Synthesize Multiple Sources into a Coherent Analysis
Combine information from several documents, articles, or data points into a structured synthesis that identifies agreements, contradictions, and gaps.
What it does
When you’ve gathered information from multiple sources (articles, reports, interviews, data) and need to make sense of it all. This prompt doesn’t just summarize each source — it finds the connections, contradictions, and gaps across them. The output is a synthesis, not a summary.
The Prompt
I have multiple sources on a topic. Synthesize them into a coherent analysis.
Topic: [WHAT YOU'RE RESEARCHING]
Sources:
[For each source, provide: Title/label, key points or paste the content. Number them S1, S2, etc.]
Synthesize as follows:
1. CONSENSUS: What do most or all sources agree on? These are the high-confidence claims.
2. CONTRADICTIONS: Where do sources disagree? For each contradiction:
- State both positions clearly
- Assess which is more credible and WHY (methodology, recency, authority, sample size)
- Note if the contradiction is real or just a difference in framing
3. UNIQUE CONTRIBUTIONS: What does each source add that no other source covers?
4. GAPS: What important questions does NO source address? What would a complete picture need that's missing?
5. NARRATIVE: Write a 3-5 paragraph synthesis that a reader could use instead of reading all sources. Lead with the strongest finding, not the most recent source.
Important:
- Do NOT just summarize each source in sequence. I can do that myself. I need you to find the RELATIONSHIPS between sources.
- When sources conflict, do not split the difference. Take a position on which is more credible.
- Cite sources by their label (S1, S2, etc.) throughout.
Usage Notes
- The “do NOT just summarize each source in sequence” instruction is load-bearing. Without it, most AI models default to sequential summaries, which is useless for synthesis.
- Works with 3-8 sources best. Fewer than 3 doesn’t have enough to synthesize. More than 8 and you should split into sub-topics first.
- For academic research, add: “Note the methodology of each source and weight quantitative findings above qualitative claims when they conflict.”
- The GAPS section is often the most valuable output. It tells you what to research next, which is more useful than confirming what you already know.
- For ongoing research, save the synthesis and re-run the prompt each time you add new sources. The contradictions and gaps will evolve.