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: 1. Literature reviews made simple

• ConnectedPapers
• Research Rabbit
• Consensus
• SciSpace
• Litmaps
• Scite
• Elicit

These tools you discover relevant research papers effortlessly.

Visualize your references and stay updated with the latest publications.

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? Combine synthesis + evaluation:

• Find papers with similar findings
• Group them under one theme
• Connect everything together
• Add critique for each study

Most people approach critical thinking wrong.

They focus on individual skills:
• Problem-solving ability
• Decision making
• Logical reasoning

But critical thinking has 3 deeper layers: 1. Question Everything

Ask "why" before accepting claims
Challenge your own assumptions
Seek evidence beyond opinions

2. Build Connections

Link knowledge to experience
Find patterns in complex data
Connect seemingly unrelated ideas

3. Stay Open-Minded

Listen to opposing views
Update beliefs with new evidence
Focus on learning, not being right

The difference between good and great thinkers?

A systematic review requires exhaustive, comprehensive searching with quality assessment criteria, while a rapid review can be completed with time-limited formal quality assessment. The difference is months of work.

According to this paper, 14 literature review types exist.

If you get started, focus on 2 main types:

Systematic reviews → exhaustive analysis
Rapid reviews → quick assessment Systematic reviews:

• Quality assessment required
• Comprehensive searching
• 6-24 months timeline
• Tabular presentation
• Narrative synthesis
• Formal protocols

Rapid reviews:

• Limited quality checks
• Time-bound searching
• Evidence summary
• Basic presentation
• 1-6 month timeline
• Flexible protocols

The distinction?

Speed vs. thoroughness.

The human mind, heart, and body are more complex than we think.

(This will change how you see decision-making forever)

Most people view the mind as a simple input-output machine. But it's actually a sophisticated system of interconnected layers: Core

• Raw existence (energy, matter, time)
• Basic survival instincts
• Pure consciousness

Personal

• Your unique experiences
• Individual behaviours
• Personal values

Environment

• Cultural institutions
• Power structures
• Economic forces

Each layer influences every decision you make.

But you have to understand which layer drives specific choices.

Want to change behaviour for good?
Target the correct layer.

Chat PDF in Paperpal just changed how I read research papers.

Just uploaded a systematic review paper and my jaw dropped.

Here's what happened: 1. Instant paper breakdown

• Title, authors, DOI extracted automatically
• Smart summary generated in seconds
• Key sections identified and linked
• Research questions pulled out precisely

2. Smart paper connections

• Found relevant papers I hadn't discovered
• Connected papers across different fields
• Added them to my library with one click
• Surfaced hidden relationships

But the real magic? The built-in question engine.

Most researchers make a fatal mistake in their proposal's introduction, but understanding the "Why-What" sequence can change everything...

Here's a 15-part structure I use that makes it simple.

Let's break it down into 7 broad steps: 1. Start with why it matters in context

• State your research purpose
• Hook readers with significance

2. Back up claims in literature

• Map the existing knowledge
• Find the gaps to fill

Most philosophers got problem-solving better than modern design thinking.

This missing piece changes everything about tackling complex challenges:

Most people think philosophy is useless in business and politics.

They're missing the most powerful operating system for decision-making. There is a kind of magic to how great thinkers solve problems.

Here's the deal:

Your mind uses philosophical frameworks on inner autopilot:

• Logic structures how you make decisions
• Metaphysics shapes how you see reality
• Epistemology determines how you learn

A simple trick: treat different thought processes like tools.

Most researchers make a critical mistake in their methods section that instantly signals 'amateur' to reviewers. It's so common that I see it in 7 out of 10 papers, yet so simple to fix...

Delay writing your Methods section.

Spend time owning your research process first: By answering 4 questions:

• What problem did you solve?
• For whom did you solve it?
• Why did this problem need solving?
• How did you solve it effectively?

Get comfortable thinking through each:

Think through your research design
Think through your ethical choices
Think through your data collection
Think through your analysis steps
Think through your limitations

Write down specific answers for each.

And if you have unclear answers:

→ Take time to better understand

Every groundbreaking discovery in science started with someone willing to challenge their own assumptions. Your next literature review could be the one that changes everything.

Your academic work needs to fight confirmation bias.

It's blocking you from great research.

And it's easier to fix than you think.

Here's how to destroy confirmation bias in your research: 1. Plan before you search

→ Write your research questions
→ Define inclusion criteria
→ List your search terms
→ Pick your databases

2. Document everything

→ All search strings used
→ Every database checked
→ Number of results found
→ Selection decisions made

3. Remove author identity

→ Code your studies
→ Hide author names
→ Mask institutions
→ Review methods first

4. Use two reviewers

→ Independent assessments
→ Compare decisions
→ Discuss differences
→ Record resolutions

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 pure luck.

Just throw something at the wall and hope it sticks.

Wrong.

Here’s the step-by-step breakdown: 1. Define the broad topic area of research

Start broad.

In just one or two sentences, outline the general area you’re interested in.

(Example: “User interaction in virtual reality environments.”)

This sets the stage for deeper investigation.

Stop writing academic papers like a robot.

Tell stories instead.

Most academic writing puts people to sleep.

But it doesn't have to.

Academic storytelling changes everything.

Here's why it works: → Builds emotional connection
→ Creates memorable content
→ Makes complex ideas clear
→ Keeps readers engaged
→ Drives more citations

Yet most academics fail at storytelling.

So I broke it down into 5 simple techniques:

How I turned a 50-page literature review into a concise 10-page masterpiece using 9 simple questions:

Most researchers get lost in endless summaries.
They miss the big picture.

But there's a simple framework to fix this.

I call it the 9-Question Literature Review Framework: 1. What has been done?
2. What were the hypotheses?
3. What were the research questions?
4. How was the work done?
5. When was it done?
6. Who did it?
7. What were the main findings?
8. What were the conclusions?
9. What should be done next?

This framework helps you:

• Organize your thoughts
• Identify research gaps
• Develop your own questions

Feel like giving up on research proposals? (Read this, please)
Back in my early career, I lost two grant applications.

In my PhD, I nearly quit academic writing altogether.

I almost gave up on research. Twice.

But as Associate Professor, something shifted. 3 things, actually: 1. Proposal structure → without compromise

I committed to using a foolproof outline for every proposal:

Title Page → Your research's first impression
Table of Contents → A roadmap for reviewers
Abstract → Your research in a nutshell

What if choosing between quantitative and qualitative methods is asking the wrong question entirely?

A comparison of quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods

Researchers often agonize over picking quantitative or qualitative methods.

But here's the truth: This "either-or" thinking is outdated.

Let's break down why:

1. Quantitative methods:

• Focus on numbers and statistics
• Provide generalizable results
• Test hypotheses

→ But can miss nuanced insights

My data's strong, but my paper's weak. 😱

Don't just write; guide your reader.

How to use the PASTOR framework: 1. PROBLEM: Identify the gap

• State a clear gap in existing literature.
• Pinpoint the issue your research tackles.

Be explicit about the problem.

❌ 'This area needs more study.'

✅ 'Current methods fail to address X accurately.'

Vagueness won't cut it.
Clearer = better.

How to go from idea to published paper?

I've struggled with writing many times. (And it’s no piece of cake)

So I want to make it easier for you by sharing a simple process that can help anyone improve their writing today.

You can scroll away now... OR you can read below: 1. When you're just starting → Gather your ideas, know your purpose, and think about who you’re writing for.

💡 Organize your thoughts before you start typing.

The dark side of research: Fake citations are on the rise.

Dubious scientists join drug lords and counterfeiters on the black market.

The problem goes deeper than you think. In a nature news article, researchers exposed a disturbing truth:

Citations are being sold in bulk to inflate academic profiles.

For $300, 50 citations will boost a researcher's Google Scholar profile.

Even for a fake scientist.

Yes, fake scientists.

WTF?

3 data types that can power your next data visualization

Most people struggle with how to plot their data.

But if you know your data type, the process becomes easy.

How to visualize your data (by Steve Franconeri): Here’s a quick overview of three common types

1. Discrete categories

These are distinct groups, like cities or product names.
Use bar charts to show differences in their size or count.

The Hero’s Journey is everywhere, but here’s why it works.

Most stories that grip us have something in common:

A powerful structure.

This is the Archplot!

The engine behind Harry Potter, Star Wars, and The Odyssey. (Read on) It’s the journey of a hero who steps out of their comfort zone, faces enemies, hits rock bottom, and rises to victory. The structure transforms ordinary characters into unforgettable legends.

What makes it so effective?

Research grant writing is always evolving. (Yes, professors)

If you’re struggling with grant applications, read on...

What I'm about to share applies to all tenure-track academics. Hopefully, this guide will refine your strategy and enhance your grant success rate. 1. 🎯 Preparation

• Identify funding opportunities
↳ Databases
↳ Deadlines
↳ Eligibility

• Understand funder priorities
↳ Mission
↳ History
↳ Focus

• Develop your research idea
↳ Questions
↳ Review
↳ Gaps

• Assemble your team
↳ Roles
↳ Co-lead
↳ Collaborations