Agent Skills
› brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
› devpsych-literature-positioning
devpsych-literature-positioning
GitHub用于在《发展心理学》期刊投稿时精准定位研究贡献。通过明确发展性空白（变化、年龄或机制），区分于其他期刊，强调对发展理论的贡献，适用于引言撰写及应对审稿人质疑。
Trigger Scenarios
起草或修改引言部分
审稿人指出贡献增量不足或非发展性
需要将具体发现关联至广泛发展问题
决定引用哪些发展文献及对比竞品期刊
Install
npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill devpsych-literature-positioning -g -y
SKILL.md
Frontmatter
{
"name": "devpsych-literature-positioning",
"description": "Use when positioning a Developmental Psychology (APA) manuscript against the developmental literature. Positioning here must establish a developmental gap (what is unknown about change, age, or mechanism) and the contribution, while distinguishing the venue from siblings such as Child Development and Developmental Science. Stakes the contribution; it does not write the literature review."
}
Literature Positioning (devpsych-literature-positioning)
Developmental Psychology expects an Introduction that names a developmental gap — what is unresolved about change, age, or mechanism — and states the contribution to theory about development, not just to a topic. Positioning is where many submissions are judged "interesting but not developmental"; this skill makes the developmental stakes legible.
When to trigger
- Drafting or tightening the Introduction
- A reviewer said the contribution is "incremental," "not clearly developmental," or "already known"
- Connecting a specific age/trajectory finding to a broad developmental question
- Deciding which developmental literatures (and which sibling-journal work) to cite
How to position a developmental contribution
- Open with the developmental question and its stakes, not a topic history. Why does the change (or its mechanism) matter for theories of development?
- Name the developmental gap precisely. Is the unknown about whether an effect changes with age, how it changes (shape, timing, sensitive period), for whom (moderators), or why (mechanism)? Avoid "little is known about development of X."
- State the contribution early. By the end of a tight Introduction the reader knows the developmental claim, the design that supports it, and what is new (first within-person test, a trajectory shape, a boundary age, a mechanism).
- Cite the developmental conversation, not everything. Anchor on the works that define the developmental question and the closest prior longitudinal/age-comparative studies.
- Distinguish the venue. Position relative to work in Developmental Psychology and its siblings; show why this is a broad lifespan-development advance.
Developmental-gap typology (pick the kind of gap you fill)
| Gap kind | What is unknown | What your contribution adds |
|---|---|---|
| Existence | does the effect change with age at all? | an age contrast or within-person test |
| Form | what shape/timing does change take? | a trajectory (slope/curvature, sensitive period) |
| Population | for whom does the trajectory differ? | a moderated-change finding |
| Mechanism | what process drives the change? | a mediated / transactional test |
| Generality | does a known effect hold across ages/cohorts? | replication across ages with invariance |
Worked micro-example (illustrative)
A longitudinal self-regulation package wants to position against a large but mostly cross-sectional effortful-control literature. Weak framing: "Prior work has studied effortful control (refs 1–25)." Venue-fit framing:
Stakes: Effortful control is a load-bearing construct in developmental
theories of adjustment, but its within-person growth is under-tested.
Gap (Form + Mechanism): Most evidence is cross-sectional; how effortful
control grows across early childhood, and whether parenting
steepens that growth, is unresolved.
Contribution (by paragraph two): A three-wave latent-growth test (ages 4-8)
estimates the trajectory and tests scaffolding as a driver of slope.
Distinction: Broad developmental-theory advance (life-span change + mechanism),
appropriate to this venue rather than a single-construct topical note.
Positioning-stage reviewer pushback and the venue fix
| Reviewer pushback | Developmental Psychology fix |
|---|---|
| "Not clearly developmental" | recast the gap as change/age/mechanism, not a topic survey |
| "Incremental" | name the specific developmental unknown (form, timing, mechanism) you settle |
| "'First to show' overclaim" | downgrade to "first within-person test of"; cite the cross-sectional priors honestly |
| "Reads like a sibling-journal paper" | state the broad lifespan-development theory advance this venue wants |
Anti-patterns
- A topic-by-topic literature tour with no developmental gap
- Positioning a cross-sectional age difference as if it settled a change question
- Burying the contribution after pages of background
- "First to show" claims for an incremental, single-age effect
- Citing exhaustively to seem thorough instead of anchoring the developmental conversation
Output format
【Developmental question + stakes】why the change/mechanism matters for theory
【Gap kind】existence / form / population / mechanism / generality
【Contribution】stated early? what is new about the developmental claim
【Anchor citations】defining works + closest longitudinal/age-comparative priors
【Venue distinction】why Developmental Psychology, not a sibling
【Next】devpsych-study-design
Supplementary resources
../../resources/exemplars/library.md— verified Developmental Psychology papers by method × developmental domain../../resources/official-source-map.md— scope statement and sibling-journal boundaries
Version History
- 1839142 Current 2026-07-05 12:51
