gabrielmoreira Conditional-Accept Response (aeri-rebuttal)
When to trigger
- A conditional accept letter arrived from AER: Insights
- You must return a revised short paper within the conditional window (~8 weeks)
- The letter lists changes the editor expects, and you need a tight response
- You received a reject and are deciding what to do (see end of this skill)
What an AER: Insights conditional accept means (检索于 2026-06；以官网为准)
AER: Insights does not issue traditional revise-and-resubmit decisions. A conditional accept means the editor expects to publish the paper subject to the changes in the decision letter; authors typically get about 8 weeks to return the revision, which is normally not sent back to referees. The conditions are meant to be achievable without substantial uncertainty — this is finishing, not relitigating. So the response is short, complete, and non-defensive: do what the letter asks, document it crisply, and do not reopen settled issues.
How to respond
- Treat the letter as a punch list. Map every requested change to a concrete edit; nothing is "optional."
- Comply, don't argue. Since there is no referee round to win, push back only where a request is genuinely infeasible or would be wrong — and then offer an alternative that satisfies the underlying concern.
- Keep the response letter short. One numbered item per request: the request, what you did, where in the paper (section/exhibit/line). Editors of a short journal reward concision.
- Protect the caps. Edits must keep the paper within 7,000 − 200×(#exhibits) words and ≤5 exhibits — added text or an added exhibit can re-breach the gate. Move new material to the Supplemental Appendix (
aeri-robustness). - Finalize the replication package. A conditional accept means the AEA Data Editor check is imminent; have the deposit ready (
aeri-replication-package). - Keep the single insight intact. Do not let requested additions turn the short paper into a sprawling one.
Response-letter structure
Dear Editor [name],
Thank you for the conditional acceptance. We have addressed each point below.
1. [Editor request, quoted/paraphrased]
Response: [what we did], now in [Section/Exhibit/Appendix].
2. ...
We confirm the manuscript remains within the word and exhibit limits, and the
replication package is prepared for the AEA Data Editor.
Checklist
- Every item in the decision letter mapped to a concrete edit
- Response letter is concise, point-by-point, non-defensive
- Any pushback is rare, justified, and offers an alternative
- Revised paper still within word + exhibit caps; new material to the appendix
- The single insight is unchanged; no scope creep
- Replication package finalized for the AEA Data Editor check
- Returned within the conditional window (~8 weeks)
Anti-patterns
- Arguing with the editor as if this were a multi-round R&R
- Adding text/exhibits that re-breach the word or exhibit cap
- A long, defensive response letter for a short paper
- Letting requested additions sprawl the paper beyond its single insight
- Leaving the data/code deposit until after the response is sent
If it was a REJECT instead
There is no path to relitigate a reject at AER: Insights. Reframe quickly: the short paper is often a strong fit for an AEJ field journal, or can be expanded into a fuller AER-style paper if the idea supports more. Route back to aeri-topic-selection to decide which.
Output format
【Decision】conditional accept / reject
【Punch list】each request → edit → location
【Caps after revision】words = __ (≤ 7000 − 200×__?), exhibits __/5
【Insight intact】single idea unchanged? [Y/N]
【Data editor】replication package ready? [Y/N]
【If reject】next venue (AEJ / expand to AER) → aeri-topic-selection
【Next step】submit revision within ~8-week window