Use when executing and reporting the analysis for a Journal of Marriage and Family (JMF) manuscript so it survives expert double-blind review — honest uncertainty, robustness, attention to selection and non-independence, and correct handling of complex-survey, longitudinal, and dyadic data. Guides analysis norms; it does not fabricate results.
Scanned 6/5/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill jmf-data-analysis --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Jmf Data Analysis?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/brycewang-stanford-jmf-data-analysis)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: jmf-data-analysis
description: Use when executing and reporting the analysis for a Journal of Marriage and Family (JMF) manuscript so it survives expert double-blind review — honest uncertainty, robustness, attention to selection and non-independence, and correct handling of complex-survey, longitudinal, and dyadic data. Guides analysis norms; it does not fabricate results.
---
# Data Analysis (jmf-data-analysis)
JMF reviewers are methodologically sophisticated and family data are tricky: complex-survey weights,
panel attrition, missingness, and the non-independence of partners and family members all bite. This
skill covers execution and reporting norms; design decisions live in `jmf-research-design`.
## When to trigger
- Running main and supporting analyses; building the results section
- A reviewer asked for robustness, heterogeneity, selection checks, or alternative specifications
- Reconciling preregistered vs. exploratory analyses
- Making the analysis reproducible before deposit
## Analysis norms JMF expects
1. **Report uncertainty and magnitude honestly.** Confidence intervals and effect sizes (not stars
alone); state the substantive size in family terms (months to divorce, percentage-point change in a
transition, points on a relationship-quality scale).
2. **Address selection explicitly.** In observational family research, show what survives within-person/
couple fixed effects, sibling comparisons, propensity adjustment + sensitivity, or honest scoping.
3. **Respect the data structure.** Apply **complex-survey** weights/clusters/strata for PSID, NSFG,
Add Health, etc.; cluster or model **non-independence** for dyads and families; use survival models
for time-to-event outcomes.
4. **Handle missingness principled-ly.** Multiple imputation or FIML rather than listwise deletion;
report the missing-data mechanism assumption and the share imputed; probe panel **attrition**.
5. **Robustness that probes, not decorates.** Alternative measures, samples, estimators, and
specifications that could *break* the result — and what you learn.
6. **Heterogeneity with discipline.** Pre-specify subgroups (by gender, family structure, race/
ethnicity, cohort) where possible; correct for multiple comparisons; do not mine interactions.
## Family-data specifics
- Report the analytic sample and how it was derived from the full dataset (eligibility, attrition,
missingness) — reviewers will check the funnel.
- For dyadic models, report actor and partner effects and whether dyads are distinguishable.
- For growth/event-history models, report the time metric, censoring, and competing risks.
## Reproducibility while you work (not at the end)
- One **master script** regenerates every table and figure from the (raw or constructed) data.
- **Set and report seeds** for imputation, bootstrap, simulation, and any stochastic step.
- Pin software/package versions (`renv.lock`, `requirements.txt`, recorded `ssc`/`net` installs).
- Keep table/figure numbers in the manuscript matched to script outputs.
## Anti-patterns
- Stars-only tables with no effect sizes, intervals, or substantive interpretation
- Ignoring survey weights/design or treating dyad members as independent
- Listwise deletion that silently changes the sample; ignoring attrition
- p-hacking / fishing for a significant interaction; HARKing exploratory results into hypotheses
- A results section whose numbers the code cannot reproduce
## Output format
```
【Main estimate】magnitude + interval + substantive (family) meaning
【Selection check】(per research-design) result
【Data structure】weights/clusters/dyad-family non-independence handled? [Y/N]
【Missing data】MI/FIML + attrition probed? [Y/N]
【Robustness】specs that could break it → what held
【Reproducible】master script + seeds + pinned versions? [Y/N]
【Next】jmf-tables-figures
```
## Supplementary resources
- [`../../resources/external_tools.md`](../../resources/external_tools.md) — estimation, survey, dyadic, survival, and imputation packages
- [`../../resources/official-source-map.md`](../../resources/official-source-map.md) — replication-detail and data expectations
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!