How to write an annotated bibliography
Three moves per annotation, in a fixed proportion. Most students get the first right and skip the other two.
An annotated bibliography is usually set for a reason that is not explained: it is training for the literature review. Doing one properly forces you to judge sources rather than collect them, which is the skill the review will need.
What each annotation contains
Three moves, and the proportions matter as much as the content.
| Move | Answers | Share of 150 words |
|---|---|---|
| Summary | What does it argue, and how was it done? | ~40 words |
| Evaluation | How good is the evidence, and what are its limits? | ~70 words |
| Relevance | What does it contribute to your project? | ~40 words |
Evaluation is the largest share and the one most often missing. An annotation that only summarises is a longer abstract, and abstracts already exist.
A worked example
Reference
Ahmed, S. and Brown, T. (2024) 'Adherence and attrition in adolescent trials', Journal of Health Research, 18(3), pp. 210–228.
Annotation
Ahmed and Brown report attrition rates across fourteen adolescent intervention trials, finding a mean loss of 34% by six-month follow-up and identifying school-based recruitment as the strongest predictor of retention. The synthesis is thorough and the inclusion criteria clearly stated, though all fourteen trials were conducted in clinical settings, which limits what the findings can say about community programmes. The reliance on published trials also raises the possibility of reporting bias, since studies with severe attrition may never have been submitted. For this project the paper is valuable as the most recent quantification of the problem, and its clinical-only sample is itself part of the justification for examining community settings.
Notice the shape. Two sentences of summary, three of evaluation, one of relevance. The evaluation is specific rather than general: it names the limitation and explains why it matters, instead of saying the study was "useful but limited".
Descriptive versus critical
Descriptive, which loses marks
This article looks at attrition in adolescent trials. The authors reviewed fourteen studies and found high attrition rates. They discuss recruitment methods and make recommendations. It is a useful source for my topic.
Critical
The synthesis is thorough and the inclusion criteria clearly stated, though all fourteen trials were conducted in clinical settings, which limits what the findings can say about community programmes.
"It is a useful source for my topic" is the phrase to search for and delete. Say why it is useful and to which part of your argument, or say nothing.
Phrases that carry evaluation
When the evaluation sentence will not come, these openings usually unlock it:
- The strength of this study lies in...
- The findings should be treated with caution because...
- The sample is drawn exclusively from..., which means...
- This contrasts with X (Year), who found...
- The method is well suited to..., though it cannot address...
- Although widely cited, the study predates...
Formatting
- Full reference first, in your required style, formatted exactly as it would be in a reference list
- Annotation below, indented or in a new paragraph, consistently
- Alphabetical by author surname unless told otherwise
- Some briefs ask for thematic grouping with subheadings; follow the brief
- Single or double spacing as specified, applied uniformly
Choosing what to include
Where the number is fixed, say ten sources, choose for coverage rather than convenience. A strong set usually contains:
- Two or three foundational works the field keeps citing
- Three or four recent studies, ideally from the last five years
- At least one that disagrees with the others
- One methodological source, if your project needs to justify an approach
That last category is the one students forget. If you plan to use thematic analysis, an annotation on Braun and Clarke does real work later.
Using it afterwards
Keep the annotations. When you write the literature review, the evaluation sentences become your analysis and the relevance sentences tell you which theme each source belongs to. A well-made annotated bibliography is roughly half of a literature review already drafted, which ourreview guide shows how to assemble.
Last updated: 30 July 2026 · Written by the AssignWise editorial team ·Spotted something wrong?
Frequently asked questions
A list of sources where each reference is followed by a short paragraph summarising the source, evaluating its quality, and explaining its relevance to your project. It is a reference list that does some thinking.
Usually 100 to 200 words, though the brief may specify. Within that, roughly a quarter summary, a half evaluation and a quarter relevance. Most weak annotations are all summary.
An annotated bibliography treats each source separately, in alphabetical order. A literature review synthesises sources into a continuous argument organised by theme. The bibliography is often a stepping stone towards the review.
Critical, unless you are explicitly told otherwise. A descriptive annotation states what the source says; a critical one judges how well it says it and what it is good for. Marks follow the judgement.
Usually not, unless the brief invites reflection. Write "the study draws on a small clinical sample" rather than "I found the sample small". Check your brief, because reflective modules sometimes ask for the opposite.
Want a second pair of eyes on it?
Send us your document for a fixed, no-obligation quote. We reply within one working hour.
Get Your Free Quote