Use when appraising the cumulative evidence and ensuring balance in an Academy of Management Annals (Annals) review — weighing conflicting findings by credibility, steelmanning rival schools, and handling the author's own work even-handedly. Audits evidence quality and fairness; it does not design the framework (amann-organizing-framework) or build exhibits (amann-tables-figures).
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Use when responding to an Academy of Management Annals (Annals) proposal decision or full-review referee letter — framework/attitude asks, coverage gaps, balance complaints, and accessibility. Drafts the response letter and revision plan; it does not run the portal preflight (amann-submission) or redesign the framework from scratch (amann-organizing-framework).
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Use when deciding whether a project is a strong AAMAS fit, comparing AAMAS with AAAI, IJCAI, NeurIPS, ICML, EC, and the JAAMAS journal, identifying whether the agents are truly the research object, naming the interaction primitive (solution concept, mechanism, coordination, negotiation), and sharpening the multiagent framing before writing begins.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Use when deciding which amann-* sub-skill to invoke next, or when sequencing a comprehensive review article from topic selection through revision for an Academy of Management Annals (Annals) submission. Routes — it does not replace — the specialized skills.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Use when articulating and differentiating the theoretical contribution of an Academy of Management Review (AMR) manuscript — showing precisely what is NEW versus prior theory and why it matters. Frames the contribution; it does NOT build the theory (amr-theory-development) or check its internal logic (amr-data-analysis).
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Use when running and reporting the statistical analysis for an Academy of Management Journal (AMJ) manuscript — measurement validity, common-method bias, the right estimator (HLM, SEM, panel, experiments), endogeneity, and robustness. Executes and reports the analysis; it does not design the study (amj-methods) or frame the contribution (amj-contribution-framing).
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Use when deciding which amj-* sub-skill to invoke next, or when sequencing manuscript work from topic selection through rebuttal for an Academy of Management Journal (AMJ) manuscript. Routes — it does not replace — the specialized skills.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Use for full-manuscript prose polish of an Academy of Management Journal (AMJ) manuscript — front-loading the argument, active voice, structure, and AOM house style. Polishes language and structure; it does not create the theoretical contribution (amj-contribution-framing) or fix the analysis (amj-data-analysis).
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Use when systematically gathering, coding, and synthesizing a management/organization literature for an Academy of Management Annals (Annals) review — the search-and-coverage methodology and the choice of narrative vs. systematic vs. bibliometric integration. Builds the corpus and synthesis notes; it does not impose the organizing spine (amann-organizing-framework) or write prose.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Use when the theoretical argument and hypotheses are the bottleneck for an Academy of Management Journal (AMJ) manuscript — building a mechanism and deriving testable hypotheses a priori. Constructs the theory; it does not run the analysis (amj-data-analysis) or write the final contribution paragraph (amj-contribution-framing).
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Use when scoping or sanity-checking a research question for an Academy of Management Journal (AMJ) manuscript — fit, theory-drivenness, and feasibility. Decides whether the idea can earn a theoretical contribution; it does not build the theory itself (use amj-theory-development) or position the literature (amj-literature-positioning).
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Use when running the final pre-submission preflight for an Academy of Management Journal (AMJ) manuscript — ScholarOne portal, anonymization for double-blind review, AOM house-style formatting, files, and ethics declarations. Checks readiness to submit; it does not handle the post-decision response (amj-rebuttal).
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Use when you need to understand or set expectations for the Academy of Management Journal (AMJ) editorial and peer-review process — desk review, the developmental multi-round R&R culture, and reading a decision letter. Explains the process and how to read decisions; it does not draft the response letter (amj-rebuttal).
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Use when drafting the revision and response letter after an Academy of Management Journal (AMJ) revise-and-resubmit — structuring point-by-point responses to the action editor and reviewers across a multi-round developmental process. Drafts the response after revisions; it does not interpret the decision letter (amj-review-process).
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Use when the front end of an Academy of Management Journal (AMJ) manuscript needs to engage the right literatures and stake a clear position in an ongoing theoretical conversation. Positions the paper among theories; it does not derive the hypotheses (amj-theory-development) or write the contribution paragraph (amj-contribution-framing).
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Use when turning results into an explicit theoretical contribution for an Academy of Management Journal (AMJ) manuscript — the "what new theory do we learn?" statement and the discussion section. Frames the contribution and implications; it does not build the original theory (amj-theory-development) or run the analysis (amj-data-analysis).
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Use when revising an Academy of Management Annals (Annals) review for the house voice — authoritative, integrative, agenda-setting "reviews with an attitude," with a strong problem-first opening and a contribution-stating abstract. Polishes prose and structure; it does not design the framework (amann-organizing-framework) or run the submission preflight (amann-submission).
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Use when judging whether a management/organization literature is an Academy of Management Annals (Annals)-scale review topic — mature, important, fragmented, and integrable into a new framework — rather than a narrow review. Decides fit and frames the review's animating problem; it does not gather the literature (amann-literature-synthesis) or write the proposal (amann-proposal-framing).
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Use when designing or auditing AAMAS experiments - self-play and population-based training, opponent selection, equilibrium and regret metrics, game-theoretic simulations, ablations, seeds, hyperparameters, compute, and claim-to-evidence fit - with emphasis on experiments that probe the interaction rather than chase a single-agent leaderboard.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Use when building exhibits for an Academy of Management Annals (Annals) review — the signature framework figure, who-studied-what synthesis tables, and search/coverage exhibits that summarize across a literature. Designs review exhibits; it does not produce original-estimate regression tables (an Annals review reports no new data of its own).
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Use when planning around the two-step proposal→invited-review process of the Academy of Management Annals (Annals) — the twice-yearly proposal cadence, double-blind proposal review, the editor-only full-review development, and timelines. Explains the process; it does not write the proposal (amann-proposal-framing) or run the portal preflight (amann-submission).
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Use when building the novel integrative framework that an Academy of Management Annals (Annals) review must deliver — the theory-advancing "new way of seeing the field" that is the acceptance bar, not a catalog of papers. Designs the spine; it does not gather the literature (amann-literature-synthesis) or appraise evidence balance (amann-evidence-standards).
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Use when positioning an AAMAS submission against multiagent, game-theory, and reinforcement-learning literature spread across AAMAS, AAAI, IJCAI, NeurIPS, ICML, EC, and JAAMAS, including arXiv and workshop versions, concurrent submissions, prior conference versions, and the cross-community citation coverage AAMAS reviewers expect.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Use when preparing an accepted AAMAS paper for the IFAAMAS open-access camera-ready, covering author de-anonymization, proceedings metadata, two-column reflow of game figures and learning curves, resolving rebuttal-stage promises, registration, in-person presentation, and the public code and environment release for a multiagent paper.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.