asr-literature-positioning — independently scanned and version-tracked by SaferSkills.
SaferSkills independently audited asr-literature-positioning (Agent Skill) and scored it 100/100 (green). The audit ran 55 deterministic rules across Security, Supply Chain, Maintenance, Transparency, and Community; it found 0 high-severity and 0 lower-severity findings. The full rule-by-rule trace and per-finding evidence are below. Free, methodology-open.
Findings & checks · 0 flagged
Every scanned point with the score it earned and what moved between them.
First recorded scan — no prior version to compare against.
The primary manifest — the file an agent reads to learn what this artifact does.
An ASR paper has to convince sociologists beyond its niche that the contribution matters. Positioning places the paper in a sociological debate — about inequality, culture, institutions, mechanisms — that a general reader recognizes, and shows precisely what the paper changes.
question your paper addresses, and cite the works that define it.
matters for sociology). The intro must make a demographer care about an ethnographic paper and vice versa.
mismeasured, and why resolving it advances sociological understanding.
is incomplete / conditional / better understood as M′."
asr-research-design).
| If your paper is… | also engage… |
|---|---|
| an ethnographic case | the general theory of the mechanism it reveals |
| a demographic trend | the substantive sociology the trend bears on (family, work, inequality) |
| comparative-historical | the general causal/processual theory, not only area studies |
| a network/computational study | the substantive literature your structure or method speaks to |
ASR editors screen for fit before sending a paper out; as the ASA's general flagship they decline work that reads as a subfield note no matter how clean. These positioning failures most often draw an early decline.
| Pattern | Why it stalls at ASR | The positioning fix |
|---|---|---|
| "First study of X in setting Y" | descriptive, not disciplinary | frame the general mechanism the setting illuminates |
| Citations from one subfield only | reads as a specialty paper | add the cross-subfield debate it speaks to |
| Gap stated as "little is known" | no live disagreement | name what is contested or under-theorized |
| Closest competitor uncited | reads as evasion | engage the nearest rival; state the difference |
An ethnographer studies how gig-platform drivers contest algorithmic management.
Weak frame: "First ethnography of driver resistance on Platform Z" → subfield note, likely declined
Strong frame: enters the general debate on control and consent in the labor process; shows
algorithmic management reproduces an older managerial logic through new infrastructure
Move: "Prior work treats algorithmic control as a rupture; the case shows continuity with
conditions C1–C3" → a portable, contestable claimThe same fieldwork goes from a platform case study to a contribution another subfield can use.
more citations from your own niche.
("M is incomplete / conditional / better understood as M′").
payoff before the case details.
a generalist in the same breath — the defining ASR positioning demand.
far more than an exhaustive but inert survey.
the move is a refinement rather than an overturning.
asr-submission)【Debate】the live sociological disagreement / open question
【Key works】the 3-6 that define it (incl. cross-subfield)
【Gap】what is contested / under-theorized / mismeasured
【Move】how this paper changes the debate
【Strongest rival】and how the design will adjudicate it
【Next】asr-theory-building../../resources/official-source-map.md — ASR scope and contribution expectations~30 seconds. Free. No account. Every finding cites a rule and a line of evidence.