Tables & Figures for a Review (amann-tables-figures)

When to trigger

The synthesis is done and the reader needs to see the field at a glance
The organizing framework would land far better as a diagram than as prose
A fragmented literature would be clearer as a synthesis table than as paragraphs
You are tempted to paste a regression table — but this is a review, not a primary paper

Annals exhibits summarize and reorganize across the literature; they never present the author's own estimation. The workhorses:

Exhibit	Purpose	Design notes
Framework figure	render the organizing spine — typology grid, process model, multi-level architecture	this is usually the review's signature exhibit; it should be restate-able from memory and carry the "new way of seeing the field"
Who-studied-what synthesis table	one row per study (or per stream): construct, theory base, method/context, finding, your appraisal	rows ordered by the framework's cells, not chronology; columns let the reader compare comparable work
Search / coverage exhibit	a PRISMA-style flow, a search-terms table, or a publications-over-time chart	documents the systematic process from `amann-literature-synthesis` and pre-empts "why did you omit X?"
Agenda / gap matrix	the framework's empty cells laid out as the future-research agenda	turns the generativity of the framework into a concrete, visible roadmap