You can visit my following articles on regular literature reviews (also called survey papers) and Systematic Literature Review papers for more details on how to write papers in both formats.

• How to Write a Better Survey Paper in 06 Easy Steps?
• The Art of Conducting a Systematic Literature Review (SLR): Expert Advice for Researchers

1. Detailed list of parameters to consider when making the decision.
   • Scope: Consider the breadth and depth of your research topic. Is it well-defined, or does it require a more comprehensive exploration? Are you focusing on a specific aspect or seeking a broader understanding?
   • Methodology: Think about the approach you intend to take. Are you conducting a systematic analysis of existing research, or do you prefer a more flexible and narrative approach? Does your research involve specific research questions or hypotheses?
   • Available Literature: Assess the quantity and quality of existing literature on your topic. Are there ample peer-reviewed articles and studies available, or is the literature limited or scattered?
   • Audience Expectations: Reflect on the expectations of your target audience or the publication venue. Are they accustomed to seeing Structured Literature Reviews or do they expect more traditional Literature Review papers?
2. Each parameter’s significance in the decision-making process.
   • Scope: The scope of your topic can guide your choice. A Structured Literature Review is typically better suited for focused, specific research questions, while a Regular Literature Review can accommodate broader topics with a wide range of sources.
   • Methodology: Your research approach plays a pivotal role. If you require a systematic and rigorous analysis to answer specific questions, a Structured Literature Review is ideal. For a more narrative exploration of a topic, a Regular Literature Review offers flexibility.
   • Available Literature: The quantity and quality of existing literature influence your decision. If your topic lacks substantial research or consists of diverse source types, a Regular Literature Review may be more practical.
   • Audience Expectations: Consider the preferences of your target audience or the expectations of the publication venue. Some journals or academic communities may prefer one format over the other, so aligning with these expectations can be advantageous.

Examples:

• Scope: Suppose you are researching the impact of digital marketing on consumer behavior. If you have specific research questions like “How does social media advertising influence purchase decisions?” and “What demographic groups are most affected?”, a Structured Literature Review can systematically address these questions. However, if your goal is to provide an overview of digital marketing trends over the past decade, a Regular Literature Review might be more appropriate.
• Methodology: If you’re conducting a study comparing the effectiveness of various teaching methods in improving student outcomes, you likely need a structured approach to identify and analyze relevant studies. In this case, a Structured Literature Review aligns with your research methodology. Conversely, if you want to explore the historical development of education theories, a Regular Literature Review allows for a more narrative examination.
• Available Literature: Let’s say you’re researching a highly specialized niche topic in a relatively new field with limited peer-reviewed articles. A Structured Literature Review could be challenging due to the scarcity of sources. In contrast, a Regular Literature Review can incorporate a wider range of materials, such as conference papers, books, and reports, making it more feasible.
• Audience Expectations: Consider submitting your review to a journal that primarily publishes Structured Literature Reviews. In this case, adhering to the format expected by the journal aligns with the audience’s preferences and increases the chances of publication. Conversely, if you’re writing for a publication with a tradition of regular Literature Reviews, sticking to that format makes sense.

Examples in the context of Computer Science Domain

1. Scope:

Example: Imagine you’re researching the topic of “Machine Learning Algorithms for Image Classification.” If your research goal is to compare the performance of three specific machine learning algorithms (e.g., Support Vector Machines, Random Forest, and Convolutional Neural Networks) on a narrowly defined dataset, a Structured Literature Review would be suitable. It allows you to systematically analyze and compare these algorithms for a specific research question.

Alternatively, if you want to provide a broad overview of the evolution of machine learning techniques in image classification, including their historical context, key milestones, and trends, a Regular Literature Review is a better fit. It provides the flexibility to explore the topic holistically.

2. Methodology:

Example: Consider a research project aiming to analyze the security vulnerabilities in blockchain technology. If you plan to follow a systematic approach, including a predefined search strategy, specific inclusion and exclusion criteria, and a quantitative analysis of identified vulnerabilities, a Structured Literature Review aligns with your methodology. This format allows for a rigorous examination of the literature to answer precise research questions about security in blockchain.

On the other hand, if your research focuses on discussing the challenges, applications, and future directions of blockchain technology in a broader context without specific hypotheses, a Regular Literature Review is appropriate. It lets you provide a comprehensive narrative discussion of the topic without the need for a strict systematic approach.

3. Available Literature:

Example: Let’s say you’re investigating the role of quantum computing in cryptography. If there’s an abundance of peer-reviewed articles, research papers, and studies on this subject, a Structured Literature Review can efficiently analyze and synthesize the existing literature to answer specific questions, such as “What are the current encryption challenges that quantum computing poses?”

Conversely, if the literature on this topic is limited due to its emerging nature, a Regular Literature Review can incorporate a wider range of sources, including blog posts, whitepapers, and conference presentations, to provide a more comprehensive overview of the field.

4. Audience Expectations:

Example: Suppose you’re submitting your review to a computer science journal that primarily publishes Structured Literature Reviews with a focus on algorithm optimization. In this case, adhering to the structured format expected by the journal aligns with the audience’s preferences. It ensures that your work meets the journal’s requirements and increases the likelihood of acceptance.

However, if you intend to contribute to a publication that traditionally features regular Literature Reviews in computer science, your choice of a regular format is more suitable. It fits the journal’s style and audience expectations, making your submission a better match.

More Examples in Tabular Format

Here are few more examples in a table format, specifically focused on computer science, to illustrate how different parameters influence the choice between a Structured Literature Review (SLR) and a Regular Literature Review (RLR):

• Practical Advice: For a Structured Literature Review, rigor is key. Develop a detailed protocol outlining your search strategy, inclusion/exclusion criteria, and data extraction methods before you start. This ensures a systematic approach.
• Source Selection: Focus on peer-reviewed journal articles and established research databases to maintain a high standard of quality and reliability in your sources.
• Organization: Structure your review according to established guidelines such as PRISMA. This typically includes sections like Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion. This structured format enhances transparency and replicability.
• Writing Style: Maintain a concise and objective writing style. Report your findings systematically, emphasizing key details like study characteristics, outcomes, and limitations. Avoid personal opinions or conjecture.

Examples:

Regular Literature Review: Suppose you’re writing a Regular Literature Review on the topic of “The Evolution of Cloud Computing.” Practical tips include:

• Organization: Start with an introduction that sets the stage by defining cloud computing and its significance. Then, organize your review chronologically, discussing the major milestones and developments over the years.
• Source Selection: Besides academic journals, explore reputable technology magazines and whitepapers from leading cloud service providers like AWS, Azure, and Google Cloud.
• Writing Style: Ensure clarity in your explanations, especially when discussing technical concepts. Use graphics or diagrams to illustrate key points, making them accessible to a broad readership.

Structured Literature Review: Imagine you’re conducting a Structured Literature Review on “The Impact of Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare.” Practical tips include:

• Practical Advice: Develop a clear protocol outlining your search strategy (e.g., keywords, databases), inclusion/exclusion criteria (e.g., publication date, study types), and data extraction process.
• Source Selection: Prioritize studies from reputable medical journals and academic databases, focusing on systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, and cohort studies.
• Organization: Structure your review following PRISMA guidelines, beginning with an Introduction explaining the importance of AI in healthcare, followed by Methods, Results (summarizing study characteristics and findings), and Discussion (highlighting key takeaways and limitations).
• Writing Style: Maintain an objective and concise tone. Emphasize the evidence-based findings from your selected studies, avoiding conjecture or subjective commentary.

These practical tips for each format help researchers navigate the unique requirements and expectations of Regular Literature Reviews and Structured Literature Reviews in their respective research projects.

1. As we’ve explored in the previous sections, the choice between a Regular Literature Review (RLR) and a Structured Literature Review (SLR) hinges on several critical factors. These include the scope of your research, the methodology you plan to employ, the available literature on your topic, and the expectations of your target audience or publication venue. Each of these parameters should be carefully considered as they will significantly influence the format that best serves your research objectives.
2. Take a moment to reflect on your research objectives and how they align with the parameters we’ve discussed. If your primary goal is to provide a broad overview, historical context, or narrative exploration of a topic, a Regular Literature Review might be your best choice. On the other hand, if your research is highly focused, requiring a systematic analysis to address specific questions or hypotheses, a Structured Literature Review may be more appropriate.
3. It’s important to recognize that there’s no one-size-fits-all solution when it comes to choosing between RLR and SLR. Your decision should be guided by the unique characteristics of your research project and the goals you aim to achieve. What works for one study may not work for another. Therefore, it’s essential to make this decision through thoughtful evaluation, considering the specific context and objectives of your research.

Suppose you are conducting research in the field of artificial intelligence and are deciding between a Regular Literature Review and a Structured Literature Review. If your research goal is to provide a comprehensive narrative of AI’s historical development, discussing key milestones and trends, a Regular Literature Review is a natural choice. It allows you the flexibility to explore the evolution of AI over time and offer insights accessible to a wide audience.

On the other hand, if you are researching the performance comparison of deep learning algorithms for natural language processing tasks, and your objective is to systematically evaluate their effectiveness through predefined criteria, a Structured Literature Review is your best option. This format ensures rigor in your analysis and allows for a focused examination of the relevant literature.

In conclusion, the decision between RLR and SLR should not be taken lightly. By weighing your research goals against the parameters discussed in this guide, you can make an informed choice that aligns with the unique needs of your research project. Remember that the format you select can significantly impact the clarity and effectiveness of your literature review, so choose wisely based on your specific research objectives.

You can refer to the following Systematic Literature Review papers for further understanding.

1. Systematic Literature Review on Machine Learning and Student Performance Prediction: Critical Gaps and Possible Remedies

 Boran Sekeroglu ^*,†,Rahib Abiyev ^†,Ahmet Ilhan ^†,Murat Arslan ^† and John Bush Idoko ^†

2. A systematic literature review on machine learning applications for consumer sentiment analysis

using online reviews :Praphula Kumar Jain ^a, Rajendra Pamula ^a, Gautam Sriva