Agent Skills
› brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
› jim-writing-style
jim-writing-style
GitHub专为《国际市场营销期刊》(JIM) 稿件设计的写作风格优化技能。聚焦摘要精炼（200字内）、引言架构及跨文化表述规范，消除刻板印象，提升学术表达的精准度与决策导向性，不涉及实质内容修正。
Trigger Scenarios
摘要超字数或像目录
引言冗长未达研究问题
存在国家刻板印象或用词不当
文风偏向方法论而非营销高管受众
Install
npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill jim-writing-style -g -y
SKILL.md
Frontmatter
{
"name": "jim-writing-style",
"description": "Use when drafting or revising the prose of a Journal of International Marketing (JIM) manuscript — the 200-word abstract, introduction architecture, precise culture language, and AMA-journal conventions. It polishes expression; substance fixes belong to the upstream skills."
}
Writing in the JIM Voice (jim-writing-style)
When to trigger
- The abstract exceeds 200 words or reads like a table of contents
- The introduction takes three pages to reach the research question
- Drafts slip into country stereotypes or use "culture" as an all-purpose noun
- The paper is written for methodologists when JIM's readership includes global marketing executives
The abstract: 200 words, third person, decision-forward
JIM caps the abstract at 200 words, written in third person (per the AMA/SAGE guidelines — re-check current wording before submission). Structure that works: one sentence of tension (what the field believed or disputed), one of approach (countries, data, design — numbers included), two or three of findings (directions and the cross-national pattern), one of the managerial rule. Kill throat-clearing ("This paper aims to explore…") and write findings as findings: "brand globalness lifts preference in emerging markets but not developed ones," not "the relationship between globalness and preference is examined."
Introduction architecture (≤ 2 pages)
- The cross-border tension, concretely. Open with the phenomenon a global marketer faces — divergent campaign results across markets, an entry decision, a standardization dilemma — or the theoretical inconsistency across country studies. Not with "Globalization has increased…" (the most deleted first sentence in the field).
- Why existing answers fail across borders. Two or three moves: the domestic canon assumed universality; international evidence conflicts; the mechanism was never taken across an institutional boundary.
- What this paper does. Question, countries and design in one breath, and the answer — JIM readers get the finding in the introduction, not a mystery novel.
- Contribution preview. The ledger rows from
jim-contribution-framing, compressed to a sentence each.
Precision rules for writing about countries and cultures
- Nation ≠ culture. Write "consumers in our Japanese sample," not "the Japanese"; attribute differences to the measured dimension, not to nationality as essence.
- Dimension language over stereotype language. "In high uncertainty-avoidance markets" is a claim; "in cautious cultures like Germany" is a stereotype wearing a citation.
- Anchor direction words. "Higher collectivism" than what? Name the comparison explicitly the first time.
- Home/host discipline. Fix the perspective (whose home?) in the first use and never rotate it silently.
- Translation transparency. When quoting items or respondents, state the language of administration; italicize emic terms and gloss them once.
- No development euphemism drift. Pick one taxonomy (emerging vs. developed; income bands) and hold it; "third-world," never.
Sentence-level moves that read as JIM
- Verbs carry the theory: mechanisms amplify, suppress, substitute, signal — they do not "play a role."
- One idea per sentence in the hypothesis build-up; the "because" clause gets its own sentence when the logic is subtle.
- Numbers in prose keep their context: "a 12% adaptation premium in weak-IP markets," not "a significant positive effect."
- Present tense for what the paper does and what theory says; past tense for what the data showed.
- Headings that assert ("Globalness Pays Only Where Institutions Are Weak") beat labels ("Results") where the template allows.
- Prune the double qualifier ("may potentially suggest") — one hedge per claim, chosen deliberately.
AMA-journal surface conventions
Author–date citations in AMA marketing-journal style — e.g., (Katsikeas, Leonidou, and Morgan 2000); "and" spelled out, no ampersand in text; references formatted per the current JIM guidelines (re-check the SAGE author instructions rather than trusting a reference manager's "AMA" preset, which is the medical AMA style — a classic trap). First-person plural is acceptable and often cleaner than passive voice. Define each acronym at first use; CET, PBG, and MNE are not universal knowledge even here.
Checklist
- Abstract ≤ 200 words, third person, findings and managerial rule explicit
- Introduction reaches the question within two paragraphs, answer disclosed
- Every country difference in prose attributed to a dimension, not a nationality
- Home/host perspective and development taxonomy consistent throughout
- Hypothesis prose: one idea per sentence, explicit because-clauses
- Citations in marketing-AMA author–date form, not medical-AMA numeric
- No "globalization has increased" opener; no role-playing verbs
Anti-patterns
- Stereotype shorthand ("collectivist consumers like the Chinese") passing as cultural theory
- The mystery-novel structure that withholds findings until page 30
- Abstract listing topics covered instead of results found
- Reference list auto-formatted in numeric medical-AMA style
- Hedging stacked three deep until the claim disappears
- Translationese from a non-English drafting language left unedited — recruit a native-level pass before submission
Output format
【Abstract】word count / third person / findings + managerial rule present: pass/fix
【Intro】tension → failed answers → question + answer → contributions: pass/fix
【Culture language】dimension-attributed, stereotype-free: pass/fix
【Consistency】home-host, taxonomy, acronyms: pass/fix
【Citations】marketing-AMA author–date verified: pass/fix
【Next skill】jim-submission
Version History
- 9f86f09 Current 2026-07-19 16:33
