What's the difference between a literature review and an annotated bibliography?

[Cooper]

My advisor told me my literature review “looks like an annotated bibliography” . I don't understand the difference. An annotated bibliography is a list of sources with summaries. A literature review organizes sources by theme or debate and shows how they relate to each other and to your research question.

So instead of: “Smith (2020) found X. Jones (2021) found Y.” I should write: “Researchers disagree about X. Smith found evidence supporting Y, while Jones challenges this, arguing that Z is more significant.”

Is that right? How do I know when my literature review is synthesized enough? I'm stuck between summarizing and analyzing. Help!

 

[Trump]

Okay so here's a practical test: read your paragraph out loud. If you can replace each source name with "another person" and it still makes sense, it's probably an annotated bib. Example: "Another person found X. Another person found Y." That's a list. A lit review would sound like: "Some people think X, but others disagree because Y. This disagreement matters because Z." The second version has tension. It has stakes. Your reader should feel like something is at stake in the debate. If there's no tension, there's no review. Just a list. You're on the right track though. Your examples show you understand. Now execute.