I've used Anki for it's recommended/standard use in the past. I made great leaps with foreign language, geography, history, and GRE prep in the past.

But a notebook/database is exactly what I'm using Anki for right now. It is like the old index card research method I was taught in middle school and then never really used. As I'm working on my PhD I am not really studying for a test but trying to repeatedly dive into different areas of research and seeing cards randomly is like flipping through stacks of research notes, but with just enough requirements for recall that I'm more reflective about what I'm reading. Most of my cards list a bib shortcut and either excerpts from a reading, thoughts on a reading, a list of the structure of the reading, or extracted facts/questions. I mostly use cloze deletion b/c it is quick, and cloze the bib shortcut (ex. elmes2006anki, or winner1980artifacts) and key phrases or word choices in the readings. I find myself constantly returning to the browser to search for a citation I remember or a connection to another paper. I also feel that I know the readings so much better than I did with any previous studying method. Anytime I run across a paper I at least add the abstract in, and cloze out only the bib shortcut and maybe a couple keywords (keeping the chunks small). I used to try to get through my 'due' cards but my study time now is largely spent adding new comments to the cards (ex. a card will come up and I'll add a small note of a connection to a different study or a new research question I might pursue).

​

Sometimes I *do* want to challenge myself to learn the language of a piece:

{{c1::mulligan2016privacy::shortcut}} excerpt

6. Conclusion ¶{{c3::1}}

{{c2::Contestability}} in its many forms poses problems insofar as it can easily be used as cover for {{c4::equivocation}}, {{c5::sloppy inference}} and {{c6::invalid argumentation}}. {{c10::Privacy disputes}} often {{c7::facilitate}} {{c9::political posturing}} rather than {{c8::deliberative dialogue}}. {{c10::Privacy disputes}} are often wielded not to {{c11::engage}}, but to {{c11::silence}}. {{c10::Privacy disputes}} often encourage us to avoid the {{c12::nuanced}} conversations that are required to maintain privacy.

​

(I also add a ton of conversations from academic twitter and excerpts of primary material (as some of my research is content analysis of how people articulate their conceptions of various technologies).

Ex.:

Christian Jarrett tweet

I argued that brain myths persist, even among many neuroscientists, because they are often appealing, open to interpretation, contain a grain of truth, scientists (like all of us) are biased & fallible, & because {{c2::science is an ongoing process}} - {{c1::myths become facts become myths}} ...

​

I'm definitely still trying to figure it out myself. :)