FFR-LR3

1

Literature Review

Student Name

Columbia Southern University

Course

Instructor

Due Date

LITERATURE REVIEW EXAMPLE

LITERATURE REVIEW

Literature reviews should contain an introduction, a body, and a conclusion.

The introduction of a literature review will identify the main topic of your research. This is a

good place to mention any recurring themes you found in your sources, as well as presenting any

contradictory ideas you may have come across.

The body of the literature review is where you will discuss each of your sources in more detail.

Your conclusion will make any final connections between your sources, and will explain how the

information presented in the literature is relevant to your topic.

While this example paper includes only the literature review itself, keep in mind that most

literature reviews will occur within the body of a larger research paper.

Always check your course syllabus for any additional requirements and specifications.

2

Literature Review

While rarely discussed in the political sphere, the ongoing Anthropocene extinction is

widely recognized as the sixth great extinction event in the known history of Earth. The various

data available agree that there is a massive loss of wildlife occurring in direct correlation to human

interference. The event, known commonly as the sixth extinction, begins with the disappearance

of megafauna shortly after the Ice Age, conveniently dovetailing with the introduction of human

predation as man began to migrate and colonize new parts of the planet (Barnes, 2017).

In the course of her book The Sixth Extinction: An Unnatural History, journalist

Elizabeth Kolbert (2014) cites various situations from her travels and research to illustrates that

the Anthropocene extinction is especially disturbing because it is directly linked to humans:

Overpopulation, deforestation, and pollution are the driving forces behind the current species

loss. The Sixth Extinction’s readability allows it to fill an important niche in the existing

literature on the subject, making information about the current crisis readily accessible for

readers of all levels. However, some of this book (which proclaims objectivity from the outset) is

obviously influenced by Kolbert’s opinions. Her writing exhibits a clear undertone of concern

and a desire to prevent the worst of the extinction event’s potential outcomes, which, while

admirable goals, are still subjective in nature. Kolbert’s passion and personable touches almost

certainly make the findings of this book questionable.

Another journalist, Simon Barnes (2017), closely examines a wide range of the extant

data regarding the ongoing extinction event in his article, “A World without Animals.” Barnes

(2017) directly addresses the fact that Kolbert (2014) hints at but never states: “[Humans] have

accepted the idea that the loss of wild animals is the sad but acceptable price of progress” (p.32).

The author takes an understandably pessimistic approach to the topic and provides exceptional

The introduction introduces the

main topic and the most

important findings of the research.

Use these guiding questions to

help structure your Body Paragraphs:

What assumptions does the source make about the topic?

What is the author’s opinion?

What are the strengths and weaknesses of this source? What is the most important information from the source?

Why is that information important to your own topic?

The body paragraphs begin here. These

examine the literature on the topic

closely, and should include both support

for the writer’s opinion and arguments

against it. In this paper, the supporting

sources are listed first.

Always include the author’s name, the title of the

source, and any other important information, like the

publication year or name of the journal the article was

published in, whenever you introduce a new source.

3

data to prove his point, claiming (between 1970 and 2012) decreases of 36% in marine

populations, 38% in terrestrial animal population, and, the most alarming, 81% in the freshwater

animal population. There was a startling correlation between these extirpations and the equally

massive increase in the human population, which rose 89% be tween 1970 and 2012. Barnes’s

(2017) research successfully illustrates the enormous damage that will be inflicted on Earth as a

whole should humans continue on their current destructive path.

In contrast to the works by Barnes (2017) and Kolbert (2014), Peter Brannen (2017) of

the Atlantic does not believe that Earth is currently undergoing a crisis, or at least not more of

one than usual. His 2017 article, the title of which clearly announces his opinion (“Earth is Not

in the Midst of a Sixth Mass Extinction”), records Brannen’s interactions and correspondences

with paleontologist Doug Erwin. Erwin claims that the data indicates that the sixth extinction is

in no way comparable to the massive devastation and extraordinarily high density of lost species

during other extinctions, as visible in the fossil record. While the frank nature of Erwin’s

responses and Brannen’s diligent writing do them both credit, Erwin fails to provide any outside

evidence to support his own personal claims and research. Erwin himself recognizes that he may

be incorrect, and even ends the interview by declaring that, in the case of species extinction,

“everything’s fine until it’s not” (as cited in Brannen, 2017, para. 30). While Erwin and Brannen

(2017) do make a convincing argument, the lack of supporting data causes their argument for the

nonexistence of the sixth extinction to fall short.

Kolbert (2014), Barnes (2017), and Brannen (2017) all agree that the data regarding

population decreases are disturbing and recognize that humans are almost certainly to blame, but

their individual approaches to the topic are characteristic of mankind’s general reactions to

ecological crises. Kolbert (2014) reacts hopefully; Barnes is cryptic and pessimistic (2017);

The conclusion is the last paragraph

of the review, and prepares the

reader for the rest of the essay.

This paragraph discusses a source that argues

against the writer’s opinion and the conclusions of

the other sources. Including sources with a

different opinion gives an opportunity to address

the opposition and refute their arguments.

4

Brannen (2017) and interviewee Erwin deny that the rate of extinctions is unusual enough for

alarm. In such a polarizing topic, it is critical to acknowledge all aspects of the data and compare

it, as Erwin claims he has done, with historical events of a similar nature. As none of these

authors (or Erwin, though he speaks about it) have produced satisfactory data regarding

similarities and dissimilarities between the sixth extinction event and the five before it, it is

difficult to quantify the consequences of the current decline in species. Regardless, it is evident

that some action should be taken to preserve as much wildlife as possible and decrease the

impact that human overpopulation is effecting on the environment.

Use these guiding questions to help structure your Literature Review Conclusion:

What are some recurring trends and themes in the sources?

What findings and opinions are common?

What relationships exist between your sources?

Are there any subtopics in the sources that consistently need

more research?

5

References

Barnes, S. (2017, September 1). A world without animals. New Statesman, 146(5382), 30-34.

Brannen, P. (2017, June 13). Earth is not in the midst of a sixth mass extinction. The Atlantic.

https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/06/the-ends-of-the-world/529545/

Kolbert, E. (2014). The sixth extinction: An unnatural history. Henry Holt and Company.

When writing a literature review, try to use the most up-to-

date sources available. Sources are usually considered

“recent” if they are less than ten years old.

If you have any generalized questions

about your references page, refer to

the APA Citation Guide.