Individual skill
expecon-rebuttal
Use when responding to a revise-and-resubmit or referee report for an Experimental Economics (ExpEcon) manuscript — including when a referee demands a new treatment, more sessions, or raises a deception/power concern. Plans the response; it does not run the new analysis.
Experimental-Economics-Skills/skills/expecon-rebuttal/SKILL.md
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)
- 1,405
- Repository last updated
- Sep 27, 2026
- License
- MIT
Observed agent integration: No specific integration evidence. Standard SKILL.md installation does not imply verified compatibility.
- academic-writing Repository topic
- agent-skills Repository topic
- journal Repository topic
- academic-research Repository topic
- ai-agents Repository topic
- anthropic Repository topic
- awesome-list Repository topic
- claude Repository topic
- claude-code Repository topic
- economics Repository topic
- engineering Derived category
Files and excerpt
File metadata and permitted, redacted excerpts come from the recorded scan. Source links are pinned to that commit.
Browse files
SKILL.mdcore · 8,380 bytes
Read excerpt
# Rebuttal Strategy (expecon-rebuttal)
## When to trigger
- An R&R or rejection arrived and you must decide what to concede, contest, or re-run
- A referee asks for a **new treatment or more sessions** — the costliest and most common ExpEcon request
- A reviewer raised a **deception** or **power/inference-unit** concern that could be decisive
- Two referees disagree, or the two editors' priorities differ, and you need a coherent plan
## The ExpEcon revision reality: new data is on the table
Unlike journals where revisions are textual, an ExpEcon R&R often requires **collecting new data** — an added control treatment, more matching groups for power, or a robustness condition. Plan the response around that fact.
1. **Triage every comment** into: (a) **new data needed** (new treatment / more sessions), (b) **re-analysis** (correct inference unit, MHT correction, new test), (c) **clarification** (already in the paper, surface it), (d) **respectful disagreement** (with evidence). Most letters are mostly (b)–(c); isolate the (a) items because they set the timeline and budget.