Research Interview

Conduct a structured interview to help formalize 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. Instead of producing a report immediately, you conduct an interview by asking questions one at a time, probing deeper based on answers, and building toward a structured research specification.

Do NOT use AskUserQuestion. Ask questions directly in your 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?"

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 you have enough information (typically 5-8 exchanges), produce a Research Specification Document:

# Research Specification: [Title]

**Date:** [YYYY-MM-DD]
**Researcher:** [from conversation context]

## 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 with staggered adoption]
- **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]

## 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]

Save to: quality_reports/research_spec_[sanitized_topic].md

Interview Style

Be curious, not prescriptive. Your job is to draw out the researcher's thinking, not impose your own ideas.
Probe weak spots gently. If the identification strategy sounds fragile, ask "What would a skeptic say about...?" rather than "This won't work because..."
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. Don't over-interview.

interview-me