# Geb Replication And Data Policy > Use when planning data and code sharing for a Games and Economic Behavior (GEB) manuscript. GEB encourages but does NOT mandate a replication archive — unlike AER/Econometrica/JAE — so this skill helps you share well voluntarily and avoid assuming requirements that do not exist here. - Skill: `thedixitjain/geb-replication-and-data-policy` (Agent Skill) - Install (CLI): `npx skillmds add thedixitjain/geb-replication-and-data-policy` - Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/thedixitjain/geb-replication-and-data-policy/raw - Safety review: pending - Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex - Category: Coding & Dev Tools - Author: thedixitjain (https://skillmd.com/u/thedixitjain) - Updated: 2026-09-08 - Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/thedixitjain/geb-replication-and-data-policy --- # Replication & Data Policy (geb-replication-and-data-policy) ## When to trigger - You have experimental data, simulation code, or solver inputs and are unsure what GEB requires - You assumed GEB has a mandatory data archive (it does not) and are budgeting effort accordingly - You want to make a theory paper's numerical examples reproducible - An accepted-stage checklist is being assembled ## The GEB data policy — encouraged, not required This is a **meaningful distinction** for a journal that publishes experimental work: GEB does **not** operate a mandatory data/code replication archive comparable to the AEA journals (AEJ/AER), Econometrica, or the JAE Data Archive. GEB follows Elsevier's **"encourages and enables"** research-data stance (Option C): authors are *invited* to deposit data and code in a repository (e.g., **Mendeley Data**, free and open access), to include a **data-availability statement**, or to publish a **Data Brief** — but deposit is **not a condition of publication**. Do not assume a required openICPSR-style archive; verify the current wording on the Guide for Authors (some details here are 待核实 — drawn from secondary sources). Even though it is optional, sharing well is good practice and pre-empts referee doubts about your experiment or computation. ## What to prepare (voluntarily, but recommended) ### For experimental papers - **Raw and cleaned data** plus the analysis scripts that produce every table and figure. - **Experiment code** (oTree / z-Tree) and the **instructions** shown to subjects. - A **README** describing variables, sessions, treatments, and how to run the pipeline. - An **IRB / ethics** note where applicable. ### For theory papers with computation - The **scripts and solver inputs** (e.g., Gambit files, `nashpy`/Python notebooks) that generate every numerical example, figure, and counterexample. - **Pinned versions** and **reported seeds** so examples regenerate deterministically. - A short README mapping each script to the corresponding result in the paper. ### Statement and deposit - Add a **data-availability statement** even when depositing voluntarily. - Deposit on a stable repository (Mendeley Data, Zenodo, or OSF) and cite it. - Disclose any **generative-AI** use in the dedicated declaration section (separate from data policy, but part of the same transparency package). ## Why voluntary sharing still pays at GEB No mandate does not mean referees ignore reproducibility — the check simply moves from an editorial gate to referee judgment: - **Experimental referees** routinely ask for instructions-to-subjects and session structure; deposited oTree/z-Tree code and instructions let you answer with a link instead of a rewritten appendix. - **Theory referees** who doubt a counterexample may recompute it; a Gambit file or notebook that regenerates the example turns suspicion into a two-minute verification. - A visible deposit also strengthens the revision round: geb-rebuttal responses can cite the exact script rather than describe computations. ## Worked micro-example: the availability statement - *Weak:* "Data are available from the authors upon reasonable request." — unverifiable, and gives a referee nothing to act on. - *Stronger (voluntary deposit):* "Experimental instructions, oTree code, raw session data, and the scripts reproducing every table and figure are deposited at [repository DOI]; seeds and pinned versions are in the README." — checkable today. If ethics or consent limits sharing, state exactly what is withheld and why instead of defaulting to on-request language. ## Anti-patterns - Assuming GEB will block publication without a deposited archive (it will not) - ...but also shipping an experiment with no reproducible analysis path - Numerical examples with no seeds or pinned versions, so referees cannot regenerate them - A data file with no README or variable documentation - Confusing GEB's optional policy with the mandatory archives of AER/Econometrica/JAE - An "upon reasonable request" statement standing in for a plan you could deposit today ## Reproducibility pass for Games and Economic Behavior Use this as a second-pass capability check. First lock the primitives, equilibrium concept, comparative statics, and proof or experiment boundary; then test whether the manuscript addresses game theorists who ask what the model teaches beyond a clever example. - **Primary move:** Name data, code, environment, disclosure limits, and archive/deposit route; unresolved proprietary or ethics barriers must be explicit. - **Decision ledger:** return `claim / evidence / blocker / next edit` rows so the next pass can patch the manuscript directly. - **Neighbor test:** compare against JET for theory abstraction, Theoretical Economics for compact theory contribution, Experimental Economics for experiment-first designs; if the neighboring outlet has the stronger audience claim, recommend re-routing before polishing. - **Verification floor:** before submission-ready advice, re-open `resources/official-source-map.md` for volatile rules and name the one unresolved fact that could change the recommendation. ## Output format ``` 【Paper type】experimental / computational-theory / pure-theory 【GEB requirement】sharing encouraged, NOT mandatory (verify wording) 【Prepared】data + code + README + (exp) instructions/IRB? [Y/N each] 【Reproducible computation】seeds + pinned versions + run_all? [Y/N / NA] 【Deposit plan】Mendeley Data / Zenodo / OSF + availability statement? [Y/N] 【Next step】geb-review-process or geb-submission ``` --- **Source:** [`brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills`](https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) → `Games-and-Economic-Behavior-Skills/skills/geb-replication-and-data-policy/SKILL.md`