Digital resources in the Social Sciences and Humanities OpenEdition Our platforms OpenEdition Books OpenEdition Journals Hypotheses Calenda Libraries OpenEdition Freemium Follow us

Breaking the Binge Writing Cycle: News about my project of becoming a better academic writer

Today’s post is a collection of reflections on writing, research habits, and the messy realities of trying to work sustainably. After another deadline sprint, I’m taking a closer look at what’s working (and what isn’t) in my writing routine—from how I manage reading and citing sources to how I handle drafting without falling into the binge-writing trap. If you’re also trying to find a better balance, maybe you’ll find some ideas here!

Daily Writing Habits versus Deadline-Driven Binges

I really like my new concept of building writing routines around my biorhythm. It’s definitely a good way to stay connected to my research every day. However, looking back, (at the time of first drafting this) I’m now three days past a deadline after an extremely intense long weekend of stressful writing—and the paper still needs proofreading.

I’m feeling a little disenchanted. Of course, I did put off some writing, but it also genuinely wasn’t possible to get much done aside from teaching. I don’t want to blame myself too much for that. After all, I did stay engaged with my research every day, even in small ways, and that’s something I want to recognize and be proud of.

One way routines fail is when you expect too much, get part of the work done, but then only focus on what didn’t get done—associating the process with only the negatives. I don’t want to do that anymore. Following advice from Cathy Mazak and others, I’m trying to correlate writing with something positive, so it becomes a habit instead of a chore I procrastinate on.

Raising the Temperature?

One thing I noticed: when I did research in the morning on busy days, I often went down a lot of rabbit holes. It was interesting, but definitely a distraction. Especially with politically charged topics, like AI ethics, I realized that reading sometimes pulled me into emotional reactions. Only when I finally sat down to actually write did I recognize, “Wow, this is way too grandiose. I can’t say it like that.”

Drafting with ChatGPT helped, but speaking drafts out loud makes me more prone to tangents than typing. When I type, I stay more analytical and focused, producing fewer unusable sections.

Maybe that early “grandiose” thinking is just part of the creative process—similar to raising the “temperature” for creativity with LLMs —before cooling down into analysis. So perhaps that’s normal.

The “One More Source” Trap

I wondered if I spent too much time reading—falling for the “one more source to cite” myth. But I also tried to listen to myself: when is it time to stop reading and start writing?

Following Joshua Schimel’s advice, you need a strong grasp of the discourse to make a powerful argument. And there was a point where reading became repetitive; I wasn’t learning much new. That’s when I knew it was time to shift gears.

Still, implementing Schimel’s methods in practice remains challenging. Writing took much longer than expected. I spent four full days in the final writing phase, with no other commitments, just to push the project over the finish line.

I’m not sure I can eliminate the final writing sprint before deadlines, even though I’m trying to write more consistently. Maybe bursts work better for me—but it’s not sustainable. It’s physically exhausting, and afterward, you end up rewarding yourself by not writing, which is not recommended (by Paul Silvia) risks pushing you right back into binge-writing cycles.

Not all reading is equal

Since I’m trying to write better articles, I’m spending much more time on them. But I’ve noticed that I often spend too much time on semi-important sources—things that only end up contributing one tiny citation. In contrast, the core of the article often comes from just two or three key sources that I engage with deeply. That’s an important lesson. I need to prioritize earlier: identify the most important sources and spend most of my effort there, rather than getting bogged down in endless background reading.

Especially when starting a new section, it helps to focus on two or three key sources instead of drowning in dozens of minor ones. For larger sections or full articles, focusing deeply on a few books or articles can take you much further than skimming hundreds of papers.

Looking back, I realized that much of the material I spent time reading didn’t actually contribute much to my final article. Often, I found it very engaging, but ultimately I only got one tiny citation out of it—or it ended up being repetitive. The sources that truly shaped the article were often different from the ones I had initially invested the most time in. That said, reading broadly did give me a solid overview of the field, and I feel more confident now in speaking about it. So while not all the reading was equally efficient, it still had some value.

Outlining Is Important But Outlines Don’t Always Hold Up

I created an ambitious outline and grand narrative to guide me, but in practice, it didn’t work out the way I hoped. During writing, I kept noticing places where I needed additional references, and I had to go back to research more. The final narrative of the article only really came together through writing—not from the original outline. My first draft, based on the initial outline, turned out to be a hot mess. So for future submissions, I know I’ll need to rethink how I approach outlines.

Emotional Rollercoaster: Loving and Hating My Drafts

I’m definitely cycling through stages of loving and hating what I wrote—sometimes thinking it’s innovative and great, and other times worrying it’s not innovative enough and wondering who would even publish it. It’s exhausting, but I guess that’s just part of the process. I still haven’t fully figured it out, but I’m learning to accept the emotional ups and downs as part of writing.

Finding a Better Restart Strategy

I’m currently trying to develop a better system for picking up my writing without needing massive binge-writing sessions. Hemingway’s advice to stop mid-sentence doesn’t really work for me, but I like the idea of knowing exactly where to restart.

One strategy that seems promising: before stopping, pick a key paper you want to integrate next, and note what you plan to do with it. Starting the next session by summarizing or citing a specific source gives a clear re-entry point without feeling overwhelming.

A Practical Method for Moving From Excerpts to Drafts

Following Cal Newport’s advice:

  • Start with headings based on your outline.
  • Add a few keywords under each heading.
  • Paste in citations and excerpts you want to use.
  • Build the text around the sources, instead of writing a full text first and adding citations later.

This method saves time, keeps arguments anchored in evidence, and avoids the need for huge rewrites later.

Why I No Longer Rely on Pre-Drafts

I used to generate a lot of pre-draft material, print it out, mark ideas, and try to integrate it into my writing. But I realized that trying to directly pull in pre-draft notes into my actual draft creates a Frankensteinian mess. In the pre-draft stage, my thoughts aren’t fully formed, and I’m prone to chasing rabbit holes. Integrating that early, messy material into a final draft usually requires massive reworking—and often, it’s not worth the effort.

Now, I treat pre-drafts as idea generators: I pull useful citations and insights from them, insert those directly into my document, and then write a clean draft around the structured references.

Final Thoughts

Writing consistently while managing your research process—and your emotions around it—is hard. I definitely haven’t figured it all out yet. But I’m learning that better routines, prioritizing important sources, and building texts around literature from the start all make a real difference.

It’s still messy, but maybe that’s just part of the process too.


OpenEdition suggests that you cite this post as follows:
Sarah Lang (July 12, 2025). Breaking the Binge Writing Cycle: News about my project of becoming a better academic writer. Epigrammetry. Retrieved March 14, 2026 from https://doi.org/10.58079/14cby


You may also like...

1 Response

  1. Céline Guilleux says:

    Dear Hypotheses blogger,

    We found your article particularly interesting. To increase its visibility so the community can more easily appreciate it, we made it a headline article on en.hypotheses.org portal.

    Best regards,
    The Hypotheses team

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.