「yc」の検索結果

Use when you need to understand how Accounting, Organizations and Society (AOS) evaluates a manuscript — triage by the joint Editors-in-Chief, double-anonymized review by interdisciplinary referees, the meaning of each decision type, and how to read the editor's letter. Explains the process; it does not draft the revision response (aos-rebuttal).

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 exhibits of an Accounting, Organizations and Society (AOS) manuscript — data-inventory and evidence tables for qualitative work, cell-means and process-test tables for experiments, and figures that carry theoretical weight — in Elsevier-compatible format. Builds exhibits; it does not run the analysis (aos-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 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 designing the study for an Accounting, Organizations and Society (AOS) manuscript — qualitative field studies (access, case logic, interviews, observation), behavioral experiments, surveys, historical/archival inquiry, or theory-laden archival designs, each with the ethics and site-anonymity groundwork done early. Designs the inquiry; it does not run the coding or estimation (aos-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 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 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 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 articulating what an Accounting, Organizations and Society (AOS) manuscript contributes — converting findings into a claim that changes how the field understands accounting's social, organizational, behavioral or institutional operation. Frames the payoff; it does not produce new analysis (aos-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 deciding which aos-* sub-skill to invoke next, or when sequencing manuscript work from topic selection through rebuttal for an Accounting, Organizations and Society (AOS) manuscript. Routes — it 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 building the conceptual exhibits of an Academy of Management Review (AMR) manuscript — process models, 2x2 typologies, multi-level frameworks, and propositions tables that carry theoretical work. These are CONCEPTUAL figures, NOT data plots; AMR has no charts of results because it has no data.

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 applying a theory-construction method for an Academy of Management Review (AMR) manuscript — building constructs, defining their domain, specifying relationships, articulating the underlying logic/mechanisms, and setting boundary conditions. This is the THEORY-CONSTRUCTION craft, NOT empirical method; AMR publishes no datasets, no measures, and no statistical tests.

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 organizing appendices and supplementary material for an ACL paper under ACL Rolling Review, covering the mandatory Limitations and optional ethics sections, appendices after references, anonymized software and data archives, the no-cloud-links rule, and deciding what must stay in the 8-page or 4-page body.

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 strengthening reproducibility evidence for an ACL paper reviewed through ACL Rolling Review, covering the Responsible NLP checklist end to end, hyperparameter and compute reporting, prompt and decoding disclosure for LLM experiments, data contamination auditing, variance across runs, and checklist-to-paper consistency.

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 when deciding whether a project fits ACL versus EMNLP, NAACL, EACL, TACL, Computational Linguistics, COLM, or an ML venue, covering contribution typing for NLP work, long-versus-short paper choice, the annual theme track, Findings-tier expectations, and sharpening the computational-linguistics framing before writing starts.

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 preparing an accepted ACM CCS paper for the ACM Digital Library proceedings, covering de-anonymization, the ACM sigconf final format, ACM rights and eRights forms, badge placement from artifact evaluation, incorporation of shepherd and minor-revision requirements, disclosure-timing coordination, registration, and in-person presentation.

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 deciding which amr-* sub-skill to invoke next, or when sequencing a theory-building manuscript from theoretical-puzzle framing through developmental-review revision for an Academy of Management Review (AMR) submission. 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 polishing the prose and structure of an Academy of Management Review (AMR) manuscript to AOM house style and an argument-driven voice. Late-stage polish; it does NOT build theory or check logic — do those first with amr-theory-development and amr-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 polishing the prose of an Accounting, Organizations and Society (AOS) manuscript — sustained argumentative writing that carries theory and evidence together, a self-contained abstract, disciplined length despite the absence of a hard cap, and full anonymization for double-anonymized review. Polishes prose; it does not run the submission preflight (aos-submission).

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 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 the theoretical puzzle is the bottleneck for an Academy of Management Review (AMR) manuscript — deciding whether an idea is theory-worthy and AMR-fit before any theorizing begins. Frames the puzzle; it does NOT build constructs (that is amr-theory-development) or design any empirical study (AMR has none).

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。