| name | jop-workflow |
| description | Use as the entry point for any The Journal of Politics (JOP) manuscript. Routes to the right JOP sub-skill based on where you are in the lifecycle and whether a Research Article (<= 35 pages) or a Short Article (<= 10 pages) fits. JOP counts pages, not words, and makes acceptance contingent on replicability. It dispatches; it does not draft content. |
JOP Workflow Router (jop-workflow)
The orchestrator for a JOP submission. Figure out the stage and the category, then send the user
to the matching skill. JOP is a general-interest journal that counts pages, not words, and makes
acceptance contingent on replicability — so the router's first jobs are to fix the category against
the page budget and to start the replication package early.
When to trigger
- Starting a new JOP paper and unsure where to begin
- Mid-project and unsure which skill applies next
- Deciding between a Research Article (≤ 35 pp) and a Short Article (≤ 10 pp)
- Returning with a decision letter (route to
jop-rebuttal)
First question: which category?
| Situation | Category | Route to |
|---|
| Full original study, broad interest | Research Article (≤ 35 pages) | normal pipeline below |
| Single sharp contribution, fits tight | Short Article (≤ 10 pages) | normal pipeline, tighter scope |
| Lots of robustness / derivations / SI | keep main text lean | jop-tables-figures + Online Appendix (≤ 25 pp) |
| Empirical/formal results to deposit | replication package | jop-replication-and-data-policy early |
JOP caps pages (double-spaced, 12-pt), not words. A paper that clears an APSR/AJPS word cap can
still blow the 35-page budget — decide the category before you write.
Routing map (stage → skill)
Idea / fit? → jop-topic-selection
Where does it sit in the field? → jop-literature-positioning
What's the argument? → jop-theory-building
Is the design defensible? → jop-research-design
Are the analyses sound? → jop-data-analysis
Are the exhibits clear + lean? → jop-tables-figures
Does it fit 35 / 10 pages? → jop-writing-style
Repro package for the analyst? → jop-replication-and-data-policy
How will it be judged? → jop-review-process
Ready to submit? → jop-submission
Got an R&R / decision? → jop-rebuttal
Default order
topic-selection → literature-positioning → theory-building → research-design → data-analysis → tables-figures → writing-style → replication-and-data-policy → review-process → submission → rebuttal
Iterate: most papers loop theory ↔ design ↔ analysis several times, and trim against the page budget
before writing-style is done.
Anti-patterns
- Planning by word count — JOP's binding constraint is pages
- Padding a Short Article toward 35 pages instead of keeping one crisp contribution
- Leaving the replication package until acceptance — a JOP replication analyst re-checks it
- Dumping the whole paper into the Online Appendix to dodge the 35-page main-text budget
Triage by symptom (where the manuscript actually hurts)
When a paper is mid-flight, route by the loudest problem rather than the default order. These are the
symptom-to-skill jumps a JOP author makes most often.
| Symptom | Likely real problem | Jump to |
|---|
| "Feels specialist / incremental" | Contribution not pitched general-interest | jop-topic-selection, then jop-literature-positioning |
| "Reviewer doubts the causal claim" | Identification or theory-test link | jop-research-design |
| "Over the page budget" | Exhibits, notes, or references too heavy | jop-tables-figures, then jop-writing-style |
| "Worried about the analyst re-run" | Package not reproducible | jop-replication-and-data-policy |
Referee pushback patterns and the JOP fix
- "This reads like the wrong venue." Before polishing format, confirm the contribution is general-interest
and not better suited to a sibling venue (APSR, AJPS, World Politics); reroute early, not at submission.
- "The replication package is an afterthought." Start the package during analysis so the post-acceptance
analyst check is routine; the router should trigger
jop-replication-and-data-policy early, not last.
Router pass for Journal of Politics
Treat this skill as an executable review pass, not a prose hint. First lock the political mechanism, evidence design, and scope condition; then judge whether the current manuscript answers the venue's real reader: political-science reviewers who want theory, identification or formal logic, and generalizable political implications in balance.
- Do the pass: Run the pack as a sequence: fit gate, evidence gate, writing gate, source-map gate, and final output contract; stop when a gate lacks evidence.
- Return a ledger: give
claim / evidence / risk / manuscript location rows, so the next agent can edit rather than rediscover the issue.
- Sibling guard: compare against APSR for field-wide political science, AJPS for design-heavy empirical work, World Politics for comparative/international politics; if a sibling owns the contribution, recommend re-routing before polishing format.
- Stop condition: do not give submission-ready advice until the pack's
resources/official-source-map.md has been checked for volatile rules and the manuscript has one concrete fix for the largest venue-specific risk.
Output format
【Stage】idea / positioning / theory / design / analysis / exhibits / writing / replication / review / submit / rebut
【Category】Research Article (≤35 pp) / Short Article (≤10 pp)
【Route to】jop-<skill>
【Why】one line
【Then】the next skill after that
Supplementary resources
