Tips on How to Write Your Literature Review Introduction

Struggling to start your literature review? You're not alone. The introduction to a literature review serves a unique purpose, it's not just introducing your topic, but justifying why the existing research needs to be synthesized, analyzed, and interpreted in a new way. Unlike research paper introductions that set up new studies, literature review introductions establish why a comprehensive examination of existing knowledge is essential right now.

Think of it as making the case for why readers need a roadmap through the research landscape. With the right approach, you can craft an introduction that clearly demonstrates the value of your synthesis work.

<ProTip title="💡 Pro Tip:" description="Use your introduction to explain why reviewing past research now is timely and necessary." />

Purpose of the Introduction

A literature‑review introduction does more than name the topic, it explains why the review needs to happen. In a few lines you should:

<BulletList items="Map what is known so far.|Point out the gaps or contradictions in that knowledge.|Explain the payoff of synthesizing existing studies." />

Example: Suppose you’re reviewing climate‑change adaptation strategies. Dozens of papers cover the subject, but few compare findings across regions. By flagging that missing comparison up front, your introduction shows readers exactly why a fresh synthesis will move the conversation forward.

Key Writing Tips

These strategies will help you structure your literature review introduction effectively and distinguish it from other academic writing.

1. Start Broad, Then Narrow

Begin with the wider research landscape and gradually guide the reader to the specific area your review will cover.

Example: Open with the overall debate on AI ethics and end the paragraph on privacy concerns in healthcare apps.

<ProTip title="🧭 Writing Tip:" description="Guide readers from the general research landscape down to your specific focus to build context and relevance." />

2. Apply the CARS Model

Use the Create A Research Space approach in a single, three‑line move:

<BulletList items="Establish the territory: note what is already been studied.|Identify the niche: highlight where synthesis is missing.|Occupy that niche: explain how your review will organize and interpret those scattered findings." />

This shows you are filling a synthesis need, not proposing new data collection.

<ProTip title="📌 Reminder:" description="Clarifying scope early reduces confusion later and makes your review easier to follow." />

3. Define Scope and Focus

Clarify what you will include and why: years, regions, databases, study designs, or theoretical lenses. Setting these boundaries early lets readers see how comprehensive your review aims to be and prevents confusion later on.

Core Elements to Cover

Pro Tips for Writing the Introduction

<BulletList items="Write it last. Finishing the review first clarifies what your intro must preview.|Stay concise. Save detailed analysis for later sections; your job here is orientation.|Skip long quotes. Summarize key ideas in your own voice to show synthesis.|Match your field. Check recent lit-reviews in your discipline to meet reader expectations." />

These tweaks keep the guidance intact while making each idea faster to locate and easier to remember.

Example Literature Review Introductions

Here are four examples showing how these principles work across different fields:

Literature Review Introduction Example #1

Digital learning platforms have proliferated across higher education, with numerous studies examining individual tools and their effects on student engagement. Research has focused on specific technologies like learning management systems, virtual reality applications, and adaptive learning software, each studied in isolation within particular institutional contexts. However, existing research remains fragmented across different educational contexts and technological approaches, making it difficult for educators to understand which strategies consistently improve learning outcomes across diverse settings. This systematic review synthesizes findings from 67 empirical studies published between 2018-2024, drawn from education and technology databases, to identify patterns in successful digital learning implementations. By examining quantitative and qualitative studies across multiple disciplines and institutional types, this review reveals three key factors that predict successful technology integration, filling a critical gap in our understanding of what makes digital learning effective regardless of specific technological choices or institutional characteristics."

Literature Review Introduction Example #2

Urban heat island mitigation strategies have been extensively studied in individual cities worldwide, with researchers documenting the effectiveness of green roofs, cool pavements, and urban forestry initiatives. The literature spans climate science, urban planning, and public health journals, reflecting the interdisciplinary nature of this challenge. Yet the effectiveness of different approaches across varying climates, urban designs, and socioeconomic contexts remains unclear, as most studies focus on single cities or specific interventions. This narrative review examines 89 peer-reviewed studies from 2015-2024, selected from environmental science and urban planning databases, to synthesize findings on green infrastructure, reflective surfaces, and policy approaches. The review identifies which strategies work best in specific urban contexts, from humid subtropical to arid climates, and proposes a decision-making framework for cities to select appropriate mitigation approaches based on their unique geographic, economic, and social characteristics, addressing the current lack of comparative guidance.

Literature Review Introduction Example #3

Workplace burnout among healthcare workers has generated substantial research attention, particularly following the COVID-19 pandemic. Individual studies have examined various factors contributing to burnout, including workload, organizational support, personal resilience, and coping strategies, predominantly through cross-sectional surveys and interviews within specific healthcare settings. While these studies provide valuable insights into burnout experiences, the field lacks a comprehensive understanding of how different factors interact across various healthcare contexts and professional roles. This integrative review synthesizes findings from 54 empirical studies published between 2020-2024, focusing on nurses, physicians, and allied health professionals across hospital, clinic, and community settings. By examining both quantitative predictive models and qualitative experiences, this review identifies common pathways to burnout and develops a multi-level framework that explains how individual, interpersonal, and organizational factors combine to either promote resilience or contribute to burnout, providing a more nuanced understanding than previous single-factor analyses.

<ProTip title="📝 Writing Note:" description="Use strong topic sentences and key phrases to signal the direction of your synthesis." />

Literature Review Introduction Example #4

Remote work productivity has become a critical organizational concern, with numerous studies investigating factors that influence employee performance in virtual environments. Research has examined technology adoption, communication patterns, work-life balance, and management practices, typically within specific industries or organizational contexts during distinct time periods. However, findings often appear contradictory, some studies suggest remote work enhances productivity while others indicate decreased performance, making it challenging for organizations to develop evidence-based remote work policies. This scoping review examines 76 studies published between 2019-2024, drawn from management, organizational psychology, and information systems literature, to map the current understanding of remote work productivity factors. By analyzing studies across different industries, job types, and cultural contexts, this review identifies the conditions under which remote work enhances or hinders productivity, reconciles seemingly contradictory findings, and develops a contingency model that helps organizations optimize remote work arrangements based on their specific operational contexts and workforce characteristics.

Craft Your Lit‑Review Introduction with Confidence

A clear, purposeful introduction shows readers exactly why your review matters and how it will pull scattered research into focus.

<CTA title="Start Your Lit Review Strong" description="Use Jenni to organize outlines, insert citations, and focus your argument without distractions." buttonLabel="Try Jenni Free" link="https://app.jenni.ai/register" />

When you’re ready to streamline the process, Jenni AI can handle outlines and citations while you concentrate on the analysis that makes your review stand out.