Individual skill

cps-data-analysis

Use when running and reporting the analyses for a Comparative Political Studies (CPS) manuscript — estimation, uncertainty, robustness, and multi-method triangulation on comparative data. Sets analysis norms; it does not choose the identification strategy (see cps-research-design).

Comparative-Political-Studies-Skills/skills/cps-data-analysis/SKILL.md

Read pinned source

Source commit 932eb23331721b16e967c59f093781be1928b498

What was checked

Matches the observed repository HEAD
Yes
Scanner rules are current
Yes
Repository scan complete
No
Skill scan complete
Yes
Observed behavior
Network or broad shell
Last checked
Nov 9, 2026

These are observations at the recorded commit, not a guarantee of safety. Review the source before running it.

Install this skill

Choose an agent in your Stack or copy a command below. Commands fetch the pinned commit and copy only this skill directory. Existing destinations are refused. Copying a command does not install anything.

An install command is unavailable: current rules, complete repository and skill scans, an eligible behavior level and a permitted license are required.

Repository context

Repository stars (not skill ratings)
1,404
Repository last updated
Sep 27, 2026
License
MIT

Observed agent integration: No specific integration evidence. Standard SKILL.md installation does not imply verified compatibility.

Files and excerpt

File metadata and permitted, redacted excerpts come from the recorded scan. Source links are pinned to that commit.

Browse files
Read excerpt

# Data Analysis (cps-data-analysis)

Once the design is fixed (`cps-research-design`), this skill governs how the analyses are run and
reported so a CPS reviewer trusts them. Comparative data bring distinctive hazards: few clusters
(countries), cross-national measurement error, missing data that differ by regime, and the temptation to
over-read a panel correlation as causal. The standard is modern, transparent, and replication-ready.

## When to trigger

- Estimating the main results, robustness, and heterogeneity
- A reviewer questioned standard errors, specification, measurement, or fragility of the result
- Deciding what goes in the main text vs. the supplementary/online appendix
- Triangulating quantitative estimates with case evidence
Back to top