Winning proposals aren’t written to impress. They’re written to persuade. A clear problem statement wins more grants than 100 fancy references. The last 10% of your proposal writing takes 50% of the energy. That’s where careers are made.

“I don’t know where to start.” Start with AI for outlining. “I don’t know how to revise.” Start with AI for structure. “I don’t know how to finish.” Start with AI for clarity. Always finish with your own brain. Excuses gone. Paper done.

7 tips for writing research papers: • Avoid jargon, speak to general academics • Be clear, not clever about your solution • Spend 20% on writing, 80% on editing • Focus on benefits for people • Focus on your contribution • Understand your problem • Erase your adjectives

Proposal frameworks every school should teach: • Timeline buffers (Murphy’s Law insurance) • Literature synthesis, not summary • Problem → Aim → Method • Reviewer-first writing • Resource mapping Any others you would add?

3 challenges you will experience when trying to write a research proposal: 1. Freezing on the first page 2. Writing too much background 3. Overpromising timelines But, overcome these and you win.

Proposal writing is a lot like cooking: • Ingredients = references • Recipe = methodology • Timing = project plan Probably why doing proposals teaches you so much about patience, too.

Stop trying to: • Impress reviewers with jargon • Write 50-page proposals • Predict every outcome Instead, just focus on defining a problem that matters. The rest will take care of itself.

Avoid these mistakes as a beginner proposal writer: • Writing for yourself, not reviewers • Listing citations without critique • Overpromising timelines • Ignoring resources You'll dodge a ton of brainpain, my friend.

If you want to be a successful PI, these are the proposal skills you need: • Early problem framing • Persuasive synthesis • Method justification • Timeline realism Dedicate all efforts to developing these exclusively.

When using ChattieG. Some academics think a paid plan = privacy. It doesn’t. Logs can still be stored, flagged, and reviewed by humans. It’s a dangerous assumption. Do you assume plus means private?

Confession: I used to take paper rejections personally. Like reviewers met to tell me: Leave academia. Reviewers spend 2-3 hours on your paper. They're overworked, unpaid, and squeezed between deadlines. That harsh comment? It's not you. It's clarity, rigour, contribution. All fixable.

My favourite research proposal framework: 1. Define the problem 2. Contextualize it 3. Review the literature 4. Match aims to methods 5. Set realistic timelines Works every time.

Me at 25 • Overstuffed literature reviews • Vague problem statements • Unrealistic timelines Me at 45 • Funders who trust my proposals • Tight methods in publications • Crisp aims 20 years can change everything. Don’t give up.

Avoid these mistakes as a beginner academic writer: • Forgetting to argue instead of summarize • Trying to perfect the first draft • Starting without an outline • Ignoring your audience You’ll save yourself so many headaches.

Students who get revisions to their viva: defend their research. Students who pass with distinction: discuss their research. Students who excel?

What I thought would bring career security: • More collaborations • More publications • More gaps filled What actually brings career security: • Research people care about • Solving real problems • Clear argumentation Internal rewards > external status.

If you want to be a successful postdoc, these are the skills you need: • Project triage • Grant targeting • Fast, persuasive writing • Collaboration management Ignore everything else. Just build these.

If you really want to finish your dissertation, stop screwing around. Do these 5 things: 1. Choose finishing over starting new projects 2. Choose editing over reading more papers 3. Choose feedback over silence 4. Choose clarity over jargon 5. Choose writing over email

Here are 4 reasons why anyone struggling with procrastination should start daily writing: 1. Builds momentum 2. Reduces anxiety 3. Creates visible progress 4. Makes editing easier I firmly believe this. More here: lennartnacke.substack.com/p/i-tried-e...

These things ruin you as a PhD student: • Waiting for inspiration • Chasing too many projects • Avoiding the last 10% of work • Writing only for your supervisor Avoid as many of these as possible.

The 4 pillars of a happy, effective academic life: 1. Finish what you start 2. Detach your self-worth from reviewers 3. Protect sleep like your h-index 4. Take daily breaks to think So simple, but we complicate it.

5 simple tips I would give anyone who wants to start publishing: 1. Keep atomic notes on every paper 2. Always track reviewer comments 3. Pick journals before writing 4. Write ugly drafts fast 5. Edit in rounds Yes, it’s this easy to get started.

Unexpected ways academic writing makes your life better: • Gives you a record of progress • Clarifies your own thinking • Reveals patterns in chaos • Builds persistence • Teaches patience Every researcher should write daily, even if only 200 words.

6 traits of every professor I look up to: 1. Clear writing 2. Relentless consistency 3. Grace under reviewer fire 4. Ability to finish projects 5. Care for students 6. Courage to say no

The feedback law of learning: Predictable input feels like reward. Unpredictable input feels like punishment. Brains wire themselves to get more of the first. Less of the second. Could you apply that to teaching?

The last 10% of a paper takes 50% of the total time. Formatting, co-author feedback, submission systems. I banned myself from starting new projects until one hit submitted. It was the single most important rule I ever adopted.

Academic writing starts with self-expression and ends with transformation.

Play the game of peer review while staying honest about which problems matter. That’s what makes it rigour. Anything else is academic dress-up.

Academic goals you should strive for: • Weekly pulse checks • Progress on every active project • Batching analysis/writing/editing • Tracking actual time spent Achieving these puts you in the top 1% of organized researchers. More here: lennartnacke.substack.com/p/7-ways-to...

Call for Participation: First Interdisciplinary Workshop for Human-Computer Narrative Interactions (HCNI) at CHI PLAY 2025 Join our hybrid HCNI workshop at CHI PLAY 2025! Discuss and explore player-game interaction for impactful digital storytelling with others. #chiplay2025 #gamestudies #hci

The most powerful Discussions don’t close the book. They open new chapters. Contagious. Curious. Crisp. Each question you raise is a doorway for someone else to walk through.

The 3 biggest mistakes academics make: • Waiting for a full week of free time • Starting new projects before finishing old ones • Letting drafts die in silence Let’s fix them: • Use 2-hour windows • Apply the 90% rule • Do a weekly pulse check

A great framework for handling too many projects quickly: 1. Pulse check Monday morning 2. Batch tasks by day 3. Minimum viable progress weekly 4. Handoff notes for future you I’ve used this to keep 7+ papers alive without burning out. Works every time.

If you chase gaps, you chase ghosts. If you chase problems, you change your field.

Here’s the irony: ChatGPT’s power comes from learning from our data. But that’s the exact reason you might not want to share your own. It’s a gift and a liability rolled into one. Would you still use it if you knew your queries could train future models?

Academic rejection hits different at 2 AM. That's when the imposter syndrome whispers loudest. When you question if you belong in academia at all. I've been there. Three rejections deep, wondering if I should just quit.

Feeling stuck? Go minimum viable. • No perfect prose • No full rewrite • No waiting for inspiration Just 15 minutes on one project. When I adopted this, my abandoned manuscripts finally started moving again.

You can accomplish finishing your dissertation if you… • Do a 15-min pulse check each week • Make minimum viable progress • Batch similar tasks together • Enforce the 90% rule Congrats. You defended with clarity instead of drowning in chaos.

PhD defense hack that nobody talks about: Within your first 10 minutes, say: "Before we proceed, I want to address three key constraints that shaped this research..." Then explain each one with: • Why it existed (funding/time/access) • How it actually benefited the study • What you did instead

A good project tip: always write a next steps note before closing the file. Here’s why: You save 20 minutes of confusion every time you reopen it. I learned this the hard way after losing hours re-orienting myself in old drafts.

90% of finishing a paper is really just: • Touching it once a week • Leaving clear notes for future you • Forcing yourself to finish the boring last 10% I learned this after losing 3 drafts to neglect. The little stuff makes all the difference.

Forget multitasking. It’s not serving you. Do one layer at a time. Notes today. Skeleton tomorrow. Polish later.

Got asked today: “How do I stop rewriting the same intro?” Answer: • Separate outlining from drafting • Separate drafting from editing • Do each on different days That’s how you escape Groundhog Day.

If you can’t write, it’s not because you’re lazy. It’s because your brain maxes at 4 ± 1 chunks of info. Respect that limit. Offload to notes and maps.

Nothing motivates me like gaps. Gaps in the matrix. Gaps in the argument. Gaps force me to write, connect, and fill. Gaps get me to problems faster. That’s momentum.

Want flow in your paragraphs? Do the hourglass method: broad → narrow → broad. It’s basically PEEL with better architecture. My students doubled their clarity with this.

How to break writing paralysis: 1. Notes = one idea per file 2. Matrix = arguments vs sources 3. Hourglass = context → evidence → implications I’ve written my recent papers faster using this rhythm.

Scientists have built a hybrid brain. Not a metaphor. Electrodes, neurons, digital input, biological output. It’s as close to science fiction as science gets. Except it’s already shipping.

Want paragraphs that don’t collapse under pressure? Do the difficult thing: Build a synthesis matrix. When I map sources by argument and method, I can spot gaps instantly. No more rereading the same PDFs hoping insight appears.

Underrated benefits of atomic notes: • Free your working memory • See patterns you’d otherwise miss • Make blank pages vanish I use Apple Notes for this. One concept per note with links. When I search “cognitive load,” my paper outline basically builds itself.