@rubytech/create-realagent 1.0.406

package/payload/premium-plugins/writer-craft/references/journal-article-models.md

@@ -0,0 +1,74 @@
+# Journal Article Reference Models
+
+## Standard Models
+
+### One Author
+**Format:** `Author, Aaaa A. yyyy. "Title of the Journal Article: Subtitle." *Journal Title* ## (#): ####–####. https://doi.org/DOI.`
+
+**Example:** `Binnall, James M. 2019. "Jury Diversity in the Age of Mass Incarceration: An Exploratory Mock Jury Experiment." *Psychology, Crime & Law* 25 (4): 345–363. https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2018.1528359.`
+
+**Citations:** Binnall (2019) [narrative]; (Binnall 2019) [parenthetical]
+
+### Two Authors
+**Format:** `Author, Aaaa A., and Bbbb B. Author. yyyy. "Title." *Journal Title* ## (#): ####–####. https://doi.org/DOI.`
+
+**Example:** `Machado, Mercedes M., and Jacqueline M. Swank. 2019. "Therapeutic Gardening: A Counseling Approach for Bereavement from Suicide." *Death Studies* 43 (10): 629–633.`
+
+### Three Authors
+**Format:** `Author, Aaaa A., Bbbb B. Author, and Cccc C. Author. yyyy. "Title." *Journal Title* ## (#): ####–####.`
+
+**Example:** `Nowacki, J. S., D. Creech, and M. Parks. 2020. "Political Climate, Voter Suppression Policies and Federal Sentencing Outcomes." *British Journal of Criminology* 60 (5): 1115–1180.`
+
+### Four to Ten Authors
+List all authors in reference. Use "et al." only in citations.
+
+**Example:** `Prinzie, Peter, Geert Jan J. M. Stams, Maja Deković, Albert H. A. Reijntjes, and Jay Belsky. 2009. "The Relations between Parents' Big Five Personality Factors and Parenting." *Journal of Personality and Social Psychology* 97 (2): 351–362.`
+
+### Eleven or More Authors
+List first seven authors, comma, "et al."
+
+**Example:** `Adeloye, Davies, Adebanke Olawole-Isaac, Asa Auta, Mary T. Dewan, Chiamaka Omoyele, Nnenna Ezeigwe, Wura Jacobs, et al. 2019. "Epidemiology of Harmful Use of Alcohol in Nigeria." *American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Use* 45 (5): 438–450.`
+
+## Special Cases
+
+### Organizational Author (without abbreviation)
+`Select Committee on Race Relations and Immigration. 1975. "The Organisation of Race Relations Administration." *Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies* 4 (3): 314–316.`
+
+### Organizational Author (with abbreviation)
+`SCRRI (Select Committee on Race Relations and Immigration). 1975. "The Organisation of Race Relations Administration." *Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies* 4 (3): 314–316.`
+
+### No Credited Author
+`"Physician Oversight of Specialized Emergency Medical Services." 2019. *Prehospital Emergency Care* 23 (4): 590–591.`
+
+### Nonprimary Author Credit
+Add collaboration note after authors: `With P. López Torres and M. V. Reina.`
+
+### Author-Supplied Translation of Non-English Title
+`Guzmán, Fernando, Javier Barros, Paola Corti, and Magdalena Pereira. 2019. "El rito bautismal y las imágenes pintadas en la iglesia de Curahuara de Carangas" [The baptismal rite and the images painted in the church of Curahuara de Carangas]. *Colonial Latin American Review* 28 (1): 81–105.`
+
+### Published Translation
+`Ioffe, D. G. 2017. "The Revolutionary Aesthetics of the Second Russian Avant-Garde." Translated by N. Seligman Favorov. *Russian Studies in Literature* 53 (2): 172–200.`
+
+### Advance Online Publication
+`Chasi, Colin, and Cuthbeth Tagwirei. 2020. "Death and Ubuntu in Oliver Mtukudzi's Music." *Muziki*. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/18125980.2020.1810110.`
+
+### Forthcoming Article
+`Rao, Smriti, Sarah Gammage, Julia Arnold, and Elizabeth Anderson. Forthcoming. "Human Mobility, COVID-19, and Policy Responses." *Feminist Economics*.`
+
+### Journal without Issue Divisions (Volume Only)
+`Bilish, Shane P., J. Nikolaus Callow, and Hamish McGowan. 2020. "Streamflow Variability and the Role of Snowmelt." *Arctic, Antarctic, and Alpine Research* 52:161–176.`
+
+### Article with e-Location
+`Capurro, G., J. Tustin, C. G. Jardine, and S. M. Driedger. 2022. "When Good Messages Go Wrong." *Human Vaccines & Immunotherapies* 18 (7): 2145822.`
+
+### Article from Supplement
+`Bender, Kimberly, et al. 2020. "A Human-Centered Design Approach." In "Advancing Social Work Education," edited by Benjamin F. Henwood and Amanda Aykanian. Supplement, *Journal of Social Work Education* 56 (S1): S28–S45.`
+
+### Special Issue (Cited in Full)
+`McCone, David R., Cynthia J. Thomsen, and Janice H. Laurence, eds. 2018. "Sexual Harassment and Sexual Assault in the US Military." Special issue, *Military Psychology* 30 (3).`
+
+### Abstract from Compiled Abstract Issue
+`Buckley, Anne F. 2017. "Mitochondrial Disorders." Abstract. *Ultrastructural Pathology* 41 (1): 76.`
+
+### Review without Original Title
+`McCully, Alan. 2019. Review of *Teacher Preparation in Ireland*, by Tom O'Donoghue, Judith Harford, and Teresa O'Doherty. *History of Education* 48 (5): 700–702.`

package/payload/premium-plugins/writer-craft/references/line-editing.md

@@ -0,0 +1,55 @@
+# Line Editing
+
+## What Line Editing Is
+
+Sentence by sentence, paragraph by paragraph. Clarity, flow, word choice, syntax, tonal consistency. Line editing is harder to define than developmental editing because it is more holistic — a good line editor doesn't just fix sentences; they restructure paragraphs, query plot points, ensure tonal consistency, and serve as the author's most attentive and honest first reader.
+
+## What Line Editors Do
+
+### The Prose Tics
+Common problems that experienced line editors eliminate on sight:
+
+- **Hedging adverbs** — "somewhat," "rather," "a bit," "quite" — weakening statements the author should commit to
+- **Empty intensifiers** — "very," "really," "absolutely," "totally" — adding emphasis that actually dilutes
+- **Passive constructions** (where active is better) — "the door was opened by Sarah" when "Sarah opened the door" is stronger
+- **Clichés** — dead metaphors and overused phrases that slide past the author but bore the reader
+- **Throat-clearing** — paragraphs or sentences that circle before getting to the point; openings that begin before they begin
+- **Redundancies** — saying the same thing twice in different words, or providing information the reader already has
+- **Tonal shifts** — moments where the register lurches without reason (formal → casual → formal, or serious → flip → serious)
+
+### Beyond Sentence Fixing
+Good line editors also:
+- Restructure paragraphs for clarity and impact
+- Query logical gaps — missing steps in reasoning or narrative
+- Flag where the author tells when they should show (and vice versa)
+- Identify repetition that isn't serving a purpose
+- Note where the prose loses momentum — where the reader would disengage
+- Serve as the representative of the reader in the room
+
+## Calibration
+
+Line editing must be calibrated to what each individual author needs and can tolerate. This is not a mechanical process.
+
+### What Calibration Requires
+- **Read the author, not just the manuscript.** Some authors need reassurance and gentle guidance. Others thrive on direct, challenging feedback. Aggressive editing of an author who needs reassurance damages confidence and impedes writing.
+- **Serve the author's voice, not your own.** The editor's job is to help the author become the best version of themselves. The most damaging editorial interventions make a book sound more like the editor and less like the author.
+- **Know when to leave it alone.** If a sentence works — if it does what it needs to do and sounds like the author — it doesn't need editing, even if you would have written it differently.
+
+## How Line Editors Are Formed
+
+The best line editors are formed by a lifetime of critical reading — not reading for pleasure alone, but reading to understand how effects are achieved. They have internalised enough about narrative, argumentation, and prose rhythm that they can feel instinctively when something is wrong, even before they can articulate why.
+
+## Line Editing Checklist
+
+When line editing a passage:
+
+- [ ] Does each sentence say what it means to say — clearly, without ambiguity?
+- [ ] Is every word earning its place? Can any be cut without loss?
+- [ ] Are there hedging adverbs or empty intensifiers to remove?
+- [ ] Are clichés replaced with fresh language?
+- [ ] Is the tonal register consistent? Are shifts deliberate?
+- [ ] Does each paragraph lead naturally to the next?
+- [ ] Are there throat-clearing openings that can be cut?
+- [ ] Are there logical gaps where the reader needs a bridge?
+- [ ] Is the author's voice preserved throughout the editing?
+- [ ] Are there places where momentum flags?

package/payload/premium-plugins/writer-craft/references/misbelief-desire-worldview.md

@@ -0,0 +1,87 @@
+# Misbelief, Desire, and Worldview — Story Genius
+
+## The Misbelief
+
+The misbelief is a false conclusion about how the world works, rooted in a painful past experience, that governs the protagonist's behaviour. It is the internal problem the novel will force the protagonist to confront.
+
+### What the Misbelief Is
+- A **coping strategy** that once made sense given the protagonist's history
+- Not a personality flaw or character trait — it is a worldview
+- It **protected** the protagonist once; now it imprisons them
+- It feels exactly like truth to the person holding it
+- It actively shapes every subsequent decision, relationship, and interpretation
+
+### What the Misbelief Is Not
+- A generic flaw ("she has trust issues")
+- A surface-level problem ("he's afraid of commitment")
+- Something the protagonist is aware of as false
+- Static — it must have deepened over time through reinforcement
+
+### Requirements for a Story-Worthy Misbelief
+1. **Specific** — traceable to a concrete origin experience, not a general tendency
+2. **Earned** — the reader can understand why the protagonist reached this conclusion
+3. **Active** — currently shaping decisions and relationships (not sitting inert in backstory)
+4. **Challenged by the What If** — the story's premise must directly threaten it
+5. **In conflict with the desire** — desire and misbelief are locked in permanent tension
+
+### Examples of Misbelief Specificity
+
+**Too vague**: "She doesn't trust people."
+**Specific**: "She believes that letting anyone see her real feelings will get her abandoned, because that's exactly what happened when she was twelve and told her mother the truth about her stepfather, and her mother chose him."
+
+**Too vague**: "He's afraid of failure."
+**Specific**: "He believes that any visible imperfection will be used against him, because his father publicly humiliated him at age eight for coming in second at the science fair."
+
+## The Desire
+
+Something the protagonist has wanted, perhaps for years, that they may have suppressed, rationalised away, or convinced themselves they don't need.
+
+### The Desire-Misbelief Tension
+- The desire and misbelief are in **permanent conflict**
+- Every time the protagonist moves toward what they want, the misbelief sabotages them
+- Often the sabotage is unconscious — the protagonist doesn't recognise what they're doing
+- This tension is what creates the internal urgency that carries the reader through hundreds of pages
+
+### Requirements
+1. The desire must be something the protagonist genuinely, deeply wants — not a surface goal
+2. It must be directly blocked by the misbelief
+3. The reader must be able to feel both the pull of the desire and the grip of the misbelief
+4. The novel's job is to force the protagonist into a situation where maintaining the misbelief becomes impossible — where they must change or be destroyed by their own false worldview
+
+## The Worldview
+
+The complete subjective interpretive filter through which the protagonist processes every experience.
+
+### What Worldview Is
+- The specific, idiosyncratic lens ground by the protagonist's past experiences
+- Determines what they notice and ignore, what frightens them, what they refuse to see
+- The brain's prediction engine — it constantly uses past experience to generate expectations about the present
+- The novel is the story of what happens when reality refuses to match these predictions
+
+### What Worldview Is Not
+- A bird's-eye view of the story's setting
+- Point of view (the narrative perspective — first person, third person, etc.)
+- General philosophy or political outlook
+- Personality — worldview is specifically the protagonist's belief system about how the world works
+
+### Three Common Misconceptions
+1. **Worldview is backdrop** — No, it is the foreground of all meaning
+2. **Worldview is static** — No, it must change (or there is no story)
+3. **Worldview equals personality** — No, it is specifically the belief system about how the world works, shaped by specific past experiences
+
+## Excavation Process
+
+To develop misbelief, desire, and worldview:
+
+1. Start with the What If — what internal conflict does the premise imply?
+2. Ask: who would be most affected by this premise, and why?
+3. Identify the desire: what has this person wanted for years?
+4. Identify the misbelief: what false conclusion prevents them from getting it?
+5. Trace the misbelief to a specific origin experience
+6. Verify the tension: is desire in direct conflict with misbelief?
+7. Check that the What If directly threatens the misbelief
+8. Write the origin scene (see story-genius-origin-scenes.md)
+9. Write escalating backstory scenes showing the misbelief deepening
+10. Return to step 4 and deepen — each pass reveals more
+
+The process is iterative. Expect to revise misbelief, desire, and worldview multiple times as you learn more about the protagonist through writing.

package/payload/premium-plugins/writer-craft/references/neurochemistry-of-engagement.md

@@ -0,0 +1,94 @@
+# The Neurochemistry of Story Engagement
+
+## Three Neurochemicals of Story
+
+Story activates three interlocking neurochemical responses. Understanding them helps writers diagnose why a passage works or fails.
+
+### Dopamine — The Curiosity Chemical
+**Triggered by:** Broken patterns, unanswered questions, the suggestion that significant information is incoming
+**Reader experience:** "What happens next?" — the forward pull, the inability to stop reading
+**Story mechanism:** Surprise, mystery, unresolved tension, the gap between what the reader knows and what they want to know
+
+**How writers trigger dopamine:**
+- Plant questions the reader needs answered
+- Break expected patterns — the thing that should happen doesn't
+- Create information gaps — the reader knows something is significant but doesn't know what
+- End scenes with unresolved tension
+- Introduce surprising details that reframe what the reader thought they understood
+
+**How writers kill dopamine:**
+- Answer every question as soon as it's raised
+- Maintain predictable patterns without variation
+- Tell the reader everything up front — no gaps, no mystery
+- Resolve tension prematurely
+
+### Cortisol — The Tension Chemical
+**Triggered by:** Conflict, hard choices, consequences, the sense that something bad might happen
+**Reader experience:** "Will they get through this?" — anxiety on the protagonist's behalf
+**Story mechanism:** Stakes, danger, dilemmas, ticking clocks, the escalation of obstacles
+
+**How writers trigger cortisol:**
+- Put the protagonist in genuine danger (physical, emotional, social)
+- Create dilemmas where all options have costs
+- Establish ticking clocks with real consequences
+- Escalate complications — each setback raising stakes higher
+- Force the protagonist to risk what they value most
+
+**How writers kill cortisol:**
+- Remove real consequences — the protagonist can fail without cost
+- Provide easy escape routes — the danger isn't genuinely threatening
+- Make the antagonist incompetent or absent
+- Let the protagonist succeed without sacrifice
+
+### Oxytocin — The Empathy Chemical
+**Triggered by:** Vulnerability, connection, the sense of shared humanity with the protagonist
+**Reader experience:** "I'm on their side" — emotional investment, caring what happens
+**Story mechanism:** The protagonist's internal life made visible; moments of honesty, weakness, courage, and connection
+
+**How writers trigger oxytocin:**
+- Show the protagonist's vulnerability — their fears, doubts, and longings
+- Give the protagonist moments of genuine human connection
+- Let the protagonist make mistakes and admit them
+- Show the protagonist caring about something deeply
+- Reveal the protagonist's inner world — not just what they do, but what it means to them
+
+**How writers kill oxytocin:**
+- Keep the protagonist emotionally opaque — no internal life visible
+- Make the protagonist invulnerable — no weaknesses, no fears
+- Have the protagonist respond to everything with competence and cool
+- Skip the protagonist's emotional reactions to events
+
+## The Interplay
+
+The three neurochemicals work together:
+- **Dopamine** (curiosity) gets the reader to start
+- **Oxytocin** (empathy) makes the reader care
+- **Cortisol** (tension) makes the reader unable to stop
+
+A story that triggers only one is flat:
+- Dopamine alone = a puzzle with no heart
+- Cortisol alone = stress without investment
+- Oxytocin alone = sentimentality without stakes
+
+A story that triggers all three simultaneously is virtually impossible to put down.
+
+## Emotion as the Engine of Reason
+
+### The Platonic Error
+Western thought since Plato has treated emotion as the enemy of reason. Neuroscience has established the opposite: emotion is the prerequisite for rational decision-making.
+
+### The Case of Elliot
+Neurologist Antonio Damasio's patient Elliot had a brain tumour removed, along with some frontal lobe tissue. His IQ tested at the 97th percentile. He could enumerate every possible solution to any problem. But he couldn't choose between them. Without the ability to feel which option mattered more, he couldn't decide anything — not even what to have for lunch. He lost his job, family, and savings.
+
+**Without emotion, reason is paralysed.** Emotion doesn't cloud judgment; it provides the experiential data that judgment requires.
+
+### For Writers
+Every decision in a story must be emotionally motivated. Not because emotion is decoration, but because emotion is how decisions are actually made — in fiction and in life. If the reader can't feel why a character makes a choice, the choice is inert.
+
+## Mirror Neurons
+
+When we observe someone in pain or joy, the same neural circuits fire as when we experience it ourselves. The brain does not fully distinguish between observed and directly experienced emotion.
+
+This is why fiction works: the reader literally simulates the protagonist's experience. The same brain regions that would activate if the reader were living through the events activate while reading about them.
+
+This is also why the protagonist must react to everything: if the protagonist doesn't react emotionally, the reader's mirror neurons have nothing to mirror. The emotional simulation stops. The reader is cast out of the story.

package/payload/premium-plugins/writer-craft/references/origin-scenes-and-escalation.md

@@ -0,0 +1,82 @@
+# Origin Scenes and Escalating Turning Points — Story Genius
+
+## The Origin Scene
+
+The specific moment in the protagonist's past when the misbelief took root. This is not optional backstory — it is the foundation of the entire story architecture.
+
+### Purpose
+- Shows the reader exactly how and why the protagonist formed their misbelief
+- Makes the misbelief feel like a reasonable conclusion given the circumstances
+- Provides the emotional bedrock for everything that follows
+- Gives the reader the context needed to understand why the protagonist behaves as they do
+
+### Requirements
+1. Write it as a **full scene** — not a summary, not a mention, not a memory. A scene with sensory detail, dialogue, action, and emotional weight.
+2. Write it in the **protagonist's subjective POV** — the reader must experience this moment as the protagonist experienced it
+3. The reader must be able to see **how the misbelief formed** — the specific logic that made this conclusion feel true
+4. The experience must be **emotionally specific** — not "she had a bad childhood" but the particular day, the particular words, the particular moment of realization
+
+### What the Origin Scene Is Not
+- A clinical case study explaining the character's psychology
+- A simple "bad thing happened" trauma event
+- Generic suffering without specific emotional logic
+- Backstory that exists only to justify present behaviour
+
+### The Emotional Logic
+The origin scene must show the specific chain:
+1. Something happens (external event)
+2. The protagonist experiences it subjectively (internal response)
+3. The protagonist draws a conclusion about how the world works (the misbelief forms)
+4. This conclusion, given their age and experience, makes complete sense
+
+The reader doesn't need to agree with the conclusion — they need to understand why a person in that moment would reach it.
+
+## Escalating Turning Points
+
+After the origin scene, write 3-5 scenes from the protagonist's past in which the misbelief was reinforced, tested, or deepened. These are the causal chain that explains who the protagonist is on page one.
+
+### Purpose
+- Show that the misbelief isn't a one-time event but a pattern
+- Each scene makes the misbelief more entrenched
+- The pattern of reinforcement explains why the misbelief is so deeply held by the time the novel begins
+- These scenes contain seeds of the external plot (the protagonist's predictable reactions to certain stimuli generate consequences)
+
+### Structure of Escalating Scenes
+Each scene should:
+1. Present a situation that tests or activates the misbelief
+2. Show the protagonist interpreting events through the misbelief filter
+3. Show the protagonist acting on the misbelief
+4. Result in a consequence that appears to confirm the misbelief
+5. Deepen the misbelief's hold — the protagonist is now more convinced than before
+
+### Escalation Pattern
+The scenes must escalate in significance:
+- **Scene 1**: The misbelief is subtly reinforced in a relatively low-stakes situation
+- **Scene 2**: The misbelief is tested more directly; the protagonist actively chooses it
+- **Scene 3**: The misbelief costs the protagonist something real — a relationship, an opportunity
+- **Scene 4**: The misbelief becomes entrenched — the protagonist builds their life around it
+- **Scene 5** (optional): The moment just before the novel begins — the final reinforcement that makes the opening situation explosive
+
+### The Desire-Misbelief Pattern in Backstory
+In each escalating scene, the desire-misbelief tension should be visible:
+- The protagonist moves toward what they want
+- The misbelief sabotages them (often without their conscious awareness)
+- The failure reinforces both the misbelief and the suppression of the desire
+- Over time, the protagonist may convince themselves they don't want the desire at all
+
+### What These Scenes Produce
+1. A protagonist with psychological depth and specificity
+2. A reader who understands the protagonist's behaviour before the novel explains it
+3. Seeds for the external plot (predictable reactions generate predictable consequences)
+4. The raw material for flashbacks and backstory revelations in the novel itself
+5. A causal chain from origin to page one that the writer can trace at any time
+
+## Using Origin Scenes and Backstory in the Novel
+
+Not all backstory scenes belong in the novel. Many exist only for the writer's understanding. Those that do appear should:
+- Be triggered by present events (the protagonist is reminded by something happening now)
+- Illuminate the current scene (the reader sees the present with new understanding)
+- Arrive at the moment they are needed (not before the reader needs them, not after)
+- Be rendered as scenes, not exposition (show, don't summarize)
+
+The origin scene itself may appear early in the novel, late, or in fragments throughout — the timing depends on when the reader needs to understand the misbelief at that depth.

package/payload/premium-plugins/writer-craft/references/other-source-models.md

@@ -0,0 +1,146 @@
+# Other Source Reference Models
+
+## Conference Models
+
+### Serial Conference Proceedings (published in journal)
+`Albright, Madeleine. 1991. "The Role of the United States in Central Europe." *Proceedings of the Academy of Political Science* 38 (1): 71–84.`
+
+### Nonserial Conference Proceedings (published in book)
+`Shupe, A. D., Jr., B. L. Hardin, and D. G. Bromley. 1983. "A Comparison of Anti-cult Movements." In *Of Gods and Men*, edited by E. Barker, 177–194. Macon, GA: Mercer University Press.`
+
+### Paper Presentation (unpublished)
+`Bunn, Matthew, Anna Bennett, and Penny Jane Burke. 2018. "Temporalities of Trust and Betrayal." Paper presented at the Society for Research in Higher Education, Newport, UK, December 2018.`
+
+### Poster Presentation
+`Wagmiller, Robert L., Kendall LaParo, David Schrider, et al. 2018. "Attitudes towards Interracial Marriage." Poster presented at the American Sociological Association 113th Annual Meeting, Philadelphia, PA, August 2018.`
+
+## Dissertation and Thesis Models
+
+### Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation
+`Zaragoza, Kevin. 2005. "A Moral Psychology of Blame." PhD diss., Princeton University.`
+
+### Unpublished Master's Thesis
+`Niraula, K. 2015. "Addressing the Neglect of Local Peacebuilding Practices through Documentaries." Master's thesis, University of Notre Dame.`
+
+### Published in Online Repository
+`Boudreaux, Corinne M. 2015. "The City Framed." PhD diss., Tulane University. https://digitallibrary.tulane.edu/...`
+
+## Report Models
+
+### Multiple Authors
+`Lempert, Robert J., Parry Norling, Christopher G. Pernin, Susan A. Resetar, and Sergej Mahnovski. 2003. *Next Generation Environmental Technologies*. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.`
+
+### Organizational Author (without abbreviation)
+`National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism. 2016. *Alcohol Use Disorder: A Comparison between DSM-IV and DSM-5*. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.`
+
+### Organizational Author (with abbreviation)
+`NIAAA (National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism). 2016. *Alcohol Use Disorder*. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.`
+
+### Online Publication
+`Warner-Griffin, Catharine, et al. 2017. *Reading Achievement of U.S. Fourth-Grade Students*. https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2018/2018017.pdf.`
+
+## Newspaper Models
+
+### Print
+`Lewis, A. E. 1972. "5 Held in Plot to Bug Democrats' Office Here." *Washington Post*, June 18, 1972.`
+
+### Online
+`Kantor, Alice. 2021. "Women Primed to Fill Cyber Security Talent Gap." *Financial Times*, January 25, 2021. https://www.ft.com/...`
+
+### Editorial (Online, No Author)
+`*Guardian*. 2019. "*The Guardian* View on the Rise in Domestic Killings." September 13, 2019. https://www.theguardian.com/...`
+
+## Magazine Models
+
+### Print (Month and Day)
+`Hersey, John. 1946. "Hiroshima." *New Yorker*, August 31, 1946.`
+
+### Print (Month Only)
+`Garber, Marjorie. 2002. "Our Genius Problem." *Atlantic*, December 2002.`
+
+### Online
+`Ruff, C. 2016. "Computer Science, Meet Humanities." *Chronicle of Higher Education*, February 5, 2016. https://www.chronicle.com/...`
+
+## Web Models
+
+### Web Page with Multiple Authors
+`Harris, Beth, and Steven Zucker. 2015. "Haussmann the Demolisher." Smarthistory. https://smarthistory.org/...`
+
+### Web Page, Organizational Author, No Date
+`Pitt Rivers Museum. n.d. "Conservation Case Study: Noh Theatre Masks." Pitt Rivers Museum, University of Oxford. Accessed June 11, 2021. https://www.prm.ox.ac.uk/...`
+
+### Blog Post
+`Price, D. 2018. "On Using Archives and Freedom of Information Act." *Anthro{dendum}* (blog). October 7, 2018. https://anthrodendum.org/...`
+
+### Tweet
+`Singer, Peter (@PeterSinger). 2019. "Why are animal rights activists the orphans of the left?" Twitter, May 1, 2019, 7:52 a.m. https://twitter.com/PeterSinger/status/...`
+
+### Facebook Post
+`Thunberg, Greta. 2019. "Climate strike is named 2019 word of the year! #climatestrike." Facebook, November 9, 2019. https://www.facebook.com/...`
+
+## Software, App, and Dataset Models
+
+### Software with Version Number
+`Hecht, Kendall, Robert McKinnon, et al. 2021. "Spectrum." V. 6.06. Avenir Health. https://avenirhealth.org/...`
+
+### Software by Organizational Developer
+`HISP (Health Information Systems Programme). 2020. "DHIS2." University of Oslo. Accessed February 26, 2021. https://releases.dhis2.org/...`
+
+### Mobile App
+`Schneider, Ziv. 2016. *The Museum of Stolen Art VR*. V. 1.0. Ziv Schneider. Android 4.4 or later.`
+
+### Dataset with Accession and Version
+`Hevner Mueller, Kate. 2015. "American Symphony Orchestra Repertoires 1842–1970" (dataset). Accession number ICPSR 35235. V. 1. National Archive of Data on Arts & Culture. https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR35235.v1.`
+
+## Audiovisual Models
+
+### Film (Original Release)
+`Jenkins, Barry, dir. 2018. *If Beale Street Could Talk*. Los Angeles: Annapurna Pictures.`
+
+### Film (Streaming)
+`Zhao, Chloé, dir. 2020. *Nomadland*. Century City, CA: Searchlight Pictures. https://www.hulu.com/movie/nomadland.`
+
+### Television Episode (Original Broadcast)
+`Beavan, C., and J. Runcie, dirs. 2006. *Simon Schama's Power of Art*. Season 1, episode 3, "Rembrandt." Aired November 3, 2006, on BBC Two.`
+
+### Streaming Video
+`Butler, J. 2016. "Why Preserve the Life of the Other?" Filmed March 30, 2016, in New Haven, CT. Yale University video, 1:22:24. https://www.youtube.com/...`
+
+### Podcast Episode
+`Harford, Tim. 2022. "The Wild Turkeys of Schleswig." Produced by Ryan Dilley, et al. In *Cautionary Tales*, November 28, 2022. Podcast, Pushkin, 44:12. https://www.pushkin.fm/...`
+
+### Artwork
+`Wiley, Kehinde. 2008. *Three Wise Men Greeting Entry into Lagos*. Oil on canvas, 72 × 95 1/4". Pennsylvania Academy of the Fine Arts, Philadelphia. https://www.pafa.org/...`
+
+## Unpublished and Informal Models
+
+### Unpublished Manuscript
+`Swanson, K. W. 2006. "Hog Heaven or Hell's Kitchen?" Unpublished manuscript, last modified November 14, 2006. Microsoft Word file.`
+
+### Working Paper
+`Bojinov, Iavor, Prithwiraj Choudhury, and Jacqueline N. Lane. 2021. "Virtual Watercoolers." Harvard Business School Working Paper 21-125. Harvard University, Cambridge, MA. https://www.hbs.edu/...`
+
+## Archival Material Models
+
+### Titled Document with Accession Number
+`Long, Huey P. 1935. "Our Blundering Government." LaRC 282, box 1, folder 1. William B. Wisdom Collection on Huey P. Long, 1924–75. Louisiana Research Collection, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA.`
+
+### Untitled Document with Accession Number
+`Elgar, Edward. 1917. Letter to Sidney Colvin. Colvin/Elgar/2. Sir Sidney Colvin Archive. Fitzwilliam Museum, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.`
+
+## Patent, Legal Case, and Statute Models
+
+### Patent
+`Pfeifer, Andrea, et al. 2016. Phospospecific antibodies recognising tau. European Patent 2,764,022, filed October 5, 2012, and issued August 17, 2016. https://worldwide.espacenet.com/...`
+
+### U.S. Supreme Court Case
+`Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma v. Leavitt, 543 U.S. 631 (2005). https://supreme.justia.com/...`
+
+### U.K. Supreme Court Case (Neutral Citation)
+`Patel v. Mirza, [2016] UKSC 42 (Eng.). https://www.bailii.org/...`
+
+### U.S. Federal Statute (United States Codes)
+`Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, 21 U.S.C. § 387 (1938). https://uscode.house.gov/...`
+
+### U.K. Statute (After 1963)
+`Climate Change Act, 2008, c. 27 (Eng.). http://www.legislation.gov.uk/...`

package/payload/premium-plugins/writer-craft/references/persuasion-case-studies.md

@@ -0,0 +1,67 @@
+# Persuasion Case Studies
+
+## Immortal Fans — SC Recife (Brazil, 2013)
+
+**Problem:** Critical shortage of organ donors in Brazil.
+**Audience:** Passionate football fans of Sport Club Recife.
+**Misbelief:** Organ donation is morbid and irrelevant to my life.
+**Approach:** Tapped into fans' single most consuming passion — love for the club. "What if your organs could keep rooting for SC Recife after you're gone?" Cards carrying organ donor pledges became badges of tribal loyalty.
+**Key mechanism:** Spoke to the audience's self-narrative rather than threatening it.
+**Results:** 51,000 donor cards issued. Organ donations rose 54%. Transplant waiting lists hit zero for the first time.
+
+## Always #LikeAGirl (2014)
+
+**Problem:** Always needed to connect with a new generation of girls. Over 80% of girls had a negative association with "like a girl."
+**Misbelief:** Doing something "like a girl" means doing it poorly.
+**Approach:** Director asked teens to demonstrate running/fighting/throwing "like a girl." They mimed weakness. Then asked a 10-year-old — she ran flat out. Younger girls did the same. The contrast unfolded in real time. No one was told what to think.
+**Realization:** A teenage boy, asked if he'd insulted his sister, stopped cold: his sister is a girl.
+**Transformation:** A teenage girl asked to "run like a girl" again ran like herself — fast, focused, determined.
+**Results:** Positive association with "like a girl" rose from 19% to 76%. Two-thirds of men said they'd think twice. Most-shared Super Bowl ad of 2015. UN award for impact on female empowerment.
+
+## Motel 6 / Tom Bodett
+
+**Problem:** Nobody wanted to admit staying at Motel 6, even though everyone in the focus group had.
+**Misbelief:** Staying at Motel 6 signals you're poor or stingy.
+**Research insight:** One woman said: "If it's late at night, I'll stay. And the money I save, I can spend on a tank of gas." Others echoed her. The shame transformed into pride. They weren't cheap — they were frugal.
+**Truth:** Staying at Motel 6 means you're smart with money and spend it on what matters.
+**Tagline (ad-libbed by Tom Bodett):** "We'll leave the light on for you."
+**Why it worked:** Offered what every weary traveller needs — the feeling that someone sees you, knows what you're going through, and is on your side.
+**Results:** 30 consecutive years of growth. Consistently rated best value in economy lodging.
+
+## Extra Gum — "The Story of Sarah & Juan" (2015)
+
+**Misbelief:** Gum is trivial, a throwaway.
+**Approach:** A couple's relationship across a decade, catalogued through gum wrappers Juan saves, each with a tiny sketch. At the end, framed in a gallery. The last sketch shows him on one knee.
+**Point:** Even the smallest, most ordinary moments can be the glue of a lasting love.
+**Emotion:** Unexpected joy; the tenderness of being truly seen.
+**Results:** 78 million Facebook views. 1.1 million shares in one week.
+
+## WATERisLIFE — Nkaitole's Bucket List
+
+**Problem:** Children dying from unsafe water in Kenya — abstract statistics nobody acts on.
+**Approach:** Told the story of Nkaitole, a 4-year-old with a 1-in-5 chance of dying before age five. Helped him complete a bucket list: ride a boat, play football, fly in a plane, see the ocean.
+**Key mechanism:** The audience is the implied protagonist — we have what Nkaitole lacks: the power to donate. Statistics would have remained abstract. The specificity of one child made it unbearable not to act.
+
+## Teen Driver — Noah DeVico (PSA)
+
+**Misbelief:** I have to reply immediately or I'll lose Becky to Malik — belonging is worth the risk.
+**Approach:** Instead of crash footage (fear → paralysis), built a story around a girl driving with her dog. She's giggling at her phone; the dog stares at her. A small huff breaks the spell. She puts the phone in the glove box.
+**Point:** Caring for your loved ones is worth more than staying in the loop.
+**Key emotion:** Unconditional love (the dog), not fear.
+**Why it worked:** By giving the protagonist agency — the choice is hers, not forced — the story activated the brain's reward circuitry. Autonomous choice makes the story one of triumph, not cautionary tale.
+
+## Lynda.com
+
+**Background:** In 1995, Lynda Weinman wrote a web design textbook in a friendly, story-based style for art school students intimidated by technology. Her publisher rewrote it to match their technical-manual house style.
+**The Aha moment:** She called on a Monday: "I consider this a rejection of my work." She exercised her contract clause and demanded her rights back.
+**Results:** Published in original form. First industry textbook of its kind. Over one million copies sold. Translated into 12 languages. In 2015, LinkedIn bought Lynda.com for $1.5 billion.
+**The lesson:** The book's value came precisely from what the publisher tried to eliminate — its humanity, accessibility, and trust in the reader. Vulnerability was the path to reaching her audience.
+
+## Common Patterns Across Case Studies
+
+1. **None led with facts or statistics.** All led with story.
+2. **All identified the audience's specific misbelief** — not the logical objection, the emotional one.
+3. **All spoke to the audience's self-narrative** rather than threatening it.
+4. **All gave the protagonist agency** — the transformation was chosen, not forced.
+5. **All used specificity** — one person, one moment, one concrete detail — rather than abstractions.
+6. **All ended at the transformation** — no lingering codas or explicit moralising.