Skills Productivity Academic Publishing Workflow Router

Academic Publishing Workflow Router

v20260724
jop-workflow
An essential orchestrator for academic manuscripts submitting to specialized journals. This router guides authors through the entire publishing lifecycle—from initial idea generation and literature positioning to final submission and rebuttal. It assesses the article's scope (Research Article vs. Short Article), manages page limitations, and ensures early focus on data replicability, directing users to the precise sub-skill needed at any stage.
Get Skill
201 downloads
Overview

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

Info
Category Productivity
Name jop-workflow
Version v20260724
Size 6.08KB
Updated At 2026-07-28
Language