From orgsci-skills
Analyzes and reports results for Organization Science manuscripts, establishing trustworthiness for qualitative data, selecting appropriate estimators for quantitative/multilevel data, ensuring transparency for simulations, and supporting mechanism-based inference when causal identification is unavailable.
How this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/orgsci-skills:orgsci-data-analysisThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
- Data are collected (or a model built) and it is time to analyze and report
Because Organization Science is methodologically eclectic, "rigor" looks different by method. Report the standard that fits, transparently.
The venue holds that causal inference is valued but "not necessary and often impossible." Where clean identification is unavailable, support inference with mechanism evidence, theoretical logic, institutional knowledge, triangulation, and falsification/placebo logic, and rule out alternatives empirically where possible. Do not overclaim causality; do not abandon a credible mechanism for want of an instrument.
Provide enough detail and references that others could replicate the work. Under the 2025 data and methods transparency policy, authors should be ready to share statistical code upon editor request during review, and accepted quantitative papers must publicly share data/code unless a documented exception and alternative transparency plan applies. Keep clean, regenerable scripts regardless of whether the underlying data can be public.
Use this as a second-pass capability check. First lock a level map, a mechanism paragraph, and the cover-letter contribution statement; then test whether the manuscript addresses interdisciplinary organization reviewers who ask whether the mechanism travels across levels of analysis.
claim / evidence / blocker / next edit rows so the next pass can patch the manuscript directly.resources/official-source-map.md for
upload-week rules and name the one live-check item that could change the recommendation.【Method】qualitative / multilevel / panel-EH / experiment / simulation / formal
【Rigor evidence】trustworthiness (data structure, audit trail) OR estimator + SE clustering OR sensitivity/seeds OR proofs
【Inference】identification? if not — mechanism + design logic + falsification; alternatives ruled out
【Replicability】detail/scripts ready; data/code sharing or exception plan ready
【Next step】orgsci-contribution-framing
npx claudepluginhub brycewang-stanford/awesome-journal-skills --plugin orgsci-skillsGuides transparent qualitative coding, process analysis, and quantitative robustness checks for Organization Studies manuscripts. Makes the evidence-to-theory link auditable.
Guides selection and defense of research designs for Organization Science manuscripts, matching qualitative, quantitative, experimental, or simulation methods to the research question and level of analysis. Addresses reviewer demands for causal inference.
Executes and reports analysis for Management Science manuscripts: proves analytical results or estimates/validates empirical models, with replication package preparation.