qje-workflow
GitHubQJE投稿工作流路由器，根据稿件当前阶段或症状（如选题、实证、写作等）智能路由至对应的专用子技能，覆盖从选题到反驳信的全流程。
Trigger Scenarios
Install
npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill qje-workflow -g -y
SKILL.md
Frontmatter
{
"name": "qje-workflow",
"description": "Use when deciding which qje-* sub-skill to invoke next, or when sequencing manuscript work from topic selection through rebuttal for a Quarterly Journal of Economics (QJE) submission. Routes — it does not replace — the specialized skills."
}
QJE Workflow Router (qje-workflow)
Overview
This is the router. It does not replace any specialized skill. It tells you which qje- skill to use at the current stage* of a manuscript aimed at the Quarterly Journal of Economics.
Default assumption: unless the user says otherwise, treat the target as QJE — the oldest English-language economics journal (founded 1886, published by Oxford University Press for the Harvard Department of Economics), a top-5 general-interest journal that rewards a big conceptual idea backed by clean, credible empirics. Its five Harvard-based Editors (Barro, Katz, Nunn, Shleifer, Stantcheva as of 2024) desk-decide in roughly two weeks — the fastest at desk among the top-5 — and desk-reject the majority; unconditional acceptance is only ~1-4%. There is no submission fee; initial submission is a single PDF via Editorial Express under double-blind review. Re-verify volatile specifics (current editors, fee, deposit policy) on the official journal page before relying on them.
When to trigger
- The user asks "what should I do next?"
- The user hands over a draft and needs the current bottleneck diagnosed
- Work is ping-ponging between empirics, theory, writing, and response letters
- A QJE decision letter arrived and the user needs to switch into revision mode
Routing table
| Current symptom | Next skill |
|---|---|
| Idea feels small / "so what?" unclear / not obviously top-5 material | qje-topic-selection |
| Contribution relative to the literature is fuzzy or undersold | qje-literature-positioning |
| Empirics rest on OLS + controls; causal claim is undefended | qje-identification |
| Reduced-form result has no conceptual frame / no model | qje-theory-model |
| Main result exists but robustness / appendix is thin | qje-robustness |
| Tables are dense; paper is not figure-forward enough | qje-tables-figures |
| Prose buries the idea; abstract/intro do not land the "big question" | qje-writing-style |
| Accepted-stage data/code deposit, or pre-empting referee replication | qje-replication-package |
| Want to anticipate referee objections before submitting | qje-referee-strategy |
| Ready to submit via Editorial Express; need a preflight checklist | qje-submission |
| Received an R&R; need a response-letter strategy | qje-rebuttal |
Default order
qje-topic-selection— lock the big question + the conceptual takeawayqje-literature-positioning— stake the contribution against the frontierqje-identification— make the causal design bulletproofqje-theory-model— give the result a conceptual frame / modelqje-robustness— build the extensive appendix QJE expectsqje-tables-figures— finalize figure-forward main exhibitsqje-writing-style— make the prose land the idea (abstract + intro last)qje-replication-package— assemble the deposit (also revisit at acceptance)qje-referee-strategy— war-game referee objections pre-submissionqje-submission— Editorial Express preflightqje-rebuttal— after the R&R
qje-writing-styleis a late-stage polish. Do not rewrite the intro before the identification is settled — the argument will change.
Pipeline status check
Fill this in before asking "what next?" — work top-down and take the first NO as the route.
QJE PIPELINE STATUS — first NO wins
Big question answerable in one sentence a non-specialist cares about? NO -> qje-topic-selection
Delta vs. the frontier papers named, not just cited? NO -> qje-literature-positioning
Causal design survives the toughest referee attack you can imagine? NO -> qje-identification
Headline coefficient has a conceptual frame or model behind it? NO -> qje-theory-model
Online appendix already covers the checks referees will demand? NO -> qje-robustness
Main exhibits figure-forward; no table past ~6 columns? NO -> qje-tables-figures
Abstract states question, design, and magnitude in plain prose? NO -> qje-writing-style
QJE Dataverse deposit (data + code) assembled and re-runnable? NO -> qje-replication-package
Referee objections war-gamed and pre-empted in the draft? NO -> qje-referee-strategy
Single anonymized PDF ready for Editorial Express (no fee due)? NO -> qje-submission
Decision letter with an R&R in hand? YES -> qje-rebuttal
Decision shortcuts
- "I have data but no big idea" →
qje-topic-selection - "I don't know who I'm building on or beating" →
qje-literature-positioning - "My DID is TWFE on staggered timing" →
qje-identification - "My result is a coefficient with no story" →
qje-theory-model - "A referee will ask for X robustness" →
qje-robustness - "My main table has 9 columns" →
qje-tables-figures - "The abstract doesn't state the finding" →
qje-writing-style - "Editor wants data and code" →
qje-replication-package - "Submitting tomorrow" →
qje-submission - "Got three referee reports" →
qje-rebuttal
Differences vs. other top-5 stacks
If the paper is methods-first (a new estimator, an asymptotic theorem) it belongs at Econometrica; if it is a structural-IO or macro-quantitative paper leading with a calibrated model, JPE or Econometrica may fit better. QJE's comparative advantage is the big empirical-micro question with a clean natural experiment and a broad lesson (labor, public, development, behavioral, economic history, political economy) — the lineage runs from Akerlof's "Market for 'Lemons'" (QJE 1970) and Mankiw–Romer–Weil (QJE 1992) to Chetty–Hendren–Kline–Saez on mobility (QJE 2014). When in doubt, ask whether a smart non-specialist would care about the answer, not the technique. Operational tells that you are at QJE and not a sibling: no submission fee, one PDF via Editorial Express, double-blind review, ~2-week desk decisions, deposit to the QJE Dataverse (not openICPSR).
Anti-patterns
- Do not skip
qje-literature-positioningand jump to identification — QJE referees judge the contribution first - Do not let
qje-tables-figurespolish exhibits while the identification is still shaky - Do not let
qje-rebuttaldraft a response letter before the revised manuscript exists - Do not treat
qje-robustnessas optional — a thin online appendix reads as an incomplete paper here
Version History
- 1839142 Current 2026-07-05 14:18
