The number of academic papers doubles every 12 years. This wealth of new knowledge is exciting, but the pace of growth makes keeping up with the latest developments increasingly difficult.
One response to this challenge is “living literature reviews”. At Open Phil, we define a living literature review as a continuously updated online collection of accessible articles that synthesize academic research on a specific topic. These reviews are primarily written by a single expert who is responsible for its quality and accuracy.
Living literature reviews aim to be accessible to readers unfamiliar with a field while maintaining rigor. Unlike news articles that often focus on single, sensational studies, these reviews provide a broader perspective, synthesizing findings from multiple sources. They differ from traditional academic literature reviews by avoiding paywalls, dense jargon, and lengthy formats that pose barriers to non-specialists. Moreover, because they don’t assume familiarity with the assumptions of a field, living literature reviews aim to describe how conclusions were reached, not just what the conclusions are. This transparency allows readers to better understand the research methodology and form their own judgment on the strength of the findings.
Living literature reviews also help readers assess a field by relying on a single individual to provide a consistent voice, perspective, and expert curatorial taste. While these individuals collaborate with other experts in their fields, having one consistent author allows readers to gauge how much they trust the author’s judgment over time.
Finally, living literature reviews leverage digital platforms for hosting and distribution. Websites allow for post-publication corrections and updates, enabling a level of currency that traditional print reviews can’t match. Complementing these, email newsletters and podcasts extend the reach and convenience of learning about academic research.
By making research accessible to a broader audience, living literature reviews can facilitate interdisciplinary connections and inform policy work. They offer insights into work happening in adjacent fields, potentially inspiring collaborations and novel research directions.
Open Philanthropy supports several living literature reviews:
- New Things Under the Sun by Matt Clancy: social science research on science and innovation
- Existential Crunch by Florian Jehn: academic literature on societal collapse
- Some Are Useful by Tom Gebhart: how AI and machine learning are used in different parts of science
- Good Questions Review by Paul Kellner: the relationship between academic research and policy impact
We are now seeking pre-proposals from individuals to write living literature reviews. We are particularly interested in reviews on neglected topics relevant to policymaking. Ideal candidates will have a PhD or equivalent expertise in their proposed area. Our support typically allows authors to dedicate a quarter to a third of their time to the project.
If you’re interested in launching your own living literature review, we encourage you to reach out. For more information on how to submit a pre-proposal, please contact matt.clancy@openphilanthropy.org.