Skills DirectorySkills Directory
SkillsLearnSecurityCategoriesDocsCommunityBlog
Sign InSubmit Skill
Skills Directory

Security-tested agent skills for Claude, coding agents, and AI workflows.

Directory

  • Browse Skills
  • All Skills A–Z
  • Claude Skills
  • Claude Code Skills
  • Agent Skills
  • Categories
  • Authors
  • Submit a Skill

Learn

  • Learn Hub
  • Install Claude Skills
  • Write SKILL.md
  • Skills vs MCP
  • Directories Compared

Security

  • Security
  • Methodology
  • Secure Claude Skills
  • Security Badges

Company

  • About
  • Community
  • Blog
  • API Docs
  • Advertise

2026 Skills Directory. All rights reserved.

ProTermsPrivacyRefunds
Back to skills

Sf Research Design

ASecurity

Use when defending the research design of a Social Forces (SF) manuscript — causal identification for quantitative work, formal demographic design, case selection and process tracing for comparative-historical and ethnographic work, network and computational designs. SF's reputation rests on methodological rigor. Strengthens the design; it does not write code.

1,052 stars
0 votes
0 copies
1 views
Added 6/6/2026
ai-agentspythongotesting

Security Analysis

A100/100

Scanned 6/6/2026

Install to Claude Code

$npx -y skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill sf-research-design --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Sf Research Design?

Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.

Security grade badge for Sf Research Design
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/brycewang-stanford-sf-research-design/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/brycewang-stanford-sf-research-design)

More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.

Download with Pro
Files
SKILL.md
---
name: sf-research-design
description: Use when defending the research design of a Social Forces (SF) manuscript — causal identification for quantitative work, formal demographic design, case selection and process tracing for comparative-historical and ethnographic work, network and computational designs. SF's reputation rests on methodological rigor. Strengthens the design; it does not write code.
---

# Research Design (sf-research-design)

Social Forces is known for **methodological rigor**, and its reviewers are demanding about each
tradition. The design must credibly connect the argument (`sf-theory-building`) to evidence and rule
out the strongest alternative. This skill is mode-aware: pick the section that matches your work and
defend it on its own terms.

## When to trigger

- Specifying identification, demographic design, case selection, or a network/computational pipeline
- A reviewer questioned causal claims, case choice, measurement, or a confound
- Deciding what design buys the cleanest test of your mechanism within a tight word budget
- Justifying why your design adjudicates the rival account from `sf-literature-positioning`

## Quantitative / causal inference
- **Identification first.** State the estimand and the assumptions that license a causal reading
  (ignorability, parallel trends, exclusion, continuity). Defend them, don't assert them.
- **Designs**: panel/fixed effects, DID/event study (use modern staggered-adoption estimators, not
  naive TWFE), IV (first-stage strength, exclusion, weak-IV-robust inference), RDD (density tests,
  bandwidth robustness), matching/weighting with balance + sensitivity.
- **Inference**: cluster at the level of treatment/sampling; account for complex survey designs and
  weights; correct for multiple comparisons when testing many implications.
- **Sensitivity**: how strong must an unobserved confounder be to overturn the result?

## Demographic
- Be explicit about period vs. cohort, exposure, and standardization/decomposition choices.
- Handle censoring and competing risks correctly in event-history work; justify the hazard form.

## Comparative-historical / ethnographic
- **Case selection** justified by design logic (typical, deviant, most/least-likely, paired
  comparison) — not convenience. Say what the case is a case *of*.
- **Process tracing** with explicit tests (hoop, smoking-gun, straw-in-the-wind); state what evidence
  would have **disconfirmed** the argument.
- **Source transparency**: archives, interviews, fieldnotes — plan how they will be documented and
  cited (see `sf-data-and-transparency`).

## Network / computational
- Justify boundary specification, tie definition, and the null/baseline you compare against.
- Validate any computational measure (e.g., classifier, topic model) against human-labeled samples.

## The adjudication test (SF-specific)

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

## Anti-patterns

- Naive TWFE on staggered treatment; clustering at the wrong level
- "Causal" language on a design that only supports association
- Convenience case selection dressed up as theory-driven
- An unvalidated computational measure treated as ground truth
- A design that cannot distinguish your argument from the leading alternative

## Output format

```
【Mode】quant-causal / demographic / comparative-historical / ethnographic / network-computational
【Estimand or claim】what is being identified/shown
【Key assumption(s)】and how each is defended
【Rival ruled out】the adjudication sentence
【Robustness/sensitivity】planned checks
【Next】sf-data-analysis
```

## Supplementary resources

- [`../../resources/external_tools.md`](../../resources/external_tools.md) — design/identification packages (R/Stata/Python), demography, networks, CAQDAS/QCA
- [`../../resources/official-source-map.md`](../../resources/official-source-map.md) — SF rigor reputation and scope

Attribution

brycewang-stanfordbrycewang-stanford
View sourceMore from brycewang-stanford →
SSkills DirectorySkills Directory

Your tool, in front of Claude Code builders.

3 founder slots · $299/mo · GSC-verified traffic · sponsors can never buy grades.

See placements

Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.

Comments (0)

No comments yet. Be the first to comment!

SSkills DirectorySkills Directory

Your tool, in front of Claude Code builders.

3 founder slots · $299/mo · GSC-verified traffic · sponsors can never buy grades.

See placements

Related Skills

Caveman

Ultra-compressed communication mode that cuts output tokens while keeping technical accuracy. Levels: lite, full, ultra and the wenyan variants. Use for /caveman, "caveman mode", "talk like caveman", "be brief" or "less tokens".

1066601 votes

Hyperplan

Adversarial multi-agent planning skill. Self-orchestrates 5 hostile category members (unspecified-low, unspecified-high, deep, ultrabrain, artistry) via team-mode for ruthless cross-critique debate, distills only the defensible insights, then MANDATORILY hands the distilled insight bundle to the `plan` agent for executable plan formalization. Use when planning needs maximum rigor and surfacing of weak assumptions, blind spots, and over-engineering. Triggers: 'hyperplan', 'hpp', '/hyperplan', ...

686011 votes

Mcp Code Execution

Routes multi-tool workflows through MCP servers for large datasets and pipelines. Use when Bash tool overhead is limiting throughput on data-heavy tasks.

3351 votes

catchup

Recovers the conversation and failed tool calls of a previous Codex, Claude Code, Antigravity, Cline, Copilot CLI, Cursor, DeepSeek Harness, Kimi, OpenCode, Pi Agent, or ZCode session. Use when the user says "catch up", "what did the last session do", "get me up to speed", "I switched agents", asks to recover/summarize a previous session before continuing, or asks to diagnose or report a catchup failure. Do NOT use for the current conversation, git history, or any non-agent log.

651 votes

math-skill

A comprehensive mathematical reasoning skill for AI assistants — handles arithmetic to research-level problems with rigorous step-by-step reasoning, systematic verification, and transparent uncertainty handling

381 votes
View all in ai-agents →