psci-workflow

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

| Situation | Type | Route note |

|-----------|------|-----------|

| Completed empirical study | Research Article | main pipeline below; mind the 2,000-word format |

| Prospective design, no results yet | Registered Report (Stage 1) | go to psci-study-design + psci-review-process early |

| Stage-1 accepted, now have results | Registered Report (Stage 2) | psci-data-analysis → psci-writing-style |

| Confirmatory test on existing data | Registered Report with Existing Data | psci-study-design (declare data provenance) |

| Short critique/reply to a published paper | Commentary / 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 says | Stage | Route to |

|----------------------|-------|----------|

| "Is this even right for the journal?" | fit | psci-topic-selection |

| "My intro is 1,400 words and still growing" | format | psci-writing-style |

| "Reviewer says single underpowered study" | design/analysis | psci-study-design + psci-data-analysis |

| "Where does the Transparency Statement go?" | transparency | psci-open-science-and-transparency |

| "I have an R&R" | revision | psci-rebuttal |

| "Should I preregister before running?" | design | psci-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

• [../../resources/external_tools.md](../../resources/external_tools.md) — preregistration, repositories, power, effect-size tooling
• [../../resources/official-source-map.md](../../resources/official-source-map.md) — official Psychological Science URLs behind every fact in this pack