Produce research proposal and literature matrix with inputs, checks, findings and limitations.
2026-10-26.2 · 60 minutes estimated; work in several sessions
Saved on this device; sign in to import explicitly.
Prerequisites and goal
Choose a target role and explain research and programme fit. Diagnose first, then revisit the checklist as needed.
Start with diagnostics; skip explanations you can already apply independently.
Research and programme fit
Use research and programme fit to make decisions inspectable.
Compare research areas, training and requirements across three programmes.
Teaching example: A relevant supervisor topic does not establish current availability.. Predict the result, independently check the key step, and compare these assumptions with the actual role. Do not use demonstration results as real-world advice.
Literature discovery and synthesis
Use literature discovery and synthesis to make decisions inspectable.
Build a five-paper matrix of questions, methods, findings and limits.
Teaching example: A literature review compares arguments rather than only summarising papers.. Predict the result, independently check the key step, and compare these assumptions with the actual role. Do not use demonstration results as real-world advice.
Research gap and contribution
Use research gap and contribution to make decisions inspectable.
Identify a bounded unanswered question from the literature matrix.
Teaching example: Not finding a paper does not prove a question is unstudied.. Predict the result, independently check the key step, and compare these assumptions with the actual role. Do not use demonstration results as real-world advice.
Methods and feasibility
Use methods and feasibility to make decisions inspectable.
State data/material sources, methods and time constraints.
Teaching example: Interviews, experiments and textual analysis need different evidence and conditions.. Predict the result, independently check the key step, and compare these assumptions with the actual role. Do not use demonstration results as real-world advice.
Proposal structure
Use proposal structure to make decisions inspectable.
Draft question, context, methods, contribution, timetable and references.
Teaching example: A proposal should be narrowed to a feasible question.. Predict the result, independently check the key step, and compare these assumptions with the actual role. Do not use demonstration results as real-world advice.
Materials and eligibility
Use materials and eligibility to make decisions inspectable.
Check official materials, deadlines and language requirements.
Teaching example: Requirements vary by programme and current cycle.. Predict the result, independently check the key step, and compare these assumptions with the actual role. Do not use demonstration results as real-world advice.
Research discussion and interview
Use research discussion and interview to make decisions inspectable.
Prepare a three-minute pitch and answer method/limitation questions.
Teaching example: Explain why the method fits instead of piling up terminology.. Predict the result, independently check the key step, and compare these assumptions with the actual role. Do not use demonstration results as real-world advice.
Worked example · fictional
From a problem to inspectable work
Synthetic clustered measurements: 20 people, five measures each, 100 rows; use the approximation DE = 1+(m−1)ICC with m=5 and ICC=0.5.
DE = 1+(5−1)×0.5 = 3. A hundred rows are not a hundred independent people; distinguish approximate information from the analysis model.
Further judgment: What happens if all 100 rows are treated as independent?
Uncertainty may be understated; model the clustering
Deliver research proposal and literature matrix: the calculation reference is 3; the recommendation must respect Uncertainty may be understated; model the clustering. Separate numbers, inference and unknowns.
Failure case and repair
In Methods and feasibility, copy tool output without definitions, then retain the conclusion when asked: What happens if all 100 rows are treated as independent?
Even a result of 3 does not explain when Uncertainty may be understated; model the clustering is supported.
DE = 1+(5−1)×0.5 = 3. A hundred rows are not a hundred independent people; distinguish approximate information from the analysis model. Then test assumptions in Materials and eligibility.