Rje identification strategy
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。
npx -y skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill rje-identification-strategyAssembled 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 the identification or estimation strategy is the bottleneck for a RAND Journal of Economics (RJE) industrial-organization manuscript — structural demand/supply, entry and dynamic games, auctions, or reduced-form designs off mergers and regulation. Stress-tests the design to the IO-flagship bar before tables are drafted.
SKILL.md
7.2 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it
Identification Strategy (rje-identification-strategy)
When to trigger
- Your structural model's identification (instruments, functional form, moments) is unargued
- A merger/regulation evaluation rests on TWFE over staggered timing with no modern estimator
- An IV's first stage or exclusion restriction is weak in an IO setting
- You are unsure your design clears the RJE industrial-organization bar
The RJE identification bar
RJE is the flagship industrial-organization journal, so identification is judged by IO norms: the economic model and the source of identifying variation must be explicit, and counterfactuals must be disciplined by the model and the data. Both structural and reduced-form work is welcomed — there is no preference for one, but each carries field-specific obligations.
Branch A: Structural demand (BLP-style)
- Price endogeneity is the central threat. Instrument price with cost shifters, rival/own product characteristics (BLP instruments), or Gandhi–Houde differentiation instruments; argue their validity in market terms.
- Add micro-moments (consumer-level data) where available to pin down substitution and heterogeneity.
- State functional-form assumptions (random-coefficients distribution) and show key elasticities are reasonable, not artifacts.
Branch B: Supply, conduct & markups
- Be explicit about the conduct assumption (Nash-Bertrand, Cournot, collusion) and, where possible, test conduct rather than assume it.
- Identify marginal cost from the supply-side FOCs; show pass-through and markups are economically sensible.
Branch C: Entry / dynamic games
- For static entry, address multiplicity of equilibria (bounds, equilibrium selection).
- For dynamic models, justify the CCP / two-step (Hotz–Miller) approach or full-solution estimation, and state the state space and discount factor handling.
Branch D: Auctions
- Map the observed bids to the value distribution through the equilibrium first-order conditions; state the information paradigm (private vs common values).
Branch E: Reduced-form (mergers / regulation)
- Name the policy or merger shock giving exogenous variation; defend it institutionally.
- Staggered timing? Move beyond TWFE — use Callaway–Sant'Anna, Sun–Abraham, or de Chaisemartin–D'Haultfœuille, with an event-study plot and a Goodman-Bacon check.
- For IV: strong first stage, weak-IV-robust inference, and an exclusion restriction argued from market institutions.
Execution bridge (StatsPAI / Stata MCP)
Estimate and audit the design, don't only describe it. Full map:
execution-with-mcp. RAND is industrial organization — endogeneity of prices/entry and structural demand; the reduced-form chain for causal claims, structural IO outside it.
detect_design→recommend→ fit withas_handle=true→audit_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_wolffor many-outcome control. - Sensitivity:
oster_delta/sensemakrfor observational claims.
Report the magnitude in interpretable units; route the full battery to the appendix. A run end-to-end (synthetic data, real returns) is in the JF execution walkthrough.
Checklist
- Economic model / identifying variation stated in one sentence
- Price endogeneity (structural) or treatment exogeneity (reduced-form) defended
- Instruments named and their validity argued in market terms
- Conduct / equilibrium-selection assumptions made explicit
- Modern estimator used where TWFE would be biased
- Counterfactual assumptions bounded and stated
- Claims never exceed what the model + data support
Variation-to-parameter map (what pins down which primitive)
RJE referees want an explicit account of which variation identifies which structural object.
| Structural object | Identifying variation | Threat if absent |
|---|---|---|
| Own-price elasticity | Cost/input-price shifters orthogonal to demand shocks | Endogeneity biases elasticity to zero |
| Substitution / random coefficients | Rival characteristics across markets; micro-moments | Restrictive IIA, wrong merger effects |
| Marginal cost | Supply-side FOCs given conduct and demand | Cost confounded with markup |
| Conduct parameter | Demand rotations (slope- vs level-shifters) | Conduct assumed, not identified |
Worked vignette: identifying conduct in an entry model
Suppose you study airline entry on city-pair routes (illustratively 1,200 routes over six years, one potential entrant each) and ask whether incumbents deter entry.
- Identifying variation: endpoint market-size shifters move entry value; slot/gate cost shifters move fixed costs independently.
- Multiplicity: simultaneous entry admits multiple equilibria — use Ciliberto-Tamer-style bounds or an explicit selection rule, and report the parameter set.
- One-sentence map: "Demand shifters identify entry value, cost shifters identify fixed costs, and incumbent presence correlating with non-entry net of profitability identifies deterrence."
Referee-pushback patterns and the venue fix
- "Demand identification rests on functional form, not variation." Fix: show which excluded instruments move price versus substitution, and perturb the random-coefficient distribution to prove the elasticities are not artifacts.
- "The exclusion restriction is asserted, not defended." Fix: argue why the cost shifter is plausibly orthogonal to the demand shock here, and probe with an overidentification or placebo-instrument check.
- "Conduct is assumed Nash-Bertrand without test." Fix: run a conduct test (Rivers-Vuong or a markup restriction) or report results under competing conduct models.
- "Pre-trends violate the reduced-form design." Fix: show event-study leads, use the heterogeneity-robust estimator, and report the Goodman-Bacon decomposition.
Anti-patterns
- A demand system with price treated as exogenous, or weak/unargued price instruments
- Assuming Nash-Bertrand conduct when the data could test it
- TWFE on staggered merger/regulation timing with no heterogeneity-robust estimator
- Selling an in-sample fit as a credible far-out-of-sample counterfactual
Output format
【Approach】structural demand / conduct / entry-dynamics / auctions / reduced-form
【Identifying variation】one sentence
【Key assumptions】[instruments, conduct, equilibrium selection, exclusion]
【Diagnostics done】[elasticities, first-stage F, pre-trends, conduct test]
【Diagnostics missing】[...]
【Next step】rje-data-analysis