Research Rabbit
Visual academic research discovery — 'Spotify for papers.' Start with one paper, discover hundreds through citation mapping, author networks, and AI recommendations. Free, with Zotero integration.
What should journalists know about Research Rabbit?
Research Rabbit solves the hardest part of academic research for journalists: you found one good paper, now what? Traditional academic databases force you to craft keyword searches and manually follow citations. Research Rabbit inverts this: drop in a paper (or a set of papers), and it maps the citation network visually — showing you what that paper cited, what cited it, related work by the same authors, and algorithmically similar papers you might have missed. The visual interface is genuinely useful: you can see clusters of related research, identify the foundational papers in a field, and spot the most-cited researchers — all potential expert sources for your story. The 'Spotify for papers' analogy is apt: like a recommendation engine, it gets better as you feed it more seeds. Build a collection of 5-10 papers on a topic and the recommendations become remarkably targeted. Zotero integration means you can sync discoveries directly into your reference manager without manual export. Over 270 million papers indexed. Used by researchers at Harvard, MIT, Stanford, Oxford, and Cambridge — which suggests the recommendation algorithms are producing results academics trust. For journalists specifically, the value is efficiency. A health reporter investigating a new treatment can map the entire evidence base in an afternoon. A tech journalist can trace whether a company's cited research actually supports their claims by following the citation graph. An investigative reporter can identify co-authorship networks that reveal undisclosed conflicts of interest. The limitation: Research Rabbit helps you find papers, not read them. Paywalled papers still require institutional access or other means. And like any recommendation system, it can create filter bubbles — if you seed it with papers from one perspective, it will recommend more of the same. Cross-reference with Semantic Scholar or Google Scholar to ensure you are not missing contrarian or critical work.
Mapping the full research landscape around a topic starting from a single paper. Identifying key researchers and potential expert sources in any scientific field. Visual exploration of citation networks for investigative stories about research influence. Building comprehensive literature collections quickly for deadline reporting. Discovering papers you would never find through keyword search alone.
Accessing full text of paywalled papers (discovery only, not access). Real-time research monitoring (it is not an alerting tool). Non-academic literature — government reports, news articles, legal documents are not indexed. Quick factual lookups where you already know what you need. Comprehensive systematic reviews that require explicit search methodology documentation (the algorithm is a black box).
Security & Privacy
Data is scrambled while being sent to their servers
Data is scrambled when stored on their servers
Where servers are located — affects which governments can request your data
Privacy policy summary
Account required (email signup). Research Rabbit collects your saved papers, collections, and usage data to power recommendations. The company does not run advertising on the platform. Your research collections and reading patterns reveal your interests — this is inherent to a recommendation engine. The specific data retention and sharing policies are not prominently detailed on their website. No advertising trackers visible on the platform.
How to protect yourself:
Your saved collections and browsing patterns reveal exactly what you are researching. For sensitive investigative work, consider using a separate account not tied to your newsroom email. Do not save collections related to active investigations on an account linked to your real identity if source protection is a concern. Cross-reference Research Rabbit findings with Semantic Scholar and Google Scholar — no single discovery tool catches everything, and recommendation algorithms can create blind spots. Verify that recommended papers are actually relevant by reading abstracts rather than trusting algorithmic similarity scores alone. Export important findings to Zotero or another local reference manager so your research survives if the service changes or disappears.
Standard security for a free research discovery tool. HTTPS throughout, no visible advertising trackers. The 'adequate' rating reflects two concerns: first, the company's ownership and funding model are opaque — journalists should know who is behind their tools. Second, an account is required and your research collections inherently reveal your investigative interests. There is no anonymous usage path. For routine academic research this is fine. For sensitive investigative work where your research topics themselves are sensitive, the mandatory account and unclear data practices warrant caution. Use a pseudonymous account for sensitive research and do not rely solely on Research Rabbit for critical work.
Who Owns This
Known issues
Opaque ownership and funding — the company does not prominently disclose its investors, revenue model, or long-term sustainability plan. This matters because journalists may build workflows dependent on the tool. Recommendation algorithms are a black box — you cannot inspect why certain papers are suggested or what is being excluded. The tool can create filter bubbles if seeded narrowly. Account required (no anonymous usage). Coverage may lag behind the very latest publications. Visual interface, while powerful, can become cluttered with large collections. Limited export options beyond Zotero integration. No API for programmatic access (unlike Semantic Scholar). The service's long-term viability depends on an undisclosed business model — free tools without clear revenue paths sometimes shut down abruptly or pivot to models that compromise user interests.
Pricing
Free
This is an editorial assessment based on publicly available information as of 2026-04-11, using our published methodology. Independent security review is pending. Security posture can change at any time. This is not a guarantee of safety.
Something wrong or outdated? Report it.