jmcb-workflow

JMCB Workflow Router (jmcb-workflow)

Overview

This is the router. It names which jmcb- skill to use at the current stage* of a manuscript aimed at the Journal of Money, Credit and Banking (JMCB) — the monetary-economics, banking, and macro-finance outlet owned by the Ohio State University Department of Economics and published by Wiley-Blackwell (founded 1969). JMCB rewards policy-relevant work that bridges theory and evidence on monetary transmission, bank balance sheets, credit frictions, and central-bank policy — whether the engine is a monetary/banking model (DSGE, search-and-matching banks) or empirics (SVAR, local projections, high-frequency monetary surprises, micro-banking panels).

Operational tells you are at JMCB and not a sibling: submission runs through Editorial Express (not Wiley's ScholarOne or Editorial Manager); there is a submission fee (US$150 subscriber / US$200 non-subscriber, refunded minus US$50 if desk-rejected; waived for resubmissions — 检索于 2026-06；以官网为准); the journal strongly recommends ≤40 pages including references, tables, and figures but excluding the online appendix; and it carries the historical JMCB Data Archive legacy (the Dewald–Thursby–Anderson 1986 replication study and the 2006 "Got Replicability?" follow-up were both about this journal). Editors as of 2026 include Sanjay Chugh and Pok-sang Lam (OSU), Robert DeYoung (Kansas), and Kenneth D. West (待核实；以官网为准).

When to trigger

• The user asks "what should I do next?" on a JMCB-targeted paper
• A draft needs its current bottleneck diagnosed (fit, identification, evidence, exhibits, submission)
• Work is ping-ponging between the model/empirics, framing, exhibits, and the response letter
• A JMCB decision letter arrived and the user needs to switch into revision mode
• The team is weighing JMCB against the Journal of Monetary Economics, AEJ:Macro, Review of Economic Dynamics, or the Journal of Banking & Finance

Routing table

Current symptom	Next skill
Scope/audience fit uncertain; might be a JME or JBF paper instead	jmcb-topic-selection
Contribution vs. the monetary/banking frontier is fuzzy or undersold	jmcb-literature-positioning
Macro identification (SVAR/narrative/HF surprises) or micro-banking causal design is shaky	jmcb-identification
Bank/central-bank data construction, measurement, or sample is fragile	jmcb-empirical-design
Results may be specification-, sample-, or inference-sensitive	jmcb-robustness
Exhibits are dense; IRFs/coefficient plots do not answer the question	jmcb-tables-figures
Online appendix is too thin, too sprawling, or carries main claims	jmcb-internet-appendix
Intro/abstract bury the policy message; prose misses the JMCB voice	jmcb-writing-style
Close to submission; need the 40-page + Editorial Express preflight	jmcb-submission
Likely objections (and which editor desk) should be anticipated	jmcb-referee-strategy
A decision letter or referee report needs a response plan	jmcb-rebuttal

Default order

1. jmcb-topic-selection — lock the monetary/banking/macro-finance question and policy stakes
2. jmcb-literature-positioning — stake the contribution vs. JME, AEJ:Macro, RED, JBF
3. jmcb-identification — macro identification or micro-banking causal design
4. jmcb-empirical-design — bank/central-bank data, measurement, sample construction
5. jmcb-robustness — specification, sample, and inference fragility
6. jmcb-tables-figures — IRFs, coefficient plots, balance-sheet tables that read cleanly
7. jmcb-internet-appendix — offload supporting material; keep the 40-page core self-contained
8. jmcb-writing-style — make the policy idea land (abstract + intro last)
9. jmcb-submission — Editorial Express preflight, fee, page limit, data exemption
10. jmcb-referee-strategy — anticipate objections before submitting
11. jmcb-rebuttal — after the R&R

jmcb-writing-style is a late-stage polish; do not rewrite the intro before identification and the evidence hierarchy settle. jmcb-referee-strategy is most useful before submission (to harden the paper) and again when a report lands.

Anti-patterns

• Treating JMCB as interchangeable with the Journal of Monetary Economics (more theory/field-macro depth) or AEJ:Macro (general-interest macro) — JMCB prizes the policy bridge and institutional detail
• Routing a pure corporate-finance or asset-pricing paper here when it belongs at JBF or a finance field journal
• Letting jmcb-tables-figures polish IRFs while the SVAR identification is still moving
• Deferring the data/code question to acceptance — the journal's replication heritage means referees ask early
• Polishing prose before the contribution and evidence hierarchy are stable

Routing by paper archetype

JMCB spans four engines, and the binding constraint differs by engine. Read the archetype, then enter the chain at the right link.

Archetype	Likely first bottleneck	Enter at
Quantitative monetary/banking model (DSGE, banking-friction)	what disciplines the parameters; policy-relevant counterfactual	jmcb-identification → jmcb-empirical-design
Macro identification (SVAR / narrative / HF monetary surprises)	shock identification + IRF inference	jmcb-identification
Micro-banking causal design (bank/loan-level panel)	clustering, weak-IV, staggered-policy bias	jmcb-identification → jmcb-empirical-design
Measurement / policy-evaluation (central-bank, regulation)	data construction + robustness to sample/window	jmcb-empirical-design → jmcb-robustness

Worked routing example (illustrative)

A user says: "My local-projection estimates of how a monetary-policy shock hits small-bank lending look fine, but a referee says the shock is contaminated by the Fed's information effect and the bank panel SEs are understated." Those are two distinct JMCB pushbacks — shock identification (informationally robust high-frequency surprises, à la the information-effect critique) and inference (clustering at the bank and time level). Route to jmcb-identification first to clean the shock, then jmcb-robustness for two-way clustering and a Driscoll–Kraay alternative; only once the lending elasticity is stable (say it settles at −1.8%, illustrative) return to jmcb-tables-figures and jmcb-rebuttal.

Where the pack overlaps and how to sequence

Three pairs of skills frequently get conflated; keep them distinct. jmcb-identification owns the causal/structural argument (is the shock clean, is it supply not demand), while jmcb-empirical-design owns the data the argument runs on (construction, measurement, sample) — fix identification logic first, then harden the data, then stress both in jmcb-robustness. jmcb-referee-strategy is anticipatory (war-game objections before submission), while jmcb-rebuttal is reactive (respond to a report that arrived). jmcb-tables-figures and jmcb-internet-appendix both touch exhibits, but the first is about making the core exhibits legible and the second about what to offload — run them together near the end, after the evidence is final.

Minimal decision snippet

if decision_letter_arrived:           -> jmcb-rebuttal
elif anticipating_objections:         -> jmcb-referee-strategy
elif ready_to_submit:                 -> jmcb-submission
elif appendix_thin_or_overloaded:     -> jmcb-internet-appendix
elif exhibits_unclear:                -> jmcb-tables-figures
elif results_fragile:                 -> jmcb-robustness
elif data_or_measurement_weak:        -> jmcb-empirical-design
elif identification_shaky:            -> jmcb-identification
elif contribution_fuzzy:              -> jmcb-literature-positioning
else:                                 -> jmcb-topic-selection