For researchers in marketing & business
Describe your idea in a few sentences. ScholarSignal searches the literature for the closest existing work and returns an editor-style verdict on contribution, design and journal fit, while changing direction is still cheap.
Do recommendation feeds make customers more loyal?
A relevant question, but a one-time survey cannot support the causal claim about personalisation, and “loyalty” needs a precise outcome. Narrow the claim or find variation in exposure.
Closest existing work · 12 papers retrieved from OpenAlex, each with how your idea differs
Illustrative evaluationDoes double jeopardy hold for B2B software brands?
A known law tested in a new category with an aligned measure. State the boundary conditions and aim at an outlet that publishes replications and empirical generalizations.
Closest existing work · 9 papers retrieved, including earlier tests of the same law in other categories
Illustrative evaluationDo green claims raise Gen Z's willingness to pay?
A crowded question where a new survey adds a sample, not an insight. Reframe around when green claims backfire, or test a boundary condition the literature has not settled.
Closest existing work · 12 papers retrieved; the closest three already test the same main effect
Illustrative evaluationDo chatbot apologies repair satisfaction after a service failure?
A timely mechanism with a clear experimental design. The contribution depends on why an apology from a bot should work differently from a human one; build the hypothesis on that difference.
Closest existing work · 11 papers retrieved on service recovery and reactions to AI agents
Illustrative evaluationA contribution that already exists, or a claim the data can’t support, usually surfaces only at desk review, months into the work. Most AI review tools read finished manuscripts. ScholarSignal reads the idea.
Day one
ScholarSignal tests the contribution and design before you invest in data collection and writing.
What a change takes: an afternoon of rethinking
Weeks in
AI and human reviewers catch problems in a finished draft, when the design is already fixed.
What a change takes: weeks of redesign and rewriting
Months in
An editor names the problem after the paper is written, submitted and waiting in the queue.
What a change takes: new data, a new draft, a new journal
A structured second opinion you can act on, not a score and a shrug. Here is what each report contains.
Contribution viability, claim–design alignment, journal fit and desk-reject risk, each explained, ending in Go, Refine, Pivot or Retire.
The closest existing papers and authors, retrieved from OpenAlex, with how your idea differs and where the evidence is thin.
Journals where this literature actually publishes, with a suitability score (never an acceptance probability), plus open calls and special issues that fit.
Three to five actions, ordered by importance, so you know what to fix before the next version. Then a weekly radar of matched opportunities.
Three steps. You can close the tab after the first.
A title and a few sentences to a full abstract: the question, setting, data if any, and what the paper would claim.
Your idea becomes construct-aware literature queries. An evaluator applies an editor rubric to the idea and the retrieved work.
The evaluation arrives by email and stays in your account. Revise the idea and evaluate the next version when you are ready.
What the evaluation stands on, and where it stops. Read the full method.
One free evaluation per account. No password: results arrive by email.
The evaluation quality is the same on both plans.
Free
€0
No card needed.
Pro
€15 / month
Before applicable taxes; the final total is shown before you pay.
Failed evaluations do not use your allowance. Cancel renewal at any time; your saved history stays readable.
A chatbot answers from memory and tends to agree with you. ScholarSignal first retrieves the actual closest papers from OpenAlex, then applies a fixed editor rubric to your idea and that evidence, and shows you the works it used so you can check them.
Those read a finished paper. ScholarSignal evaluates the idea before you have data or prose, when it is still cheap to narrow the claim, change the design or pick another question.
Your idea is used only to produce your evaluation and radar. Requests go only to AI providers that OpenRouter classifies as not training on submitted text; this is a routing restriction, not a zero-retention guarantee. Read the privacy details.
No. The verdict is a structured second opinion based on published editorial criteria and the literature we found. Editors and reviewers make the decision.
It works best in marketing and adjacent business fields today. Evaluations in other disciplines are possible but may be less reliable, and the opportunity radar has its strongest coverage in marketing.
Sign in with the email you used. Your workspace keeps every evaluation, lets you evaluate revisions and shows your weekly radar.
One free evaluation. It takes a few minutes to describe your idea.
Evaluate my idea for free