quant-findings-writer
Quantitative Findings Writer
Draft Results/Findings sections for quantitative sociology articles using structural patterns discovered in 83 Social Problems and Social Forces articles.
Project Integration
This skill reads from project.yaml when available:
# From project.yaml
type: quantitative # This skill is for quantitative projects
paths:
drafts: drafts/sections/
tables: output/tables/
figures: output/figures/
Project type: This skill is designed for quantitative projects.
Consumes output from r-analyst or stata-analyst (tables, figures, interpretation memos from Phase 5).
Updates progress.yaml when complete:
status:
results_draft: done
artifacts:
results_section: drafts/sections/results-section.md
Connection to Other Skills
| Skill | Relationship | Details |
|---|---|---|
| r-analyst | Upstream | Produces tables, figures, interpretation memos (Phase 5 output) |
| stata-analyst | Upstream | Same as r-analyst but for Stata |
| article-bookends | Downstream | Takes results section as input for framing |
| methods-writer | Parallel | Methods section written alongside or before results |
| lit-synthesis | Upstream | Provides theoretical framework for theory-linking |
| prose-craft | Craft guide | Sentence/paragraph benchmarks (evaluative mode); tone, anti-LLM rules |
File Management
This skill uses git to track progress across phases. Before modifying any output file at a new phase:
- Stage and commit current state:
git add [files] && git commit -m "quant-findings-writer: Phase N complete" - Then proceed with modifications.
Do NOT create version-suffixed copies (e.g., -v2, -final, -working). The git history serves as the version trail.
Workflow
Phase 1: Orient
Gather from the user:
- Method type: secondary-survey-analysis, administrative-data, or content-analysis
- Key results: tables, model output, or thematic findings to present
- Theoretical predictions: hypotheses or expectations the results address
- Target length: typical is 12-25 paragraphs (2,000-5,000 words)
If the user has already written a draft, read it and assess which cluster it most resembles before suggesting revisions.
Phase 2: Select Cluster
Present the 7 clusters with their canonical arcs. Recommend 1-2 based on method type and analytic strategy:
| Cluster | Best for | Arc |
|---|---|---|
| Progressive Model Builder | Regression-heavy papers building from simple to complex specs | DESCRIBE → BASELINE → ELABORATE → MECHANISM → ROBUSTNESS |
| Hypothesis Tester | Papers with numbered H1/H2/H3 predictions | SETUP → BASELINE → ELABORATE → SUBGROUP → SUMMARY |
| Decomposition Analyst | Gap/disparity papers using Oaxaca-Blinder, mediation | DESCRIBE → BASELINE → DECOMPOSE → MECHANISM → ROBUSTNESS |
| Subgroup Comparator | Heterogeneity-focused papers (by race, gender, class) | DESCRIBE → BASELINE → SUBGROUP → COMPARISON → ROBUSTNESS |
| Temporal Tracker | Event studies, trend analysis, periodization | TEMPORAL → BASELINE → TEMPORAL → SUBGROUP → ROBUSTNESS |
| Thematic Explorer | Content analysis with qualitative themes/frames | THEMATIC → THEMATIC → THEMATIC → SUMMARY |
| Causal Inference Specialist | DiD, IV, RDD, matching designs | SETUP → BASELINE → ELABORATE → ROBUSTNESS → MECHANISM |
Selection heuristics:
- Survey data + model progression → Progressive Model Builder
- Admin data + quasi-experimental design → Causal Inference Specialist
- Admin data + inequality decomposition → Decomposition Analyst
- Any method + explicit hypotheses → Hypothesis Tester
- Any method + group comparisons as central question → Subgroup Comparator
- Content analysis + thematic coding → Thematic Explorer
- Panel/longitudinal + change over time → Temporal Tracker
After the user selects a cluster, read the matching guide from clusters/{cluster-name}.md for detailed arc, paragraph budget, signature techniques, and exemplar patterns.
Phase 3: Build the Arc
Using the cluster guide, construct a section outline:
- Map each major finding/table to a MOVE from the standardized vocabulary
- Sequence moves following the cluster's canonical arc
- Allocate paragraphs using the cluster's paragraph budget
- Identify the opening and closing moves
Standardized move vocabulary:
| Move | Function |
|---|---|
| DESCRIBE | Descriptive statistics, sample overview, bivariate patterns |
| SETUP | Methodological restatement, analytic strategy recap |
| BASELINE | Initial/simple models, main effects without interactions |
| ELABORATE | Add complexity: interactions, nonlinearities, mediators |
| DECOMPOSE | Formal decomposition (Oaxaca-Blinder, mediation, etc.) |
| SUBGROUP | Heterogeneity by subgroups (race, gender, class) |
| MECHANISM | Mediation, mechanism tests, process tracing |
| ROBUSTNESS | Sensitivity analysis, alternative specs, placebo tests |
| THEMATIC | Substantive theme/topic analysis |
| TEMPORAL | Over-time patterns, periodization, event studies |
| COMPARISON | Cross-group or cross-context comparison |
| VISUAL | Key figure/visualization driving the narrative |
| SUMMARY | Brief recap paragraph |
| TRANSITION | Bridge to discussion section |
Present the arc to the user as a numbered outline with paragraph counts per move.
Phase 4: Draft
Write each move following corpus norms. Consult techniques/techniques.md for the full technique catalog.
Opening paragraph (choose one based on cluster):
- Table reference (58% of corpus): "Table 2 presents results from..."
- Sample description (20%): "Before turning to multivariate models, I describe..."
- Hypothesis restatement (14%): "Recall that H1 predicted..."
- Methodological setup (5%): "To estimate the causal effect, I use..."
Body paragraphs:
- Lead with the finding, not the method
- Translate every key coefficient into substantive terms (85% of corpus does this)
- Use attenuation tracking when adding controls: "the coefficient falls from .34 to .21"
- Connect to theory at moderate density: ~1 theory reference per 3-4 paragraphs for most clusters
- Report null findings transparently (45% of corpus does this)
Closing paragraph (choose one):
- Robustness cascade (18%): "Results are robust to..."
- Strongest finding (18%): save the most important result for the end
- Subgroup analysis (17%): end with heterogeneity
- Supplemental reference (14%): "Additional specifications in Appendix Table A3..."
- Summary (11%): brief recap of all findings
Cross-cutting norms:
- Median section length: ~18 paragraphs, 3 tables/figures referenced
- 75% use hybrid table strategy: tables anchor the narrative but prose interprets
- 55% link results to theory heavily; 40% moderately; only 5% minimally
- Distinguish statistical from practical significance when warranted
Phase 5: Calibrate
After drafting, check against cluster norms:
- Does the arc match the canonical sequence?
- Is the paragraph budget balanced?
- Are tables referenced with interpretive guidance, not just pointed at?
- Is theory linking at the right density for the cluster?
- Are robustness checks present if the cluster expects them?
- Are null findings acknowledged rather than buried?
Present the draft with a brief calibration note.
Reference Files
- Cluster guides (read the one matching the selected cluster):
clusters/progressive-model-builder.mdclusters/hypothesis-tester.mdclusters/decomposition-analyst.mdclusters/subgroup-comparator.mdclusters/temporal-tracker.mdclusters/thematic-explorer.mdclusters/causal-inference-specialist.md
techniques/techniques.md— 20 writing techniques with descriptions and frequency datareferences/corpus-statistics.md— summary statistics from the 83-article analysis corpus