Jet Contribution Framing

---
name: jet-contribution-framing
description: Frame the contribution of a Journal of Economic Theory (JET) paper so its theoretical advance is unmistakable — lead with the theorem, state why the result matters for the relevant theory, and right-size the claim to exactly what the proof delivers. For JET's theory-first bar; it does not overclaim.
---

# Contribution Framing (jet-contribution-framing)

## When to trigger

- Writing the abstract and introduction of a JET theory paper
- A desk editor must see the theoretical contribution within the first page
- You need to make sure the claim does not exceed the proof

## What JET rewards

JET accepts a paper because it is a **rigorous, original theoretical contribution**. Framing must put
the **theorem first** and make its significance legible to the matching editor and two expert
referees. A JET introduction is not a story arc around data — it is a precise statement of *what is now
known that was not before*.

## The framing template

1. **The question, theoretically posed.** What property of mechanisms / equilibria / preferences /
   markets is at stake?
2. **The result, stated as a theorem.** One sentence the abstract can carry: "We characterize / prove
   that / show existence of ...". Because **abstract references must be written in full**, cite at most
   one or two anchor results there.
3. **Why it matters.** Which prior result it weakens an assumption of, generalizes, or overturns — the
   delta from jet-literature-positioning.
4. **What it does *not* claim.** Name the scope (finite types, specific domain) so referees do not read
   in a stronger claim than the proof supports.
5. **Subfield signal.** State the area (mechanism design, decision theory, matching, …) so routing
   reaches the right editor.

## Right-sizing the claim

- Distinguish **characterization** vs. **existence** vs. **comparative statics** — claim only the one(s)
  you proved.
- Avoid "general" / "robust" / "essentially" unless the theorem literally says so.
- If a result holds only under an extra condition, say it in the abstract, not a footnote.

## Anti-patterns

- An empirical-style narrative intro that buries the theorem
- Overclaiming generality the proof does not reach
- An abstract with a sweeping claim and a much narrower theorem in §3
- Selling motivation while leaving the actual statement vague

## Output format

```
【One-line theorem】<abstract sentence>
【Why it matters】weakens/generalizes/overturns <closest result>
【Scope guardrail】holds under <conditions>; does NOT claim <X>
【Subfield】<routing area>
【Next】jet-writing-style (polish) / jet-submission
```