坏的研究问题浪费几个月。下面 15 个 Prompt 把话题走完标准精炼流程——收窄、变量映射、PICO 或 PEO 化、可行性核查——直到给出一个能在会议上立住的 FINER 问题。
适合哪些场景
荣誉学位论文作者，MPhil 和 PhD 候选人，毕业项目学生，写质量改进（QI）项目的临床人员。
什么时候不建议这样写 Prompt
问题已被基金或导师锁定时不用——超出约束的精炼浪费时间。如果还没读完至少 10 篇相关文献也不要急着精炼。
Prompt 结构公式
精炼 Prompt 一定要带这六个要素：
- 角色：AI 扮演谁——研究导师、同行评议人、考试教练、辩论对手、图书馆员。
- 上下文：水平、学科、deadline、论文数量、引用风格、课程或项目。
- 目标：一个具体交付物——12 道题、1 页文献矩阵、5 条反论、4 周复习计划。
- 限制：字数、深度、允许的来源类型、跳过什么、绝不主张什么。
- 输出格式：编号清单、表格、JSON 或分级块（E / M / H），能粘到 Notion / Anki / Word。
- 示例 / 信号：1-2 段参考或反例（“不要像维基那样讲”）。
这套 Prompt 适合用在哪
- 荣誉 / MPhil / PhD 选题收窄
- 基金申请问题段
- 毕业项目范围划定
- QI 项目立项
- 课程论文 proposal
15 个可直接复制的 Prompt 模板
1. 话题 → 5 个更窄问题
首轮收窄，产生候选。
You are a research methods professor. My topic is "{topic}" in {field}. Generate 5 candidate research questions that narrow this topic, each more specific along a different dimension (population, time, setting, mechanism, comparator). For each: 1-sentence question plus 1-sentence rationale.可替换变量： topic, field
优化建议： 候选仍模糊时追加：“Each question must specify at least one of: population, time, setting, comparator. No abstract framings.”
2. PICO 化（临床 / 健康）
Convert my research interest "{interest}" into a PICO-formatted question: Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome. Output 3 candidate PICO formulations and note which would be most feasible given my constraint of {constraint}.3. PEO 化（质性）
For my qualitative interest "{interest}", produce 3 PEO-formatted questions: Population, Exposure / Experience, Outcome / theme of interest. Note the methodological tradition (phenomenology, ethnography, grounded theory) that best matches each.4. 变量映射
For my candidate research question "{question}", identify: independent variable(s), dependent variable(s), key moderators, potential confounders, and the unit of analysis. Output as a table.5. FINER 可行性审计
Audit my research question "{question}" on FINER criteria: Feasible (time, sample access, instruments), Interesting (to whom), Novel (vs prior literature), Ethical, Relevant (to whom). Score each 1-5 with a 1-line justification. End with one revision suggestion.6. 操作化探测
For my question "{question}", how would I operationalize each construct? Suggest 2 candidate measures per construct, citing one prior study that used each.7. 范围蔓延检测
Below is my current research question draft and a list of "things I also want to study". Identify which extras would blow scope; suggest which to defer to a follow-up study and which can be folded into the primary question.
Question: {paste}
Extras: {paste list}8. 利益相关方框架
My question "{question}" matters to which stakeholders ({researchers, practitioners, policymakers, patients, students})? For each, what 1-sentence answer they would want from my study. Mark which framing fits a thesis vs a paper vs a policy brief.9. 比较对精炼
My current question compares {A vs B} in {setting}. Suggest 3 alternative comparator framings (different baseline, different intervention magnitude, different population) and the trade-off each implies.10. 假设推导
For the research question "{question}", state 2-3 specific hypotheses that follow. For each: directional or non-directional, what data would test it, what would constitute a "null" result.11. “已被回答”核查
Has my question "{question}" likely been answered already? List 3 search strings I should run, the kinds of sources I should check, and 2 indicators that the question is settled vs still open.12. 一段 specific aims
Convert my research question "{question}" into a 200-word specific-aims paragraph: long-term goal, overall objective, central hypothesis, 2-3 specific aims, expected impact. Voice: NIH-style if applicable.13. 导师 pitch 脚本
I have 2 minutes with my mentor. Write a 200-word script pitching the research question "{question}": why it matters (1 sentence), what is known (2 sentences), the gap (1 sentence), the question, the method (1 sentence), feasibility (1 sentence). End with the 1 ask I should make.14. 精炼 diff
Below is my old question and my new question after refinement. Identify the moves I made (narrowed population, added comparator, swapped outcome) and any remaining weaknesses.
Old: {paste}
New: {paste}15. 最终 FINER 一句话
Refine my draft question into a single-sentence FINER-compliant research question. Include population, comparator (if any), outcome, and time-frame. Max 30 words. Topic: "{topic}". Draft: "{draft}".容易踩的坑
- 停在”我想研究 X”——那是话题不是问题。
- 不用 PICO / PEO，结构化框架本可省下数周。
- 可行性留到最后查——纸面 FINER 过关也可能现实上不可行。
- 没有 comparator——没有对比就是描述不是研究。
- 没查”已被回答”。
- 问题膨胀到涵盖所有感兴趣的东西——范围蔓延会害死项目。
- 把精炼后的问题当最终——预期 3-5 次修订。
优化技巧
- 挑一个之前先写 5 个候选（模板 1）。
- 精炼配可行性（模板 5）——做不了的最好问题等于坏问题。
- 尽早操作化（模板 6）——测不了就是模糊。
- 提交前用模板 11 查”已被回答”。
- 砍下的 extras 存档——常成为下一个研究。
- 导师会议带 3 个候选而不是 1 个，你会带回更好的选择。
- 前 5 篇文献后、IRB 提交后、数据采集开始后各修订一次。
FAQ
- 研究问题应该多具体？: 具体到能在一句话里点出回答它需要的数据。否则继续精炼。
- 每个学科都需要 PICO 吗？: 不是——PICO 偏健康。质性用 PEO。其他学科用 IV-DV 或理论问题框架。
- 精炼需要多久？: 论文 2-4 周迭代是常态。一周以内通常欠精。
- AI 能替我写研究问题吗？: 不能。它生成候选、审可行性、重述。选择、文献立锚、辩护必须人来。
- 导师想要不同问题怎么办？: 带 3 个精炼候选和权衡分析。你做足功课，导师推回得更合理。