Research Prompts
Compare Two Sources
Systematically compare two articles or studies to find agreements, conflicts, and gaps.
Prompt
I want to compare two sources on the topic of: [TOPIC_OF_COMPARISON] **Source 1:** [SOURCE_1_SUMMARY] **Source 2:** [SOURCE_2_SUMMARY] Please produce a structured comparison covering: 1. **Agreement table** — a markdown table with rows for each major point where both sources agree, citing which source supports it. 2. **Disagreements** — for each point of conflict between the sources: - State the disagreement clearly - Summarize each source's position - Explain a likely reason for the disagreement (e.g., different time periods, different methodologies, different definitions, different data sources) 3. **Unique contributions** — what does Source 1 cover that Source 2 does not? What does Source 2 cover that Source 1 does not? 4. **Comparative credibility** — based on what I've provided, which source appears more credible or rigorous, and why? Note any caveats about making this assessment from summaries alone. 5. **Open questions** — list 3-5 questions that neither source fully answers, which future research or additional sources would need to address.
How to Use
Write a brief summary of each source in your own words (3-10 sentences each) and paste them into [SOURCE_1_SUMMARY] and [SOURCE_2_SUMMARY]. Specify the shared topic you are investigating in [TOPIC_OF_COMPARISON]. This prompt is designed for literature reviews, fact-checking, and building a balanced view before forming a position.
Variables
| Variable | Description |
|---|---|
| [TOPIC_OF_COMPARISON] | The specific question or subject both sources address |
| [SOURCE_1_SUMMARY] | Your summary of the first source (include author, publication, date if known) |
| [SOURCE_2_SUMMARY] | Your summary of the second source (include author, publication, date if known) |
Tips
- You can paste raw excerpts instead of your own summaries — just note that the AI will need to do the summarizing itself, which may reduce precision.
- This prompt works well for comparing a primary study against a replication, or an original article against a critical response to it.