rof-review-process
Use when interpreting Review of Finance desk screening, Screen Reports, double-blind review, top-three-finance-journal referee standards, two-round decision philosophy, Fast-Track timing, and sanctions for undisclosed resubmission or dual submission.
Profile →npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill rof-review-process --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.
# Review of Finance Review Process Use this to plan around RoF's editorial model. ## Process model - RoF uses double-blind anonymous review under the current OUP instructions; manuscripts must contain no author-identifying references (also scrub PDF metadata). - Screen Reports from trusted referees and Associate Editors can inform desk-rejection decisions before full review. - Referees are asked to apply top-three-finance-journal standards and to separate their comments into (1) major concerns required for publication and (2) suggestions. Read reports through this lens: bucket (1) is what you must satisfy. - RoF states a two-round decision philosophy: it aims to decide by the second round and will likely ignore new round-two concerns not raised in round one and unrelated to your changes, so round one is decisive. - Published papers identify the accepting editor and the submission and acceptance dates; the policy frames authors (not referees) as the owners of the paper. - Fast-Track submissions pay a premium (EUR 900 first submission) for a 14-day decision target. - Undisclosed resubmission of a rejected RoF paper, or simultaneous submission elsewhere, triggers desk rejection and a
- Process model
- Desk-screen patterns at this journal
- Timing expectations (hedged)
- Reading the decision letter
- Editorial board (as of the 1 January 2026 update — re-verify)
- Output format
What does the rof-review-process skill do?
Use when interpreting Review of Finance desk screening, Screen Reports, double-blind review, top-three-finance-journal referee standards, two-round decision philosophy, Fast-Track timing, and sanctions for undisclosed resubmission or dual submission.
How do I install it?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill rof-review-process --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.