Use when running and reporting the estimation for a The Accounting Review (TAR) manuscript — the estimator, fixed effects, standard-error clustering, robustness, and the data-authenticity / code-access documentation TAR requires. Executes and reports the analysis; it does not design identification (tar-methods) or frame the contribution (tar-contribution-framing).
Scanned 9/12/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add thedixitjain/the-mega-skill-library --skill tar-data-analysis --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Tar Data Analysis?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/thedixitjain-tar-data-analysis)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: tar-data-analysis
description: "Use when running and reporting the estimation for a The Accounting Review (TAR) manuscript — the estimator, fixed effects, standard-error clustering, robustness, and the data-authenticity / code-access documentation TAR requires. Executes and reports the analysis; it does not design identification (tar-methods) or frame the contribution (tar-contribution-framing)."
category: backend-and-data
source_repo: brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
source_path: "The-Accounting-Review-Skills/skills/tar-data-analysis/SKILL.md"
source_url: https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/blob/HEAD/The-Accounting-Review-Skills/skills/tar-data-analysis/SKILL.md
---
# Estimation, Robustness & Data Authenticity (tar-data-analysis)
## When to trigger
- The sample is built and it is time to estimate and report
- You are unsure whether your standard errors, fixed effects, or estimator match the design
- Reviewers will probe robustness, alternative measures, or sample-selection screens
- You must assemble the data-authenticity / code-access package TAR requires
- A reviewer says "the result is not robust" or "I cannot tell how the sample was built"
## Estimator and inference (large-sample archival core)
- **Match the estimator to the design** set in `tar-methods`: OLS with high-dimensional fixed
effects (firm, year, industry-year) for panel associations; DiD / staggered-DiD with a modern
estimator for adoption shocks; 2SLS for endogenous regressors; RDD for threshold settings; logit/
probit/Poisson/Tobit for limited or count outcomes (e.g., restatement, going-concern, fraud).
- **Cluster standard errors** at the level of treatment assignment / correlation (firm, or two-way
firm-and-year); for few clusters use the wild-cluster bootstrap.
- **Report fixed effects explicitly** and show how the coefficient moves as you add them — a result
that survives tighter fixed effects is more credible than one that does not.
- For **accounting-specific measures** (discretionary accruals, real earnings management, abnormal
audit fees, effective/cash tax rates, disclosure tone), state the construction model and screen,
and show the result is not an artifact of the proxy.
## Robustness reviewers expect
- Alternative measures of the focal accounting construct (e.g., a second accruals model; cash vs.
GAAP ETR; alternative disclosure proxy).
- Alternative samples and screens (drop financials/utilities; winsorize vs. truncate; subperiods).
- Sensitivity of the identifying assumption (pre-trends, placebo dates, alternative instruments,
bandwidth choices for RDD).
- Falsification / placebo tests where the effect should be absent.
- Economic magnitude, not just significance — interpret the coefficient in accounting terms.
## Data-authenticity & code access (a TAR-specific requirement)
TAR requires authors to enable confirmation of data authenticity, with differentiated rules:
- **Publicly available databases** (Compustat, CRSP, I/B/E/S, Audit Analytics): provide a precise
description of the data **and** access to the **computer code** used to process it.
- **Data abstracted from public sources** (hand-collected from filings, PCAOB reports): provide the
**abstraction methodology** plus code access.
- **Privately collected data** (proprietary field data, experiments): provide enough detail for
reader confidence; **corroborating third parties** are acceptable.
Code/data sufficiency is part of the submission and acceptance requirements (待核实 whether a named
public repository deposit is mandated at acceptance). Build clean, commented scripts from raw
extract to every table now — not after the R&R.
## Execution bridge (StatsPAI / Stata MCP)
Run the battery, don't just enumerate it. Full map:
[`execution-with-mcp`](../../../shared-resources/empirical-methods/execution-with-mcp.md). TAR is archival accounting — DiD around regulation / standard changes, IV, and earnings-based designs; the corporate-causal chain fits directly.
- **Many outcomes / specifications:** `romano_wolf` (step-down FWER) or
`benjamini_hochberg` — report the adjusted threshold.
- **OVB sensitivity:** `oster_delta` / `sensemakr`.
- **Inference:** `wild_cluster_bootstrap` (few clusters), `twoway_cluster` / `conley`;
multilevel data → cluster at the right level.
- **Re-fit off one handle:** `audit_result(result_id)` lists the missing checks and the
exact `suggest_function` for each.
- **Exhibits:** `etable` / `did_summary_to_latex` from the handle — no retyped numbers.
Keep the decisive checks in the body and the exhaustive battery in the appendix. See the
executed chain in the [JF execution walkthrough](../../../Journal-of-Finance-Skills/resources/worked-examples/02-execution-walkthrough.md).
## Checklist
- [ ] Estimator matches the design; FEs reported; SEs clustered at the right level
- [ ] Coefficient stability shown across FE/control sets
- [ ] Focal accounting measure validated with an alternative construction
- [ ] Pre-trends/placebo/falsification tests reported where the design needs them
- [ ] Economic magnitude interpreted, not just p-values
- [ ] Data-authenticity package assembled per data type (description + processing code / methodology)
- [ ] Sample-construction screens documented and reproducible from raw data
## Anti-patterns
- **Uncluttered p-values, no magnitude** — significance without economic interpretation.
- **Single proxy** for a contested construct (e.g., one accruals model) presented as definitive.
- **TWFE on staggered adoption** ignoring heterogeneous-treatment-effect bias.
- **Robustness theater**: many tables that never vary the thing a skeptic doubts.
- **Unreproducible sample**: screens and merges that no one can rebuild from the raw data.
- **No processing code** ready, in violation of the data-authenticity policy.
## Output format
```
【Estimator】OLS-HDFE / staggered-DiD / 2SLS / RDD / logit-Poisson ...
【Fixed effects & clustering】... ; SE level ...
【Focal measure】construction + alternative proxy: pass/issues
【Robustness】alt measures / samples / placebo / pre-trends ...
【Economic magnitude】coefficient means ... in accounting terms
【Data authenticity】public-db / abstracted / private — code & description ready? yes/no
【Open issues for reviewers】...
【Next step】tar-contribution-framing
```
---
**Source:** [`brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills`](https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) → `The-Accounting-Review-Skills/skills/tar-data-analysis/SKILL.md`
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!