Your supervisor has written “Please shorten the theoretical chapter”. You have a full chapter in front of you, with references you want to keep. Write your research question in one sentence above the chapter. Look at the first three paragraphs and note what each one gives a reader who needs to understand that question. Keep the concepts and findings you still need, along with their sources. Combine repeated points, move the details of your own study into the methods section and set aside background you never use again.
First step. Make a copy of the chapter with your supervisor’s comments. In the working copy, give each paragraph a short note such as “defines the concept”, “reports a finding” or “describes what I measure”. Put a question mark next to any paragraph whose purpose is unclear. Come back to it after reading the whole subsection.
What does your supervisor mean by “please shorten this chapter”?
Work out whether the issue is the total length, background that is too broad, or too much detail on one point. If the comment sits next to the history of phones, start there. If your supervisor says “this comes up again in the methods”, separate the reason for the study from the account of what you did. If the comment is next to the chapter title with no further detail, agree a short plan before cutting a large section.
You might write, “I plan to cut the general background and move the survey description to the methods. I’ll keep the findings that support the research question. Is that the scope you had in mind?” This makes it easier for your supervisor to identify the part that matters than a general question about how much to cut.
Check your university’s required structure. In the first format for a written psychology master’s thesis at the University of Gdańsk, the theoretical introduction provides the basis for the empirical study. This is an example from one programme. Check your own faculty’s current guidelines and the arrangements for your thesis seminar in Poland.
How much do you actually need to cut?
Compare the same passage in the same format. If your faculty sets a page limit, check whether it includes footnotes, references and appendices. If the agreement applies to the chapter alone, select its text and record the starting word or character count. That figure helps you compare drafts even when headings or figures move.
Say you have an 18-page chapter and agree on a target of about 14 pages. In your working plan, allow around two pages for removing broad background, one for combining accounts of similar studies and one for moving the survey description into the methods. Moving a page will shorten the theory chapter. Most of the reduction in the overall thesis will come from cutting the background and combining the study accounts.
Check the result in the required file format after your first pass. If you still need to cut half a page, return to the paragraphs you marked with a question mark. If you cut more than you planned, check whether the explanation for an important research decision disappeared with the extra text.
Decide what to do with each paragraph
- Keep. Keep the definition of a concept you use later, a key finding from the literature and any qualification that affects its interpretation. Check that a reader can still tell what the cited researchers actually studied.
- Combine. When two paragraphs make the same point, state it once. Preserve meaningful differences if studies use different groups or measure different things. Keep references beside the claims they support.
- Move. Instructions for participants, the wording of your survey questions and the way you calculate a score usually belong in the methods section. Use the theoretical chapter to explain the concept you are measuring and why it matters.
- Remove from the chapter. Set aside a broad history, a third near-identical definition or an example you never use again. Check the discussion first. If a cut removes the basis for a later comparison, keep the relevant sentence and source or revise that comparison.
Start with the bigger decisions. Assess whole blocks of background, then combine paragraphs serving the same purpose. Polish individual sentences last. There is little point in editing a paragraph you may cut entirely.
A psychology example. From four paragraphs to one
The sample master’s thesis asks whether students who report receiving phone notifications more often while reading course materials also report more difficulty concentrating. The supervisor asks the student to cut back the background on phones and keep the material that explains why concentration is being studied. The thesis excerpts are written for this guide. The experiment by Stothart and colleagues is a published study.
Before editing
Mobile phones have long been used to make calls and send messages. Over time they gained cameras, maps and apps. A single device can now serve many purposes.
A notification signals an event, such as an incoming call or message. It can arrive while a student is reading course materials. Receiving the alert can be distinguished from responding to it, for example by unlocking the phone to read a message.
Stothart et al. (2015) studied performance on a laboratory task that required sustained attention. From the first to the second part of the task, the likelihood of pressing the key in error when the number 3 appeared increased more in the call-alert group than in the control group, which received no alerts from the researchers. Participants who looked at or handled their phones during the task were excluded from the analysis. The experiment measured performance on a task involving numbers. The students in this thesis will report their own experience of reading.
The survey asks students separately how often they received notifications and how much difficulty they had concentrating while reading course materials in the past seven days.
The decision. Drop the history of phone features. Keep the distinction between receiving an alert and checking the phone. Retain the experimental finding and its reference, as well as the difference between a laboratory task and students’ reports. Move the seven-day period to the survey description in the methods section.
After editing
Receiving a notification and checking a phone are separate events. From the first to the second part of a laboratory task requiring sustained attention, the likelihood of pressing the key in error when the number 3 appeared increased more in the call-alert group than in the control group, which received no alerts from the researchers. The analysis excluded participants who looked at or handled their phones (Stothart et al., 2015). This finding supports examining the receipt of notifications itself. The present study asks whether reported notifications during reading are associated with self-reported difficulty concentrating.
Sentence moved to the methods section. In the survey, participants report how often they received notifications and how much difficulty they had concentrating while reading course materials in the past seven days.
The edited version still shows what the experiment measured and what the survey will measure. The reader can check the finding in its source. This type of survey can show whether the two self-reported measures are associated. Establishing an effect of notifications on reading would require a different study design.
Should you keep several definitions of the same concept?
One working definition is enough when the others mean the same thing and you use the chosen definition consistently. If two definitions lead to different measures or conclusions, keep the distinction in two short sentences. In the phone example, receiving an alert and actively reading a message are different events. Your reader needs to know which event the survey asks about.
Compare the definition with your instrument. If you describe an attention test in the theory chapter and ask about perceived concentration problems in the survey, add a sentence explaining the difference. You might write, “In this study, concentration difficulties are problems students notice themselves while reading. The survey asks about their experiences over the past week.” That takes less room than a long list of definitions and tells the reader what the results will concern.
Before cutting a definition, search for the term in the methods and discussion. If you have been using one word in two different senses, give each a clearer name first. Cutting the theory chapter is a good opportunity to tidy up the terminology elsewhere in the thesis.
How can you combine accounts of studies with different findings?
Build one paragraph around a question both studies help answer. Before writing it, note who took part, what the researchers measured, what they found and under which conditions. If the findings differ, this helps the reader see whether the studies genuinely disagree. Mazur and Orłowska describe separate stages of collecting and comparing data in a systematic review. For an ordinary theory chapter, borrow the habit of recording comparable information about each source.
Imagine two sources in a working review. The first examines errors on a task after a phone alert. The second is hypothetical and concerns self-rated concentration during study. If the second study found no association, explain that the two studies address different questions and that the laboratory result cannot be carried over directly to self-reports. In your own thesis, cite the actual source beside each finding you report. Avoid giving a reason for the difference unless the researchers tested it.
End the paragraph with a sentence explaining what the comparison means for your thesis. You could explain why your survey asks about reading experiences and why you will consider laboratory measures separately in the discussion.
What belongs in the methods, and what stays in the theory chapter?
Keep the reason for studying the phenomenon and the relevant evidence in the theory chapter. Put the information needed to follow what you actually did in the methods. In the phone study, this includes the seven-day period, how the questions were asked and how responses were processed. University of Łódź guidance for psychology theses places procedure, participants, instruments and analyses in the methods section.
Some sentences contain both a rationale and an instruction to participants. Split them. In the theory chapter, explain why you distinguish receiving an alert from checking a phone. In the methods, say which event you ask about and over what period. If your instrument has a source publication, keep the citation next to the information drawn from it. Check the receiving paragraph as well. If the information is already there, a small addition may be enough.
If your thesis is a literature review, check the structure you agreed with your supervisor. The account of how you searched for and selected publications may belong in a separate section. Decide where to move a passage after checking what it does in your project.
Check the references after each substantial cut
- Compare the cited sentence with the publication. If a source supports only the first part of a combined sentence, put the reference next to that part. Split the sentence if it is easier to follow.
- Keep the scope of each claim. In the example, the incoming call alerts, the task conditions and the way performance was measured all matter. “Smartphones make it harder to concentrate while studying” would go beyond what the experiment tested.
- Check the entire document before removing a reference-list entry. Search for the author and year, including in notes and captions. Update the reference list according to your faculty’s rules. The Polish adaptation of APA 7 calls for a citation even when you explain a finding in your own words.
How can you combine sentences that cite different sources?
While editing, mark which part of the new paragraph comes from each source. If one publication supplies the definition and another reports the finding, use two sentences and give each its own citation. A single set of parentheses at the end can suggest that both publications support the whole passage. The Polish adaptation of APA 7 explains how to identify the source of a paraphrase. Use the citation style your programme requires.
The phone example shows what happens when too much is cut. “Notifications cause reading difficulties in students” merges a laboratory finding with the question of a survey that has yet to be carried out. State what the researchers observed and what your thesis will examine in separate sentences. Keep the experimental citation with its finding and give your own research question separately.
If you use a reference manager, check a few in-text citations after moving passages and refresh the list of references using the relevant command. Checking a working copy makes it easier to see whether a moved citation is still linked to its source.
What if the argument stops making sense after a cut?
Read the subheadings, the first sentence of each paragraph and the sentence that states your aim. If a concept appears without explanation or your question goes beyond the studies you discuss, add a short bridge. In the phone example, it could be, “Stothart and colleagues (2015) observed errors on an attention task after call alerts. My survey asks whether receiving notifications is associated with self-reported difficulty concentrating while reading.”
Check pronouns and phrases that relied on the deleted text. “These findings”, “both groups” and “the model described above” can become unclear after a cut. Name the finding, group or model explicitly the first time it appears. If your conclusion depends on a distinction you removed, restore the part you need, with its citation.
Finally, read each transition from both sides. The previous paragraph’s last sentence should prepare for what comes next. The opening paragraph of a new section should also make sense to someone who jumped there from the contents.
Read the shortened chapter before sending it back
- Read the headings and the first sentence of each paragraph. Can you follow the argument from the concept, through the findings of other researchers, to your question?
- Check the methods and discussion. Does the theory still explain the concepts you use there? Have you kept the sources you use to interpret your results?
- Update the contents and cross-references to subsections. Compare the length using the same document format.
- Summarise in two or three sentences what you cut, moved and kept. Identify one point that still needs your supervisor’s decision.
If the comments cover other parts of your thesis, see Supervisor feedback on a bachelor's or master's thesis – how to address it.
What should you send your supervisor after editing?
Find out whether your supervisor wants to see the edits or prefers a clean draft. If they want visible edits, you can turn on Track Changes before starting. If you already have two separate files, you can use Compare Documents in desktop Word. Microsoft explains how to create a separate document showing the differences. Review it before sending because the comparison may also include formatting changes.
Use your message to point out the main changes and ask for feedback on one specific point. For example, “I cut the general background and combined two study accounts. The survey description is now in the methods. Would you prefer me to keep a short definition of distraction in the theory chapter?” This gives your supervisor a clear question and a place to look.
Before exporting, update the entire automatic table of contents if headings changed, then open the resulting PDF. Check the pages with moved passages and make sure comments and revision marks appear as intended in the copy for reading. Keep both working versions for the next round of feedback.
Questions about citations and materials for revision
Does every paragraph in a theoretical chapter require a footnote?
It is not the number of paragraphs that decides, but the origin of the information. Others' findings, definitions, data, arguments, and paraphrases require source attribution according to the applied style. Your own introduction to the chapter structure may not require a citation. However, the reader must know which sentences are based on a specific publication. One footnote at the end of a long paragraph may be insufficient when discussing multiple authors.
What should I send if I already have feedback from my supervisor?
Send the current version of the thesis, the supervisor's comments, guidelines, and the deadline. If the comments concern a specific chapter or results, highlight those sections. Based on this, I will define the scope of changes, the price, and the possible completion date.
Sources
- Kossakowska, K. (n.d.). Jak napisać pracę magisterską? Zasady przygotowania pracy magisterskiej na kierunku psychologia UŁ zgodnie z wymogami APA 7. Faculty of Educational Sciences, University of Łódź. Sections on thesis structure and citations.
- Skimina, E., Harasimczuk, J., & Cieciuch, J. (2022). Podstawowe standardy edytorskie naukowych tekstów psychologicznych w języku polskim na podstawie reguł APA 7. Liberi Libri. Chapter 2, “Cytowania”.
- Stothart, C., Mitchum, A., & Yehnert, C. (2015). The attentional cost of receiving a cell phone notification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 41(4), 893-897. DOI 10.1037/xhp0000100.
- Institute of Psychology, University of Gdańsk. (n.d.). Przygotowanie prac magisterskich w psychologii. Guidance from the 2025/2026 academic year, first format for a written master’s thesis. Accessed 10 November 2026.
- Mazur, Z., and Orłowska, A. (2018). Jak zaplanować i przeprowadzić systematyczny przegląd literatury. Polskie Forum Psychologiczne, 23(2), 235-251. DOI 10.14656/PFP20180202.
- Microsoft Support. (n.d.). Compare two versions of a document and Update a table of contents. Word documentation.
Discuss cuts to your drafted chapter
Send the chapter, your supervisor’s comment, your research question and any faculty guidelines you have. We can work out whether you need help with the chapter’s structure, specific cuts or citations after the edits.
