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.