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:👇

Every successful CHI author uses these 7 rules of writing.

Most graduate students do not know them.

I'm releasing them to you here for free to help you become a better writer.

🧵⬇️ 1. Do not use contractions in academic writing.

It makes you sound informal and takes away the professionalism required in an academic paper.

Research success looks impressive from the outside.

But the real work happens under water.

These tricks separate thriving from struggling scholars.

Most researchers ignore them completely.

Here are 7 actions that actually drive career growth: 1. Write Every Single Day

Train writing consistently.
Fifteen minutes beats weekend marathons.
Daily writing builds thinking muscles you didn't you had.

• Creates momentum that compounds weekly
• Reduces writing anxiety over time
• Clarifies complex ideas faster

Consistency trumps intensity every time.

Most PhD students stare at a blank page for months.

They have smart ideas but no mindmap.

The difference between finishing and forever-editing?

A bulletproof thesis structure.

Here's what successful PhDs know from day one: 1. Introduction sets expectations

Don't bury your thesis statement.
Page 5, not page 50.

2. Literature review proves necessity
Show the gap.

Then point to the problem.

3. Methodology builds trust

Reproducibility is credibility.
Details matter more than smarts.

I watched my mentee restart his introduction 10 times.

"I just can't get the flow right," he said.

His manuscript had been stuck for three months.
That's when I showed him my writing framework.

The same framework that helped me publish my papers.
(And it works for writing bits in ChatGPT 5 as well.)

The problem was just the process.
I'll break it down for you here: 1. Context Mapping First

I always suggest we map before we write.
Context is a powerful frame.

Start with your publication areas and field.
Analyze successful papers in your venue.
Never start with your introduction.

After 15 years in academia, I'll tell you in 30 seconds:

1. Perfect presentations don't pass vivas.
(Confident discussions do.)
2. Your weaknesses are actually opportunities
(to show academic maturity)

Here's the viva slide playbook that works every time: Your viva isn't about memorizing your thesis. 👀

It's about demonstrating three things:

1. You understand your research deeply
2. You can defend your choices confidently
3. You can think critically under pressure

Most students focus on 1 and ignore 2 and 3.

90% of academic papers I read are now AI-assisted.

Most researchers are in complete denial.

I'm a professor who's been brutally using AI for 18 months.

Here's what I learned that could save your career: The ancient superpower is gone.

Remember when knowing obscure citations was our academic flex?

When students looked at us in awe as we casually referenced that crucial 1976 paper?

Those days are vanishing faster than free wine at receptions. ⬇︎

I've been a Prof 13+ years and have 300+ citations.

It took me a decade of reviewing terrible literature sections and deep analysis to learn what I'm about to tell you in 3 minutes: The Problem:

Most PhD students organize related work completely wrong.

They create random catalogs:

Paper A did this.
Paper B did that.
Paper C found something else.

Sound familiar? 😅

In 20 years, I've published 300+ papers: 41k+ citations.

It all started with just 3 simple writing tips per section.

The best researchers know this secret.

Great papers tell great stories that keep readers hooked. How?

Here's my academic storytelling framework: INTRODUCTION
Start with curiosity, not conclusions.

Your introduction should make readers think:
I've never considered that.

• Contrast an intriguing fact to existing work in your field
• Introduce a thought-provoking problem
• Focus on a little-known perspective

This creates immediate engagement.

As a professor I've worked with dozens of high-performing researchers.

The secret to thriving in modern academia?

Most early-career researchers think:
Academic success = publish papers + teach classes.

Wrong.

What actually creates breakthrough careers: Traditional academia is dying.

The professors thriving today don't just publish—they:

• Get really good at AI to 10x research effectiveness
• Design transformative curricula (not just lectures)
• Lead innovation ecosystems beyond campus

Here's the playbook: 👇

ChatGPT will die.

Gemini will die.

Claude will die.

Grok will die.

But your research skills won't.

Every PhD student faces the same dilemma:

(I'll send you a mind map if you repost & comment) Use AI tools for everything or build core skills?

Most choose the shortcut.
Smart students choose differently.

Here's the 4-Step Foundation Framework:

Most researchers spend 40+ hours reading papers but can barely remember what they read last week.

After diving deep into how to take notes for my courses,
I found this 4-step system that turns reading into permanent knowledge.

Here's how to never forget what you read again: Most of us treat note-taking like passive transcription.

We:

• Can't connect ideas across sources
• Never revisit our notes
• Copy quotes verbatim
• Highlight everything

Result? Our notes become information graveyards.

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")

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: 🗣️ "A literature review is just a summary of sources"

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. 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.

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:

• Polish existing arguments
• Speed up writing papers
• 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 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.

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.