Prof Lennart Nacke, PhD Profile picture
Sep 3, 2022 β€’ 8 tweets β€’ 29 min read β€’ Read on X
Sure, IMRaD is a scientist's ballgame, but have you heard of IRMReDiLiFuConcR?

That's how we roll at #chi2023.

Here's what's in that tongue-twisting paper structure:
πŸ§΅β†“
Introduction:

β†’ What is known?
β†’ What is unknown?
β†’ How and why should we fill the gap?
β†’ Why should people care?

Use @Grammarly @HemingwayApp @languagetool @Writefullapp @TheQuillBot @ReadableHQ @whoisjenniai when editing this section (and the rest of your paper) to rock.
@Grammarly @HemingwayApp @languagetool @Writefullapp @TheQuillBot @ReadableHQ @whoisjenniai Related work:

β†’ Prepare the state-of-the-art you will talk about later in your discussion.

Use tools like @paperpile, @pure_suggest, @ConnectedPapers, @RsrchRabbit, @scite, @scholarcy, @elicitorg, @LitmapsApp, @sci_hub_, @Science_Open to make this easy for yourself.
@Grammarly @HemingwayApp @languagetool @Writefullapp @TheQuillBot @ReadableHQ @whoisjenniai @paperpile @pure_suggest @ConnectedPapers @RsrchRabbit @scite @scholarcy @elicitorg @LitmapsApp @sci_hub_ @Science_Open Methods:

β†’ What did you do?

β†’ Present all specifics.

Write this first!

Nothing like @NotionHQ to keep track of things while you run your experiments.
@Grammarly @HemingwayApp @languagetool @Writefullapp @TheQuillBot @ReadableHQ @whoisjenniai @paperpile @pure_suggest @ConnectedPapers @RsrchRabbit @scite @scholarcy @elicitorg @LitmapsApp @sci_hub_ @Science_Open @NotionHQ @rstudio @jamovistats @JASPStats @figma @inkscape Discussion, Limitations, Future Work:

β†’ Meaning and implications of this research.
β†’ How do the results fill the gap?
β†’ Where do your results not apply?
β†’ What should we do next?

Check my last thread for an in-depth dive into how to write a discussion section.
@Grammarly @HemingwayApp @languagetool @Writefullapp @TheQuillBot @ReadableHQ @whoisjenniai @paperpile @pure_suggest @ConnectedPapers @RsrchRabbit @scite @scholarcy @elicitorg @LitmapsApp @sci_hub_ @Science_Open @NotionHQ @rstudio @jamovistats @JASPStats @figma @inkscape Conclusion: 5Cs

β†’ Why did your advancement matter?

1. Close the loop.

2. Conclude. Show what your final position is.

3. Clarify. Why it's relevant.

4. Concern. For whom does it matter?

5. Consequences. End by noting in one final sentence why this is of such importance.

β€’ β€’ β€’

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
γ€€

Keep Current with Prof Lennart Nacke, PhD

Prof Lennart Nacke, PhD Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @acagamic

Jun 14
The 3-2-1 Writing Clarity Rule that changed how I approach every academic paper:

Most academics think complex ideas need complex sentences.

They're wrong.

Here's how the 3-2-1 rule works:
3 Types of Unnecessary Words to Cut:

Redundant pairs
("completely eliminate," "exact same")

Vague time markers
("nowadays," "at this point in time")

Meaningless intensifiers
("very unique," "quite significant")
2 Voice Choices:

Passive: "The data was analyzed by the research team"
Active: "The research team analyzed the data"

Active = energy and clarity
Passive = subtlety and focus shift

Choose active
(unless actor is unknown, object is the star, or you want to detach yourself)
Read 7 tweets
May 19
I believed these 11 lies about literature reviews until I knew better

Don't let these myths hold you back.

The honest truth about literature reviews:
πŸ—£οΈ "A literature review is just a summary of sources"
Nope.
Read 45 tweets
Apr 14
How I went from 12 citations to 39,286 by changing how I wrote.

Not what I researched.

My biggest struggles as a researcher were:

* Staying motivated
* Getting published
* Being cited

The one thing I learned:
Writing a paper isn’t hard. Writing a readable one is.

Successful research papers are 60% science, 40% packaging.How to package a research paper
Here's my 7-step framework for writing papers
people actually want to read:

1. Abstract = Your 30-second pitch

Answer simply: "What problem did I solve and why should anyone care?"

Your abstract is your elevator pitch.
Most of you are still writing disclaimers.
2. Introduction = The warm oatmeal of your paper

Begin with what readers already know
before introducing your unique angle

Your introduction isn’t the place to show off.
It’s where trust begins.
Read 9 tweets
Feb 19
The biggest mistake researchers make with AI?

Using it to confirm what they already believe.

Don't turn AI into an echo chamber instead of an adversary.

The lazy way to use AI in academia:

β€’ Polish existing arguments
β€’ Speed up writing papers
β€’ Format citations faster

Using AI just to speed up, not to question methods.
But aren't we already going fast enough, folks?AI's real power is disagreeing with you (infographic)
AI's real power is in its ability to disagree with you

Try these 3 approaches instead:

1. Force AI to argue against your hypothesis

Make it play devil's advocate with cherished research assumptions. The counterarguments it generates might shed light on things you've missed.
2. Demand alternative explanations for your data

Don't just ask AI to analyze your findings. Instead, ask it to generate 3 completely different interpretations that still fit your data. Check.
Read 5 tweets
Jan 13
Most PhD students work 10x harder than needed.

I see it daily - smart students drowning in manual tasks tools could handle.

(This kills your research productivity)

8 use cases where you can cut your workload in half: 33 Must have tools for PhD students
1. Literature reviews made simple

β€’ ConnectedPapers
β€’ Research Rabbit
β€’ Consensus
β€’ SciSpace
β€’ Litmaps
β€’ Scite
β€’ Elicit

These tools you discover relevant research papers effortlessly.

Visualize your references and stay updated with the latest publications. Image
Perfect your academic writing

β€’ Google Docs with Gemini
β€’ Hemingway
β€’ WordTune
β€’ Paperpal
β€’ Overleaf
β€’ Quillbot
β€’ Yomu
β€’ Jenni

These (mostly) AI-supported tools help you improve:

β€’ Clarity
β€’ Grammar
β€’ Readability

So your papers meet top academic standards. Image
Read 10 tweets
Dec 30, 2024
Here's the perfect formula to write a literature review paragraph.

A great literature review paragraph needs exactly 2 components.

Most students think every paper needs its own paragraph.

Completely off the mark.

The secret? Lit Review Paragraph example.
Combine synthesis + evaluation:

β€’ Find papers with similar findings
β€’ Group them under one theme
β€’ Connect everything together
β€’ Add critique for each study
Example:

Bad:
"Smith (2020) studied caffeine. Jones (2021) also studied caffeine."

Good:
"Studies show caffeine boosts performance in endurance athletes (Smith, 2020; Jones, 2021), though dosage timing remains debated. While Smith found pre-workout intake optimal, Jones demonstrated mid-workout consumption produced stronger results in elite runners."

See the difference?

One uses contrasting to tell a story.
One just glances over the studies.
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(