Monographs And Essays Differences

Not to be confused with Monogram.

A monograph is a specialist work of writing (in contrast to reference works)[1] on a single subject or an aspect of a subject, usually by a single author.

In library cataloging, monograph has a broader meaning, that of a nonserial publication complete in one volume (book) or a finite number of volumes. Thus it differs from a serial publication such as a magazine, journal, or newspaper.[2] In this context only, books such as novels are monographs.

In academia[edit]

See also: Monographic series

The term "monographia" is derived from the Greek "mono" (single) and grapho (to write), meaning "writing on a single subject". Unlike a textbook, which surveys the state of knowledge in a field, the main purpose of a monograph is to present primary research and original scholarship. This research is presented at length, distinguishing a monograph from an article. For these reasons, publication of a monograph is commonly regarded as vital for career progression in many academic disciplines. Intended for other researchers and bought primarily by libraries, monographs are generally published as individual volumes in a short print run.[3]

In Britain and the U.S., what differentiates a scholarly monograph from an academic trade title varies by publisher, though generally it is the assumption that the readership has not only specialized or sophisticated knowledge but also professional interest in the subject of the work.[4]

In art[edit]

Book publishers use the term "artist monograph" to indicate books dealing with a single artist, as opposed to broader surveys of art subjects.

In biology[edit]

In biological taxonomy a monograph is a comprehensive treatment of a taxon. Monographs typically review all known species within a group, add any newly discovered species, and collect and synthesize available information on the ecological associations, geographic distributions, and morphological variations within the group. See this reference as an example.[5]

The first-ever monograph of a plant taxon was Robert Morison's 1672 Plantarum Umbelliferarum Distributio Nova, a treatment of the Apiaceae.[6]

In United States Food and Drug Administration regulation[edit]

See also: Pharmacopoeia

In the context of Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulation, monographs represent published standards by which the use of one or more substances is automatically authorized. For example, the following is an excerpt from the Federal Register: "The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is issuing a final rule in the form of a final monograph establishing conditions under which over-the-counter (OTC) sunscreen drug products are generally recognized as safe and effective and not misbranded as part of FDA's ongoing review of OTC drug products."[7] Such usage has given rise to the use of the word monograph as a verb, as in "this substance has been monographed by the FDA".

See also[edit]


  1. ^Campbell, Robert; Pentz, Ed; Borthwick, Ian (2012). Academic and Professional Publishing. ISBN 978-1-78063-309-1.  .
  2. ^Prytherch, Raymond John, Harrod's librarians' glossary and reference book: a directory of over 10,200 terms, organizations, projects and acronyms in the areas of information management, library science, publishing and archive management, 10th edn (Aldershot, Hants, England ; Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2005), p. 462.; "For the purpose of library cataloging, any nonserial publication, complete in one volume or intended to be completed in a finite number of parts issued at regular or irregular intervals, containing a single work or collection of works. Monographs are sometimes published in monographic series and subseries. Compare with book."[1]
  3. ^Williams, Peter; Stevenson, Iain; Nicholas, David; Watkinson, Anthony; Rowlands, Ian (2009). "The role and future of the monograph in arts and humanities research". Aslib Proceedings. 61: 67. doi:10.1108/00012530910932294. 
  4. ^Thompson, John B. (2005). Books in the Digital Age: The Transformation of Academic and Higher Education Publishing in Britain and the United States. Cambridge: Polity Press. pp. 84–85. ISBN 978-0745634784. 
  5. ^Lent, Herman; Wygodzinsky, Pedro W. "Revision of the Triatominae (Hemiptera, Reduviidae), and their significance as vectors of Chagas' disease". Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History. 163 (3): 125–520. hdl:2246/1282. 
  6. ^Vines, Sydney Howard (1913). "Robert Morison 1620–1683 and John Ray 1627–1705". In Oliver, Francis Wall (ed.). Makers of British Botany. Cambridge University Press. p. 22. 
  7. ^"DOCID:fr21my99-6", Federal Register, Rules and Regulations, 64 (98), pp. 27666–27693, May 21, 1999 

Elements of a Monograph

While there are as many ways to write a monograph as there are authors to write them, there are nonetheless common elements in all critical monographs of which readers should be aware. In order to engage in a critical reading of a monograph, the reader should be able to identify and critique these elements.
The thesis is the central "point" of the monograph, the hypothesis the author is attempting to prove. Sometimes the author's thesis is complex, containing several subtopics or related issues. Sometimes the thesis is straightforward and unified. The reader should be able to restate an author's thesis in three or four sentences at most.

The argument is the system of logic employed by the author in order to prove the monograph's thesis. This is not merely a summary of the story told by the author, but instead recreates the logical structure that the author has put together to prove the monograph's point.

Method has to do with the rules employed by the author in organizing evidence, the kinds of question the author asks, and the approach utilized in answering them. Methodology consists of several elements, including sources, organization of the study, theoretical orientations, and manners of analysis.
Are the sources used by the author typical and appropriate to the study and the topic? Does the author use the sources in a responsible, distinctive, or even unique way? What rules of use and analysis govern the author's utilization of the sources?
Organization of the Study
Is the study organized chronologically, thematically, chaotically? Does the way in which the author organizes the study enhance the argument, or hinder it? Does it herd the study toward (or away from) a particular conclusion?
Theory and Models
On what work(s) is this study modelled? Does the author draw models and/or theoretical orientations from a specific discipline, and does its use of those models and theories liberate or limit the study? For example, it is worthwhile to examine the author's underlying assumptions about causation and the engines of change, and the ways in which these assumptions affect the author's analysis of sources.
In what forms of analysis--internal and external textual criticism, aesthetic evaluation, methodological examination, etc.--of evidence does the author engage? Are these forms of analysis appropriate and sufficent for the author's questions and conclusions?

Historiography indicates the tradition in which the author writes about the past. It has to do with the intellectual approach taken to the subject, the school of historical thought from which the author writes, and the assumptions, values, or analytical framework employed. For the purposes of American Studies, historiography should be defined broadly to include any discipline's literature within the field. The reader should look for differences between the monograph and studies which have come before; usually, these historiographical debates with the previous literature appear in footnotes, but sometimes they also appear within the text itself. Often, introductory chapters or the introductory materials in specific chapters will provide an overview of the ways in which the monograph draws upon and deviates from previous literature.

In addition to these considerations, it is also useful to address critical differences between what could be termed "research issues" on the one hand, and "storytelling issues" on the other. Research issues have to do with the conceptualization of the study, the research and thinking that went into it, and the success of the author's research questions and answers. Storytelling issues have to do with the author's success in putting across the thesis and the argument, and can include questions of style and readability. Many monographs which are excellent examples of research are much less successful examples of storytelling; the opposite is also often true. If people tell you that your monograph "reads better in French," this might be a gentle hint that you have created a great work of research and a lesser work of storytelling. On the other hand, many wonderful stories teeter on shaky foundations of research. Clearly, the goal is balance and excellence in both regards. As a reader, it is often quite helpful to be able to separate one's critique into these two categories, because horribly-told stories can often turn out to be the most important research monographs of their time.

Prepared by Professor Catherine Lavender for courses taught in The Department of History, The College of Staten Island of The City University of New York. Send email to
Last modified: Wednesday 3 February 1999.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *