agentsclimarketplace

Commres research design

Skill brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/Communication-Research-Skills/skills/commres-research-design

Journal-specific Claude Code/Codex skill packs covering mainstream journals — AER, QJE, Nature, Cell, 管理世界, 经济研究 & 200+ more — your fast track to getting published. | 覆盖主流期刊的 Claude Code/Codex 期刊技能包,从选题、识别策略到表格规范与审稿回复全流程,助你快速发论文。

Install
npx -y skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill commres-research-design

Assembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.

What its author says it does

Copied from the file, not written here

Use when defending the research design of a Communication Research (CR) manuscript — experiments (lab/online), panel surveys, and content analysis with intercoder reliability. CR is quantitative and demanding about identification, measurement, and confound control. Strengthens the design; it does not write code.

SKILL.md

7.2 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it

Research Design (commres-research-design)

CR is a quantitative journal and demanding about each design. The design must credibly connect the hypotheses (commres-theory-building) to evidence and defeat the strongest rival explanation. This skill is mode-aware — pick the section that matches your study and defend it on social-science terms.

When to trigger

  • Specifying an experiment, panel survey, or content-analysis protocol
  • A reviewer questioned causal claims, sampling, coding reliability, validity, or a confound
  • Preparing a preregistration / pre-analysis plan (note it in the cover letter)
  • Justifying why your design adjudicates the rival account from commres-literature-positioning

Experiments (lab / online / survey-embedded)

  • Preregister design and primary analyses; report a-priori power / MDE; pre-specify subgroups.
  • Stimulus sampling: treat messages as a sample, not a fixture — multiple exemplars per condition; model message as a random factor so the feature effect is not one text's idiosyncrasy.
  • Manipulation and attention checks; treatment realism; report and model attrition.
  • Pre-specify the mediation/moderation test that operationalizes H2/H3; for causal mediation, prefer manipulating the mediator or a measurement-of-mediation design with stated assumptions.
  • Ethics/IRB and informed consent; debrief where deception is used.

Surveys / panels

  • Sampling frame, mode, and generalization claims; weighting where appropriate.
  • Validated multi-item measures; report reliability (alpha/omega) and, ideally, a CFA/measurement model; guard against common-method variance (procedural and statistical remedies).
  • For process claims, prefer panel (lagged) or experimental leverage — cross-sectional mediation cannot license a temporal/causal story; say so plainly if you are cross-sectional.

Content analysis

  • A documented codebook; trained coders; report intercoder reliability (Krippendorff's alpha or equivalent) on an adequate subsample, and the unit of analysis.
  • Justify text sampling (timeframe, sources); establish construct validity of categories, not just reliability — reliable coding of the wrong construct is still wrong.

Computational / text-as-data (when hypothesis-testing)

  • Validate automated measures against human-coded gold-standard samples; report agreement.
  • Document model/version, hyperparameters, seeds; report stability; do not treat outputs as ground truth.

The adjudication test (CR-specific)

For the single strongest rival explanation, write one sentence: "If the rival were true rather than my hypothesis, the data would look like ___; instead they look like ___." If you cannot, the design does not yet identify the contribution.

Reviewer-pushback patterns and the CR-specific fix

Reviewer objectionWhy it lands at CRDesign-stage fix
"Single-message confound"one stimulus cannot separate the message feature from the textsample multiple messages per condition; model message as a random factor
"Measurement validity unclear"a scale or coded category may not be the constructreport CFA / construct validity, not just reliability
"Common-method variance"same-survey predictor and outcome inflate the pathprocedural separation + a statistical CMV check
"Cross-sectional process claim"mediation on one wave cannot license a causal storymove to an experiment/panel, or hedge the claim
"Effect without mechanism"a main effect alone does not advance theorymeasure and pre-specify the mediator/moderator before collection

Worked micro-example: framing survey-experiment design (illustrative)

A study claims gain- vs. loss-framed vaccine messages change intention via perceived response-efficacy, moderated by prior knowledge. A CR-defensible design: 2 (frame) × 3 (message exemplars per frame) factorial so the frame effect is estimated across six texts — defeating the single-message confound. Validated multi-item efficacy and intention scales (report alpha + a CFA), target N sized to the registered MDE, preregister the moderated-mediation model (frame → response-efficacy → intention, moderated by knowledge) with bootstrap CIs, plus an attention check. The adjudication sentence: if "any health message moves intention" were true, the gain/loss contrast would be null while overall intention rose; instead the contrast runs through efficacy and only for low-knowledge audiences — advancing framing theory rather than re-documenting persuasion.

Execution bridge (StatsPAI / Stata MCP)

Estimate and audit the design, don't only describe it. Full map: execution-with-mcp. Communication Research is experiment- and survey-heavy; emphasize randomization inference, mediation done right, and family-wise corrections.

  • detect_designrecommend → fit with as_handle=trueaudit_result.
  • Observational causal claims: staggered DiD (callaway_santanna / sun_abraham + bacon_decomposition + honest_did_from_result); IV (effective_f_test + anderson_rubin_ci); RDD (rdrobust + mccrary_test).
  • Experiments: randomization-based inference, romano_wolf for many-outcome family-wise control, and mediate for mediation (not naive controlling-away).
  • Sensitivity: oster_delta / sensemakr for observational claims.

Report the effect size in interpretable units; route the full battery to the appendix/supplement. A run end-to-end (synthetic data, real returns) is in the JF execution walkthrough.

Anti-patterns

  • Causal language on a cross-sectional survey that only supports association
  • Content analysis with no reported intercoder reliability or an unstated unit of analysis
  • A single-message stimulus carrying a claim about a message feature
  • Scales used with no reliability/validity evidence; ignoring common-method variance
  • A design that cannot distinguish your hypothesis from the leading alternative

Output format

【Mode】experiment / survey-panel / content-analysis / computational
【Estimand or claim】what is being identified/tested
【Key assumption(s)】and how each is defended (incl. reliability/validity, CMV)
【Rival ruled out】the adjudication sentence
【Mediation/moderation】design supports the causal ordering? [Y/N]
【Robustness/sensitivity】planned checks
【Next】commres-data-analysis

Supplementary resources

Keep looking

Skills are one crate of 328,083. Ordering is by how many stacks a row turns up in, so the top of any crate is what has actually been picked rather than what has the most stars.