Comparing Annotated Bibliography to Literature Review
| Annotated Bibliography | Literature Review | |
| Purpose | Provides the reader with an ordered list of sources for additional reading. Usually also provides brief explanations of why each source is credible and relevant to the topic | Provides an overview of a particular topic or problem by summarizing and explaining the most significant sources in the field. |
| Structure | Sources are separated from each other and are arranged alphabetically, so they will be easy to locate. | Sources are integrated into paragraphs based on the progression of the topical overview, and they may be mentioned more than once. |
| Components | Each item in the list uses the formal citation style (usually APA, MLA or Chicago) to cite a single source and includes a short paragraph with a summary explaining its credibility and relevancy. | Uses an introduction to explain the topic, synthesizes sources progressively as the topic is explained through the body, and then concludes by summarizing the overall background presented. |
Additional differences:
- In the case of an annotated bibliography, there is a separate paragraph for each source cited. In a literature review, each body paragraph should include several sources, and sources may be repeated as necessary
- An annotated bibliography examines each source based on its relationship to the topic; a literature review draws together multiple sources to examine where they agree or disagree
- An annotated bibliography must organize sources alphabetically, but a literature review is likely to use analysis and synthesis methods: problem/solution, cause/effect, comparison/contrast, classification/division, or process to organize sources
- An annotated bibliography allows the reader to choose whether to explore the available sources or not on their own while a literature review directs the reader to a particular understanding of the available sources. The literature answers the question: what is the current knowledge of my topic?
There has been an increase in the amount of people using different types of social media in
recent years. Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and the like are all available at our fingertips and many
teenagers and adults use these platforms as the main way in which to communicate with friends and
family. Many studies have been done that discuss the use of social media reaching the level of
addiction. However, the psychological cognitive and emotional aspects have not been researched on
the same level and this includes how social media, along with the 24-hour news cycle and the
constant barrage of bad news, fake news, political bantering and negative tweets have affected
relationships. Additionally, the psychological social cognitive processes have been looked at through
the lens of neuroscience. This proposal asks the questions, how have adults been emotionally
affected by the use of social media and the 24-hour news cycle and how is neuroscience being used
to evaluate these issues through research?
Internet usage has been increasing over the years. Many of us are constantly connected to
our smart phones or other tablet type computers. With this, the use of social media will also be
consistently on the rise. According to Meshi, Tamir & Heekeren (2015) as internet access increases
worldwide, so will the use of social media. In a review of previous studies, the authors outline how
social motives drive people to use social media and what neural systems support these motives
(Meshi et al., 2015). The article discusses how neuroscientists can capitalize on the fact that social
media is so widely used in order to get the most information about cognitive processes and neural
systems that support them (Meshi et al., 2015).
The authors also state that since the term “social media” was created in 1997, over 10,000
published journal articles have been written using the term (Meshi et al., 2015). However, Meshi et
al. (2015) also state that research has not delved deeply enough into the topic of human social
cognitive behavior. They state that social media fits into the basic hierarchy of biological needs that
all humans strive to fulfill such as obtaining food to the reproductive needs (Meshi et al., 2015).
Through reciprocity and the use of the “like” feature on platforms such as Facebook, humans that
use social media are gaining positive reinforcement when posting images of themselves and sharing
other details of their lives (Meshi et al., 2015). The authors of this review take this information a step
further and discuss how the article covers how these behaviors are seen through such ways of
neuroimaging.
Meshi et al. (2015) state that the neural areas that are affected by the use of social media
are the anterior temporal lobe, inferior frontal gyrus, dorsomedial prefrontal cortex, temporoparietal
junction as well as other areas in the self-referential cognition network including the medial
prefrontal cortex, and areas in the reward center including the ventromedial prefrontal cortex, ventral
striatum and ventral tegmental area. The authors state that neuroscientists have only just begun to
gain a better understanding of human social cognition but have found information on things such as
how one’s social networking size may affect gray matter density and cause people to have a larger
amygdala (Meshi et al., 2015). Future studies using neuroimaging need to occur to further the
understanding of how social media affects people on a neurological and biological level (Meshi et al.,
2015).
Need More Help?
Click here to schedule a 1:1 with a tutor, coach, and or sign up for a workshop. *If this link does not bring you directly to our platform, please use our direct link to "Academic Support" from any Brightspace course at the top of the navigation bar.