During my academic career, I've spent 10,000+ hours editing LaTeX.
Want to know a secret?
I use these 5 easy-to-follow LaTeX snippets every time I submit a CHI paper, and this thread will save you the time of searching for how to do them.
You'll want to bookmark this. 🧵👇
1. Use the right documentclass options before submitting your paper to CHI
How it works:
- Comment out this line of code with % \documentclass[sigconf,authordraft]{acmart}
- Then add \documentclass[manuscript,screen,review, anonymous]{acmart}
This is the right review format.
2. Format nicer-looking research questions
How it works:
Load in LaTeX doc header:
\usepackage{enumerate}
\usepackage[shortlabels]{enumitem}
Type in LaTeX doc body:
\begin{enumerate}[label= \textbf{RQ\arabic*:}]
\item x
\end{enumerate}
3. Make sure to always define acronyms before use
How it works:
Load in LaTeX doc header:
\usepackage[nolist]{acronym}
Define acronyms:
\begin{acronym}
\acro{ANOVA}{Analysis of Variance}
\end{acronym}
Write the acronym in your text like this:
"We conducted an \ac{ANOVA}."
4. Create pretty quotes for qualitative findings
How it works:
Define a new command called \quoting:
\newcommand{\quoting}[2][P]{``\emph{#2}''\emph{[\textbf{#1}]}}
Use the command like this to quote participants:
\quoting[P13]{This prototype rocked my world.}.
TL;DR: 5 drops of my secret LaTeX sauce to write smooth #chi2023 papers
1. Use the right documentclass options for submission 2. Format nicer-looking RQs 3. Always define acronyms before use 4. Create pretty quotes for qualitative findings 5. Leave highlighted comments
Done like disco.
If you enjoyed this thread:
1. Follow me @acagamic for more tips on writing research papers 2. Buy my How to Write Better Research Papers course: chicourse.com 3. RT the tweet below to share this thread with your writing crew
Most researchers waste months on a systematic review
(when a rapid review would have been good enough.)
Two review types. Same question.
Completely different amount of work.
According to this paper, 14 literature review types exist.
If you get started, focus on 2 main types:
Run a systematic review when you’re shaping guidelines.
Use a rapid review when leadership wants an answer this quarter.
Systematic reviews:
• Multi-database + grey literature search, no date limits
• Typically used for guidelines or high-stakes decisions
• Dual screening + full critical appraisal, validated tools
• In-depth narrative synthesis to explain heterogeneity
• Detailed evidence tables, if possible, meta-analysis
• Formal, pre-registered protocol (e.g. PROSPERO)
Rapid reviews:
• Typically used for time-sensitive service (1–6 months)
• Output a short decision brief, slide deck, or summary
• High-level narrative summary with minimal detail
• Focused search (fewer databases, tighter limits)
• Single-reviewer screening with spot checks
• Streamlined or internal-only protocol