For Students
Your reading list and your argument are the same thing.
Scopic gives every source, every claim, and every relationship between them a record that stays connected as your thinking develops.
Join waitlistThe situation
You are writing a dissertation chapter. Sources are in Zotero. The argument structure is in a Word outline. The conceptual relationships you are actually trying to show live in margin notes and a whiteboard diagram that was accurate three weeks ago. All of these describe the same intellectual territory. None of them talk to each other.
Or you are in a seminar working through a complex reading. You can see the structure when you are in the room. Two days later it is a page of notes that loses the shape. The connections between ideas existed for an hour and then dissolved back into text.
A connection that says what it meant
In Scopic, the link between a source and the claim it supports is a connection with a type, a notes field, and the specific passage you used. When you revisit the map three weeks later, every relationship still says what it meant when you drew it. Filter by source to see everything you have extracted from one paper.
Screenshot: open connection between source and claim with type and passage notes
From seminar to structured map in the session
When you map a seminar reading in Scopic, the structure you build during the session is the structure you revise from — not a photograph of a whiteboard. Add a new source that changes one relationship and the rest of the map does not need to change. Share the map with your study group before you leave the room.
Screenshot: seminar reading mapped with actors, concepts, and typed connections
See where your argument is thin
Filter the map to show only connections where the supporting source is a single document. The visual shows you immediately which claims are well-grounded and which need more evidence. The map is your working argument — not a summary of it.
Screenshot: argument map filtered to single-source claims
What people say
Built my entire literature review in Scopic. The map of which papers challenge which is the most useful thing I made for my dissertation. I couldn't see that structure before.
2 months ago
Started mapping seminar readings in Scopic. By the end of the session I have a structured model instead of a page of notes. My supervisor asked where the diagrams came from.
1 month ago
Filtering to single-source claims showed me the weak points in my argument before my first committee meeting. Would have taken days of rereading to find that manually.
3 weeks ago
My research framework — questions, lenses, data sources — is all in one Scopic map. My supervisor can see the whole structure in five minutes. No lengthy explanation needed.
5 weeks ago
Map the argument you are building.
Join waitlistFor Students
Your reading list and your argument are the same thing.
The situation
You are writing a dissertation chapter. The sources are in Zotero. The argument structure is in a Word outline. The conceptual relationships you are actually trying to show live in margin notes, a whiteboard photograph, and a half-finished diagram that was accurate three weeks ago. All of these describe the same intellectual territory. None of them talk to each other.
Or you are in a seminar working through a complex reading. The key actors, the pressures between them, the historical sequence — you can see it when you are in the room. Two days later it is a page of notes that loses the shape. The connections between ideas existed for an hour and then dissolved back into text.
What changes
In Scopic, the link between a source and the claim it supports is a connection with a source field, a type, and a notes page of its own. When you revisit the map three weeks later, every relationship still says what it meant when you drew it. Filter by source to see everything you have extracted from one paper. Filter by claim type to see which arguments are well-supported and which are thin.
When you map a seminar reading in Scopic, the structure you build in the session is the structure you revise from. Add a new source that changes one relationship and the whole map updates — without touching the sources that have not changed. The map is your working argument, not a summary of it.
Maps you'd build
- Literature review map
Sources, claims, and concepts as records, connected by 'supports', 'challenges', and 'extends'. Each connection carries the source paper and a notes field for the specific passage. Filter by connection type to see where your argument is contested.
- Research framework
Your research questions, theoretical lenses, and data sources — with connections showing which lenses apply to which questions and which sources speak to which lenses. Useful for supervisory meetings: the whole framework visible in one map.
- Seminar reading map
Actors, concepts, and events from a difficult text, mapped during or after a seminar. Connections carry the page reference and the type of relation (caused, responded to, was constrained by). The map is shareable — send one link to your study group.
Map the argument you are building.
Join the waitlist to get early access or talk through your use case.
Join waitlist- Literature mapping
Sources connected by challenges, supports, extends. See the structure of the debate clearly.
- Research framework
Questions, lenses, and sources — all in one map. Share with your supervisor in one link.
- Seminar mapping
Map a complex reading during the session. Keep building between sessions.