Does the introduction start with a specific statement of the problem and its importance? Are any
underlying theories adequately described, if applicable?
2. Does the introduction and literature review move from topic to topic instead of from citation to
citation?
3. Are citations correctly provided for “factual” statements (the ones that are not common
knowledge)? (If opinions are not clearly separated from facts and research findings, give a 0 on this
criterion.)
4. Are direct quotations from the literature mainly avoided?
5. Are the stronger and weaker studies identified and the relevant features or their research
methodologies described or mentioned?
6. Is the review written well, without excessive grammatical/punctuation errors or awkward phrasing?
7. Is the structure of the literature review sound/well-organized, with the train of thought moving
logically and smoothly? (If there are any unnecessary loops/repeats or inadequate transitions between
paragraphs, give the lowest grade on this criterion.)
8. Is the literature review formatted in APA style?
9. Are there at least 5 recent empirical studies (published in peer-reviewed journals) included in the
review?
10. Are the key findings and highlights from the literature clearly synthesized in the review? After
reading the intro/literature review, does the reader get some good understanding about the main topic and
research on it (usually, the topic/research question is listed in the title)?
11. What are the main strengths of this review? What did the author do well?
12. What are the main weaknesses of this review? What can the author improve for the next revision?
