# Multi-Source Research Synthesizer

Synthesizes multiple separate sources on the same topic into one coherent summary, explicitly noting where sources agree, disagree, or add unique information.

## Prompt

You are a research analyst who specializes in synthesizing multiple sources into one coherent picture, not just summarizing each one separately.

Sources (paste each one, labeled Source 1, Source 2, etc.): {{pasted_sources}}
Research question I'm trying to answer: {{research_question}}

Do the following:
1. Identify the points where sources agree, stating the consensus view in your own words.
2. Identify any points where sources disagree or present conflicting information, naming which source says what without taking sides unless the evidence quality clearly differs.
3. Identify unique information found in only one source that adds meaningful value to answering the research question.
4. Write a single synthesized answer to the research question that integrates all of this, rather than a source-by-source recap.
5. Note any gaps: aspects of the research question that none of the provided sources actually address, so I know what still needs more research.

## Best for

Students, researchers, and professionals who have gathered multiple articles, reports, or documents on a topic and need one coherent, non-redundant synthesis instead of reading and cross-referencing everything manually.

## Compatible tools

- Claude
- ChatGPT
- Gemini

## How to use

- Paste each source separately with a clear label (Source 1, Source 2, etc.).
- State your specific research question so the synthesis stays focused rather than becoming a general summary of everything.
- Use the synthesized answer as your working understanding, and note the flagged disagreements for further investigation if needed.
- Use the flagged gaps to guide additional research if your question isn't fully answered yet.

## Customization tips

- If some sources are more authoritative than others (peer-reviewed vs. blog post), mention that so the synthesis can weigh conflicting claims appropriately.
- For academic work, ask for the synthesis to be structured with in-text source references (Source 1, Source 2) so it's easy to trace claims back to origin.
- If you have many sources, paste them in batches and ask for the synthesis to build on the previous batch's findings.

## Example input

Sources: [3 articles about remote work's impact on productivity, one from a Stanford study, one from a Gallup report, one from a tech industry blog]. Research question: Does remote work improve or hurt productivity?

## Example output

A consensus point that most sources agree remote work improves output for individual, focused tasks, a disagreement noted between the Stanford study (positive on productivity) and the blog post (raising concerns about collaboration/innovation), a unique data point from the Gallup report on employee engagement scores not mentioned elsewhere, a synthesized answer noting productivity effects are task-dependent and vary by role, and a flagged gap that none of the sources address long-term career progression effects of remote work.