agentsclimarketplace

Arsoc workflow

Skill brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/Annual-Review-of-Sociology-Skills/skills/arsoc-workflow

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。

Install
npx -y skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill arsoc-workflow

Assembled 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 which arsoc-* sub-skill to invoke next, or when sequencing an invited review article from topic through revision for an Annual Review of Sociology (ARSoc) manuscript. Routes — it does not replace — the specialized skills.

SKILL.md

7.1 KB, ~1.6k tokens by cl100k_base, as published. Nobody here has run it

ARSoc Workflow Router (arsoc-workflow)

Overview

This is the router. It tells you which arsoc- skill to use at the current stage* of an invited review article aimed at the Annual Review of Sociology (ARSoc) — the Annual Reviews (nonprofit) sociology survey series, founded 1975, published as an annual volume with the discipline's highest impact factor (检索于 2026-06;2024 JIF ≈ 9, ranked 1st of 219 in Sociology;以官网为准). ARSoc does not publish original empirical research. It publishes authoritative, accessible review articles that synthesize a sociology subfield — stratification, culture, organizations, networks, race/ethnicity, gender, demography, political and economic sociology — for sociologists across the discipline. So the lifecycle is not "design → identify → estimate → defend"; it is scope a synthesis-worthy subfield → secure the commission → read the whole literature → impose an organizing framework → cover comprehensively and even-handedly → land the ARSoc voice → clear the Annual Reviews process → revise.

Default assumption: unless the user says otherwise, treat the target as ARSoc and the artefact as an invited review, not a primary-research paper. Operational tells that you are at ARSoc and not a sibling: the work reviews other scholars' results rather than reporting its own; unsolicited finished manuscripts are not accepted — the Editorial Committee commissions topics and authors (you can suggest a topic, but you cannot self-submit a finished paper the way you would to ASR or AJS) (检索于 2026-06;以官网为准); there is no identification strategy and no replication package of your own data (you appraise the studies you cover); the contribution is an analytical map of a subfield ending in a research agenda, not a new finding. If the user actually has original data and results, they want a primary-research journal (ASR, AJS, Sociological Science, Demography), not ARSoc — say so.

When to trigger

  • The user asks "what should I do next?" on an invited review
  • A review draft reads like an annotated bibliography and needs a spine
  • Work is ping-ponging between coverage, framing, balance, and the topic pitch
  • An ARSoc editor/Committee letter arrived and the user needs to switch into revision mode

Routing table

Current symptomNext skill
Unsure the subfield is mature/important enough to review for ARSocarsoc-topic-selection
Need to get the topic in front of the Editorial Committee / accept an invitationarsoc-proposal-and-commissioning
Reading is unsystematic; citation gaps likelyarsoc-literature-synthesis
Draft is a list of studies, not an argument about the subfieldarsoc-organizing-framework
Coverage vs. selectivity, or fairness across theoretical schools, feels offarsoc-comprehensiveness-and-balance
Need who-found-what tables or the conceptual framework figurearsoc-tables-figures
Prose is dense/jargon-laden; a sociologist outside the subfield can't followarsoc-writing-style
Documenting the coverage account, or a meta-analysis the review reportsarsoc-transparency-and-reproducibility
Working with the Editorial Committee on scope / the annual-volume timelinearsoc-editor-strategy
Ready to deliver the commissioned draft; need a preflightarsoc-submission
Received editor/Committee feedback on the reviewarsoc-revision

Default order

  1. arsoc-topic-selection — confirm the subfield is ARSoc-scale (mature, important, needs synthesis)
  2. arsoc-proposal-and-commissioning — get the topic to the Editorial Committee / shape the invitation
  3. arsoc-literature-synthesis — gather and read the literature systematically (coverage discipline)
  4. arsoc-organizing-framework — impose the analytical spine
  5. arsoc-comprehensiveness-and-balance — completeness, fairness, even-handed treatment of schools
  6. arsoc-tables-figures — who-found-what tables and the conceptual figure
  7. arsoc-writing-style — the authoritative-yet-accessible ARSoc voice (abstract + intro last)
  8. arsoc-transparency-and-reproducibility — coverage account + any meta-analytic data/code
  9. arsoc-editor-strategy — scope and the Committee/production relationship + volume clock
  10. arsoc-submission — Annual Reviews delivery preflight
  11. arsoc-revision — after the editor/Committee letter

arsoc-writing-style is a late-stage polish; do not rewrite the intro before the framework and coverage settle. The commission comes early — ARSoc is commissioning-first, so arsoc-proposal-and-commissioning precedes the heavy reading.

Anti-patterns

  • Treating ARSoc as a journal you submit to cold — it is commissioning-driven; unsolicited manuscripts are not accepted (检索于 2026-06;以官网为准)
  • Treating the review as an annotated bibliography (no framework) — the cardinal review-article failure
  • Using the author's own line of work as the review's center of gravity (self-promotion)
  • Importing primary-research instincts: there is no "identification" or "replication package" of your own — you appraise others' designs
  • Confusing ARSoc with ASR / AJS (sociology's primary-research flagships), Sociological Theory (theory development, not survey), or the sister series Annual Review of Psychology / Economics

Routing by review archetype

A "review" is not one thing; the bottleneck differs by type. Read the archetype, then enter the chain at the right link.

ArchetypeLikely first bottleneckEnter at
subfield-defining synthesis (broad area)scope is enormous; needs a taxonomyarsoc-organizing-framework
concept/process review (e.g. a mechanism or construct)accessibility across subfields; clear definitionsarsoc-writing-style
empirical-evidence stocktake (what is the consensus?)weighing conflicting findings; even-handed schoolsarsoc-comprehensiveness-and-balance
emerging-area review (young, fast-moving)is it mature enough for an ARSoc volume yet?arsoc-topic-selection

Minimal decision snippet

if editor_or_committee_letter:        -> arsoc-revision
elif ready_to_deliver_draft:          -> arsoc-submission
elif coverage_account_or_meta:        -> arsoc-transparency-and-reproducibility
elif prose_dense_or_inaccessible:     -> arsoc-writing-style
elif need_tables_or_figures:          -> arsoc-tables-figures
elif coverage_or_fairness_off:        -> arsoc-comprehensiveness-and-balance
elif reads_like_a_list:               -> arsoc-organizing-framework
elif reading_unsystematic:            -> arsoc-literature-synthesis
elif no_commission_yet:               -> arsoc-proposal-and-commissioning
else:                                 -> arsoc-topic-selection

What ships with it

Read from the repository

Just SKILL.md. No reference files, no scripts.

Keep looking

Skills are one crate of 328,083. Ordering is by how many stacks a row turns up in, so the top of any crate is what has actually been picked rather than what has the most stars.