From misq-skills
Positions an MIS Quarterly manuscript within the appropriate IS conversation by engaging canonical work, centralizing the IT artifact, and distinguishing from ISR, JMIS, JAIS, and reference disciplines.
How this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/misq-skills:misq-literature-positioningThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
- Your front end reads as "no one has studied X" (gap-spotting) rather than joining a conversation
MISQ rewards problematization over gap-spotting: surface and challenge an assumption in the existing IS literature, then show why resolving it matters. State explicitly which IS conversation you join (e.g., technology adoption and use, IT value and productivity, digital platforms and markets, IS security and privacy, IS development and design, the future of work). Cite the canonical anchors of that conversation, not just recent adjacent papers.
The positioning must make clear the IT artifact is theorized, not incidental. If your argument would survive deleting the technology, an editor will read it as a management, economics, or CS paper wearing IS clothing. Show how the properties of the artifact (its affordances, design, data, or market structure) drive the phenomenon.
| Venue | What distinguishes it | When it is the better target |
|---|---|---|
| MISQ | Broad IS flagship; rigorous theory across behavioral, design-science, economics, organizational | A general, foundational IS contribution |
| ISR | IS flagship with a strong quantitative/analytical and behavioral emphasis | Tightly scoped quantitative/analytical IS work |
| JMIS | Management of IS, often technical/economic | Management-of-IT and technical-economic papers |
| JAIS | AIS flagship, theory-forward, methodologically diverse | Theory-heavy or methodologically novel IS work |
(Confirm current scopes; venue emphases shift — treat boundaries as 待核实.)
Acknowledge the parent theory (from management, economics, psychology, or CS) you borrow, then show the IS twist: what changes when the phenomenon is mediated by an IT artifact? That twist is the contribution that makes it an IS paper.
Use this as a second-pass capability check. First lock the IS phenomenon, artifact/platform, theory mechanism, design or empirical warrant, and managerial implication; then test whether the manuscript addresses information-systems reviewers who expect strong IS theory, digital artifact or platform grounding, and evidence with organizational consequence.
claim / evidence / blocker / next edit rows so the next pass can patch the manuscript directly.resources/official-source-map.md for volatile rules and name the one unresolved fact that could change the recommendation.【IS conversation joined】...
【Problematized assumption】...
【IT artifact's central role】...
【Vs. adjacent venues / reference discipline】...
【Next step】misq-methods
npx claudepluginhub brycewang-stanford/awesome-journal-skills --plugin misq-skillsPositions ISR manuscripts in the IS literature by naming conversations, bridging silos (behavioral/economic/design-science/organizational), and engaging IS scholarship.
Positions a JMIS manuscript against IS literature to show it advances an IS-management/economics conversation rather than a reference discipline.
Positions a JAIS manuscript against the IS conversation by naming the live debate, engaging the IS canon and JAIS discourse, and staking the gap the theory will fill. For when a reviewer says the paper does not engage the relevant IS literature.