counterfactual-reasoning

To stress-test research conclusions for causal inference, provide your core claim, key evidence, and optional study design. The skill decomposes the causal structure, enumerates competing explanations, and outputs simulated reviewer critiques with actionable revision recommendations.

Identifying competing explanations and selection bias requires systematically evaluating threats from confounding variables, reverse causation, and observer effects. The skill breaks down your claim's interpretive direction and mechanism to evaluate alternative explanations against your evidence.

Yes, you can simulate reviewer critiques before journal submission by inputting your target journal alongside your claim and evidence. It generates multiple reviewer perspectives, testing generalizability challenges and contextual transferability.

The best way to check boundary conditions and generalizability of academic claims is to test representativeness, time robustness, and contextual transferability. The skill validates the scope of your claim and clarifies the specific conditions under which it holds.

This approach works for both qualitative and quantitative academic claims requiring pre-submission defenses against reviewer objections. It decomposes the interpretive structure and evidence-to-claim inference gap regardless of the research methodology used.