Use when choosing or sharpening the research question for a Marketing Science manuscript — testing whether a marketing problem is important AND admits a formal model (structural or analytical), and whether Marketing Science (not JCR/JMR/Management Science) is the right venue.
Scanned 9/12/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add thedixitjain/the-mega-skill-library --skill mksc-topic-selection --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Mksc Topic Selection?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/thedixitjain-mksc-topic-selection)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: mksc-topic-selection
description: "Use when choosing or sharpening the research question for a Marketing Science manuscript — testing whether a marketing problem is important AND admits a formal model (structural or analytical), and whether Marketing Science (not JCR/JMR/Management Science) is the right venue."
category: marketing-and-growth
source_repo: brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
source_path: "Marketing-Science-Skills/skills/mksc-topic-selection/SKILL.md"
source_url: https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/blob/HEAD/Marketing-Science-Skills/skills/mksc-topic-selection/SKILL.md
---
# Topic Selection & Venue Fit (mksc-topic-selection)
## When to trigger
- You have a marketing phenomenon (pricing, advertising/digital, branding, channels/retail, platforms, analytics) but no modeling angle
- You are unsure whether the question is "important" by Marketing Science standards
- You have a finding but it is a reduced-form correlation with no model
- You cannot decide between Marketing Science, JCR, JMR, or Management Science
## The two-part fit test
Marketing Science publishes "articles that answer **important research questions in marketing using mathematical modeling**." A topic must pass both gates:
1. **Substantive importance.** A real marketing decision or market phenomenon — how firms price, advertise, design assortments, or how consumers and markets respond — that managers or the field care about.
2. **Modelability.** It can be framed as an analytical (game-theoretic) model of strategic interaction, OR a structural econometric model of demand/supply that is estimable and yields counterfactuals. If neither fits, MKSC is likely the wrong venue.
A strong MKSC topic usually implies a **counterfactual or policy question** — "what happens to prices, share, or welfare if the firm/platform changes X?" — that only a model can answer.
## Pick the genre the question implies
- **Analytical** when the insight is about strategic interaction and you want clean comparative statics (channel conflict, competitive pricing, information/targeting design).
- **Structural** when you need quantitative magnitudes and counterfactuals from data (demand estimation, dynamic discrete choice, auctions, search).
- A **Frontiers** topic is timely and high-impact with one dominant contribution dimension — scope it to a 6,000-word total story.
## Venue contrast
- **JCR** — consumer-psychology theory and experiments with no formal model. If that is your paper, target JCR.
- **JMR** — broader, methods-forward marketing (modeling or behavioral); MKSC is narrower on the modeling core.
- **Management Science** — general management science; if the contribution is not specifically a marketing decision, it may belong there.
## Checklist
- [ ] Question is an important marketing decision/market phenomenon, in one sentence
- [ ] It admits a formal model (analytical or structural), not just a regression
- [ ] There is a clear counterfactual/policy payoff a model can deliver
- [ ] Genre (analytical / structural / Frontiers) chosen deliberately
- [ ] Venue confirmed vs. JCR / JMR / Management Science
## Anti-patterns
- A correlation in search of a story, with no model.
- A pure consumer-psychology effect dressed up as quantitative marketing.
- "Important to a manager" but no tractable model — or an elegant model answering no real marketing question.
## Fit pass for Marketing Science
Treat this skill as an executable review pass, not a prose hint. First lock the demand/supply mechanism, fit evidence, and counterfactual decision margin; then judge whether the current manuscript answers the venue's real reader: quantitative marketing reviewers who read the model through the managerial counterfactual it makes possible.
- **Do the pass:** Score the manuscript on venue fit, novelty, evidence readiness, and audience ownership; reject a prestige-only target when a sibling venue owns the contribution more directly.
- **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 Journal of Marketing Research for empirical marketing breadth, Management Science for wider OR/MS reach, Quantitative Marketing and Economics for specialist modeling; 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
```
【Question】one-sentence marketing question
【Importance】why the field/manager cares
【Modelability】analytical / structural / unclear; counterfactual payoff
【Genre】analytical / structural / Frontiers
【Venue】Marketing Science vs JCR/JMR/MgmtSci — fit verdict
【Next step】mksc-theory-development
```
---
**Source:** [`brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills`](https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) → `Marketing-Science-Skills/skills/mksc-topic-selection/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!