Based on Simons Writing Guide

research_review.md

📝 Scientific Manuscript Revision Checklist

Based on the Simons "Musings on Writing" Framework

🛠 Phase 1: The Physical Intervention

• Physical Printout: Have you printed this draft and read it on paper? (Simons Rule: Repetition and flow issues are invisible on a screen).
• The Reverse Outline: Have you written a single phrase summarizing the point of every paragraph?
  • If you can't summarize it in one phrase, the paragraph needs revision.

🏛 Phase 2: Structure & Organization

• The Opening: Does the paper establish a controversy, mystery, or conundrum? (Avoid "laundry list" introductions).
• The Narrative Flow: Does every paragraph in the intro add "clue" or "fuel" to the mystery/controversy?
• The "GoTo" Test: Have you removed all instances of "As noted above" or "As discussed earlier"? (If they exist, the paper needs reorganization).
• Relevant Substance: Does the literature review only include studies that motivate your specific question?

🔬 Phase 3: Scientific Narrative Tone

• Researcher Names: Are names relegated to citations? (e.g., "The task shows..." vs "Smith says...").
• The Brain/Mind Check: Have you ensured you aren't saying "the brain sees" or "the mind explores"? (People do these things, not organs).
• Jargon: Have you asked a non-expert friend to read it to spot "sciencey" complexity?

✂️ Phase 4: Word-Level "Search and Destroy"

• No Acronyms: Have you removed arbitrary letter-constructs to make life easy for the reader?
• Active Voice: Have you replaced "to be" verbs (is, was, were) with powerful action verbs?
• Which Hunt: Have you checked every "which" to see if "that" is better or if the phrase is unnecessary?
• The "Very" Rule: Have you deleted every instance of the word "very"?

Use this markdown file as your github pull request review for the submission version of a scientific manuscript