跳到主要内容
知仓学习社ZHICANG

ajps-theory-building

Use when building the theoretical argument of an American Journal of Political Science (AJPS) manuscript — whether empirical with explicit mechanism…

不碰外部(只输出文字)无严重或高危命中brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills

它会碰到什么

扫了多少1 个文本文件,5 KB
它会碰到什么不碰外部(只输出文字)
命中总数0 处
命中统计严重 0 · 高 0 · 中 0 · 低 0

这一栏是扫描器报的事实,不是结论。命中多不等于有毒(安全工具、规则库、示例脚本本来就会包含危险写法),命中少也不等于干净。它和你手上的凭据、文件、网络有什么关系,需要你自己看。

技能内容

Theory & Argument Building (ajps-theory-building)

At AJPS the theory exists to generate testable expectations that the design and data then

adjudicate. The journal's empirical bar means a model or argument earns its place only if it yields

observable, falsifiable implications that the analysis can confront. This skill turns an idea into

hypotheses, mechanisms, and scope conditions in the idiom your work demands.

When to trigger

  • The empirics are strong but the "why" / mechanism is thin
  • A reviewer said the paper is "atheoretical," "ad hoc," or "a model with no test"
  • You need to state mechanisms, assumptions, and scope conditions explicitly
  • Formal modeling: deciding what to model, what to assume, and what the model buys

Build the argument (by mode of work)

Empirical paper with a theory

  1. Concept — define key constructs precisely; distinguish from neighbors and from how they will be

measured (hand off to ajps-data-analysis for validation).

  1. Mechanism — the causal story: who acts, why, under what incentives/constraints.
  2. Hypotheses — state the directional, testable expectations before the results, and what

pattern would disconfirm them. These become the tests in ajps-research-design.

  1. Scope conditions — where the argument holds and where it does not.

Formal / game-theoretic paper

  • State the substantive puzzle the model addresses before the setup.
  • Keep assumptions transparent and motivated; flag which results depend on which assumptions.
  • Translate equilibrium predictions into comparative statics a reader can test or recognize.
  • Make the empirical test follow from the model, and distinguish predictions unique to your model

from those shared with rivals.

Measurement / methodology paper (Research Note territory)

  • Define the quantity the new measure/method recovers and the bias in existing approaches.
  • State the conditions under which it outperforms incumbents, with a validation plan.

The "testability" gate (AJPS-specific)

Before proceeding, write the sentence: *"If the theory is right, we should observe ___; if a rival is

right, we should observe ___ instead."* If you cannot fill both blanks with something the data can

distinguish, the theory is not yet ready for an AJPS empirical confrontation.

Anti-patterns

  • HARKing — fitting hypotheses to results after the fact; state theory before tests, preregister where possible
  • A model whose assumptions are reverse-engineered to deliver the desired prediction
  • Mechanisms named but never made observable or testable
  • Universal claims with no scope conditions
  • Burying the argument under the empirics — the contribution must be stated plainly up front

Operating pass for American Journal of Political Science

Run this as a concrete capability pass. First lock the political theory, design leverage, measurement validity, and scope condition; then test whether the manuscript addresses political-science reviewers who expect tight theory, transparent design, and a contribution that travels across political settings.

  • Primary move: Return a claim-evidence-risk ledger; every recommendation must point to a manuscript location or missing artifact.
  • Decision ledger: return claim / evidence / blocker / next edit rows so the next pass can patch the manuscript directly.
  • Sibling comparison: compare against APSR for field-wide breadth, Journal of Politics for broader political-science audience, Political Analysis for methods-first work; if the neighboring outlet has the stronger audience claim, recommend re-routing before polishing.
  • Verification floor: before submission-ready advice, re-open resources/official-source-map.md for volatile rules and name the one unresolved fact that could change the recommendation.

Output format

【Core claim】one sentence
【Mechanism】the causal/logical story
【Hypotheses】directional, stated before results
【Assumptions】(formal) the load-bearing ones
【Disconfirming pattern】what would falsify it
【Scope conditions】where it holds / fails
【Next】ajps-research-design

Supplementary resources

  • [../../resources/external_tools.md](../../resources/external_tools.md) — formal-modeling and analysis tooling
  • [../../resources/official-source-map.md](../../resources/official-source-map.md) — AJPS scope and contribution expectations

想直接用这个技能?

本站把开放许可(MIT / Apache 等)的技能按仓库打包整理到网盘,点一下转存到你自己的网盘,不用一个个从 GitHub 拉。许可未声明的技能只给原始仓库链接,不打包。

它属于哪个仓库

星标★ 1,120
本站分层T1
该仓技能数4166
原文件路径American-Journal-of-Political-Science-Skills/skills/ajps-theory-building/SKILL.md

同一个仓库里的其他技能

看这个仓库的全部 4166 个技能