academic book review

Organizing Research for Arts and Humanities Papers and Theses

• General Guide Information
• Developing a Topic
• What are Primary and Secondary Sources
• What are Scholarly and Non-Scholarly Sources
• Writing an Abstract
• Writing Academic Book Reviews
• Writing A Literature Review
• Using Images and other Media

Purpose of a Book Review

Note: This information is geared toward researchers in the arts and humanities. For a detailed guide on writing book reviews in the social sciences, please check the USC Libraries guide to  Writing and Organizing Research in the Social Sciences , authored by Dr. Robert Labaree.

When writing an academic book review, start with a bibliographic citation of the book you are reviewing [e.g., author, title, publication information, length]. Adhere to a particular citation style, such as Chicago, MLA, or APA.  Put your name at the very end of the book review text.

The basic purpose of a book review is to convey and evaluate the following:

a.     what the book is about;

b.     the expertise of the author(s);

c.     how well the book covers its topic(s) and whether it breaks new ground;

d.     the author’s viewpoint, methodology, or perspective;

e.     the appropriateness of the evidence to the topical scope of the book;

f.      the intended audience;

g.     the arrangement of the book (chapters, illustrations) and the quality of the scholarly apparatus, such as notes and bibliographies.

Point "c. how well the book covers its topics and whether it breaks new ground" requires your engagement with the book, and can be approached in a variety of ways. The question of whether the book breaks new ground does not necessarily refer to some radical or overarching notion of originality in the author’s argument. A lot of contemporary scholarship in the arts or humanities is not about completely reorienting the discipline, nor is it usually about arguing a thesis that has never been argued before. If an author does that, that's wonderful, and you, as a book reviewer, must look at the validity of the methods that contextualize the author's new argument.

It is more likely that the author of a scholarly book will look at the existing evidence with a finer eye for detail, and use that detail to amplify and add to existing scholarship. The author may present new evidence or a new "reading" of the existing evidence, in order to refine scholarship and to contribute to current debate. Or the author may approach existing scholarship, events, and prevailing ideas from a more nuanced perspective, thus re-framing the debate within the discipline.

The task of the book reviewer is to “tease out” the book’s themes, explain them in the review, and apply a well-argued judgment on the appropriateness of the book’s argument(s) to the existing scholarship in the field.

For example, you are reviewing a book on the history of the development of public libraries in nineteenth century America. The book includes a chapter on the role of patronage by affluent women in endowing public libraries in the mid-to-late-1800s. In this chapter, the author argues that the role of women was overlooked in previous scholarship because most of them were widows who made their financial bequests to libraries in the names of their husbands. The author argues that the history of public library patronage, and moreover, of cultural patronage, should be re-read and possibly re-framed given the evidence presented in this chapter. As a book reviewer you will be expected to evaluate this argument and the underlying scholarship.

There are two common types of academic book reviews: short summary reviews, which are descriptive, and essay-length critical reviews. Both types are described further down.

[Parenthetically, writing an academic/scholarly book review may present an opportunity to get published.]

Short summary book reviews

For a short, descriptive review, include at least the following elements:

a.     the bibliographic citation for the book;

b.     the purpose of the book;

c.     a summary of main theme(s) or key points;

d.     if there is space, a brief description of the book’s relationship to other books on the same topic or to pertinent scholarship in the field.

e.     note the author's affiliation and authority, as well as the physical content of the book, such as visual materials (photographs, illustrations, graphs) and the presence of scholarly apparatus (table of contents, index, bibliography, footnotes, endnotes, credit for visual materials);

f.     your name and affiliation.

Critical or essay-length book reviews

For a critical, essay-length book review consider including the following elements, depending on their relevance to your assignment:

b.     an opening statement that ought to peak the reader’s interest in the book under review

c.     a section that points to the author’s main intentions;

d.     a section that discusses the author’s ideas and the book’s thesis within a scholarly perspective. This should be a critical assessment of the book within the larger scholarly discourse;

e.     if you found errors in the book, point the major ones and explain their significance. Explain whether they detract from the thesis and the arguments made in the book;

f.     state the book's place within a strand of scholarship and summarize its importance to the discipline;

g.    include information about the author's affiliation and authority, as well as the physical content of the book, such as visual materials (photographs, illustrations, graphs) and the presence of scholarly apparatus (table of contents, index, bibliography, footnotes, endnotes, credit for visual materials);

h.     indicate the intended readership of the book and whether the author succeeds in engaging the audience on the appropriate level;

i.     your name and affiliation.

Good examples of essay-length reviews may be found in the scholarly journals included in the JSTOR collection, in the New York Review of Books , and similar types of publications, and in cultural publications like the New Yorker magazine.

Remember to keep track of your sources, regardless of the stage of your research. The USC Libraries have an excellent guide to  citation styles  and to  citation management software . 

• << Previous: Writing an Abstract
• Next: Writing A Literature Review >>
• Last Updated: Jan 19, 2023 3:12 PM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/ah_writing

• Link to facebook
• Link to linkedin
• Link to twitter
• Link to youtube
• Writing Tips

How to Write an Academic Book Review

4-minute read

• 13th September 2019

For researchers and postgraduates , writing a book review is a relatively easy way to get published. It’s also a good way to refine your academic writing skills and learn the publishing process. But how do you write a good academic book review? We have a few tips to share.

1. Finding a Book to Review

Before you can write a book review, you need a suitable book to review. Typically, there are two main ways to find one:

• Look to see which books journal publishers are seeking reviews for.
• Find a book that interests you and pitch it to publishers.

The first approach works by finding a journal in your field that is soliciting reviews. This information may be available on the journal’s website (e.g., on a page titled “Books for Review”). However, you can also email the editor to ask if there are book review opportunities available.

Alternatively, you can find a book you want to review and pitch it to journal editors. If you want to take this approach, pick a book that:

• Is about a topic or subject area that you know well.
• Has been published recently, or at least in the last 2–3 years.
• Was published by a reputable publisher (e.g., a university printing press).

You can then pitch the review to a journal that covers your chosen subject.

Some publishers will even give reviewers access to new books. Springer, for example, has a scheme where reviewers can access books online and receive a print copy once a review is published. So this is always worth checking.

2. Follow the Style Guide

Once you know the journal you want to write for, look for the publisher’s style guide. This might be called the “Author Instructions” or “Review Guidelines,” but it should be available somewhere on the publisher’s website. If it is not obviously available, consider checking with the editor.

Find this useful?

Subscribe to our newsletter and get writing tips from our editors straight to your inbox.

When you have found the style guide, follow its instructions carefully. It should provide information on everything from writing style and the word count to submitting your review, making the process much simpler.

3. Don’t Make It About You!

You’d be surprised how often people begin by summarizing the book they’re reviewing, but then abandon it in favor of explaining their own ideas about the subject matter. As such, one important tip when reviewing an academic book is to actually review the book , not just the subject matter.

This isn’t to say that you can’t offer your own thoughts on the issues discussed, especially if they’re relevant to what the author has argued. But remember that people read reviews to find out about the book being reviewed, so this should always be your focus.

4. Questions to Answer in a Book Review

Finally, while the content of a review will depend on the book, there are a few questions every good book review should answer. These include:

• What is the book about? Does it cover the topic adequately? What does the author argue? Ideally, you will summarize the argument early on.
• Who is the author/editor? What is their field of expertise? How does this book relate to their past work? You might also want to mention relevant biographical details about the author, if there are any.
• How does the author support their argument? Do they provide convincing evidence? Do they engage with counterarguments? Try to find at least one strength (i.e., something the book does well) and one weakness (i.e., something that could be stronger) to write about.
• As a whole, has the book helped you understand the subject? Who would you recommend it to? This will be the concluding section of your review.

If you can cover all these points, you should end up with a strong book review. All you need then is to have it proofread by the professionals .

Share this article:

Post A New Comment

Got content that needs a quick turnaround? Let us polish your work. Explore our editorial business services.

2-minute read

How to Cite the CDC in APA

If you’re writing about health issues, you might need to reference the Centers for Disease...

5-minute read

Six Product Description Generator Tools for Your Product Copy

Introduction If you’re involved with ecommerce, you’re likely familiar with the often painstaking process of...

3-minute read

What Is a Content Editor?

Are you interested in learning more about the role of a content editor and the...

The Benefits of Using an Online Proofreading Service

Proofreading is important to ensure your writing is clear and concise for your readers. Whether...

6 Online AI Presentation Maker Tools

Creating presentations can be time-consuming and frustrating. Trying to construct a visually appealing and informative...

What Is Market Research?

No matter your industry, conducting market research helps you keep up to date with shifting...

Make sure your writing is the best it can be with our expert English proofreading and editing.

Book Reviews

What this handout is about.

This handout will help you write a book review, a report or essay that offers a critical perspective on a text. It offers a process and suggests some strategies for writing book reviews.

What is a review?

A review is a critical evaluation of a text, event, object, or phenomenon. Reviews can consider books, articles, entire genres or fields of literature, architecture, art, fashion, restaurants, policies, exhibitions, performances, and many other forms. This handout will focus on book reviews. For a similar assignment, see our handout on literature reviews .

Above all, a review makes an argument. The most important element of a review is that it is a commentary, not merely a summary. It allows you to enter into dialogue and discussion with the work’s creator and with other audiences. You can offer agreement or disagreement and identify where you find the work exemplary or deficient in its knowledge, judgments, or organization. You should clearly state your opinion of the work in question, and that statement will probably resemble other types of academic writing, with a thesis statement, supporting body paragraphs, and a conclusion.

Typically, reviews are brief. In newspapers and academic journals, they rarely exceed 1000 words, although you may encounter lengthier assignments and extended commentaries. In either case, reviews need to be succinct. While they vary in tone, subject, and style, they share some common features:

• First, a review gives the reader a concise summary of the content. This includes a relevant description of the topic as well as its overall perspective, argument, or purpose.
• Second, and more importantly, a review offers a critical assessment of the content. This involves your reactions to the work under review: what strikes you as noteworthy, whether or not it was effective or persuasive, and how it enhanced your understanding of the issues at hand.
• Finally, in addition to analyzing the work, a review often suggests whether or not the audience would appreciate it.

Becoming an expert reviewer: three short examples

Reviewing can be a daunting task. Someone has asked for your opinion about something that you may feel unqualified to evaluate. Who are you to criticize Toni Morrison’s new book if you’ve never written a novel yourself, much less won a Nobel Prize? The point is that someone—a professor, a journal editor, peers in a study group—wants to know what you think about a particular work. You may not be (or feel like) an expert, but you need to pretend to be one for your particular audience. Nobody expects you to be the intellectual equal of the work’s creator, but your careful observations can provide you with the raw material to make reasoned judgments. Tactfully voicing agreement and disagreement, praise and criticism, is a valuable, challenging skill, and like many forms of writing, reviews require you to provide concrete evidence for your assertions.

Consider the following brief book review written for a history course on medieval Europe by a student who is fascinated with beer:

Judith Bennett’s Ale, Beer, and Brewsters in England: Women’s Work in a Changing World, 1300-1600, investigates how women used to brew and sell the majority of ale drunk in England. Historically, ale and beer (not milk, wine, or water) were important elements of the English diet. Ale brewing was low-skill and low status labor that was complimentary to women’s domestic responsibilities. In the early fifteenth century, brewers began to make ale with hops, and they called this new drink “beer.” This technique allowed brewers to produce their beverages at a lower cost and to sell it more easily, although women generally stopped brewing once the business became more profitable.

The student describes the subject of the book and provides an accurate summary of its contents. But the reader does not learn some key information expected from a review: the author’s argument, the student’s appraisal of the book and its argument, and whether or not the student would recommend the book. As a critical assessment, a book review should focus on opinions, not facts and details. Summary should be kept to a minimum, and specific details should serve to illustrate arguments.

Now consider a review of the same book written by a slightly more opinionated student:

Judith Bennett’s Ale, Beer, and Brewsters in England: Women’s Work in a Changing World, 1300-1600 was a colossal disappointment. I wanted to know about the rituals surrounding drinking in medieval England: the songs, the games, the parties. Bennett provided none of that information. I liked how the book showed ale and beer brewing as an economic activity, but the reader gets lost in the details of prices and wages. I was more interested in the private lives of the women brewsters. The book was divided into eight long chapters, and I can’t imagine why anyone would ever want to read it.

There’s no shortage of judgments in this review! But the student does not display a working knowledge of the book’s argument. The reader has a sense of what the student expected of the book, but no sense of what the author herself set out to prove. Although the student gives several reasons for the negative review, those examples do not clearly relate to each other as part of an overall evaluation—in other words, in support of a specific thesis. This review is indeed an assessment, but not a critical one.

Here is one final review of the same book:

One of feminism’s paradoxes—one that challenges many of its optimistic histories—is how patriarchy remains persistent over time. While Judith Bennett’s Ale, Beer, and Brewsters in England: Women’s Work in a Changing World, 1300-1600 recognizes medieval women as historical actors through their ale brewing, it also shows that female agency had its limits with the advent of beer. I had assumed that those limits were religious and political, but Bennett shows how a “patriarchal equilibrium” shut women out of economic life as well. Her analysis of women’s wages in ale and beer production proves that a change in women’s work does not equate to a change in working women’s status. Contemporary feminists and historians alike should read Bennett’s book and think twice when they crack open their next brewsky.

This student’s review avoids the problems of the previous two examples. It combines balanced opinion and concrete example, a critical assessment based on an explicitly stated rationale, and a recommendation to a potential audience. The reader gets a sense of what the book’s author intended to demonstrate. Moreover, the student refers to an argument about feminist history in general that places the book in a specific genre and that reaches out to a general audience. The example of analyzing wages illustrates an argument, the analysis engages significant intellectual debates, and the reasons for the overall positive review are plainly visible. The review offers criteria, opinions, and support with which the reader can agree or disagree.

Developing an assessment: before you write

There is no definitive method to writing a review, although some critical thinking about the work at hand is necessary before you actually begin writing. Thus, writing a review is a two-step process: developing an argument about the work under consideration, and making that argument as you write an organized and well-supported draft. See our handout on argument .

What follows is a series of questions to focus your thinking as you dig into the work at hand. While the questions specifically consider book reviews, you can easily transpose them to an analysis of performances, exhibitions, and other review subjects. Don’t feel obligated to address each of the questions; some will be more relevant than others to the book in question.

• What is the thesis—or main argument—of the book? If the author wanted you to get one idea from the book, what would it be? How does it compare or contrast to the world you know? What has the book accomplished?
• What exactly is the subject or topic of the book? Does the author cover the subject adequately? Does the author cover all aspects of the subject in a balanced fashion? What is the approach to the subject (topical, analytical, chronological, descriptive)?
• How does the author support their argument? What evidence do they use to prove their point? Do you find that evidence convincing? Why or why not? Does any of the author’s information (or conclusions) conflict with other books you’ve read, courses you’ve taken or just previous assumptions you had of the subject?
• How does the author structure their argument? What are the parts that make up the whole? Does the argument make sense? Does it persuade you? Why or why not?
• How has this book helped you understand the subject? Would you recommend the book to your reader?

Beyond the internal workings of the book, you may also consider some information about the author and the circumstances of the text’s production:

• Who is the author? Nationality, political persuasion, training, intellectual interests, personal history, and historical context may provide crucial details about how a work takes shape. Does it matter, for example, that the biographer was the subject’s best friend? What difference would it make if the author participated in the events they write about?
• What is the book’s genre? Out of what field does it emerge? Does it conform to or depart from the conventions of its genre? These questions can provide a historical or literary standard on which to base your evaluations. If you are reviewing the first book ever written on the subject, it will be important for your readers to know. Keep in mind, though, that naming “firsts”—alongside naming “bests” and “onlys”—can be a risky business unless you’re absolutely certain.

Writing the review

Once you have made your observations and assessments of the work under review, carefully survey your notes and attempt to unify your impressions into a statement that will describe the purpose or thesis of your review. Check out our handout on thesis statements . Then, outline the arguments that support your thesis.

Your arguments should develop the thesis in a logical manner. That logic, unlike more standard academic writing, may initially emphasize the author’s argument while you develop your own in the course of the review. The relative emphasis depends on the nature of the review: if readers may be more interested in the work itself, you may want to make the work and the author more prominent; if you want the review to be about your perspective and opinions, then you may structure the review to privilege your observations over (but never separate from) those of the work under review. What follows is just one of many ways to organize a review.

Introduction

Since most reviews are brief, many writers begin with a catchy quip or anecdote that succinctly delivers their argument. But you can introduce your review differently depending on the argument and audience. The Writing Center’s handout on introductions can help you find an approach that works. In general, you should include:

• The name of the author and the book title and the main theme.
• Relevant details about who the author is and where they stand in the genre or field of inquiry. You could also link the title to the subject to show how the title explains the subject matter.
• The context of the book and/or your review. Placing your review in a framework that makes sense to your audience alerts readers to your “take” on the book. Perhaps you want to situate a book about the Cuban revolution in the context of Cold War rivalries between the United States and the Soviet Union. Another reviewer might want to consider the book in the framework of Latin American social movements. Your choice of context informs your argument.
• The thesis of the book. If you are reviewing fiction, this may be difficult since novels, plays, and short stories rarely have explicit arguments. But identifying the book’s particular novelty, angle, or originality allows you to show what specific contribution the piece is trying to make.
• Your thesis about the book.

Summary of content

This should be brief, as analysis takes priority. In the course of making your assessment, you’ll hopefully be backing up your assertions with concrete evidence from the book, so some summary will be dispersed throughout other parts of the review.

The necessary amount of summary also depends on your audience. Graduate students, beware! If you are writing book reviews for colleagues—to prepare for comprehensive exams, for example—you may want to devote more attention to summarizing the book’s contents. If, on the other hand, your audience has already read the book—such as a class assignment on the same work—you may have more liberty to explore more subtle points and to emphasize your own argument. See our handout on summary for more tips.

Analysis and evaluation of the book

Your analysis and evaluation should be organized into paragraphs that deal with single aspects of your argument. This arrangement can be challenging when your purpose is to consider the book as a whole, but it can help you differentiate elements of your criticism and pair assertions with evidence more clearly. You do not necessarily need to work chronologically through the book as you discuss it. Given the argument you want to make, you can organize your paragraphs more usefully by themes, methods, or other elements of the book. If you find it useful to include comparisons to other books, keep them brief so that the book under review remains in the spotlight. Avoid excessive quotation and give a specific page reference in parentheses when you do quote. Remember that you can state many of the author’s points in your own words.

Sum up or restate your thesis or make the final judgment regarding the book. You should not introduce new evidence for your argument in the conclusion. You can, however, introduce new ideas that go beyond the book if they extend the logic of your own thesis. This paragraph needs to balance the book’s strengths and weaknesses in order to unify your evaluation. Did the body of your review have three negative paragraphs and one favorable one? What do they all add up to? The Writing Center’s handout on conclusions can help you make a final assessment.

Finally, a few general considerations:

• Review the book in front of you, not the book you wish the author had written. You can and should point out shortcomings or failures, but don’t criticize the book for not being something it was never intended to be.
• With any luck, the author of the book worked hard to find the right words to express her ideas. You should attempt to do the same. Precise language allows you to control the tone of your review.
• Never hesitate to challenge an assumption, approach, or argument. Be sure, however, to cite specific examples to back up your assertions carefully.
• Try to present a balanced argument about the value of the book for its audience. You’re entitled—and sometimes obligated—to voice strong agreement or disagreement. But keep in mind that a bad book takes as long to write as a good one, and every author deserves fair treatment. Harsh judgments are difficult to prove and can give readers the sense that you were unfair in your assessment.
• A great place to learn about book reviews is to look at examples. The New York Times Sunday Book Review and The New York Review of Books can show you how professional writers review books.

Works consulted

We consulted these works while writing this handout. This is not a comprehensive list of resources on the handout’s topic, and we encourage you to do your own research to find additional publications. Please do not use this list as a model for the format of your own reference list, as it may not match the citation style you are using. For guidance on formatting citations, please see the UNC Libraries citation tutorial . We revise these tips periodically and welcome feedback.

Drewry, John. 1974. Writing Book Reviews. Boston: Greenwood Press.

Hoge, James. 1987. Literary Reviewing. Charlottesville: University Virginia of Press.

Sova, Dawn, and Harry Teitelbaum. 2002. How to Write Book Reports , 4th ed. Lawrenceville, NY: Thomson/Arco.

Walford, A.J. 1986. Reviews and Reviewing: A Guide. Phoenix: Oryx Press.

You may reproduce it for non-commercial use if you use the entire handout and attribute the source: The Writing Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Make a Gift

• My Library Account
• Gateway Seminary
• GS Student Resources

How to Write a Book Review: Introduction

• Introduction

Steps to Write a Book Review

• Other Resources on Writing Reviews

Writing Book Reviews

Academic book reviews are helpful in enabling people to decide if they want to read a given book. A book review is not a book report, which you may hae done in elementary school. A book report describes the basic contents. Book reviews go far deeper than that. This guide will explain what an academic book review is and how to write one well.

Introduction to Writing Book Reviews

• What is a Book Review?
• Benefits of Writing Book Reviews

 What is a Book Review?

• Describes the purpose of the book
• Describes the contents of the book (subject of each chapter)
• Analyzes the approach/argument(s) of the book: Does it seem accurate? Does it make sense? Is the argument strong or weak?
• Assesses whether the book did what the author said it would do
• Suggests potential audiences for the book (pastors, students, professors, lay people) and potential uses, such as a textbook
• Based upon a careful reading of the entire book
• Uses a structured, formal, academic tone
• Most often appears in academic journals, though more informal versions may appear in magazines and blogs
• May include comparisons to other works in the same subject, e.g., if you are reviewing a book on Paul's theology, it would help to compare it briefly to another book on Paul's theology
• In an academic setting, a review assumes an academic audience

A book review requires the reviewer to read the book carefully and reflect on its contents. The review should tell a reader what the book seeks to do and offer an appraisal of how well the author(s) accomplished this goal. That is why this is a "critical" book review. You are analyzing the book, not simply describing it. A review assumes that the readers know the vocabulary of the discipline. For example, a reviewer of a book on the Gospel of Matthew could use "Q" and not need to explain it because it is assumed that the audience knows what Q is in the context of talking about the canonical gospels.

A book review does not

• Seek to be entertaining and/or engaging
• Describe your feelings regarding the book, e.g., “I loved it,” “it was terrible,” or “I disagree completely.”
• Superficial treatment similar to the blurb on the back of the book
• Offers an ad hominem (against the person) attack on the author

Here are two examples of typical academic book reviews:

https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=lsdar&AN=ATLAiFZU171223002713&site=eds-live&authtype=ip,sso&custid=s8984749

https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=lsdar&AN=ATLAi9KZ180630003303&site=eds-live&authtype=ip,sso&custid=s8984749

You may see non-academic book reviews that are more inform al or use humor but that is not appropriate for an academic book review.

Why would you write a book review? There are a few reasons.

• Meet a course requirement
• Understand a book better and grow as a scholar
• Write reviews for publications in the future, such as magazines

1. Your professor assigned it. You are probably reading this page because a professor gave you an assignment to write a review. This is straightforward. Your professor may have a specific set of requirements or directions and you need to follow those, even if they differ from what you read here. In either case, assume that your review is for a large audience. 

2. Writing a review will help you understand a book better. When you are going to write a good book review, you need to read the entire book carefully. By assigning a book review, the professor is seeking to help you understand the book better. A book review is a critical assessment of a book. “Critical” here means analytical. What did the author seek to do and how convincing was it? Your professor wants you to read the book carefully enough to explain both. A critical assessment recognizes that the status of an author/scholar is no guarantee that the book accomplishes its goal. The skill of critical assessment is valuable in all your research work, both now and after graduation.

3. You may have an opportunity in the future to write a book review for a denominational publication, a magazine like Christianity Today , a church newsletter, or in a blog post, which is very common.

So, a book review can fulfill a course requirement, make you better at critical assessment of the views of others, and create opportunities to use that skill for various publications.

Step 1: Read the book carefully.

Step 2: Write the basics.

Step 3: Fill in the details.

These steps are explained in the next tab of this research guide.

This is not for Book Reflections

If you have a (personal) reflection on a book assigned, what this guide says, besides step #1, likely does not apply to your assignment. You need to ask your professor for guidance on writing a reflection. There are two reasons.

1. A book reflection is not a standard, academic type of document. Therefore, general help based upon reading book reviews is not relevant.

2. Book reflections are heavily dependent upon exactly what a professor asks for. These frequently require comparing good and bad points of the book. That is not a feature of book reviews as such and reviews do not include your personal reflections.

Library Links

• Library Catalog
• A to Z Journal Databases & Ebook Collections
• Library Hours
• Library Policies & Procedures
• More Research Guides & Reference Helps

Need help? Ask us!

Ask a Librarian!

Make an Appointment with a Librarian

• Next: Steps to Write a Book Review >>
• Last Updated: Jun 20, 2022 4:36 PM
• URL: https://gs.libguides.com/BookReviews

Expert Tips for Writing an Academic Book Review

Navigating the intricacies of writing an academic book review can be a challenging yet rewarding endeavor. This guide aims to demystify the process, offering invaluable book review advice and writing tips .

Whether you’re a seasoned academic or a curious novice, these insights will enhance your book critique skills and contribute meaningfully to scholarly dialogue.

Grasping the Essence of the Book

• To truly capture the essence of the book, create a mind map highlighting its main ideas, themes, and arguments. For instance, if reviewing a book on climate change, identify key concepts like environmental policies, global impact, and scientific data.
• Challenge yourself to go beyond the summary. Pose questions: What new perspectives does the book offer? How does it challenge existing paradigms? For example, if the book presents a novel theory on renewable energy, discuss how this theory diverges from or complements existing literature.

Strategies for an Impactful Book Review

• When emphasizing the book’s contribution, consider using a ‘before and after’ approach. How did existing knowledge stand before this book, and how does it stand now? For example, if the book introduces groundbreaking research on neurological disorders, highlight how this research alters previous understanding.
• Balance in critique is key. For every critique, find a positive. If you point out a lack of empirical evidence in one chapter, also highlight the author’s compelling argumentation or innovative methodology in another.

Structuring Your Review

• Start with an engaging hook in your introduction. Perhaps a surprising statistic or a provocative question related to the book’s theme. Then, lead into the author’s thesis and your thesis about the book.
• When analyzing, don’t just list facts. Engage with the content. Agree, disagree, question, and relate to other works. For example, if reviewing a historical text, compare the author’s interpretation of an event with other historians’ viewpoints.

Best Practices in Review Writing

• Use quotes not just to show but to argue. A quote should support your critique or highlight a point. For instance, use a quote to demonstrate the author’s unique writing style or to critique an unsupported argument.
• Maintain objectivity, but don’t shy away from weaving in your personal academic perspective. Share how the book resonated with or challenged your own scholarly experiences.

Contextual Analysis

• Compare the book with others in the same field. Create a comparison chart: themes, methodologies, and conclusions. For example, if reviewing a book on behavioral economics, contrast it with Daniel Kahneman’s works to highlight differences in approach and conclusions.
• Contextualize the author’s contributions within the broader academic conversation. How does this work push the field forward? What conversations does it ignite? This approach not only shows your grasp of the subject but also places the book in a larger academic narrative.

By implementing these engaging and actionable strategies, your book review will not only be informative but also a thought-provoking piece that stimulates academic discussion and showcases your depth of understanding in the field.

Mastering the art of writing an academic book review involves striking a balance between comprehensive analysis and succinct writing. By applying these book review tips and strategies, you’ll not only appraise the book effectively but also contribute to the broader academic conversation.

Learn more in-depth techniques through Publication Academy’s Digital Badge Program . Aside from the modules that cover academic book reviews , we also offer courses that touch on developing paid training proposals , writing newsletters , and much more!

Get in touch with our team to get started.

• Full Name *
• Contact Reason * -- General Inquiry -- Technical Support
• I consent to my data being stored according to the guidelines set out in the Privacy Policy *
• I consent to receiving e-mails with discounts and offers
• Email This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

© 2021-2024 Publication Academy, Inc. All Rights Reserved

The Thursday Thinker Terms & Conditions Privacy Policy

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site, you are agreeing to the use of cookies outlined in our Cookie Policy .

• Harvard Library
• Research Guides
• Faculty of Arts & Sciences Libraries

Finding Book Reviews

Introduction, basic sources.

• Additional Sources
• 18th-19th Century British Book Reviews
• Major Review Periodicals and their Indexes

This guide is intended to help Harvard students and faculty find book reviews. Book reviews are published in general/popular magazines (e.g., Newsweek ), scholarly journals (e.g., British Journal for the History of Science ), and in book review periodicals ( New York Review of Books ). The reviews may be brief summaries or long scholarly evaluations.

Find them by consulting periodical indexes and book review indexes. This guide lists some of the major general indexes which include book reviews. Many periodical indexes index book reviews; others do not. See Finding Articles in General and Popular Periodicals (North America and Western Europe) for general periodical indexes which may index book reviews. Research guides to specialized periodical indexes are listed in the Introduction to Finding Articles in General and Popular Periodicals (North America and Western Europe) .

Online resources are available through Harvard Library (Harvard ID and PIN required) unless otherwise indicated.

If you want scholarly evaluative book reviews, you may wish to omit reviews in: American Libraries , Booklist , Choice , Library Journal , Publishers Weekly . These reviews do provide good short statements of the subjects of books.

HOLLIS In the Catalog+Articles search, enter the title of your book in quotes ("").  If the title is short and insufficient to specify the book, add the author's name. If there are too many other kinds of articles, choose Reviews under Resource Type on the left side of the screen. Example: Emigrants Sebald.

Academic Search Premier (EBSCOHost) coverage is, largely, from the 1980s to the present. For book reviews enter author and title words. Thus, "Buell and imagination" for reviews of Lawrence Buell's The Environmental Imagination . Results can be limited to book reviews by using the Document Type limitation, but this may exclude some articles of interest, e.g., interviews with the author, which are not strictly speaking book reviews.

Citation Indexes (Web of Science) . Choose General Search. You may enter the authors last name and a word or words from the title. Thus for W. G. Sebald's Vertigo , search Sebald and Vertigo. You may limit to Book Reviews using "Restrict search by languages and document types:". A guide is available: Searching the Citation Indexes (Web of Science) . The Web of Science comprises three indexes: Science Citation Index, (1900- ), Social Sciences Citation Index (1956- ) and Arts and Humanities Citation Index (1975- ). The indexed journals are listed by subject categories in the Thomson Master Journal List .

H-Net Reviews in the Humanities and Social Sciences (1994- ) offers online reviews of academic books.

JSTOR contains full text book reviews for over 200 journals in many subjects. Journals are covered from their date of inception to around 5 years ago. Choose Search JSTOR, then enter search in the form <rt:book title ra:book author>. Thus, for MacArthur and Wilson's Theory of Island Biogeography search: ra:MacArthur rt:biogeography.

Periodicals Index Online includes several thousand general/humanities/social sciences journals indexed from their dates of inception to 1995.

• Next: Additional Sources >>
• Last Updated: Nov 4, 2023 9:05 PM
• URL: https://guides.library.harvard.edu/bookreviews

Harvard University Digital Accessibility Policy

The Academic Book Review

• First Online: 22 August 2023

Cite this chapter

• Irena Vassileva 2  

58 Accesses

This chapter dwells on the features and functions of the academic book review and uses the methodology of contrastive discourse analysis where the languages envisaged are English and German. The methodological apparatus for the analysis of academic book reviews in the two languages is the classical theory of argumentation. The results of the analysis show that of the three types of argumentation depending on the speaker’s purpose (epistemic, deontic, and ethical), epistemic argumentation dominates the reviews. This is not surprising, since academic discourse generally reflects the natural striving of science for the truth and for explanations of phenomena. Deontic argumentation is observed in recommendations where reviewers usually propose alternative, allegedly better ways and means of solving a particular problem. In contrast to other academic genres, deontic argumentation is relatively more frequent due to the evaluative character of the reviews. The same holds for ethical argumentation that presupposes the categorization of a claim on the scale of ‘good–bad’. Although this kind of personalized evaluation clashes in principle with the universal assumption of the objectivity of science, the wide use of topoi from the person in reviews points once again to their highly subjective character.

Especially prominent in this respect is the relatively frequent use of ‘personal attacks’ in English, realized in “scornful, contemptuous, and sarcastic tones” (Tannen, J Pragmatics, 34:1664, 2002)—a fact that contradicts Galtung’s (Struktur, Kultur und intellektueller Stil. Ein vergleichender Essay über sachsonische, teutonische, gallische und nipponische Wissenschaft. In Wierlacher A (ed) Das Fremde und das EigeneJudicum-Verlag, pp 151–193, 1985) observation that the English-speaking academic discourse community is more tolerant than the German-speaking one. This new development is most probably due to the function of English as the world lingua franca of research, the language which is the medium of the ever-growing global competition in academia.

A shorter version of part of this chapter, including all graphs, has been published in: Vassileva, Irena (2010) Critical Book Reviews in German. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 20, N 3 . 354–367.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Durable hardcover edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

The peculiar reluctance when it comes to criticism can also be explained by the fear that criticized colleagues could “take revenge” as reviewers under the protection of anonymity. Giving well-founded criticism is more time-consuming than handing out compliments, it benefits the competition, and replication studies hardly bring any reputation. In addition, criticism often goes largely unnoticed.

http://linguistlist.org/pubs/reviews/guidelines.cfm

The frequent references to printing mistakes also seem to be a professionally related speciality of linguists.

Bakhtin, M. (1981). The dialogic imagination: Four essays (C. Emerson & M. Holquist, Trans.; M. Holquist, Ed.). University of Texas Press.

Google Scholar  

Bakhtin, M. (1986). Speeh genres and other late essays (Ver W. McGee, Trans.; C. Emerson & M. Holquist, Eds.). University of Texas press.

Bal-Gezegin, B. (2016). A corpus-based investigation of metadiscourse in academic book reviews. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 232 , 713–718.

Article   Google Scholar  

Becher, T. (1989). Academic tribes and territories: Intellectual inquiry and the cultures of disciplines . SRHE/OUP.

Bhatia, V. K. (2004). Worlds of written discourse . Continuum.

Candlin, C., & Maley, Y. (1997). Intertextuality and interdiscursivity in the discourse of alternative dispute resolution. In B.-L. Gunnarson, P. Linell, & B. Nordberg (Eds.), The construction of professional discourse (pp. 201–222). Longman.

Clark, K., & Holquist, M. (1984). Michail Bakhtin . Harvard University Press.

Clyne, M. (1991). The sociocultural dimension: The dilemma of the German-speaking scholar. In H. Schröder (Ed.), Subject-oriented texts (pp. 49–67). de Gruyter.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Clyne, M. (1993a). Pragmatik, Textstruktur und kulturelle Werte. Eine interkulturelle Perspektive. In H. Schröder (Ed.), Fachtextpragmatik (pp. 3–18). Gunter Narr Verlag.

Clyne, M. (1993b). Homogene und heterogene Strömungen: Eindrücke aus dem fernen Süden von der deutschen Sprache und dem neuen Europa. In J. Born & G. Stickel (Eds.), Deutsch als Verkehrssprache in Europa (pp. 2–37). Walter de Gruyter.

Diani, G. (2007). The representation of evaluative and argumentative procedures: Examples from the academic book review article. Textus, XX , 37–56.

Eggs, E. (1994). Grammaire du discours argumentatif . Kime.

Eggs, E. (1996). Formen des Argumentierens in Zeitungskommentaren – Manipulation durch mehrsträngig-assoziatives Argumentieren? In E. W. B. Hess-Lüttich, W. Holly, & U. Püschel (Eds.), Textstrukturen im Medienwandel (pp. 179–209). Peter Lang.

Fairclough, N. (1989). Language and power . Longman.

Foucault, M. (1972). The archaeology of knowledge . Tavistock Publications.

Fröhlich, G. (2003). Kontrolle durch Konkurrenz und Kritik? Das „wissenschaftliche Feld“ bei Pierre Bourdieu. In Boike Rehbein, Gernot Saalmann, Hermann Schwengel (Eds.), Pierre Bourdieus Theorie des Sozialen (117–129). UVK.

Galtung, J. (1985). Struktur, Kultur und intellektueller Stil. Ein vergleichender Essay über sachsonische, teutonische, gallische und nipponische Wissenschaft. In A. Wierlacher (Ed.), Das Fremde und das Eigene (pp. 151–193). Judicum-Verlag.

Giannoni, D. S. (2006). Expressing praise and criticism in economic discourse: A comparative analysis of English and Italian Book Reviews. In G. Del Lungo Camiciotti, M. Dossena, & B. Crawford Camiciottoli (Eds.), Variation in business and economics discourse. Diachronic and genre Prespectives (pp. 126–138). Officina Edizioni.

Giannoni, D. S. (2007). Metatextual evaluation in journal editorial. Textus, XX , 57–82.

Gläser, R. (1990). Fachtextsorten im Englischen . Gunter Narr Verlag.

Halliday, M. (1985). Introduction to functional grammar . Edward Arnold.

Hunston, S. (1993). Professional conflict: Disagreement in academic discourse. In M. Baker, G. Francis, & E. Tognini-Bonelli (Eds.), Text and technology: In honour of John Sinclair (pp. 115–134). John Benjamins.

Hutz, M. (2001). “Insgesamt muss ich leider zu einem ungünstigen Urteil kommen.” Zur Kulturspezifik wissenschaftlicher Rezensionen im Deutschen und Englischen. In Ulla Fix, et al. (Eds.), Zur Kulturspezifik von Textsorten (pp. 109–130). Stauffenburg Verlag.

Hyland, K. (2004). Disciplinary discourses, Michigan classics ed.: Social interactions in academic writing . University of Michigan Press.

Book   Google Scholar  

Hyland, K., & Diani, G. (2009). Academic evaluation. Review genres in university settings . Palgrave Macmillan.

Itakura, H., & Tsui, A. B. M. (2011). Evaluation in academic discourse: Managing criticism in Japanese and English book reviews. Journal of Pragmatics, 43 ( 5 ), 1366–1379. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2010.10.023

Knapp-Potthoff, A. (1992). Secondhand politeness. In R. J. Watts et al. (Eds.), Politeness in language (pp. 203–220). Mouton de Gruyter.

Kristeva, J. (1986). Word, dialogue and novel. In T. Moi (Ed.), The Kristeva reader (pp. 34–61). Blackwell.

Lather, P. (1999). To be of use: The work of reviewing. Review of Educational Research, LXIX (1), 15–26.

Maingueneau, D. (1976). Initiation aux Methodes d’Analyse du Discours . Hachette.

Martin, J. R. (1998). Discourses of science. Recontextualisation, genesis, intertextuality and hegemony. In J. R. Martin & R. Veel (Eds.), Reading science. Critical and functional perspectives on discourse of science (pp. 3–14). Routledge.

McElholm, D. (2002). Text and argumentation in English for science and technology . Peter Lang.

Moreno, A. I., & Suárez, L. (2008). A study of critical attitude across English and Spanish academic book reviews. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, VII (1), 2–7.

Moreno, A. I., & Suárez, L. (2009). Academic book reviews in English and Spanish: Critical comments and rhetorical structure. In K. Hyland & G. Diani (Eds.), Academic evaluation. Review genres in university settings (pp. 161–178). Palgrave Macmillan.

Motta-Roth, D. (1996). Investigating connections between text and discourse communities: A cross-disciplinary study of evaluative discourse practices in academic book reviews . Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Association for Applied linguistics, 23–26 March 1996, http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/eridocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/39/cf/88.pdf . Accessed on 14 Feb 2008.

Obeng-Odoom, F. (2014). Why write book reviews? Australian Universities’ Review, 56 (1), 78–82.

Ong, W. J. (1977). The Writer’s audience is always a fiction. In Interfaces of the word: Studies in the evolution of consciousness and culture (pp. 53–81). Cornell University.

Ottmers, C. (1996). Rhetorik . J. B. Metzler Verlag.

Pagano, A. (1994). Negatives in written texts. In M. Coulthard (Ed.), Advances in written text analysis (pp. 250–265). Routledge.

Pätzold, J. (1984). Beschreibung und Erwerb von Handlungsmustern . Beispiel: Rezensionen wissenschaftlicher Publikationen . Akademie der Wissenschaften der DDR. Reihe A. Arbeitsberichte 138.

Phelps, L. (1990). Audience and authorship: The disappearing boundary. In G. Kirsch & D. Roen (Eds.), A sense of audience in written communication (pp. 153–174). Sage Publications.

Purves, A. C. (1984). The teacher as reader: An anatomy. College English, 46 , 259–265.

Römer, U. (2008). Identification impossible? A corpus approach to Realisations of evaluative meaning in academic writing. Functions of Language, XV (1), 115–130.

Salager-Meyer, F. (2001). The bittersweet rhetoric of controversiality in 19th- and 20th-century French and English medical literature. Journal of Historical Pragmatics, 2 , 141–173.

Sanz, R. L. (2009). (Non-) critical voices in the reviewing of history discourse: A cross-cultural study of evaluation. In K. Hyland & G. Diani (Eds.), Academic evaluation. Review genres in university settings (pp. 143–160). Palgrave Macmillan.

Shaw, P. (2004). How do we recognise implicit evaluation in academic book reviews? In G. Del Lungo Camiciotti & E. Tognini Bonelli (Eds.), Academic discourse – New insights into evaluation (pp. 121–140). Peter Lang.

Shaw, P. (2009). The lexis and grammar of explicit evaluation in academic book reviews, 1913 and 1993. In K. Hyland & G. Diani (Eds.), Academic evaluation. Review genres in university settings (pp. 217–235). Palgrave Macmillan.

Simon, L. (1996). The pleasures of book reviewing: Suggestions for how to get started as a book reviewer, when one should not review a particular book and how the review publication process works. Journal of Scholarly Publishing. North York: Jul 1996, 27 ( 4 ), 237–241.

Spink, A., Robins, D., & Schamber, L. (1998). Use of scholarly book reviews: Implications for electronic publishing and scholarly communication. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 49 (4), 364–374.

Swales, J. (2004). Research genres. Exploration and applications . Cambridge University Press.

Tannen, D. (2002). Agonism in academic discourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 34 , 1651–1669.

Tomlinson, B. (1990). Ong may be wrong: Negotiating with nonfictional readers. In G. Kirsch & D. Roen (Eds.), A sense of audience in written communication (pp. 85–98). Sage Publications.

Van Eemeren, F. H. (1996). Fundamentals of argumentation theory . Erlbaum.

Vassileva, I. (2006). Author-audience interaction. A cross-cultural perspective . Asgard Verlag.

Vassileva, I. (2010). Critical book reviews in German. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 20 (3), 354–367.

Ventola, E. (1999). Semiotic spanning at conferences: Cohesion and coherence in and across conference papers and their discussions. In W. Bublitz, U. Lenk, & E. Ventola (Eds.), Coherence in spoken and written discourse (pp. 1–35). John Benjamins.

Volosinov, V. N. (1973). Marxism and the philosophy of language (L. Matejka & I. R. Titunik, Trans.). Seminar Press. Generally attributed to M. M. Bakhtin.

Wiegand, H. E. (1983). Nachdenken über wissenschaftliche Rezensionen. Deutsche Sprache, 11 , 122–137.

Wiley, M. V. (1993). How to read a book: Reflections on the ethics of book reviewing. The Journal of Advanced Composition, 13 (2), 477–492. Accessed at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/20865928

Wills, W. (1997). Hedges in expert-language reviews. In R. Markkanen & H. Schröder (Eds.), Hedging and discourse: Approaches to the analysis of a pragmatic phenomenon in academic texts (pp. 134–147). Walter de Gruyter.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Foreign Languages and Cultures, New Bulgarian University, Sofia, Bulgaria

Irena Vassileva

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Vassileva, I. (2023). The Academic Book Review. In: Confrontation in Academic Communication. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-32736-0_4

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-32736-0_4

Published : 22 August 2023

Publisher Name : Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-031-32735-3

Online ISBN : 978-3-031-32736-0

eBook Packages : Social Sciences Social Sciences (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

• Research Guides
• Vanderbilt University Libraries
• Central Library

How to Find Book Reviews

• Academic Book Reviews
• Best Starting Places
• General Sources
• Books Published Before 1990

African-American and Diaspora Studies

• International Index to Black Periodicals This link opens in a new window Select "Review" under Document Type. more... less... All current Vanderbilt University students, faculty, and staff have access, both on and off campus.

Anthropology

• AnthroSource This link opens in a new window Archive of all journals, newsletters, and bulletins of the American Anthropological Association.

• Art Full Text and Art Index Retrospective This link opens in a new window Comprehensive resource for art literature: articles, indexing and abstracting of journals, and art dissertations; covering fine, decorative, and commercial art, folk art, photography, film, and architecture. Includes indexing of publications, and citations of book reviews. Indexing of art reproductions provides examples of styles and art movements, including works by emerging artists. more... less... Coverage: 1929 to present. User Limit: 4.

Asian Studies

• Historical Abstracts This link opens in a new window Select "Review" under Publication Type. more... less... Coverage: 1955 to present. User Limit: 6.
• JSTOR This link opens in a new window In Advanced Search, select Narrow By "Review."
• Nature Browse reviews by year: Click “Archive” in the headline banner, then click “Article category archive,” then look for “Books and Arts.”
• Science Book reviews may be searched or browsed by ticking the “Book & Web Reviews” box on the Advanced Search page.
• Springer Link This link opens in a new window Journal articles, book chapters, reference works, and protocols. more... less... All current Vanderbilt University students, faculty, and staff have access, both on and off campus.
• Business Source Complete This link opens in a new window Select "Book Review" under Document Type. more... less... All current Vanderbilt University students, faculty, and staff have access, both on and off campus.
• American Chemical Society Publications This link opens in a new window American Chemical Society's peer-reviewed research journals in chemical and related sciences.
• Choice Reviews Online This link opens in a new window ***Individual user accounts will not be ported to the new site. Users will need to create new individual accounts on choicereviews.org. For instructions on how to do so, please see the Choice Reviews Quick-start Guide.*** Reviews of academic books, electronic media, and Internet resources of interest to those in higher education. more... less... User Limit: 1. Vendor Tutorials: http://choicereviews.org/faq
• Royal Society of Chemistry Journals Do a search for book reviews in the search field.

Cinema & Media Studies

• FIAF International Index to Film Periodicals This link opens in a new window Indexes academic and popular film journals. In the Advanced Search limit Document Type to "Review" for best results. more... less... Coverage: 1972 to present.
• Année Philologique This link opens in a new window To find reviews: Search for the title of the book. In the detail record for the book there will be a list of references to book reviews at the end of the entry. more... less... Coverage: 1969 to present. User Limit: Unlimited. Vendor Tutorials: http://www.library.vanderbilt.edu/central/classics/APhGuide.html
• Classical Review The Classical Review publishes informative reviews from leading scholars on new work covering the literatures and civilizations of ancient Greece and Rome.

Communication Studies

• Communication & Mass Media Complete (CMMC) This link opens in a new window Content of CommSearch and Mass Media Articles Index and other journals in communication, mass media, and other closely-related fields of study.

Computer Science

• ACM Digital Library This link opens in a new window Association for Computing Machinery's access to journals, magazines, transactions, ACM proceedings, SIG proceedings, newsletters, and publications by affiliated organizations.

Earth and Environmental Science

• Earth Formerly known as Geotimes.
• Geology Today
• Nature Geoscience
• EconLit with Full Text This link opens in a new window Comprehensive, indexed bibliography with selected abstracts of the world's economic literature, produced by the American Economic Association. Includes working papers which have been licensed from the Cambridge University Press. more... less... Coverage: 1969 to present. User Limit: Unlimited.
• Education Full Text This link opens in a new window Select "Review" under Document Type. more... less... Coverage: 1929 to present. Full text begins 1996. User Limit: 4.

Engineering

• IEEE Xplore This link opens in a new window To browse book reviews, click the “Advanced Search” link, then type “book reviews” (quote marks optional) and change the value in the dropdown box to “IEEE Terms.” To search for a review of a specific title, follow the first steps above, then in the second search box enter the book title in quotes, keeping “Metadata Only” in the dropdown box. more... less... Coverage: 1988 to present. User Limit: 15.

English & Theatre

• Annual Bibliography of English Language and Literature, 1920- (ABELL) This link opens in a new window Select "Review" under Limit To. more... less... Coverage: 1920 to present.
• MLA International Bibliography This link opens in a new window Subject indexing of journals, books, proceedings, and dissertations in the areas of literature, language and linguistics, folklore, film, literary theory & criticism, dramatic arts, and the historical aspects of printing and publishing. more... less... Coverage: 1926 to present.

A brief selection of resources is below.  A larger selection is on the book reviews tab of the History Resources research guide.

• America: History and Life This link opens in a new window Select "Review" under Publication Type. more... less... Coverage: 1910 to present. User Limit: 6.

Jewish Studies

Mathematics.

• MathSciNet: Mathematical Reviews (EBSCOhost) This link opens in a new window Pure and applied mathematics and statistics, and applications to other fields, such as physics, computer science, and engineering. Most entries contain an author's abstract or critical review. more... less... Coverage: 1940 to present.
• MathSciNet: Mathematical Reviews (American Mathematical Society) This link opens in a new window Pure and applied mathematics and statistics, and applications to other fields, such as physics, computer science, and engineering. Most entries contain an author's abstract or critical review. more... less... Coverage: 1940 to present.
• Music Periodicals Database This link opens in a new window A database of articles published in music and related periodicals containing over 160,000 citations to more than 350 journals. Under Advanced Search, limit "Document Type" to "Review" for best results. more... less... User Limit: 5.
• Philosopher's Index This link opens in a new window Click Advanced Search, then select "Book Review" under Publication Type. more... less... Coverage: 1940 to present.
• ScienceDirect This link opens in a new window Scientific, business, technical and medical journals and books, including pre-pub and open access content. The back file of the Business collection is an invaluable archival source for business research. In Advanced Search, limit Article Types to Book Reviews. more... less... All current Vanderbilt University students, faculty, and staff have access, both on and off campus. You can set up your own personal profile which will enable you to save searches and create alerts for new issues.

Political Science

• Worldwide Political Science Abstracts (WPSA) This link opens in a new window In Advanced Search, choose "Book Review" from Document type. more... less... Coverage: 1975 to present.
• PsycINFO This link opens in a new window In Advanced Search, choose "Review-book" from Record type. more... less... Coverage: 1800s to present.
• ATLA (American Theological Library Association) Religion Database with ATLA Serials (Alumni Access) This link opens in a new window Select "Review" under Publication Type more... less... Access Note: To obtain or reset a VUNetID, submit a request via the link Ask a Librarian with your full name, school name and the year of graduation. Coverage: 19th century to present.
• Religion and Philosophy Collection This link opens in a new window Select "Book Review" under Document Type
• Review of Biblical Literature
• Reviews in Religion and Theology Journal dedicated to the review of theological scholarship
• Sociological Abstracts This link opens in a new window In Advanced Search, choose "Book Review" from Document type. more... less... Coverage: 1953 to present.
• << Previous: Books Published Before 1990
• Last Updated: Dec 7, 2023 2:13 PM
• URL: https://researchguides.library.vanderbilt.edu/bookreviews

• Library Home
• Library Guides

How do I find reviews?

• Book Reviews

Getting Started

Reviews for a general audience, reviews for a scholarly audience.

• Film Reviews
• Music Reviews
• Theater Reviews

Do you want to know how a book was received by scholars? Are you trying to determine the quality of a particular book? Or, are you just interested in knowing if a book is worth reading? Book reviews are a great place to start. This guide provides guidance on finding two types of book reviews, those for a general audience and those for a scholarly audience.

Literature and popular works (memoirs, travel writing, manuals, etc.) are often reviewed by journalists or fellow authors upon publication in newspapers or magazines. Use the following databases to find reviews in these publications.

• Book Review Index This link opens in a new window & more less... A comprehensive online guide to book reviews with over five million review citations from thousands of publications.
• Book Review Digest Plus This link opens in a new window & more less... Book Review Digest is a reference database that provides review excerpts and book summaries for current English-language fiction and non-fiction books. Limit of 1 simultaneous user.
• Book Review Digest Retrospective This link opens in a new window 1903-1982 & more less... Indexes and abstracts reviews of English language adult and juvenile fiction and non-fiction titles. Reviews are selected from journals in the humanities, sciences, social sciences and library review media.

Other Sources for Book Reviews

Many reviews are published in newspapers and magazines. Use the guides below to find the best databases to search for reviews in these publications.

• How do I find magazines? by Ask a Librarian Updated Feb 17, 2024 312 views this year
• How do I find newspapers? by Ask a Librarian Updated Apr 3, 2024 4365 views this year

Scholarly books are reviewed in academic or peer-reviewed journals and are written by academics. As these reviews place the work in the context of current scholarship, they can take several years to appear after the book was published.

Starting Points

• JSTOR This link opens in a new window Recommended Starting Point . Use Advanced Search and limit to "Reviews". You can also limit by discipline. & more less... A database of back issues of core journals in the humanities, social sciences, and sciences. All issues of each journal are included in full-text except for the most recent 2-to-5 years.
• IBR Online This link opens in a new window & more less... Multilingual and interdisciplinary index to book reviews, chiefly in the arts, humanities and social sciences.
• Web of Science This link opens in a new window Conduct your search for book or author, and then limit to "Book Reviews". & more less... Authoritative, multidisciplinary content covers over 10,000 of the highest impact journals worldwide, including Open Access journals and over 110,000 conference proceedings. You'll find current and retrospective coverage in the sciences, social sciences, arts, and humanities, with coverage available to 1900. Includes the Science Citation Expanded, Social Sciences Citation Index, and Arts & Humanities Citation Index. Web of Science is especially useful for its citation linking.
• Periodicals Index Online This link opens in a new window & more less... Part of Nineteenth Century Index. Indexes the contents of thousands of periodicals in the humanities and social sciences from 1665 to 1995, including many European titles. Includes links to some full-text articles. Dates of full-text coverage vary by title.
• Humanities & Social Sciences Index Retrospective This link opens in a new window & more less... Database corresponds to International Index, 1907 - March 1965; Social Sciences & Humanities Index, April 1965 March 1974; Humanities Index, April 1974 March 1984; and Social Sciences Index, April 1974 March 1983

Other Databases for Book Reviews

We strongly recommend searching the article database or index that covers the academic literature in a specific field for reviews. Use the Advanced Search option and limit to "Book Reviews" or "Reviews".  Find the best database for book reviews in your field by using our subject guides.

• Library Subject Guides

Book Review Indexes in Print

Below are a few print sources for finding book reviews.

• Combined Retrospective Index to Book Reviews in Humanities Journals, 1802-1974 & more less... 10 vols. Ed by Evan Ira Farber. Woodbridge: Research Publications, 1982-1984. Covers 150 literature, philosophy, classics, folklore, linguistics & music journals, from England and the US Organized by primary authors or editors and then by book titles.
• Literary and Historical index to American Magazines, 1800-1850 & more less... Ed by Daniel A. Wells & Jonathan Daniel Wells. Westport: Praeger, 2004.

Ask a Librarian

Publications with Book Reviews

• London Review of Books Library has on microfilm 1979 - present.
• New York Review of Books This link opens in a new window & more less... New York Review of Books reviews contemporary books in all subject areas.
• New Yorker Library has in print 1925 - present.
• Publishers Weekly Library has in print and microfilm 1873 - present. Recent issues available online via Find It!
• TLS: Times Literary Supplement Historical Archive This link opens in a new window & more less... Covers 1902-2006. This easy-to-navigate, fully-searchable resource is a witness to the cultural revolutions of the last 100 years and offers unparalleled opportunities for tracking the views of influential opinion-makers, the response of their peers, the controversies of the day and how they developed. --Publisher's website
• << Previous: Home
• Next: Film Reviews >>
• Subjects: Social Services
• Updated: Feb 17, 2024 12:09 PM
• URL: https://guides.lib.uchicago.edu/reviews
• Report a problem
• Login to LibApps

Open sourcetools

How to Find Book Reviews: Scholarly Reviews

• Getting Started
• Scholarly Reviews
• Critical Reviews
• General Interest Reviews

About Scholarly Reviews

Scholarly reviews are written for scholars by scholars. These reviews place the book within the scholarly discourse, compare the book to other works in the field, and analyze the author's methodology, interpretations, and conclusions. Due to this amount of engagement with the book, reviews of academic titles may appear two or three years after publication of the book.

The searches in most of the databases below will find scholarly book reviews in addition to general interest and critical reviews. Scholarly reviews will be published in journals, and tend to be longer and more recent.

Best Bet Library Databases

• Library Catalog Search engine for materials in the library. Includes a list of all the books in the library, and a selection of articles. Does not include all articles owned by the library, but it's a good starting place.

Resources for Recent Reviews

In addition to the resources below, see also subject databases related to the discipline of the book.

Resources for Older Reviews

Research Tip: Book Review Searching

Book review searching.

• Search for the title of the book, enclosed in quotation marks ("World's Best Book")
• If the title is not very distinctive, add the author's last name
• Look for limit to "book review" or add search term "review"

Need Help? You can ask!

Other ways to get help:

Call us at 413-597-2505

Text us at 413-648-6071

Stop by during our service hours .

• << Previous: Getting Started
• Next: Critical Reviews >>
• Last Updated: Apr 8, 2024 10:24 AM
• URL: https://libguides.williams.edu/book-reviews

How to Write Academic Book Review – a Complete Guide

Introduction

Welcome to The Knowledge Nest, your go-to resource for comprehensive guides on various academic subjects. In this guide, we will provide you with all the necessary information and steps to write an outstanding academic book review.

Why Write an Academic Book Review?

Before diving into the details, let's first understand why writing an academic book review is important. A book review allows you to critically analyze and assess the merit of a particular book. It not only helps you sharpen your analytical skills but also provides an opportunity to contribute to the academic community by sharing your insights and recommendations.

Step 1: Choose the Right Book

The first step in writing a high-quality academic book review is to select the right book. Identify a book that aligns with your area of interest or the subject you are studying. Ensure that the book is relevant, reputable, and has a substantial impact on the field you wish to explore.

Step 2: Read the Book Thoroughly

Once you have chosen the book, it's time to engage in a comprehensive reading. Read the book attentively, making notes of key arguments, main themes, and any significant evidence presented by the author. Pay close attention to the author's writing style, methodology, and the overall structure of the book.

Step 3: Analyze and Evaluate

After reading the book, critically analyze and evaluate its strengths and weaknesses. Consider the author's arguments, their supporting evidence, and how effectively they present their ideas. Assess the book's contribution to the field, its relevance, and its potential impact on future scholarship.

Step 4: Organize Your Thoughts

Before starting to write the actual review, it's essential to organize your thoughts and create an outline. Identify the main points and arguments you wish to address in your review. This will help you maintain a logical flow and structure in your writing.

Step 5: Start Writing

Now that you have a clear outline, it's time to put pen to paper and start writing your academic book review. Begin with a concise introduction that provides an overview of the book and its context. Clearly state your thesis or main argument regarding the book's strengths and weaknesses.

Step 6: Support Your Claims

As you progress with your review, make sure to back up your claims and arguments with supporting evidence from the book. Quote relevant passages, cite significant examples, and provide specific details to substantiate your viewpoints. Remember to analyze and critique the book's content objectively and fairly.

Step 7: Summarize and Conclude

In the final section of your review, summarize your main points and offer a concise conclusion. Highlight the book's significance and evaluate its contribution to the field. You can also provide recommendations for further research or suggest potential audiences who would benefit from reading the book.

Step 8: Revise and Refine

After completing your initial draft, take the time to revise and refine your review. Check for grammatical errors, ensure clarity in your arguments, and strengthen the overall structure of your writing. Edit ruthlessly to make your review concise, coherent, and compelling.

Step 9: Finalize and Submit

Once you are satisfied with the quality of your review, make any final adjustments and proofread carefully. Ensure that your content adheres to any specific submission guidelines provided by your academic institution or the platform where you plan to publish your review. Submit your review with confidence!

Writing an academic book review is a challenging task that requires careful analysis, critical thinking, and effective communication skills. By following the steps outlined in this guide, you will be well-equipped to craft a comprehensive and insightful book review that contributes to the scholarly discourse in your field.

About The Knowledge Nest

The Knowledge Nest is a community-driven platform dedicated to providing valuable educational resources and comprehensive guides across various academic disciplines. Our mission is to empower learners by sharing knowledge and enabling them to excel in their educational endeavors.

Tags: Academic Book Review, How to Write Academic Book Review, Writing Book Reviews, Writing Tips, The Knowledge Nest

Ph.D. Dissertation Help on Management

How to Start a Book Report - Studybay

An Overview of the Major Ethical Issues in Information Systems

All About Nike Shoes Manufacturing Process

Architecture Thesis Examples

Tips for Writing a Biography Book Report - Studybay

Economics Research Paper Examples & Study Documents

Dissertation Data Analysis Help - Studybay

Geography Homework Help for Stress-Free Studying - The Knowledge Nest

College Homework Help for Students - Studybay

• About the LSE Impact Blog
• Comments Policy
• Popular Posts
• Recent Posts
• Subscribe to the Impact Blog
• Write for us
• LSE comment

Fleur Johns

May 19th, 2021, why, when and how 10 tips for academic book reviewers.

2 comments | 112 shares

Estimated reading time: 7 minutes

Professor Fleur Johns  offers 10 rules of thumb that have guided her own reviewing efforts and may prove helpful to others working on book reviews, or thinking of doing so, in the course of their academic lives.

A recent experience prompted me to reflect on the role of academic book reviews and about when, why and how to write them. I wrote a  review  several months ago of a book that has received widespread and overwhelmingly laudatory attention. While acknowledging the importance and value of the book’s contribution, I took issue with it in no uncertain terms and questioned its attainment of one of its major goals. Several respondents on social media reacted with verbal frowns. One wondered if I had contacted the author prior to the review’s publication (I had not). Another bristled at what they interpreted as audacity on my part, remarking that it was ‘easier’ to write a book review than ‘a book of significance’ (it is). I worried a bit too. Had I been disrespectful, ungenerous? Should I have cushioned my remarks in a fuller recitation of the book’s strengths?

Reflection on this experience led me to formulate, more explicitly than I had previously, some rules of thumb for my own reviewing efforts. I reproduce these here in case they might be helpful to others working on book reviews, or thinking of doing so, in the course of their academic lives. It goes without saying – but let me say it anyway – that these are conditioned by my own unduly privileged circumstances and that I still have much to learn, as a reviewer and otherwise. I have thought and  written about lists  in the past, and have an affection for them, so I present these as 10 suggestions:

1.  Reviewing books maintains one’s sense of being part of a larger, longer, scholarly conversation. It should be as much of a regular responsibility of academic life as peer reviewing (relative to opportunity). And like peer reviewing, it needs to be approached with greater care than it is sometimes afforded.

2.  Everyone should write book reviews, at all academic career stages. It’s not just a practice recommended for graduate students needing free books. It keeps one in the habit of close, critical, cover-to-cover reading. And what of the probable response: that contemporary academic work is structured in ways that make the continued cultivation of this habit unachievable? That may be so for many of us at many times. If we concede that across the board, however, then we acquiesce to the very transformation of universities that we often lament.

Everyone should write book reviews, at all academic career stages. It’s not just a practice recommended for graduate students needing free books. It keeps one in the habit of close, critical, cover-to-cover reading.

3.  Conflicts of interest, actual or perceived, are best avoided. Book reviewers should disclose anything that could be viewed as such. I have reviewed friends’ books before, to try to lend support to and foster engagement with colleagues’ and collaborators’ work. Upon reflection though, I should not have done so because of the possible perception that I might benefit professionally from advances in my co-authors’ and collaborators’ careers, and that my judgment might be coloured accordingly. I might instead have facilitated reviews of these books by someone at a greater distance from their authors. Of particular importance among conflicts is the following: think very carefully before reviewing a book in which your own work features prominently. If there is any reference to your work in the book you’re reviewing, let it pass. Use of the first-person voice can be refreshing, but a book review ought not to revolve predominantly around the reviewer. Professor  Leslie Green’s 2020 review  of a section of Professor Joanne Conaghan’s 2013 book (to which Conaghan offered a  patient response ) is illustrative of the kinds of perils that can be associated with dwelling, as a reviewer, on the treatment of one’s own work in the book under review.

4.  Attend to power imbalances. If you are an established academic, don’t review a first book or a book of an early career researcher with which you fervently disagree. Ordinarily, disagreement can make for engaging writing and productive argument (more on this below). However, in the context of a power imbalance favouring the reviewer, discord may be misread and could do unintended damage.

5.  Foreground the criticism. Keep summary to a minimum. Be sure to make an argument – about the book, but also by reflecting critically on the intervention that it makes in the field, and what it suggests about the state of that field. Be fair, respectful and try to meet the book on its own terms, but don’t shy away from critical engagement. It is a mark of respect for the seriousness of the author’s endeavour.

6.  Some say one should only review books that one loves. I disagree. My version would be the following: only review books by which you feel provoked, and that seem significant to you. This position counsels against reading books that hold you in their thrall. If you are utterly in awe of a book or its author, that might be a good reason not to review it (gushy reviews can be a tad nauseating). At the same time, it militates against reviewing books that you think are good, but which don’t really excite you either positively or negatively. Critique can carry a degree of risk (recall the  extraordinary tribulations  through which journal editor Professor Joseph Weiler was put by one disgruntled author). Nonetheless, a fence-sitting, anodyne review wastes the writer’s, editor’s and reader’s energies and does the author concerned no service at all. Reviewing books that frustrate you, but that you still regard as important and worthy of attention – this can really help move scholarly argument along.

If you are utterly in awe of a book or its author, that might be a good reason not to review it

7.  Don’t just review ‘up’ or focus on renowned and established authors. Seek out lesser-known works to spotlight. If you are bilingual or multilingual, seek out books in a range of languages to pitch to book review editors to help disturb the  dominance of English  in scholarly publication.

8.  Don’t send the review to the author, at least not prior to publication. Don’t imagine yourself in direct conversation with the author so much as with the book and its other readers. This does not, of course, override the imperative of being fair.

Don’t imagine yourself in direct conversation with the author so much as with the book and its other readers.

9.  Explore the genre, including the (often undervalued) review essay. Read widely in it. Approach the genre on its own terms, inspired by those book reviews that you have found most arresting and illuminating as a reader. The  Los Angeles Review of Books , the  New York Review of Books , the  London Review of Books ,  Biblio , the  Paris Review , the  Singapore Review of Books ,  The New Yorker ,  The Nation   and the  Latin American Research Review  all publish excellent book reviews, as do many other online and print publications.

10.  There are awards for book reviewing: in the US,  the Nona Balakian Citation for Excellence in Reviewing , for example. One might learn from taking a look at the work of those lauded for reviewing and trying to unpick what they do well. Accolades for book reviewing are, however, very few. If you are a member of an editorial board or scholarly association, you might consider introducing such an award. Or maybe that suggestion misses part of the point of book reviewing. The poet Philip Larkin’s letters may have presented him as a ‘ habitual racist and full-time misogynist’ . Yet he was on to something, I think, when he ruefully celebrated the unheralded reading and writing of  ‘book-drunk freak[s]’  for precisely that – its ingloriousness. Perhaps, when one can, there is some small grace in doing difficult work in honour of reading and readers, with little or no expectation of recognition.

This blogpost originally appeared on the LSE Review of Books , where readers can find a wide range of books to review. If you would like to contribute please contact the managing editor of LSE Review of Books, Dr Rosemary Deller, at  [email protected]

Note: This article gives the views of the author, and not the position of the Impact of Social Science blog, nor of the London School of Economics. Please review our  Comments Policy  if you have any concerns on posting a comment below.

Image Credit: Adapted from Cottonbro via Pexels.

About the author

Fleur Johns is a Professor and Australian Research Council Future Fellow in the Faculty of Law and Justice at UNSW Sydney. Her books include Non-Legality in International Law: Unruly Law (Cambridge 2013). Fleur is also an avid reader and a periodic writer of book reviews. Find her on Twitter at @FleurEJ

• Pingback: Top tips for writing academic book reviews (and why you should do them in the first place!) – ECRAG

These are golden rules by Professor Fleur Johns, no doubt! Everyone should read and follow these rules.

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Notify me of follow-up comments by email.

Related Posts

How to Write a Book Review of an Edited Collection

June 25th, 2019.

Author Interview: Q and A with Dr Phillipa K. Chong on Inside the Critics’ Circle: Book Reviewing in Uncertain Times

November 29th, 2020.

Bibliodiversity – What it is and why it is essential to creating situated knowledge

December 5th, 2019.

Writing for edited collections represents a model for a creative academic community unfairly rejected by the modern academy

June 12th, 2020.

Visit our sister blog LSE Review of Books

Academic Book Review: Guidelines, Template & Structure

When it comes to writing a book review it is important to be extraordinarily perceptive. Book reviews usually share some important insights that goes into the broad system of academic publishing that benefits the people in the academic profession.  

Hence, writing an academic book review carries a lot more responsibility and weightage that what it actually seems to have.  

What Is A Book Review?

What isn’t an academic book review, how do you structure a book review, phase i – assess, understand and plan before you write, phase ii – prepping to write, phase iii – writing, helpful writing tips for reviewers.

Talking about book review many people think that it is merely offering their opinion on a specific book. However, reviewing a book has a much wider scope than that. An effective book review involves assessing a book and then giving a descriptive criticism based on it.  

In general, book review involves evaluating the content, analyzing the characters, information about the author’s background and summarizing the book in short. While writing you can cover the important ideas and topics given in the book assuming that the readers have not read the book.  

While academic book reviews are written by scholars to be read by their fellow scholars. This is the reason it is also called as scholarly reviews. That being said, book reviews are useful for the researchers and readers to decide if they should go for the book or not.  

So, when outlining the academic book review structure make sure it serves the relevant purposes. This includes making the fellow scholars familiar with the objective, quality and reasoning represented by the book’s content. Also, make sure to explain how the content is suitable and valuable for the present-day literature.  

Writing an academic book review is definitely not a very easy or quick job, but it surely oils the wheels of the historians and professional book reviewers. So, if you are wondering how to write a good academic book review, it’s important to understand the prominent parts of academic book review.  

Sometimes readers confuse it with literature review but there is an evident difference between the two.  

Literature review usually focuses on providing a short summary of fellow scholar’s research, blending the present-day content on a particular current topic, and stating the limitations in their research.  

Whereas, the academic book review template appears like an entry done in the annotated bibliography. It lays the entire focus on the evaluation and summary of the published material.  

Reviewing a book means helping fellow scholars in deciding whether or not to purchase the book. It doesn’t cover any hypothesis as academic book review is not a research paper.  

Furthermore, you can’t compare it with a book report even when there might be a few similarities. A book report presents a larger outline of the book contents. The clear-cut goal of an academic book review is to analyze what the author what wanted to convey, how well have they done that, and what are your original thoughts on it (both positive and negative).  

In order to write a successful review it is important to have an excellent academic book review structure. Generally, there is a fairly easy and simple structure for most book reviews.  

• It starts with a brief introduction to summarizing the individual argument of the author and concluding it with helpful suggestions. Don’t forget to share your fair and impersonal response while writing the review.
• The right way how to write an academic book review, is to first make sure to perform some critical thinking and brief research. It will help you to write a well-structured and well-supported review in a logical manner.   In simple words, you can start with an introduction that explains the prominence of the book in relation to the current developments in the field. Understand why is it important to study about the selected topic. That way, you can quickly explain about the main argument of the author and share your insights about the content’s quality.
• In the middle section you can add summarised paragraphs for different parts of the book. Just like most reviewers you can either do it topic-wise or chapter-wise. While evaluating the author’s individual arguments make sure to analyze them based on your personal thinking and opinion.Just make sure to understand if they appropriately relate to the central ides of the book. Although, most reviewers like to share their opinions in the end of the review. But it is better to introduce your thoughts going with the flow as you analyze each element of the book.
• Lastly, give a helpful conclusion summing up the review by telling how valuable the book is. Here you need to explain the readers why they should buy and read the book and why they should not. While sharing your final evaluation make sure to be considerate and generous about the originality of the book.

Wondering How To Write A Good Academic Review?

Just go through the easy to follow academic book review guidelines discussed below.  

Sometimes reviewers or writers might not find any creative insight or research behind a published book or article . It deprives them of the motivation and they keep on thinking how to write an academic book review. Well! It is best for the scholar reviewers to take their sweet time to think it through before beginning to write.   They should plan and analyze the other theories within the subject area. Based on it, they should provide critical assessment, evaluation of the author’s methodology and relevance to other published literature.   Some points review writer must have at the back of their head includes:   What was the author’s purpose in writing the book? Remember that it is really important to highlight the content that shares the author’s objective in writing the book. That way you can provide your opinions of whether the readers or other scholars should give it a try or not.  

Understand the main argument of the book Be thorough while going through the academic book so you can understand the author’s main argument highlighted in the book.  

What sources does the author use to support her arguments? In order to provide an accurate summation of the book’s content, find out the main sources used by author to support the argument. It will help you in understanding whether or not the author was able to provide relevant and accurate summary of the content.  

Is the book well written? Just read and analyse the book thoroughly to decide if it is well-written and concise. Remember the book should be able to provide significant knowledge to the learners.  

Intended audience While doing your research make sure the book connects well with the intended readers.  

When was the book written? A crucial aspect of writing a book review is to find out the timing when it was written. You should know if it is in accordance with progressive ideas or not.  

Does the argument persuade you? Check whether the book was able to convince you with what it was trying to tell.  

Authors background and book genre Since you need to write limited words while assessing the book make sure to understand the genre and the background of the book.  

The next important phase is to master the skill of writing a successful book review. Before you actually start writing it is very important to do some prepping and thinking fundamental for writing a valuable review. Ponder upon the questions we listed above and then move ahead.  

You might even need to understand the book’s connection with similar literature. It will help you develop a personal logic and argument about the work at hand. This way you can come up with an well-organized and supported academic book review.  

Feel free to check some other relevant reviews in your subject area. After some thorough research you can collectively sum up your thoughts into a statement describing the objective of your review.  

Do you want to know how to write an academic book review? Read on to know the various elements of the book that should be covered.  

A. Introduction Start by choosing a suitable citation style of your field and then mention the book. Also, mention about the current rates of book in the market. Provide a summary of the important arguments made by the author all through their work.  

Read the book thoroughly and give an outline of the content organization in the book. Also, look out for the arguments and mention about them with relevant context.  

You should be able to allure the readers by providing relevant statements about why the book is suitable for their subject area. Here you can state some main points on author’s thesis and importance of studying it. Let’s not forget to mention about the quality of content and share some general evaluation.  

B. Body When it comes to the body of your academic book review template, you can share the main ideas mentioned in the book. Just start by writing a brief summary since there is a set word count for writing book review.  

Based on your convenience you can either write a summary chapter by chapter or topic by topic. After performing a thorough assessment of the book compare it with other literature on the same subject area. Mention how it has contributed to the previous and current literature and research.  

Talking about how to write an academic book review, a reviewer should always provide their opinion about the relevance of the book for target readers. This means you should  mention who should read the book and who should not. For example, mention if it will be useful for the college students, fellow scholars, teachers, or researchers.  

An important part of academic book review guidelines are anaylzing the research methods of the author.  

C. Conclusion While giving your concluding evaluation just try to be thoughtful with the words. Remember writing an academic book review is incomplete without reliable recommendations and criticism.  

Your scholarly views will definitely play a crucial role in helping fellow scholars and readers to decide if they should put their money in getting the book. Make sure to mention suitable reasons about why you recommend the book. This includes covering the benefits and drawbacks of the book.  

For instance, you can mention whether or not the book was interesting, concise and well-written. You should explain why readers should spend their valuable time in reading this book.  

If you are thinking how to write an academic book review effectively, go through some useful tips discussed below.  

Related : How to write a lyric poem?  

Here, take a glance at some important tips for writing a book review that is valuable for the readers.

• Just avoid being pedantic and focus on picking the major details for a successful review. This includes originality of the content, factual mistakes, relevance for the readers, focusing on each chapter and other crucial elements.
• While writing an academic book review, keep the language easy to understand, your thoughts clear, and the writing concise.
• Make sure to be careful with the tone and words that you pick while writing the review. Do not keep your tone peculiarly impersonal.
• Go through the reviews presented on some prominent studies in the chosen subject area for academic review.
• Read the academic content thoroughly to figure out the unpredictability in the writer’s argument.
• Avoid any conflicting ideas and thoughts associated with the writer of the selected academic book.
•  Be sure to provide a clear and concise summary of the book. Feel free to present your argument about the book while being respectful.
• Always dig into the references and quotations of the author to understand if the interpretation is unbiased.

Related : Best Grammar Courses Online , Online Business Writing Courses , How to write a synopsis?  

Q. What academic writing is both an evaluation and descriptions of a book?

A . A book review is a piece of academic writing that is both a concise description and evaluation about the major elements of the book. This mainly involves the critical evaluation of the meaning, importance, quality and authenticity of the book’s content. It should clearly highlight the objective and authority of the book’s matter.  

Q. How do you write a book review for a PhD?

A . Providing a book review is surely a great option to make your way in the academic profession world. While different people share different perspectives when it comes to writing a book review for a PhD.  

You just have to make sure to cover the following points: give a summary of the book’s important aspects written with kindness, provide a detailed summary for each chapter and highlight the important elements you found in the book.  

Also, give complete citation and be honest with your thoughts. Don’t forget to meticulously mention about the strengths and weakness of the book.  

Q. What are the 4 stages in writing a book review?

A . Writing an academic book review involves giving a critical analysis about prominent parts of a book to the readers. This goes for the material, advantages, layout and the importance of the book. Reviewers valuable inputs help readers to understand the benefits and limitations of the book’s matter.  

Just make sure your academic book review structure has these 4 stages: a short introduction, defining its contents, choosing specific themes or chapters and highlighting important parts and finally providing a comprehensive concluding evaluation.  

Q. How long should a book review be?

A . Generally, reviews are written in brief. Whether they are published in academic journals or newspapers, reviews are usually 600 -2000 words long.  

But it is best to summarize your review in about 1000 words. Keeping your academic book reviews concise and short is the key even when you encounter some broadened commentaries and lengthy assignments. It would be pointless to write a lengthy review since it won’t drag any special attention, instead make it troublesome for the readers to read.

Related Posts

Online Content Writing Courses with Certification  – What’s My Pick?

Best Online Poetry Classes & Courses + FAQs & Expert Suggestions

SEO Writing Training: 9 Best SEO Content Writing Courses Online

13 Best Business Writing Courses Online

Leave a comment cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Book Reviews: What Should An Academic Book Review Look Like?

• Book Reviews
• Finding Existing Book Reviews
• What Should An Academic Book Review Look Like?

Academic Book Reviews Follow a General Format

Academic Book Reviews are written for two main readers, the academic scholars and specialized readers.  Every book review will be different depending on assignment or the audience of review.  Generally speaking a review should have the following four sections.

Introduction

• Middle or Body
• Critical Book Review Tip Sheet from University of Alberta Libraries This PDF Tip Sheet has several elements to keep in mind when writing a Academic Book Review.
• Brienza, Casey. “Writing Academic Book Reviews.” Inside Higher Ed, 27 Mar. 2015, https://www.insidehighered.com/advice/2015/03/27/essay-writing-academic-book-reviews.

Standardized citation (MLA, APA, Chicago etc.) also include ISBN, number of pages in book, format (hard cover, online, etc.), and price (check cover or publishers web site for cost)  

Should generally cover three basic areas

• how this material fits into existing writings
• authors qualifications and standing in field
• history of topic
• state what the authors thesis is
• evaluate how this thesis compares with the field
• DO NOT just summarize, make sure to add your opinion as reader and expert (even if you don’t feel like one)
• give an overall value added commentary

Middle or Body – Method of Critique

• Author’s main argument
• Individual chapters and arguments
• Author’s methodology
• Accessibility / Readability
• Factual errors
• Appropriateness for intended audience
• Relationship to other research in field
• Originality
• Implications for future study
• Back up opinion with quotes from text
• Follow the Chapters : evaluate and group chapters together following the order of the book.
• Topic / Ideas : organize by the general topics covered in the book and evaluate each grouping as appropriate
• Criticism based : Each paragraph will address your critical points about the book. This can lead to a choppy review offering examples that jump around the text.
• End on a positive note but don’t lie or embellish
• Who should read and why
• Be Detailed but succinct
• Back up criticism with examples from the text. 
• Stay away from minor points such as spelling/grammar mistakes, cover art, visual appeal and gossip.
• << Previous: Finding Existing Book Reviews
• Last Updated: Nov 20, 2023 11:38 AM
• URL: https://uscupstate.libguides.com/BookReviews

Explore millions of high-quality primary sources and images from around the world, including artworks, maps, photographs, and more.

Explore migration issues through a variety of media types

• Part of The Streets are Talking: Public Forms of Creative Expression from Around the World
• Part of The Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 34, No. 1 (Winter 2020)
• Part of Cato Institute (Aug. 3, 2021)
• Part of University of California Press
• Part of Open: Smithsonian National Museum of African American History & Culture
• Part of Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies, Vol. 19, No. 1 (Winter 2012)
• Part of R Street Institute (Nov. 1, 2020)
• Part of Leuven University Press
• Part of UN Secretary-General Papers: Ban Ki-moon (2007-2016)
• Part of Perspectives on Terrorism, Vol. 12, No. 4 (August 2018)
• Part of Leveraging Lives: Serbia and Illegal Tunisian Migration to Europe, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace (Mar. 1, 2023)
• Part of UCL Press

Harness the power of visual materials—explore more than 3 million images now on JSTOR.

Enhance your scholarly research with underground newspapers, magazines, and journals.

Explore collections in the arts, sciences, and literature from the world’s leading museums, archives, and scholars.

Purdue Online Writing Lab Purdue OWL® College of Liberal Arts

Writing a Book Review

Welcome to the Purdue OWL

This page is brought to you by the OWL at Purdue University. When printing this page, you must include the entire legal notice.

Copyright ©1995-2018 by The Writing Lab & The OWL at Purdue and Purdue University. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, reproduced, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our terms and conditions of fair use.

Book reviews typically evaluate recently-written works. They offer a brief description of the text’s key points and often provide a short appraisal of the strengths and weaknesses of the work.

Readers sometimes confuse book reviews with book reports, but the two are not identical. Book reports commonly describe what happens in a work; their focus is primarily on giving an account of the major plot, characters, and/or main idea of the work. Most often, book reports are a K-12 assignment and range from 250 to 500 words. If you are looking to write a book report, please see the OWL resource, Writing a Book Report.

By contrast, book reviews are most often a college assignment, but they also appear in many professional works: magazines, newspapers, and academic journals. They typically range from 500-750 words, but may be longer or shorter. A book review gives readers a sneak peek at what a book is like, whether or not the reviewer enjoyed it, and details on purchasing the book.

Before You Read

Before you begin to read, consider the elements you will need to included in your review. The following items may help:

• Author: Who is the author? What else has s/he written? Has this author won any awards? What is the author’s typical style?
• Genre: What type of book is this: fiction, nonfiction, romance, poetry, youth fiction, etc.? Who is the intended audience for this work? What is the purpose of the work?
• Title: Where does the title fit in? How is it applied in the work? Does it adequately encapsulate the message of the text? Is it interesting? Uninteresting?
• Preface/Introduction/Table of Contents: Does the author provide any revealing information about the text in the preface/introduction? Does a “guest author” provide the introduction? What judgments or preconceptions do the author and/or “guest author” provide? How is the book arranged: sections, chapters?
• Book Jacket/Cover/Printing: Book jackets are like mini-reviews. Does the book jacket provide any interesting details or spark your interest in some way? Are there pictures, maps, or graphs? Do the binding, page cut, or typescript contribute or take away from the work?

As You Read

As you read, determine how you will structure the summary portion or background structure of your review. Be ready to take notes on the book’s key points, characters, and/or themes.

• Characters: Are there characters in the work? Who are the principal characters? How do they affect the story? Do you empathize with them?
• Themes/Motifs/Style: What themes or motifs stand out? How do they contribute to the work? Are they effective or not? How would you describe this author’s particular style? Is it accessible to all readers or just some?
• Argument: How is the work’s argument set up? What support does the author give for her/findings? Does the work fulfill its purpose/support its argument?
• Key Ideas: What is the main idea of the work? What makes it good, different, or groundbreaking?
• Quotes: What quotes stand out? How can you demonstrate the author’s talent or the feel of the book through a quote?

When You Are Ready to Write

Begin with a short summary or background of the work, but do not give too much away. Many reviews limit themselves only to the first couple of chapters or lead the reader up to the rising action of the work. Reviewers of nonfiction texts will provide the basic idea of the book’s argument without too much detailed.

The final portion of your review will detail your opinion of the work. When you are ready to begin your review, consider the following:

• Establish a Background, Remember your Audience: Remember that your audience has not read the work; with this in mind, be sure to introduce characters and principles carefully and deliberately. What kind of summary can you provide of the main points or main characters that will help your readers gauge their interest? Does the author’s text adequately reach the intended audience? Will some readers be lost or find the text too easy?
• Minor principles/characters: Deal only with the most pressing issues in the book. You will not be able to cover every character or idea. What principles/characters did you agree or disagree with? What other things might the author have researched or considered?
• Organize: The purpose of the review is to critically evaluate the text, not just inform the readers about it. Leave plenty room for your evaluation by ensuring that your summary is brief. Determine what kind of balance to strike between your summary information and your evaluation. If you are writing your review for a class, ask your instructor. Often the ratio is half and half.
• Your Evaluation: Choose one or a few points to discuss about the book. What worked well for you? How does this work compare with others by the same author or other books in the same genre? What major themes, motifs, or terms does the book introduce, and how effective are they? Did the book appeal to you on an emotional or logical way?
• Publisher/Price: Most book reviews include the publisher and price of the book at the end of the article. Some reviews also include the year published and ISBN.

When making the final touches to your review, carefully verify the following:

• Double-check the spelling of the author name(s), character names, special terms, and publisher.
• Try to read from the vantage point of your audience. Is there too much/enough summary? Does your argument about the text make sense?
• Should you include direct quotes from the reading? Do they help support your arguments? Double-check your quotes for accuracy.

Applications for 2024 Columbia Summer Session programs are now open!

Academic review committee.

The School of Professional Studies (SPS) follows Columbia University’s Arts and Sciences Guidelines for Academic Review, which require that programs undergo review every five to seven years. This process aims to cultivate and strengthen academic excellence throughout the School's graduate and continuing education programs.

Following the methodology of the Academic Review Committee (ARC), the principal functions of an academic review are (1) to assess program quality and effectiveness, (2) to foster planning and improvement, and (3) to provide guidance for administrative decisions in strategic planning. 

The academic review process includes a program self-study, convening internal and external review committees composed of industry and higher education leaders in the field of review, on-campus stakeholder meetings and class observation, the summation of the committee recommendations in a final report, and the implementation and monitoring of approved recommendations. 

Detailed information regarding committee member participation and administration may be found in the SPS Academic Review Committee Guidelines.

SPS Academic Review Committee Guidelines

• Search Menu
• Advance articles
• AHFS First Release
• AJHP Voices
• AJHP Residents Edition
• Top Twenty-Five Articles
• ASHP National Surveys of Pharmacy Practice in Hospital Settings
• Medication Safety
• Pharmacy Technicians
• Specialty Pharmacy
• Emergency Preparedness and Clinician Well-being
• Author Guidelines
• Submission Site
• Open Access
• Information for Reviewers
• Self-Archiving Policy
• Author Instructions for Residents Edition
• Advertising and Corporate Services
• Advertising
• Reprints and ePrints
• Sponsored Supplements
• Editorial Board
• Permissions
• Journals on Oxford Academic
• Books on Oxford Academic

Article Contents

The efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants in the treatment of the acute phase of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia: a systematic review.

• Article contents
• Figures & tables
• Supplementary Data

Cooper Sadowski, Justin P Reinert, The efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants in the treatment of the acute phase of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia: A systematic review, American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy , 2024;, zxae109, https://doi.org/10.1093/ajhp/zxae109

• Permissions Icon Permissions

In an effort to expedite the publication of articles, AJHP is posting manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time.

To investigate the safety and efficacy of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in the treatment of the acute phase of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT).

A systematic review of the literature was conducted on PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science Core Collection through July 2023. Search terms included “heparin-induced thrombocytopenia AND direct-oral-anticoagulants” in addition to a list of oral anticoagulants. Adult patients who used direct oral anticoagulants as the initial treatment for the acute phase of HIT were included. A total of 1,188 articles were initially identified, with 770 articles reviewed following removal of duplicates. Following the application of inclusion and exclusion criteria, 12 articles were ultimately included. Rivaroxaban was the most-utilized DOAC (28 patients), followed by apixaban (7 patients) and dabigatran (1 patient). All patients with thrombocytopenia demonstrated successful platelet recovery, with two patients presenting with normal platelet counts. One patient developed a deep venous thrombosis with no other new or recurrent thromboses. There were no reported clinically significant adverse events in any patient. Obstacles and deterrents to the use of the standards of care in the acute phase of HIT exist. Argatroban and bivalirudin require intravenous infusion and require close aPTT monitoring and dose adjustment. Fondaparinux requires injection and is contraindicated with body weight <50kg. DOACs would offer the novel ability for an oral treatment in the treatment of the acute phase HIT and allow for minimal monitoring and consistent dosing strategies. Therefore, DOACs are an intriguing choice for the treatment of the acute phase of HIT.

Data from 12 publications and across 36 patients suggests that the use of DOACs in the acute phase of HIT may be a safe and efficacious treatment option with favorable ease of monitoring and management.

Email alerts

Citing articles via.

• Recommend to Your Librarian

Affiliations

• Online ISSN 1535-2900
• Print ISSN 1079-2082
• Copyright © 2024 American Society of Health-System Pharmacists
• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Institutional account management
• Rights and permissions
• Get help with access
• Accessibility
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Maintenance work is planned for Wednesday 1st May 2024 from 9:00am to 11:00am (BST).

During this time, the performance of our website may be affected - searches may run slowly and some pages may be temporarily unavailable. If this happens, please try refreshing your web browser or try waiting two to three minutes before trying again.

We apologise for any inconvenience this might cause and thank you for your patience.

Chemical Society Reviews

Bridging the gap between academic research and industrial development in advanced all-solid-state lithium–sulfur batteries.

* Corresponding authors

a Chemical Sciences and Engineering Division, Argonne National Laboratory, 9700 S Cass Ave, Lemont, IL 60439, USA E-mail: [email protected] , [email protected]

b Eastern Institute for Advanced Study, Eastern Institute of Technology, Ningbo, Zhejiang, P. R. China

c Laurel Heights Secondary School, 650 Laurelwood Dr, Waterloo, ON, Canada

The energy storage and vehicle industries are heavily investing in advancing all-solid-state batteries to overcome critical limitations in existing liquid electrolyte-based lithium-ion batteries, specifically focusing on mitigating fire hazards and improving energy density. All-solid-state lithium–sulfur batteries (ASSLSBs), featuring earth-abundant sulfur cathodes, high-capacity metallic lithium anodes, and non-flammable solid electrolytes, hold significant promise. Despite these appealing advantages, persistent challenges like sluggish sulfur redox kinetics, lithium metal failure, solid electrolyte degradation, and manufacturing complexities hinder their practical use. To facilitate the transition of these technologies to an industrial scale, bridging the gap between fundamental scientific research and applied R&D activities is crucial. Our review will address the inherent challenges in cell chemistries within ASSLSBs, explore advanced characterization techniques, and delve into innovative cell structure designs. Furthermore, we will provide an overview of the recent trends in R&D and investment activities from both academia and industry. Building on the fundamental understandings and significant progress that has been made thus far, our objective is to motivate the battery community to advance ASSLSBs in a practical direction and propel the industrialized process.

Article information

Download citation, permissions.

J. Lee, C. Zhao, C. Wang, A. Chen, X. Sun, K. Amine and G. Xu, Chem. Soc. Rev. , 2024, Advance Article , DOI: 10.1039/D3CS00439B

To request permission to reproduce material from this article, please go to the Copyright Clearance Center request page .

If you are an author contributing to an RSC publication, you do not need to request permission provided correct acknowledgement is given.

If you are the author of this article, you do not need to request permission to reproduce figures and diagrams provided correct acknowledgement is given. If you want to reproduce the whole article in a third-party publication (excluding your thesis/dissertation for which permission is not required) please go to the Copyright Clearance Center request page .

Read more about how to correctly acknowledge RSC content .

Social activity

Search articles by author.

This article has not yet been cited.

Advertisements

Now available! Books+Publishing reviews for library & school digital catalogs

Libraries and schools around the world now have access to Books+Publishing reviews, which focuses on Australian and New Zealand published books. With 30 new reviews added each month, some reviews will be available as early as three months before the book’s publication date.  

  Established in 1921, Books+Publishing is Australia’s number-one source of news about the book industry, keeping subscribers up to date with the latest book industry news, events, features, interviews, opinion, personnel changes, job advertisements and classifieds.  

The reviews are available to librarians as they perform collection development duties. The only source of pre-publication reviews of Australian and New Zealand books, Books+Publishing becomes the ninth source of reviews available in OverDrive Marketplace.  

Libraries interested in learning more can visit the link here .  

Browse blog and media articles

Public library training, k-12 library training.