From jape-skills
Frames the headline contribution of a JAE manuscript as an empirical application on real data with replicable results, calibrating claims to what the design and data support and compressing into a 100-word summary.
How this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/jape-skills:jape-contribution-framingThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
- Writing or sharpening the contribution paragraph and the 100-word summary
JAE rewards a contribution that is an application on real data with replicable results: here is a substantive question, here is a credible empirical strategy applied to real data, here is what we find, and every number can be regenerated from the data and code we deposit. Acceptable types:
Pure theoretical novelty ("we prove a new asymptotic result") is not the JAE contribution; if you have method development, frame the real-data demonstration as the payoff.
Applied-econometrics referees punish over-claiming. The contribution must not exceed what the design and data support — distinguish association from causal effect, note external-validity limits, and let replicability carry weight: a modest reproducible finding beats an overclaimed fragile one.
The contribution must compress into a summary of ≤ 100 words containing no citations, understandable on its own (see jape-writing-style). Draft the one-sentence contribution first, expand into the summary, then back-check against the results.
Before any referee sees the paper, the editorial screen looks for the venue's identity markers. Put them where they are found fast:
| Signal | Where it must appear | Risk if missing |
|---|---|---|
| Real data named (source, span, frequency, N) | First two pages | Read as a theory paper mis-sent to an applied journal |
| Econometric lesson (when/why the method matters here) | Contribution paragraph | "Estimator demo without an applied payoff" |
| Replication commitment (deposit to the JAE Data Archive) | Intro or data section | Doubt about reproducibility — fatal at this venue |
| Claim calibrated to design (causal vs. associational) | Contribution paragraph | Over-claiming flag from applied-econometrics referees |
Illustrative numbers only. Draft claim: "We show import prices respond incompletely to exchange rates." Too thin for JAE. Reframed: "Using monthly import-price micro data on 1,900 product lines (2002–2023), we estimate 12-month pass-through of 0.31 (HAC s.e. 0.06) — roughly half the aggregate consensus — and show the gap closes once invoicing-currency composition is held fixed; all series and programs will be deposited in the JAE Data Archive." This names the data, the inference, the quantitative finding, the econometric lesson (aggregation bias in pass-through regressions), and the replication hook — the elements a JAE contribution paragraph carries.
Hedged from public JAE issues rather than internal data: accepted papers tend to state the contribution within the first two pages, quantify the headline estimate with its standard error early, and spend a sentence on portability — why the approach generalizes past this application. Confirm current scope wording against the journal's author guidelines.
【Type】new finding / method application / replication
【Claim】associational / causal — matches design? [Y/N]
【Replicable hook】stated? [Y/N]
【Summary fit】≤100 words, no citations, self-contained? [Y/N]
【Lesson】econometric takeaway travels beyond this dataset? [Y/N]
../../resources/official-source-map.md — summary cap and scope sourcesnpx claudepluginhub brycewang-stanford/awesome-journal-skills --plugin jape-skillsSharpens a contribution for The Econometrics Journal into a compact leading-case claim with failure mode, advance, applied payoff, and scope guardrails.
Evaluates whether a research project fits the Journal of Applied Econometrics (JAE) by testing scope, replicability, and article track (Research vs. Replication).
Sharpens marginal contribution framing for Journal of Economic Growth submissions. Guides articulation of theoretical/empirical advances, bounding scope and connecting to growth debates.