/amr-submission
Use when running the final pre-submission preflight for an Academy of Management Review (AMR) manuscript — ScholarOne portal, AOM format and length, abstract, anonymization for review, references, ethics/originality, and required files. Theory-only journal; there is no
$ npx -y skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill amr-submission --agent claude-codeHow it fires
How this skill gets triggered: by you, by Claude, or both.
- Fires itselfAuto-invocation. Claude auto-loads it when your prompt matches the work.Auto-invocation is when the right skill fires by itself at the right moment, driven by a FLOW.md router and a hook, instead of you invoking it by name. It is the difference between a skill being installed and a skill actually getting used.Read the full definition →
- You can call itInvoke it directly when you want it.
- Slash command
/amr-submission
Context preview
The summary Claude sees to decide when to auto-load this skill.
Use when running the final pre-submission preflight for an Academy of Management Review (AMR) manuscript — ScholarOne portal, AOM format and length, abstract, anonymization for review, references, ethics/originality, and required files. Theory-only journal; there is no
SKILL.md
amr-submission.SKILL.mdname: amr-submission
description: Use when running the final pre-submission preflight for an Academy of Management Review (AMR) manuscript — ScholarOne portal, AOM format and length, abstract, anonymization for review, references, ethics/originality, and required files. Theory-only journal; there is no data-availability or replication step.
Pre-Submission Preflight (amr-submission)
> AMR is theory-only. There is no dataset, code, or replication package to deposit. The > preflight centers on the *theory paper's* format, anonymization, and AOM ethics — not on > empirical materials.
When to trigger
- "I'm about to submit to AMR"
- Final check before clicking submit in ScholarOne
- Unsure which files the portal expects for a conceptual paper
Pre-submission checklist
Scope & fit
- [ ] The paper builds **new theory** (constructs / process model / reconceptualization), not an empirical study
- [ ] It enters and "challenges and extends" a specific theoretical conversation
- [ ] There is **no data, no measures, no statistical test** anywhere in the manuscript
- [ ] Fit confirmed against the current AMR aims & scope (verify on the official page)
Format (verify exact current requirements on the AOM author page)
- [ ] Manuscript is a Word file using Times New Roman 12-point body text, double spacing, 1-inch margins, and no page numbers or running heads
- [ ] Title page separate from the manuscript body (for anonymous review)
- [ ] Abstract present and no more than 200 words
- [ ] Within the journal's overall length expectation (verify; AMR articles are full-length)
- [ ] Figures meet AOM resolution/format specs; each is a conceptual model/typology, not a data plot
- [ ] Propositions numbered consistently and matched to the figure
Anonymization for double-anonymous review
- [ ] No author-identifying content in the manuscript body
- Self-citations phrased neutrally ("prior work (Author, 2020)"), not "in our earlier paper"
- Acknowledgments removed from the body (added after acceptance)
- Funding/grant identifiers kept out of the body
- [ ] Document file properties scrubbed of author name/affiliation
- [ ] File names contain no author or institution name
References & citations
- [ ] AOM author–date in-text citations; full reference list per the AOM Style Guide
- [ ] Every in-text citation appears in the reference list and vice versa
- [ ] The recent, live conversation in the target stream is cited, not only seminal works
- [ ] All references are real and accurately quoted (no fabricated or mis-cited sources)
Ethics & originality (AOM Code of Ethics)
- [ ] Manuscript is original, unpublished, and not under review elsewhere
- [ ] Authorship reflects genuine intellectual contribution; order agreed by all authors
- [ ] Any prior conference/working-paper version is disclosed as required
- [ ] Similarity check run (institutional tool); overlap acceptable and self-overlap disclosed
Portal files (ScholarOne)
- [ ] Anonymized main manuscript (body + figures + references), required format
- [ ] Separate title page with author info and corresponding author
- [ ] Cover note / response to editor if requested
- [ ] Any author-agreement or conflict-of-interest forms the system requires
Desk-reject triggers to preempt
1. **It's an empirical study** (reports data, tests hypotheses) — the defining AMR desk reject. 2. **Incremental theory** — a minor extension with no new construct or mechanism. 3. **A literature review** with no original theoretical move (AMR is not a review journal). 4. **Construct proliferation** — relabeling existing ideas (cf. Suddaby, AMR 2010, DOI 10.5465/amr.2010.0419). 5. **Untestable-in-principle or tautological propositions** (AMR's scope demands "testable knowledge-based claims"). 6. **Poor fit/scope** or anonymization/formatting failures.
ScholarOne operation notes
- AMR uses **ScholarOne Manuscripts (Manuscript Central)** at `https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/amr`; register and submit through the AMR portal linked from the AOM author resources page.
- Enter author metadata only in the system, never in the anonymized manuscript.
- Suggested/opposed reviewers: provide only if the system asks and per its limits.
- Choose the correct submission/article type (theoretical/conceptual article).
- **Submission fee**: none — the Academy of Management does not charge submission fees. New users establish a ScholarOne account with name, affiliation, address details, and keywords before using the Author Center; check any portal-stage prompts at submission time.
- Keep within the file-size and file-type limits the portal states.
Anti-patterns
- Submitting a paper that is really an empirical study or a literature review
- Author identity leaking through "our prior study," acknowledgments, or file properties
- Reference list missing the recent conversation reviewers belong to
- Figures that are data plots (impossible at AMR) or undefined boxes-and-arrows
- Forgetting to scrub document metadata after a final edit
- Over-length manuscript that ignores the current limit (verify before submitting)
Output format
【Scope】builds new theory, no data: yes / fix
【Format】double-spaced / abstract within limit / figures conceptual: pass / fix
【Anonymization】body + properties + filenames clean: yes / fix
【References】AOM style; recent conversation cited; all real: yes / fix
【Ethics】original, not under review, authorship correct: yes / fix
【Portal files】anonymized MS + title page + forms: complete / missing [...]
【Next step】await decision → amr-review-process; R&R → amr-rebuttal
Related resources
- [`templates/manuscript_template.md`](templates/manuscript_template.md) — Standard AMR conceptual-article skeleton (puzzle intro, theory development, propositions, conceptual model, discussion)
- [`templates/checklist.md`](templates/checklist.md) — 8-section pre-submission self-check (scope / format / anonymization / abstract / theory / figure
Read more
name: amr-submission description: Use when running the final pre-submission preflight for an Academy of Management Review (AMR) manuscript — ScholarOne portal, AOM format and length, abstract, anonymization for review, references, ethics/originality, and required files. Theory-only journal; there is no data-availability or replication step.
Pre-Submission Preflight (amr-submission)
> AMR is theory-only. There is no dataset, code, or replication package to deposit. The > preflight centers on the *theory paper's* format, anonymization, and AOM ethics — not on > empirical materials.
When to trigger
- "I'm about to submit to AMR"
- Final check before clicking submit in ScholarOne
- Unsure which files the portal expects for a conceptual paper
Pre-submission checklist
Scope & fit
- [ ] The paper builds **new theory** (constructs / process model / reconceptualization), not an empirical study
- [ ] It enters and "challenges and extends" a specific theoretical conversation
- [ ] There is **no data, no measures, no statistical test** anywhere in the manuscript
- [ ] Fit confirmed against the current AMR aims & scope (verify on the official page)
Format (verify exact current requirements on the AOM author page)
- [ ] Manuscript is a Word file using Times New Roman 12-point body text, double spacing, 1-inch margins, and no page numbers or running heads
- [ ] Title page separate from the manuscript body (for anonymous review)
- [ ] Abstract present and no more than 200 words
- [ ] Within the journal's overall length expectation (verify; AMR articles are full-length)
- [ ] Figures meet AOM resolution/format specs; each is a conceptual model/typology, not a data plot
- [ ] Propositions numbered consistently and matched to the figure
Anonymization for double-anonymous review
- [ ] No author-identifying content in the manuscript body
- Self-citations phrased neutrally ("prior work (Author, 2020)"), not "in our earlier paper"
- Acknowledgments removed from the body (added after acceptance)
- Funding/grant identifiers kept out of the body
- [ ] Document file properties scrubbed of author name/affiliation
- [ ] File names contain no author or institution name
References & citations
- [ ] AOM author–date in-text citations; full reference list per the AOM Style Guide
- [ ] Every in-text citation appears in the reference list and vice versa
- [ ] The recent, live conversation in the target stream is cited, not only seminal works
- [ ] All references are real and accurately quoted (no fabricated or mis-cited sources)
Ethics & originality (AOM Code of Ethics)
- [ ] Manuscript is original, unpublished, and not under review elsewhere
- [ ] Authorship reflects genuine intellectual contribution; order agreed by all authors
- [ ] Any prior conference/working-paper version is disclosed as required
- [ ] Similarity check run (institutional tool); overlap acceptable and self-overlap disclosed
Portal files (ScholarOne)
- [ ] Anonymized main manuscript (body + figures + references), required format
- [ ] Separate title page with author info and corresponding author
- [ ] Cover note / response to editor if requested
- [ ] Any author-agreement or conflict-of-interest forms the system requires
Desk-reject triggers to preempt
1. **It's an empirical study** (reports data, tests hypotheses) — the defining AMR desk reject. 2. **Incremental theory** — a minor extension with no new construct or mechanism. 3. **A literature review** with no original theoretical move (AMR is not a review journal). 4. **Construct proliferation** — relabeling existing ideas (cf. Suddaby, AMR 2010, DOI 10.5465/amr.2010.0419). 5. **Untestable-in-principle or tautological propositions** (AMR's scope demands "testable knowledge-based claims"). 6. **Poor fit/scope** or anonymization/formatting failures.
ScholarOne operation notes
- AMR uses **ScholarOne Manuscripts (Manuscript Central)** at `https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/amr`; register and submit through the AMR portal linked from the AOM author resources page.
- Enter author metadata only in the system, never in the anonymized manuscript.
- Suggested/opposed reviewers: provide only if the system asks and per its limits.
- Choose the correct submission/article type (theoretical/conceptual article).
- **Submission fee**: none — the Academy of Management does not charge submission fees. New users establish a ScholarOne account with name, affiliation, address details, and keywords before using the Author Center; check any portal-stage prompts at submission time.
- Keep within the file-size and file-type limits the portal states.
Anti-patterns
- Submitting a paper that is really an empirical study or a literature review
- Author identity leaking through "our prior study," acknowledgments, or file properties
- Reference list missing the recent conversation reviewers belong to
- Figures that are data plots (impossible at AMR) or undefined boxes-and-arrows
- Forgetting to scrub document metadata after a final edit
- Over-length manuscript that ignores the current limit (verify before submitting)
Output format
【Scope】builds new theory, no data: yes / fix 【Format】double-spaced / abstract within limit / figures conceptual: pass / fix 【Anonymization】body + properties + filenames clean: yes / fix 【References】AOM style; recent conversation cited; all real: yes / fix 【Ethics】original, not under review, authorship correct: yes / fix 【Portal files】anonymized MS + title page + forms: complete / missing [...] 【Next step】await decision → amr-review-process; R&R → amr-rebuttal
Related resources
- [`templates/manuscript_template.md`](templates/manuscript_template.md) — Standard AMR conceptual-article skeleton (puzzle intro, theory development, propositions, conceptual model, discussion)
- [`templates/checklist.md`](templates/checklist.md) — 8-section pre-submission self-check (scope / format / anonymization / abstract / theory / figure
Stanford REAP × CoPaper.AI · 由斯坦福实证方法论团队精选与维护 访问 copaper.ai 微信:CoPaper.AI 按 11 个主流学科板块覆盖 经管与商科 社会科学 人文学科 数学与物理科学 生命科学 医学与健康 工程与技术 计算机科学与 AI 体育科学 点击任一学科名可跳转到对应说明;每类下的代表子领域在正文总览中完整列出。下方封面墙按 venue 导航,完整分类见覆盖一览。 🧭 布局指南 · 📚 Skill Pack 一览 · ⚡ 如何使用 · 🧪 自动实证
Other skills on awesome-journal-skills.
- /aaai-artifact-evaluation
Use when packaging AAAI code, data, multimedia appendices, technical appendices, reproducibility evidence, and post-acceptance artifact releases without violating double-blind or immutable-supplement rules.
Open skill - /aaai-author-response
Use when drafting an AAAI author response (rebuttal) under the single short character-limited author-feedback window, the no-URL rule, no-new-results guidance, AI-generated-review handling, and the AAAI two-phase review process where Phase-2 papers receive one feedback round
Open skill - /aaai-camera-ready
Use when preparing an accepted AAAI paper for camera-ready source submission to AAAI Press, including proceedings page limits, two-column template compliance, copyright transfer, purchased extra technical pages, deanonymization, registration, oral or poster presentation, and
Open skill - /aaai-experiments
Use when designing or auditing AAAI experiments for the broad-AI program committee, including baselines, ablations, statistical significance, robustness, human evaluation, AI-for-Social-Impact and alignment/safety evidence, compute and cost reporting, and
Open skill - /aaai-related-work
Use when positioning an AAAI paper's novelty against archival work, contemporaneous arXiv or workshop papers, and AAAI/IJCAI/NeurIPS/ICML/ICLR neighbors across the broad AI scope, while staying inside AAAI's dual-submission and AI-as-source policy constraints and writing a
Open skill - /aaai-reproducibility
Use when strengthening an AAAI paper's reproducibility checklist (placed after references), experimental traceability, seed and hyperparameter reporting, compute and cost disclosure, dataset access and licensing, code/data ZIP readiness, and the claim-to-evidence map that
Open skill

