Claude Skills by brycewang-stanford

Use when writing or sharpening the conceptual contribution of a Journal of Consumer Research (JCR) manuscript and drafting the mandatory 300-word Consumer Relevance and Contribution Statement. Turns results into an explicit theory contribution about consumption; it does not run the studies (jcr-data-analysis).

Use when running and reporting the evidence for a Journal of Consumer Research (JCR) manuscript — process evidence (mediation/moderation) for behavioral experiments, or trustworthy interpretation for Consumer Culture Theory (CCT) work — plus robustness and the transparency reporting JCR requires. Executes and reports; it does not design the studies (jcr-methods).

Use when positioning a Journal of Consumer Research (JCR) manuscript — joining a live consumer-research conversation across disciplines, problematizing rather than gap-spotting, and separating the paper from JCP, JMR, JM, and disciplinary psychology/sociology outlets.

Use when choosing or stress-testing the research design for a Journal of Consumer Research (JCR) manuscript — multi-study behavioral experiments, interpretive Consumer Culture Theory (CCT) fieldwork, mixed designs, or a Registered Report — so the evidence matches the conceptual claim. Designs the studies; it does not analyze them (jcr-data-analysis).

Use when responding to a Journal of Consumer Research (JCR) revise-and-resubmit — planning the revision, running new studies or analyses, satisfying the transparency requirements that become mandatory at invited revision, and drafting a point-by-point response letter for double-anonymized re-review. Drafts the response after the revision is real; it does not interpret the decision (jcr-review-process).

Use when understanding how Journal of Consumer Research (JCR) review and decisions work — double-anonymized review, the co-editor/AE/reviewer structure, decision letters, and what reviewers from different disciplines expect — before submitting or when a decision arrives. Sets expectations; the actual response is drafted in jcr-rebuttal.

Use when running the final pre-submission preflight for a Journal of Consumer Research (JCR) manuscript — ScholarOne portal, anonymization for double-anonymized review, the 60-page cap, the 200-word abstract, the 300-word Consumer Relevance and Contribution Statement, the Step-6 Data Collection Statement, Chicago/Word formatting, and the transparency apparatus. Checks readiness to submit; it does not handle the post-decision response (jcr-rebuttal).

Use when building the exhibits for a Journal of Consumer Research (JCR) manuscript — study-summary tables, mediation/moderation results, interaction and spotlight plots, conceptual/process figures, and CCT data displays — in Chicago house style, mindful of the 60-page embedding rule and the web appendix. Late-stage polish; settle the contribution first (jcr-contribution-framing).

Use when building the conceptual core of a Journal of Consumer Research (JCR) manuscript — the psychological process and hypotheses for an experiments paper, or the interpretive theorization for a Consumer Culture Theory (CCT) paper. Builds the mechanism; it does not run the studies (jcr-methods/jcr-data-analysis).

Use when shaping or stress-testing a research question for the Journal of Consumer Research (JCR) — confirming it is a genuine consumer-behavior question with a conceptual contribution, and that JCR (not JCP, JMR, or JM) is the right venue.

Use when deciding which jcr-* sub-skill to invoke next, or when sequencing manuscript work from topic selection through rebuttal for a Journal of Consumer Research (JCR) manuscript. Routes — it does not replace — the specialized skills.

Use when polishing the prose of a Journal of Consumer Research (JCR) manuscript — front-loading the consumer insight, writing for an interdisciplinary readership, and conforming to JCR/Chicago house style, the 200-word abstract, and double-anonymized anonymization. Late-stage polish; do not use it to rescue a thin contribution (jcr-contribution-framing).

Use when sharpening the stated contribution of a Journal of Corporate Finance (JCF) manuscript — turning a result into a crisp "what is new and why it matters to corporate finance" claim that survives the editor's desk screen. It frames the pitch (abstract, intro, cover letter); it does not run analysis.

Use when building and running the empirical analysis for a Journal of Corporate Finance (JCF) paper — assembling WRDS-era firm panels (Compustat/CRSP/SDC/DealScan), constructing variables, estimating with fixed effects and clustered errors, and layering robustness. It guides the empirical build; pair it with jcf-identification-strategy for the design itself.

Use when designing or defending the causal identification strategy for a Journal of Corporate Finance (JCF) empirical paper — choosing and stressing a design (DID/staggered shocks, IV/GMM, RDD, event study, matching) for firm-level data with endogenous corporate decisions. It evaluates and hardens the design; it does not run the regressions.

Use when positioning a manuscript within the corporate-finance literature for the Journal of Corporate Finance (JCF) — locating the paper in the right strand (capital structure, governance, payout, contracting, M&A, international) and stating the marginal contribution. It frames citations and gap statements; it does not draft full sections.

Use when preparing a revise-and-resubmit response for the Journal of Corporate Finance (JCF) — a point-by-point reply to two-or-more single-anonymized reviewers and the handling editor, reconciling divergent demands without over-claiming. It structures the response letter and revision plan; it does not run new analysis on its own.

Use when preparing the data-availability statement and code/data archive for a Journal of Corporate Finance (JCF) submission under Elsevier "Research Data" Option C — stating data availability at submission and depositing or explaining why data cannot be shared. It builds the data/code deliverables; it is not a substitute for vendor-license compliance.

Use to understand and plan around the Journal of Corporate Finance (JCF) review process — single-anonymized (single-blind) refereeing, a minimum of two reviewers, an active desk-rejection policy, and required Elsevier declarations. It sets expectations and timing strategy; it does not draft the manuscript or the rebuttal.

Use when running the final pre-submission preflight for the Journal of Corporate Finance (JCF) via Editorial Manager — the US$340 non-refundable fee, single-anonymized (non-anonymized) manuscript, ≤250-word abstract, author-date "your paper, your way" references, Option C data statement, declarations, and the optional free SSRN preprint. Final checks; it does not draft content.

Use when building the tables and figures for a Journal of Corporate Finance (JCF) empirical paper — summary statistics, main regression tables with fixed effects and clustering disclosed, event-study/CAR plots, and self-contained notes. It shapes the exhibits; pair with jcf-data-analysis for the underlying estimates.

Use when judging whether a corporate-finance question fits the Journal of Corporate Finance (JCF) and whether it suits a full-length or "shorter format" paper. Helps scope the idea to JCF's empirical/theoretical corporate-finance remit; it does not run analysis or draft text.

Use to orchestrate the full Journal of Corporate Finance (JCF) manuscript lifecycle — from a corporate-finance question through identification, robustness, the US$340 fee submission via Editorial Manager, single-anonymized review, and R&R. Routes to the other eleven jcf-* skills; it coordinates, it does not draft content.

Use when drafting or polishing prose for a Journal of Corporate Finance (JCF) manuscript — the ≤250-word abstract, 1–7 keywords, author-date (Harvard) in-text citations, and the "your paper, your way" first-submission reference flexibility. It enforces JCF house conventions; it does not generate results.

Use when sharpening the development-economics takeaway of a Journal of Development Economics (JDE) manuscript — the explicit "what this teaches about development" claim that an editor and referees can restate in one sentence. Frames the contribution; it is not a writing-polish pass.

Use when estimation, heterogeneity, attrition, measurement, or inference choices need to meet Journal of Development Economics (JDE) empirical norms — clustered field data, survey measurement error, and treatment-effect heterogeneity in low- and middle-income settings. Covers the analysis itself, not the identifying design.

Use when the causal identification strategy is the bottleneck for a Journal of Development Economics (JDE) manuscript — RCT/field experiment, DID, IV, RDD in low- and middle-income settings. Stress-tests the design against development-economics empirical norms before tables are drafted.

Use when staking a manuscript's contribution against the development-economics literature for the Journal of Development Economics (JDE). Positions the paper at the frontier; it does not write a standalone survey.

Use when responding to a Journal of Development Economics (JDE) decision — drafting the response letter and revision plan for a single-anonymized R&R, including the short-paper track's single 4-week limited-revision round. Strategy for the response; it does not rewrite the manuscript.

Use when assembling the data and code deposit for a Journal of Development Economics (JDE) submission or accepted paper — JDE's mandatory replication policy, Mendeley Data hosting, and the fact that data/code can be requested at the review stage. Builds the package; it does not run the analysis.

Use when choosing a submission route or understanding how peer review works at the Journal of Development Economics (JDE) — the full-length, AER-Insights-style short-paper, and pre-results review (Registered Reports) tracks, single-anonymized review, timelines, and the submission cap. Explains the pipeline; it is not the final preflight.

Use when running the final pre-submission preflight for the Journal of Development Economics (JDE) via Editorial Manager — route selection, single-anonymized review, no-fee policy, replication readiness, language consistency, and route-specific length caps. Final checks; it does not draft content.

Use when designing the main exhibits for a Journal of Development Economics (JDE) manuscript — figure-forward presentation of treatment effects, heterogeneity, and event studies for development settings, with self-contained notes. Shapes exhibits; it does not run the estimation.

Use when judging whether a research question fits the Journal of Development Economics (JDE) — a first-order question about low- and middle-income economies and the process of economic development. Tests topic fit before identification or drafting begins.

Use when deciding which jde-* sub-skill to invoke next, or when sequencing manuscript work from topic selection through rebuttal for a Journal of Development Economics (JDE) submission. Routes — it does not replace — the specialized skills.

Use when polishing prose for a Journal of Development Economics (JDE) manuscript so the development question, answer, and policy stakes land for a field audience. A late-stage polish; do not rewrite the intro before identification and framing are settled.

Use when a Journal of Econometrics (JoE) manuscript has a correct result but fails to articulate why it matters to econometrics. Frames the methodological contribution as a general, reusable advance rather than a narrow technical fix.

Use when designing the Monte Carlo study and empirical illustration that demonstrate a Journal of Econometrics (JoE) method works in finite samples. Covers size/power simulation design, DGP stress tests, and the role of the applied illustration relative to the theory.

Use when the assumptions, regularity conditions, identification result, and asymptotic theory of a Journal of Econometrics (JoE) methodological paper are the bottleneck. Stress-tests the formal core — what is assumed, what is proved, and how general it is — before tables are drafted.

Use when the contribution of a Journal of Econometrics (JoE) manuscript relative to the econometrics literature is fuzzy or undersold. Locates the paper precisely against the nearest estimators, tests, and asymptotic results so referees see the methodological delta.

Use after a Journal of Econometrics (JoE) revision request to plan the response letter and revised manuscript — handling technical referee objections on assumptions, asymptotics, and Monte Carlo, and resubmitting via Editorial Express (note the fee can re-trigger on resubmissions over one year old).

Use to prepare code and data materials for a Journal of Econometrics (JoE) submission under Elsevier's data-citation and availability norms, including reproducible Monte Carlo and the [dataset] reference tag. Reflects that JoE has no mandatory central replication archive — replication is encouraged, not universally mandated.

Use to understand and navigate the Journal of Econometrics (JoE) editorial process — single-anonymized review, editor screening before a minimum of two referees, the three submission tracks (Regular/Annals/Themed), Guest Associate Editors, and what referees of a methods paper look for.

Use when running the final pre-submission preflight for the Journal of Econometrics (JoE) via Editorial Express — the USD $75 fee with proof-of-payment upload, PDF-only single-file format (~40 pages), 250-word abstract, single-anonymized review, and track selection. Final checks; it does not draft content.

Use when building the Monte Carlo tables and theory-illustrating figures for a Journal of Econometrics (JoE) manuscript. Covers size/power table conventions, estimator-comparison layout, and figures that make asymptotic and finite-sample behavior legible.

Use when deciding whether a project is a genuine methodological contribution for the Journal of Econometrics (JoE) versus a purely applied result better placed elsewhere. Pressure-tests the idea against JoE's theory-plus-applied-methods scope before months are spent.

Use when deciding which joe-* sub-skill to invoke next, or when sequencing a Journal of Econometrics (JoE) manuscript from methodological topic selection through revision rebuttal. Routes — it does not replace — the specialized skills.

Use to make a Journal of Econometrics (JoE) manuscript read in house style — a precise abstract under 250 words, a contribution-first introduction, legible theorem-and-proof exposition, and Elsevier elsarticle/[dataset] reference conventions. Late-stage polish; it does not invent results.

Use when articulating the marginal contribution of a manuscript to the Journal of Economic Growth (JEG) — sharpening what the paper adds to economic-growth knowledge, calibrated to a specialist Springer Nature theory-and-empirics outlet. Turns "a paper about X" into "the first result that Y."

Use when building or auditing Journal of Economic Growth empirical estimates, calibrated growth models, transition paths, cross-country panels, historical datasets, robustness, and reproducibility.