Menu
Skills in this repository
SkillsMP has collected 3,969 skills from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills. Open a skill to review its source and details.
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-SkillsShowing 40 of 3,969 collected skills.
Use when judging whether a question is a Perspectives on Psychological Science (PoPS)-scale contribution — broad, integrative, theoretical, or meta-scientific rather than a single study — and framing its animating question. Decides fit and venue; it does not…
Use when meeting open-science and reproducibility obligations for a Perspectives on Psychological Science (PoPS) piece — repository deposit for any original data, a documented and ideally preregistered systematic protocol for meta-science, and exemplary…
Use when deciding which ppsych-* sub-skill to invoke next, or when sequencing a broad integrative review, theoretical statement, or meta-science piece from topic through revision for a Perspectives on Psychological Science (PoPS) manuscript. Routes by…
Use when revising a Perspectives on Psychological Science (PoPS) piece for the PoPS voice — broad, provocative, accessible to psychologists outside the subfield, signposted, with a strong opening, a forward-looking close, an APA reference style, and a…
Use when deriving predictions from a Psychological Review theory and confronting them with existing data and rival models — the journal's substitute for an empirical results section. Develops the argument; it does NOT build the model…
Use when setting the scope of a Psychological Review theory — what it explains, what it does NOT, and (for formal models) whether its parameters are identifiable. Bounds the theory; it does NOT derive its predictions (psychrev-argument-development) or frame…
Use when designing the figures of a Psychological Review manuscript — model/architecture diagrams and simulation-of-model-behavior plots (NOT experiments). Builds the exhibits; it does NOT derive the predictions they display (psychrev-argument-development) or…
Use when articulating the theoretical advance of a Psychological Review manuscript — what the field can explain after the paper that it could not before, stated against the specific prior models it improves on. Frames the contribution; it does NOT build the…
Use when locating a Psychological Review manuscript within its theoretical conversation — naming the theories it extends and, above all, the rival models it must beat or subsume. Positions the theory; it does NOT build the model (psychrev-theory-construction)…
Use when a Psychological Review decision letter (usually a major revision) has arrived and you must write the response document and revise the theory. Drafts the response and revision plan; it does NOT run the resubmission preflight (psychrev-submission) or…
Use when running the final pre-submission preflight for a Psychological Review manuscript — Editorial Manager portal, APA format and length, abstract, masking, references, ethics, and (for computational models) sharing the author's own model code. Theory…
Use when building the actual theory or formal/computational model for a Psychological Review manuscript — turning a framed problem into explicit assumptions, mechanisms, formal structure, and derivations. Constructs the model; it does NOT derive and test…
Use when deciding whether an idea is a genuine theoretical problem with the scope and generality Psychological Review demands — and, critically, whether it is theory rather than an empirical report. Screens fit and frames the problem; it does NOT build the…
Use when polishing a Psychological Review manuscript to APA house style and theory-paper register — mechanism-first prose, model vocabulary, no empirical-report framing. A late-stage polish; it does NOT build the theory (psychrev-theory-construction) or…
Use when testing exhaustiveness, risk-of-bias, heterogeneity, and sensitivity for a Review of Educational Research (RER) review or meta-analysis. Hardens the synthesis against omission and fragility; it does not build the conceptual spine…
Use when executing the systematic search, screening to a PRISMA flow, and extracting data for a Review of Educational Research (RER) review or meta-analysis. Builds the documented evidence corpus; it does not impose the conceptual spine…
Use when turning a screened, coded corpus into an analytic spine that advances theory or policy for a Review of Educational Research (RER) manuscript. Builds the conceptual contribution beyond a tally; it does not run the search…
Use when writing the protocol, fixing scope and eligibility, and (where applicable) preregistering a systematic review or meta-analysis before searching, for a Review of Educational Research (RER) manuscript. Produces the a-priori plan; it does not run the…
Use when an editor/reviewer decision letter arrives on a Review of Educational Research (RER) review or meta-analysis and you must plan the revision and response. Turns the letter into action and a point-by-point reply; it does not run the submission…
Use when designing the PRISMA flow diagram, forest/funnel plots, and coding/evidence tables for a Review of Educational Research (RER) review or meta-analysis. Builds exhibits that carry the synthesis; it does not run the analyses…
Use when deciding whether a question is synthesis-worthy and RER-scale before committing to a Review of Educational Research (RER) review or meta-analysis. Tests fit and frames the contribution; it does not run the search (revedres-literature-synthesis) or…
Use when settling coding reliability, open materials, PRISMA/MARS reporting, and a reproducible meta-analysis for a Review of Educational Research (RER) manuscript. Makes the review auditable and re-runnable; it does not run the substantive robustness…
Use when deciding which revedres-* sub-skill to invoke next, or when sequencing a systematic review, meta-analysis, or critical integrative synthesis from question-scoping through revision for a Review of Educational Research (RER) manuscript. Routes — it…
Use when drafting or revising prose, the 150-word abstract, and the introduction in the Review of Educational Research (RER) synthesizing voice and APA 7 style. Lands the integrative voice; it does not build the analytic spine (revedres-organizing-framework)…
Use when you need to understand how the Journal of Monetary Economics (JME) review process actually works — single anonymized (single-blind) review with at least two reviewers, the distinctive "up or out" first-revision rule, the ~50% publication-likelihood…
Use to understand how MIS Quarterly's editorial process works and to read a decision letter — the double-anonymous model, the Senior-Editor/Associate-Editor routing where the SE owns the decision, what a major/minor revision versus reject signals, and what to…
Use when running the final pre-submission preflight for World Politics via ScholarOne — article-type selection, triple-blind anonymization, the 12,500-word limit (including notes and references), the 150-word abstract, double-spacing, the 15-page…
Use when understanding how The Accounting Review (TAR) review and decisions work, or when reading a TAR decision letter — the editor routing, double-blind two-reviewer model, decision types, and post-publication integrity rules. Explains and interprets the…
Use when an AEJ: Economic Policy decision letter (R&R or reject-and-resubmit) has arrived and a response-letter strategy and revision plan are needed. Structures the response to referees and editor with policy-relevance front and center; it does not run new…
Use when anticipating how AEJ: Economic Policy referees and editors will read a manuscript, before submission or before an R&R, to pre-empt the objections that sink policy-evaluation papers. Maps likely pushback to fixes and calibrates expectations; it does…
Use when assembling the data and code deposit for an AEJ: Economic Policy manuscript to satisfy the AEA Data and Code Availability Policy and the AEA Data Editor's pre-publication reproducibility check. Builds the openICPSR deposit, README, and…
Use when deciding which aejpol-* sub-skill to invoke next, or when sequencing manuscript work from topic selection through rebuttal for an AEJ: Economic Policy manuscript. Routes — it does not replace — the specialized skills.
Use when drafting or revising the prose of an AEJ: Economic Policy manuscript — especially the abstract and introduction — to translate causal estimates into a clear policy takeaway without overclaiming. Shapes the policy-first narrative and house style; it…
Use when positioning a Cognitive Psychology (Elsevier) manuscript against the field, especially against rival models and prior empirical programs. In a long-form, model-driven venue, positioning means showing what theoretical question your model adjudicates…
Use when meeting Cognitive Psychology (Elsevier) open-science expectations — sharing data, model code, analysis scripts, and materials so the modeling is reproducible, depositing in repositories with persistent identifiers, completing the Elsevier…
Use when writing the response to a Cognitive Psychology (Elsevier) major/minor revision. Reviews here often demand added experiments, more model comparisons, recovery analyses, or fuller reproducibility, so the response must address every point and strengthen…
Use when you need to understand how Cognitive Psychology (Elsevier) evaluates a manuscript — editorial triage for theoretical impact and fit, expert review weighing model rigor, recovery, design, and reproducibility, and the long revision cycles typical of a…
Use when running the final pre-submission preflight for Cognitive Psychology (Elsevier) via Editorial Manager — scope/length fit, abstract and keywords, APA-style reporting, model-comparison completeness, reproducible model/analysis code, and the Elsevier…
Use when stating the theory, formalizing the model, and deriving predictions for a Cognitive Psychology (Elsevier) manuscript. The journal rewards a formal/computational account whose parameters mean something and whose predictions discriminate it from…
Use when deciding whether a cognition project fits Cognitive Psychology (Elsevier) and what contribution shape to target. The journal favors longer, integrative, model-driven work that produces a substantial theoretical advance — not a single isolated effect.…