Authoring a book chapter vs. a full book — how I framed the difference

Contributed a chapter to an edited academic volume, distinct from authoring a full book, and wanted to share how I thought about presenting this under the scholarly articles criterion, since the regulation's language doesn't explicitly walk through this distinction. A book chapter in a reputable, peer-reviewed or editorially-curated academic volume reads similarly to a strong journal article in terms of evidentiary weight, in my understanding and my attorney's — it's scholarly authorship in a legitimate professional venue. What mattered for presenting it well: being clear about the volume's standing (was it published by a recognized academic press, was it peer-reviewed or editorially selective) and my specific role (sole chapter author, not just a contributor to a larger collaborative section). I didn't inflate a single book chapter into something bigger than it was, but I also didn't undersell it just because it wasn't a full standalone book — presented accurately, with real context about the venue's standing, it held its own as solid evidence.