Topic Selection & Scope Fit (jhr-topic-selection)

When to trigger

• You are choosing a target journal and JHR is a candidate
• The paper's title or framing uses "human resources / HR" language
• You want to confirm a policy-relevant micro question is in scope before submitting
• Deciding whether a descriptive paper is JHR-worthy

The single most important gate: scope

JHR's name is misleading. It is a leading empirical-microeconomics journal, founded 1965 at the UW-Madison Institute for Research on Poverty, and it does NOT consider management or personnel ("HR management") research. The nonrefundable $175 fee is not refunded for out-of-scope papers — so this check has real money attached. If your paper is about firm HR practices, recruitment systems, or organizational behavior, JHR is the wrong venue.

What JHR actually wants

Empirical microeconomics with a public-policy orientation, in one of its core fields:

• Labor economics — employment, wages, labor supply, minimum wage, unions
• Economics of education — attainment, returns to schooling, school/teacher effects
• Health economics — insurance, health behaviors, birth/mortality outcomes
• Development economics — household welfare, schooling and health in low-income settings
• Discrimination — labor-market and other gaps (audit studies, decompositions)
• Retirement — Social Security, claiming, saving, aging

A JHR paper typically pairs a policy-relevant question with a credible empirical design on real microdata, and draws a lesson a policymaker or applied economist would care about.

Fit checklist

• The question is economics, not HR-management/organizational behavior
• It sits in a core JHR field (labor / education / health / development / discrimination / retirement)
• There is a clear policy relevance or first-order applied-micro lesson
• A causal design is available (or the descriptive facts are genuinely new and disciplined)
• The data can ultimately be deposited (or waivered) under JHR's CC0 policy

Anti-patterns

• Submitting a "human resource management" paper because the name seems to match
• A narrow within-subfield estimate with no policy lesson
• Theory with no empirical content (JHR is empirical)
• A descriptive paper whose facts are neither new nor policy-relevant

Borderline calls and how to make them

Two-paper vignette

• Paper A: county-staggered childcare-subsidy expansion, linked mother-child administrative records, event-study evidence on maternal employment and child outcomes. Fits JHR on all three axes: field (labor/education), design (rollout DID), policy lever (subsidy generosity). Proceed.
• Paper B: "How our talent-acquisition platform reduced time-to-hire" with internal firm metrics. The word "human resources" in the title is exactly the trap the scope rule exists for — redirect before spending the fee.

Pre-commitment questions

Before locking JHR as the target, answer in writing:

1. Which JHR field claims this paper, and which recent work in that field is the natural shelf neighbor? (Scope lists can shift; confirm against the journal's current author guidelines.)
2. What variation will referees test: rollout timing, a cutoff, a lottery, or an instrument?
3. Can the data eventually satisfy the CC0 deposit or a defensible waiver?
4. Is the policy lesson statable in one sentence a state legislator's analyst could act on?

Output format

【In scope?】empirical micro + policy, not HR-mgmt? [Y/N]
【Field】labor / education / health / development / discrimination / retirement
【Policy lesson】one sentence
【Design available】RCT / RDD / DID / IV / decomposition / descriptive
【Verdict】proceed to jhr-literature-positioning, or redirect venue