3.40 How to read academic papers more quickly

One of the most common comments I hear from PhD students is that reading always takes longer than they expect. In this episode, I share four elements that you need to take into account when deciding how much time you are going to give an article, book or other piece of writing. By being more intentional in considering these elements, you can be much more accurate in how long each piece will take to read and often read it in less time. This is crucial for anyone at any stage of their research career – not only will it help you to manage workflow and hit deadlines, it will also improve your understanding of the literature. 

****
I'm Dr Vikki Wright, ex-Professor and certified life coach and I help everyone from PhD students to full Professors to get a bit less overwhelmed and thrive in academia. Please make sure you subscribe, and I would love it if you could find time to rate, review and tell your friends! You can send them this universal link that will work whatever the podcast app they use. http://pod.link/1650551306?i=1000695434464

I also host a free online community for academics at every level. You can sign up on my website, The PhD Life Coach. com - you'll receive regular emails with helpful tips and access to free online group coaching every single month! Come join and get the support you need.

Transcript

This week's topic really came out of a coaching session in my membership. So in the membership, students have the opportunity to come to what we call open coaching, which is where they can bring anything that they're finding challenging at all, and I will coach them on it.

And I had a student come who was struggling to know how long it took to read a paper. Okay, and this is something that comes up all the time, and so I thought, you know what? We'd had such a useful discussion about it there in the session that I thought it'd be a great opportunity to share with all of you listeners as well.

So when you are planning out what reading you need to do, I want you to think about how you decide how long it'll take to read an article. And in most cases, one of the things I get told more than anything else is I'm really bad at judging how long it takes. And there's a few underpinning beliefs with that statement that I think it's really worth us questioning.

So "I don't know how long it will take to read this paper" really has the underlying belief that there is a set amount of time that it will take and that you have very little control over it. And I wanna remind you that neither of those things are true. There isn't a fixed amount of time that it takes to read any particular paper, and you have a huge amount of control over how long it takes.

So what I'm gonna do in this episode is explain to you how people usually do it and why I think you'd benefit from doing it in a different way. And the specific suggestions I would make that are gonna massively speed up or at a more kind of complex level, make you much more in control of how long it takes to read a paper.

'cause this also isn't just about speeding up, right? This is about spending time on the right things. So we're gonna make it faster, we're gonna make it more predictable, which it's gonna make it so much easier for you to organize your time and to get stuff done. So let's get started.

 Hello and welcome to the PhD Life Coach Podcast. I am Dr. Vicki Wright, the PhD Life Coach. I'm an ex professor and certified life coach, and I help PhD students and researchers to overcome overwhelm and imposter syndrome so that we can actually get our work done and enjoy the process. We are gonna dig in to how we can take more control over how long it takes to read a paper. And for those of you who are in the more kind of arts and humanities where you're studying from books and archives and all that stuff, this can get extrapolated out to any length of document that you are talking about. So when I say article, just insert whatever word is appropriate for your discipline. Okay.

Now I want you to spend a moment just thinking, how do I currently estimate how long something will take? Do I estimate or do I just start reading? Do I decide this is the thing I need to read? Let's go or do you actually try and estimate? A lot of people don't even try and estimate. They start reading. They have two versions of an article. They either haven't read it or they have read it, they don't read it, or they do read it. And that's kind of two binary options. Hint. In this episode today, we're gonna think about how there's a lot of inbetweens there as well.

So they either just get reading or they take a rough guess on how long it should, whatever should means take, based usually on two things. I want you to see if these are the same two things for you. What I see with my clients, the two things that usually get taken into account is how long is the article or book? How complex is the article or book? If it's long and complex, we're gonna take a long time to read it. If it's short and simple, we'll take less time to read it. And it sort of feels as though that's intuitively true, right? That has face validity. It kind of makes sense that if something is long and complicated, it's gonna take us a long time to read it. And if it's simple and short, it's gonna take us a short amount of time to read it. I think this is where we're falling down. This is where we're wasting time. This is where we are making it really hard for ourselves to judge how long things take.

So I'm gonna share with you four other things that I think we need to think about in order not to work out how long it will take to read this article. But in order to decide how long we are giving this article, okay, I want you to notice the difference in how I described that. On one hand, is this quite passive, sort of, I wonder how long it will take as though there's some truth out there, which is how long it takes. And over here is how long I have decided to give to this article. These are very different. It is much more empowering to think about how much time am I giving to this article than how long will it arbitrarily take?

Now in order to decide though, you need to be taking into account the length of the article and the complexity of the article. Definitely. But I'm gonna share with you four other things that I think you need to also take into account so that you really know what options you've got, and you can then make decisions from there.

Once you understand those options, you'll often be able to read an article much, much more quickly than you are at the moment. And if it takes as long or even longer than it currently does with my approach, you will know exactly why and you will have chosen that rather than it just ending up taking a long time.

The reason that most people think that they're the most important variables is because what most people do when they're reading an article is they start at the beginning and they read all the bits until they get to the end. And they go more quickly through the bits that are simple that they understand and they go more slowly through the bits that are more complex, that need to be taken in more.

And therefore, if that's the approach, if that is your definition of reading something, then yes, absolutely. The length and complexity of it will be the main variables that predict the amount of time it takes. And usually what happens is the length of it shouldn't catch a by surprise 'cause hopefully we can see how long it is. Although with electronic versions, that's not always as clear. Um, but the complexity sometimes catches us out. There's more of it that's more complex than we thought. Therefore, we go slower.

Now the twist that I want you to make in your thinking that will then open up all these tools that I'm going to share with you is that we don't need to read, in fact, we shouldn't be reading by picking up an article, starting at the beginning, going to the end, and that's it read every time. What we should be doing instead is making a conscious decision about why we are reading that article.

So as well as length and complexity, the first of the four things that I want you to take into account is purpose. We need to be thinking about the purpose of us as an individual reading that article at this time point. Okay? And the at this time point is important as well. And I'll get to that.

One of the things I get my members to do in our coworking sessions, if they're reading, if that's the task they've turned up to do, is to actually write a sentence before they start reading the article. Write a sentence or two sentences about what it is they're specifically intending to get outta this article.

Why that article? What do they want from it? Because think about it, right when you read an article. Sometimes it's because that topic is absolutely central to what you are doing in your thesis and you need to know everything about it. Other times you read it because you are gonna be using a similar method to that person.

You know, they were investigating something completely different, but they did the same data analysis strategy that you are going to use. Other times you are looking for something to back up a kind of passing point that you are making in your general introduction. So, as an example, many of you know I used to be an exercise scientist. So kinesiologist, those of you in North America. And so let's think of that as an example. If I'm reading for a exercise intervention that I'm doing to look at the effects of exercise on some biomarker, then some articles will have done exercise interventions on that same biomarker using similar, similar methods to me, and I'm gonna wanna know that paper inside out, back to front, every detail of it. When did they do their measurements? Exactly? How did they measure that biomarker? Absolutely everything. Especially the method and results particularly, I wanna know in absolute depth. However, when I'm writing this up, I'm gonna need a paragraph at the beginning of the introduction. That's going to be something like the generic physical inactivity is associated with a number of adverse our health outcomes, including type two diabetes, reference, obesity, reference, cardiovascular disease reference, and whatever else, right? Reference. And I just need references to fill those in. I'm also potentially gonna read papers where they measured that biomarker, but not in the context of exercise or they did the same exercise intervention as me, but with different markers. Now. I need to reference all of those things. I need a reference for my exercise intervention. I need a reference for how I measured the biomarker. I need a reference for how I analyze the data. I need references for all of this stuff.

I need reading for all of this stuff, understanding but how I read each of those articles is gonna be completely different depending on why I'm reading it, which purpose it's having. Now, even if we backtrack in time, maybe I don't know yet exactly what my study's doing, then the purpose is to get a feel for the types of exercise interventions that have been done in relation to this biomarker, or to get a feel for what biomarkers have been shown to be modulated by this intervention, for example.

So sometimes it's not as simple as I need to know this specific thing, but my specific reason for reading it might be to familiarize myself with what else has been done in this specific bit of the literature. So our first job always is to know why we are reading it. A valid reason is not background. If you find yourself going, oh, I'm reading it for background. I'm reading it. 'cause I don't know enough, I'm reading it. 'cause I don't understand enough yet. I need a broader understanding. That's too vague. We don't want that. I want you to get as specific as possible. Why is this the article that made it onto your desk, onto your screen?

Why is this the article that's on the to-do list for today? I'm reading this article because so and so has a strong reputation in this field, and they're working on a similar population that I'm gonna be working on, and I want to understand better how they justify that decision, for example. Get really, really specific about it, because we cannot judge how long it's gonna take to read this article if we don't know that.

Now you may remember, I said at this time point, this is not just about why am I reading this article? It's why am I reading this article at this time point? And the reason I emphasize that is because often what we think when we read something is that we should read it thoroughly enough and make good enough notes that that is our only time reading it.

'cause that's efficient, right? That's the efficient way to do it. Only read it once, get everything you need from it and then you are won't have to read it again. Won't that be efficient? You'll have this wonderful note system. That's not efficient because the problem is every time you read that article, you should and probably are reading it for different reasons to last time and even more complexly you are reading it with a different brain now because when you read an article when you are final year PhD student, those of you who are there already know this. When you read it as a final year student, you read it in a completely different way and with completely different understanding than when you read it for the first time.

So we are thinking what is the purpose of reading this for me at this time point with what I am currently trying to do. That's what we mean by purpose, and that is gonna really influence how long we are gonna take over this. Because in my example, if I'm reading this so that I can say physical inactivity is associated with type two diabetes incidence, for example, then I am not spending a long time reading that article. This is not a controversial point. There's about a billion articles that I could reference to do it. I want a nice meta-analysis. I want a nice systematic review. Something like that. We have a quick look. Is it published somewhere good? Does it seem to be methodologically sound?

Does it make the point? I want it to make. Boom. It'll do no prizes. Forgetting the absolute perfect one. Do I need to read every single aspect of it? Exact. Every single bit? No. I'm just backing up a point at the beginning of my introduction, okay. The purpose is simply to be able to back that point up.

If the purpose is to understand the methodology. Do I need to read all their introduction? No. I need to know what they did and what they found, and then I need to read in detail the method. So I'm gonna direct myself to that bit of it, which means that I've now got a much better way of estimating how long this will take. 'cause if I know I need to understand how they designed their exercise intervention. Translate that out into your discipline, then I'm much better able to guess how long it's gonna take me to figure that out. Whereas if I'm trying to read the introduction or the results and all the discussion and everything as well, and dah, dah, dah, who knows how long it will take? 'cause it depends how much I understand the things they did.

Quick interjection. If you are finding this episode helpful, but you are driving, walking the dog or doing dishes, just remember this. When you're done, head to the PhD life coach.com and sign up for my newsletter. We've all listened to a podcast and thought this is great. I should do something with it, and that didn't.

That's where I created the newsletter to help you actually apply the stuff that you hear. Each week you'll get a short summary, some reflective questions on one simple action that you can take right away. You'll also get access to a searchable archive of all the past episodes so you can find the exact one that you need to help with your current challenges.

Plus all newsletter subscribers get a free webinar every single month on a topic that affects all PhD students and academics, and you'll always be the first to hear for when my membership opens to new members. So once you're done listening, or even right now, go sign up for my newsletter and make sure you don't miss out.

So purpose is one of the four. That then relates to the second of the four things I want you to take into account. And the second is centrality. And what I mean in this context by centrality is how fundamental is this article to what I'm doing? Now you may say, how do I work that out? All of them are important. It's not true. If I asked you to write an abstract that sums up your whole thesis and that you were allowed to give me three references that inform your thesis, you would be able to narrow that down. It's tricky, but you would find articles that probably are a very similar topic, a very similar methodology, very similar philosophical underpinnings, dah, dah, dah, and that are very central to why you did what you did. In fact, many of them may be, this is what we know so far. Paper A or whatever, but they left this gap. They uncovered this unknown bit, which is what my thesis is now gonna do. Those articles are super central to your thesis. The articles that are central to why you use that particular method. That's a little bit more peripheral because now they only have the method in common, but they might be different topics, or they might just be a methodological paper or whatever. They're slightly less central. The articles that are just sort of backing up introduction points or providing a bit of extra context or whatever. Those are less central. Those who watching me on YouTube will be able to see. I'm making kind of target type circles in front of my face. So we've got the articles that are right at the bullseye, and then we've got the articles that are further out from the center.

We need to be reading the articles that are more central to our work in much more depth and much more detailed understanding than the ones that are much more peripheral. So is this an article that's central to what I do? In which case I'm probably gonna read it slowly. I'm gonna read it many times for many different purposes, and I'm gonna know every bit of it inside out, versus is it much less central or is it simply serving one point, or is it kind of a nice to have but not crucial in which case I'm gonna read it in less depth and I'm gonna read it more quickly.

So the purpose, why are we reading it and the centrality of it both are gonna influence how long we are gonna decide to take on this article.

The third thing we are gonna take into account is how familiar we are with the type of work we are reading. Because, and this was one of the things that came up in the coaching session, is that many of you will be working at intersections between disciplines. I was super interdisciplinary, so I was often working at the intersection of psychology, neuroendocrinology, immunology, exercise sciences, kind of a smush between those. So as you can imagine, some papers, if you gimme an exercise intervention where it's got some simple biomarkers, I can read that inside out, back to front, understand every bit of it very, very quickly. Not a problem. I am an exercise scientist at heart. If you give me an article where, instead of how it's still an exercise intervention, but instead of being a simple biomarker, they're doing some complex immunological measurements of some description.

Gonna take me a little bit longer if you give me a pure, you know, say, 'cause I often was looking at articles where I was looking at the impact of, I don't know, some particular hormone or whatever in vitro on an immune outcome. So a much more pure neuroendocrine immunology study, then I'm gonna be much less familiar. I'm still all right, you know, but I'm st I'm much less familiar with the techniques being used, with what makes a good study versus a weak study, with what controls there should be, da, da, da. My expectations are much blurrier. And the reason we take this into account is because it is reasonable to expect you to take longer to read something that you are less familiar with the topic area than if you are more familiar with it.

Now we do always have to remember that purpose though, because sometimes when something's less familiar, we expect ourselves to understand every single word of it. And it may be even if it's quite central to what we are doing. If for example, my purpose is not to replicate their methods, then perhaps I do need to understand exactly why they chose those immune markers, exactly why they chose those hormones, exactly why they manipulated it the way they did.

But I probably don't need to fully understand media that they used and why the incubations were the length they were and why they did that wash routine or whatever it is, right? I probably don't need to understand all of that 'cause I'm not doing that. So even where we are less familiar sometimes what we get to do is decide that, you know what, I'm not big on this stuff. That's not my specialty and it is not that central to what I'm doing. So that bit I can skim or that bit I can pull out the key bits that I need, but I don't need all of the detail. So I want you to notice I'm giving you four things, but they all super sort of overlap and interact with each other.

So we've got the centrality, the knowing the purpose, we've got how familiar we are with the discipline and the kind of the content of this sort of a paper. And then the fourth one is really about our expectations of ourselves because one of the things that became really clear in the coaching session yesterday is that clever people expect themselves to understand everything. And if you are working at the intersections between disciplines. At the beginnings at least, that may not be realistic. So if you are reading, in my case, an immunology paper, a pure immunology paper that is related to what you are doing is outside of your familiarity and you understand the purpose of it because it's gonna relate to the measures you are taking or whatever.

We also have to tell ourselves what level of understanding am I expecting myself to get on this read? Because like I said, we are gonna be reading these articles if they are central, and if we have a key reason to do so, we are gonna be reading these articles more than one time. And it may be that at this time point, it is not reasonable for you to expect yourself to understand every nuanced element of the article, even if you will need to eventually.

So this is a bit different from when you decide, you know what? I don't need to know that nuanced stuff. 'cause it's not central. It's not the purpose why I'm reading it. This is a bit different. This is stuff that you probably will need to understand in detail that probably will be central to your work, but you don't have to get yourself to have that 100% understanding of every detail right now.

And that's because it's really hard to understand every nuanced detail of something where you don't have pre-knowledge or pre framework in place. When we're reading stuff from within our disciplines, the reason it's faster is because we intuitively know what the words mean. You know, the technical words, we're familiar with them.

We don't have to translate them out. We don't have to think about it, and we've got a whole kind of background of knowledge and understanding on which to hang this new information. Whereas when you are reading something that's outta your discipline or in a discipline that you are sort of just going into or collaborating with, you don't have that framework.

You don't have that base understanding of what the technical words mean, of where this fits or whatever. And if you try and understand every level of a paper all at once. A, it's super hard, super frustrating, but b, it takes forever because you're trying to hang details on a very wobbly framework. So if you understand, okay, this paper is gonna be central, I understand why I'm reading it at this time point, I'm not very familiar with the topic. Therefore, my expectation for this read is for me to get a superficial understanding of the key main points, for example . That then intersects with our kind of purpose for reading, but we are really saying, you know what? With my current level of familiarity with the current stage I'm at in my PhD, what we're aiming for is a rudimentary understanding and your brain will tell you no, but you need to know it all. No, but what if the examiner asked this? What if you can't back up that? That's okay. We've got time. PhDs are a long journey. We are gonna read this article again, but if on this read through our fundamental purpose and understanding of ourself and our own understanding is that we need to get a sort of overview of the key points.

They're making a kind of framework on which to hang the rest of our understanding. That's what we need to focus on this time, and that's where we get to decide, okay, I've got an hour to pull out as much kind of basic understanding as I can. I'm not gonna worry about all these nuanced different definitions. I'm not gonna worry about exactly why they did X, Y, z. I wanna know what did they do? Why did they do it? What did they find, for example? So we're bringing into it a layer of compassion, understanding for ourselves that we can't expect ourselves to understand every single detail on this particular read through.

So those are the four things. So we already identified two length, complexity. But we're gonna take into account how central it is to what you're doing, exactly what your purpose is for reading it, how familiar you are with the topic area already, and how much kind of compassion and understanding you're giving yourself as to what level of understanding you're expecting this time.

From there, we get to decide rather than find out, 'cause this is an active choice, we get to decide how long we are giving to this article. Now the one bit that then adds on top of all of this is your note taking strategy. Because the thing that takes a lot of time often is not just the reading, it's the note taking.

And when you are note taking, you need to take into account all those things I just said, why am I reading it? How central is it? What do I know already? All that stuff you need to be taking into account when you choose what notes you are taking. Often we think that the purpose of notes is to have a shorter summary of that article for us to refer back to later.

That is not the purpose of notes. This is why AI note taking will never replace your human brain unless we learn to use it a lot better than we do at the moment. The purpose of your notes is not to have a precised version of the article. The purpose of your notes is twofold. And again, you need to decide which of these you're doing at any one time. One purpose of notes is to focus your attention and help you process your thoughts on paper. This version of notes, you could just bin it after you've read the article. The purpose is not record keeping. The purpose is to help you keep track of what you are thinking about while you are reading that article in order to better understand the article.

As an example, I love to draw a flow chart. I love, especially if I'm doing some sort of, it's like an exercise trial or that kind of thing, or even an immunology protocol. Love to draw a little diagram that shows the protocol, the timings, when measures were taken, all that stuff, for example. So one purpose of notes is to just allow you to see your thoughts, to pour them onto the page, to see them, to keep track of what you're reading and to facilitate the reading process.

Those are valuable even if you never, ever look at them again. The other form of note taking is to keep a record of what you read that is relevant to the point of why you are reading it this time. It is not to provide a summary of the entire paper. It is when you've decided the purpose of why you are reading it, how central it is to what you're doing. Then the bit of notes that you are gonna actually file somewhere and keep, is only going to be related to the reason you are reading it this time. So if we're reading it this time, because you're working on your methodology, you only need to make notes on your methodology. And I can hear you. I can hear you screaming at your phones or whatever you're listening on this game. Yeah. But that's so inefficient because then I'll have to read it again later when I need the other stuff. Yes, you will. Yes you will. And I promise this is still more efficient. The reason this is still more efficient is because you don't know exactly what you'll need next time when you read this again in three months time.

So you are now trying to second guess what it is you might need in the future, which means you are much more likely to over note, to write far too much. You are also much more likely to be noting in order to keep track of what they're saying. Rather than noting to keep track of what you are thinking about what they're saying, which is what notes should be. Even the notes that you are gonna keep. I want your notes to not just be they did this method, using this for these reasons. I want your notes to be, they did this method in this way for these reasons. I'm a bit concerned about why they didn't have a control for whatever, or whether their exercise intervention was long enough, or, I really liked the way they included two baseline measures or whatever, right.

So the notes you are taking on the specific bit you are reading for a specific reason that you have identified 'cause you are in control of your PhD. You make notes on that, the intersection between their thinking and your thinking, where that overlaps in that gorgeous Venn diagram. That is what we are noting.

Not everything. We are noting the bits we need right now that are what you are thinking about what they've done. When you read this again in the future, you are gonna be reading it with a different brain. So your brain circle is gonna be different shape than it was. You are gonna be reading a different bit of it for different reasons. And so the intersection between their thinking, you are thinking it's gonna be somewhere else, it's gonna be a different place. You can't do it now. That's why these dreams people have of what I need to do is just to get a complete, like library of all my reading with all my notes, and then it'll be super easy to write.

No, you, you don't, it's not even desirable. It's definitely not possible. It's not even desirable. You need to be reading the things that you need to read, making notes of the thoughts you are having about the stuff that you need to be reading, how it has implications for your work right now. This also is a little bonus for you, is a massively useful way to transition from writing about the work of others in a kind of narrative reporter way versus writing your thoughts about a field in a thought leader, senior academic sort of a way.

If your note taking is always the intersection between your brain and their work and never just a faithful replication of their work, then you are always building that habit of asking, what do I think about this? And from there, that helps. Knowing how you are gonna do your notes helps you inform.

How long you're gonna spend on this article, because if you know that what you need is a detailed outline of their methodology, you can have a think about how long that will take for you to write out, for you to pick out, turn into something that you can record. Whereas if you've got to take notes on everything, how long does that take?

Who knows? It also is an added, added bonus. This massively helps with overwhelm because one of the worst things about reading is its ability to spiral in 50 directions. You think you're just reading this article, by the time you've read the whole article with a vague kind of, I need to know it purpose and made all your notes.

You've got 40 other references that you need to go and look up now, and you're suddenly like, oh my goodness. If every paper I read gives me 10 new references. I'm, how am I ever gonna get through this? This is just gonna extrapolate wildly, Hey, we don't need to do that. Because if we are reading it for its methodology, we don't need to look at all the different background articles. If we are reading it because it works on similar population to us. We don't need to read all the articles about how they did their analytic strategy. Okay. We read for a purpose for reasons that we have chosen, to a level that we have chosen and take notes in a way that enable us to do the thing we're trying to do at the moment. And from there, it's so much easier to decide how long it takes, and then people will say, okay, yeah, I decide how long it takes.

And then it takes longer. And my answer sounds so flippant, but hopefully you guys know me well enough to know that I mean it from a good place. Don't. My answer is don't. If you decide you are giving this article an hour, and at the end of the hour you're like, oh, I need more time. Don't. Get it done to the level you are able to get it done in the time you've been given.

What that means is if you gave yourself an hour and you decided what you are doing in it, it means you've started reading it in more detail, at a greater depth, at a level of understanding that you don't have, that you've gone off and looked up their references or whatever it is. You've deviated from your plan.

Don't. Give yourself the hour and do as much as you can in that hour. You can come back to it another time if you need to. If you need to read it for more depth in a later date. If you need to read it for a different reason at a later date, come back to it. Happy days. But this is how, by taking control of it, identifying exactly what we're doing and deciding how long it takes, that is how we stay on top of our workloads. That is how we actually stick to deadlines.

Now, some of you, I'm doing a lot of like objection answering here. I can hear your voices in my head. Some of you might say, oh, but that takes out the joy of lit reviewing that, you know, I love to just immerse myself in the literature. Then that's great. We get to decide that. If you decide, actually, what I wanna do is spend an afternoon, two days, a week, a month, who knows? Immersing myself in the literature with the purpose of having fun, chasing rabbit holes and not having to be intentional. Great, do it, but decide that intentionally, because if your purpose is to dive into the literature, enjoy swimming around, enjoy following rabbit holes, then what you can't do is at the end of that period of time, moan about the fact that you haven't got a structured lit review out of it.

Moan about the fact that you haven't "got anywhere". Because that wasn't the purpose. The purpose was the pleasure. The purpose was enjoying following these little trails down through different bits of literature and stuff. So even that. You can still do it. Just choose it as the purpose and therefore focus on enjoying the process 'cause what I see people doing is they tell me I wanna be able to follow the literature. I wanna be able to go down rabbit holes. I really enjoy it. That's why I get to distracted. But they simultaneously beat themselves up for not making enough progress, not being focused, never getting anywhere.

You don't get it both ways. You get to decide, am I reading this thing because I'm intentionally trying to develop the method section of my thesis or whatever. Am I reading this thing to generally enjoy swimming around in the literature? Am I reading this thing because I need to learn about this particular approach or this particular argument?

Why am I reading it? Use that to decide exactly how you do it. Taking into account the state your brain's at where, what time it is in your PhD, exactly what you're doing, decide how long it's gonna take, and then spend that long on it. I say that like it's easy, your brain is gonna argue with you. Your brain is gonna say, oh, but I should probably write these bits down. Oh, I should probably take a bit longer. Just know that that's gonna happen. And remember, you don't have to listen to that bit of your brain. You can go, yeah, yeah, I know you think that, but this is what I decided. I decided that I'm reading it for this purpose to this level of depth, for this amount of time and making notes on these things. And that's what we're doing. And I know you've got a bunch of concerns about it, but that's what we're doing.

I want you to try out this week. Let me know how you get on. If you are not already on my newsletter, why not? You get summaries of all of this stuff and you get access to the PhD Life Coach podcast archive, which is a completely searchable resource that has everything I've ever done in the podcast summaries, take home messages, they're categorized. You can control F and find whatever you are struggling with at the moment. So if you're not already on the newsletter, make sure you head over to the websites. Sign on up. I will send you that and every week you'll get a reminder about the podcast and of course my free monthly webinars as well.

Hope to see you all at one of those soon. Thank you so much for listening, and I will see you next week.

Thank you for listening to the PhD Life Coach podcast. If you like this episode, please tell your friends, your colleagues, and your universities. I'd appreciate it if you took the time to like leave a review, give me stars, stickers, and all that general approval as well. If you'd like to find out more about working with me, either for yourself or for people at your university, please check out my website at the PhD life coach com.

You can also sign up to hear more about my free group coaching sessions for PhD students and academics time.