Individual skill

smr-literature-positioning

Use when positioning a Sociological Methods & Research (SMR) manuscript against the methods literature across sociology, statistics, econometrics, psychometrics, and computational social science, and avoiding sibling-journal misattribution. Maps the contribution onto prior methods; does not derive or simulate.

Sociological-Methods-and-Research-Skills/skills/smr-literature-positioning/SKILL.md

Read pinned source

Source commit 932eb23331721b16e967c59f093781be1928b498

What was checked

Matches the observed repository HEAD
Yes
Scanner rules are current
No
Repository scan complete
No
Skill scan complete
Yes
Observed behavior
Not checked yet
Last checked
Nov 9, 2026

These are observations at the recorded commit, not a guarantee of safety. Review the source before running it.

Install this skill

Choose an agent in your Stack or copy a command below. Commands fetch the pinned commit and copy only this skill directory. Existing destinations are refused. Copying a command does not install anything.

An install command is unavailable: current rules, complete repository and skill scans, an eligible behavior level and a permitted license are required.

Repository context

Repository stars (not skill ratings)
1,411
Repository last updated
Sep 27, 2026
License
MIT

Observed agent integration: No specific integration evidence. Standard SKILL.md installation does not imply verified compatibility.

Files and excerpt

File metadata and permitted, redacted excerpts come from the recorded scan. Source links are pinned to that commit.

Browse files
Read excerpt

# SMR Literature Positioning

Use this to place the contribution in the *methods* literature, not the substantive one. SMR
reviewers are methodologists who often know the closest prior estimator, the original derivation, and
the competing approach in a neighboring discipline. A missed precedent is the fastest path to a
reject.

## Position against methods, not findings

The literature review of an SMR paper answers "what is the closest *method*, and how is yours
different?" — not "what is known about the substantive topic." Structure the review as a small map:

- **Direct ancestors**: the method(s) your contribution extends, corrects, or replaces. Cite the
  primary source, not a textbook summary.
Back to top