Research Design & Methods (car-methods)
When to trigger
- The design may not deliver the inference the question needs (identification, internal validity, equilibrium logic)
- An archival causal claim rests on an endogenous regressor with no strategy
- An experiment's manipulation may not isolate the theorized construct
- The study involves human participants and ethics-approval verification is unprepared
- A reviewer says "the design cannot support this claim"
Match the design to the question (CAR is method-agnostic)
CAR welcomes any appropriate method; the bar is fit and rigor, not a preferred method. Pick the design that earns the claim:
| Claim |
Design that earns it |
| Capital-market/contracting effect of reporting |
Panel archival with fixed effects + an identification strategy |
| Causal effect of an information feature on judgment |
Controlled experiment (lab/online/professional subjects) |
| Existence/optimality of an equilibrium or contract |
Analytical model: primitives, equilibrium concept, proofs |
| Mechanism inside firms, audits, or standard-setting |
Field study / interviews with an explicit coding protocol |
| A new construct's measurement and external validity |
Survey with a validated instrument; or multi-method |
A two-study design (e.g., an experiment isolating the mechanism behind an archival association) is a recognized CAR strength.
Design against the threats CAR reviewers probe
- Identification (archival). Anticipate omitted variables, reverse causality, and selection; plan a strategy (natural experiment, difference-in-differences with a credible parallel-trends argument, instrument, entropy balancing/matching, firm/year fixed effects) and state the assumptions each requires.
- Internal validity (experimental). Design manipulation and attention checks; randomize; pre-specify the predicted mediator; rule out demand effects and confounds; justify the participant pool (student, online, or professional) for the inference.
- Model discipline (analytical). Justify each assumption and the equilibrium concept; show which results are robust to relaxing assumptions.
CAR-specific design requirements
- Ethics-approval verification (mandatory). For any research involving human participants — experiments, interviews, surveys, including secondary human-participant data — you must obtain and upload institutional REB/IRB clearance, an REB-issued exemption, or a senior-administrator letter where no review board exists. A bare assertion is not accepted, and failure is grounds for withdrawal by the EIC. Plan this before data collection.
- Instrument capture. Surveys/experiments must submit the full research instrument with the manuscript (Data Integrity policy, item 1).
- Proprietary/field data. If you use proprietary organizational data, plan a credible means of verifying the data source/site on editor request and disclose any non-disclosure restrictions (policy item 2).
Execution bridge (StatsPAI / Stata MCP)
For the empirical / causal lane, estimate and audit rather than only specify. Full
map: execution-with-mcp. CAR is archival/empirical accounting; the DiD / IV / RDD chain serves its causal designs around reporting and regulation.
detect_design → recommend → fit with as_handle=true → audit_result to
enumerate the checks the design owes.- Panel / staggered DiD:
callaway_santanna / sun_abraham + bacon_decomposition
honest_did_from_result. IV: effective_f_test + anderson_rubin_ci. RDD:
rdrobust + mccrary_test.
- Experiments: randomization-based inference and
romano_wolf for the many-outcome
family-wise correction reviewers expect.
Match the toolchain to the reviewer pool, and report the effect size the venue
wants. A run end-to-end (synthetic data, real returns) is in the
JF execution walkthrough.
Checklist
Anti-patterns
- Cross-sectional causal claims from one-period archival correlations with no strategy.
- Confounded manipulations that move more than the theorized construct.
- Assumption-driven results (analytical) never tested for robustness.
- Treating ethics approval as a formality — CAR requires documented verification, not a statement.
Output format
【Design】panel-archival / experiment / analytical / field / survey / multi-method
【Inference fit】each prediction supportable? notes ...
【Identification / internal validity / equilibrium】strategy + assumptions ...
【Ethics】REB/IRB clearance, exemption, or senior-admin letter secured?
【Instrument & proprietary data】full instrument; verification/NDA plan ...
【Next step】car-data-analysis
Source: brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills → Contemporary-Accounting-Research-Skills/skills/car-methods/SKILL.md
1---2name: car-methods3description: Use when the research design and identification are the bottleneck for a Contemporary Accounting Research (CAR) manuscript — choosing and defending an archival, experimental, analytical, field, or survey design and, for human-participant work, meeting CAR's mandatory ethics-approval verification. Designs the study; it does not run the estimation (car-data-analysis).4---5
6
7# Research Design & Methods (car-methods)
8
9## When to trigger
10
11- The design may not deliver the inference the question needs (identification, internal validity, equilibrium logic)
12- An archival causal claim rests on an endogenous regressor with no strategy
13- An experiment's manipulation may not isolate the theorized construct
14- The study involves human participants and ethics-approval verification is unprepared
15- A reviewer says "the design cannot support this claim"
16
17## Match the design to the question (CAR is method-agnostic)
18
19CAR welcomes any appropriate method; the bar is *fit and rigor*, not a preferred method. Pick the design that earns the claim:
20
21| Claim | Design that earns it |
22|----------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
23| Capital-market/contracting effect of reporting | Panel archival with fixed effects + an identification strategy |
24| Causal effect of an information feature on judgment | Controlled experiment (lab/online/professional subjects) |
25| Existence/optimality of an equilibrium or contract | Analytical model: primitives, equilibrium concept, proofs |
26| Mechanism inside firms, audits, or standard-setting | Field study / interviews with an explicit coding protocol |
27| A new construct's measurement and external validity | Survey with a validated instrument; or multi-method |
28
29A two-study design (e.g., an experiment isolating the mechanism behind an archival association) is a recognized CAR strength.
30
31## Design against the threats CAR reviewers probe
32
33- **Identification (archival).** Anticipate omitted variables, reverse causality, and selection; plan a strategy (natural experiment, difference-in-differences with a credible parallel-trends argument, instrument, entropy balancing/matching, firm/year fixed effects) and state the assumptions each requires.
34- **Internal validity (experimental).** Design manipulation and attention checks; randomize; pre-specify the predicted mediator; rule out demand effects and confounds; justify the participant pool (student, online, or professional) for the inference.
35- **Model discipline (analytical).** Justify each assumption and the equilibrium concept; show which results are robust to relaxing assumptions.
36
37## CAR-specific design requirements
38
39- **Ethics-approval verification (mandatory).** For *any* research involving human participants — experiments, interviews, surveys, including secondary human-participant data — you must obtain and upload institutional REB/IRB clearance, an REB-issued exemption, or a senior-administrator letter where no review board exists. A bare assertion is not accepted, and failure is grounds for withdrawal by the EIC. Plan this *before* data collection.
40- **Instrument capture.** Surveys/experiments must submit the full research instrument with the manuscript (Data Integrity policy, item 1).
41- **Proprietary/field data.** If you use proprietary organizational data, plan a credible means of verifying the data source/site on editor request and disclose any non-disclosure restrictions (policy item 2).
42
43## Execution bridge (StatsPAI / Stata MCP)
44
45For the **empirical / causal lane**, estimate and audit rather than only specify. Full
46map: [`execution-with-mcp`](../../../shared-resources/empirical-methods/execution-with-mcp.md). CAR is archival/empirical accounting; the DiD / IV / RDD chain serves its causal designs around reporting and regulation.
47
48- `detect_design` → `recommend` → fit with `as_handle=true` → `audit_result` to
49 enumerate the checks the design owes.
50- **Panel / staggered DiD:** `callaway_santanna` / `sun_abraham` + `bacon_decomposition`
51 + `honest_did_from_result`. **IV:** `effective_f_test` + `anderson_rubin_ci`. **RDD:**
52 `rdrobust` + `mccrary_test`.
53- **Experiments:** randomization-based inference and `romano_wolf` for the many-outcome
54 family-wise correction reviewers expect.
55
56Match the toolchain to the **reviewer pool**, and report the effect size the venue
57wants. A run end-to-end (synthetic data, real returns) is in the
58[JF execution walkthrough](../../../Journal-of-Finance-Skills/resources/worked-examples/02-execution-walkthrough.md).
59## Checklist
60
61- [ ] Design can support each prediction (identification / internal validity / equilibrium logic)
62- [ ] (Archival) endogeneity strategy specified with its assumptions
63- [ ] (Experimental) manipulation/attention checks, randomization, predicted mediator, pool justified
64- [ ] (Analytical) assumptions and equilibrium concept justified; robustness mapped
65- [ ] Ethics-approval verification secured for any human participants
66- [ ] Full instrument prepared; proprietary-data verification/NDA plan in place
67
68## Anti-patterns
69
70- **Cross-sectional causal claims** from one-period archival correlations with no strategy.
71- **Confounded manipulations** that move more than the theorized construct.
72- **Assumption-driven results** (analytical) never tested for robustness.
73- **Treating ethics approval as a formality** — CAR requires documented verification, not a statement.
74
75## Output format
76
77```
78【Design】panel-archival / experiment / analytical / field / survey / multi-method
79【Inference fit】each prediction supportable? notes ...
80【Identification / internal validity / equilibrium】strategy + assumptions ...
81【Ethics】REB/IRB clearance, exemption, or senior-admin letter secured?
82【Instrument & proprietary data】full instrument; verification/NDA plan ...
83【Next step】car-data-analysis
84```
85
86---
87
88**Source:** [`brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills`](https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) → `Contemporary-Accounting-Research-Skills/skills/car-methods/SKILL.md`
thedixitjain