Agent Skills
› brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
› popdevr-literature-positioning
popdevr-literature-positioning
GitHub指导《人口与发展评论》稿件定位，确保同时连接人口科学与发展政策对话。通过精准命名差距、区分贡献及预判异议，避免单一学科局限，提升跨领域影响力。
Trigger Scenarios
撰写或修改引言及贡献段落
审稿人指出忽视发展文献或仅为应用估算
人口分析扎实但未连接发展或政策辩论
需区分与最接近的人口-发展研究的贡献
Install
npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill popdevr-literature-positioning -g -y
SKILL.md
Frontmatter
{
"name": "popdevr-literature-positioning",
"description": "Use when positioning a Population and Development Review (PDR, Wiley \/ Population Council) manuscript against the population-and-development literature so it reads as a broad-interest contribution. PDR readers span demography, economics, environment, and policy, so the paper must engage both the population-science conversation and the development debate it touches. Stakes the contribution; it does not write the lit review."
}
Literature Positioning (popdevr-literature-positioning)
PDR editors screen for whether a paper speaks to the relationships between population and social, economic, and environmental change and to policy — and whether it will interest a readership wider than one sub-discipline. A paper that engages only a narrow applied literature, or only formal demography, reads as off-fit. The goal is to place the paper where both population scientists and development/policy scholars can see the gap and the move.
When to trigger
- Drafting or revising the introduction and the "contribution" paragraph
- A reviewer said you "missed the development literature" or "this is just an applied estimate"
- Your population analysis is solid but the paper does not connect to a development or policy debate
- You need to distinguish your contribution from the closest prior population-and-development work
How PDR wants the literature engaged
- Engage two conversations at once. Identify the open question in population science (a contested trend, an unexplained gap, a measurement dispute) and the development/policy debate it bears on (growth, inequality, gender, climate, ageing systems). PDR's distinctive value is the bridge.
- Honor the synthetic tradition. PDR is famous for conceptual/synthetic essays that reorganize a field (proximate determinants, demographic transition theory, the second demographic transition). If your contribution is a framework, position it against the prior frameworks it revises, not a pile of empirical citations.
- Name the gap precisely. Not "little is known" — say what is mismeasured, undertheorized, or contested in the population-and-development record, and why resolving it matters for both audiences.
- Position the contribution as a move. "Prior work attributes the trend to X; we show development channel Y drives it" — or "the standard framing conflates A and B; we separate them and the policy implication flips."
- Pre-empt the obvious objection. Reviewers are expert demographers and development scholars;
acknowledge the strongest rival explanation and say how the design adjudicates it (hand off to
popdevr-research-design).
Cross-field engagement (a distinctive PDR demand)
| If your paper is… | also engage… |
|---|---|
| an estimate of a fertility/mortality/migration trend | the development or policy literature it bears on |
| a population–environment study | the climate/resource and the demographic literatures together |
| a synthetic/conceptual essay | the prior frameworks it revises, across fields |
| a single-country case | the comparative population-and-development theory it speaks to |
| an ageing/structure paper | the economic-growth, labor, or pension literature it informs |
Anti-patterns
- A "literature dump" with no organizing population-and-development question
- Engaging only formal demography (off-fit toward Demography/Population Studies) or only development economics (off-fit toward a development journal)
- Strawmanning prior estimates or prior frameworks, or hiding the closest competitor
- Self-citation that breaks double-anonymized review (strip self-identifying references — see
popdevr-submission) - Claiming "first to study" when the contribution is incremental
Positioning pass for PDR
Run this as a concrete capability pass. First lock the population process, the development/policy linkage, the data and time scale, the selection/measurement issue, and the uncertainty; then test whether the manuscript addresses PDR's broad audience who inspect both the population evidence and its development meaning.
- Primary move: Build a three-column map: incumbent conversation (population and development), unresolved tension, and this manuscript's delta; include one sibling-venue omission that would make a referee doubt the fit.
- Decision ledger: return
claim / evidence / blocker / next editrows so the next pass can patch the manuscript directly. - Sibling comparison: compare against Demography and Population Studies (methods-forward), Population Research and Policy Review (applied policy), and Studies in Family Planning (programs); if a neighbor has the stronger audience claim, recommend re-routing before polishing.
- Verification floor: before submission-ready advice, re-open
resources/official-source-map.mdfor volatile rules and name the one unresolved fact that could change the recommendation.
Output format
【Conversation】the open population question + the development/policy debate it touches
【Key works】the 3-6 that define them (incl. prior frameworks if a synthetic essay)
【Gap】what is mismeasured / unexplained / contested across both
【Move】how this paper changes the population-and-development record or framing
【Strongest rival】and how the design will adjudicate it
【Next】popdevr-theory-building
Supplementary resources
../../resources/external_tools.md— population + development data sources to anchor the literature../../resources/official-source-map.md— PDR aims, scope, and broad-interest standard
Version History
- 1839142 Current 2026-07-05 14:12
