Skill UI

This guide helps researchers navigate and interpret the rigorous, multi-round developmental review process of the Academy of Management Review (AMR). It explains the core criteria (theoretical contribution, logical soundness) and decision signals, assisting authors in understanding editor priorities and triaging reviewer comments before drafting a response. It is a strategic guide for understanding the academic feedback process.

This comprehensive skill guides authors through the rigorous submission process for Angewandte Chemie International Edition. It provides detailed criteria covering scientific scope, required novelty, evidentiary standards for claims (mechanistic, physical), structural formatting, and common desk-reject triggers, ensuring manuscripts meet the journal's high academic bar.

A comprehensive guide for mathematicians on drafting a highly structured and impactful cover letter for submissions to top-tier journals. It teaches authors how to concisely convey the main theorem, its significance to the field, the specific advance over prior work, and why the journal is the ideal venue, maximizing the chances of initial editor interest.

A comprehensive guide detailing the rigorous academic review process for submissions to elite journals. It covers initial editor triage, double-anonymized refereeing by interdisciplinary experts, interpreting complex decision letters, and diagnosing failure points (scope, theory, evidence). Learn how to anticipate critiques and structure effective revisions for publication.

A comprehensive preflight checklist designed for authors submitting manuscripts to the Accounting, Organizations and Society (AOS) journal via Editorial Manager. It verifies all necessary components, including double-anonymization compliance, declarations (AI, ethics, interests), article types, and open-access decisions, ensuring readiness before the final submission.

This guide provides a detailed strategy for responding to a Revise-and-Resubmit (R&R) decision for high-stakes academic journals. It teaches authors how to structure a persuasive cover letter, address conflicting reviewer demands, and reconcile feedback without weakening the paper's core contribution. Focuses on maintaining scholarly rigor and managing editor expectations.

A comprehensive preflight checklist for submitting manuscripts to the American Political Science Review (APSR). This guide emphasizes the critical steps for double-anonymous review, including stripping file metadata, properly anonymizing text to prevent author identification, and adhering to strict formatting rules (APSA Style, word counts, and abstract limits). Use this before uploading to Editorial Manager.

This guide provides comprehensive strategic advice for authors writing commissioned review articles for the Annual Review of Economics (ARE). It covers essential topics such as scope negotiation with the Editorial Committee, anticipating the rigorous criteria used by expert referees (e.g., completeness, balance, and framework), managing the author-editor relationship, and adhering to strict academic and production deadlines. It ensures the resulting work maintains the highest standards of rigor and scholarly balance.

This guide provides a comprehensive strategy for authors managing the complex production relationship with academic editors. It details how to proactively manage crucial elements such as scope fit, assigned length, strict deadlines, and potential overlaps. Use this when an invitation has been accepted and continuous coordination with the editorial and production teams is required to ensure timely and rigorous publication.

This guide details the critical process of revising a scholarly review article following feedback from journal editors or peer reviewers (e.g., ARPsych). It provides a structured methodology for addressing coverage gaps, ensuring balance, correcting inaccuracies, and maintaining the integrity of the manuscript's core argument (the 'spine'). It covers everything from point-by-point response letters to handling final copyediting queries.

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.

This guide details the rigorous double-blind peer review process used by major art history journals. It helps authors understand what expert referees and editors focus on—such as the originality of the argument, close visual analysis, and documentary evidence—to pre-empt common objections and significantly improve manuscript quality before submission. It emphasizes mastering academic standards and anonymity protocols.