Awesome-Agent-Skills-for-Empirical-Research interview-me
Structured conversational interview to formalise a research idea or extension into a concrete specification with hypotheses and empirical strategy. This skill should be used when asked to "interview me", "help me think through an idea", "formalise this idea", or "start fresh" on a new research direction.
git clone https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Agent-Skills-for-Empirical-Research
T=$(mktemp -d) && git clone --depth=1 https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Agent-Skills-for-Empirical-Research "$T" && mkdir -p ~/.claude/skills && cp -r "$T/skills/41-sticerd-eee-sewage-econometrics-check/skills/interview-me" ~/.claude/skills/brycewang-stanford-awesome-agent-skills-for-empirical-research-interview-me-1f9d16 && rm -rf "$T"
skills/41-sticerd-eee-sewage-econometrics-check/skills/interview-me/SKILL.mdResearch Interview
Conduct a structured interview to help formalise a research idea into a concrete specification.
Input:
$ARGUMENTS — a brief topic description or "start fresh" for an open-ended exploration.
How This Works
This is a conversational skill. Ask questions one at a time, probe deeper based on answers, and build toward a structured research specification.
Ask questions directly in text responses, one or two at a time. Wait for the user to respond before continuing.
Interview Structure
Phase 1: The Big Picture (1-2 questions)
- "What phenomenon or puzzle are you trying to understand?"
- "Why does this matter? Who should care about the answer?"
Phase 2: Theoretical Motivation (1-2 questions)
- "What's your intuition for why X happens / what drives Y?"
- "What would standard theory predict? Do you expect something different?"
Phase 3: Data and Setting (1-2 questions)
- "What data do you have access to, or what data would you ideally want?"
- "Is there a specific context, time period, or institutional setting you're focused on?"
For this project, also probe:
- Can this be answered with the existing EDM + Land Registry + Zoopla data?
- Does this require new data (e.g. water company financials, bathing water quality, health data)?
Phase 4: Identification (1-2 questions)
- "Is there a natural experiment, policy change, or source of variation you can exploit?"
- "What's the biggest threat to a causal interpretation?"
Phase 5: Expected Results (1-2 questions)
- "What would you expect to find? What would surprise you?"
- "What would the results imply for policy or theory?"
Phase 6: Contribution (1 question)
- "How does this differ from what's already been done? What's the gap you're filling?"
After the Interview
Once enough information is gathered (typically 5-8 exchanges), produce:
Research Specification Document
# Research Specification: [Title] **Date:** YYYY-MM-DD ## Research Question [Clear, specific question in one sentence] ## Motivation [2-3 paragraphs: why this matters, theoretical context, policy relevance] ## Hypothesis [Testable prediction with expected direction] ## Empirical Strategy - **Method:** [e.g., Difference-in-Differences] - **Treatment:** [What varies] - **Control:** [Comparison group] - **Key identifying assumption:** [What must hold] - **Robustness checks:** [Pre-trends, placebo tests, etc.] ## Data - **Primary dataset:** [Name, source, coverage] - **Key variables:** [Treatment, outcome, controls] - **Sample:** [Unit of observation, time period, N] - **Available in project:** [Yes/No — what exists vs what's needed] ## Expected Results [What the researcher expects to find and why] ## Contribution [How this advances the literature — 2-3 sentences] ## Open Questions [Issues raised during the interview that need further thought] ## Feasibility Assessment - Data availability: [Ready / Partially available / Needs collection] - Infrastructure reuse: [What from the existing pipeline can be reused] - Estimated effort: [Low / Medium / High]
Save to
output/log/research_spec_[topic].md.
Interview Style
- Be curious, not prescriptive. Draw out the researcher's thinking, don't impose ideas.
- Probe weak spots gently. "What would a sceptic say about...?" rather than "This won't work."
- Build on answers. Each question should follow from the previous response.
- Know when to stop. If the researcher has a clear vision after 4-5 exchanges, move to the specification.
- Project-aware. Connect ideas to the existing sewage project infrastructure where relevant.