apsr-topic-selection

GitHub

评估政治学项目是否符合APSR期刊标准并推荐投稿栏目。通过通用重要性、实质贡献、方法严谨性和范围清晰度四项测试,指导作者跨子领域定位,区分Regular Article与Research Note等轨道,避免狭隘或描述性选题。

American-Political-Science-Review-Skills/skills/apsr-topic-selection/SKILL.md brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills

Trigger Scenarios

为APSR选择项目选题或框架 审稿人认为论文过于狭窄 决定在Regular Article和Research Note之间选择 考虑Registered Reports或Replications and Reappraisals

Install

npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill apsr-topic-selection -g -y
More Options

Non-standard path

npx skills add https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/American-Political-Science-Review-Skills/skills/apsr-topic-selection -g -y

Use without installing

npx skills use brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills@apsr-topic-selection

指定 Agent (Claude Code)

npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill apsr-topic-selection -a claude-code -g -y

安装 repo 全部 skill

npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --all -g -y

预览 repo 内 skill

npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --list

SKILL.md

Frontmatter
{
    "name": "apsr-topic-selection",
    "description": "Use when deciding whether a political-science project fits the American Political Science Review (APSR) and which of its five tracks to target. APSR is the discipline's generalist flagship, so the test is general significance across subfields, not subfield novelty alone. Helps frame the question; it does not collect data."
}

Topic Selection & Fit (apsr-topic-selection)

APSR is the general-interest flagship of political science. The bar is not "new to my subfield" — it is "matters to the discipline." Use this skill to pressure-test fit before you invest.

When to trigger

  • Choosing among possible projects or framings for an APSR submission
  • A reviewer/colleague said the paper feels "too narrow" or "subfield-only"
  • Deciding between a Regular Article and a Research Note
  • Considering Registered Reports (prospective design) or Replications and Reappraisals

The APSR fit test

A strong APSR paper usually clears all four:

  1. General significance. A scholar in a different subfield (e.g., a comparativist reading an Americanist paper) should see why it matters. State the stakes for politics broadly — power, institutions, behavior, representation, conflict, justice.
  2. A real contribution, not just a finding. It changes how the field thinks, measures, or argues — a new theory, a decisive test, a reconceptualization, a corrected record.
  3. Credible on its own methodological terms. Quantitative, qualitative, formal, experimental, or interpretive — each is welcome, but each must be done rigorously (see apsr-research-design).
  4. A clean, answerable scope. The question is sharp enough to answer convincingly within ~11,000 words (Article) or ~7,000 (Research Note).

Subfield framing (write past your home subfield)

Home subfield Reach to the discipline by…
American politics tie to representation, institutions, or behavior that travels beyond the US case
Comparative draw the general mechanism, not just the country case; speak to theory others can use
International relations connect to cooperation, conflict, or institutions as general phenomena
Political theory show why the normative/conceptual stakes matter for empirical work or public life
Methodology show what substantive questions the method newly answers — not method for its own sake

Track choice

  • Regular Article — full study, broad claim, < 11,000 words.
  • Research Note — one crisp contribution (a decisive test, a measurement advance, a focused reappraisal), < 7,000 words. Faster to read; do not pad it into an Article.
  • Registered Report — you have a strong design but no results yet; get in-principle acceptance on the design (see apsr-review-process).
  • Replications and Reappraisals — your contribution is to re-examine an influential published result (see apsr-transparency-and-data-policy for materials expectations).

Anti-patterns

  • "It's never been studied in country X" as the whole contribution (descriptive, subfield-only)
  • A clever method demo with no substantive political-science payoff
  • A sprawling question that cannot be answered within the length cap
  • Choosing Article length out of habit when a Research Note would land harder

Output format

【Question】one sentence
【General significance】who outside the subfield cares, and why
【Contribution type】theory / test / measurement / reconceptualization / corrected record
【Track】Regular Article / Research Note / Registered Report / Replication / Synthesis
【Fit verdict】strong / needs reframing / off-fit (why)
【Next】apsr-literature-positioning

Supplementary resources

Version History

  • 1839142 Current 2026-07-05 12:21

Same Skill Collection

AAAI-Skills/skills/aaai-artifact-evaluation/SKILL.md
AAAI-Skills/skills/aaai-author-response/SKILL.md
AAAI-Skills/skills/aaai-camera-ready/SKILL.md
AAAI-Skills/skills/aaai-experiments/SKILL.md
AAAI-Skills/skills/aaai-related-work/SKILL.md
AAAI-Skills/skills/aaai-reproducibility/SKILL.md
AAAI-Skills/skills/aaai-review-process/SKILL.md
AAAI-Skills/skills/aaai-submission/SKILL.md
AAAI-Skills/skills/aaai-supplementary/SKILL.md
AAAI-Skills/skills/aaai-topic-selection/SKILL.md
AAAI-Skills/skills/aaai-workflow/SKILL.md
AAAI-Skills/skills/aaai-writing-style/SKILL.md
AAMAS-Skills/skills/aamas-artifact-evaluation/SKILL.md
AAMAS-Skills/skills/aamas-author-response/SKILL.md
AAMAS-Skills/skills/aamas-camera-ready/SKILL.md
AAMAS-Skills/skills/aamas-experiments/SKILL.md
AAMAS-Skills/skills/aamas-related-work/SKILL.md
AAMAS-Skills/skills/aamas-reproducibility/SKILL.md
AAMAS-Skills/skills/aamas-review-process/SKILL.md
AAMAS-Skills/skills/aamas-submission/SKILL.md
AAMAS-Skills/skills/aamas-supplementary/SKILL.md
AAMAS-Skills/skills/aamas-topic-selection/SKILL.md
AAMAS-Skills/skills/aamas-workflow/SKILL.md
AAMAS-Skills/skills/aamas-writing-style/SKILL.md
Academy-of-Management-Annals-Skills/skills/amann-editor-strategy/SKILL.md
Academy-of-Management-Annals-Skills/skills/amann-evidence-standards/SKILL.md
Academy-of-Management-Annals-Skills/skills/amann-literature-synthesis/SKILL.md
Academy-of-Management-Annals-Skills/skills/amann-organizing-framework/SKILL.md
Academy-of-Management-Annals-Skills/skills/amann-proposal-framing/SKILL.md
Academy-of-Management-Annals-Skills/skills/amann-review-process/SKILL.md
Academy-of-Management-Annals-Skills/skills/amann-revision/SKILL.md
Academy-of-Management-Annals-Skills/skills/amann-submission/SKILL.md
Academy-of-Management-Annals-Skills/skills/amann-tables-figures/SKILL.md
Academy-of-Management-Annals-Skills/skills/amann-topic-selection/SKILL.md
Academy-of-Management-Annals-Skills/skills/amann-workflow/SKILL.md
Academy-of-Management-Annals-Skills/skills/amann-writing-style/SKILL.md
Academy-of-Management-Journal-Skills/skills/amj-contribution-framing/SKILL.md
Academy-of-Management-Journal-Skills/skills/amj-data-analysis/SKILL.md
Academy-of-Management-Journal-Skills/skills/amj-literature-positioning/SKILL.md
Academy-of-Management-Journal-Skills/skills/amj-methods/SKILL.md
Academy-of-Management-Journal-Skills/skills/amj-rebuttal/SKILL.md
Academy-of-Management-Journal-Skills/skills/amj-review-process/SKILL.md
Academy-of-Management-Journal-Skills/skills/amj-submission/SKILL.md
Academy-of-Management-Journal-Skills/skills/amj-tables-figures/SKILL.md
Academy-of-Management-Journal-Skills/skills/amj-theory-development/SKILL.md
Academy-of-Management-Journal-Skills/skills/amj-topic-selection/SKILL.md
Academy-of-Management-Journal-Skills/skills/amj-workflow/SKILL.md
Academy-of-Management-Journal-Skills/skills/amj-writing-style/SKILL.md
Academy-of-Management-Review-Skills/skills/amr-contribution-framing/SKILL.md
Academy-of-Management-Review-Skills/skills/amr-data-analysis/SKILL.md

Metadata

Files
0
Version
9f86f09
Hash
c64f1db6
Indexed
2026-07-05 12:21

Accueil - Wiki
Copyright © 2011-2026 iteam. Current version is 2.155.2. UTC+08:00, 2026-07-29 14:48
浙ICP备14020137号-1 $Carte des visiteurs$