Lancaster University

- Implementing and driving the institute's research strategy across several research areas. 
- Leading new international strategic partnerships, increasing institute impact and research income.
- Developing new research opportunities and driving growth across the UK and South East Asia.
- Building an academic network,identifying key topics and experts across disciplines and institutions.
- Overseeing the scientific research program, managing a portfolio of projects and budgets.

Director of the Future Cities Research Institute

- Driving development and growth across key national and international partners/clients, increasing, identifying new business opportunities of follow-on and as well as new projects. 
- Developing and leading strategic projects and teams in the health, healthcare and circular economy areas, ensure profitability and high client satisfaction. 
- Engaging in thought leadership (e.g. publications, presentations, press, blogs) and development of intellectual property.

Professor in Global Health Design Innovation

- Setting and leading the direction of the institute on research, innovation and business engagement on sustainable cities, digital cities, resilient cities and liveable cities in the UK and Malaysia.
- Leading new international strategic partnerships, increasing institute impact and income sources.
- Identifying new business opportunities and driving development and growth across key clients


The Future Cities Research Institute (FCRI) is a new joint research institute between Sunway and Lancaster Universities, helping to tackle significant challenges associated with the rapid urbanisation experienced across the global south.

Co-Director of Future Cities Research Institute

- Generating insights and recommendations for global health interventiosna dn products in Africa,  Souteast Asia and Europe
- Leading the development of cross-department international training and stakeholder engagement, generating over 20 new stratregic connections 
- Consultancy to national and international research bodiest and the UK Research Institute on Digital Health innovations
- Engaging in thought leadership (e.g. publications) and development of intellectual property for use on future engagements
- Coaching of staff and external stakeholders on global innovation methods

Director for Health and International Research at ImaginationLancaster

- Developed training programmes on innovation, increasing numbers of clients 
- Developed and managed over 5 externally funded international innovation and research projects, increasing institutional income and outputs
- Trained and mentored small and large groups of adults in design thinking, innovation and
design, user research, achieving high client satisfaction
- Led division marketing leading to increased income from new students

Senior Lecturer/Associate Professor in Design Interactions at ImaginationLancaster

- Set and led strategic department direction in health innovation and research increasing research income
- Developed international special interest group in Global Health, leading to new strategic
partnerships, increasing organisation impact and influence

Strategic Lead for Health & Wellbeing Research

EPFL

Visiting Researcher/Professor at EPFL+ECAL Lab, EPFL.

• Co-developed new Digital Health Innovation Research Framework
• Delivered presentations and talks on speculative design and design innovation.
• Collaborated with interdisciplinary teams to drive cutting-edge research initiatives.

Visiting Researcher/Professor

Sunway University

Visiting Researcher/Professor at Sunway University as part of my role as Director of the Future Cities Research Institute.

• Led CRI Half-Day Ideation Series to brainstorm ideas and facilitate collaboration between SU and LU colleagues.
• Developed strategies for NetZero Cities, Healthy Communities/Healthy Planet, and Urban Poverty initiatives.
• Collaborated with Sunway University colleagues to drive research and innovation in Future Cities.
Conducted capability development workshops:
- Early Career Research Network (ECRN) Seminar – Beyond Journal: Redefining Research Impact
- Post Graduate Academic Career Mentoring and PhD Training

Brunel University

- Developed new and restructured existing training programmes, increasing organisation
income and making savings on resources

Course Director for Multimedia Technology and Design

- Developed and managed innovation project with the NHS, leading to successful completion
- Supervised students placed in the industry making new industrial links and gathering industrial insights for the organisation

Lecturer/Assistant Professor

- Managed complex project of 9 partners from 7 different countries with 25+ staff to successful completion
- Led technical work packages and generated insights from a range of sources leading to innovation development
- Contributed to the research application leading to funding success

Co-Investigator, Project Manager and Engagement Coordinator

• Conducted technical and user research leading to successful completion of project on multi-national EU funded project (IP-Based Networks, Services and TermINals for Converged SysTems -INSTINCT), that led to new insights and additional funding for the organisation.

Research Assistant

I help PhDs, Postdocs & Lecturers secure tenure-track jobs and navigate academia | Insider knowledge tips on how to succeed | Academic Career Mentor | Professor & Research Director

I was a lost PhD student. Confused. Overwhelmed. Ready to quit.

Sitting in my tiny office at 2 AM, drowning in research papers, I made a promise...

"If I somehow make it through this, I'll help others navigate what I'm struggling with."

Today, I'm a Professor at a top UK university. But here's what matters more...

I've kept that promise by helping over 10,000 researchers complete their PhDs and secure academic positions.

The brutal truth about academic careers:
→ 80% of PhD graduates never get academic jobs
→ Universities teach research, not career strategy
→ Brilliant minds give up because they lack guidance
→ Hiring committees have secret rules nobody explains

The brutal truth about doing a PhD whilst working:
→ You're figuring it out alone with minimal supervisor support
→ You lose sleep worrying about failure and its professional consequences
→ You're paralyzed by pressure - procrastinating makes deadlines feel impossible
→ Impostor syndrome hits hard: "Everyone else knows what they're doing, but I'm lost"
→ You're overwhelmed juggling your demanding job with complex academic requirements

My mentors saved my career. Without their guidance, I would have quit. Now I'm that mentor for you.

My transformation story:
→ From PhD uncertainty to Professor by 40
→ £9 million in research funding secured
→ 130+ publications across top journals
→ Research reached 30+ million people globally
→ 220K researchers follow my guidance daily

But here's my real achievement:
Thousands of researchers now have the roadmap I desperately needed.

FREE RESOURCES I PROVIDE:
✅ Weekly newsletter (10K+ subscribers) - PhD completion & job search strategies -  www.phdtoprof.com/newsletter
✅ Daily LinkedIn content - Insider academic career tips
✅ Free academic resources - www.phdtoprof.com/store
✅ AI tools and strategies for ethical research productivity

PREMIUM & PERSONALISED SERVICES:
🎯 1:1 Career Coaching - Personalized academic job search strategy
🎯 Academic Job Application Reviews - CV, cover letters, research statements
🎯 The 6P Success System - 6-week academic job accelerator program -  www.phdtoprof.com/6p-succes

🎯 Premium PhD Coaching - For busy professionals completing their PhD
🎯 Expert Dissertation Review - Academic editing and proofreading of PhD dissertations
🎯 PhD Proposal Development - Support in developing and successfully passing proposals

My mission is simple:
Help you complete your PhD on time AND secure your dream academic position.

Academic careers don't have to be a mystery. You just need the right guide.

I tested 12 AI writing tools over 3 months. 
Here's which ones actually pass journal editorial standards.

Academic publishing is evolving rapidly. 

Yet, one thing remains unchanged: your reputation is everything.

Recently, a talented PhD student approached me in panic. 

Her manuscript was desk rejected. 

Not for weak science, but for using an AI tool the wrong way.

The message from journal editors is clear: 
They are vigilant. 
They are testing submissions. 
They are catching mistakes.

One misstep can cost you more than a paper. It can cost you your future in academia.

After months of conversations with editors and tracking submission outcomes, I have distilled the safest approach for researchers using AI:

AI Tools Editors Accept:

Grammarly (with full disclosure)
- Polishes language to professional standards
- Detects subtle errors
- Must be acknowledged in your paper

Quillbot (for light paraphrasing only)
- Refines awkward sentences
- Avoids unintentional plagiarism
- Never use for entire paragraphs

Hemingway Editor
- Enhances clarity and readability
- Editors appreciate concise writing
- No risk of detection

DeepL (for translation)
- Maintains academic tone
- Outperforms standard translators
- Essential for non-native English speakers

Notion AI (for planning and structure)
- Helps organise arguments and sections
- Should never draft your content
- Use for outlining only

AI Tools That Put Your Career at Risk:

ChatGPT or similar for full text generation
- Editors spot AI-generated prose instantly
- Immediate grounds for rejection

Claude for academic writing
- Text may appear polished, but patterns are detectable
- Editors are trained to notice

Perplexity without transparency
- Lacks proper referencing
- Raises ethical red flags

Any undisclosed AI-generated content
- Breaches publication ethics
- Can result in permanent blacklisting

My advice to every researcher: 
If an AI tool creates content, always disclose it. 
If it checks or organises, you are generally safe. 
When uncertain, err on the side of caution.

Academic integrity is non-negotiable. 
No shortcut is worth your career.

Which AI tool have you found most useful or surprising in your writing process?

Emmanuel Tsekleves

li_at

JSESSIONID

Talks about #phd, #postdoc, #phdcareers, #academicjobs, and #highereducationjobs

I help struggling PhD students complete on time & PhDs/Postdocs secure academic jobs | From PhD confusion to Professor by 40 | Proven roadmap + AI strategies for academic success | 10,000+ researchers guided

How to find the perfect journal for your paper without wasting months on rejections.

Most researchers submit to the wrong journals and waste 6-12 months on rejections.

They pick journals based on prestige instead of fit.

Or spend weeks manually searching through hundreds of options.

Here are 12 free tools that match your manuscript to the right publication venue:

Major Publisher Tools:

Elsevier Journal Finder
→ Best for science, technology, and medical fields
→ Analyzes your abstract to suggest matches

Springer Nature Journal Suggester 
→ Ideal for interdisciplinary and Nature journals
→ Covers broad range of scientific disciplines

Wiley Journal Finder
→ Suitable for health, social sciences, and humanities
→ Provides impact factor and scope information

Taylor & Francis Journal Suggester
→ Great for social sciences, arts, and humanities
→ Detailed subject area matching

IEEE Publication Recommender
→ Perfect for engineering, technology, and computing
→ Specialized for technical research

Specialized & Open Access Tools:

PLOS Journal Selector
→ Best for Open Access in life sciences and medicine
→ Focuses on rapid publication options

MDPI Journal Finder
→ Fast finder for multidisciplinary open-access journals
→ Quick turnaround times

JANE (Journal/Author Name Estimator)
→ Powered by PubMed database
→ Ideal for medical and life science research

Independent & Analysis Tools:

JournalGuide
→ Independent tool covering multiple publishers
→ Includes credibility indicators and peer reviews

Edanz Journal Selector
→ Filter by impact factor and subject area
→ Comprehensive database coverage

Enago Journal Finder
→ AI-powered suggestions with detailed metrics
→ Publication timeline estimates

Scimago Journal & Country Rank (SJR)
→ Check journal quartiles and international rankings
→ Compare journal performance metrics

The secret to successful journal selection:

Use 2-3 tools to cross-reference results.

Match your research scope to journal focus.

Consider acceptance rates alongside impact factors.

Most researchers pick journals randomly or by reputation alone.

Smart researchers use systematic matching tools to increase acceptance rates.

Your research deserves the right audience.

These tools ensure you find journals where your work will be valued and cited.

Which of these journal finder tools would be most helpful for your research field?

#phd #research #journalpublishing #academia

The 42 research tools that helped me publish twice as many papers last year

Every productive researcher has a secret weapon: the right combination of tools that save hundreds of research hours.

After testing dozens of options with my PhD students and postdocs, here's my carefully curated list of tools that made the biggest difference to our productivity:


Paper Reading (My Top 3)
 - PubReader : Transforms dense papers into readable formats with better navigation.
 - Undermind : AI assistant that extracts key insights from papers in minutes.
 - Bohrium SciMaster : Lets you "chat" with research papers to find connections between studies.

Literature Review (My Top 3)
 - PubMed: Precision filters for biomedical literature that find exactly what you need.
 - Sourcely : Streamlines citation management with smart tagging and formatting.
 - SciSpace : Creates visual maps showing how papers connect across your field.

Paper Review (My top 2)
- Paper-Wizard : Comprehensive AI research paper review and feedback
- PaperCheck : Instant AI feedback on methodology and structure, with data deletion options

Data Analysis (My Top 3)
 - Google Sheets : Collaborative analysis with surprising power for academic projects.
 - JASP : Free statistical software with both frequentist and Bayesian capabilities.
- NVivo : Powerful qualitative analysis for interviews and unstructured data.

Paper Writing (My Top 3)
 - @paperpalteam : AI editor that catches academic language issues other tools miss.
 - Hemingway Editor : Eliminates complex sentences for clearer scientific writing.
 - Jenni AI : Helps overcome writer's block and restructure dense academic paragraphs.

Research Presentation (My Top 3)
 - Visme : Academic templates that make conference materials stand out.
 - Piktochart : Creates infographics that explain complex concepts to non-specialists.
 - Alexandre Malucelli : Massive template library for consistent visuals across all research materials.


I've found that choosing the right tool for each research phase dramatically improves productivity.

 Most offer free versions that work well for academic budgets.

Which research tools have you found most helpful? 

Any overlooked gems that should be on this list?

#ResearchTools #AcademicProductivity #PhD #academia

Undermind

SciMaster

Sourcely

SciSpace

Paper-Wizard

PaperCheck

Jenni AI

Vendas de Velas Decorativas

How to use the PRISMA flowchart and avoid getting your systematic review rejected for poor methodology.

Most systematic reviews get rejected because researchers can't clearly show their search and selection process.

Reviewers want transparency.

They need to see exactly how you found and filtered your studies.

The PRISMA flowchart is your roadmap to acceptance.

Here's how to use it properly:

Identification Stage
Start with your database searches.
Record exact numbers from each database.
Include additional sources like reference lists or grey literature.
Remove duplicates systematically using reference management software.

Screening Stage
Apply inclusion and exclusion criteria to titles and abstracts.
Use independent reviewers to reduce bias.
Document how many studies you excluded and why.
Resolve disagreements through discussion or third reviewer.

Eligibility Stage
Assess full-text articles against detailed criteria.
Be specific about exclusion reasons.
Common categories: wrong population, no outcome data, inappropriate study design.
Keep detailed records of every decision.

Included Stage
Separate studies for qualitative synthesis vs meta-analysis.
Not all studies will have comparable data for statistical pooling.
Clearly show which studies contribute to which analyses.

The numbers tell your story:

From 2,847 initial records to 45 final studies shows rigorous selection.
224 full-text exclusions with specific reasons demonstrates systematic approach.
Clear documentation proves your review is comprehensive and unbiased.

The PRISMA flowchart isn't just a reporting requirement.

It's proof that your review is systematic, transparent, and reliable.

Journals reject reviews that can't demonstrate proper methodology.

This flowchart shows reviewers you followed international standards.

Most researchers treat PRISMA as an afterthought.

Smart researchers use it to guide their entire review process from the beginning.

Your systematic review's credibility depends on showing exactly how you selected your evidence.

Which part of the PRISMA process do you find most challenging to document?

#systematicreview #prisma #research #methodology #evidencesynthesis

PhD Students – How to identify and validate your research gap in minutes instead of months?

Stop staring at blank pages wondering if your "brilliant" gap was already filled.

The problem with manual research:
↳ Months spent wondering if you're on the right track
↳ No systematic way to validate gap authenticity
↳ Overwhelming literature with unclear direction

Meet AnswerThis, You Get 1 Month Free Credits here https://lnkd.in/e9SYp4Yt to find research gaps that help you:
 
a) identify genuine research gaps against the entire scientific literature and 
b) discover where opportunities actually exist.

How AnswerThis supports your research gap identification process:

1️⃣ Enter your research query with smart paper filters for targeted results
2️⃣ Select Research Gap Finder tool to identify underexplored research areas 
3️⃣ Review suggested gaps with citation counts and reference quality scores
4️⃣ Ask targeted follow-up questions to validate and narrow down specific gaps
5️⃣ Export comprehensive PDF reports with citations and gap analysis included

Why AnswerThis works:
✅ Discovers genuine gaps in minutes
✅ Shows citation patterns visually
✅ Provides evidence-based validation
✅ Saves weeks of uncertainty

Pro tip: Cross-reference AI findings with your supervisor's expertise for best results.

Stop guessing if your research addresses a real gap.

Get evidence-based identi

Try AnswerThis with 1 month FREE credits today and turn research uncertainty into research opportunity: https://lnkd.in/e9SYp4Yt 

Get 10% off using the code: LINKEDIN10

PhDs - How to develop and write a winning PhD proposal that gets you accepted.

PhD applications get rejected by 5 universities.

I see this pattern constantly among the researchers who follow me.

Brilliant ideas wrapped in terrible proposals.

20 pages of rambling thoughts with no clear structure.

That's when I created my 5-step proposal framework.

The PhDs who use this approach get accepted at 3 out of 4 universities on average.

Here's what works:

Most PhD applicants think longer proposals are better proposals.

They dump every idea they've ever had into a massive document.

But admissions committees want clarity, not confusion.

Here's the simple approach that gets results:

Step 1: Write a Clear Introduction
Start with the problem your research will solve.
Explain why this research matters right now.
List your key research questions simply.
Briefly outline your approach.
Keep it focused and direct.

Step 2: Create a Targeted Literature Review
Identify the most important studies in your field.
Show how your work connects to existing research.
Point out specific gaps you'll address.
Demonstrate your knowledge without showing off.
Quality matters more than quantity.

Step 3: Explain Your Methods Clearly
Describe exactly how you'll conduct your research.
Explain why you chose these specific methods.
Address potential challenges honestly.
Include ethical considerations.
Be realistic about what you can accomplish.

Step 4: Make a Practical Timeline
Break your project into clear phases.
Set realistic milestones for each year.
Include time for writing and revision.
Show you understand the PhD timeframe.
Prove you can plan effectively.

Step 5: End with a Strong Conclusion
Remind readers why your research matters.
Highlight your potential contribution.
Connect your work to broader issues.
End with confidence, not apology.

The transformation I see is incredible:

More interviews at target universities.
Higher rates of funding offers.
Faster acceptance into programs.

The difference isn't the research ideas.
The difference is presenting them clearly.

Your proposal doesn't need to be perfect.
It just needs to show your potential and planning ability.

Most applicants try to impress with complexity.
Smart applicants win with clarity.

A clear proposal shows you can think systematically about complex problems.
That's exactly what PhD programs are looking for.

Which part of proposal writing feels most challenging for you right now?

#phd #proposal #phdapplication #research

After testing 50+ AI tools, these 8 free options maintain complete academic integrity.

Worried that AI tools might put your academic reputation at risk?

You are not alone. Many researchers fear that using AI could lead to accusations of misconduct or even paper rejections.

But here is what most do not realise:
Some AI tools are designed to support rigorous research, not to generate content or cut corners.
Used wisely, they can actually strengthen your academic integrity.

Imagine this scenario:
You spend weeks on a literature review, only to miss a pivotal paper buried deep in the archives.
Or you struggle to map the connections between hundreds of studies.
This is where the right AI tools become game-changers.

After extensive testing, I recommend these 8 free tools that help you work smarter without ever crossing ethical lines:

1. Semantic Scholar
- Advanced search uncovers hidden papers and citation contexts

2. Elicit
- Streamlines systematic reviews and extracts key findings, saving hours

3. ResearchRabbit
- Visualises citation networks so you spot trends and influential work instantly

4. Connected Papers
- Maps out research landscapes, revealing gaps and new directions

5. Scite
- Analyses citation relationships, distinguishing between supporting and contradicting evidence

6. Litmaps
- Tracks how research ideas evolve over time, highlighting opportunities

7. Insiteful
- Recommends relevant literature tailored to your interests

8. Consensus
- Summarises scientific evidence across studies, clarifying where consensus exists

The principle is simple:
Let AI help you discover, organise, and analyse.
Never let it write or fabricate.

These tools amplify your expertise. They do not replace it.
They help you uphold the highest standards of academic integrity.

Which AI research tool will you try first?

Elicit

ResearchRabbit

Litmaps

Consensus

PhDs - how to find your research gap in 2 weeks instead of wasting 8 months reading randomly.

Most PhD students think research gaps are hidden treasures waiting to be discovered.

They read hundreds of papers hoping to stumble across something nobody has studied.

But research gaps follow predictable patterns.

I showed my mentee, David, the 7 types that appear in every field:

Evidence Gap
Look for conclusions based on limited data.
David found that sleep research relied heavily on college students.
What about shift workers or parents with newborns?

Knowledge Gap
Find questions that remain unanswered.
Basic questions in David's field had conflicting answers.
Perfect opportunity for clarifying research.

Practical Knowledge Gap
Identify theories never tested in real settings.
David's literature was full of lab studies.
Nobody had tested these ideas in actual workplaces.

Empirical Gap
Discover where fresh data could challenge assumptions.
Old studies in David's area used outdated measurement tools.
Modern technology could provide better insights.

Methodological Gap
Find where traditional methods fall short.
David realized most studies used surveys.
Direct observation might reveal different patterns.

Population Gap
Spotlight neglected communities.
David's field focused on urban populations.
Rural communities were completely ignored.

Theoretical Gap
Identify missing connections between existing ideas.
David found two relevant theories that had never been combined.
His research could bridge them.

Your research gap isn't hiding in some obscure paper.

It's waiting to be recognized using the right framework.

Most students hope to accidentally discover their gap.

Smart students use proven methods to find theirs.

Which type of research gap sounds most promising for your field?

#phd #research #researchgaps #academia

How to write an academic cover letter that gets you interviewed

Most PhD candidates write cover letters that sound like everyone else's.

Generic. Forgettable. Ignored.

Here's what hiring committees actually look for:

They're asking four critical questions:

- Did you research our specific position?
- How exactly do you fit what WE need?
- Would you accept if we offered?
- Will you contribute to our culture?

Your cover letter must answer all four convincingly.

The 4-paragraph structure that wins interviews:

Paragraph 1: Prove you understand THEIR context

Don't start with "I am writing to apply..."

Start with immediate impact:

"Your department's leadership in community-engaged environmental research directly aligns with my expertise in participatory infrastructure design."

Show you researched their department.
Connect your work to their needs.
Create interest immediately.

Paragraph 2: Address THEIR top 3 priorities

Reference specific faculty and their work.
Connect to departmental strategic priorities.
Show collaboration potential.

"Building on my publications in [specific journals], I would contribute to your existing strengths in [specific areas] while developing new collaborations with [specific faculty names]."

𝗣𝗮𝗿𝗮𝗴𝗿𝗮𝗽𝗵 𝟯: 𝗣𝗼𝘀𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗬𝗢𝗨𝗥 𝗮𝗰𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗶𝘀𝗵𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀 𝗮𝘀 𝘀𝗼𝗹𝘂𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 𝘁𝗼 𝗧𝗛𝗘𝗜𝗥 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗯𝗹𝗲𝗺𝘀

This isn't about listing achievements.

It's about showing how you solve their specific challenges.

Research their recent developments:
- New programs launching
- Faculty retirements creating gaps
- Strategic initiatives needing support

Then position yourself as the solution.

Paragraph 4: Connect to THEIR future vision

Show them how hiring you moves them toward where they want to be.

"I am excited to contribute to [Department Name]'s mission of [their specific goals] and would welcome discussing how my expertise advances your strategic priorities."

The difference between generic and strategic:

Generic: "I am qualified for academic positions"
Strategic: "I am the ideal candidate for YOUR specific position because..."

Common mistakes that kill applications:

Weak openings that don't grab attention.
Using templates that could apply anywhere.
Focusing on what you want vs. what they need.
Failing to show genuine institutional knowledge.
Repeating CV information instead of demonstrating fit.
Being too long (over 2 pages) or too short (under 3/4 page).

Remember this:

Your cover letter competes against hundreds of others.

Generic doesn't get interviews.

Specificity, research, and institutional fit demonstration do.

What's the biggest mistake you see in academic cover letters?

Is anonymous peer review ensuring quality or enabling revenge? - Reviewer 2 killed my paper with one sentence.

"This work lacks novelty and rigour."

Six months of research dismissed in 12 words.

No explanation. No constructive feedback. Just rejection.

Here's the twist:

I discovered later that Reviewer 2 was working on identical research.

My rejection became their publication six months later.

This taught me something ugly about peer review: The system meant to protect science is broken.

I've now reviewed 67 papers myself.

I've seen things that would shock you:

Reviewers demanding citations to their own work.

Three-month delays for reviews that take 4 hours to complete.

Senior researchers ignoring obvious conflicts of interest.

Competitors rejecting breakthrough work to protect their turf.

Reviews written to humiliate rather than improve.

The worst part?

Everyone knows this happens.

Nobody talks about it publicly.

We pretend peer review is sacred and objective.

But it's become a gatekeeping tool for academic elites.

Anonymous review was meant to ensure honesty.

Instead, it enables:
- Competitor suppression
- Bias without consequences
- Revenge without accountability
- Career advancement through others' rejection

I'm not saying we abandon peer review.

But we need radical transparency:

Optional open peer review.
Consequences for abusive reviews.
Conflicts of interest declared openly.
Review timelines with accountability.

The current system is failing early career researchers.

It's failing science itself.

Junior researchers with breakthrough ideas get rejected by threatened seniors.

Innovation gets suppressed to protect established paradigms.

We can do better.

But first, we need to admit the problem exists.

Stop pretending peer review is perfect.

Start demanding accountability.

What's your worst peer review experience? Have you ever suspected a conflict of interest in your rejection?

#peerreview #academia #research #academicpublishing

How to stop your quantitative research paper getting rejected due to poor structure & unclear methodology and get it published on the first submission

Most quantitative papers get rejected within 48 hours.

Not because of bad data.

Because of bad organization.

Reviewers stop reading after the methods section.

Your results never get seen.

After reviewing hundreds of quantitative papers, I found the pattern that separates accepted from rejected research.

Here's the 26-step structure that gets papers published:

Title
Clear, specific title communicating key variables, population, and research design.

Introduction
Literature review synthesizing prior research.
Research gap identifying unexplored areas.
Hypothesis statement with testable predictions.
Research questions that are specific and measurable.
Study objectives defining concrete goals.

Methods
Research design specifying your quantitative approach.
Population and sampling describing target group and selection.
Variables definition with clear operationalization.
Data collection tools detailing instruments and surveys.
Validity and reliability documenting quality measures.
Statistical methods outlining tests and significance levels.
Ethics and approvals covering considerations and consent.

Results
Descriptive statistics presenting summary data.
Inferential statistics reporting test results.
Hypothesis testing with systematic evaluation.
Statistical significance including p-values and confidence intervals.
Data visualization through clear graphs and charts.

Discussion
Interpret results in context of research questions.
Compare with literature noting consistencies and differences.
Study limitations acknowledging methodology weaknesses.
Future research directions based on findings.

Other Elements
Abstract summarizing objectives, methods, results, and conclusions.
Conclusion synthesizing key findings and implications.
References following required citation style.
Appendices including supplementary materials.

The secret isn't complex statistics.

It's systematic organization that reviewers can follow easily.

Your data tells a story.

This structure helps you tell it clearly.

Most quantitative researchers focus only on their analysis.

Smart researchers know structure determines publication success.

Reviewers need to understand your logic before they evaluate your findings.

Which section of quantitative paper writing creates the most confusion for you?

#phd #quantitativeresearch #research #academia

Poor writing kills more academic careers than bad research. Here's a FREE guide to help you ..

Published by Education and Training Boards Ireland.
94 pages of systematic writing guidance.
Completely free download.

This comprehensive handbook reveals everything:

Step 1: Getting Started
- Planning and brainstorming techniques
- Mind mapping for idea organization
- Research methods and source evaluation
- Critical thinking about your research

Step 2: Writing the Draft
- Sentence and paragraph construction
- Structuring arguments effectively
- Integration of research and referencing
- Professional academic tone and style

Step 3: Reviewing Your Work
- Self-assessment techniques
- Clarity and logic evaluation
- Content organization review

Step 4: Editing and Proofreading
- Grammar and punctuation mastery
- Common error identification
- Professional editing strategies

Step 5: Professional Presentation
- Formatting and submission standards
- Final quality checks and presentation

The secret most students miss:
Good academic writing follows a systematic 5-step process.
Not inspiration or natural talent.

Here is what makes it invaluable for PhD students and early career researchers:

- Step-by-step guidance: Move from brainstorming to submission with clarity, not confusion.
- Real techniques: Learn how to structure arguments, avoid common pitfalls, and use professional editing strategies.
- Self-assessment tools: Spot weaknesses in your own work before reviewers do.

This handbook gives you the complete framework used by successful academic writers.

Which writing step challenges you most?

Academic Writing

How to separate yourself from the 70% of PhD students who struggle and join the top performers who thrive.

After supervising 37 PhD students over 15 years, I notice clear patterns.

Some students excel while others constantly struggle.

The difference isn't intelligence or research topic.

It's mastering the unspoken rules of academic success.

Here are the 9 behaviors that separate successful PhD students from the rest:

Come prepared to every meeting
→ Bring specific questions, not vague concerns
→ Show you've thought through problems before asking for help

Keep detailed records of everything 
→ Document methods, decisions, and results systematically
→ Save yourself months when writing your thesis

Suggest solutions, not just problems
→ When you hit obstacles, propose potential approaches
→ Show you're a problem-solver, not just a problem-identifier

Take initiative on administrative tasks
→ Organize paper submissions and paperwork without being asked
→ Demonstrate you understand the bigger picture

Share interesting findings immediately
→ Don't wait for formal meetings to discuss breakthroughs
→ Keep momentum and excitement around your research

Update your online presence regularly
→ Maintain professional profiles that reflect well on your work
→ Build your academic reputation from day one

Set realistic deadlines and stick to them
→ Under-promise and over-deliver consistently
→ Build trust through reliable performance

Collaborate with other students actively
→ Help create a positive research environment
→ Strong labs produce better outcomes for everyone

Express appreciation for guidance received
→ Acknowledge support in presentations and publications
→ Build lasting professional relationships

The students who follow these practices:

Complete their PhDs 8 months faster on average.
Publish 40% more papers during their degree.
Get better recommendation letters and job prospects.
Actually enjoy their PhD experience instead of just surviving it.

The difference between struggling and thriving PhD students isn't talent.

It's understanding that success comes from professional behaviour, not just research skills.

Most PhD students focus only on their research.

Successful PhD students understand that relationships and professionalism matter just as much.

Which of these behaviours would make the biggest difference in your PhD experience?

#phd #phdlife #academia #research #gradschool

PhDs - FREE resources to help you stop getting your research papers rejected and finally get published using free expert training.

Most PhD students and researchers get their papers rejected multiple times before ever seeing publication.

The reason isn't bad research.

It's bad presentation and journal selection.

You spend years on brilliant research, then lose months to avoidable rejection cycles.

Here are 8 free Elsevier tutorials that teach you exactly what editors want to see:

Finding the Right Journal:

1) How to easily spot reliable journals
→ Learn to identify quality journals vs predatory ones
→ 15 minutes that could save you months of wasted effort

2) Finding the right fit: Resources that make your search easier
→ Tools and databases for matching your research to journals
→ 15 minutes of strategic guidance

Manuscript Preparation:

3) How to write an abstract and improve your article
→ Craft abstracts that editors actually want to read
→ 40 minutes of detailed instruction

4) Structuring your article correctly
→ Organize your paper for maximum impact
→ 40 minutes covering every section

Publication Process:

5) Step-by-step guide to publishing your research
→ Navigate the entire publication journey
→ 35 minutes from submission to acceptance

6) Shorten your path to publication: Researcher insights
→ Learn from real experiences of successful authors
→ 33 minutes of insider knowledge

Writing Skills:

7) Writing a persuasive cover letter for your manuscript
→ Create cover letters that get your paper noticed
→ 8 minutes of concentrated value

8) How to turn your thesis into an article
→ Transform your dissertation into publishable papers
→ 60 minutes of comprehensive guidance

These tutorials are created by one of the world's largest academic publisher, Elsevier.

They know exactly what editors and reviewers want to see.

The difference between published and unpublished researchers isn't talent.

It's knowing the system.

Most researchers learn publication skills through painful trial and error.

Successful researchers learn from experts who understand exactly how the process works.

Your research deserves to be published.

These free resources remove the guesswork from the entire process.

Which of these publication skills would help your research career most right now?

#phd #research #publishing #elsevier #academia

PhD Students – How to validate research questions and discover scientific consensus in 20 minutes instead of months?

First, why every PhD needs a reliable tool to validate research questions?

You need systematic research question support:
↳ To quickly test if your research idea is viable and novel
↳ To identify scientific consensus before investing months of work 
↳ To get evidence-based validation for your research direction

But without the right tool, manual research can leave you staring at blank pages, lost in thousands of papers, wondering if your "brilliant" idea was already solved in 1987?

Meet Consensus your AI-powered research validation tool that helps you test research questions against the entire scientific literature and discover where the evidence actually stands.

How Consensus supports your research validation process:

1️⃣ Question: Enter your research question in natural language with smart filters
2️⃣ Summary: Review AI-generated analysis summarizing key findings from top papers 
3️⃣ Deeper exploration: Ask targeted questions using "Ask Paper" to clarify limitations and gaps
4️⃣ Accelerate: Use the Consensus Meter to see scientific agreement with quality indicators
5️⃣ Export: Export comprehensive PDF with validated research foundation
6️⃣ Share: Share evidence-based research direction confidently with your supervisor

Consensus also supports deep exploration. 

Why Consensus works as your research validator:
✅ Tests question viability in minutes (while you focus on original research)
✅ Shows scientific consensus visually (so you understand the landscape) 
✅ Provides evidence-based validation (for confident research direction)
✅ Highlights genuine research gaps (that you can investigate further)
✅ Saves weeks of uncertainty (so you can start meaningful work faster)

Some pro tips for research validation:
➝ Use Consensus Meter results to understand research landscape before diving deep
➝ Cross-reference AI findings with your supervisor's guidance
➝ Let Consensus Organize findings from 220+ million papers into clear insights
➝ Use exported reports as foundation for your literature review
➝ Combine AI efficiency with your critical thinking and domain expertise

Stop guessing if your research questions are worth pursuing.

Get evidence-based validation that helps you start your PhD with confidence and direction.

Try Consensus today and turn research anxiety into research confidence.

👉 Start with Consensus free, or unlock 1 month of Pro free with my link: https://lnkd.in/eykd7hvJ. Pro supercharges your research with more deep searches and unlimited Pro analyses.

#phd #research #consensus #academicresearch #researchquestions

graphical user interface, text, application, Word

Most PhD students submit papers blindly and get rejected. Here's the 5-step system to choose the right journal

They pick the highest impact factor journal.

Or the first one that looks relevant.

Then wait 6 months. Desk rejected.

The problem: They never did the strategic analysis.

Here's the 5-step system to choose the right journal first time:

Step 1: Use Journal Finder Tools

Generate your initial list with automated tools:
- Elsevier Journal Finder
- Springer Nature Journal Suggester 
- JANE (Journal/Author Name Estimator)
- Web of Science

Input your abstract and keywords. Get 10-15 targeted suggestions.

Step 2: Check Quality Metrics

Visit Scimago Journal Rank and evaluate:

- Impact Factor and Quartile (Q1-Q4)
- Citation trajectory over 5 years (growing or declining?)
- H-index and subject area ranking

Red flag: Declining citations despite decent current impact factor.

Step 3: Evaluate Journal Details

Visit each journal's website and check:

Scope and fit:
✓ Aims and scope statement
✓ Types of articles published
✓ Editorial board expertise

Logistics that matter:
- Review timeline (3 months vs 9 months makes a huge difference)
- Publication fees and APC costs
- Open access vs subscription model
- Author guidelines and formatting

Step 4: Browse Recent Issues

Read the latest 2-3 issues and look for:

- Papers with similar topics to yours
- Studies using your methodology
- Research from your specific discipline

If you find 3-5 papers that could cite your work, that's a strong fit signal.

If you can't find similar work, wrong journal.

Step 5: Compare and Verify Your Final Choice

Narrow to your top 3 journals and compare:
- Impact factor vs fit score
- Review time vs your deadlines
- Fees vs your budget
- Where your bibliography citations appear

Cross-reference with mentor recommendations.

Trust fit over impact factor.

The truth nobody tells you:

The "best" journal isn't the one with the highest impact factor.

It's the one where:
✓ Your research fits the scope perfectly
✓ Your target audience will actually read it
✓ The review timeline matches your needs

Common mistakes that waste months:

Choosing prestige over fit.
Ignoring review timelines.
Submitting where your methodology is uncommon.
Not checking recent issues for similar work.

The bottom line:

This analysis takes 3-4 hours upfront.

It saves you 6-12 months of rejected submissions.

Strategic journal selection is the difference between publishing in 6 months vs 2 years.

Do the analysis. Make the strategic choice.

What's the biggest challenge you face when selecting journals for your research?

After mentoring 100+ PhD students, these 20 free resources solve 90% of common PhD challenges.

Most PhD students struggle alone.
Reinvent wheels daily.

Waste years on solved problems.

All while free solutions exist.
They just don't know about them.

I compiled their most essential resources.
These 20 free tools solve the problems that derail dissertations.
Bookmark them all.

The 20 PhD survival resources:

Writing and Editing Tools:
1. Grammarly - Grammar and clarity checking
2. Hemingway Editor - Readability improvement 
3. Google Docs - Collaborative writing platform
4. LaTeX/Overleaf - Professional document formatting
5. Notion - Research organization and note-taking

Research Databases and Search Engines:
6. Google Scholar - Academic search engine
7. JSTOR - Academic journal database
8. PubMed - Medical and life sciences literature
9. Semantic Scholar - AI-powered research discovery
10. ResearchGate - Academic social networking

Mental Health and Productivity:
11. Headspace - Meditation and mindfulness
12. Forest App - Focus and productivity tracking
13. PhD Balance - Mental health resources
14. Pomodoro Timer - Time management technique
15. Calm - Anxiety and stress management

Academic Networking and Collaboration:
16. Academic Twitter - Professional networking
17. Discord Communities - Academic group discussions
18. Bluesky - Decentralized academic networking
19. ORCID - Researcher identifier and profile
20. LinkedIn - Professional relationship building

The secret successful PhD students know:
- You don't have to solve everything alone.
- Smart resources multiply your effectiveness.
- Free tools often work better than expensive alternatives.

Stop reinventing wheels.
Start leveraging collective wisdom.

Which of these could make your life easier this week?

PhD Students - Stop Wasting Weeks on Literature Reviews. How to validate your research questions in 20 minutes instead of 4 weeks?

Stop drowning in 147 browser tabs wondering if your question is even viable.

The problem with traditional literature reviews:
↳ 3+ weeks just to validate if your research question is worth pursuing
↳ No clear way to compare evidence across different approaches
↳ Zero visibility into whether sufficient research exists

Meet Consensus Scholar Agent.

An AI copilot that validates your PhD research direction before you waste months on the wrong question.

How Scholar Agent validates your research questions:
1️⃣ Enter your research question with smart filters to search across 220+ million papers
2️⃣ Review AI-generated analysis with instant summaries of key findings from top studies
3️⃣ Ask targeted follow-up questions to explore methodology, limitations, and research gaps
4️⃣ Check the Consensus Meter for visual scientific agreement (High/
Moderate/Low/Insufficient findings)
5️⃣ Export comprehensive PDFs with all findings and citations to share with your supervisor

Why Scholar Agent works:
✅ Compares multiple approaches in one search
✅ Validates question viability in 5 minutes
✅ Provides citation-backed evidence instantly
✅ Shows research consensus visually
✅ Saves weeks of manual screening

Pro tip: Use Scholar Agent in Week 1 of your PhD to validate your research direction early. 

The #1 dissertation killer? Starting with the wrong question and discovering it 6 months later.

Stop guessing if your research question is valid.

Get evidence-based validation in 20 minutes.

👉 Start with Consensus free, or unlock 1 month of Pro free with my link: https://lnkd.in/eykd7hvJ. Pro supercharges your research with more deep searches and unlimited Pro analyses.

40% of PhD students fail their methodology chapter.
Here's how to design your PhD research methodology to ace your PhD

Most PhD students start with a vague research question.

Then they panic about methods.

"Should I do interviews or surveys?"
"Qualitative or quantitative?"
"What about mixed methods?"

The problem: They're starting in the wrong place.

Research design isn't about choosing methods first.

It's about creating perfect alignment from question to methods.

Here's the 3-level framework that works:

Level 1: Your Research Question

The overarching question driving your entire study.

This must be:
- Clear and focused
- Answerable through research
- Significant to your field

Example: "How does remote work affect employee wellbeing in technology companies?"

Level 2: Your Research Objectives

Break your big question into 3-4 specific, measurable goals.

Each objective addresses one aspect of your research question.

Using the remote work example:

Objective 1: Identify factors affecting wellbeing in remote settings
Objective 2: Measure the relationship between remote hours and wellbeing
Objective 3: Develop recommendations for organizations

Notice how each objective needs different evidence to answer it.

Level 3: Your Research Methods

Now (and only now) choose the specific tools for each objective.

Objective 1 needs: Literature review + Qualitative interviews
Objective 2 needs: Quantitative survey + Statistical analysis 
Objective 3 needs: Case studies + Thematic analysis

Your methods flow logically from what each objective requires.

The three non-negotiable principles:

✓ All three levels must align and justify each other
✓ Each objective must directly address part of your research question
✓ Methods must be appropriate and sufficient for each objective

Common mistakes that destroy research design:

Choosing methods because "everyone in my field uses them."
Having objectives that don't actually answer your research question
Misalignment between what you're asking and how you're measuring
Starting with methods you're comfortable with rather than methods the research needs


The clarity test:

Can you draw a straight line from your research question → through each objective → to specific methods?

If not, you need to redesign.

Why this matters:

Clear research design makes:
- Your methods defensible in your viva
- Your methodology chapter easier to write
- Your entire PhD more focused and achievable
- Your examiners' jobs easier (they love logical alignment)

The bottom line:

Don't choose methods first.

Start with your question.
Break it into objectives.
Let the objectives dictate your methods.


What's the biggest challenge you face in designing your research methodology?

#phd #dissertation #thesis #methodology #research #methods

How to choose the right paper type to get published and avoid getting rejected for using the wrong format.

Most academic papers get rejected for format problems, not content issues.

Brilliant researchers write the wrong type of paper.

They submit original research as review papers.

Or try to publish opinion pieces as research studies.

Immediate desk rejection.

The editor never reads their methodology or findings.

After publishing 130+ papers, I learned that paper type determines everything.

Here are the 4 types that shape academic careers:

Research Paper
Purpose: Present original research findings
Best for: Building reputation as an innovator
When to use: You have new data or tested hypotheses
Example: "Effects of Diet on Cognitive Function"

Review Paper
Purpose: Summarize and analyze existing literature
Best for: Becoming the authority on a topic
When to use: You want to consolidate knowledge on a broad topic
Example: "A Review of Climate Change Mitigation Strategies"

Case Study
Purpose: Examine a specific instance or phenomenon
Best for: Connecting theory to practice with real-world insights
When to use: You want to explore a unique or representative case
Example: "Implementation of AI in Healthcare: IBM Watson"

Position Paper
Purpose: Argue for a particular stance or viewpoint
Best for: Influencing debates and policy discussions
When to use: You want to advocate for a position on a contentious issue
Example: "The Need for Universal Basic Income"

The secret most academics miss:

Your career goal determines your paper type.

Not your comfort zone.

Want to establish expertise? Write reviews.
Have original data? Write research papers.
Want policy influence? Write position papers.
Have unique examples? Write case studies.

Paper type determines:
Which journals will consider your work.
Which audiences will read your research.
Which career doors will open.

Match format to content and watch your acceptance rates soar.

Most academics learn this through painful trial and error.

Smart academics understand the strategy from the start.

Which type of paper would best serve your current research goals?

#phd #academicwriting #research #publishing

Taplio

Emmanuel Tsekleves's Linkedin Analytics

Who is engaging with Emmanuel

's Best Posts (last 30 days)

Want to drive more opportunities from LinkedIn?

Taplio

.css-1jgreyo{background-image:linear-gradient(284deg, rgba(39,43,72,1) 0%, rgba(33,47,183,1) 100%);color:transparent;-webkit-background-clip:text;background-clip:text;}Emmanuel Tsekleves's Linkedin Analytics

Who is engaging with Emmanuel

's Best Posts .css-qqfgvy{font-size:var(--chakra-fontSizes-md);}(last 30 days)

Want to drive more opportunities from LinkedIn?

Emmanuel Tsekleves's Linkedin Analytics

's Best Posts (last 30 days)