Yes, figures can appear in a literature review when they add clarity, follow the journal style, and carry full captions with sources.
Readers skim. Good visuals carry weight by compressing method steps, mapping themes, or comparing results at a glance. In a review of prior work, images and tables should serve a single aim: make the narrative easier to grasp.
When Visuals Help A Review
Not every topic needs graphics. Add them when a picture tells the story faster and cleaner than paragraphs. Typical wins include a map of fields and subfields, a timeline of landmark studies, or a simple model that the reader can scan in seconds.
Fit comes first. Ask two questions: does the visual remove confusion, and can a reader understand it without hunting for the legend? If both answers are yes, it belongs. If it repeats the text or needs long notes to decode, cut it.
Strong Use Cases
- Concept maps that group theories or mechanisms across schools of thought.
- Timelines that show how ideas or methods changed across decades.
- Comparison panels that distill sample sizes, regions, and designs across studies.
- Flow charts that outline how sources were found, screened, and kept.
- Schematic drawings that explain a repeated apparatus or protocol seen across studies.
Weak Use Cases
- Decorative stock art that adds no evidence.
- Overly dense diagrams with tiny labels.
- Plots with raw data the review never discusses.
Common Visuals And When They Fit
The table below lists frequent visual types in scholarly reviews, when they earn space, and traps to avoid.
| Visual Type | Best Use | Watch For |
|---|---|---|
| Concept map | Shows relationships across themes or theories | Overcrowding; unclear grouping rules |
| Timeline | Marks turning points and method shifts | Cherry-picked dates; lack of criteria |
| Matrix table | Compares designs, samples, and measures | Too many columns; tiny fonts |
| Forest-style chart | Summarizes effect sizes across studies | Mixed metrics; missing confidence info |
| Flow diagram | Documents search, screening, and inclusion | Counts that do not match text |
| Schematic | Explains a shared setup or pipeline | Ambiguous labels; missing scale or units |
What Editors Expect
Editors want visuals that read cleanly and follow house rules. At minimum, each figure needs a number, a short title, a legend or note when needed, and a clear callout in the text. Most style guides also ask that the figure appear near its first mention. Many journals let the system place it on the page at production, but you still mark the point where the reader should see it. Submit high-resolution originals and keep editable files handy for revision. Label axes and units when space allows.
Numbering, Titles, And Notes
Number figures and tables on separate tracks: Figure 1, Figure 2 … and Table 1, Table 2 …. Put the number first, then the title in sentence case. Notes sit below the image when they explain symbols, data sources, or sample limits.
Citations And Permissions
Reused material needs credit. When you adapt, cite the source in the note line and in the references. When you reproduce, many publishers ask you to obtain permission unless the license allows reuse. Elsevier, for one, routes requests through RightsLink on a per-article basis. If you drew the image yourself based on the studies you review, make that clear by writing “adapted from” or “created by the author.”
Placement And Cross-References
Place the image after the paragraph that first mentions it. Keep the callout precise: “see Figure 2” beats “see the figure below.”
Including Figures In A Review Of Literature — Style Rules
Rules live in style books and journal guides. For social and behavioral fields, APA Style gives clear layouts for numbering, titles, and notes. You can check the official page on tables and figures for current guidance. In health research, a screening chart is common because readers expect a transparent audit trail. The PRISMA group provides a standard PRISMA 2020 flow diagram that many review articles now include.
House Guides And Variants
Not all outlets share the same rules. Some journals cap the number of display items. Others ask for files in vector format, with fonts embedded. Many want short, active titles and crisp axis labels. Read the author guide for your target journal and match its specs early to avoid rework near submission.
Style Guides At A Glance
Here is a quick snapshot of how well-known guides treat visuals. Always confirm the live rule in the latest guide for your field and journal.
| Guide | What It Says | Where To Check |
|---|---|---|
| APA Style | Separate numbering for tables and figures; titles and notes follow fixed order | Official “tables and figures” page |
| PRISMA | Standard diagram for screening and inclusion counts | PRISMA 2020 flow page |
| Journal guides | File types, size limits, color mode, and caption length vary | Target journal’s author guide |
Original Versus Reused Graphics
Original graphics are easier to adapt. Sketch your own concept maps, matrices, and schemas based on the literature you synthesize. When you must reuse a published panel, check the license. Some open access works allow reuse with attribution. Many closed access works need permission. Add a short credit line in the note so the reader sees the source without leaving the page.
Adapt, Reproduce, Or Summarize?
Three routes exist. Adapt: redraw or simplify and cite the source. Reproduce: copy as is with permission or under a license that allows it. Summarize: build a fresh figure that aggregates results across many papers. Reviews often take the third route since it adds new value while avoiding reuse hurdles.
Systematic Reviews And Flow Diagrams
When the review follows a protocol with database searches and screening, a flow diagram avoids confusion about counts. Show the number of records found, deduplicated, screened, excluded with reasons, and included. Keep those values synced with text and any appendix. Readers use that block to audit your method in seconds.
PRISMA gives clear boxes and labels, with templates for new reviews and updates. Pick the version that matches your process, fill in counts, and keep labels consistent.
Formatting Tips That Reduce Rework
- Match file type to the journal: vector (SVG, EPS, PDF) for line art; high-resolution PNG or TIFF for photos.
- Pick a clear font that matches the paper’s text. Keep sizes readable at column width.
- Limit color to a small palette with good contrast. Add direct labels so the legend can stay short.
- Write titles that state the claim, not just the topic. Notes carry details like units or codes.
- Test grayscale legibility if print is likely.
- Provide alt text that states what the figure shows and why it matters.
- Keep data to the right precision. Two decimals on estimates often suffice.
Ethics And Fair Use Basics
Ethical reuse runs on two rails: license and attribution. Licenses such as CC BY let you reuse and adapt when you cite the source. Non-open licenses often need written approval. Many publishers handle this through a permissions portal tied to each article. Treat the caption as the place to be transparent. Say whether the panel is original, adapted, or reproduced, and add the credit in the note line along with any license text the owner requests.
Quoting data points is not the same as copying a panel. You may extract numbers from published tables and then chart them in your own style as part of synthesis. That route reduces permission needs while adding value. Still, check any data use limits in the source and give credit to the studies that produced the numbers. When doubt lingers, ask the rights holder early so layout does not stall at the end.
Captions That Earn Trust
Write captions that tell the reader what to look for. Lead with the claim the panel backs, then point to key features: sample ranges, time spans, or model names. Keep abbreviations short and decode them in the note. If data were filtered or transformed, say how. Small, clear notes prevent confusion and cut reviewer queries later.
Common Pitfalls And How To Fix Them
Too Many Panels
Fix by pruning to the one panel that advances the point. Move the rest to an appendix or a link if the outlet allows.
Inconsistent Measures
Fix by standardizing metrics or by grouping panels so like compares with like. The note can list any conversions.
Unreadable Text
Fix by increasing label size, trimming jargon, and improving spacing. Dense figures cause fatigue and get skipped.
Counts That Do Not Match
Fix by checking the flow chart against the method section and any spreadsheet. Mismatched numbers erode trust fast.
Quick Steps To Decide If A Visual Belongs
- State the point the image will make in one plain sentence.
- Draft a rough sketch on paper. If the claim is not clearer than text alone, drop it.
- Check the style guide and the target journal for file type, size, and caption rules.
- Build a clean version with consistent fonts and spacing.
- Add a title that states the claim, then a short note with sources and any caveats.
- Call it out in the text and place it near the first mention.
- Proof at print size, then export to the exact file type the journal requests.
Final Takeaway
Visuals can lift a review when they make complex ideas plain, show scope at a glance, and guide the reader through the search and screening story. Pick images that earn space, follow the rules that govern captions and numbering, and cite or seek permission when you reuse. With those boxes checked, your figures will read cleanly, carry weight, and help the review land with clarity. Clear visuals boost comprehension.