Jbf Rebuttal

---
name: jbf-rebuttal
description: Use when responding to a Journal of Banking & Finance revise-and-resubmit, including triaging referee reports, strengthening identification, adding robustness, preserving anonymity where needed, and drafting a point-by-point response letter.
---

# R&R Rebuttal (jbf-rebuttal)

## When to trigger

- JBF returns a major or minor revision decision
- Referees request more identification, robustness, data detail, or mechanism evidence
- You need a response letter that is firm, empirical, and concise

## Triage first

Classify every comment:

1. **Must-do**: editor requests, identification threats, data errors, missing
   robustness, unclear contribution.
2. **Should-do**: additional heterogeneity, mechanism tests, clearer exposition,
   appendix reorganization.
3. **Negotiate**: infeasible data, out-of-scope extensions, tests that would
   answer a different paper.
4. **Clarify**: misunderstandings caused by your writing.

## JBF-style response strategy

- Put the editor's main concern first.
- For identification comments, add the strongest feasible test and explain what
  it does and does not rule out.
- For robustness comments, add a table or appendix panel with exact line/table
  references.
- For data comments, document sources, merge rules, sample attrition, and
  proprietary-data limits.
- For scope comments, tie revisions back to banking/finance implications.

## Response paragraph pattern

```text
We thank the referee for raising this point. We now [change made]. The new
analysis appears in Table X / Appendix Table Y and shows [result]. We also revised
page Z to clarify [interpretation]. This addresses the concern because [logic].
```

## Anti-patterns

- Arguing instead of adding evidence where evidence is feasible
- Saying "space constraints" when the appendix can carry the work
- Hiding null or weaker robustness checks
- Changing the design without updating the contribution claim

## Output format

```text
[Decision type] major / minor / conditional
[Editor priority] ...
[Comment matrix] must-do / should-do / negotiate / clarify
[New analyses] ...
[Response tone] grateful, precise, evidence-led
[Next step] revise manuscript + response letter
```