Agent skill · Code Review & Quality

nbr-measurement

Use for measurement rigor in 《南开管理评论》 (Nankai Business Review) survey studies — reliability (Cronbach's α, composite reliability), validity (convergent via AVE, discriminant via Fornell-Larcker / HTMT), and common-method-bias diagnosis (Harman single-factor, marker variable, common latent factor). Use whenever a paper uses self-report scales, especially if measures were borrowed or single-source.

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

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

Facts
Files in the skill folder: 1
SKILL.md size: 3 KB
Bundled scripts: none
Path: Nankai-Business-Review-Skills/skills/nbr-measurement/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

# 测量规范(nbr-measurement) ## 触发时机 - 用了量表(个体或企业层级自报) - 量表照搬国外/他文,未做本土化与心理测量 - 单一来源、同一时点测自变量与因变量(CMV 高风险) ## 信度(Reliability) - **Cronbach's α** ≥ 0.70(探索性 0.60 可商榷,需说明) - **组合信度 CR** ≥ 0.70 - 报告每个构念的题项数、均值/标准差、来源出处 ## 效度(Validity) | 类型 | 指标 | 经验门槛 | |------|------|----------| | 收敛效度 | 标准化载荷显著且较高;**AVE** | 载荷 > 0.50(宜 > 0.70);AVE > 0.50 | | 区分效度 | Fornell-Larcker:√AVE > 构念间相关 | 或 **HTMT** < 0.85(严格 0.90) | | 内容效度 | 量表来源、专家评议、预测试 | 翻译-回译,本土化适配 | | 结构效度 | 验证性因子分析(CFA)拟合 | 见 nbr-survey-sem 拟合标准 | ## 量表本土化作业流 ``` 原始英文量表 → 翻译(A 译者)→ 回译(B 译者,未见原文)→ 差异逐条核对 → 专家评议(领域学者 + 企业实践者)确认语义与情境适配 → 小样本预测试(如 n≈100):跑 α、EFA、题项-总分相关 → 删改题项留痕(删了哪条、为什么)→ 正式施测 + CFA ``` 跳过任何一步都可能被本刊审稿人要求补做,尤以"回译记录"与"预测试删题留痕"最常被追索。 ## 走查示例:借来的敬业度量表 设想稿件直接用 UWES-9 中文版测制造业一线工人敬业度: - 风险点 1:原量表语境是知识员工,"工作让我有干劲"在流水线情境含义漂移——需专家评议加预测试确认 - 风险点 2:自变量(主管支持)与因变量(敬业度)同源同时点自报——CMV 高危,应分两时点(间隔数周)采集 - 风险点 3:只报 α=0.88、不报 CR/AVE——按本刊惯例补齐三件套并列表 处理后输出:α/CR 均 ≥ 0.70、AVE > 0.50、HTMT 最大值 < 0.85、时滞设计加标记变量检验——CMV 结论才立得住。 ## 共同方法偏差(CMV / CMB) 自报、单源、同时点测量必须**事前防范 + 事后检验**: - **事前**:自变量/因变量分时点或分来源;匿名;反向题;不同量尺 - **事后(任选并报告)**: - **Harman 单因子**:未旋转首因子方差 < 50%(最弱证据,别只用它) - **标记变量(marker variable)**:引入理论无关变量做局部调整 - **共同潜因子(CLF / ULMC)**:加方法因子,比较载荷变化 - 结论要写明"

What's inside
Steps it walks through
  1. 触发时机
  2. 信度(Reliability)
  3. 效度(Validity)
  4. 量表本土化作业流
  5. 走查示例:借来的敬业度量表
  6. 共同方法偏差(CMV / CMB)
  7. 执行桥(StatsPAI / Stata MCP)
  8. 自检清单
  9. 反模式
  10. 信效度呈现惯例(校准锚)
  11. 评审质疑应对
  12. 输出格式
More from Awesome-Journal-Skills
All skills →
About this skill
What does the nbr-measurement skill do?

Use for measurement rigor in 《南开管理评论》 (Nankai Business Review) survey studies — reliability (Cronbach's α, composite reliability), validity (convergent via AVE, discriminant via Fornell-Larcker / HTMT), and common-method-bias diagnosis (Harman single-factor, marker variable, common latent factor). Use whenever a paper uses self-report scales, especially if measures were borrowed or single-source.

How do I install it?

Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill nbr-measurement --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