Writing and content frameworks organized by purpose. Each entry includes category, components, use case, source, and related frameworks. Category-level LLM prompts are provided for each section.

Thought Pieces

Frameworks for exploratory writing that develop ideas through analysis and synthesis.

LLM Prompts: Create | Review - Category-level prompts that work with any thought piece framework (Classical Rhetoric, SECTIONS Model, Inverted Pyramid Meets Exploration, Dialogic Essay Structure).

Classical Rhetoric (Aristotle)

Category: Thought piece, persuasive essay.

Components:

  • Ethos: credibility and authority
  • Pathos: emotional appeal
  • Logos: logical reasoning

Use case: Essays requiring persuasion and exploration of ideas. Use when content must balance credibility, emotion, and logical reasoning.

Source: Classical rhetoric framework from Aristotle’s Rhetoric (c. 350 BCE).

Related: Dialogic Essay Structure, SECTIONS Model.

SECTIONS Model

Category: Thought piece, idea mapping.

Components:

  • Situation: context and background
  • Emotions: emotional dimensions
  • Contradictions: conflicting viewpoints or tensions
  • Thoughts: analysis and reasoning
  • Implications: consequences and outcomes
  • Options: alternative approaches
  • Next: forward-looking actions
  • Summary: synthesis and conclusion

Use case: Mapping complex ideas requiring exploration of multiple dimensions. Use for thought experiments and exploratory writing.

Source: SECTIONS model for idea mapping and exploration (framework origin not definitively attributed).

Related: Inverted Pyramid Meets Exploration, Dialogic Essay Structure.

Inverted Pyramid Meets Exploration

Category: Thought piece, layered exploration.

Components:

  • Core idea: central concept stated first
  • Layers: progressive expansion of related thinking
  • Implications: consequences and alternatives

Use case: Articles that start with a clear central idea and expand outward. Use when readers need the core concept immediately, followed by deeper exploration.

Source: Combines inverted pyramid structure (journalism) with exploratory writing techniques.

Related: SECTIONS Model, Classical Rhetoric (Aristotle).

Dialogic Essay Structure

Category: Thought piece, dialectical exploration.

Components:

  • Competing viewpoints: two or more opposing perspectives
  • Weaving: alternating between viewpoints
  • Synthesis: resolution or open question

Use case: Essays exploring complex topics with multiple valid perspectives. Use when showing nuance rather than arguing a single position.

Source: Dialectical method (Socratic tradition) adapted for essay structure.

Related: Classical Rhetoric (Aristotle), SECTIONS Model.

Influence Pieces

Frameworks for persuasive writing that aim to change behavior or attitudes.

LLM Prompts: Create | Review - Category-level prompts that work with any influence piece framework (Problem-Agitate-Solve, AIDA, 5 Whys + Benefit Ladder, BJ Fogg’s Behavior Model, Cialdini’s Influence Framework).

Problem-Agitate-Solve (PAS)

Category: Influence piece, behavior change.

Components:

  • Problem: identification of the issue
  • Agitate: explanation of why it matters and the consequences
  • Solve: proposed solution or action

Use case: Content that needs to motivate action by establishing a problem, intensifying concern, and then providing a clear path forward.

Source: Problem-Agitate-Solve (PAS) copywriting framework (attributed to Dan Kennedy and others in direct response marketing).

Related: AIDA, BJ Fogg’s Behavior Model.

AIDA

Category: Influence piece, copywriting.

Components:

  • Attention: capture the reader’s focus
  • Interest: maintain engagement
  • Desire: create want or need
  • Action: prompt specific behavior

Use case: Marketing copy, calls to action, and content designed to drive specific behaviors. Classic copywriting framework adapted for behavior change.

Source: AIDA model, attributed to E. St. Elmo Lewis (1898) for advertising effectiveness.

Related: Problem-Agitate-Solve (PAS), Influence Framework (Cialdini).

5 Whys + Benefit Ladder

Category: Influence piece, motivation mapping.

Components:

  • 5 Whys: iterative questioning to find root motivation
  • Benefit Ladder: linking surface behavior to deeper values

Use case: Content connecting actions to underlying motivations. Use when behavior change requires understanding deeper drivers.

Source: Combines 5 Whys root cause analysis (attributed to Sakichi Toyoda, Toyota Production System) with benefit laddering techniques (marketing research methodology).

Related: BJ Fogg’s Behavior Model, Influence Framework (Cialdini).

BJ Fogg’s Behavior Model

Category: Influence piece, behavior design.

Components:

  • Motivation: desire to perform the behavior
  • Ability: ease of performing the behavior
  • Prompt: trigger or cue to act

Use case: Writing designed to increase motivation, reduce friction, and provide clear triggers. Use for any content aiming to change behavior.

Source: See 🔎The Behavior Model.

Related: 5 Whys + Benefit Ladder, Problem-Agitate-Solve (PAS).

Influence Framework (Cialdini)

Category: Influence piece, persuasion principles.

Components:

  • Reciprocity: giving to receive
  • Authority: credible sources and expertise
  • Social proof: others’ actions and validation
  • Consistency: alignment with commitments
  • Scarcity: limited availability
  • Liking: similarity and rapport

Use case: Structuring examples and calls to action using proven persuasion principles. Use when you need multiple angles of influence.

Source: See 🔎Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion.

Related: AIDA, BJ Fogg’s Behavior Model.

Fact-Based Reference Articles

Frameworks for authoritative, lookup-oriented documentation and reference content.

LLM Prompts: Create | Review - Category-level prompts that work with any reference framework (Diátaxis Reference Mode, Topic + Definition + Context + Examples + Caveats, TEA, FAQ Pattern, Cornell Note Style).

Diátaxis (Reference Mode)

Category: Reference documentation.

Components:

  • Facts: authoritative statements
  • Data: specific information and values
  • Examples: concrete illustrations
  • Where/how to use: application context

Use case: Standardized reference documentation where readers need fast lookup of facts, data, and usage patterns.

Source: See 🔎Diátaxis.

Related: TEA (Topic, Evidence, Analysis), Topic + Definition + Context + Examples + Caveats.

Topic + Definition + Context + Examples + Caveats

Category: Reference documentation.

Components:

  • Topic: subject identification
  • Definition: precise meaning
  • Context: placement within a larger system
  • Examples: concrete illustrations
  • Caveats: exceptions and limitations

Use case: Reference articles defining terms, showing context, providing examples, and noting exceptions. Flexible structure for various reference needs.

Source: Standard reference documentation pattern (common in technical writing).

Related: Diátaxis (Reference Mode), FAQ Pattern.

TEA (Topic, Evidence, Analysis)

Category: Reference documentation, analytical reference.

Components:

  • Topic: subject identification
  • Evidence: cited facts and data
  • Analysis: interpretation of what the facts mean

Use case: Reference content requiring both factual presentation and analytical interpretation. Use when readers need both data and meaning.

Source: TEA (Topic, Evidence, Analysis) framework for analytical reference (framework origin not definitively attributed).

Related: Diátaxis (Reference Mode), Topic + Definition + Context + Examples + Caveats.

FAQ Pattern

Category: Reference documentation, web reference.

Components:

  • Question: specific query
  • Answer: direct response
  • Expanded explanation: detailed context
  • Links to deeper sources: related resources

Use case: Web reference pages organized around common questions. Use for content that needs to answer specific queries quickly.

Source: FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions) pattern for web reference (common web documentation pattern).

Related: Topic + Definition + Context + Examples + Caveats, TEA (Topic, Evidence, Analysis).

Cornell Note Style (adapted)

Category: Reference documentation, learning reference.

Components:

  • Header: topic identification
  • Notes: factual information
  • Cue/keywords: important terms and concepts
  • Summary: synthesis and takeaways

Use case: Reference articles that double as learning aids. Use when content needs to serve both lookup and study purposes.

Source: Adapted from Cornell Note-Taking System (developed by Walter Pauk at Cornell University, 1940s).

Related: TEA (Topic, Evidence, Analysis), Topic + Definition + Context + Examples + Caveats.

Lesson Planning

Frameworks for instructional content aligned with instructional design principles, suitable for solo learners creating their own lesson plans.

LLM Prompts: Create | Review - Category-level prompts that work with any lesson planning framework (Backward Design, Bloom’s Taxonomy, 5E Instructional Model, Gagne’s Nine Events).

Backward Design (Wiggins & McTighe)

Category: Instructional design, lesson planning.

Components:

  • Desired outcomes: what learners should know or do
  • Assessment: how to measure achievement
  • Learning activities: experiences to reach outcomes

Use case: Instructional content where clarity on outcomes drives design. Forces explicit definition of success before creating activities.

Source: See Understanding by Design. For more details, see Wikipedia: Backward Design.

Related: Bloom’s Taxonomy, 5E Instructional Model.

Bloom’s Taxonomy

Category: Instructional design, learning objectives.

Components:

  • Remember: recall information
  • Understand: explain concepts
  • Apply: use in new situations
  • Analyze: break down and examine
  • Evaluate: judge and critique
  • Create: produce new work

Use case: Shaping learning objectives and exercises that progress from simple to complex. Use to structure content from basic recall to advanced creation.

Source: See Bloom’s Taxonomy.

Related: Backward Design (Wiggins & McTighe), Gagne’s Nine Events.

5E Instructional Model

Category: Instructional design, self-paced learning.

Components:

  • Engage: capture interest
  • Explore: hands-on investigation
  • Explain: concept introduction
  • Elaborate: extend understanding
  • Evaluate: assess learning

Use case: Self-paced instructional modules. Use for content that needs to guide learners through discovery and application.

Source: 5E Instructional Model developed by the Biological Sciences Curriculum Study (BSCS) in the 1980s.

Related: Backward Design (Wiggins & McTighe), Gagne’s Nine Events.

Gagne’s Nine Events

Category: Instructional design, lesson structure.

Components:

  • Gain attention
  • State objective
  • Stimulate recall
  • Present material
  • Provide guidance
  • Elicit performance
  • Provide feedback
  • Assess performance
  • Enhance retention

Use case: Structured lesson planning with explicit events from attention through retention. Use when you need a systematic approach to lesson design.

Source: Gagne’s Nine Events of Instruction from The Conditions of Learning (1965).

Related: 5E Instructional Model, Bloom’s Taxonomy.

Framework Selection Guide

Quick lookup by writing goal:

Thought exploration: Classical Rhetoric (Aristotle), Dialogic Essay Structure, SECTIONS Model, Inverted Pyramid Meets Exploration.

Behavior change: Problem-Agitate-Solve (PAS), AIDA, BJ Fogg’s Behavior Model, Influence Framework (Cialdini), 5 Whys + Benefit Ladder.

Reference documentation: Diátaxis (Reference Mode), FAQ Pattern, TEA (Topic, Evidence, Analysis), Topic + Definition + Context + Examples + Caveats, Cornell Note Style (adapted).

Instructional content: Backward Design (Wiggins & McTighe), Bloom’s Taxonomy, 5E Instructional Model, Gagne’s Nine Events.

Cross-References

Related articles:

References