From wp-skills
Defends the research design of a World Politics manuscript across comparative-historical, quantitative, qualitative, experimental, and formal-empirical methods. Strengthens argumentation without writing code.
How this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/wp-skills:wp-research-designThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
World Politics asks every article to "be explicit about its research design and use appropriate
World Politics asks every article to "be explicit about its research design and use appropriate
methods," and applies separate expectations to quantitative and qualitative work. Because the journal
values arguments that travel across cases, the design must connect a portable argument
(wp-theory-building) to evidence in a way that rules out the strongest cross-case rival. This
skill is mode-aware: pick the section that matches your work.
wp-literature-positioningwp-review-process/wp-submission). State the generalization claim across
contexts honestly.For the single strongest rival explanation, write one sentence: "If the rival were true rather than my argument, the cases/data would look like ___; instead they look like ___." If you cannot, the design does not yet identify a contribution that travels.
World Politics judges each tradition on its own terms and prizes designs built to adjudicate, so design objections cluster predictably across the comparative and IR styles it publishes.
| Referee objection | The fix this skill drives |
|---|---|
| "Case selection unjustified" | State what each case is a case of and the design logic (typical / deviant / most–least-likely / paired); convenience is not a design |
| "Selecting on the dependent variable" | Add variation on the outcome, or reframe as a scope-condition study with disconfirming cases |
| "Causal language on associational design" | Match the verb to the warrant; reserve causal claims for designs that identify them |
A hypothetical comparative study asks whether electoral autocracies are more war-prone than closed ones. A weak version selects three war-fighting electoral autocracies and infers a tendency — a selection-on-the-outcome flaw a referee will name immediately.
Mode: comparative-historical, structured-focused comparison
Estimand: conflict propensity, electoral vs closed autocracy, holding capacity fixed
Selection: 2 electoral + 2 closed autocracies matched on GDP/region; varies on the OUTCOME
Adjudication: if the rival "capacity, not regime type" held, the matched closed cases would
fight as often; instead the electoral cases initiate ~2x more disputes (illustrative).
Travel: scope condition — holds where elections raise audience costs, not where they are sham
The redesign varies on the outcome and writes the adjudication sentence, so the comparison can identify a contribution that travels. (Counts and ratios illustrative; confirm design expectations against current guidelines.)
【Mode】comparative-historical / quant cross-national / qualitative / experiment / formal-empirical
【Estimand or claim】what is being identified/shown, and across which cases
【Case selection / key assumption(s)】and how each is defended
【Rival ruled out】the adjudication sentence
【Robustness/sensitivity】planned checks
【Next】wp-data-analysis
../../resources/external_tools.md — identification/TSCS packages, QCA, and CAQDAS for qualitative work../../resources/official-source-map.md — reviewer-guideline expectations for design and methodsnpx claudepluginhub brycewang-stanford/awesome-journal-skills --plugin wp-skillsDefends research design for Comparative Political Studies manuscripts — causal identification, case comparison, process tracing, experiments, and multi-method designs.
Defends research design for APSR manuscripts: causal identification, case selection, process tracing, experimental design, and formal-empirical linkage.
Defends research designs for JOP (Journal of Politics) manuscripts — covering causal identification, experimental/survey design, formal-empirical linkage, and qualitative case selection/process tracing. Does not write code.