agentsclimarketplace

Jfi topic selection

Skill brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/Journal-of-Financial-Intermediation-Skills/skills/jfi-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。

Install
npx -y skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill jfi-topic-selection

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 working on Journal of Financial Intermediation (JFI) manuscripts to test whether the paper is centrally about banking and financial intermediation — whether an intermediary mechanism is load-bearing, how it differs from a Journal of Banking and Finance fit, and whether to lead with theory or empirics — before investing in the draft.

SKILL.md

4.8 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it

Topic Selection (jfi-topic-selection)

When to trigger

  • Deciding whether a project fits the Journal of Financial Intermediation (JFI) at all
  • Choosing whether the paper's spine is a model (theory) or an empirical design

The JFI fit bar

JFI is an Elsevier journal on banking, financial intermediation, and the economics of financial institutions and markets, publishing both theory and empirics. The decisive question is: is an intermediary or financial-institution mechanism first-order? Strong fits put banks, lenders, dealers, insurers, or other intermediaries — and the frictions they resolve or create (information asymmetry, monitoring, liquidity transformation, capital and regulation, relationship lending) — at the center.

A paper is off-fit if intermediation is incidental: a pure asset-pricing result, a corporate-finance study where banks are just a control, or a macro paper with no institutional channel. Redirect those to a general finance or field journal unless you can make the intermediation mechanism the load-bearing contribution.

Theory vs. empirics (decide early)

  • Theory-led: the contribution is a model of intermediary behavior or a market friction. Plan around assumptions, propositions, and proof exposition (see jfi-identification-strategy) and a numerical example (see jfi-data-analysis).
  • Empirics-led: the contribution is a credibly identified fact about banks/credit. Plan around a causal design and bank/loan-level data (see jfi-identification-strategy, jfi-data-analysis).

This choice shapes how almost every later skill is applied, so make it now.

Fit decision table

ProjectVerdictWhy
Relationship lending and information capture in a credit registerStrongCore intermediation mechanism
Bank capital shock transmission to credit and firmsStrongRegulation working through the intermediary balance sheet
Deposit competition and franchise valueStrongLiability-side intermediation economics
Fintech lenders displacing bank creditStrong if the displacement runs through screening/monitoringThe intermediation contrast must do the work
Bank stock-return anomaliesRedirectAsset pricing wearing bank clothing
Firm capital structure with bank debt as one covariateRedirectBanks incidental to the question
Macro credit cycles with no institutional channelRedirectNo intermediary mechanism to test

The JBF boundary test

A quick differentiator from the Journal of Banking and Finance, JFI's closest neighbor: JBF accommodates broad empirical banking — institutional documentation, cross-country performance, risk-management practice. JFI expects the paper to test, discipline, or extend an intermediation mechanism. Ask: "which theory of intermediation does my result speak to?" If the honest answer is "none, but the facts are useful," the project is likely a better JBF match; if a named friction does the work, you are on JFI ground.

Worked fit check (illustrative)

A draft shows banks with older depositor bases raise deposit rates 15bp less after policy hikes. As pure documentation: borderline at best. Re-anchored to the deposit-franchise mechanism — market power over inattentive depositors funds stable long-duration lending, with the asset-side prediction then tested — the same data become a strong JFI fit. At this venue, topic selection is mechanism selection.

Rescue moves for a borderline verdict, in order of preference: (1) find the intermediation prediction your setting can uniquely test and promote it to the headline; (2) add the heterogeneity cut (bank capital, relationship intensity, depositor stickiness) that separates the intermediary channel from alternatives; (3) if neither exists, redirect early — before the non-refundable submission fee, not after. Run this check again whenever the headline result changes during analysis; fit verdicts drift.

Anti-patterns

  • Submitting an asset-pricing or corporate-finance paper where intermediation is decorative
  • Leaving "theory or empirics?" unresolved, producing a paper that is thin on both
  • Choosing JFI only because of fit with a sub-literature without a clear intermediary mechanism

Output format

【Intermediation mechanism】<the first-order bank/intermediary channel>
【Fit verdict】strong / borderline / redirect-elsewhere
【Paper type】theory-led / empirics-led / both
【Next skill】jfi-literature-positioning

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.