Agent Skills
› brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
› psci-workflow
psci-workflow
GitHubPsychological Science投稿工作流路由器，根据稿件类型和研究阶段分发至对应子技能。处理严格字数与开放科学要求，覆盖从选题到投稿及回复决策信的全流程，不直接撰写内容。
Trigger Scenarios
启动或导航任何Psychological Science手稿且不确定适用哪个子技能时
在稿件类型间选择或收到决定信需要路由时
Install
npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill psci-workflow -g -y
SKILL.md
Frontmatter
{
"name": "psci-workflow",
"description": "Use when starting or navigating any Psychological Science manuscript and you are unsure which sub-skill applies. Use when choosing among manuscript types or returning with a decision letter. Routes by lifecycle stage and manuscript type (Research Article, Registered Report Stage 1\/2, Registered Report with Existing Data, Commentary), and flags the journal's tight word format and open-science requirements. It dispatches; it does not draft content."
}
Psychological Science Workflow Router (psci-workflow)
The orchestrator for a Psychological Science submission. The journal's two defining constraints are a very tight word format and strong open-science requirements — the router makes sure both are handled from the start, then sends the user to the matching skill.
When to trigger
- Starting a new Psychological Science paper and unsure where to begin
- Mid-project and unsure which skill applies next
- Choosing among manuscript types
- Returning with a decision letter (route to
psci-rebuttal)
First question: manuscript type
| Situation | Type | Route note |
|---|---|---|
| Completed empirical study | Research Article | main pipeline below; mind the 2,000-word format |
| Prospective design, no results yet | Registered Report (Stage 1) | go to psci-study-design + psci-review-process early |
| Stage-1 accepted, now have results | Registered Report (Stage 2) | psci-data-analysis → psci-writing-style |
| Confirmatory test on existing data | Registered Report with Existing Data | psci-study-design (declare data provenance) |
| Short critique/reply to a published paper | Commentary / Reply (≤ 1,000 words) | psci-literature-positioning |
Short Reports and standalone Preregistered Direct Replications are no longer accepted — fit your replication/extension into a Research Article or a Registered Report.
Routing map (stage → skill)
Idea / fit? → psci-topic-selection
Where does it sit in the field? → psci-literature-positioning
Theory + hypotheses? → psci-theory-and-hypotheses
Design / power / preregistration? → psci-study-design
Analysis sound + disclosed? → psci-data-analysis
Exhibits (APA, embedded)? → psci-tables-figures
Fits the word format? → psci-writing-style
Open data/materials + statement? → psci-open-science-and-transparency
How will it be judged? → psci-review-process
Ready to submit? → psci-submission
Got an R&R / decision? → psci-rebuttal
Default order
topic-selection → literature-positioning → theory-and-hypotheses → study-design → data-analysis → tables-figures → writing-style → open-science-and-transparency → review-process → submission → rebuttal
For Registered Reports, the Stage 1 package (theory + design + analysis plan) is reviewed before
data — pull study-design and review-process forward.
Worked micro-example — routing a live project (illustrative)
A team has two preregistered attention studies (N = 240; N = 300), open data, and an R2 asking for power and a replication. The router walks them:
Type: Research Article (results in hand, internal replication present).
Entry: not idea-stage → skip topic-selection; they are at analysis/exhibits.
Route: data-analysis (effect sizes + CIs + disclosure)
→ tables-figures (dot/CI figure, embedded)
→ writing-style (fit Intro+Discussion ≤ 2,000)
→ open-science-and-transparency (DOIs + Transparency Statement)
→ submission (preflight) ; on R&R → rebuttal.
Flag: Transparency Statement must sit between Intro and Methods — verify
current placement against the journal's submission guidelines.
Stage-triage table (symptom → skill)
| What the author says | Stage | Route to |
|---|---|---|
| "Is this even right for the journal?" | fit | psci-topic-selection |
| "My intro is 1,400 words and still growing" | format | psci-writing-style |
| "Reviewer says single underpowered study" | design/analysis | psci-study-design + psci-data-analysis |
| "Where does the Transparency Statement go?" | transparency | psci-open-science-and-transparency |
| "I have an R&R" | revision | psci-rebuttal |
| "Should I preregister before running?" | design | psci-study-design (consider RR Stage 1) |
Routing pitfalls specific to this venue
- Sending a confirmatory-prospective project straight to
psci-data-analysisinstead of considering a Registered Report Stage 1 first — the route matters before data exist. - Deferring
psci-open-science-and-transparencyto the end; deposits and DOIs should be built early so the Transparency Statement is drafted from live identifiers, not promised at acceptance.
Anti-patterns
- Writing long, then trying to cut to 2,000 words — design for the format from the start
- Treating open data/materials as optional (they are required; exemptions are case-by-case and graded)
- Forgetting the Research Transparency Statement (it sits between Intro and Methods)
- Choosing a Registered Report after results exist
Output format
【Stage】idea / positioning / theory / design / analysis / exhibits / writing / transparency / review / submit / rebut
【Type】Research Article / Registered Report S1 / S2 / RR-Existing-Data / Commentary
【Route to】psci-<skill>
【Why】one line
【Then】the next skill after that
Supplementary resources
../../resources/external_tools.md— preregistration, repositories, power, effect-size tooling../../resources/official-source-map.md— official Psychological Science URLs behind every fact in this pack
Version History
- 1839142 Current 2026-07-05 14:16
