agentsclimarketplace

Psci workflow

Skill brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/Psychological-Science-Skills/skills/psci-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 psci-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 starting or navigating any Psychological Science manuscript and you are unsure which sub-skill applies. Use when choosing among manuscript types or returning with a decision letter. Routes by lifecycle stage and manuscript type (Research Article, Registered Report Stage 1/2, Registered Report with Existing Data, Commentary), and flags the journal's tight word format and open-science requirements. It dispatches; it does not draft content.

SKILL.md

5.8 KB, ~1.3k tokens by cl100k_base, as published. Nobody here has run it

Psychological Science Workflow Router (psci-workflow)

The orchestrator for a Psychological Science submission. The journal's two defining constraints are a very tight word format and strong open-science requirements — the router makes sure both are handled from the start, then sends the user to the matching skill.

When to trigger

  • Starting a new Psychological Science paper and unsure where to begin
  • Mid-project and unsure which skill applies next
  • Choosing among manuscript types
  • Returning with a decision letter (route to psci-rebuttal)

First question: manuscript type

SituationTypeRoute note
Completed empirical studyResearch Articlemain pipeline below; mind the 2,000-word format
Prospective design, no results yetRegistered Report (Stage 1)go to psci-study-design + psci-review-process early
Stage-1 accepted, now have resultsRegistered Report (Stage 2)psci-data-analysispsci-writing-style
Confirmatory test on existing dataRegistered Report with Existing Datapsci-study-design (declare data provenance)
Short critique/reply to a published paperCommentary / Reply (≤ 1,000 words)psci-literature-positioning

Short Reports and standalone Preregistered Direct Replications are no longer accepted — fit your replication/extension into a Research Article or a Registered Report.

Routing map (stage → skill)

Idea / fit?                       → psci-topic-selection
Where does it sit in the field?   → psci-literature-positioning
Theory + hypotheses?              → psci-theory-and-hypotheses
Design / power / preregistration? → psci-study-design
Analysis sound + disclosed?       → psci-data-analysis
Exhibits (APA, embedded)?         → psci-tables-figures
Fits the word format?             → psci-writing-style
Open data/materials + statement?  → psci-open-science-and-transparency
How will it be judged?            → psci-review-process
Ready to submit?                  → psci-submission
Got an R&R / decision?            → psci-rebuttal

Default order

topic-selection → literature-positioning → theory-and-hypotheses → study-design → data-analysis → tables-figures → writing-style → open-science-and-transparency → review-process → submission → rebuttal

For Registered Reports, the Stage 1 package (theory + design + analysis plan) is reviewed before data — pull study-design and review-process forward.

Worked micro-example — routing a live project (illustrative)

A team has two preregistered attention studies (N = 240; N = 300), open data, and an R2 asking for power and a replication. The router walks them:

Type:    Research Article (results in hand, internal replication present).
Entry:   not idea-stage → skip topic-selection; they are at analysis/exhibits.
Route:   data-analysis (effect sizes + CIs + disclosure)
         → tables-figures (dot/CI figure, embedded)
         → writing-style (fit Intro+Discussion ≤ 2,000)
         → open-science-and-transparency (DOIs + Transparency Statement)
         → submission (preflight) ; on R&R → rebuttal.
Flag:    Transparency Statement must sit between Intro and Methods — verify
         current placement against the journal's submission guidelines.

Stage-triage table (symptom → skill)

What the author saysStageRoute to
"Is this even right for the journal?"fitpsci-topic-selection
"My intro is 1,400 words and still growing"formatpsci-writing-style
"Reviewer says single underpowered study"design/analysispsci-study-design + psci-data-analysis
"Where does the Transparency Statement go?"transparencypsci-open-science-and-transparency
"I have an R&R"revisionpsci-rebuttal
"Should I preregister before running?"designpsci-study-design (consider RR Stage 1)

Routing pitfalls specific to this venue

  • Sending a confirmatory-prospective project straight to psci-data-analysis instead of considering a Registered Report Stage 1 first — the route matters before data exist.
  • Deferring psci-open-science-and-transparency to the end; deposits and DOIs should be built early so the Transparency Statement is drafted from live identifiers, not promised at acceptance.

Anti-patterns

  • Writing long, then trying to cut to 2,000 words — design for the format from the start
  • Treating open data/materials as optional (they are required; exemptions are case-by-case and graded)
  • Forgetting the Research Transparency Statement (it sits between Intro and Methods)
  • Choosing a Registered Report after results exist

Output format

【Stage】idea / positioning / theory / design / analysis / exhibits / writing / transparency / review / submit / rebut
【Type】Research Article / Registered Report S1 / S2 / RR-Existing-Data / Commentary
【Route to】psci-<skill>
【Why】one line
【Then】the next skill after that

Supplementary resources

What ships with it

Read from the repository

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

Keep looking

Skills are one crate of 327,132. 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.