메뉴
이 저장소의 skills
SkillsMP는 brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills에서 3,969개의 skill을 수집했습니다. skill을 열어 소스와 세부 정보를 확인하세요.
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills수집된 skill 3,969개 중 40개를 표시합니다.
Use when staking the contribution of a Human Resource Management (Wiley "HRM") manuscript against the right conversation — and against the siblings it is confused with (HRMJ, Personnel Psychology, JAP, AMJ). Positions the paper; it does not sharpen the…
원문 언어: 영어
Use when drafting the revision and response letter after a Human Resource Management (Wiley "HRM") revise-and-resubmit — structuring point-by-point responses to the action editor and reviewers across the journal's developmental, multi-round, double-blind…
원문 언어: 영어
Use when calibrating expectations for the Human Resource Management (Wiley "HRM") editorial process — the EIC fit/relevance screen, double-blind peer review, the developmental R&R culture, and reading a decision letter. Explains the process and how to read…
원문 언어: 영어
Use when the theoretical argument and hypotheses are the bottleneck for a Human Resource Management (Wiley "HRM") manuscript — building an HRM/OB mechanism (AMO, HR-system strength, signaling, social exchange) and deriving testable predictions a priori.…
원문 언어: 영어
Use when scoping or stress-testing the research question for a Human Resource Management (Wiley "HRM") manuscript — confirming an HR-system/practice phenomenon with both a scholarly advance and a workforce-policy or HRM-practice payoff. Locks the question; it…
원문 언어: 영어
Use when deciding which hrm-* sub-skill to invoke next, or when sequencing manuscript work from topic selection through rebuttal for a Human Resource Management (Wiley "HRM") submission. Routes — it does not replace — the specialized skills.
원문 언어: 영어
Use when the prose, abstract, or introduction are the bottleneck for a Human Resource Management (Wiley "HRM") manuscript — making the HRM/OB argument land and surfacing the practitioner takeaway in the journal's dual-audience voice. Late-stage polish; it…
원문 언어: 영어
Use when working with the Associate Editor and Editor of an Academy of Management Annals (Annals) review — scope alignment after a proposal is invited, what review-article referees evaluate, and revision expectations. Plans the interaction; it does not run…
원문 언어: 영어
Use when systematically gathering, coding, and synthesizing a management/organization literature for an Academy of Management Annals (Annals) review — the search-and-coverage methodology and the choice of narrative vs. systematic vs. bibliometric integration.…
원문 언어: 영어
Use when building the novel integrative framework that an Academy of Management Annals (Annals) review must deliver — the theory-advancing "new way of seeing the field" that is the acceptance bar, not a catalog of papers. Designs the spine; it does not gather…
원문 언어: 영어
Use when writing the short proposal that gates an Academy of Management Annals (Annals) review — the ≤5-page, four-heading proposal submitted under the twice-yearly deadlines before any full review is invited. Builds the proposal; it does not gather the…
원문 언어: 영어
Use when running the final pre-submission preflight for an Academy of Management Annals (Annals) proposal or invited full review via the Manuscript Central portal — proposal-vs-invited-review route, deadlines, formatting, CV, and anonymity. Final checks; it…
원문 언어: 영어
Use when building exhibits for an Academy of Management Annals (Annals) review — the signature framework figure, who-studied-what synthesis tables, and search/coverage exhibits that summarize across a literature. Designs review exhibits; it does not produce…
원문 언어: 영어
Use when judging whether a management/organization literature is an Academy of Management Annals (Annals)-scale review topic — mature, important, fragmented, and integrable into a new framework — rather than a narrow review. Decides fit and frames the…
원문 언어: 영어
Use when deciding which amann-* sub-skill to invoke next, or when sequencing a comprehensive review article from topic selection through revision for an Academy of Management Annals (Annals) submission. Routes — it does not replace — the specialized skills.
원문 언어: 영어
Use when revising an Academy of Management Annals (Annals) review for the house voice — authoritative, integrative, agenda-setting "reviews with an attitude," with a strong problem-first opening and a contribution-stating abstract. Polishes prose and…
원문 언어: 영어
Use when sharpening the theoretical contribution and the "so what" for a Human Relations (HR) manuscript once results exist. Frames the contribution; it does not develop the underlying theory or run analysis.
원문 언어: 영어
Use when staking a Human Relations (HR) manuscript's contribution against the relevant scholarly conversation and adjacent journals. Positions the paper; it does not develop the theory or run analysis.
원문 언어: 영어
Use when calibrating expectations for the Human Relations (HR) review process — the editorial scoping screen, double-anonymous developmental review, decision types, timelines, and when a sibling journal is the better route. Sets expectations; it does not…
원문 언어: 영어
Use when building the theoretical engine for a Human Relations (HR) manuscript — mechanisms grounded in social theory, process vs. variance logic, constructs, and boundary conditions. Builds the argument; it does not choose methods or run analysis.
원문 언어: 영어
Use when deciding whether a question belongs in Human Relations (HR) and how to frame it for the journal's interdisciplinary work-and-society audience. Tests fit and sharpens the question; it does not develop the theory or invent evidence.
원문 언어: 영어
Use when deciding which humrel-* sub-skill to invoke next, or when sequencing manuscript work from topic through rebuttal for a Human Relations (HR) submission. Routes — it does not replace — the specialized skills.
원문 언어: 영어
Use when staking the contribution of an Organization Studies (OS) manuscript against the specific theoretical conversation it joins — what the field knows, what it misses, and the precise gap this paper closes. Positions the argument; it does not build the…
원문 언어: 영어
Use when drafting the response to reviewers and the revision plan for an Organization Studies (OS) R&R — turning developmental, theory-level reviewer comments into a credible point-by-point reply and revised manuscript. Plans and drafts the response; it does…
원문 언어: 영어
Use when building the theoretical engine for an Organization Studies (OS) manuscript — the mechanism, process model, or conceptual move that constitutes the contribution. Builds the argument; it does not select methods or run analysis.
원문 언어: 영어
Use when choosing or sharpening the phenomenon and research question for an Organization Studies (OS) manuscript — testing whether it is theoretically generative for OS's European organization-theory audience. Diagnoses fit and scope; it does not build the…
원문 언어: 영어
Use when deciding which orgstud-* sub-skill to invoke next, or when sequencing manuscript work from topic through rebuttal for an Organization Studies (OS) submission. Routes — it does not replace — the specialized skills.
원문 언어: 영어
Use for full-manuscript prose and the discursive European register of an Organization Studies (OS) manuscript — voice, theoretical texture, the argument's arc, and qualitative craft. Polishes the writing; it does not change the theory or analysis.
원문 언어: 영어
Use when systematically gathering, reading, and synthesizing a body of economic research for an Annual Review of Economics (ARE) review — coverage discipline and avoiding citation gaps. Builds the evidence corpus and synthesis notes; it does not impose the…
원문 언어: 영어
Use when imposing an analytical structure or taxonomy on a literature for an Annual Review of Economics (ARE) review — the "spine" that turns a reading list into an argument about the field. Designs the framework; it does not gather the literature…
원문 언어: 영어
Use when getting a review topic in front of the Annual Review of Economics (ARE) Editorial Committee or shaping an accepted invitation — the commissioned/invited intake route, how to suggest a topic, and what a Committee-ready pitch contains. Frames the…
원문 언어: 영어
Use when calibrating expectations for the Annual Review of Economics (ARE) Editorial Committee review cycle on an invited article — what happens after delivery, who reviews, the accuracy/rigor/balance bar, and the annual-volume timeline. Sets expectations; it…
원문 언어: 영어
Use when running the final delivery preflight for a commissioned Annual Review of Economics (ARE) review via the Annual Reviews production system — disclosure statements, reference/format compliance, figure permissions, and the transparency/reproducibility of…
원문 언어: 영어
Use when building exhibits for an Annual Review of Economics (ARE) review — summary "who-found-what" tables, the conceptual/framework figure, and meta-evidence exhibits that synthesize across studies. Designs review exhibits; it does not produce…
원문 언어: 영어
Use when judging whether a literature is an Annual Review of Economics (ARE)-scale review topic — mature, important, and genuinely in need of an authoritative, accessible synthesis — and framing the review's animating question. Decides fit; it does not gather…
원문 언어: 영어
Use when deciding which arecon-* sub-skill to invoke next, or when sequencing an invited review article from topic through revision for an Annual Review of Economics (ARE) manuscript. Routes — it does not replace — the specialized skills.
원문 언어: 영어
Use when revising an Annual Review of Economics (ARE) review for the ARE voice — authoritative, accessible to economists outside the subfield, signposted, with a strong opening, a forward-looking close, and a survey-style abstract. Polishes prose and…
원문 언어: 영어
Use when the one-sentence computational/methodological claim of an INFORMS Journal on Computing (IJOC) manuscript is not sharp, or the contribution reads as application rather than computing. Sharpens the "what is new and by how much"; it does not run the…
원문 언어: 영어
Use when staking the computational/methodological contribution of an INFORMS Journal on Computing (IJOC) manuscript against OR/MS and CS prior art. Positions the advance relative to the right baselines and the right frontier; it does not invent citations.
원문 언어: 영어
Use when drafting the response to an INFORMS Journal on Computing (IJOC) decision letter — turning referee objections (especially about experiments and reproducibility) into a point-by-point response with re-run evidence. Builds the rebuttal and revision…
원문 언어: 영어