Agent skill · Data & Analytics

jbv-data-analysis

Use when running and reporting the analysis for a Journal of Business Venturing (JBV) manuscript — choosing estimators that fit entrepreneurial data (survival/event-history, selection models, panels, experiments, qualitative trustworthiness), handling attrition and endogenous founding, and reporting robustness. Executes and reports the analysis; it does not design the study (jbv-methods) or frame the contribution (jbv-contribution-framing).

brycew6m878★ · +32/wk · 1 repos on radarProfile →
claude-codeMIT
Install
npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill jbv-data-analysis --agent claude-code

Same command for any agent — swap --agent for codex, cursor, copilot.

Facts
Files in the skill folder: 1
SKILL.md size: 8 KB
Bundled scripts: none
Path: Journal-of-Business-Venturing-Skills/skills/jbv-data-analysis/SKILL.md
Open the folder on GitHub →
Where it comes from
Stars: 909 · +31 this week
Language: Stata
Read our review of the source →

Weekly change comes from our own snapshots, not the repository page — it measures attention, not adoption.

From the SKILL.md

# Data Analysis & Validity (jbv-data-analysis) ## When to trigger - Data are collected and it is time to estimate and report - You are unsure the estimator matches an entrepreneurial-data structure (venture survival, founding choice, nested funding events) - Reviewers will probe survivorship, selection into founding, or endogeneity - A handling editor says "the analysis does not support the inference about entrepreneurship" ## Match the estimator to the entrepreneurial data structure JBV is methodologically pluralistic, so the right tool depends on the claim. Common patterns in new-venture data: | Data structure / claim | Estimator | |---------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------| | Time-to-exit / IPO / failure | Survival / event-history (Cox, parametric AFT, competing risks) | | Choice to found / endogenous selection | Heckman / Roy selection; control function | | Venture panel with unit heterogeneity | Fixed/random effects; cluster-robust SE (`reghdfe`, `fixest`) | | Policy / ecosystem / financing shock | DiD / event study / staggered-adoption estimators | | Counts (patents, funding rounds, ventures) |

What's inside
Steps it walks through
  1. When to trigger
  2. Match the estimator to the entrepreneurial data structure
  3. Handle entrepreneurship-specific threats
  4. Robustness expected by JBV reviewers
  5. Reporting
  6. Execution bridge (StatsPAI / Stata MCP)
  7. Checklist
  8. Referee-pushback patterns and the JBV-specific fix
  9. Worked micro-example (illustrative numbers)
  10. Calibration anchors (hedged)
  11. Anti-patterns
  12. Output format
More from Awesome-Journal-Skills
All skills →
About this skill
What does the jbv-data-analysis skill do?

Use when running and reporting the analysis for a Journal of Business Venturing (JBV) manuscript — choosing estimators that fit entrepreneurial data (survival/event-history, selection models, panels, experiments, qualitative trustworthiness), handling attrition and endogenous founding, and reporting robustness. Executes and reports the analysis; it does not design the study (jbv-methods) or frame the contribution (jbv-contribution-framing).

How do I install it?

Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill jbv-data-analysis --agent claude-code` — it drops the skill into your project so the agent can pick it up. Swap the --agent value for codex, cursor or copilot if you use one of those.

Where does this skill come from?

From brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills, a repository with 909 stars. We read it straight from the repository tree rather than a submitted listing, so what you see here is what is actually published.

Is a popular skill a good skill?

Not necessarily. Stars measure attention, not adoption — a repository can trend for a week and be abandoned. That is why we show the weekly change from our own snapshots next to the total, instead of a single flattering number.

Keep going