Literature Positioning (crim-literature-positioning)
A common reason criminology papers stall is that they read as "another dataset" rather than a move in a
theoretical debate. Positioning is therefore not throat-clearing — it places the paper where a
general criminology audience can see the open question and your move on it.
When to trigger
- Drafting or revising the introduction and the "contribution" paragraph
- A reviewer said you "missed key work" or "don't engage the theory"
- Your empirics are solid but the paper doesn't connect to a criminological debate
- You need to distinguish your contribution from the closest prior papers
How Criminology wants the literature engaged
- Engage the debate, not a pile of citations. Identify the live disagreement or open question —
e.g., is desistance driven by cognitive change or social bonds? do hot-spot effects displace or
diffuse? does procedural justice cause compliance? Cite the works that define it.
- Name the theoretical tradition. Locate the paper within (or against) a recognizable theory —
social control, social learning, strain/GST, routine activity, life-course/age-graded informal
control, labeling, deterrence, procedural justice, social disorganization/collective efficacy.
- Two audiences at once. Satisfy the specialists (you know the frontier) and the
interdisciplinary readership (a developmental psychologist and a criminal-justice scholar both see
why it matters).
- Name the gap precisely. Not "little is known" — say what is contested, mismeasured,
confounded, or untested, and why resolving it advances theory.
- Pre-empt the obvious objection. Reviewers are expert; name the strongest rival mechanism and say
how your design adjudicates it (hand off to
crim-research-design).
Cross-field engagement (a Criminology demand)
| If your paper is… |
also engage… |
| a developmental/life-course study |
the criminal-career and desistance debates, not just psychology |
| a neighborhoods-and-crime study |
social disorganization / collective-efficacy theory and spatial work |
| an experiment on policing or courts |
deterrence and procedural-justice/legitimacy theory |
| a measurement contribution |
the substantive theories that will use the measure |
Anti-patterns
- A "literature dump" with no organizing theoretical debate
- Engaging only one discipline's literature when the journal is interdisciplinary
- Strawmanning prior theory, or hiding the closest competitor paper
- Self-citation that breaks anonymity (the main document is anonymized — see
crim-submission)
- Claiming "first to study" when the contribution is incremental
Positioning pass for Criminology
Treat this skill as an executable review pass, not a prose hint. First lock the crime/justice process, measurement validity, research design, and policy consequence; then judge whether the current manuscript answers the venue's real reader: criminology reviewers who expect theory-linked crime, justice, or harm mechanisms plus transparent measurement.
- Do the pass: 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.
- Return a ledger: give
claim / evidence / risk / manuscript location rows, so the next agent can edit rather than rediscover the issue.
- Sibling guard: compare against Justice Quarterly for applied justice, Journal of Quantitative Criminology for methods focus, Social Problems for broader sociological framing; if a sibling owns the contribution, recommend re-routing before polishing format.
- Stop condition: do not give submission-ready advice until the pack's
resources/official-source-map.md has been checked for volatile rules and the manuscript has one concrete fix for the largest venue-specific risk.
Output format
【Debate】the live disagreement / open question
【Tradition】the theory the paper engages or challenges
【Key works】the 3-6 that define it (incl. cross-field)
【Gap】what is contested / mismeasured / confounded / untested
【Move】how this paper changes the debate
【Strongest rival】and how the design will adjudicate it
【Next】crim-theory-building
Supplementary resources
Source: brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills → Criminology-Skills/skills/crim-literature-positioning/SKILL.md
1---2name: crim-literature-positioning3description: Use when positioning a Criminology (ASC / Wiley) manuscript against the literature so it reads as a contribution to the field's live debates, not a citation pile. Criminology readers expect engagement with the relevant theoretical tradition and the closest prior empirical work across the field's many disciplines. Stakes the contribution; it does not write the lit review.4---567# Literature Positioning (crim-literature-positioning)89A common reason criminology papers stall is that they read as "another dataset" rather than a move in a10**theoretical debate**. Positioning is therefore not throat-clearing — it places the paper where a11general criminology audience can see the open question and your move on it.1213## When to trigger1415- Drafting or revising the introduction and the "contribution" paragraph16- A reviewer said you "missed key work" or "don't engage the theory"17- Your empirics are solid but the paper doesn't connect to a criminological debate18- You need to distinguish your contribution from the closest prior papers1920## How Criminology wants the literature engaged21221. **Engage the debate, not a pile of citations.** Identify the live disagreement or open question —23 e.g., is desistance driven by cognitive change or social bonds? do hot-spot effects displace or24 diffuse? does procedural justice cause compliance? Cite the works that *define* it.252. **Name the theoretical tradition.** Locate the paper within (or against) a recognizable theory —26 social control, social learning, strain/GST, routine activity, life-course/age-graded informal27 control, labeling, deterrence, procedural justice, social disorganization/collective efficacy.283. **Two audiences at once.** Satisfy the specialists (you know the frontier) *and* the29 interdisciplinary readership (a developmental psychologist and a criminal-justice scholar both see30 why it matters).314. **Name the gap precisely.** Not "little is known" — say what is **contested, mismeasured,32 confounded, or untested**, and why resolving it advances theory.335. **Pre-empt the obvious objection.** Reviewers are expert; name the strongest rival mechanism and say34 how your design adjudicates it (hand off to `crim-research-design`).3536## Cross-field engagement (a Criminology demand)3738| If your paper is… | also engage… |39|-------------------|--------------|40| a developmental/life-course study | the criminal-career and desistance debates, not just psychology |41| a neighborhoods-and-crime study | social disorganization / collective-efficacy theory and spatial work |42| an experiment on policing or courts | deterrence and procedural-justice/legitimacy theory |43| a measurement contribution | the substantive theories that will use the measure |4445## Anti-patterns4647- A "literature dump" with no organizing theoretical debate48- Engaging only one discipline's literature when the journal is interdisciplinary49- Strawmanning prior theory, or hiding the closest competitor paper50- Self-citation that breaks anonymity (the main document is anonymized — see `crim-submission`)51- Claiming "first to study" when the contribution is incremental525354## Positioning pass for Criminology5556Treat this skill as an executable review pass, not a prose hint. First lock the crime/justice process, measurement validity, research design, and policy consequence; then judge whether the current manuscript answers the venue's real reader: criminology reviewers who expect theory-linked crime, justice, or harm mechanisms plus transparent measurement.5758- **Do the pass:** 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.59- **Return a ledger:** give `claim / evidence / risk / manuscript location` rows, so the next agent can edit rather than rediscover the issue.60- **Sibling guard:** compare against Justice Quarterly for applied justice, Journal of Quantitative Criminology for methods focus, Social Problems for broader sociological framing; if a sibling owns the contribution, recommend re-routing before polishing format.61- **Stop condition:** do not give submission-ready advice until the pack's `resources/official-source-map.md` has been checked for volatile rules and the manuscript has one concrete fix for the largest venue-specific risk.6263## Output format6465```66【Debate】the live disagreement / open question67【Tradition】the theory the paper engages or challenges68【Key works】the 3-6 that define it (incl. cross-field)69【Gap】what is contested / mismeasured / confounded / untested70【Move】how this paper changes the debate71【Strongest rival】and how the design will adjudicate it72【Next】crim-theory-building73```7475## Supplementary resources7677- [`../../resources/external_tools.md`](../../resources/external_tools.md) — data sources mapped to criminological literatures78- [`../../resources/official-source-map.md`](../../resources/official-source-map.md) — Criminology scope and contribution expectations7980---8182**Source:** [`brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills`](https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) → `Criminology-Skills/skills/crim-literature-positioning/SKILL.md`
thedixitjain