Aaag topic selection
Journal-specific Claude Code/Codex skill packs covering mainstream journals — AER, QJE, Nature, Cell, 管理世界, 经济研究 & 200+ more — your fast track to getting published. | 覆盖主流期刊的 Claude Code/Codex 期刊技能包,从选题、识别策略到表格规范与审稿回复全流程,助你快速发论文。
npx -y skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill aaag-topic-selectionAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
What its author says it does
Copied from the file, not written here
Use when deciding whether a topic fits the Annals of the American Association of Geographers and which of its four areas to target. Tests geographic significance and area fit; it does not design the study or write the paper.
SKILL.md
5.2 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it
Topic Selection & Area Fit (aaag-topic-selection)
The Annals is the AAG's broad four-area flagship. A topic earns a place by being geographic — space, place, scale, region, or spatial process is constitutive of the question — and by speaking to one of the journal's areas with enough reach that geographers outside that subfield see why it matters.
When to trigger
- Choosing a project, or deciding if a draft fits the Annals vs. a specialty venue
- A reviewer or colleague said "this isn't really geography" or "this is too narrow"
- Unsure whether to declare Geographic Methods, Human, Nature-Society, Physical, or General Geography
The two-part fit test
- Geographic-ness. Could you delete every spatial/place/scale element and keep the argument? If yes, it is not yet a geography paper — the geography must do theoretical work, not just locate data.
- Area reach. Within the declared area, would a geographer in a neighboring subfield see the stake? An over-narrow result that only its sub-sub-field cares about is an Annals off-fit.
Declare the area (it routes the paper and sets the bar)
| Area | Core of a strong topic | Off-fit signal |
|---|---|---|
| Geographic Methods | a method/model that improves geographic inference (spatial dependence, scale, MAUP, uncertainty) | a generic ML/stats trick with a coordinate column bolted on |
| Human Geography | a spatially/relationally theorized account of social process | a sociology/anthropology paper with a study-area map |
| Nature and Society | a coupled human-environment dynamic where both sides are theorized | one side asserted as backdrop to the other |
| Physical Geography, Earth & Environmental | an earth-surface/environmental process with geographic framing and earth-science rigor | a lab/RS result with no geographic question |
| General Geography | a contribution that reorders how all geographers see something | a paper that just won't pick an area |
Calibrating ambition (Annals vs. specialty venue)
- Specialty venue (e.g., IJGIS, Geomorphology, Environment and Planning D) when the audience is the sub-field and the advance is incremental within it.
- The Annals when the contribution is legible to the area broadly and connects to geographic theory or to a cross-cutting concern (scale, place, environment-society, spatial method).
- The cross-disciplinary/General track when the contribution genuinely spans areas.
Sibling-journal guard (do not mis-pitch)
- Progress in Human Geography — review/agenda essays, not original empirical studies.
- Geographical Analysis — formal spatial-analytic methods; the Annals Methods area is broader and more applied.
- Transactions of the IBG / The Professional Geographer — overlapping scope; the Annals is the AAG's broad flagship with the four-area structure.
Worked micro-example (illustrative)
A draft asks "what predicts urban tree-canopy loss in City X?" and maps the result by census tract.
Delete-test: remove the map and "tract" → "what predicts canopy loss?" survives → geography decorative
Repair: reframe around SCALE — does the predictor of loss change with the unit/scale of analysis, and
what does that imply for where canopy is added? Now space is the argument, not the backdrop.
Area: Nature and Society (canopy = environment-society) or Methods (if the scale claim leads)
Reach: a methods reader gets a MAUP/scale lesson; a nature-society reader gets an equity mechanism
The repaired version makes the geography load-bearing and gives a neighboring subfield a reason to read.
Checklist
- The geography is load-bearing (delete-test passes)
- One area declared, with a one-line reason it belongs there
- A neighboring-subfield geographer can state the stake in a sentence
- Right venue confirmed (Annals vs. a specialty journal)
- Article type chosen (Article / Forum / Commentary) — see
aaag-workflow
Anti-patterns
- "Spatial decoration" — coordinates or a study-area map standing in for a geographic argument
- Pitching a specialty-venue increment to the broad flagship
- Refusing to pick an area (the paper lands with the wrong editor and reviewers)
- A Nature-Society topic that theorizes only the social or only the biophysical side
Output format
【Area】Methods / Human / Nature-Society / Physical / General
【Geographic core】the space/place/scale/process the argument turns on
【Reach】why a neighboring-subfield geographer cares
【Venue check】Annals vs. specialty (one line)
【Type】Article / Forum / Commentary
【Next】aaag-literature-positioning
Supplementary resources
../../resources/exemplars/library.md— real Annals papers by area × method to calibrate fit../../resources/official-source-map.md— areas, scope, and article types