From jcp-skills
Guides the sharpening of a one-sentence contribution for Journal of Consumer Psychology manuscripts, ensuring the novelty reads as a psychological mechanism rather than an effect. Useful when reviewers say the finding is incremental.
How this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/jcp-skills:jcp-contribution-framingThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
- Your "contribution" sentence describes an **effect** ("X increases Y") rather than a mechanism
A JCP contribution sentence has a specific shape: "We show that [antecedent] shapes [consumer outcome] because it [changes psychological state M], which means [implication / new boundary / overturned belief]." The "because" clause is the contribution. If your sentence stops at the comma after the outcome, you have an effect, and an effect alone is a reject. The framing job is to make the mechanism the headline and the effect merely the vehicle that reveals it.
The second JCP requirement is theoretical surprise or correction: the process should change what a knowledgeable reader expected — a non-obvious mediator, a reversal under a predicted condition, a reconciliation of conflicting accounts. "Confirms intuition" is not a JCP contribution; "explains why the intuitive account is wrong" is.
| Framing | Template | When to use |
|---|---|---|
| Novel mechanism | "Effect E runs through unexpected process M, not the assumed P" | The effect is known but mis-attributed |
| Theory-test moderation | "Because the effect runs through M, it reverses when C blocks M" | You have strong moderation-of-process data |
| Reconciliation | "Conflicting findings F1/F2 are reconciled once M is recognized" | Two literatures disagree and your process resolves it |
Whichever you pick, lead with the mental process and the consumer stake in the same breath; JCP wants both theoretical interest and consumer relevance, but the process is primary.
【Contribution sentence】"…because it [process M]…" (one line, process-led)
【Why non-obvious】what informed reader belief it corrects/surprises
【Backing study】the strongest process design that supports it
【Scope bound】populations/stimuli the claim is limited to
【Consumer stake】one line of relevance (subordinate to the process)
【Next skill】jcp-tables-figures
npx claudepluginhub brycewang-stanford/awesome-journal-skills --plugin jcp-skillsFrames JCR manuscript contributions as theory advances, deepens, or repudiations and drafts the mandatory 300-word Consumer Relevance and Contribution Statement.
Polishes JCP manuscript prose to foreground the psychological mechanism, not the effect. Use after design and analysis are stable.
Frames results into a JMR contribution statement by addressing both substantive insight and methodological credibility. Use when discussion lacks clear contribution.