Skill UI

A comprehensive guide for formatting academic manuscripts for the American Historical Review (AHR). This skill mandates adherence to the Chicago Manual of Style (CMOS) guidelines where all citations must be placed exclusively in footnotes or endnotes. It strictly prohibits the use of bibliography pages or in-text parenthetical citations, providing detailed rules for citing books, journals, digitized, and especially sensitive archival/manuscript sources.

This comprehensive checklist guides authors through the final steps before submitting a manuscript to The American Historical Review (AHR) via ScholarOne. It ensures adherence to strict double-blind anonymity rules, specific formatting standards (Times New Roman, double-spaced, 8,000-word limit), Chicago manual style notes (no bibliography), and proper handling of image permissions, preventing common submission failures.

A comprehensive guide for responding to reviews and comments for the American Journal of Sociology (AJS). It structures persuasive, evidence-based rebuttal letters for Revise-and-Resubmit (R&R) stages or formal author replies to published Comments. Focuses on maintaining academic rigor, addressing conflicting points, and advancing the field's understanding through measured, theoretical engagement.

This guide teaches the unique, high-level writing style required for scholarly reviews, particularly in management science. It moves beyond simple description to crafting an authoritative, integrative, and agenda-setting argument. Learn how to structure a problem-first opening, articulate a clear critical position, and provide a future research roadmap, transforming a mere summary into a scholarly contribution.

A comprehensive guide for drafting the formal rebuttal and response letter following a journal's revise-and-resubmit (R&R) decision, specifically tailored for AMJ standards. It teaches authors how to structure point-by-point responses to action editors and reviewers, reconcile conflicting demands, and strategically defend or deepen the manuscript's theoretical and methodological contributions while maintaining a professional and collegial tone.

This comprehensive checklist guides authors submitting theory-only manuscripts to the Academy of Management Review (AMR). It ensures compliance with AOM formatting, rigorous anonymity standards, correct scope definition (must build new theory, no data), and ethical guidelines, minimizing desk rejection risk. It is designed for conceptual, non-empirical work.

This guide provides late-stage polishing for academic manuscripts, specifically targeting the Academy of Management Review (AMR) house style. It helps transform drafts that read like literature reviews or essays into tightly structured, argument-driven theoretical pieces. Key focus areas include establishing a clear theoretical puzzle in the introduction, maintaining continuous argumentative flow, ensuring precise definition of constructs, and articulating propositions without using hypothesis language. It is crucial for authors who need to refine their prose and structure before final subm...

A comprehensive guide for authors facing a revise-and-resubmit (R&R) status in academic journals. It outlines the entire revision lifecycle, from building a structured response matrix and performing substantive re-analysis (re-coding, new experiments) to strategically drafting the point-by-point rebuttal letter. Focuses on maintaining academic rigor, reconciling conflicting reviews, and ensuring methodological consistency before final resubmission.

A guide for creating high-impact academic exhibits for literature reviews (e.g., Annual Reviews of Economics). It teaches how to synthesize findings into structured formats, including 'Who-found-what' summary tables, conceptual framework diagrams, and meta-evidence plots. The focus is on synthesizing existing knowledge across studies, not presenting original estimates. Essential for communicating complex, cross-field research findings to non-specialists.

This framework guides the creation of high-impact academic literature reviews, transforming a mere annotated bibliography into a cohesive, argumentative essay. It helps researchers impose a unifying 'spine'—such as a taxonomy, process model, or levels of analysis—to make complex psychological fields legible and accessible to non-specialist readers. Ideal for synthesizing scattered research into a single, powerful argument.

This guide provides comprehensive strategic advice for authors contributing review articles to the Annual Review of Sociology (ARSoc). It covers how to negotiate the scope of the review with the Editorial Committee, anticipate the specific rigor checks performed by academic reviewers (e.g., completeness, balance, framework), and manage the complex production timeline. It is essential for ensuring the manuscript meets the high standards of academic rigor and balance required for top-tier sociological publications.

A comprehensive guide for authors revising academic review articles, particularly for high-stakes journals. It teaches structured methods for addressing common referee feedback, such as coverage gaps, balance complaints, structural weaknesses, and accessibility issues. Use this guide to transform critical feedback into a robust, publishable revision plan, ensuring methodological transparency and scholarly rigor.