Skill UI

A comprehensive guide to understanding the Journal of Consumer Psychology (JCP) peer review process. This resource helps authors interpret editor decisions (desk-reject, major revision, etc.), sets realistic expectations for the revision timeline, and guides the development of a robust revision strategy, including when new studies are necessary.

This guide details the specific, rigorous peer-review process for the Journal of Monetary Economics (JME). It covers crucial elements such as single-blind anonymity, the distinct "up or out" single-revision rule, the ~50% publication likelihood threshold for R&R, and best practices for preparing suggested referees. Use it when you need to set realistic expectations for journal submissions or strategically interpret complex review decisions.

A comprehensive guide for authors navigating the JMIS editorial process. It explains the EIC-led, double-anonymized review structure, detailing how to interpret critical feedback related to identification, construct validity, and scope. This resource helps set realistic expectations regarding submission posture, revision strategies, and expected timelines, helping authors differentiate fatal framing issues from fixable evidence gaps.

Details the rigorous, masked peer review process for top academic journals. It outlines the critical "dual gate" criteria—theoretical contribution and methodological rigor—and common desk-reject patterns. Use this guide to stress-test your manuscript, structure your arguments, and set realistic expectations for submission and revision rounds.

Provides comprehensive methodological guidelines for designing rigorous studies in public policy and marketing. The framework covers both prospective (e.g., realistic experiments) and retrospective (e.g., DiD, RDD) evaluation designs, emphasizing the necessity of establishing a strong counterfactual basis and ensuring policy relevance in data collection and analysis.

A comprehensive guide detailing the multi-stage evaluation process for submitting to the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (JPSP). It covers section routing, the critical innovation gate, classifying limitations (central vs. peripheral), and understanding the decision categories (Accept/Revise/Reject). This resource helps authors set realistic expectations and correctly interpret reviewer feedback.

A comprehensive guide for authors targeting top-tier security conferences like NDSS. This skill helps determine manuscript fit, refine the academic framing, strengthen evidence, and understand venue-specific expectations (e.g., realistic attacker models, empirical validation). It serves as a strategic tool for conference submission planning, comparing submissions against related venues like USENIX Security and CCS.

A comprehensive guide for structuring academic system evaluation papers (e.g., OSDI). It dictates how to frame experiments around core research questions, select robust baselines, utilize realistic workloads (including adversarial tests), and apply rigorous measurement disciplines (e.g., reporting distributions, p99s) while maintaining conciseness within strict page limits.

This skill provides a rigorous framework to evaluate the broad significance and quality of scientific research. It guides authors in determining if their work meets the standards for top-tier journals like PNAS, Science, or Nature, helping to make realistic calls on the optimal publication venue before drafting or after review.

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.

This guide provides comprehensive best practices for designing and auditing cloud system evaluations, particularly for academic submissions. It mandates that claims must be supported by measured evidence from real or realistic deployments, moving beyond simple simulations. Key metrics emphasized include tail latency (p99), operational cost modeling, and verifiable behavior under scale and multi-tenancy.

This comprehensive guide details the rigorous review process used by top academic journals. It explains the tiered editor structure, the critical double-blind review model, and how to interpret various decision letters (desk reject, reject, revise and resubmit). It helps authors set realistic expectations, understand professional academic integrity rules, and prepare best practices for manuscript submission.