Prof Lennart Nacke, PhD Profile picture
Apr 5, 2023 8 tweets 3 min read Read on X
Supercharge your paper submissions with 5 powerful LaTeX snippets.

I've perfected them in 10,000+ hours of coding.

Unlock the secret to lightning-fast paper editing. ↓
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. Screenshot of the replacement of the LaTeX code from the ACM
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} The image shows the described code in the Overleaf editor an
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}." The image shows the described LaTeX for the acronym package
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.}. The image shows the described LaTeX for the new quoting comm
5. Leave highlighted comments

How it works:

Load in LaTeX doc header:
\usepackage{xcolor}

Define:
\definecolor{highlighterYellow}{HTML}{fff100}
\newcommand{\lennartNote}[1]{\colorbox{highlighterYellow}{\textbf{Lennart:} \textit{#1}}}

Use:
\lennartNote{My nice comment} The image shows the described LaTeX for code to created high
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. Join more than a thousand people on my newsletter (link in profile).

• • •

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

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

Nov 1
Harvard just admitted their grading system is broken.

About 60% of grades are now As.

Two decades ago? Only 25%.

Faculty say grades don't match work quality anymore.
Sound familiar? Your PhD program faces the same crisis.
Grade inflation is everywhere.

But Harvard's new report confirms what I've known:Grades don't measure learning anymore.
Evaluation systems are broken.

Well-intentioned pedagogy created perverse incentives.
The culprit? Loss aversion + grade compression.

Here's the evidence:
Harvard's median GPA hit 3.83 for the Class of 2025.
For the Class of 2015?
Just 3.64.

Since 2016, the median GPA has been an A.
Read 14 tweets
Oct 30
Rejected within 24 hours.

That’s how my academic journey really started.

My writing has never been the same since.
Here’s what I learned from 300+ submissions:

Too many papers get rejected instantly. rules of thumb
I still remember opening my inbox at 6 AM.
One line: "We regret to inform you…"
I’d spent six months on that paper.
I thought it was genius.

Well, turns out it wasn’t.
It was unreadable.

Why?
Simple mistakes in structure and style.

Here's what I learned from writing 100+ papers:

1. Your title has ONE job

• Make it specific & catchy
• Keep it under 12 words
• Cut redundancy

2. Abstract

• Show why you did what you did and what you found
• State your conclusions
• Add key numbers

So, here's a fun thing I noticed:
Read 7 tweets
Oct 20
Most PhD students fail at research questions.

(I used to be one of them)

See, back when I started my research journey,
I thought coming up with research questions was luck.

Just throw something at the wall and hope it sticks.

Wrong.

After helping 100s of students with their research,
I've discovered a secret 4-step question formula:Image
1. Start with scope
Don't jump straight to questions.
First, outline your broad area in 1-2 sentences.

Example: "Virtual reality user interactions"
This gives you boundaries to work within.
2. Identify the gap & problem
What specific problem needs solving?
Make it obvious.

Example: "VR motion sickness during extended use"

• Look for contradictions in existing studies
• Spot practical problems without solutions
• Find areas with limited research
Read 6 tweets
Oct 17
Top researchers publish 2x more papers.

More papers, faster defence, higher grant rates.
Same effort, double output.

They all follow the same 3-pillar optimization system.

Here are 3 pillars of research superstars:
(and the research habits that compound results) 12 healthy habits for researchers
Pillar 1: Cognitive Foundation
Your brain is your primary research tool.

• Mindfulness before high-stakes presentations
• Consistent sleep for memory consolidation
• Regular exercise for enhanced focus

Without this foundation, everything else crumbles.
Pillar 2: Strategic Focus
Clarity beats activity time and again.

• Saying no to non-essential commitments
• Morning strategic planning sessions
• Weekly research trajectory reviews

This pillar protects your most valuable asset: time.
Read 6 tweets
Oct 17
I submitted my first conference article at 26.

It failed for one reason:

I structured it like a conclusion, not a story. Image
I didn’t become a better writer with tricks.
I just learned to start with the problem.

My paper didn't get rejected due to too complex prose.
But because I structured my argument backwards.

Now, I've reviewed 100+ papers from PhDs.

The biggest difference here:
Structure turns unreadable into impactful research.Image
Weak academic writing starts with the solution:

Here's what's technically interesting about it.
Here's my research result.
Here's my methodology.

This forces readers to reverse-engineer.
Why should they care about it?
Most give up before page 2. Image
Read 8 tweets
Sep 24
Over the past 16 years, I have published 20,000+ words/year in academic papers, cited 24k+ times, won many awards.

Most people don't know this peculiar paragraph writing technique that I use.

It's called PEEL (sometimes TEEL):
🧵⬇️
(1) Point (or Topic) → (2) Evidence → (3) Explanation → (4) Link.

And this is how you structure writing paragraphs. Every paragraph should be broken down into those 4 sections.

This is what goes into each section:👇
1. Point

What’s the fastest way to make your point?

Simply state it in the first sentence of your paragraph. This is also called the topic sentence.
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!

:(