Skill UI

This skill guides researchers on how to assess the suitability of their manuscript for the journal Research on Economics and Management. It provides detailed information on the journal's scope, required theoretical depth, methodological rigor (e.g., internal validity, identification strategies), structural expectations, and common pitfalls to avoid, ensuring submissions are properly framed and targeted.

A comprehensive skill designed to help users assess the suitability of their economics or management manuscript for 'Research on Financial and Economic Issues'. It provides detailed guidelines on journal positioning, submission requirements, thematic preferences, and common rejection pitfalls, ensuring authors align their work with the journal's scope and style.

This comprehensive skill guides authors targeting Research Policy. It details the journal's scope, required evidence standards, house style, and common publishing pitfalls. It helps authors frame their work to fit the interdisciplinary field of innovation studies (STI), covering topics from R&D and technology policy to economic implications.

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 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 strategy guides researchers in anticipating the specific, rigorous methodological objections raised by top-tier academic referees, especially in applied econometrics. It provides a systematic map connecting econometric designs (like DID, IV, RD) to common threats (e.g., measurement error, bias, specification issues). Users can pre-empt these criticisms by structuring their manuscript to include necessary defenses, robustness checks, and scope limitations before formal submission.

This guide is designed for advanced academic research, helping scholars evaluate whether their current research idea meets the rigorous standards of top-tier economics journals (e.g., REStud). It teaches how to distill complex findings into a single, original, and technically excellent contribution, diagnosing potential weaknesses in novelty, scope, and general interest.

A comprehensive guide for developing a rigorous, a-priori protocol for systematic reviews and meta-analyses in educational research. This tool ensures methodological transparency by defining the scope (PICO), eligibility criteria, search strategies, screening procedures, and synthesis plans before any data is collected, protecting the integrity of the research findings.

Provides a structured framework for vetting potential review topics for high-impact educational journals. It guides researchers through four critical fit tests—educational importance, literature maturity, current need for synthesis, and scope tractability—before committing to a full search or writing a protocol, ensuring the proposal genuinely advances academic understanding.

This skill is a comprehensive fit and venue-selection tool designed for authors targeting top-tier finance journals, such as Review of Finance. It helps authors assess whether their manuscript meets the journal's rigorous standards across scope, methodology, evidence, and structure. Use it to re-frame your work, check for potential desk-reject risks, and identify suitable alternative elite-field venues before submission.

This skill is a comprehensive guidance tool designed to help authors determine the suitability and required scope for submitting manuscripts to Reviews of Modern Physics (RMP). It outlines the journal's authoritative positioning, the necessary synthesis depth, expected structure (Colloquia vs. Reviews), and high academic bar, ensuring that submissions serve as definitive community references rather than primary research reports. Use this before submitting to check for conceptual fit and structural completeness.