joc-research-design
GitHub专为《Journal of Communication》稿件辩护研究设计，涵盖实验、调查、内容分析、计算及定性方法。强化因果推断、信效度及理论衔接，应对审稿人质疑，确保设计能承载理论权重。
Trigger Scenarios
Install
npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill joc-research-design -g -y
SKILL.md
Frontmatter
{
"name": "joc-research-design",
"description": "Use when defending the research design of a Journal of Communication (JoC) manuscript — experimental and survey design, content analysis with intercoder reliability, computational\/text-as-data validation, or qualitative\/critical inquiry. JoC judges each tradition on its own terms. Strengthens the design; it does not write code."
}
Research Design (joc-research-design)
JoC accepts many methodologies but is demanding about each. The design must credibly connect the
argument (joc-theory-building) to evidence. This skill is mode-aware: pick the section that matches
your work and defend it against the strongest alternative explanation.
When to trigger
- Specifying an experiment, survey, content-analysis protocol, computational pipeline, or fieldwork plan
- A reviewer questioned causal claims, sampling, coding reliability, validity, or a confound
- Preparing a preregistration / pre-analysis plan (note it in the cover letter)
- Justifying why your design adjudicates the rival account from
joc-literature-positioning
Experiments (lab / online / survey / field)
- Preregister the design and primary analyses; report a-priori power / MDE; pre-specify subgroups.
- Treatment realism and ecological validity; manipulation and attention checks; attrition.
- Stimuli sampling: treat messages as a sample, not a fixture (consider stimulus-as-random-factor).
- Ethics/IRB and informed consent; debrief where deception is used.
Surveys / panels
- Sampling frame, mode, and generalization claims; weighting where appropriate.
- Validated multi-item measures; report reliability; guard against common-method variance.
- For cross-sectional mediation, be explicit about causal limits; prefer panel/experimental designs for process claims.
Content analysis
- A documented codebook; trained coders; report intercoder reliability (Krippendorff's alpha or equivalent) on an adequate subsample, and the unit of analysis.
- Sampling of texts justified (timeframe, sources); construct validity of categories.
Computational / text-as-data
- Validate automated measures against human-coded gold-standard samples; report agreement.
- Document model/version, hyperparameters, seeds; report stability; do not treat outputs as ground truth.
- Address platform/ToS and ethics for collected data.
Qualitative / critical
- Justify case/site/text selection by design logic, not convenience; say what it is a case of.
- Trustworthiness: reflexivity, audit trail, transparent coding; state what evidence would complicate the reading.
The adjudication test (JoC-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.
Reviewer-pushback patterns and the JoC-specific fix
JoC referees at the ICA flagship rarely reject on a single statistic; they reject when the design cannot bear the theoretical weight the paper puts on it. The recurring objections and their venue-specific repairs:
| Reviewer objection | Why it lands at JoC | Design-stage fix |
|---|---|---|
| "Single-message confound" | one stimulus cannot separate the message feature from the specific text | sample multiple messages per condition; treat message as a random factor; report a stimulus-sampling check |
| "Measurement validity of message features" | a hand-coded or model-coded "frame" may not be the construct claimed | pre-validate the feature against human gold-standard coding; report construct validity, not just reliability |
| "Effect without mechanism" | a main effect alone does not advance communication theory | design the mediator/moderator measurement in before collection; pre-specify the indirect-effect test |
| "Exposure is assumed, not measured" | self-reported "saw the news" is a weak proxy | build a behavioral or attention-anchored exposure measure |
| "Cross-sectional process claim" | mediation on one wave cannot license a causal story | move the mediator to an experiment or panel, or hedge the claim |
Worked micro-example: framing survey-experiment design (illustrative)
A planned study claims that gain- vs. loss-framed vaccine messages change intention via perceived risk. A JoC-defensible design: 2 (frame) × 3 (message exemplars per frame) factorial so the frame effect is estimated across six distinct texts, not one — defeating the single-message confound. Target N ≈ 900 (illustrative; size to the registered MDE), preregister the mediation path frame → perceived risk → intention with bootstrap CIs, and add an attention check plus a behavioral exposure proxy. The adjudication sentence writes itself: if the rival "any health message moves intention" were true, the gain/loss contrast would be null while overall intention rose; instead the contrast is non-null and runs through perceived risk — advancing framing theory rather than re-documenting a persuasion effect.
Execution bridge (StatsPAI / Stata MCP)
Estimate and audit the design, don't only describe it. Full map:
execution-with-mcp. Journal of Communication spans experiments, surveys, and content analysis; randomization inference for experiments, DiD/IV for observational media-effects claims.
detect_design→recommend→ fit withas_handle=true→audit_result.- Observational causal claims: staggered DiD (
callaway_santanna/sun_abraham+bacon_decomposition+honest_did_from_result); IV (effective_f_test+anderson_rubin_ci); RDD (rdrobust+mccrary_test). - Experiments: randomization-based inference,
romano_wolffor many-outcome family-wise control, andmediatefor mediation (not naive controlling-away). - Sensitivity:
oster_delta/sensemakrfor observational claims.
Report the effect size in interpretable units; route the full battery to the appendix/supplement. A run end-to-end (synthetic data, real returns) is in the JF execution walkthrough.
Anti-patterns
- Causal language on a cross-sectional survey that only supports association
- Content analysis with no reported intercoder reliability or an unstated unit of analysis
- Automated text measures used without human validation
- Convenience case/stimulus selection dressed up as theory-driven
- A single-message stimulus carrying a claim about a message feature
- A design that cannot distinguish your argument from the leading alternative
Output format
【Mode】experiment / survey / content-analysis / computational / qualitative
【Estimand or claim】what is being identified/shown
【Key assumption(s)】and how each is defended (incl. reliability/validity)
【Rival ruled out】the adjudication sentence
【Robustness/sensitivity】planned checks
【Next】joc-data-analysis
Supplementary resources
../../resources/external_tools.md— design, reliability, and text-as-data packages (R/SPSS/Mplus/Python) and CAQDAS for qualitative work../../resources/official-source-map.md— preregistration and Open Science Badge notes
Version History
- 1839142 Current 2026-07-05 13:29
