Findings & checks · 0 flagged
Every scanned point with the score it earned and what moved between them.
Aggregate score unchanged between these scans.
The primary manifest — the file an agent reads to learn what this artifact does.
Annual Review of Psychology Skills
<p align="center"><img src="assets/cover.svg" width="200" alt="Annual Review of Psychology Skills cover"></p>
English | 简体中文
Twelve agent skills for invited review articles targeted at the Annual Review of Psychology (ARPsych) — the Annual Reviews (nonprofit) survey series, founded 1950 and among the highest-impact journals in the field. The pack is tuned to commissioned, authoritative reviews that synthesize a topic across cognitive, social, developmental, clinical, biological/neuro, I-O, and methods psychology for the whole field and adjacent disciplines. It keeps the manuscript distinct from Psychological Bulletin (submitted reviews/meta-analyses), Annual Review of Clinical Psychology (the clinical sister), and Perspectives on Psychological Science (essays), and it emphasizes the one thing that makes or breaks a review of record: an organizing framework that turns a literature into an argument.
Official basis checked 2026-06 (re-check volatile details before delivery): see resources/official-source-map.md.
Why a separate stack?
| ARPsych constraint | What it forces |
|---|---|
| Invitation-only | Articles are commissioned by the Editorial Committee; you earn an invitation, you do not cold-submit (检索于 2026-06；以官网为准) |
| Review, not research | The artefact appraises others' studies; there is no preregistration or power analysis of your own |
| Organizing framework | A spine (taxonomy / process / levels / theory-contest) is the contribution; an annotated bibliography fails |
| Balance is editorial currency | The Committee judges accuracy, rigor, and balance; self-promotion and advocacy are punished |
| Broad readership | Authoritative yet accessible to a psychologist outside the subfield |
| Sibling boundary | Must belong here, not Psychological Bulletin / ARClinPsych / Perspectives |
| Source discipline | Current process facts are cited or marked 待核实 |
Quick Start
/plugin marketplace add ./Annual-Review-of-Psychology-Skills
/plugin install annual-review-of-psychology-skillsManual use: start with skills/arpsych-workflow/SKILL.md.
Default Workflow
arpsych-workflow → arpsych-topic-selection → arpsych-proposal-and-commissioning → arpsych-literature-synthesis → arpsych-organizing-framework → arpsych-comprehensiveness-and-balance → arpsych-tables-figures → arpsych-writing-style → arpsych-transparency-and-reproducibility → arpsych-editor-strategy → arpsych-submission → arpsych-revisionSkills
| # | Skill | What it does |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | arpsych-workflow | Workflow router for ARPsych invited reviews |
| 2 | arpsych-topic-selection | Is the topic mature, important, and synthesis-ready? |
| 3 | arpsych-proposal-and-commissioning | The Editorial-Committee invitation cycle |
| 4 | arpsych-literature-synthesis | Systematic, documentable coverage of the literature |
| 5 | arpsych-organizing-framework | The analytical spine that carries the review |
| 6 | arpsych-comprehensiveness-and-balance | Even-handed coverage; credibility weighting; no self-promotion |
| 7 | arpsych-tables-figures | The framework figure and synthesis tables |
| 8 | arpsych-writing-style | The authoritative-yet-accessible ARPsych voice |
| 9 | arpsych-transparency-and-reproducibility | Documented search; reproducible meta-analysis |
| 10 | arpsych-editor-strategy | Scope, length, deadlines, production timeline |
| 11 | arpsych-submission | Annual Reviews delivery preflight |
| 12 | arpsych-revision | Responding to the Editor and Committee |
Resources
resources/README.md— resource indexresources/official-source-map.md— official Annual Reviews URLs and volatile checksresources/external_tools.md— databases, search tools, and meta-analysis softwareresources/worked-examples/01-introduction.md— fictional before/after introductionresources/exemplars/library.md— web-verified real ARPsych articles + sibling guardrails
Differences vs. sibling venues
| Venue | Intake | Artefact | This pack's stance |
|---|---|---|---|
| Annual Review of Psychology | invited by Editorial Committee | authoritative survey of record | the target — framework-first review craft |
| Psychological Bulletin | submitted | review / meta-analysis | route here if you want to submit a stand-alone meta-analysis |
| Annual Review of Clinical Psychology | invited (sister series) | clinical-science survey | route here if the audience is clinical scientists |
| Perspectives on Psychological Science | submitted | shorter, opinionated essay | route here for a provocative argument, not a survey |
Related Links
- https://www.annualreviews.org/journal/psych
- https://www.annualreviews.org/page/authors/general-information
- https://www.annualreviews.org/page/authors/editorial-policies
License
MIT (c) 2026 Bryce Wang. See LICENSE.