rfs-literature-positioning
Use when the related-work framing is the bottleneck for a The Review of Financial Studies (RFS) manuscript — defining the precise delta against JF/JFE/RFS and prior literature. Builds positioning, not the empirical design or the topic itself.
Profile →npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill rfs-literature-positioning --agent claude-code
Same command for any agent — swap --agent for codex, cursor, copilot.
Weekly change comes from our own snapshots, not the repository page — it measures attention, not adoption.
# Literature Positioning (rfs-literature-positioning) ## When to trigger - The related-work section is a list ("X did A, Y did B") with no synthesis - You cannot state your contribution as a single crisp delta - A reader asks "how is this different from [recent RFS/JF/JFE paper]?" - The novelty claim from `rfs-topic-selection` needs to be defended against the literature ## How RFS reviewers read positioning RFS referees and editors are typically the authors of the papers you cite. The handling editor pool is concrete — Executive Editor Tarun Ramadorai plus editors such as Viral Acharya, Xavier Giroud, Andrey Malenko, Anna Pavlova, Clemens Sialm, David Sraer, and Jessica Wachter — so the person screening an intermediation, household-finance, or asset-pricing paper may well be a primary author in that literature. Positioning is judged on whether you (1) know the *current* frontier, (2) cite the right primary sources rather than secondary surveys, and (3) state a delta that is real and defensible — not rhetorical. When you build on an RFS-defining result (e.g., Brunnermeier–Pedersen 2009 on the liquidity-funding spiral, RFS 22(6)), cite the RFS original, not a later survey that paraph
- When to trigger
- How RFS reviewers read positioning
- Positioning structure
- Delta types that work at RFS
- Citing across the top-3 and field journals
- Checklist
- Anti-patterns
- Output format
What does the rfs-literature-positioning skill do?
Use when the related-work framing is the bottleneck for a The Review of Financial Studies (RFS) manuscript — defining the precise delta against JF/JFE/RFS and prior literature. Builds positioning, not the empirical design or the topic itself.
How do I install it?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill rfs-literature-positioning --agent claude-code` — it drops the skill into your project so the agent can pick it up. Swap the --agent value for codex, cursor or copilot if you use one of those.
Where does this skill come from?
From brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills, a repository with 909 stars. We read it straight from the repository tree rather than a submitted listing, so what you see here is what is actually published.
Is a popular skill a good skill?
Not necessarily. Stars measure attention, not adoption — a repository can trend for a week and be abandoned. That is why we show the weekly change from our own snapshots next to the total, instead of a single flattering number.