Use when handling data documentation, sharing, and confidentiality for an American Journal of Sociology (AJS) manuscript. AJS does NOT advertise a mandatory editor-verified replication package like APSR/AJPS; document thoroughly, share what you ethically can, and verify the current policy. Prepares documentation; it does not over-state requirements.
SkillScore95Maintained
Automatic
◆Research pack
Last verified 8/15/2026
What it changes
Passed 21 of 22 test cases with the skill, and 18 of 22 without it.
Without skill82%
With skill95%
Checks it passed that the model alone missed
notes that AJS does not mandate an editor-verified Dataverse deposit step
clarifies that AJS does not advertise a mandatory editor-verified replication deposit gate
indicates that an originality statement is not required when there is no prior publication overlap
3 fixed18 passed either way1 still failing0 broke
Pass-rate lift
+14 pp
Tokens
+25%
Agent turns
0%
Response time
-34%
Model gemini-3.6-flashMeasured 8/15/2026v121 of 22 cases passed with skill
Tokens, turns and time describe resource use, not a dollar price.
See it in action
One of 3 test cases the skill fixed. Same model, same prompt, with and without the skill.
1 of 3
Prompt
I am submitting a brand new empirical paper to AJS that has no overlap with any of my previous publications or dissertations. Do I need an originality statement?
What was checked, without and with the skill
Checked
Without skill
With skill
indicates that an originality statement is not required when there is no prior publication overlap
Missed
Passed
case-18 · 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.md81 linessingle file
Data & Transparency (ajs-data-and-transparency)
AJS's public author guidance is less prescriptive on mandatory replication than APSR or AJPS:
there is no advertised editor-verified reproducibility deposit comparable to a Dataverse
verification step. Do not assert a requirement that AJS does not state. The right posture is:
document thoroughly, share what you ethically can, protect informants, and confirm the current
supplementary-materials / data-availability policy on the live AJS pages before submission.
When to trigger
Preparing data documentation and any supplementary materials
Deciding what can be shared given confidentiality, IRB, or proprietary constraints
Documenting comparative-historical or ethnographic evidence so claims are checkable
A reader asked how others could verify or build on the analysis
What AJS does / does not require (verify current wording)
No advertised mandatory, editor-verified replication package. Treat reproducibility as good
practice you choose, not a stated gate; live-check current data-availability or supplementary
policy before submission.
Originality / overlap: if the paper overlaps your prior published or under-review work, prepare
a brief originality statement saying what is new here.
Ethics:concurrent submission to more than one journal violates the Press's ethical
standards and leads to rejection.
Good practice (do this even though AJS may not pre-verify)
Document provenance and construction. A README/codebook describing sources, sample construction,
variable definitions, and analysis steps so the work is checkable.
Quantitative: keep a master script + pinned versions + seeds; be ready to share code even when
restricted data cannot be redistributed (give an access path).
Comparative-historical: cite primary sources precisely enough that the evidentiary trail can be
followed.
Ethnographic / interview: protect informants — anonymize, aggregate, or restrict sensitive
material; a controlled-access repository (e.g., QDR) where appropriate; share what supports the
claims without exposing participants.
Confidentiality first. Human-subjects protection overrides sharing; state clearly when and why
data cannot be shared, and what can (synthetic data, code, documentation).
Transparency posture by tradition (an AJS decision table)