界面已本地化;技能介绍与说明文档按所选语言由 AI 自动翻译,代码、命令、路径和专业术语保留原文,以原作者文档为准。
探索技能
开发与工程 · SKILL.md

eer-topic-selection

eer-topic-selection

【开发与工程】Use when deciding whether a question is a fit for the European Economic Review (EER) — general-interest across all of economics — rather than a field journal, JEEA, or The Economic Journal. Diagnoses fit and reframes for breadth; it does not build the identification or the model.

独立 GitHub 快照 · 自动分类 · 以原作者文档为准

技能说明

GitHub

name: eer-topic-selection description: Use when deciding whether a question is a fit for the European Economic Review (EER) — general-interest across all of economics — rather than a field journal, JEEA, or The Economic Journal. Diagnoses fit and reframes for breadth; it does not build the identification or the model.

Topic Selection & Fit (eer-topic-selection)

When to trigger

  • You are unsure whether the paper is "EER-shaped" or belongs in a field outlet
  • A reviewer/colleague said the question is "too narrow" or "of interest only to specialists"
  • You are choosing among EER, JEEA, The Economic Journal, or an Elsevier field journal
  • The contribution reads as an incremental field increment, not a broad-interest result

The EER fit bar

EER is Elsevier's general-interest European economics journal (founded 1969), publishing all fields, theory and empirical. The defining test is breadth of interest: would an economist outside your subfield find the question, the answer, or the method worth knowing? EER is not Europe-restricted in topic (the name is institutional), and it is not a methods-first journal — it wants a substantive economic result that travels. Calibrate against the desk-reject filter: editors screen out-of-scope or low-novelty work before review (and the submission fee is non-refundable), so the breadth case must be visible on page one.

Fit decision table

SignalReadingMove
Result changes how non-specialists think about a first-order questionStrong EER fitproceed to eer-literature-positioning
Solid identification but narrow policy/sector relevanceBorderline — reframe for breadth or consider a field journalreframe, then eer-literature-positioning
Incremental extension of one literature, specialists onlyWeak EER fitbroaden the question or target a field outlet
Pure theory with a clean, general resultEER fits (theory is in scope)eer-theory-model
About Europe but of only local interestTopic ≠ scope problemrecast around the general economic mechanism

EER vs. its siblings (where does this paper go?)

OutletIdentityPick it when
EERElsevier general-interest, all fields, long-standingbroad-interest result, theory or empirical, no society gate
JEEAThe EEA's own flagship (Oxford UP)you want the EEA society flagship; comparably broad, more selective slot
The Economic JournalRES flagship (Oxford UP)RES-oriented general-interest home
Elsevier field journal (e.g., JME, Labour Economics, JPubE)field-specialist depththe contribution is deep but field-internal

EER and JEEA overlap heavily in scope; the practical difference is the EEA society identity of JEEA and slot scarcity, not topic. Position on contribution and fit, not prestige labels.

Reframing a narrow question for EER breadth

  1. Name the general mechanism, not the local application ("how search frictions blunt pass-through," not "prices in one retail chain").
  2. State the first-order quantity or theoretical object a generalist cares about.
  3. Show portability — one sentence on what the result implies beyond your setting.
  4. Lead with the answer, not the dataset or estimator.

Checklist

  • One sentence states a question a non-specialist economist would care about
  • The contribution is an answer/mechanism, not a dataset or a method tweak
  • Breadth is visible in the first paragraph (survives the desk-reject screen)
  • Sibling check done: EER vs. JEEA / EJ / field journal, decided on fit not prestige
  • If theory, the result is general (not a single worked example)
  • "European" framing, if any, is recast as a general economic mechanism

Anti-patterns

  • Pitching a clean-but-narrow field increment as if breadth were obvious
  • Leading with the data source or the estimator instead of the economic question
  • Assuming EER means "European topics only" and over-localizing the framing
  • Choosing EER purely on impact factor rather than fit and breadth
  • Ignoring the desk-reject + non-refundable-fee filter when scope is marginal

Output format

【EER fit】strong / borderline / weak
【General-interest question】one sentence (non-specialist-legible)
【Contribution type】empirical answer / mechanism / theory result
【Breadth case】why a non-specialist cares + portability sentence
【Sibling decision】EER vs JEEA / EJ / field journal — and why
【Next step】eer-literature-positioning (or eer-theory-model if pure theory)
我的收藏