# Academic

> Academic work with scientific rigor — covers literature search, source evaluation, and writing. Configurable language. [WHAT] End-to-end support: (1) systematic literature search and source evaluation, (2) thematic synthesis, (3) writing essays, papers, reports, dissertations, literature reviews, method discussions. IMRAD structure, Harvard/APA, peer review. [WHEN] Use when: academic, scientific, essay, report, dissertation, literature review, paper, thesis, doctoral, peer-reviewed, systematic review, find sources, zotero, Harvard reference, APA, IMRAD, source criticism, literature review, research synthesis. NOT for: opponent role (academic-opponent), interview coding (gioia-analysis). [LANGUAGE] Configurable. Matches input. [EXPERTISE] Academic writing, IMRAD, source criticism, systematic literature search, Harvard/APA citations, thematic synthesis, qualitative/quantitative methods.

- Skill: `carlheath/academic` (Agent Skill, multi-file: 6 files)
- Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add carlheath/academic`
- Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/carlheath/academic/raw
- Safety review: pending
- Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex
- Category: Docs & Writing
- Author: carlheath (https://skillmd.com/u/carlheath)
- Updated: 2026-09-17
- Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/carlheath/academic

---


# Academic — research, writing, and synthesis

**Role:** academic work partner — from literature search to finished text.
**Language:** matches user input.
**Levels:** undergraduate, master's, doctoral, postdoc.

## When the skill activates

Three overlapping use cases:

1. **Research phase** — search literature, evaluate sources, synthesise knowledge
2. **Writing phase** — produce academic text with correct structure and references
3. **End-to-end flow** — from research question to finished text (the common case)

Identify which phase the user is in, or whether the whole flow is needed.

---

## Research phase: literature search and source evaluation

### Clarify the research question

| Question | Purpose |
|----------|---------|
| Main question? | Focus the search |
| Sub-questions? | Structure the literature |
| Search terms? | Identify keywords |
| Boundaries? | Time, geography, domain |

### Search strategy

| Source | Use |
|--------|-----|
| Zotero library | Existing collection (via MCP) |
| Google Scholar | Broad academic search |
| Scopus | Peer-reviewed |
| Web of Science | Citation data |
| arXiv | Preprints, especially CS/ML |
| PubMed | Medicine, life sciences |
| JSTOR | Social sciences, humanities |
| Domain databases | Per field |

### Source evaluation

For every source:

| Criterion | Question |
|-----------|----------|
| Authority | Who's the author? Where published? |
| Currency | When published? Still relevant? |
| Method | What did they do? Rigorously? |
| Findings | What did they find? How strong? |
| Relevance | How does this relate to the research question? |
| Citation | How cited? In what contexts? |

Mark sources: ★★★★★ (essential) → ★ (peripheral).

### Thematic synthesis

After 10-30+ sources read, synthesise:

```markdown
## Literature review: [Theme]

### Search strategy
- Databases: [list]
- Search terms: [terms]
- Filters: [years, languages]
- Hits: [N] → Included: [M]

### Thematic structure

#### Theme 1: [Heading]
[Synthesis of what the research says]
Key sources: (Author1, year; Author2, year)

#### Theme 2: [Heading]
[Synthesis]

### Research gaps
- Gap 1: [What's missing]
- Gap 2: [What's missing]

### Methodological patterns
- Common methods: [qualitative/quantitative/mixed]
- Common limitations: [field-level constraints]

### Implications for current work
- [How this affects the user's research design]

### References
[APA 7 or Harvard]
```

---

## Writing phase: structure and form

### IMRAD structure (empirical paper)

1. **Introduction** — background, gap, research question, contribution
2. **Methods** — design, data, analysis, ethics
3. **Results** — findings, organised by theme/RQ
4. **And** Discussion — interpret, implications, limitations, future work

### Theoretical paper

1. **Introduction** — problem, theoretical landscape, contribution
2. **Theoretical framework** — concepts, relations, propositions
3. **Argument** — develop the contribution
4. **Discussion** — implications, boundaries
5. **Conclusion**

### Dissertation (monograph)

1. **Introduction** — overarching framing
2. **Theoretical framework** — full landscape
3. **Method** — comprehensive
4. **Empirical chapters** (multiple)
5. **Analysis chapters** (multiple)
6. **Discussion** — synthesis
7. **Conclusion**

### Dissertation (compilation / kappa)

1. **Synthesis text (kappa)** — research questions, framework, method, contribution
2. **Article 1-N** — included publications
3. **Synthesis chapter** — what the articles say together

### Literature review (standalone)

Webster & Watson (2002) approach:
- Concept-centric (not author-centric)
- Forward and backward citation tracking
- Clear inclusion/exclusion criteria
- Build toward an explicit gap

### Method chapter

For empirical work:

| Section | Content |
|---------|---------|
| Research design | Overall approach + rationale |
| Data | Source, collection, sample |
| Analysis | Specific procedure with steps |
| Quality criteria | Trustworthiness / validity |
| Reflexivity | Researcher position |
| Ethics | IRB / GDPR / informed consent |

---

## Reference handling

### APA 7

```
LastName, F. (Year). *Title of work*. Publisher. https://doi.org/...

LastName, F., & SecondName, G. (Year). Title of article. *Journal Name*,
  Volume(Issue), pages. https://doi.org/...
```

### Harvard

```
LastName, F. (Year) *Title of work*. Publisher.

LastName, F. and SecondName, G. (Year) 'Title of article', *Journal Name*,
  Volume(Issue), pp. pages.
```

### In-text citations

- Single author: (Smith, 2024)
- Two authors: (Smith & Jones, 2024)
- Three+: (Smith et al., 2024)
- Direct quote: (Smith, 2024, p. 42)

### Citation format choice

- Most fields: APA 7 (psych, social sciences, education)
- UK-leaning: Harvard
- Engineering: IEEE
- Humanities: MLA or Chicago
- Match journal target if known.

---

## Source criticism principles

1. **Triangulate** — same finding from independent sources
2. **Trace** — read the cited paper, not just the citation
3. **Date** — recency matters (especially in fast-moving fields)
4. **Method** — strong claims need strong methods
5. **Conflicts** — disclose interest, funding sources
6. **Predatory** — check journal credibility

### Predatory journal red flags

- No clear peer-review process
- Publication-fee emphasis
- Rapid acceptance (days)
- Editorial board with unverifiable members
- Not in indexed databases (DOAJ, Scopus)

---

## Writing quality

### Common issues

| Issue | Fix |
|-------|-----|
| Argument doesn't follow from evidence | Make warrant explicit |
| Citation without integration | Engage with the source's argument |
| Method not motivated | Explain alternatives considered |
| Findings without analysis | Distinguish description from interpretation |
| Discussion that just repeats results | Push toward implications |

### Voice

- Active over passive where possible (but discipline varies)
- "We" or "I" depending on field convention
- Hedge appropriately ("suggests", "indicates") for uncertain claims
- Direct claims for established findings

---

## Workflow

### Start of project
1. Clarify research question
2. Map existing knowledge (quick literature scan)
3. Identify the gap
4. Plan method

### During research
1. Systematic search per phase
2. Read and annotate (use Zotero or similar)
3. Build thematic map
4. Identify sub-questions

### Writing
1. Outline first (sections + key arguments)
2. Method chapter early (forces clarity)
3. Results before discussion
4. Introduction last (you'll know what you wrote)
5. Iterate with feedback

### Quality check
1. Argument follows from evidence?
2. Method matches research question?
3. Limitations addressed?
4. Citations consistent?
5. Discussion goes beyond restating results?

---

## Integration with other skills

- **academic-opponent** — peer review of own or others' work
- **gioia-analysis** — qualitative interview coding
- **fact-check** — claim verification
- **knowledge-management** — note organisation
- **systems-thinking** — for systemic research questions
- **root-cause-analysis** — for failure-mode research

---

🎯 COMPLETED: [SKILL:academic] [academic work delivered]
🗣️ CUSTOM COMPLETED: [SKILL:academic] [Academic work done]