Lennart Nacke, PhD
@lennartnacke.com
🧠 Tenured brain, fresh daily takes. Maximum citations but sanity questionable. The prof your prof follows for daily research & AI takes. Quality wins. University Research Chair & Tenured Full Professor.
➜ www.lennartnacke.com
➜ www.lennartnacke.com
During my PhD, I burnt out chasing perfect papers.
Until I realized habits scale harder than hours.
Hard work doesn’t finish a thesis early.
Smart structure does.
I built a framework that multiplied my focus overnight.
You don’t need more focus.
You need fewer decisions.
Here is what works:
Until I realized habits scale harder than hours.
Hard work doesn’t finish a thesis early.
Smart structure does.
I built a framework that multiplied my focus overnight.
You don’t need more focus.
You need fewer decisions.
Here is what works:
November 7, 2025 at 6:03 AM
During my PhD, I burnt out chasing perfect papers.
Until I realized habits scale harder than hours.
Hard work doesn’t finish a thesis early.
Smart structure does.
I built a framework that multiplied my focus overnight.
You don’t need more focus.
You need fewer decisions.
Here is what works:
Until I realized habits scale harder than hours.
Hard work doesn’t finish a thesis early.
Smart structure does.
I built a framework that multiplied my focus overnight.
You don’t need more focus.
You need fewer decisions.
Here is what works:
Never mirror R2’s hostility.
Your professionalism becomes a contrast that editors notice.
When Reviewer 2’s tone crosses into hostility, use this decoder:
Your professionalism becomes a contrast that editors notice.
When Reviewer 2’s tone crosses into hostility, use this decoder:
November 6, 2025 at 8:46 PM
Never mirror R2’s hostility.
Your professionalism becomes a contrast that editors notice.
When Reviewer 2’s tone crosses into hostility, use this decoder:
Your professionalism becomes a contrast that editors notice.
When Reviewer 2’s tone crosses into hostility, use this decoder:
Turn So what? into a funded argument for your next research proposal.
Make yours explicit with this table:
1. Academic impact
2. Practical impact
3. Societal impact
Funding agencies think in impact tiers, not chapters.
Make yours explicit with this table:
1. Academic impact
2. Practical impact
3. Societal impact
Funding agencies think in impact tiers, not chapters.
November 5, 2025 at 5:57 AM
Turn So what? into a funded argument for your next research proposal.
Make yours explicit with this table:
1. Academic impact
2. Practical impact
3. Societal impact
Funding agencies think in impact tiers, not chapters.
Make yours explicit with this table:
1. Academic impact
2. Practical impact
3. Societal impact
Funding agencies think in impact tiers, not chapters.
Research papers don't have a clarity problem.
They have a skimming problem.
After reviewing 200+ paper submissions,
I stopped trusting linear writing.
Reviewers don't read linearly.
They skim in 4 predictable jumps.
Format accordingly.
They have a skimming problem.
After reviewing 200+ paper submissions,
I stopped trusting linear writing.
Reviewers don't read linearly.
They skim in 4 predictable jumps.
Format accordingly.
November 4, 2025 at 12:13 PM
Research papers don't have a clarity problem.
They have a skimming problem.
After reviewing 200+ paper submissions,
I stopped trusting linear writing.
Reviewers don't read linearly.
They skim in 4 predictable jumps.
Format accordingly.
They have a skimming problem.
After reviewing 200+ paper submissions,
I stopped trusting linear writing.
Reviewers don't read linearly.
They skim in 4 predictable jumps.
Format accordingly.
When evaluating a literature review:
Be consistent between how studies report and how you judge them.
Reporting vs Appraisal Quick Reference Below
Be consistent between how studies report and how you judge them.
Reporting vs Appraisal Quick Reference Below
November 4, 2025 at 6:03 AM
When evaluating a literature review:
Be consistent between how studies report and how you judge them.
Reporting vs Appraisal Quick Reference Below
Be consistent between how studies report and how you judge them.
Reporting vs Appraisal Quick Reference Below
After reviewing almost 100 papers for CHI,
I've noticed awesome research get killed on page 1.
Your paper has 8,000+ words.
Reviewers spend < 3 minutes to form an impression.
If they can't see why your work matters,
how you proved it, and what changes.
They reject it.
I've noticed awesome research get killed on page 1.
Your paper has 8,000+ words.
Reviewers spend < 3 minutes to form an impression.
If they can't see why your work matters,
how you proved it, and what changes.
They reject it.
November 3, 2025 at 10:02 PM
After reviewing almost 100 papers for CHI,
I've noticed awesome research get killed on page 1.
Your paper has 8,000+ words.
Reviewers spend < 3 minutes to form an impression.
If they can't see why your work matters,
how you proved it, and what changes.
They reject it.
I've noticed awesome research get killed on page 1.
Your paper has 8,000+ words.
Reviewers spend < 3 minutes to form an impression.
If they can't see why your work matters,
how you proved it, and what changes.
They reject it.
I used to believe significant meant true.
Then I reviewed 1000+ studies.
20 years in research taught me one thing:
Data rarely tells the full story.
But the science isn’t broken.
Our interpretation of it is.
Most researchers trust weak evidence.
Here’s how to never fall into that trap:
Then I reviewed 1000+ studies.
20 years in research taught me one thing:
Data rarely tells the full story.
But the science isn’t broken.
Our interpretation of it is.
Most researchers trust weak evidence.
Here’s how to never fall into that trap:
November 2, 2025 at 12:11 PM
I used to believe significant meant true.
Then I reviewed 1000+ studies.
20 years in research taught me one thing:
Data rarely tells the full story.
But the science isn’t broken.
Our interpretation of it is.
Most researchers trust weak evidence.
Here’s how to never fall into that trap:
Then I reviewed 1000+ studies.
20 years in research taught me one thing:
Data rarely tells the full story.
But the science isn’t broken.
Our interpretation of it is.
Most researchers trust weak evidence.
Here’s how to never fall into that trap:
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.
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.
November 1, 2025 at 11:12 AM
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.
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.
Professors call it progress. Their students call it burnout.
Academia rewards exhaustion.
Then wonders why no one’s thriving.
Papers, deadlines, emails. It's killing your potential.
Most professors don’t see it.
Academia rewards exhaustion.
Then wonders why no one’s thriving.
Papers, deadlines, emails. It's killing your potential.
Most professors don’t see it.
October 31, 2025 at 4:57 PM
Professors call it progress. Their students call it burnout.
Academia rewards exhaustion.
Then wonders why no one’s thriving.
Papers, deadlines, emails. It's killing your potential.
Most professors don’t see it.
Academia rewards exhaustion.
Then wonders why no one’s thriving.
Papers, deadlines, emails. It's killing your potential.
Most professors don’t see it.
Should you quit your PhD?
Here's a quick test (and food for thought).
If >70% of your reasons align with the strategic column,
you’re not giving up on your PhD, you’re optimizing your life.
Here's a quick test (and food for thought).
If >70% of your reasons align with the strategic column,
you’re not giving up on your PhD, you’re optimizing your life.
October 31, 2025 at 11:15 AM
Should you quit your PhD?
Here's a quick test (and food for thought).
If >70% of your reasons align with the strategic column,
you’re not giving up on your PhD, you’re optimizing your life.
Here's a quick test (and food for thought).
If >70% of your reasons align with the strategic column,
you’re not giving up on your PhD, you’re optimizing your life.
I became obsessed with perfect AI prompts.
And forgot progress comes from imperfect testing.
AI actually slowed me down in five specific ways.
Each one cost me hours per week.
But it's not all bad. Often I got better quality output.
It's just not the time saver for everything, everywhere.
And forgot progress comes from imperfect testing.
AI actually slowed me down in five specific ways.
Each one cost me hours per week.
But it's not all bad. Often I got better quality output.
It's just not the time saver for everything, everywhere.
October 31, 2025 at 5:00 AM
I became obsessed with perfect AI prompts.
And forgot progress comes from imperfect testing.
AI actually slowed me down in five specific ways.
Each one cost me hours per week.
But it's not all bad. Often I got better quality output.
It's just not the time saver for everything, everywhere.
And forgot progress comes from imperfect testing.
AI actually slowed me down in five specific ways.
Each one cost me hours per week.
But it's not all bad. Often I got better quality output.
It's just not the time saver for everything, everywhere.
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.
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.
October 30, 2025 at 11:11 AM
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.
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.
Your PhD shouldn’t be a loyalty test.
Smart researchers quit faster (and win more).
Strategic quitting is the most underrated PhD skill.
Here's why:
Smart researchers quit faster (and win more).
Strategic quitting is the most underrated PhD skill.
Here's why:
October 29, 2025 at 2:59 PM
Your PhD shouldn’t be a loyalty test.
Smart researchers quit faster (and win more).
Strategic quitting is the most underrated PhD skill.
Here's why:
Smart researchers quit faster (and win more).
Strategic quitting is the most underrated PhD skill.
Here's why:
Even in technical papers, readers feel tension and resolution.
The stages & emotion:
Introduction: Curiosity → urgency.
Related Work: Confusion → clarity.
Methods: Doubt → confidence.
Results: Anticipation → discovery.
Discussion: Surprise → understanding.
Conclusion: Insight → inspiration.
The stages & emotion:
Introduction: Curiosity → urgency.
Related Work: Confusion → clarity.
Methods: Doubt → confidence.
Results: Anticipation → discovery.
Discussion: Surprise → understanding.
Conclusion: Insight → inspiration.
October 29, 2025 at 2:59 AM
Even in technical papers, readers feel tension and resolution.
The stages & emotion:
Introduction: Curiosity → urgency.
Related Work: Confusion → clarity.
Methods: Doubt → confidence.
Results: Anticipation → discovery.
Discussion: Surprise → understanding.
Conclusion: Insight → inspiration.
The stages & emotion:
Introduction: Curiosity → urgency.
Related Work: Confusion → clarity.
Methods: Doubt → confidence.
Results: Anticipation → discovery.
Discussion: Surprise → understanding.
Conclusion: Insight → inspiration.
Most savvy reviewers ask about statistical power.
But most students can't answer adequately.
The result?
Delayed publications and damaged credibility.
These are the questions they'll ask.
Here are the answers that satisfy reviewers:
But most students can't answer adequately.
The result?
Delayed publications and damaged credibility.
These are the questions they'll ask.
Here are the answers that satisfy reviewers:
October 22, 2025 at 11:16 AM
Most savvy reviewers ask about statistical power.
But most students can't answer adequately.
The result?
Delayed publications and damaged credibility.
These are the questions they'll ask.
Here are the answers that satisfy reviewers:
But most students can't answer adequately.
The result?
Delayed publications and damaged credibility.
These are the questions they'll ask.
Here are the answers that satisfy reviewers:
Most people think critical thinking means finding flaws.
But true critical thinking goes deeper.
The real skill lies in identifying gaps.
You hunt for what's missing, not just for what’s wrong.
And this 4-step framework shows you exactly how.
But true critical thinking goes deeper.
The real skill lies in identifying gaps.
You hunt for what's missing, not just for what’s wrong.
And this 4-step framework shows you exactly how.
October 22, 2025 at 5:00 AM
Most people think critical thinking means finding flaws.
But true critical thinking goes deeper.
The real skill lies in identifying gaps.
You hunt for what's missing, not just for what’s wrong.
And this 4-step framework shows you exactly how.
But true critical thinking goes deeper.
The real skill lies in identifying gaps.
You hunt for what's missing, not just for what’s wrong.
And this 4-step framework shows you exactly how.
How to write a thesis statement in just 7 easy steps?
The SECRET to a strong dissertation.
Don't announce instead of argue.
Don't observe instead of claim.
Don't ramble instead of focus.
A thesis statement is the central claim of an article.
The SECRET to a strong dissertation.
Don't announce instead of argue.
Don't observe instead of claim.
Don't ramble instead of focus.
A thesis statement is the central claim of an article.
October 22, 2025 at 2:59 AM
How to write a thesis statement in just 7 easy steps?
The SECRET to a strong dissertation.
Don't announce instead of argue.
Don't observe instead of claim.
Don't ramble instead of focus.
A thesis statement is the central claim of an article.
The SECRET to a strong dissertation.
Don't announce instead of argue.
Don't observe instead of claim.
Don't ramble instead of focus.
A thesis statement is the central claim of an article.
So many early-career researchers get this wrong...
Here's the truth: You must
Keep readers engaged until your methods section.
The 5 worst related work mistakes you can make:
Here's the truth: You must
Keep readers engaged until your methods section.
The 5 worst related work mistakes you can make:
October 21, 2025 at 11:11 AM
So many early-career researchers get this wrong...
Here's the truth: You must
Keep readers engaged until your methods section.
The 5 worst related work mistakes you can make:
Here's the truth: You must
Keep readers engaged until your methods section.
The 5 worst related work mistakes you can make:
Give me 53 seconds and I'll make you a better writer.
The 7 steps I took to write better publications.
Hint: You don't get to write more.
You get to write less.
The 7 steps I took to write better publications.
Hint: You don't get to write more.
You get to write less.
October 21, 2025 at 4:56 AM
Give me 53 seconds and I'll make you a better writer.
The 7 steps I took to write better publications.
Hint: You don't get to write more.
You get to write less.
The 7 steps I took to write better publications.
Hint: You don't get to write more.
You get to write less.
6 questions I wish someone told me about projects.
Reading everything is not research planning.
There's a different approach that changes everything...
A simple framework for how you plan research projects.
Here are 6 critical questions that will save you time:
Reading everything is not research planning.
There's a different approach that changes everything...
A simple framework for how you plan research projects.
Here are 6 critical questions that will save you time:
October 20, 2025 at 9:00 PM
6 questions I wish someone told me about projects.
Reading everything is not research planning.
There's a different approach that changes everything...
A simple framework for how you plan research projects.
Here are 6 critical questions that will save you time:
Reading everything is not research planning.
There's a different approach that changes everything...
A simple framework for how you plan research projects.
Here are 6 critical questions that will save you time:
I cut 1,000 words from a paper in 30 minutes.
My students asked how.
Here's the systematic approach that works every time.
Most professors never share these techniques:
The 3-Layer Reduction Method:
My students asked how.
Here's the systematic approach that works every time.
Most professors never share these techniques:
The 3-Layer Reduction Method:
October 20, 2025 at 11:17 AM
I cut 1,000 words from a paper in 30 minutes.
My students asked how.
Here's the systematic approach that works every time.
Most professors never share these techniques:
The 3-Layer Reduction Method:
My students asked how.
Here's the systematic approach that works every time.
Most professors never share these techniques:
The 3-Layer Reduction Method:
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 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,
October 20, 2025 at 5:02 AM
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 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,
Improve your research methods with one simple tactic.
Stop writing for yourself.
Start writing for your harshest critic.
Everyone describes methods like they're taking notes.
Here's the mindset shift that changes everything:
Stop writing for yourself.
Start writing for your harshest critic.
Everyone describes methods like they're taking notes.
Here's the mindset shift that changes everything:
October 19, 2025 at 6:01 PM
Improve your research methods with one simple tactic.
Stop writing for yourself.
Start writing for your harshest critic.
Everyone describes methods like they're taking notes.
Here's the mindset shift that changes everything:
Stop writing for yourself.
Start writing for your harshest critic.
Everyone describes methods like they're taking notes.
Here's the mindset shift that changes everything:
Proposals fail because of two misplaced paragraphs.
Most researchers bury their motivation on page 3.
They lead with background instead of urgency.
The Why-What sequence flips this completely.
Here's a 15-part structure I use that makes it simple.
Let's break it down into 7 broad steps:
Most researchers bury their motivation on page 3.
They lead with background instead of urgency.
The Why-What sequence flips this completely.
Here's a 15-part structure I use that makes it simple.
Let's break it down into 7 broad steps:
October 19, 2025 at 11:13 AM
Proposals fail because of two misplaced paragraphs.
Most researchers bury their motivation on page 3.
They lead with background instead of urgency.
The Why-What sequence flips this completely.
Here's a 15-part structure I use that makes it simple.
Let's break it down into 7 broad steps:
Most researchers bury their motivation on page 3.
They lead with background instead of urgency.
The Why-What sequence flips this completely.
Here's a 15-part structure I use that makes it simple.
Let's break it down into 7 broad steps:
From 50 pages to 10.
I distilled with nine powerful questions.
Researchers drown in summaries.
Nine questions rescued my literature review.
Don't miss the big picture.
There's a simple framework to fix this.
I distilled with nine powerful questions.
Researchers drown in summaries.
Nine questions rescued my literature review.
Don't miss the big picture.
There's a simple framework to fix this.
October 19, 2025 at 4:57 AM
From 50 pages to 10.
I distilled with nine powerful questions.
Researchers drown in summaries.
Nine questions rescued my literature review.
Don't miss the big picture.
There's a simple framework to fix this.
I distilled with nine powerful questions.
Researchers drown in summaries.
Nine questions rescued my literature review.
Don't miss the big picture.
There's a simple framework to fix this.