Skill UI

This guide teaches the strategic art of positioning a theoretical paper for top-tier academic journals, specifically focusing on the requirements of the Journal of the Association for Information Systems (JAIS). It details how to structure the introduction to establish a 'live conversation,' cite the field's canon, and justify the contribution's unique place, moving beyond simple gap-spotting. Mastering positioning is crucial for passing the editor's initial fit assessment.

This guide helps authors elevate their literature review or related work section from a simple list of papers to a structured, high-impact academic argument. It provides methodologies for building multi-dimensional classification frameworks, defining the technical 'delta' (unique contribution) in original research, and ensuring systematic coverage of both domestic and international literature for top-tier academic journals.

A comprehensive guide for academic writers on how to structure the Introduction of a manuscript for top-tier educational psychology journals. It teaches authors how to move beyond simple literature reviews by precisely defining the open question, identifying the gap in the literature, and clearly stating the novel contribution and theoretical advance of their study.

This guide provides expert advice on structuring the literature review for top-tier finance journals (e.g., JFE). It teaches authors to move beyond simple chronological listing, instead mapping the core academic debates, pinpointing the exact boundaries of the closest existing work, and articulating concrete, theoretically motivated gaps that the new research fills. This is essential for convincing domain experts of novel contribution.

A detailed guide for authors submitting to the Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis (JFQA). It teaches how to precisely position a quantitative finance paper against the existing academic literature, moving beyond simple surveys to define a sharp, unique contribution gap for reviewers. Focuses on structuring the argument using a 'three-paragraph compression' method.

A guide for authors submitting to top-tier management journals (like JMS). It teaches how to crystallize raw research findings into a single, powerful, one-sentence theoretical contribution claim. This framework ensures the paper clearly defines what theoretical conversation it engages, what prior understanding it revises, and under what scope conditions, moving beyond simple results reporting.

This guide teaches authors how to structure the introduction of academic manuscripts to clearly articulate the theoretical gap, the unique scientific contribution, and the specific fit for a target journal (e.g., JAP). It moves beyond simple literature reviews, focusing on argument construction and scholarly positioning against prior work and competing venues.

This guide provides a structured framework for authors responding to Major Revision (R&R) decisions from high-tier academic journals like JOM. It emphasizes moving beyond simple point-by-point responses to prioritize the Department Editor's decisive concerns, resolving deep empirical method-check issues (e.g., endogeneity), and maintaining a clear, operations-focused narrative across multiple revision rounds.

This skill is a comprehensive guide for authors submitting manuscripts to top public economics journals, such as the Journal of Public Economics (JPubE). It evaluates the manuscript's fit, framing, methodological rigor, and policy relevance. It goes beyond simple estimates, focusing on establishing a public-finance mechanism, ensuring credible identification (e.g., DiD, RDD), and connecting findings explicitly to welfare or optimal policy outcomes. Use this when targeting highly specialized public-finance venues and needing to refine the narrative structure and empirical arguments.

This guide helps authors structure their academic manuscripts for top-tier Information Systems journals (e.g., MISQ). It emphasizes moving beyond simple gap-spotting by requiring authors to explicitly join an established IS conversation, keep the IT artifact central to the theory, and clearly differentiate the contribution from parent disciplines and adjacent venues.

This guide provides a structured approach for writing high-stakes author responses to academic paper reviews (like those in OOPSLA). It teaches authors how to move beyond simple rebuttals by framing every concern as an argument supporting a desired outcome (Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject). Focus areas include quantifying feasibility, structuring the argument for committee skimming, and strategically shaping the scope of required revisions.

This guide details how to structure and write the 'Related Work' section for highly competitive academic venues like PLDI. It emphasizes moving beyond simple citation listings by forcing the author to identify and articulate the specific technical 'delta' (improvement) their paper provides over every prior technique, while also covering inter-conference comparisons and proper bibliography formatting.