Skill UI

This guide teaches authors how to properly position their research contribution within a specialized academic field, particularly for journals like Research Policy. It instructs users on how to move beyond simple citation lists by identifying a clear, theoretical knowledge gap (a tension) in the existing literature. By anchoring the work in foundational canons and naming the prevailing consensus, authors can structure a compelling argument that defines what the field should believe after reading the paper.

This guide provides a framework for selecting and defending the appropriate research methodology for innovation-studies claims. It covers best practices for patent/bibliometric analysis, causal policy evaluation (e.g., DID, RDD), survey design, case studies, and mixed methods. It emphasizes that the method must fit the construct, not merely the indicator, guiding users to defend the underlying theoretical mechanism.

A comprehensive guide for drafting a structured, point-by-point rebuttal letter in response to major/minor research policy revisions. It teaches how to synthesize conflicting referee comments into a coherent plan, defend core innovation claims with evidence, and manage the handling editor's expectations, ensuring the original contribution is protected throughout the revision process.

A comprehensive guide for authors detailing the entire academic submission lifecycle for Research Policy (RP). It covers the double-blind review process, the role of handling editors, how desk rejects are assessed (scope vs. contribution), and strategies for planning major and minor revisions. This resource helps authors set realistic expectations and plan their next steps before drafting the formal response letter.

Provides a comprehensive preflight checklist for authors submitting manuscripts to Research Policy (RP) via the Elsevier online system. It guides authors through critical steps, including double-blind anonymization, confirming article scope (anchoring in innovation studies), selecting the correct article type (Full Article vs. Research Note), and ensuring all required declarations (data/code, funding) are included before final submission.

This guide provides best practices for building self-explanatory, high-impact exhibits for interdisciplinary academic manuscripts. It covers the structured design of complex visualizations, including regression tables, bibliometric maps, event-study plots, and qualitative data structures. The goal is to ensure every figure and table carries the core innovation mechanism and is immediately interpretable by diverse readers (e.g., policymakers, managers, and economists).

This guide assists in building a robust theoretical framework for research policy manuscripts. It moves beyond simple empirical measurement by structuring the argument using the innovation-mechanism chain (antecedent → mechanism → outcome). It teaches how to connect firm-level findings up to the systemic policy or institutional level, ensuring the contribution is theoretically advanced and legible across disciplines (e.g., economic, managerial, STS).

This guide assists researchers in scoping their academic questions to ensure alignment with specialized journals like Research Policy. It provides detailed criteria for determining if a study focuses on the emergence, diffusion, or governance of innovation systems, rather than purely economic or strategy-focused outcomes. Use it to frame your work to speak directly to innovation scholars and policymakers.

This router guides authors through the entire lifecycle of a manuscript targeting specialized academic journals like Research Policy (RP). It determines the optimal next step—whether it's refining the theory, developing methods, performing data analysis, structuring arguments, or responding to reviewer critiques (rebuttal). It ensures the paper maintains a strong focus on innovation studies and policy implications.

This skill is designed to polish the writing style and structure of interdisciplinary Research Policy manuscripts. It ensures that the core innovation-studies argument is clear and accessible to diverse readerships, including economists, management scholars, and policymakers. It focuses on structuring the narrative, translating field-specific jargon, and making the policy contribution visible and impactful throughout the paper.

This guide outlines the comprehensive policy and architecture required for submitting a fully reproducible replication package to The Review of Economics and Statistics (REStat). It details how to structure the repository, including data, master scripts, and the README file, ensuring that every result can be traced and regenerated by other researchers.

This tool guides the transformation of a coded, screened corpus into a robust analytical spine for academic synthesis. It moves beyond simple annotated bibliography summaries by requiring the construction of a conceptual framework (e.g., taxonomy, theoretical model, tensions). This structure ensures the review advances theory or policy, providing a coherent, critical argument for the field.