Conditional-Accept Response (aeri-rebuttal)

When to trigger

• A conditional accept letter arrived from AER: Insights
• You must return a revised short paper within the conditional window (~8 weeks)
• The letter lists changes the editor expects, and you need a tight response
• You received a reject and are deciding what to do (see end of this skill)

What an AER: Insights conditional accept means (检索于 2026-06；以官网为准)

AER: Insights does not issue traditional revise-and-resubmit decisions. A conditional accept means the editor expects to publish the paper subject to the changes in the decision letter; authors typically get about 8 weeks to return the revision, which is normally not sent back to referees. The conditions are meant to be achievable without substantial uncertainty — this is finishing, not relitigating. So the response is short, complete, and non-defensive: do what the letter asks, document it crisply, and do not reopen settled issues.

How to respond

1. Treat the letter as a punch list. Map every requested change to a concrete edit; nothing is "optional."
2. Comply, don't argue. Since there is no referee round to win, push back only where a request is genuinely infeasible or would be wrong — and then offer an alternative that satisfies the underlying concern.
3. Keep the response letter short. One numbered item per request: the request, what you did, where in the paper (section/exhibit/line). Editors of a short journal reward concision.
4. Protect the caps. Edits must keep the paper within 7,000 − 200×(#exhibits) words and ≤5 exhibits — added text or an added exhibit can re-breach the gate. Move new material to the Supplemental Appendix (aeri-robustness).
5. Finalize the replication package. A conditional accept means the AEA Data Editor check is imminent; have the deposit ready (aeri-replication-package).
6. Keep the single insight intact. Do not let requested additions turn the short paper into a sprawling one.

Response-letter structure

Dear Editor [name],
Thank you for the conditional acceptance. We have addressed each point below.

1. [Editor request, quoted/paraphrased]
   Response: [what we did], now in [Section/Exhibit/Appendix].
2. ...
We confirm the manuscript remains within the word and exhibit limits, and the
replication package is prepared for the AEA Data Editor.

Checklist

• [ ] Every item in the decision letter mapped to a concrete edit
• [ ] Response letter is concise, point-by-point, non-defensive
• [ ] Any pushback is rare, justified, and offers an alternative
• [ ] Revised paper still within word + exhibit caps; new material to the appendix
• [ ] The single insight is unchanged; no scope creep
• [ ] Replication package finalized for the AEA Data Editor check
• [ ] Returned within the conditional window (~8 weeks)

Anti-patterns

• Arguing with the editor as if this were a multi-round R&R
• Adding text/exhibits that re-breach the word or exhibit cap
• A long, defensive response letter for a short paper
• Letting requested additions sprawl the paper beyond its single insight
• Leaving the data/code deposit until after the response is sent

If it was a REJECT instead

There is no path to relitigate a reject at AER: Insights. Reframe quickly: the short paper is often a strong fit for an AEJ field journal, or can be expanded into a fuller AER-style paper if the idea supports more. Route back to aeri-topic-selection to decide which.

Output format

【Decision】conditional accept / reject
【Punch list】each request → edit → location
【Caps after revision】words = __ (≤ 7000 − 200×__?), exhibits __/5
【Insight intact】single idea unchanged? [Y/N]
【Data editor】replication package ready? [Y/N]
【If reject】next venue (AEJ / expand to AER) → aeri-topic-selection
【Next step】submit revision within ~8-week window