Structures a point-by-point response letter for a Human Relations R&R after manuscript revision. Handles reviewer disagreements and editor requests to deepen theory. Revise first.
How this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/human-relations-skills:humrel-rebuttalThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
- You have an HR R&R and have **already revised** the manuscript
Revise the paper first. The response letter documents changes you made; it is not a substitute for making them. If you have not revised yet, return to the relevant humrel-* skill.
HR review is developmental and theory-first. Reviewers and the handling editor (under Co-Editors-in-Chief Smriti Anand and Penny Dick, 检索于 2026-06;以官网为准) took the idea seriously; the winning posture is gracious, responsive, and intellectually serious. The central question they will ask is "did the theoretical contribution mature?" — consistent with HR's gate of a "unique and substantive theoretical contribution." A letter that reads as a checklist of mechanical robustness additions — adequate at some quantitative-leaning venues — will underperform here if the theoretical insight and the social-relational argument have not sharpened.
【Journal】Human Relations
【Skill】humrel-rebuttal
【Round】1st / 2nd / later
【Editors' core ask addressed】how + where
【Comments handled】N / N (none skipped)
【Disagreements】[...] + evidence/compromise
【Contribution deepened】how the theory matured
【Compliance】anonymized, ≤13k, AI re-declared (yes/no)
【Next step】resubmit via ScholarOne
npx claudepluginhub brycewang-stanford/awesome-journal-skills --plugin human-relations-skillsDrafts point-by-point response/rebuttal letters for Human Resource Management journal revise-and-resubmits, structuring replies to editors and reviewers.
Drafts point-by-point response letters for Administrative Science Quarterly R&R submissions after manuscript revisions are complete. Structures cover notes, reviewer comment handling, and summaries of major changes.
Plans revisions and drafts a point-by-point response letter for Organization Science R&R, following journal norms: verbatim italic quoting, no duplicated responses, non-combative tone, prioritizing the senior editor.