「research」の検索結果

Use when targeting Geology (GSA) or deciding whether a short, high-impact geoscience research letter fits this venue. Encodes the journal's broad-significance-in-tight-length fit, the novelty and rapid-communication bar, GSA house style, official-submission re-check, and desk-reject heuristics.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when drafting or polishing an American Anthropologist (AA) manuscript so it reads across all four fields, follows AA house style (Chicago author-date; free-format submission accepted), fits the section word caps (Research Articles ≤ 8,000 words; abstract 200 words), and uses inclusive, care-ful language. Tightens prose and format; it does not invent content.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when writing the response to an American Educational Research Journal (AERJ) revise-and-resubmit. AERJ R&Rs come back through the handling editor and multiple masked reviewers, so the response must convert each reviewer while keeping the editor confident the revision is convergent. Structures the response letter; it does not fabricate new results.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when handling research ethics, consent, community accountability, and data/transparency for an American Anthropologist (AA) manuscript — informed consent, anonymization, protection of vulnerable interlocutors, heritage and repatriation obligations, and what (and what NOT) to share. At AA this is an ethics-and-accountability skill grounded in the AAA ethics principles and an ethics of care. Plans the ethics and transparency; it does not grant waivers.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use as the entry point for any Agricultural Systems (AgSy) manuscript. Routes to the right AgSy sub-skill based on where you are in the lifecycle and which article type (research paper, short communication, perspective, comment, review) fits. AgSy is a systems-science journal, so the router's first job is to confirm there is a real systems question — interactions, hierarchical levels, trade-offs — not a single-factor field trial. It dispatches; it does not draft content.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when drafting or polishing an Agricultural Systems (AgSy) manuscript so it reads clearly for a systems-science audience, follows the journal's format, and meets front-matter requirements (abstract <= 250 words, Highlights, graphical abstract). Research papers run to about 8,000 words (no hard cap). Tightens prose and format; it does not invent content.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when an Advanced Materials manuscript must be fit to its article-type format — Communication versus Research Article — where word count and display items are budgeted together against a typeset page limit. Manages the length budget; does not restructure the science or polish prose line by line.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when judging whether a research idea fits Administrative Science Quarterly (ASQ) and has the *surprising* theoretical insight ASQ demands. Sharpens the puzzle and the contribution claim; it does not design the study or write theory sections.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when choosing and justifying the research design for an Administrative Science Quarterly (ASQ) manuscript — qualitative (grounded-theory, ethnographic, historical) or quantitative — and setting the rigor bar. Designs the study; it does not run the analysis (see asq-data-analysis).

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when constructing or auditing accounting measures for 《会计研究》 (Accounting Research) — discretionary accruals (modified Jones), real earnings management (Roychowdhury), conservatism (Basu / C-Score), comparability, disclosure indices, audit-quality and tax-avoidance proxies — so each measure is built transparently and reproducibly. Use before identification.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when framing or sharpening a topic for 《会计研究》 (Accounting Research) — turning a generic "X affects Y" empirical idea into an accounting contribution anchored in China's institutional setting, accounting theory, and standard-setting / practice relevance. Use before literature review.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when responding to 《会计研究》 (Accounting Research) reviewer reports / an R&R — drafting a point-by-point response letter and 修改说明 that addresses accounting-measure construction, institutional/standard accuracy, identification, and information-mechanism concerns, while keeping the revision anonymous. Use only after the manuscript itself has been revised.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when judging whether a manuscript's landing point is an ACCOUNTING issue (accounting information / disclosure / audit / standards) versus a corporate-finance mechanism, before drafting for 《会计研究》 (Accounting Research). Use this to decide fit and to re-route finance-mechanism papers to a finance journal before any other acr-* skill.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when choosing or sharpening a research question for an Accounting, Organizations and Society (AOS) manuscript — testing whether the question genuinely concerns the social, organizational, behavioral or institutional life of accounting, and picking the intellectual tradition the question demands. Screens fit; it does not build the theory (aos-theory-development).

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when writing the contribution and implications section for a 《会计研究》 (Accounting Research) manuscript — articulating both the accounting-theory contribution (role of accounting information) and concrete implications for standard-setters, regulators, and audit/reporting practice. Use after results and tables are final.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use for the pre-submission preflight to 《会计研究》 (Accounting Research) — checking footnote (当页下注) conventions, the 著者—出版年制 reference style, abstract/keyword limits, article length, the online-only submission system via the Accounting Society of China site, double-blind anonymity, and document hygiene. Use right before submitting; verify every rule against the journal's current 投稿指南.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when the empirical identification strategy is the bottleneck for a 《会计研究》 (Accounting Research) manuscript — exogenous standard / regulatory changes (event study, DID), PSM, Heckman, IV — and you need to stress-test the design before drafting tables. Prefers standard/regulatory shocks as the cleanest accounting identification source.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when the mechanism analysis for a 《会计研究》 (Accounting Research) manuscript is missing or mis-specified — the channel must be an information mechanism (reduce information asymmetry, raise disclosure quality, constrain earnings management, improve audit assurance), not a generic pricing or financing channel. Use after the main result holds.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when building the robustness section for a 《会计研究》 (Accounting Research) manuscript — replacing accounting measures with alternatives, adding governance / institutional controls, placebo tests, and endogeneity follow-ups — so the main result survives an accounting referee's scrutiny. Use after mechanism is settled.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when finalizing tables and figures for a 《会计研究》 (Accounting Research) manuscript — keeping the main table lean, reporting coefficients with the right precision, and interpreting economic magnitude (not just significance stars) for accounting measures. Use after robustness is settled.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when deciding which acr-* sub-skill to invoke next, or when sequencing manuscript work from fit positioning through rebuttal for 《会计研究》 (Accounting Research). Routes — does not replace — the specialized skills.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when writing or verifying the institutional / accounting-standard / regulatory background for a 《会计研究》 (Accounting Research) manuscript — getting standard clauses, regulatory rules, and effective dates exactly right, since precise institutional detail is a defining bar of this journal. Use before measurement and identification.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

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.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

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).

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。