Literature Positioning (demog-literature-positioning)
SkillDev toolsUse when positioning a Demography (PAA / Duke University Press) manuscript against the population-science literature so it reads as a contribution of general interest to demographers. Demography readers span fertility, mortality, migration, family, and health, so the paper must engage the demographic literatures they expect. Stakes the contribution; it does not write the lit review.
Instructions available. Your AI can read the instructions. Execution depends on the setup they require.
Account requirements not reviewed. Check the skill instructions before use; ahel provides instructions and does not run this skill.
Add ahel to your AI once: Claude, ChatGPT, Cursor, Claude Code or Codex. Then ask it to use this.
Then ask your AI: use the Literature Positioning (demog-literature-positioning) skill
What this skill tells your AI
The instructions your AI receives, as published by brycewang-stanford/awesome-journal-skills in Demography-Skills/skills/demog-literature-positioning/SKILL.md and read by ahel’s review.
Demography editors screen for whether a paper is "of general interest to demographers." A paper that engages only a narrow applied literature — and not the demographic conversation it belongs to — reads as off-fit and risks desk rejection. The goal is to place the paper where population scientists across components can see the gap and the move.
When to trigger
- Drafting or revising the introduction and the "contribution" paragraph
- A reviewer said you "missed the demographic literature" or "this is just an applied paper"
- Your applied literature is solid but the paper doesn't connect to population science
- You need to distinguish your contribution from the closest prior demographic work
How Demography wants the literature engaged
- Engage the demographic conversation, not a pile of citations. Identify the open question in population science your paper speaks to — a contested trend, an unexplained gap, a measurement dispute, a mechanism debate.
- Two audiences at once. Satisfy specialists in your component (you know the frontier) and general demographers (why it matters for population change). A mortality reader should see why your fertility paper matters.
- Name the gap precisely. Not "little is known" — say what is mismeasured, undertheorized, or contested in the demographic record, and why resolving it advances population science.
- Position the contribution as a move. "Prior work attributes the trend to X; we decompose it and show component Y, not X, drives it" — or "the standard measure conflates tempo and quantum; we separate them."
- Pre-empt the obvious objection. Reviewers are expert demographers; acknowledge the strongest
rival explanation and say how your design adjudicates it (hand off to
demog-research-design).
Cross-component engagement (a distinctive Demography demand)
| If your paper is… | also engage… |
|---|---|
| an estimate of a fertility/mortality/migration trend | the broader population-change literature it bears on |
| a measurement or formal-demographic advance | the substantive literatures that will use the measure |
| a single-country case | the comparative/general demographic theory it speaks to |
| a health or family outcome | the demographic consequences (aging, structure, life expectancy) |
Anti-patterns
- A "literature dump" with no organizing demographic question
- Engaging only a narrow applied (e.g., clinical or single-policy) literature
- Strawmanning prior demographic estimates, or hiding the closest competitor study
- Self-citation that breaks double-blind anonymity (avoid self-identifying references — see
demog-submission) - Claiming "first to study" when the contribution is incremental
Positioning pass for Demography
Run this as a concrete capability pass. First lock the demographic process, data source, time scale, selection/migration/mortality issue, and uncertainty; then test whether the manuscript addresses population-science reviewers who inspect demographic process, measurement, cohort/period logic, and population validity.
- Primary move: Build a three-column map: incumbent conversation, unresolved tension, and this manuscript's delta; include one sibling-venue omission that would make a referee doubt the fit.
- Decision ledger: return
claim / evidence / blocker / next editrows so the next pass can patch the manuscript directly. - Sibling comparison: compare against Population and Development Review for policy synthesis, JMF for family process, Social Forces for broader sociology; if the neighboring outlet has the stronger audience claim, recommend re-routing before polishing.
- Verification floor: before submission-ready advice, re-open
resources/official-source-map.mdfor volatile rules and name the one unresolved fact that could change the recommendation.
Output format
【Conversation】the open demographic question / contested trend
【Key works】the 3-6 that define it (incl. cross-component)
【Gap】what is mismeasured / unexplained / contested
【Move】how this paper changes the demographic record or understanding
【Strongest rival】and how the design will adjudicate it
【Next】demog-theory-building
Supplementary resources
../../resources/external_tools.md— population data sources to anchor the literature../../resources/official-source-map.md— Demography aims, scope, and "general interest" standard
Signals
- GitHub stars
- 1k
- Forks
- 155
- Last commit
- Sep 2026
Advanced
- Item type
- skill
- Key
demog-literature-positioning- Source
- github.com/brycewang-stanford/awesome-journal-skills
github.com/brycewang-stanford/awesome-journal-skills
Related picks
Skill · brycewang-stanford
The pick for Academic03-academic-writing
Skill · 24kchengye
The pick for Academicteach
Skill · mattpocock
More in Dev toolsimplement
Skill · mattpocock
More in Dev toolsponytail
Skill · dietrichgebert
More in Dev toolscaveman
Skill · juliusbrussee
More in Dev tools