研究論文の執筆を実際に改善する21のAIプロンプト

Write a 250-word structured abstract for a research paper in [your field].
The study used [method] to examine [research question]. Key findings include
[finding 1], [finding 2], and [finding 3]. The sample was [describe sample].
Use past tense for methods and results. Use present tense for implications.
Follow the structure: Background, Methods, Results, Conclusions.

Here is my draft abstract: [paste abstract]. Reduce it to exactly [word limit]
words. Keep all key findings and the main conclusion. Remove hedging language
unless it's scientifically necessary. Maintain formal academic register.

I'm writing the introduction for a paper about [topic] in [field]. My research
question is [question]. The gap in current literature is [gap]. Create an
outline for a 4-paragraph introduction that moves from broad context to specific
gap to research question to brief method overview. Include suggested citation
points marked as [CITE].

Here's the first paragraph of my research paper introduction: [paste paragraph].
Suggest three alternative opening sentences that would better capture reader
attention. Options should be: (1) a surprising statistic approach, (2) a
real-world problem framing, (3) a knowledge gap statement. Keep each under
30 words. Academic tone.

I'm writing a literature review paragraph about [theme]. Here are my sources
and their key findings:
- [Author 1 (Year)]: [finding]
- [Author 2 (Year)]: [finding]
- [Author 3 (Year)]: [finding]
Write a synthesis paragraph that identifies patterns and contradictions across
these sources. Do not summarize each source individually. Use citation format:
(Author, Year). Approximately 150 words.

Here is my literature review section: [paste text]. Based on what's covered,
identify 3-5 potential gaps or underexplored areas that my study could address.
For each gap, explain in one sentence why it matters. Focus on methodological
gaps, population gaps, or conceptual gaps.

Write a methods section based on these notes: [paste bullet points of what
you did]. Field: [field]. Use past tense, passive voice where conventional,
formal academic register. Organize into subsections: Participants/Sample,
Data Collection, Analysis. Include enough detail for replication.
Approximately [word count] words.

Here is my methods section: [paste text]. Review it as a peer reviewer would.
Identify any missing information that would prevent replication of this study.
List each gap as a specific question I should answer in the text.

Convert these statistical results into academic prose: [paste your stats
tables or key numbers]. Field: [field]. Use the format common in [target
journal or style guide]. Report exact values (means, SDs, p-values,
confidence intervals). Use past tense. Do not interpret the results - 
only describe them.

My key findings are: [list findings]. The existing literature shows: [key
prior results]. My study's limitations include: [list limitations]. Create
a discussion section outline with these subsections: (1) Summary of key
findings, (2) Comparison with prior research, (3) Theoretical/practical
implications, (4) Limitations, (5) Future directions. Under each, include
2-3 bullet points of what to cover.

My study has these limitations: [list them plainly]. Write a limitations
paragraph that acknowledges each one directly without being overly
apologetic or dismissive. For each limitation, briefly suggest how it
affects interpretation of results. Academic tone, approximately 200 words.

Here is a reviewer comment: "[paste comment]". Draft a professional response
that: (1) thanks the reviewer for the observation, (2) directly addresses
their concern, (3) describes what changes were made or provides justification
for not making changes. Keep the tone respectful but confident. Under 150 words.

Here is my draft response to a reviewer: "[paste your response]". Rewrite
it to be less defensive while still making the same points. The reviewer
should feel heard, not attacked. Keep the technical content identical.

Here is a section of my paper: [paste text]. Reduce the word count by
20% while keeping all key information and arguments. Remove redundancies,
tighten phrasing, and eliminate filler. Do not remove any technical
content or citations. Maintain academic register.

Rewrite this text for [target audience: e.g., a general science audience /
an undergraduate textbook / a grant application panel / a different
discipline]. Original text: [paste]. Keep the core findings and arguments
but adjust vocabulary, assumed knowledge level, and example specificity.
Approximately [word count] words.

Here is what my figure shows: [describe axes, groups, and the key pattern].
Draft a caption for a journal in [field]. First sentence states what the
figure shows. Following sentences define abbreviations, sample sizes, and
statistical annotations. Keep it under [word limit] words.

Here is my results table: [paste table]. Write a results paragraph that
reports the values relevant to [hypothesis], in past tense, without
interpreting them. Report exact values with their units and statistics
as given. Do not round or invent numbers.

Here is my thesis chapter outline: [paste outline]. My research question is
[question]. Identify sections that do not serve the research question,
sections that overlap, and any missing step in the argument chain from
literature to method to findings.

I will paste terminology and definitions from two chapters of my thesis.
List every term that is defined differently, used inconsistently, or
abbreviated in more than one way. [paste excerpts]

Edit the following paragraph for grammar, punctuation, and clarity only.
Do not change sentence order, vocabulary level, or my phrasing choices
unless they are errors. Return the edit as a list of changes with reasons.
[paste paragraph]

Here is a paragraph from my draft and a paragraph from a paper published in
[target journal]. Compare register, sentence length, and hedging style, and
list specific adjustments that would bring my draft closer to the journal's
style. Do not rewrite my paragraph. [paste both]