Use when positioning a Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (JPSP) manuscript against the literatures its section's readers expect, building the long-format introduction and literature review that precede the multi-study package. Sharpens the gap and contribution; it does not write the literature review for you.
Scanned 9/12/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add thedixitjain/the-mega-skill-library --skill jpsp-literature-positioning --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Jpsp Literature Positioning?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/thedixitjain-jpsp-literature-positioning)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: jpsp-literature-positioning
description: "Use when positioning a Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (JPSP) manuscript against the literatures its section's readers expect, building the long-format introduction and literature review that precede the multi-study package. Sharpens the gap and contribution; it does not write the literature review for you."
category: marketing-and-growth
source_repo: brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
source_path: "Journal-of-Personality-and-Social-Psychology-Skills/skills/jpsp-literature-positioning/SKILL.md"
source_url: https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/blob/HEAD/Journal-of-Personality-and-Social-Psychology-Skills/skills/jpsp-literature-positioning/SKILL.md
---
# Literature Positioning (jpsp-literature-positioning)
In JPSP the **introduction and literature review are long and load-bearing** — they justify the whole
multi-study package and set up the theory. Reviewers in your section judge whether you have engaged
the right literatures and located a real, non-trivial gap. This skill positions the paper; the
argument itself lives in `jpsp-theory-and-hypotheses`.
## When to trigger
- Drafting or restructuring the introduction / literature review
- A reviewer said the contribution is "incremental" or "misses key work"
- Reconciling competing findings the paper claims to resolve
## What the long-format introduction must do
1. **Engage the section's core literatures.** ASC readers expect the attitudes/social-cognition
canon; IRGP readers expect the relationships/groups literatures; PPID readers expect the
personality/individual-differences traditions. Cite the work the editor will expect to see.
2. **Locate a specific gap or tension.** Not "X is understudied" but a precise puzzle: conflicting
predictions, an unexplained boundary condition, a missing mechanism, an untested construct.
3. **Frame the contribution as theoretical.** State early what the paper adds to *theory*, then let
the studies serve that claim.
4. **Acknowledge points of connection and disconnection** to related theories — JPSP reviewers
reward honest mapping of where your account agrees with and departs from existing accounts.
5. **Set up the multi-study logic.** Foreshadow why it takes *several* studies (e.g., establish the
effect, then mechanism, then boundary conditions, then generalization).
## Positioning checklist
- [ ] Section's key literatures cited; no obvious canonical omission
- [ ] Gap is specific and consequential, not a generic "more research needed"
- [ ] Contribution framed as a theoretical advance, stated up front
- [ ] Competing/alternative accounts named and contrasted
- [ ] Introduction foreshadows the study set without over-promising
- [ ] Self-citations neutralized for **masked review** (see `jpsp-submission`)
## Anti-patterns
- A literature review that summarizes everything but argues nothing
- Citing only your own subfield niche and missing the section's main debates
- Burying the contribution until the General Discussion
- A long introduction that the studies never actually deliver on
- Ignoring work that predicts the opposite of your claim
## "Incremental" — the reviewer charge and the section-specific fix
"The contribution is incremental" is the most common JPSP positioning rejection. The fix differs by what the reviewer distrusts:
| Charge beneath "incremental" | Fix that reads as JPSP-scale |
|------------------------------|-------------------------------|
| "Known effect in a new sample" | Reframe around a **mechanism** or **moderator** prior work could not specify |
| "You ignore the canonical debate" | Cite the section's core conversation (ASC cognition; IRGP groups; PPID traits) and locate your tension inside it |
| "A short-report journal owns this" | Show why the claim needs *several converging studies* |
## Worked example: sharpening a PPID gap statement
*Illustrative — invented to show the move, not a real literature.*
Weak: "Self-control and well-being are understudied together" — a PPID reviewer reads a topic, not a gap. Sharper: "Trait self-control predicts well-being, yet whether it does so by *avoiding* temptation or *resisting* it is unresolved — two process accounts make opposite predictions in high-temptation contexts." This names the construct, the tension, and a diagnostic test, and foreshadows the multi-study package needed to dissociate the two processes.
## Positioning pass for Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Treat this skill as an executable review pass, not a prose hint. First lock the construct validity, study sequence, power/robustness plan, and boundary conditions; then judge whether the current manuscript answers the venue's real reader: psychology reviewers who need a theoretical construct, validated measurement, and cumulative-study logic.
- **Do the pass:** Build a three-column map: incumbent conversation, unresolved tension, and this manuscript's delta; include one sibling-venue omission that would make a referee doubt the fit.
- **Return a ledger:** give `claim / evidence / risk / manuscript location` rows, so the next agent can edit rather than rediscover the issue.
- **Sibling guard:** compare against Psychological Science for shorter general-interest findings, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin for field scope, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology for experiment-centered claims; if a sibling owns the contribution, recommend re-routing before polishing format.
- **Stop condition:** do not give submission-ready advice until the pack's `resources/official-source-map.md` has been checked for volatile rules and the manuscript has one concrete fix for the largest venue-specific risk.
## Output format
```
【Section literatures engaged】list the 3–5 the editor will expect
【Gap / tension】one precise sentence
【Theoretical contribution】one sentence, stated up front
【Competing accounts】named + how the paper adjudicates
【Study-set foreshadow】why N studies are needed
【Next】jpsp-theory-and-hypotheses
```
## Supplementary resources
- [`../../resources/external_tools.md`](../../resources/external_tools.md) — reference managers + APA 7th formatting
- [`../../resources/official-source-map.md`](../../resources/official-source-map.md) — section remits and house format
---
**Source:** [`brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills`](https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) → `Journal-of-Personality-and-Social-Psychology-Skills/skills/jpsp-literature-positioning/SKILL.md`
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!