Use when building the theoretical argument of an American Sociological Review (ASR) manuscript into a portable contribution — for quantitative, demographic, comparative-historical, ethnographic, network, or computational work. ASR rewards a mechanism that travels over a setting-bound finding. Structures the argument; it does not run analyses.
SkillScore73Maintained
Automatic
◆Research pack
Last verified 8/15/2026
What it changes
Passed 16 of 22 test cases with the skill, and 3 of 22 without it.
Without skill14%
With skill73%
Checks it passed that the model alone missed
Response contains the tag 【Portability】
Response concludes with 【Next】asr-research-design
Response includes 【Next】asr-research-design at the end
and 25 more in the full report
15 fixed1 passed either way4 still failing2 broke
Pass-rate lift
+59 pp
Tokens
+31%
Agent turns
0%
Response time
-18%
Model gemini-3.6-flashMeasured 8/15/2026v116 of 22 cases passed with skill
Tokens, turns and time describe resource use, not a dollar price.
See it in action
One of 15 test cases the skill fixed. Same model, same prompt, with and without the skill.
1 of 15
Prompt
I ran a regression showing that algorithmic tenant screening increases eviction rates by 18%. The reviewer called this an empirical finding without an explanatory social process. Help me turn this into a full theoretical argument.
What was checked, without and with the skill
Checked
Without skill
With skill
Response identifies the underlying social process under the header 【Mechanism】
Missed
Passed
Response specifies boundary conditions under the header 【Scope conditions】
Missed
Passed
Response lists testable empirical predictions under the header 【Observable implications】
Missed
Passed
case-07 · gemini-3.6-flash · 8/15/2026 · answers are capped and redacted
What's inside
The instructions your model reads when the skill loads.
SKILL.md113 linessingle file
Theory & Argument Building (asr-theory-building)
At ASR a finding becomes a contribution when it is attached to a theoretical argument other
sociologists can use. This skill turns evidence into theory: explicit mechanisms, scope conditions,
and concepts, in the idiom appropriate to your method.
When to trigger
The empirics are strong but the "so what / why" is thin
A reviewer said the paper is "atheoretical," "merely descriptive," or "case-bound"
You need to state the mechanism, the concepts, and where the argument holds
Reconciling rich case material (ethnography/history) with a general claim
Build the argument (by mode of work)
Quantitative / demographic
Concept — define key constructs (e.g., the form of inequality, mobility, the social process)
and distinguish them from neighbors.
Mechanism — the social process generating the pattern: who, why, under what structural
conditions.
Observable implications — what we should and should not see if the mechanism operates; these
become tests in asr-research-design.
Scope conditions — populations, periods, contexts where the argument holds.
Comparative-historical
Build the argument through cases and sequences; specify the causal logic (necessary/sufficient
conditions, conjunctures, path dependence) rather than a loose narrative.
State what comparison or counterfactual the cases support.
Ethnographic / interview
Move from rich observation to a named mechanism and concept the discipline can carry
elsewhere. Say what the site is a case of.
Show what the case lets sociology see that surveys or aggregates cannot.
Network / computational
Tie structure or computational result to a substantive social mechanism, not just a metric.
The "portability" test (ASR-specific)
Ask: Could a sociologist in another subfield import this mechanism or concept to their own problem?
Use when building the theoretical argument of a British Journal of Political Science (BJPS) manuscript into a contribution of general interest — whether the work is formal/game-theoretic, empirical with explicit mechanisms, interpretive, or normative. BJPS rewards a clear, portable argument over a bare finding. Structures the argument; it does not run analyses.