Agent Skills
› brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
› jm-theory-development
jm-theory-development
GitHub用于构建《营销学报》(JM) 论文的概念逻辑，基于真实营销现象推导预测。支持理论驱动或实证驱动路线，强调机制解释、边界条件及管理者启示，避免为了理论而理论，确保概念结构服务于实质性营销问题。
Trigger Scenarios
已确定现象和问题，需要构建可辩护的概念论证
审稿人质疑现象背后的原因或机制时
拥有强实证模式但缺乏组织逻辑（实证驱动）
试图将通用理论强行套用于营销发现时
Install
npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill jm-theory-development -g -y
SKILL.md
Frontmatter
{
"name": "jm-theory-development",
"description": "Use when building the conceptual logic for a Journal of Marketing (JM) manuscript — grounding theory in a real-world marketing phenomenon, deriving predictions, and accommodating an empirics-first route. Builds the argument; it does not select the question (jm-topic-selection) or run the analysis (jm-data-analysis)."
}
Theory Development, Phenomenon-First (jm-theory-development)
When to trigger
- The phenomenon and question are set; you need a defensible conceptual argument
- Reviewers will ask "why does this happen?" and "what is the mechanism?"
- You have a strong empirical pattern but no organizing logic (empirics-first)
- You are tempted to bolt a generic theory onto a marketing finding
JM's theory stance: serve the substantive question
Unlike theory-first flagships, JM does not reward theoretical machinery for its own sake. Its bar is substantive insight into a real marketing question. Theory in a JM paper earns its place by explaining a consequential marketing phenomenon and yielding predictions that, when tested, change how managers, policy makers, or society understand the market. The official editorial guidelines frame JM as a bridge between scholarly and practical stakes, so build the minimum sufficient conceptual structure that makes the phenomenon intelligible and the predictions sharp.
Two legitimate routes into JM
- Theory-first: a clear mechanism generates predictions, then data test them. Standard, accepted.
- Empirics-first: a robust, surprising real-world pattern leads, and the conceptual account is developed to explain why it occurs. JM actively solicits empirics-first work (dedicated special issue and editorials) grounded in real-world phenomena. This is encouraged here in a way that is unusual among top journals — but the pattern must still be explained, not merely reported.
Decide which route you are on and signal it honestly; do not disguise an empirics-first paper as theory-first (a HARKing risk).
Build the conceptual logic
- Anchor in the phenomenon: state the marketing fact the theory must explain (e.g., why a pricing, advertising, channel, or brand move produces an unexpected market response).
- Specify the mechanism: the process linking marketing action/condition to the consequential outcome. Name boundary conditions (when it holds, when it reverses).
- Derive predictions at the level you can measure (consumer, segment, brand, firm, market) and that map to outcomes managers/policy makers care about.
- Moderation/mediation: predict the process and the contingencies, not just a main effect, so the substantive story is mechanism-rich.
- Managerial logic: carry the implication through — if the mechanism holds, what should a decision maker do differently?
Checklist
- The phenomenon the theory must explain is stated explicitly
- Route declared (theory-first vs. empirics-first) and handled honestly
- Mechanism named, with boundary conditions
- Predictions at a measurable level, tied to consequential outcomes
- Moderators/mediators predicted, not just a main effect
- Managerial/policy/societal implication of the mechanism articulated
- Conceptual structure is as simple as the substantive insight allows
Anti-patterns
- Theory theater: elaborate framework that adds no substantive insight.
- HARKing: presenting post-hoc explanations of an empirics-first pattern as a priori theory.
- Main-effect-only logic: no mechanism, no contingencies.
- Borrowed-theory veneer: a generic psychological/economic theory pasted on without fit to the marketing phenomenon.
- Mechanism with no managerial consequence: process that no decision maker can act on.
Output format
【Phenomenon to explain】[...]
【Route】theory-first / empirics-first (declared honestly)
【Mechanism】[...]; boundary conditions: [...]
【Predictions】H1...Hk at level [...] → outcome [...]
【Process / contingencies】mediators: [...]; moderators: [...]
【Managerial logic】if mechanism holds → decision maker should [...]
【Next step】jm-literature-positioning
Version History
- 1839142 Current 2026-07-05 13:49
