From psychological-review-skills
Drafts point-by-point response documents and revision plans for Psychological Review decision letters. Classifies reviewer comments by theoretical demands and guides theory strengthening.
How this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/psychological-review-skills:psychrev-rebuttalThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
> Write the response **after** the theory has actually been revised. At a theory journal a
Write the response after the theory has actually been revised. At a theory journal a response that argues rather than strengthens the model fails. Revise first, then document.
Reviewers at Psychological Review are usually proponents or critics of the rival models. Their comments encode theoretical demands beneath the surface wording. Before drafting, classify every comment:
| Comment encodes... | Response strategy |
|---|---|
| "Your model is the same as [rival]" | Sharpen subsumption/differentiation; show the limiting case (psychrev-contribution-framing) |
| "How do you know this prediction follows?" | Add/strengthen the derivation (psychrev-argument-development) |
| "Couldn't a simpler account do this?" | Add the head-to-head on a diagnostic phenomenon |
| "Is this parameter identifiable?" | Add parameter-recovery simulation (psychrev-boundary-conditions) |
| "The model explains too much" | State scope and a breakdown regime |
| "What would falsify it?" | Add a risky novel prediction |
| "This reads as empirical / out of scope" | Reframe so data only constrain; re-establish fit |
【Summary of strengthening】[2–3 ways the theory is now stronger]
【Point-by-point】[comment → change made → location | or reasoned rebuttal with derivation]
【Theory changes】[new derivations / simulations / scope statements added]
【Concessions】[phenomena now bounded out, on our terms]
【Editor notes】[any reviewer conflicts surfaced + principled choice]
【Next step】psychrev-submission (resubmission preflight)
npx claudepluginhub brycewang-stanford/awesome-journal-skills --plugin psychological-review-skillsStructures response letters for Cognitive Psychology (Elsevier) major/minor revisions. Addresses each reviewer point, strengthens model-driven inference, and keeps the integrative argument coherent.
Drafts point-by-point responses and revision plans for Perspectives on Psychological Science (PoPS) decision letters, addressing coverage gaps, balance, framework, accessibility, and open-science requests.
Drafts point-by-point response documents for Sociological Theory Revise & Resubmit submissions, structuring replies that show the theory was strengthened.