Restat workflow

REStat Workflow Router (restat-workflow)

Overview

This is the router. It tells you which restat- skill to use at the current stage* of a manuscript aimed at The Review of Economics and Statistics (REStat) — the venerable MIT Press journal edited at the Harvard Kennedy School (founded 1917/1919; current title since 1948). REStat publishes applied economics and applied econometrics: it rewards credible causal identification, careful measurement, and quantitative evidence across labor, public, development, trade, IO, health, environment, urban, and macro-empirics. It is empirical-first — a clean research design or a measurement advance is the contribution; theory interprets, it does not lead.

Operational tells that you are at REStat and not a sibling: REStat values measurement and applied econometrics, not pure methods development (that is J. Econometrics); it is broad applied econ, wider than a field journal but more specialized than AER. Submission is via Editorial Express with a nonrefundable submission fee (US$125; source map refreshed 2026-06-20); review is editor-managed peer review; accepted empirical papers must deposit data and code to the REStat Harvard Dataverse under the journal's Data and Code Availability Policy. Editors as of the 2026-06-20 refresh: Will Dobbie (Harvard) and Raymond Fisman (Boston U), co-chairs.

When to trigger

• The user asks "what should I do next?"
• A draft needs its current bottleneck diagnosed
• Work is ping-ponging between identification, exhibits, framing, and the response letter
• A REStat decision letter arrived and the user needs to switch into revision mode

Routing table

Current symptom	Next skill
Unsure the paper fits REStat vs AER / AEJ:Applied / J. Econometrics / a field journal	restat-topic-selection
Contribution vs. the closest prior work is fuzzy or undersold	restat-literature-positioning
Causal design / measurement strategy is the bottleneck	restat-identification
Theory is overgrown or absent; unclear how much model to carry	restat-theory-model
Headline estimate's stability under specs/sample/inference is untested	restat-robustness
Exhibits are dense; the main result is not legible in one table/figure	restat-tables-figures
The question + estimate do not land in the first paragraph	restat-writing-style
Need the Harvard Dataverse data/code package + README	restat-replication-package
Want to pre-empt the objections this design invites	restat-referee-strategy
Ready to submit via Editorial Express; need a preflight	restat-submission
Received an R&R; need a response-letter strategy	restat-rebuttal

Default order

1. restat-topic-selection — lock the applied question and REStat fit
2. restat-literature-positioning — stake the marginal contribution
3. restat-identification — make the causal design / measurement credible
4. restat-theory-model — right-size theory to interpret the estimate
5. restat-robustness — show the headline survives specs, sample, inference
6. restat-tables-figures — make the result legible in one exhibit
7. restat-writing-style — land question + estimate early (intro last)
8. restat-replication-package — assemble the Harvard Dataverse package
9. restat-referee-strategy — pre-empt design-specific objections
10. restat-submission — Editorial Express preflight
11. restat-rebuttal — after the R&R

restat-writing-style is a late-stage polish; do not rewrite the intro before identification and robustness settle.

Anti-patterns

• Deferring restat-replication-package until acceptance — REStat's Data and Code Availability Policy and Harvard Dataverse deposit are part of the path to publication, not an afterthought
• Letting restat-tables-figures polish exhibits while the identification is still moving
• Treating REStat like J. Econometrics (a new estimator is the contribution) or like AER (general-interest, agenda-setting scope) — REStat is broad applied econ with a measurement tradition

Routing by paper archetype

REStat spans several applied archetypes, and the bottleneck differs. Read the archetype, then enter the chain at the right link.

Archetype	Likely first bottleneck	Enter at
applied-micro causal design (DID / RD / IV)	heterogeneity-robust estimator + clean design	restat-identification
measurement / new data or index	construct validity + measurement-error discipline	restat-identification → restat-robustness
trade / IO / spatial (shift-share)	exposure-design inference + exogeneity of shares/shocks	restat-identification
structural-light applied	how much model to carry without becoming method-first	restat-theory-model

Worked routing example (illustrative)

A user says: "My DID on a staggered state policy estimates fine, but a referee says TWFE is biased and the measure of my outcome is noisy." That is two distinct REStat pushbacks — heterogeneity-biased estimator (owned by restat-identification, Branch DID) and measurement error in the outcome (a REStat-signature concern, addressed in restat-identification measurement + restat-robustness). Route to restat-identification first; only once the headline effect is stable under Callaway–Sant'Anna and an attenuation correction do you return to restat-tables-figures and restat-rebuttal.

Minimal decision snippet

if decision_letter_arrived:        -> restat-rebuttal
elif ready_to_submit:              -> restat-submission
elif anticipating_referees:        -> restat-referee-strategy
elif need_data_code_package:       -> restat-replication-package
elif exhibits_dense:               -> restat-tables-figures
elif headline_not_robust:          -> restat-robustness
elif theory_mis-sized:             -> restat-theory-model
elif identification_or_measurement_shaky: -> restat-identification
elif contribution_fuzzy:           -> restat-literature-positioning
else:                              -> restat-topic-selection