Written by: Alessandra Giugliano

If you are choosing an AI academic writing reviewer, you care about three things: clarity of feedback, ability to iterate with follow-ups, and outputs you can actually use. To compare two popular options fairly, we ran Paperpal and thesify on the same draft academic abstract written by an undergraduate student and recorded the feedback from each AI reviewer, how the chat feature handled follow-ups, and whether the output helped improve the draft.

thesify vs Paperpal: Testing their AI Writing Reviewers

We designed our test around a single draft sociology abstract written for an undergraduate course assignment about the rise of coffee shops in Amsterdam during marijuana legalization. We copied the same 250‑word abstract into Paperpal’s AI Review and thesify’s feedback panel to compare thesify’s feedback evaluation and Paperpal’s AI Review. We then asked each chat assistant, “How can I improve my abstract?” and documented their responses. By controlling the input and recording the output, we provide a fair and meaningful comparison.

Understanding thesify and Paperpal as AI Writing Reviewers

This section introduces the two AI writing reviewers we compared and clarifies the scope of our test. You’ll learn what each tool offers and why we chose them. Both thesify and Paperpal promise to help you refine academic drafts, but they take different approaches to feedback. Knowing these differences will help you decide which reviewer aligns with your revision needs.

thesify provides a downloadable feedback report that scores your draft on thesis clarity, purpose and cohesion. Its chat assistant, Theo, stays in a single thread so you can ask follow‑up questions without losing context. 

Paperpal offers an AI review with available suggested prompts or allows you to draft a question to get customized feedback. It also includes a chat where you can request rewrites or clarifications. While both tools include proofreading checks and citation support, we focused exclusively on the reviewer and chat features for this comparison.

Methodology for Our AI Reviewer Comparison

Here we explain how the comparison was conducted so you can trust the results. We tested the reviewers on identical text and followed a consistent workflow. The aim was to isolate differences in feedback and chat performance. By keeping the conditions constant, we could fairly evaluate the tools’ abilities to improve your writing.

• Single abstract: We selected a draft abstract written by a thesify team member for an assignment during a sociology course in their undergraduate degree. The abstract explored how marijuana legalization led to the emergence of coffee shops in Amsterdam, with concepts of cool mobilization and hot cause. Abstracts are ideal test cases because they must convey a thesis statement, context, key concepts, a research question and broader significance in a short space.
  
  

• Consistent inputs: We pasted the same abstract into thesify and Paperpal to generate automated feedback.
  
  

• Follow‑up questions: After reading each report, we used the chat feature within the reviewer tool to ask how to improve the abstract, noting whether we could continue the conversation in the same thread.
  
  

• Output tracking: We recorded whether each tool provided a consolidated, downloadable report or if we had to capture the feedback manually.

This process allowed us to compare feedback clarity, depth and usability on equal terms. By looking at how each reviewer responded to identical text, you can see which tool offered clearer feedback, which supported follow-ups, and which gave a usable report.

thesify Review: AI Writing Feedback and Chat with Theo

This section explains how thesify approaches feedback for research writing. You learn what the reviewer covers, how the Chat with Theo supports iteration, and when thesify is the better choice for your abstract.

What thesify Provides 

• Full feedback report, with the option to download the report

  
  

  

thesify generates a downloadable feedback report you can keep beside your draft while revising.

• Feedback on thesis statement, purpose, evidence, context, concepts, research question, methods, implications, and suggested topics

• Chat with Theo keeps one thread for follow-ups or allows you to start new threads
  
  

How thesify’s Feedback Reads

• Moves you from an aim to a clear claim

• Models a stronger abstract

• Offers step plans you can apply directly

Chat with Theo Experience

For a full exploration of Chat with Theo’s capabilities read the Chat with Theo Guide.

• Threaded conversation stays in one place so you can build on feedback provided 

• Offers additional practical suggestions you can revise and use in your draft

• Helpful for shaping aspects like your research question and aligning it with your central claim

• When asked, “How can I improve my abstract?”, Theo provided a comprehensive breakdown on improvements with explanations and clear next steps. 

Below is an excerpt from thesify’s response: 

User: How can I improve my abstract?

Theo:

Improving your abstract is a great way to enhance the clarity and focus of your research. Based on the feedback provided and the context of your work, here are some actionable steps you can take to refine your abstract:

1. Clarify Your Thesis Statement

Your abstract should clearly communicate your main argument. Instead of stating, "I believe that my research will show how coffee shops are an interesting example of a market success driven by a social movement," consider rephrasing it to be more assertive. For example:

•"This research examines how coffee shops in Amsterdam exemplify market success driven by the social movement surrounding marijuana legalization."

2. Provide Specific Context

To strengthen your abstract, include a brief mention of the historical context surrounding coffee shops and marijuana legalization. This can help set the stage for your research question. For instance:

•"Emerging in the 1970s amidst changing attitudes towards marijuana, coffee shops have become pivotal in Amsterdam's social and economic landscape."

3. Outline Key Concepts and Their Relevance

You've mentioned "cool mobilization" and "hot cause." Briefly explain these concepts in the context of your research:

•"Utilizing the theoretical frameworks of cool mobilization and hot cause, this study investigates the interplay between social movements and market dynamics within the coffee shop phenomenon."

4. Highlight the Research Question

Your research question should be stated clearly in the abstract to guide the reader. Consider positioning it more prominently:

•"This research seeks to answer: How did the marijuana movement in Amsterdam influence the emergence and success of coffee shops?"

5. Mention Methodology and Sources

Include a brief note about your research methods and sources to demonstrate the academic rigor of your work:

•"Drawing on historical analyses and data from academic sources, including the book Market Rebels, this study will also explore statistical trends related to coffee shop revenues."

6. Conclude with Implications

End with a statement that reflects the broader implications of your research, which can pique interest:

•"This exploration not only sheds light on the unique socio-economic landscape of Amsterdam but also offers insights into potential future developments in the U.S. regarding coffee shops and marijuana legalization."

Example of a Revised Abstract:

"This research examines how coffee shops in Amsterdam exemplify market success driven by the social movement surrounding marijuana legalization. Emerging in the 1970s amidst changing attitudes, coffee shops have become pivotal in Amsterdam's social and economic landscape. Utilizing the theoretical frameworks of cool mobilization and hot cause, this study investigates the interplay between social movements and market dynamics within the coffee shop phenomenon. The research seeks to answer: How did the marijuana movement in Amsterdam influence the emergence and success of coffee shops? Drawing on historical analyses and data from academic sources, including Market Rebels, this study will explore statistical trends related to coffee shop revenues. This exploration not only sheds light on the unique socio-economic landscape of Amsterdam but also offers insights into potential future developments in the U.S. regarding coffee shops and marijuana legalization."

Next Steps:

•Revise your abstract using the suggestions above.

•Ensure that your abstract maintains a logical flow and is concise.

•Seek feedback from peers or mentors to further refine your abstract before submission.

Keep up the great work, and don't hesitate to reach out if you need further assistance!

Strengths of thesify

• Claim-level guidance: Moves you from tentative aims to a clear, defensible claim that the rest of the abstract can support.

• Holistic structure: Connects thesis, brief historical context, concept definitions, research question placement, methods, and implications into one coherent plan.

• Iterative chat (Theo): Theo keeps follow‑up exchanges in the same chat thread. You can ask, for example, whether your research question is specific enough, then immediately get suggestions for sharpening it without starting a new conversation.

• Usable output: Provides a downloadable feedback report you can keep next to your draft during revision.
  Modeled examples: Suggests short sample sentences and abstract scaffolds that match its own advice, making it straightforward to implement changes.

• Collaborative revision: Because the report is downloadable, you can keep it open while revising or share it with a colleague. This makes thesify useful for collaborative projects or repeated drafts.
  
  

Considerations When Using thesify

• Time investment: The depth of the feedback means you’ll need to invest time to revise your draft. If you’re looking for a quick fix, the length of the report might feel overwhelming at first.
  
  

• Learning curve: The detailed recommendations can be dense until you become familiar with how thesify structures its advice.

If you’re looking to develop a stronger claim and refine your research question, thesify provides a thorough plan and support to help you achieve that goal.

Paperpal Review: AI Review Panels and Chat

Here you get a concise look at Paperpal’s reviewer and chat. We outline what the AI Review panels highlight, how suggestions are presented, and where Paperpal fits best in your revision process.

What Paperpal’s Review Provides 

• Panelized review with set reviewer prompts that break down into further sections

  

Paperpal’s AI Review offers guided prompts such as “Check the flow and structure,” “Suggestions to expand this text,” and “Improve the introduction,” helping you run quick structure checks on a draft.

• Short suggestions and prompts for common fixes

• Chat feature that allows custom feedback

How Paperpal’s Feedback Reads

• Clear structural reminders based on writing project

• Frequent paraphrase of original sentences

• Less emphasis on claim-level reframing
  
  

Paperpal Reviewer Chat Experience

• One-off responses rather than a threaded dialogue

• Harder to build on prior advice across messages

• No consolidated report to keep by your side

• When asked, “How can I improve my abstract?”, Paperpal provided a thorough breakdown on typical structure improvements and suggestions. 

Below is an excerpt from Paperpal’s response:

User: How can I improve my abstract? 

Paperpal: To improve the abstract for your final paper, certain elements need to be refined for clarity, coherence, and academic rigor. Here are specific suggestions:

1. Objective Clarification: The abstract starts with a mention of a group project before transitioning to the individual project focus. This transition can be streamlined for better clarity. Instead of leading with what the group project was about, directly stating the objective of your paper would make the introduction stronger. For instance, "This paper aims to explore the emergence and impact of 'Coffeeshops' in Amsterdam following marijuana legalization, examining their relation to the concepts of cool mobilization and hot cause."

2. Conceptual Framework: You mention intending to use the concepts of cool mobilization and hot cause but do not provide a brief explanation or rationale for these concepts within the context of your study. Including a one-sentence explanation of each concept would enhance the reader's understanding of why and how they apply to your research.

3. Methodology Brief: While you mention utilizing "Market Rebels," online databases, and personal observations from a visit in Summer 2013, this section could be more structured. Specify the types of online databases (e.g., academic journals, governmental reports) and clarify how each source contributes to your research. For example, "Utilizing qualitative analysis of historical documents from academic databases and firsthand observations from a visit in Summer 2013, this study examines..."

4. Relevance and Contribution: You touch upon comparing the situation in Amsterdam with potential developments in the US. This comparison could be framed as part of your research's broader significance. Clarify how understanding Amsterdam's experience can offer insights into the potential evolution of marijuana-related businesses in the US. For instance, "This research not only sheds light on the socio-economic dynamics of Amsterdam's coffeeshops but also provides a comparative perspective that could inform the emerging landscape of marijuana legalization in the US."

5. Research Question: Your research question is mentioned at the end, which is unconventional for an abstract. It's more effective to state the research question at the beginning after introducing your topic to guide the reader through the purpose of your study. For example, "This study seeks to answer the question: How did the marijuana movement in Amsterdam affect the market for coffeeshops?"

6. Spelling and Terminology Consistency: Ensure consistency in terminology, notably "coffeeshops" (the correct spelling in this context is "coffee shops" when referring to them in general and "coffeeshops" when referring specifically to the Dutch model). Also, be consistent with the term "marijuana" throughout the abstract to maintain academic formality.

7. Conclusion and Implications: The abstract lacks a closing statement that highlights the key findings or expected contributions of your research. A concluding sentence summarizing the anticipated implications of your findings would round out the abstract effectively.

By addressing these areas, your abstract can offer a clearer, more compelling introduction to your research, setting the stage for your paper's detailed exploration of the subject.

Strengths of Paperpal

• Prompt-driven review workflow: The Paperpal AI Review screen lets you choose targeted prompts like Check the flow and structure, Suggestions to expand this text, and Improve the introduction, or enter a custom prompt for specific concerns.
  
  

  

Paperpal’s AI Review lists guided prompts and a custom input so you can request actions like improving the written abstract, checking flow, and identifying missing sections.

• Fast checks for common issues: The prompts surface typical abstract problems quickly (ordering, missing context, thin transitions) so you can make immediate fixes.
  
  

• Good when your claim is set: If your thesis is already clear, Paperpal’s guided prompts help you fine-tune placement and readability without reworking the argument.
  
  

• Low-friction edits: Short suggestions and light paraphrases offer quick polish when you’re on a deadline.
  
  

• Efficient triage: The organized prompt list helps you prioritize what to fix first (flow, expansion, or introduction) and move through a draft systematically.
  
  

Considerations When Using PaperPal

• Separate chat sessions: Each follow‑up review question opens a new chat, so you can’t build on previous answers in one continuous thread.

• No exportable report: Paperpal does not produce a consolidated report. If you want to reference the feedback later, you’ll need to manually record or screenshot the panels.

• Surface-level rewriting risk: The Paraphrase and Make Academic options mainly reword your existing sentences and often keep the original structure, which can leave your thesis unchanged rather than helping you state a sharper claim.

  
  

  

  
  
  

• Academic integrity caution: Submitting AI-generated content as your own may violate university AI policies on unauthorized assistance or plagiarism. Treat these prompts as drafting aids, rewrite ideas in your own voice, and follow your course or department’s stated rules on AI use.
  
  

Paperpal is effective when you have a clear thesis and need to address minor structural issues quickly. It’s less suited to situations where you need to reformulate your argument or iterate through several drafts.

Results and Takeaways: Paperpal vs thesify 

This section summarises the most important distinctions we found in our test so you can weigh them against your needs. By comparing feedback style, chat functionality and final outputs, you’ll get a clear picture of which tool excels at what.

This side-by-side summary shows the differences you will notice while revising with each tool.

Interface and ease of use

• Paperpal: The interface feels busy, with multiple menus and feature cards visible by default. Finding the AI Review flow can take a moment, and the prompt menu sits inside a side workflow rather than the main editor. For quick checks this is fine, but the density can slow you down the first time you use it.
  
  

  

  
  

  Paperpal’s interface surfaces many options at once, which can make the AI Review flow harder to find on first use.

  
  

• thesify: The reviewer is presented in a clear, organized layout with sectioned feedback (thesis, purpose, concepts, research question, methods, implications). Chat with Theo is easy to locate and opens alongside the report, which makes it straightforward to revise and follow up in the same place.

  

  
  

  thesify presents a structured reviewer view, and Chat with Theo is easy to access next to the report for fast follow-ups.

  
  

Assignment intake and tailoring

• Paperpal’s Suggestions are helpful for structure but feel general when the tool has not gathered assignment parameters up front. You may need extra passes to align feedback with your brief.

• thesify’s Intake questions help shape the feedback toward your assignment’s goals (for example, reinforcing a specific thesis length, scope, or disciplinary framing). The result reads targeted rather than generic.
  
  

  

thesify asks for assignment context up front, which helps tailor feedback to your instructions, length, and field of study.

Feedback style

• Paperpal focuses on structure and flow, guiding you to adjust where elements appear. Feedback focuses on standard writing guidelines.

  
  

  

Paperpal offers sentence-level edits to make aims more direct and readable.

• thesify focuses on argument strength and conceptual coherence, encouraging you to assert a clear claim and support it with context and theory. Feedback is tailored to your specific assignment’s purpose.

  
  

  

thesify report scores purpose and explains what is partially met or not met, pointing to missing context and comparison details.

Chat functionality

• Paperpal opens a new session for each review question, which can slow down your revision. 

• thesify keeps your conversation in one thread, or allows you to start a new thread, letting you refine your draft continuously.
  
  

Usability of output

• Paperpal’s panels are easy to scan but only exportable through copy and paste; you must gather the notes yourself. 

• thesify provides a downloadable report that consolidates scores and recommendations for future reference.

Thesis and purpose

• Paperpal reminds you to state your  objective and place your research question early.
  
  

  

Paperpal encourages replacing group-project mention with a clear objective.

• thesify pushes you to write a claim and align the abstract around that stance. The feedback report offers extensive thesis statement considerations.

  

The report evaluates the thesis against clear criteria and offers guidance to make the claim more specific and defensible.

Logic Gaps

• Paperpal highlights missing definitions and basic context lines.

  

Paperpal Review surfaces a missing link between contexts and supplies a suggested sentence to close the gap.

• thesify integrates compact context and shows how missing interpretations of evidence impact the connection to your argument, as well as highlights gaps through targeted suggested topics.

  

thesify flags unsupported claims and asks for examples or data to substantiate the argument.

thesify’s suggested topics show where the draft does not address key questions and where a clearer connection to the research aim is needed.

Research Question

We tested both of the chat features in each reviewer by asking for guidance on improving the existing research question. We found,

• Paperpal flags placement and clarity.

  

Paperpal’s AI Review presents feedback on research question placement.

• thesify proposes sharper alternatives and helps refine them through chat.
  
  

  

  
  

thesify feedback recommends placing the research question earlier and provides example wording to guide revision.

Chat with Theo reviews candidate research questions against clarity and focus, helping you select and refine the strongest option.

Methods and implications

• Paperpal prompts a one-line method note.

  
  

  

Paperpal suggests tightening the methods note by naming source types and clarifying how each contributes to the study.

• thesify ties method, scope, and implications together so the abstract reads as a cohesive whole.
  
  

  

Chat with Theo proposes a concise methods sentence to demonstrate rigor and link sources to the study aim.

By recognising these differences, you can select the reviewer that better aligns with your work style—whether you prefer quick structural checks or deeper, iterative guidance.

Pricing and plans: AI reviewer and chat access

What you’ll learn here: A quick look at how Paperpal and thesify price access to their AI reviewer and chat with reviewer features, so you can decide what fits your budget and workflow.

Paperpal pricing

• Plans: Paperpal lists Prime plans at USD 25/month, USD 55/quarter, or USD 139/year. These plans bundle the AI Review prompts plus the broader feature set.
  
  

• What’s included for reviewing: Access to the AI Review prompt menu (for example, “Check the flow and structure,” “Improve the introduction”) and related assistant features that support quick structural checks.

thesify pricing

• Trial and billing: thesify offers a 7-day free trial with access to all features. After the trial, billing continues on a monthly (€4.99) or yearly (€2.49/mo) plan.
  
  

• What’s included for reviewing: The pre-submission reviewer, and other features such as Paper Digest, are available during the free trial. Chat with Theo is included for paid subscribers. 

Which AI Writing Reviewer Should You Choose?

To help you decide between the two tools, consider how you work and what your draft needs. This section breaks down scenarios where each reviewer shines, so you can choose confidently.

Why You Might Pick Paperpal

If you want a fast checklist of abstract fixes and a prompts menu that nudges you toward common improvements, Paperpal Review is a straightforward place to start. It helps when you already know which area you want to tweak first.

Why You Might Pick thesify

If you need claim-level thesis help, in-thread follow-ups, and a shareable report, thesify’s AI reviewer aligned better with iterative revision in this test. The guidance felt tailored to assignment context, the chat kept your history, and the modeled abstract showed what improvement looks like in practice.

FAQs: AI Writing Reviewers for Academic Drafts

1. How does an AI writing reviewer help with abstracts?

It checks thesis clarity, context, concept definition, research-question placement, and a brief sense of contribution, which are the parts readers scan first.

2. Can AI help me strengthen my thesis?

Yes. Tools that focus on claims and provide modeled sentences tend to produce clearer, more persuasive abstracts than paraphrase-only outputs.

3. What should I look for in a reviewer chat?

Continuity and practicality. A threaded chat and paste-ready suggestions make it easier to revise in small steps without losing the conversation.

4. Do I still need peer review?

Yes. AI reviewers help you reach a cleaner draft faster. Peer or supervisor feedback still matters for disciplinary expectations and content accuracy.

Conclusion: A Reviewer for Real Revision

Both tools pointed to sensible abstract fixes. In our test, thesify delivered clearer claim-level feedback, supported follow-ups in the same thread, and produced a downloadable report that you can reference or share. Paperpal provided helpful structural reminders and quick paraphrases, yet iteration and actionable modeling were limited for your revision needs. On a short abstract where every sentence needs to carry your argument, thesify functioned more like a reviewer you can revise with.

Ready to try claim-level feedback and threaded follow-ups?

Start a 7-day trial of thesify run your next abstract through the reviewer, and use Chat with Theo to iterate.

Related Posts

• Chat with Theo – A New Way to Turn Feedback into Revision Action: Announcing thesify’s “Chat with Theo”: an academic writing chat assistant that helps you refine structure, argument, and clarity—pedagogy-first and plagiarism-free. Learn how to use this academic writing chat feature for AI essay revision. 

• Choosing the Right AI Tool for Academic Writing: thesify vs. ChatGPT: Choosing the right AI tool for academic writing means more than just improving your grades—it’s about fostering skills that will serve you throughout your academic and professional journey. During our test, even when instructed to avoid creating content, ChatGPT repeatedly offered pre-written examples that risked crossing the line into academic misconduct. In contrast, thesify went deeper by identifying where the thesis lacked clarity and connection to the assignment’s goals. This feedback not only improved the thesis but also strengthened the essay as a whole. Find out more about our test in this post. 

• Jenni AI vs. Google Gemini: Comparing AI Tools for Academic Writing and Avoiding Cheating: AI writing tools like Jenni AI and Google Gemini can assist with academic tasks, but their use raises questions about cheating if students rely on them improperly. Universities value original thought and critical analysis, and using AI to generate or significantly alter content may blur the lines of academic integrity. Based on our testing, find out how specific features of these tools might cross into ethically questionable territory.