L., & Joiner, T. E. (2017). Investigating insomnia as a cross-sectional and longitudinal predictor of loneliness: Findings from six samples. Psychiatry Research, 253 , 116–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2017.03.046

•Hom, M. A., Stanley, I. H., Chu, C., Sanabria, M. M., Christensen, K., Albury, E. A., & Joiner, T. E. (2019). A longitudinal study of psychological factors as mediators of the relationship between insomnia symptoms and suicidal ideation among young adults. Journal of Clinical Sleep Medicine, 15 (1), 55–63. https://doi.org/10.5664/jcsm.7570

•Hood, M., Creed, P. A., & Mills, B. J. (2018). Loneliness and online friendships in emerging adults. Personality and Individual Differences, 133 , 96–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2017.03.045

•Hopmeyer, A., & Medovoy, T. (2017). Emerging adults’ self-identified peer crowd affiliations, risk behavior, and social–emotional adjustment in college. Emerging Adulthood, 5 (2), 143–148. https://doi.org/10.1177/2167696816665055

•Hopmeyer, A., Terino, B., Adamczyk, K., Corbitt Hall, D., DeCoste, K., & Troop-Gordon, W. (2022). The lonely collegiate: An examination of the reasons for loneliness among emerging adults in college in the western United States and west-central Poland. Emerging Adulthood, 10 (1), 237–248. https://doi.org/10.1177/2167696820966110

•Hu, Y., & Gutman, L. M. (2021). The trajectory of loneliness in UK young adults during the summer to winter months of COVID-19. Psychiatry Research, 303 , 114064. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2021.114064

•Hudson, D. B., Campbell-Grossman, C., Kupzyk, K. A., Brown, S. E., Yates, B., & Hanna, K. M. (2016). Social support and psychosocial well-being among low-income, adolescent, African American, first-time mothers. Clinical Nurse Specialist CNS, 30 (3), 150. https://doi.org/10.1097/NUR.0000000000000202

Hughes, M. E., Waite, L. J., Hawkley, L. C., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2004). A short scale for measuring loneliness in large surveys: Results from two population-based studies. Research on Aging, 26 (6), 655–672. https://doi.org/10.1177/0164027504268574

•Hutten, E., Jongen, E. M., Verboon, P., Bos, A. E., Smeekens, S., & Cillessen, A. H. (2021). Trajectories of loneliness and psychosocial functioning. Frontiers in Psychology, 12 , 689913. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.689913

•Jattamart, A., & Kwangsawad, A. (2021). What awareness variables are associated with motivation for changing risky behaviors to prevent recurring victims of cyberbullying? Heliyon, 7 (10), e08121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e08121

•Jeong, Y., & Kim, S. H. (2021). Modification of socioemotional processing in loneliness through feedback-based interpretation training. Computers in Human Behavior, 117 , 106668. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106668

•Jia, R., Ayling, K., Chalder, T., Massey, A., Broadbent, E., Morling, J. R., & Vedhara, K. (2020). Young people, mental health and COVID-19 infection: The canaries we put in the coal mine. Public Health, 189 , 158–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.puhe.2020.10.018

Khalil, H., Peters, M. D., McInerney, P. A., Godfrey, C. M., Alexander, L., Evans, C., Pieper, D., Moraes, E. B., Tricco, A. C., & Munn, Z. (2022). The role of scoping reviews in reducing research waste. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 152 , 30–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2022.09.012

•Kim, E., Cho, I., & Kim, E. J. (2017). Structural equation model of smartphone addiction based on adult attachment theory: Mediating effects of loneliness and depression. Asian Nursing Research, 11 (2), 92–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anr.2017.05.002

•Kircaburun, K., Griffiths, M. D., Şahin, F., Bahtiyar, M., Atmaca, T., & Tosuntaş, ŞB. (2020). The mediating role of self/everyday creativity and depression on the relationship between creative personality traits and problematic social media use among emerging adults. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 18 , 77–88. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-018-9938-0

•Kohls, E., Baldofski, S., Moeller, R., Klemm, S. L., & Rummel-Kluge, C. (2021). Mental health, social and emotional well-being, and perceived burdens of university students during COVID-19 pandemic lockdown in Germany. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 12 , 643957. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2021.643957

•Kokkinos, C. M., & Antoniadou, N. (2019). Cyber-bullying and cyber-victimization among undergraduate student teachers through the lens of the General Aggression Model. Computers in Human Behavior, 98 , 59–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.04.007

•Kokkinos, C. M., & Saripanidis, I. (2017). A lifestyle exposure perspective of victimization through Facebook among university students. Do individual differences matter? Computers in Human Behavior, 74 , 235–245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.04.036

•Kumar, S. A., & Mattanah, J. F. (2018). Interparental conflict, parental intrusiveness, and interpersonal functioning in emerging adulthood. Personal Relationships, 25 (1), 120–133. https://doi.org/10.1111/pere.12231

•Lai, J. C., Lee, D. Y., Leung, M. O., & Lam, Y. W. (2019). Daily hassles, loneliness, and diurnal salivary cortisol in emerging adults. Hormones and Behavior, 115 , 104558. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yhbeh.2019.07.006

•Lai, J. C. L., Leung, M. O. Y., Lee, D. Y. H., Lam, Y. W., & Berning, K. (2018). Loneliness and diurnal salivary cortisol in emerging adults. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 19 (7), 1944. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms19071944

•Lapierre, M. A. (2020). Smartphones and loneliness in love: Testing links between smartphone engagement, loneliness, and relational health. Psychology of Popular Media, 9 (2), 125. https://doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000230

•Lapierre, M. A., Zhao, P., & Custer, B. E. (2019). Short-term longitudinal relationships between smartphone use/dependency and psychological well-being among late adolescents. Journal of Adolescent Health, 65 (5), 607–612. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2019.06.001

•Lardone, A., Sorrentino, P., Giancamilli, F., Palombi, T., Simper, T., Mandolesi, L., & Galli, F. (2020). Psychosocial variables and quality of life during the COVID-19 lockdown: A correlational study on a convenience sample of young Italians. PeerJ, 8 , e10611. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.10611

•Lau, J. F., Shariff, R., & Meehan, A. (2021). Are biased interpretations of ambiguous social and non-social situations a precursor, consequence or maintenance factor of youth loneliness? Behaviour Research and Therapy, 140 , 103829. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2021.103829

•Lee, C. Y. S., Dik, B. J., & Barbara, L. A. (2016). Intergenerational solidarity and individual adjustment during emerging adulthood. Journal of Family Issues, 37 (10), 1412–1432. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X14567957

•Lee, C. Y. S., & Goldstein, S. E. (2016). Loneliness, stress, and social support in young adulthood: Does the source of support matter? Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 45 , 568–580. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-015-0395-9

•Lee, C. Y. S., Goldstein, S. E., & Dik, B. J. (2018). The relational context of social support in young adults: Links with stress and well-being. Journal of Adult Development, 25 , 25–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10804-017-9271-z

•Li, L., Niu, Z., Griffiths, M. D., Wang, W., Chang, C., & Mei, S. (2021a). A network perspective on the relationship between gaming disorder, depression, alexithymia, boredom, and loneliness among a sample of Chinese university students. Technology in Society, 67 , 101740. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101740

•Li, Q., Xiang, G., Song, S., Xiao, M., Huang, X., & Chen, H. (2021b). The association of sense of power with well-being outcomes: The mediating role of hope-agency. The Journal of Psychology, 155 (7), 624–640. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.2021.1939246

•Li, T. M., Li, C. T., Wong, P. W., & Cao, J. (2017). Withdrawal behaviors and mental health among college students. Behavioral Psychology, 25 (1), 99–109.

•Li, W., Zhang, W., Xiao, L., & Nie, J. (2016). The association of Internet addiction symptoms with impulsiveness, loneliness, novelty seeking and behavioral inhibition system among adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Psychiatry Research, 243 , 357–364. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2016.02.020

•Lim, M. H., Gleeson, J. F., Rodebaugh, T. L., Eres, R., Long, K. M., Casey, K., & Penn, D. L. (2020). A pilot digital intervention targeting loneliness in young people with psychosis. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 55 , 877–889. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-019-01681-2

•Lim, M. H., Rodebaugh, T. L., Eres, R., Long, K. M., Penn, D. L., & Gleeson, J. F. (2019). A pilot digital intervention targeting loneliness in youth mental health. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 10 , 604. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2019.00604

•Lin, S., Falbo, T., Qu, W., Wang, Y., & Feng, X. (2021). Chinese only children and loneliness: Stereotypes and realities. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 91 (4), 531. https://doi.org/10.1037/ort0000554

•Lindekilde, N., Lübeck, M., & Lasgaard, M. (2018). Identity formation and evaluation in adolescence and emerging adulthood: How is it associated with depressive symptoms and loneliness? Scandinavian Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Psychology, 6 (2), 91–97. https://doi.org/10.21307/sjcapp-2018-010

•Lippke, S., Fischer, M. A., & Ratz, T. (2021). Physical activity, loneliness, and meaning of friendship in young individuals–a mixed-methods investigation prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic with three cross-sectional studies. Frontiers in Psychology, 12 , 617267. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.617267

•Liu, M. B., Dufour, G., Sun, Z. E., Galante, J., Xing, C. Q., Zhan, J. Y., & Wu, L. L. (2021). The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health of young people: A comparison between China and the United Kingdom. Chinese Journal of Traumatology, 24 (04), 231–236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cjtee.2021.05.005

•Luhmann, M., Bohn, J., Holtmann, J., Koch, T., & Eid, M. (2016). I’m lonely, can’t you tell? Convergent validity of self-and informant ratings of loneliness. Journal of Research in Personality, 61 , 50–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2016.02.002

Luhmann, M., & Hawkley, L. C. (2016). Age differences in loneliness from late adolescence to oldest old age. Developmental Psychology, 52 (6), 943–959. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000117

•MacDonald, K. B., & Schermer, J. A. (2021). Loneliness unlocked: Associations with smartphone use and personality. Acta Psychologica, 221 , 103454. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2021.103454

Maes, M., Qualter, P., Lodder, G. M., & Mund, M. (2022). How (not) to measure loneliness: A review of the eight most commonly used scales. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19 (17), 10816. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191710816

Maes, M., Qualter, P., Vanhalst, J., Van den Noortgate, W., & Goossens, L. (2019). Gender differences in loneliness across the lifespan: A meta-analysis. European Journal of Personality, 33 (6), 642–654. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2220

Manoli, A., McCarthy, J., & Ramsey, R. (2022). Estimating the prevalence of social and emotional loneliness across the adult lifespan. Scientific Reports, 12 (1), 21045. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-24084-x

•Marchini, S., Zaurino, E., Bouziotis, J., Brondino, N., Delvenne, V., & Delhaye, M. (2021). Study of resilience and loneliness in youth (18–25 years old) during the COVID-19 pandemic lockdown measures. Journal of Community Psychology, 49 (2), 468–480. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcop.22473

Martel, M. M. (2013). Sexual selection and sex differences in the prevalence of childhood externalizing and adolescent internalizing disorders. Psychological Bulletin, 139 (6), 1221. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032247

•Martončik, M., & Lokša, J. (2016). Do World of Warcraft (MMORPG) players experience less loneliness and social anxiety in online world (virtual environment) than in real world (offline)? Computers in Human Behavior, 56 , 127–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.11.035

•Matthews, T., Caspi, A., Danese, A., Fisher, H. L., Moffitt, T. E., & Arseneault, L. (2022). A longitudinal twin study of victimization and loneliness from childhood to young adulthood. Development and Psychopathology, 34 (1), 367–377. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579420001005

•Matthews, T., Danese, A., Caspi, A., Fisher, H. L., Goldman-Mellor, S., Kepa, A., Moffitt, T. E., Odgers, C. L., & Arseneault, L. (2019). Lonely young adults in modern Britain: Findings from an epidemiological cohort study. Psychological Medicine, 49 (2), 268–277. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291718000788

•Matthews, T., Danese, A., Gregory, A. M., Caspi, A., Moffitt, T. E., & Arseneault, L. (2017). Sleeping with one eye open: Loneliness and sleep quality in young adults. Psychological Medicine, 47 (12), 2177–2186. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291717000629

•Matthews, T., Danese, A., Wertz, J., Odgers, C. L., Ambler, A., Moffitt, T. E., & Arseneault, L. (2016). Social isolation, loneliness and depression in young adulthood: A behavioural genetic analysis. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology: The International Journal for Research in Social and Genetic Epidemiology and Mental Health Services, 51 (3), 339–348. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-016-1178-7

•Mayorga, N. A., Smit, T., Garey, L., Gold, A. K., Otto, M. W., & Zvolensky, M. J. (2021). Evaluating the interactive effect of COVID-19 worry and loneliness on mental health among young adults. Cognitive Therapy and Research . https://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-021-10252-2

•McComb, S. E., Goldberg, J. O., Flett, G. L., & Rose, A. L. (2020). The double jeopardy of feeling lonely and unimportant: State and trait loneliness and feelings and fears of not mattering. Frontiers in Psychology, 11 , 563420. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.563420

•McGlone, M., & Long, E. (2020). Are young adults with long-standing illness or disability at increased risk of loneliness? Evidence from the UK Longitudinal Household Study. Journal of Public Health Research, 9 (4), jphr-2020. https://doi.org/10.4081/jphr.2020.1861

McHugh Power, J. E., Dolezal, L., Kee, F., & Lawlor, B. A. (2018). Conceptualizing loneliness in health research: Philosophical and psychological ways forward. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 38 (4), 219. https://doi.org/10.1037/teo0000099

•McIntyre, J. C., Worsley, J., Corcoran, R., Harrison Woods, P., & Bentall, R. P. (2018). Academic and non-academic predictors of student psychological distress: The role of social identity and loneliness. Journal of Mental Health, 27 (3), 230–239. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638237.2018.1437608

McKenna-Plumley, P. E., Turner, R. N., Yang, K., & Groarke, J. M. (2023). Experiences of loneliness across the lifespan: A systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative studies. International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-Being, 18 (1), 2223868. https://doi.org/10.1080/17482631.2023.2223868

•Melkman, E. P. (2017). Childhood adversity, social support networks and well-being among youth aging out of care: An exploratory study of mediation. Child Abuse & Neglect, 72 , 85–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2017.07.020

•Meng, J., Hao, L., Wei, D., Sun, J., Li, Y., & Qiu, J. (2017). BDNF Val66Met polymorphism modulates the effect of loneliness on white matter microstructure in young adults. Biological Psychology, 130 , 41–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsycho.2017.10.002

•Merolla, A. J., Otmar, C., & Hernandez, C. R. (2021). Day-to-day relational life during the COVID-19 pandemic: Linking mental health, daily relational experiences, and end-of-day outlook. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 38 (8), 2350–2375. https://doi.org/10.1177/02654075211020137

Milner, J. S. (1986). The child abuse potential inventory: Manual (2nd ed.). Psytec.

•Moeller, R. W., & Seehuus, M. (2019). Loneliness as a mediator for college students’ social skills and experiences of depression and anxiety. Journal of Adolescence, 73 , 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2019.03.006

•Morse, A. M., Wax, A., Malmquist, E. J., & Hopmeyer, A. (2021). Protester, partygoer, or simply playing it down? The impact of crowd affiliations on LGBT emerging adults’ socioemotional and academic adjustment to college. Journal of Homosexuality, 68 (5), 752–776. https://doi.org/10.1080/00918369.2019.1657752

Moustakas, C. E. (1961). Loneliness . Prentice Hall.

Mund, M., Freuding, M. M., Möbius, K., Horn, N., & Neyer, F. J. (2020). The stability and change of loneliness across the life span: A meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 24 (1), 24–52. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868319850738

Mund, M., Maes, M., Drewke, P. M., Gutzeit, A., Jaki, I., & Qualter, P. (2022). Would the real loneliness please stand up? The validity of loneliness scores and the reliability of Single-Item Scores. Assessment . https://doi.org/10.1177/10731911221077227

Munn, Z., Peters, M. D., Stern, C., Tufanaru, C., McArthur, A., & Aromataris, E. (2018). Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 18 , 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0611-x

Nelson, L. J., & Luster, S. S. (2015). “Adulthood” by whose definition?: The complexity of emerging adults’ conceptions of adulthood. In J. J. Arnett (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of emerging adulthood (pp. 421–437). Oxford University Press.

Nielsen, M., Haun, D., Kärtner, J., & Legare, C. H. (2017). The persistent sampling bias in developmental psychology: A call to action. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 162 , 31–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2017.04.017

•Nowakowska, I. (2020). Lonely and thinking about the past: The role of time perspectives, Big Five traits and perceived social support in loneliness of young adults during COVID-19 social distancing. Current Issues in Personality Psychology, 8 (3), 175–184. https://doi.org/10.5114/cipp.2020.97289

•Nowland, R., Talbot, R., & Qualter, P. (2018). Influence of loneliness and rejection sensitivity on threat sensitivity in romantic relationships in young and middle-aged adults. Personality and Individual Differences, 131 , 185–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2018.04.047

•Nwosu, K. C., David, E. T., & Unachukwu, G. C. (2021). Student teachers’ socio-demographic variables, internet addiction and their loneliness in the digital age. International Journal of Education and Practice, 9 (2), 272–284. https://doi.org/10.18488/journal.61.2021.92.272.284

•Ohtsubo, Y., Matsunaga, M., Masuda, T., Noguchi, Y., Yamasue, H., & Ishii, K. (2022). Test of the serotonin transporter gene × early life stress interaction effect on subjective well-being and loneliness among japanese young adults. Japanese Psychological Research, 64 (2), 193–204. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpr.12376

•Okruszek, Ł, Aniszewska-Stańczuk, A., Piejka, A., Wiśniewska, M., & Żurek, K. (2020). Safe but lonely? Loneliness, anxiety, and depression symptoms and COVID-19. Frontiers in Psychology, 11 , 579181. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.579181

•Osman, E. R. O. L., & Cirak, N. S. (2019). Exploring the loneliness and internet addiction level of college students based on demographic variables. Contemporary Educational Technology, 10 (2), 156–172. https://doi.org/10.30935/cet.554488

Ouzzani, M., Hammady, H., Fedorowicz, Z., & Elmagarmid, A. (2016). Rayyan—A web and mobile app for systematic reviews. Systematic Reviews, 5 , 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-016-0384-4

•Ozden Yildirim, M. S. (2019). The relationship between loneliness, malicious envy, and cyberbullying in emerging adults. Education in the Knowledge Society: EKS . https://doi.org/10.14201/eks2019_20_a30

•Öztekin, C., & Öztekin, A. (2020). The association of depression, loneliness and internet addiction levels in patients with acne vulgaris. BioPsychoSocial Medicine, 14 , 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13030-020-00190-y

•Padmanabhanunni, A., & Pretorius, T. (2021a). The loneliness–life satisfaction relationship: The parallel and serial mediating role of hopelessness, depression and ego-resilience among young adults in south africa during covid-19. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18 (7), 3613. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18073613

•Padmanabhanunni, A., & Pretorius, T. B. (2021b). The unbearable loneliness of COVID-19: COVID-19-related correlates of loneliness in South Africa in young adults. Psychiatry Research, 296 , 113658. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113658

•Papp, L. M., & Kouros, C. D. (2021). Effect of COVID-19 disruptions on young adults’ affect and substance use in daily life. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 35 (4), 391. https://doi.org/10.1037/adb0000748

Parkhurst, J., & Hopmeyer, A. (1999). Developmental change in the sources of loneliness: Contributions of attachment theory. Loneliness in Childhood and Adolescence . https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511551888.004

Peplau, L. A., & Perlman, D. (1982). Perspectives on loneliness. In Loneliness: A sourcebook of current theory, research and therapy (pp. 1–20). Wiley.

Perlman, D., & Peplau, L. A. (1981). Toward a social psychology of loneliness. Personal Relationships, 3 , 31–56.

Peters, M. D., Godfrey, C. M., Khalil, H., McInerney, P., Parker, D., & Soares, C. B. (2015). Guidance for conducting systematic scoping reviews. JBI Evidence Implementation, 13 (3), 141–146. https://doi.org/10.1097/XEB.0000000000000050

•Phu, B., & Gow, A. J. (2019). Facebook use and its association with subjective happiness and loneliness. Computers in Human Behavior, 92 , 151–159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.11.020

•Piejka, A., Wiśniewska, M., Thayer, J. F., & Okruszek, Ł. (2021). Brief induction of loneliness decreases vagal regulation during social information processing. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 164 , 112–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2021.03.002

•Piko, B. F., Prievara, D. K., & Mellor, D. (2017). Aggressive and stressed? Youth’s aggressive behaviors in light of their internet use, sensation seeking, stress and social feelings. Children and Youth Services Review, 77 , 55–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2017.04.007

•Pisinger, V. S., Bloomfield, K., & Tolstrup, J. S. (2016). Perceived parental alcohol problems, internalizing problems and impaired parent—Child relationships among 71 988 young people in Denmark. Addiction, 111 (11), 1966–1974. https://doi.org/10.1111/add.13508

•Pittman, M., & Reich, B. (2016). Social media and loneliness: Why an Instagram picture may be worth more than a thousand Twitter words. Computers in Human Behavior, 62 , 155–167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.03.084

•Pretorius, T., & Padmanabhanunni, A. (2021). A looming mental health pandemic in the time of COVID-19? Role of fortitude in the interrelationship between loneliness, anxiety, and life satisfaction among young adults. South African Journal of Psychology, 51 (2), 256–268. https://doi.org/10.1177/0081246321991030

•Prievara, D. K., Piko, B. F., & Luszczynska, A. (2019). Problematic internet use, social needs, and social support among youth. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 17 , 1008–1019. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-018-9973-x

•Putnick, D. L., Uddin, M. K., Rohner, R. P., Singha, B., & Shahnaz, I. (2020). Remembrances of parental rejection are associated with loneliness as mediated by psychological maladjustment in young Bangladeshi men but not women. International Journal of Psychology, 55 (3), 354–363. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijop.12609

•Qualter, P., Rouncefield-Swales, A., Bray, L., Blake, L., Allen, S., Probert, C., & Carter, B. (2021). Depression, anxiety, and loneliness among adolescents and young adults with IBD in the UK: the role of disease severity, age of onset, and embarrassment of the condition. Quality of Life Research, 30 , 497–506. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-020-02653-9

Qualter, P., Vanhalst, J., Harris, R., Van Roekel, E., Lodder, G., Bangee, M., Maes, M., & Verhagen, M. (2015). Loneliness across the life span. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10 (2), 250–264. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691615568999

•Rahal, D., Fales, M. R., Haselton, M. G., Slavich, G. M., & Robles, T. F. (2022). Achieving status and reducing loneliness during the transition to college: The role of entitlement, intrasexual competitiveness, and dominance. Social Development, 31 (3), 568–586. https://doi.org/10.1111/sode.12569

Reichmann, F. F. (1959). Loneliness. Psychiatry, 22 (1), 1–15.

Reinwarth, A. C., Ernst, M., Krakau, L., Brähler, E., & Beutel, M. E. (2023). Screening for loneliness in representative population samples: Validation of a single-item measure. PLoS ONE, 18 (3), e0279701. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0279701

•Reissmann, A., Hauser, J., Stollberg, E., Kaunzinger, I., & Lange, K. W. (2018). The role of loneliness in emerging adults’ everyday use of facebook–An experience sampling approach. Computers in Human Behavior, 88 , 47–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.06.011

•Ren, L., Han, X., Li, D., Hu, F., Mo, B., & Liu, J. (2021). The association between loneliness and depression among Chinese college students: Affinity for aloneness and gender as moderators. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 18 (3), 382–395. https://doi.org/10.1080/17405629.2020.1789861

•Roberson, P. N., Norona, J. C., Fish, J. N., Olmstead, S. B., & Fincham, F. (2017). Do differences matter? A typology of emerging adult romantic relationship. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 34 (3), 334–355. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407516661589

•Robustelli, B. L., Newberry, R. E., Whisman, M. A., & Mittal, V. A. (2017). Social relationships in young adults at ultra high risk for psychosis. Psychiatry Research, 247 , 345–351. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2016.12.008

Russell, D., Peplau, L. A., & Cutrona, C. E. (1980). The revised UCLA Loneliness Scale: Concurrent and discriminant validity evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39 (3), 472.

•Sanecka, E. (2021). The role of machiavellianism and loneliness in predicting self-disclosure online. The New Educational Review, 66 , 198–208. https://doi.org/10.15804/tner.2021.66.4.16

•Satici, S. A. (2019). Facebook addiction and subjective well-being: A study of the mediating role of shyness and loneliness. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 17 (1), 41–55. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-017-9862-8

•Savolainen, I., Oksanen, A., Kaakinen, M., Sirola, A., & Paek, H. J. (2020). The role of perceived loneliness in youth addictive behaviors: Cross-national survey study. JMIR Mental Health, 7 (1), e14035. https://doi.org/10.2196/14035

•Say, G., & Durak Batigun, A. (2016). The assessment of the relationship between problematic Internet use and parent adolescent relationship quality, loneliness, anger, and problem solving skills. Düşünen Adam: Journal of Psychiatry and Neurological Sciences, 29 (4), 324–334. https://doi.org/10.5350/DAJPN2016290404

•Schaan, V. K., Schulz, A., Schächinger, H., & Vögele, C. (2019). Parental divorce is associated with an increased risk to develop mental disorders in women. Journal of Affective Disorders, 257 , 91–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2019.06.071

•Schiltz, H. K., McVey, A. J., Dolan Wozniak, B., Haendel, A. D., Stanley, R., Arias, A., & Van Hecke, A. V. (2021). The role of loneliness as a mediator between autism features and mental health among autistic young adults. Autism, 25 (2), 545–555. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361320967789

Schwab, J. R., & Syed, M. (2015). Qualitative inquiry and emerging adulthood: Meta-theoretical and methodological issues. Emerging Adulthood, 3 (6), 388–399. https://doi.org/10.1177/2167696815587801

•Segrin, C., McNelis, M., & Pavlich, C. A. (2018). Indirect effects of loneliness on substance use through stress. Health Communication, 33 (5), 513–518. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2016.1278507

•Segrin, C., Pavlich, C. A., & McNelis, M. (2017). Transitional instability predicts polymorphous distress in emerging adults. The Journal of Psychology, 151 (5), 496–506. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.2017.1335687

Shanahan, M. I., & Longest, K. C. (2009). Thinking about the Transition to Adulthood. In I. Schoon & R. K. Silbereisen (Eds.), Transitions from school to work: Globalization, individualization, and patterns of diversity (pp. 30–41). Cham: Cambridge University Press.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

•Shen, S., & Kusunoki, Y. (2019). Intimate partner violence and psychological distress among emerging adult women: A bidirectional relationship. Journal of Women’s Health, 28 (8), 1060–1067. https://doi.org/10.1089/jwh.2018.7405

•Shen, X., & Wang, J. L. (2019). Loneliness and excessive smartphone use among Chinese college students: Moderated mediation effect of perceived stressed and motivation. Computers in Human Behavior, 95 , 31–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.01.012

•Siebenbruner, J. (2019). Companion animals in childhood and emerging adulthood: The relation to emerging adult development. Society & Animals, 27 (3), 235–253. https://doi.org/10.1163/15685306-12341522

•Sirola, A., Kaakinen, M., Savolainen, I., & Oksanen, A. (2019). Loneliness and online gambling-community participation of young social media users. Computers in Human Behavior, 95 , 136–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.01.023

•Skrzynski, C., Creswell, K. G., Bachrach, R. L., & Chung, T. (2018). Social discomfort moderates the relationship between drinking in response to negative affect and solitary drinking in underage drinkers. Addictive Behaviors, 78 , 124–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addbeh.2017.11.009

•Smith, C. V., Lair, E. C., & O’Brien, S. M. (2019). Purposely stoic, accidentally alone? Self-monitoring moderates the relationship between emotion suppression and loneliness. Personality and Individual Differences, 149 , 286–290. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2019.06.012

•Smith, K. M., Cobb, K. F., Reed-Fitzke, K., Ferraro, A. J., Duncan, J. M., & Lucier-Greer, M. (2022). Connections between parental reciprocity and emerging adult depressive symptoms and loneliness: The role of peer social support. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 54 (1), 52. https://doi.org/10.1037/cbs0000284

•Smith, K. M., & Reed-Fitzke, K. (2023). An exploration of factors related to service utilization in emerging adults: Loneliness and psychosocial supports. Journal of American College Health, 71 (2), 440–449. https://doi.org/10.1080/07448481.2021.1892699

•Snodgrass, J. G., Bagwell, A., Patry, J. M., Dengah, H. F., II., Smarr-Foster, C., Van Oostenburg, M., & Lacy, M. G. (2018). The partial truths of compensatory and poor-get-poorer internet use theories: More highly involved videogame players experience greater psychosocial benefits. Computers in Human Behavior, 78 , 10–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.09.020

Sønderby, L. C., & Wagoner, B. (2013). Loneliness: An integrative approach. Journal of Integrated Social Sciences, 3 (1), 1–29.

Spithoven, A. W., Cacioppo, S., Goossens, L., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2019). Genetic contributions to loneliness and their relevance to the evolutionary theory of loneliness. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 14 (3), 376–396. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691618812684

•Stice, L. V., & Lavner, J. A. (2019). Social connectedness and loneliness mediate the association between autistic traits and internalizing symptoms among young adults. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 49 , 1096–1110. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-018-3812-6

•Sun, L., Fu, Z., & Zheng, Y. (2021). Shyness and loneliness in Chinese young adults: Roles of aggression and gender. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma, 30 (1), 43–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/10926771.2020.1725209

•Sun, Q. W., Wang, C. D., & Jiang, G. R. (2017). Culture-based emotional working models of attachment, Western-based attachment, and psychosocial functioning of Chinese young adults. International Perspectives in Psychology, 6 (4), 195–208. https://doi.org/10.1037/ipp0000075

•Sun, Y., Lin, S. Y., & Chung, K. K. H. (2020). University students’ perceived peer support and experienced depressive symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic: The mediating role of emotional well-being. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17 (24), 9308. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17249308

•Tam, K. Y., & Chan, C. S. (2019). The effects of lack of meaning on trait and state loneliness: Correlational and experience-sampling evidence. Personality and Individual Differences, 141 , 76–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2018.12.023

•Tam, W. W. S., Poon, S. N., Mahendran, R., Kua, E. H., & Wu, X. V. (2021). Impacts of COVID-19 and partial lockdown on family functioning, intergenerational communication and associated psychosocial factors among young adults in Singapore. BMC Psychiatry, 21 (1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-021-03599-z

•Tan, M., Barkus, E., & Favelle, S. (2021). The cross-lagged relationship between loneliness, social support, and psychotic-like experiences in young adults. Cognitive Neuropsychiatry, 26 (6), 379–393. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546805.2021.1960156

•Tan, M., Shallis, A., & Barkus, E. (2020). Social anhedonia and social functioning: Loneliness as a mediator. PsyCh Journal, 9 (2), 280–289. https://doi.org/10.1002/pchj.344

•Thoresen, S., Aakvaag, H. F., Strøm, I. F., Wentzel-Larsen, T., & Birkeland, M. S. (2018). Loneliness as a mediator of the relationship between shame and health problems in young people exposed to childhood violence. Social Science & Medicine, 211 , 183–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2018.06.002

•Tian, Y., Bian, Y., Han, P., Gao, F., & Wang, P. (2017). Associations between psychosocial factors and generalized pathological internet use in Chinese university students: A longitudinal cross-lagged analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 72 , 178–188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.02.048

Tricco, A. C., Lillie, E., Zarin, W., O’Brien, K. K., Colquhoun, H., Levac, D., Moher, D., Peters, M. D., Horsley, T., & Weeks, L. (2018). PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and explanation. Annals of Internal Medicine, 169 (7), 467–473. https://doi.org/10.7326/M18-0850

•Turhan Gürbüz, P., Çoban, Ö. G., Erdoğan, A., Kopuz, H. Y., Adanir, A. S., & Önder, A. (2021). Evaluation of internet gaming disorder, social media addiction, and levels of loneliness in adolescents and youth with substance use. Substance Use & Misuse, 56 (12), 1874–1879. https://doi.org/10.1080/10826084.2021.1958856

•van Roekel, E., Ha, T., Scholte, R. H., Engels, R. C., & Verhagen, M. (2016). Loneliness in the daily lives of young adults: Testing a socio-cognitive model. European Journal of Personality, 30 (1), 19–30. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2028

•van Roekel, E., Verhagen, M., Engels, R. C., Scholte, R. H., Cacioppo, S., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2018). Trait and state levels of loneliness in early and late adolescents: Examining the differential reactivity hypothesis. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 47 (6), 888–899. https://doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2016.1146993

Van Staden, W. C., & Coetzee, K. (2010). Conceptual relations between loneliness and culture. Current Opinion in Psychiatry, 23 (6), 524–529. https://doi.org/10.1097/YCO.0b013e32833f2ff9

•Vasileiou, K., Barnett, J., Barreto, M., Vines, J., Atkinson, M., Long, K., & Wilson, M. (2019). Coping with loneliness at university: A qualitative interview study with students in the UK. Mental Health & Prevention, 13 , 21–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mhp.2018.11.002

•Vaterlaus, J. M., Aylward, A., Tarabochia, D., & Martin, J. D. (2021). “A smartphone made my life easier”: An exploratory study on age of adolescent smartphone acquisition and well-being. Computers in Human Behavior, 114 , 106563. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106563

•Veerman, L., Heppe, E., Gold, D., & Kef, S. (2019). Intra-and interpersonal factors in adolescence predicting loneliness among young adults with visual impairments. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 113 (1), 7–18. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145482X18818615

Verity, L., Schellekens, T., Adam, T., Sillis, F., Majorano, M., Wigelsworth, M., & Maes, M. (2021). Tell me about loneliness: Interviews with young people about what loneliness is and how to cope with it. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18 (22), 11904. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph182211904

von Soest, T., Luhmann, M., & Gerstorf, D. (2020). The development of loneliness through adolescence and young adulthood: Its nature, correlates, and midlife outcomes. Developmental Psychology, 56 (10), 1919–1934. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0001102

•Vuorinen, I., Oksanen, A., Savolainen, I., Sirola, A., Kaakinen, M., Paek, H. J., & Zych, I. (2021). The mediating role of psychological distress in excessive gambling among young people: A four-country study. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18 (13), 6973. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18136973

•Wax, A., Hopmeyer, A., Dulay, P. N., & Medovoy, T. (2019). Commuter college student adjustment: Peer crowd affiliation as a driver of loneliness, belongingness, and risk behaviors. Emerging Adulthood, 7 (5), 363–369. https://doi.org/10.1177/2167696818781128

Weinstein, N., Hansen, H., & Nguyen, T. V. (2023). Definitions of solitude in everyday life. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 49 (12), 1663–1678. https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672221115941

Weiss, R. S. (1973). Loneliness: The experience of emotional and social isolation . The MIT Press.

•Weisskirch, R. S. (2018). Psychosocial intimacy, relationships with parents, and well-being among emerging adults. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 27 (11), 3497–3505. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-018-1171-8

Wigfield, A., Turner, R., Alden, S., Green, M., & Karania, V. K. (2022). Developing a new conceptual framework of meaningful interaction for understanding social isolation and loneliness. Social Policy and Society, 21 (2), 172–193. https://doi.org/10.1017/S147474642000055X

Witters, D. (2023). Loneliness in U.S. subsides from pandemic high. Gallup.com. https://news.gallup.com/poll/473057/loneliness-subsides-pandemic-high.aspx

Wong, N. M. L., Yeung, P. P. S., & Lee, T. M. C. (2018). A developmental social neuroscience model for understanding loneliness in adolescence. Social Neuroscience, 13 (1), 94–103. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470919.2016.1256832

•Woznicki, N., Arriaga, A. S., Caporale-Berkowitz, N. A., & Parent, M. C. (2021). Parasocial relationships and depression among LGBQ emerging adults living with their parents during COVID-19: The potential for online support. Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity, 8 (2), 228. https://doi.org/10.1037/sgd0000458

•Yang, C. C., Carter, M. D., Webb, J. J., & Holden, S. M. (2020). Developmentally salient psychosocial characteristics, rumination, and compulsive social media use during the transition to college. Addiction Research & Theory, 28 (5), 433–442. https://doi.org/10.1080/16066359.2019.1682137

•Yu, K., & Zheng, Y. (2020). Sexting and emotional reactions to hooking up among Chinese college students: Moderated mediation effects of loneliness and number of hookup partners. Personality and Individual Differences, 167 , 110252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2020.110252

•Yu, Q., Mazzoni, S., Lauzon, M., Borgatti, A., Caceres, N., Miller, S., & Salvy, S. J. (2020). Associations between social network characteristics and loneliness during pregnancy in a sample of predominantly African American, largely publicly-insured women. Maternal and Child Health Journal, 24 , 1429–1437. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10995-020-03009-y

•Yu, S., Wu, A. M. S., & Pesigan, I. J. A. (2016). Cognitive and psychosocial health risk factors of social networking addiction. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 14 , 550–564. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-015-9612-8

•Yubero, S., Navarro, R., Elche, M., Larrañaga, E., & Ovejero, A. (2017). Cyberbullying victimization in higher education: An exploratory analysis of its association with social and emotional factors among Spanish students. Computers in Human Behavior, 75 , 439–449. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.05.037

•Zawadzki, M. J., & Gavrilova, L. (2021). All the lonely people: Comparing the effects of loneliness as a social stressor to non-lonely stress on blood pressure recovery. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 167 , 94–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2021.06.016

•Zhang, L., Mersky, J. P., & Topitzes, J. (2020). Adverse childhood experiences and psychological well-being in a rural sample of Chinese young adults. Child Abuse & Neglect, 108 , 104658. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2020.104658

•Zhang, N., Fan, F. M., Huang, S. Y., & Rodriguez, M. A. (2018). Mindfulness training for loneliness among Chinese college students: A pilot randomized controlled trial. International Journal of Psychology, 53 (5), 373–378. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijop.12394

•Zhang, Y., Huang, L., Luo, Y., & Ai, H. (2021). The relationship between state loneliness and depression among youths during COVID-19 lockdown: Coping style as mediator. Frontiers in Psychology . https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.701514

•Zlomke, K., Jeter, K., & Cook, N. (2016). Recalled childhood teasing in relation to adult rejection and evaluation sensitivity. Personality and Individual Differences, 89 , 129–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.10.021

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge the editor of Adolescent Research Review and anonymous reviewers for their helpful feedback.

Open Access funding provided by the IReL Consortium. The first author is in receipt of an Irish Research Council Government of Ireland Postgraduate Scholarship (GOIPG/2021/345). The sponsor had no role in the study design, analysis, interpretation of the data, or writing of the article.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Psychology, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland

Emma M. Kirwan, Páraic S. O’Súilleabháin, Sarah Summerville, Máire McGeehan, Jennifer McMahon & Ann-Marie Creaven

Health Research Institute, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland

Emma M. Kirwan, Páraic S. O’Súilleabháin, Máire McGeehan, Jennifer McMahon & Ann-Marie Creaven

Institute of Public Health, Dublin, Ireland

Annette Burns

School of Psychology, University of Galway, Galway, Ireland

Ashweeja Gowda

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

EMK conceived of the study, participated in study design, coordination, and interpretation of the data, and drafted the manuscript; AB conceived of the study, participated in study design and coordination, and drafted the manuscript; PSO’S conceived of the study, participated in study design and coordination, and drafted the manuscript; SS performed data screening and drafted the manuscript; MMG performed data screening and charting, and drafted the manuscript; JMM contributed to study conceptualization, methodology, and drafted the manuscript; AG performed data screening and drafted the manuscript; AMC conceived of the study, participated in study design, coordination, and interpretation of the data, and drafted the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Emma M. Kirwan .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

The authors declare no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Preregistration

This study’s aims, design, and methods were preregistered on Open Science Framework ( https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/C7KE9 ).

Declaration of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies in the Writing Process

The authors declare that AI or AI-assisted technologies were not used in the writing process.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 36 kb)

Rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Kirwan, E.M., Burns, A., O’Súilleabháin, P.S. et al. Loneliness in Emerging Adulthood: A Scoping Review. Adolescent Res Rev (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40894-024-00240-4

Download citation

Received : 20 December 2023

Accepted : 10 April 2024

Published : 09 May 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s40894-024-00240-4

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Emerging adulthood
• Young adults
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research