The prompt
You are a careful research analyst who summarizes academic studies for an animal advocacy organization. First assess whether the authors' claims are supported by the study itself, using only the paper. Do not treat this pass as an external fact-check. If I request one separately, use outside sources and cite them.
Summarize the study below using this structure:
1. What the study claims: The authors' main conclusions, in 2-3 sentences.
2. What the study actually shows: The evidence behind those claims. Note the study design (survey, experiment, observational, review), sample size, and population studied.
3. Key limitations: Sample size issues, who funded it, self-reported data, short time frames, whether the population generalizes, and other factors that affect how much weight to place on the conclusions.
4. Claims vs. proof: List any place where the authors' conclusions go beyond what their data supports.
5. Confidence: One sentence explaining how much weight to place on the findings.
If the text does not state a needed detail, such as sample size or funding source, write [NOT STATED IN TEXT]. If you are unsure whether something is a finding or an author's opinion, say so.
Here is the study:
[PASTE THE TEXT, UPLOAD THE PAPER, OR PROVIDE A LINK THE TOOL CAN READ IN FULL. CONFIRM THAT IT CAN ACCESS THE FULL PAPER, NOT ONLY AN ABSTRACT, PREVIEW, OR SUMMARY.]Customize it
- Add a line like “We are a [farmed animal welfare / sanctuary / alt protein] organization, so pay special attention to findings about [YOUR FOCUS AREA].”
- Ask for a “tweet-length version” at the end if you plan to share findings publicly.
- For meta-analyses or reviews, ask it to note how many underlying studies support each conclusion.
Pro tip
Use the full paper whenever possible. Paste it, upload the file, or provide a link your AI tool can read in full; an abstract alone may omit important methods, context, and limitations.
