JohnWitman
New member
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2026
- Messages
- 6
I started my research with a nice, simple question: "How does climate change affect agriculture?" That seemed reasonable. Two months later, I have 50 sources and my question has multiplied like rabbits. I now have sub-questions about drought-resistant crops, economic impacts on farming communities, policy responses in different countries, and the psychological effects on farmers watching their livelihoods disappear. I'm drowning. 
A Norwegian university's research guide says one common mistake is being too ambitious: "It is almost impossible to run a case study and an experiment and a design within a master's thesis" . I'm not even at master's level yet and I'm already doing this.
The same guide warns against focusing too much on an application without understanding the underlying topic: "You want to do research on a computer science topic but write most of the purpose section about one application... you don't say how you want to contribute to that [underlying topic]" . I think I'm doing this with climate change. I'm so focused on agriculture that I've forgotten to properly frame the climate science part.
Another issue is that I keep finding fascinating tangents. Did you know that climate change is affecting coffee production in Colombia? I spent three hours reading about that. My paper is supposed to be about California. I have no business reading about Colombian coffee, but it's so interesting!
How do you kill your darlings? How do you cut out all the fascinating things that don't actually belong in your paper? I feel like I'm losing important knowledge every time I delete a tangent.
The guide also mentions that you need to "identify and introduce the underlying topic first, clarify your contribution to this topic, and only then use the application area as an example" . Maybe I need to go back and restructure my entire approach.
I also struggle with the "there is not much related work" trap. The guide warns: "It is not enough to say: 'there is not much related work'. Writing this sentence means you have not searched well enough. One million research articles are published each year" . I haven't written this yet, but I've thought it. I definitely need to search more.
For experienced researchers: how do you decide what to keep and what to cut? How do you know when your question is narrow enough but still interesting? I need help before I drown in information.
A Norwegian university's research guide says one common mistake is being too ambitious: "It is almost impossible to run a case study and an experiment and a design within a master's thesis" . I'm not even at master's level yet and I'm already doing this.
The same guide warns against focusing too much on an application without understanding the underlying topic: "You want to do research on a computer science topic but write most of the purpose section about one application... you don't say how you want to contribute to that [underlying topic]" . I think I'm doing this with climate change. I'm so focused on agriculture that I've forgotten to properly frame the climate science part.
Another issue is that I keep finding fascinating tangents. Did you know that climate change is affecting coffee production in Colombia? I spent three hours reading about that. My paper is supposed to be about California. I have no business reading about Colombian coffee, but it's so interesting!
How do you kill your darlings? How do you cut out all the fascinating things that don't actually belong in your paper? I feel like I'm losing important knowledge every time I delete a tangent.
The guide also mentions that you need to "identify and introduce the underlying topic first, clarify your contribution to this topic, and only then use the application area as an example" . Maybe I need to go back and restructure my entire approach.
I also struggle with the "there is not much related work" trap. The guide warns: "It is not enough to say: 'there is not much related work'. Writing this sentence means you have not searched well enough. One million research articles are published each year" . I haven't written this yet, but I've thought it. I definitely need to search more.
For experienced researchers: how do you decide what to keep and what to cut? How do you know when your question is narrow enough but still interesting? I need help before I drown in information.