Use to understand how the American Journal of Political Science (AJPS) evaluates a manuscript — double-blind peer review, desk screening, decision categories, the methodology-only Research Note and Correspondence routes, and the third-party verification that follows acceptance. Sets expectations and shapes the paper to survive review; it does not contact editors.
SkillScore100Maintained
Automatic
◆Research pack
Last verified 8/15/2026
What it changes
Passed 24 of 24 test cases with the skill, and 16 of 24 without it.
Without skill67%
With skill100%
Checks it passed that the model alone missed
The response includes the bracketed header 【Type fit】.
The response classifies the submission as a Research Note.
The response lists ajps-rebuttal as the recommended next step.
and 10 more in the full report
8 fixed16 passed either way0 still failing0 broke
Pass-rate lift
+33 pp
Tokens
+44%
Agent turns
0%
Response time
-27%
Model gemini-3.6-flashMeasured 8/15/2026v124 of 24 cases passed with skill
Tokens, turns and time describe resource use, not a dollar price.
See it in action
One of 8 test cases the skill fixed. Same model, same prompt, with and without the skill.
1 of 8
Prompt
Our empirical paper on judicial voting behavior is only 2,800 words. Since it is well under the 4,000-word limit, does it qualify for the Research Note track at AJPS?
What was checked, without and with the skill
Checked
Without skill
With skill
The response clarifies that empirical papers do not qualify as Research Notes regardless of word count.
Missed
Passed
case-20 · gemini-3.6-flash · 8/15/2026 · answers are capped and redacted
What's inside
The instructions your model reads when the skill loads.
SKILL.md103 linessingle file
Review Process (ajps-review-process)
Knowing how AJPS screens, decides, and then verifies lets you pre-empt failure modes before
submitting. AJPS is double-blind, published by Wiley for the MPSA, and pairs ordinary peer review
with a post-acceptance third-party verification step that no in-house-only journal has (see
ajps-replication-and-verification).
When to trigger
Before submitting, to stress-test the paper against likely rejection grounds
Deciding whether the paper is an Article, a methodology/meta-analysis Research Note, or a
Correspondence
Interpreting a decision letter and setting expectations
Understanding what happens between "accept" and "in print"
How AJPS review works
Double-blind. Reviewers do not know the authors and authors do not know reviewers. Anonymize
accordingly (see ajps-submission).
Editorial screening. The editorial team screens for fit, contribution, and methods before
sending to external review; weak-fit or out-of-scope papers can be returned without full review.
External review. Papers passing the screen go to expert reviewers who weigh identification,
contribution, and rigor.
Decision (typical): reject, revise and resubmit (R&R), or accept. Most accepted
papers pass through at least one R&R.
Then verification. After acceptance, replication materials are deposited and re-run by an
independent verifier to confirm they reproduce the main-text numbers — publication waits on
successful verification (see ajps-replication-and-verification).
Type-specific routes
Research Note — reserved for methodology (including methodology in normative theory) and
meta-analyses, <= 4,000 words. A short empirical study is not a Note.
Correspondence — critical responses to work already published in AJPS, <= 4,000 words. A
Correspondence flagging only a minor error (mislabeled variable, misreported result, coding error)
may be desk-rejected.
Shape the paper to pass
Make the contribution and its generalizable payoff explicit and early.
Use to understand how the British Journal of Political Science (BJPS) evaluates a manuscript — double-blind review with at least two referees, the desk screen, decision categories, and what reviewers are asked to weigh. Sets expectations and shapes the paper to survive review; it does not contact editors.