Prof Lennart Nacke, PhD Profile picture
Sep 3, 2022 โ€ข 8 tweets โ€ข 29 min read โ€ข 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:
๐Ÿงตโ†“
Introduction:

โ†’ What is known?
โ†’ What is unknown?
โ†’ How and why should we fill the gap?
โ†’ 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:

โ†’ 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:

โ†’ What did you do?

โ†’ 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:

โ†’ Meaning and implications of this research.
โ†’ How do the results fill the gap?
โ†’ Where do your results not apply?
โ†’ 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

โ†’ 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.

โ€ข โ€ข โ€ข

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

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

Jul 19
I mastered academic writing 3 years into my PhD.

My hidden ingredient is a compelling claim.

I don't:

โ€ข write unfocused arguments.
โ€ข present obvious or uncontroversial ideas.
โ€ข rehash existing knowledge without insight.
โ€ข make sweeping generalizations without evidence. Mindmap for: What is a claim? Based on the Odegaard Writing & Research Center, adapted from UW Expository Writing Program handouts
Instead:

โ€ข I craft claims that define clear goals and directions for my papers.
โ€ข I ensure my claims are argumentative, taking a specific stance.
โ€ข I support my claims with robust evidence and expert opinions.
โ€ข I make my claims complex enough to sustain an entire paper.
Thinking deeply about your main argument can transform your writing.

Take your research to a new level.

A level of truly contributing to your field.

Are you just summarizing others' work?

Or leaving your own intellectual mark?
Read 5 tweets
Jul 17
Since finishing my PhD, I've published 200+ high-impact papers.

So here's a quick PhD Publishing Masterclass:

(I know, some Universities charge crazy tuition for this)
1. Nail your literature review โ†’ comprehensiveness and critical analysis.
A review that's "exhaustive" creates context.
Therefore, it's easily defensible.

Most researchers list papers, not synthesize knowledge.
2. Focus on your discussion โ†’ goes hand-in-hand with point 1.
Less than 1% of your interpretations will be groundbreaking.
Connecting your results to the literature? Absolutely vital.

Remember the rule:

1 finding. 1 interpretation. 1 significant contribution.
Read 8 tweets
Jun 13
How I mastered explaining my reasoning in research papers

3 insider secrets to crafting compelling conclusions
1. Distill deductive paragraphs

Begin with a topic sentence.
Summarize a key data trend.
Support it with specific data.

Link the trend to readers' goals.
Prioritize key conclusions in topic sentences.
Guide readers through your thought process.

Construct your deduction.
2. Create conjunctive cohesion

Employ lexical cues (e.g., for example, in addition).

Use conjunctive ties to link data to conclusions.
Explicitly signal relationships between ideas.
Clarify your reasoning.

Conjunctive cohesion holds your argument together.
Read 6 tweets
Jun 12
Struggling to make sense of research papers?

I got to the secrets of research papers by reading them with this approach

9 essential steps every researcher must know: Overview of 9 steps to reading a paper well. They are listed below.
1. Set a reading purpose

Clarify why you're reading the paper.
Is it assigned to you for a review?
Or relevant to your research?

Your purpose guides your approach.
2. Skim for the big picture

Read the title, abstract, introduction, and conclusion.
Then, skim the section headings.
Glance at figures and tables.

Get a high-level overview before diving in.
Read 11 tweets
Jun 8
Drowning in papers?

Use this 7-step method to find your PhD research gap!

The PhD literature mapping blueprint Example of a literature map for a specific research question. Credit: KRISTA SINISCARSO
1. Define your research area

Pinpoint specific topics of interest.
Identify your broad field of study.
Clarity is crucial.

Be cautious when selecting your field of study.
2. Conduct a comprehensive search

Use academic databases and Google Scholar.
AI and semantic search tools.
Leave no stone unturned.

Cast a wide net.
Read 11 tweets
May 14
How I craft compelling research stories that editors love

The ultimate guide to creating a persuasive research narrative: Narrative paper flow structure.
1. Identify a critical problem

Be targeted.
Be focused.
Be specific.

Show a significant challenge in your field.
2. Establish the problem's significance

Explain why this issue matters.
Discuss the consequences.
Emphasize its implications.

Provide a rationale for your audience.
Read 11 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!

:(