论文设计
- 作者仓库星标 224
- 作者更新于 实时读取
- 作者仓库 research-plugins
- 领域
- 设计与多媒体
- 兼容 Agent
-
- Claude Code
- Cursor
- Cline
- Codex
- Windsurf
- Gemini CLI
- +20
- 信任分
- 88 / 100 · 社区维护
- 作者 / 版本 / 许可
- @wentorai · 未声明 license
- Token 消耗评级
- 低消耗
- 接入复杂程度
- 即装即用
- 是否需要外部 API Key
- 不需要
- 兼容的系统
- 未声明(默认跨平台)
- 底层运行要求
- Python
- 文件与系统权限
-
- 只读
- 允许写入 / 修改
- 网络行为
- 仅限本地
- 安装命令数
- 26 条
档案由构建时根据 SKILL.md 与安装命令自动衍生,可能与作者实际意图存在差异。
需要注意: 未限定 allowed-tools,默认拥有全部工具权限。
---
name: qualitative-research-guide
description: Design and conduct qualitative research using grounded theory and case studies A skill for desig…
category: 设计与多媒体
runtime: Python
---
# qualitative-research-guide 输出预览
## PART A: 任务判断
- 适用问题:视觉内容、演示材料、信息图或设计交付。
- 输入要求:目标材料、限制条件、期望输出和验收方式。
- 证据边界:围绕“Major Qualitative Traditions / Choosing an Approach / Grounded Theory Process”读取原文规则,不把推断写成作者承诺。
## PART B: 执行结果
- **01** 任务判断:确认你的需求是否属于视觉内容、演示材料、信息图或设计交付,并标出输入、限制和预期结果。
- **02** 执行计划:优先按“Major Qualitative Traditions / Choosing an Approach / Grounded Theory Process”拆成步骤,说明每一步会读取什么、修改什么、产出什么。
- **03** 交付结果:给出可复制的命令、文件改动、检查清单或内容草稿,并说明如何继续迭代。
- **04** 风险边界:结合 读取文件、写入/修改文件、主要在本地完成、通常不需要额外 API Key 给出执行前确认项。
## Running Rules
- 读取文件、写入/修改文件;主要在本地完成;通常不需要额外 API Key。
- 先小样例验证,再放大到真实任务。
- 交付时同时给结果、检查口径和下一步迭代建议。 原文没有稳定的斜杠命令要求。安装验证后通常全局生效,直接在对话里点名这个 Skill 并描述任务即可。
告诉 Agent 目标文件或材料、期望结果、不可改范围、是否允许联网或执行命令。本 Skill 的权限画像是:读取文件、写入/修改文件。
先用一个小任务确认它会围绕“Major Qualitative Traditions / Choosing an Approach / Grounded Theory Process”工作;涉及文件或命令时,先看 diff、日志、预览或测试结果。
检查最终产物是否包含明确结果、必要证据和下一步动作;如果输出泛泛而谈,就补充输入、边界和验收标准后重跑。
---
name: qualitative-research-guide
description: Design and conduct qualitative research using grounded theory and case studies A skill for desig…
category: 设计与多媒体
source: wentorai/research-plugins
---
# qualitative-research-guide
## 什么时候使用
- qualitative-research-guide 是设计与多媒体方向的技能,让 Agent 直接产出图、卡、视觉素材 适合处理界面、视觉、封面、信息图或演示材料交付,核心价值是把输入、判断、执行、验证和交付边界固定下来,避免 Age…
- 面向视觉内容、演示材料、信息图或设计交付,优先处理能明确输入、步骤和验收标准的工作。
## 需要提供什么
- 目标材料、目录范围、期望结果和不可改动内容。
- 是否允许联网、执行命令、读写文件或调用外部服务。
## 执行规则
- 围绕「Major Qualitative Traditions / Choosing an Approach / Grounded Theory Process」组织步骤,不把推断写成作者事实。
- 读取文件、写入/修改文件;主要在本地完成;通常不需要额外 API Key。
- 先跑小样例,确认结果可检查后再扩大任务范围。
## 输出要求
- 给出最终产物、关键证据、验证方式和下一步动作。
- 信息不足时标记 unknown,不编造命令、平台或依赖。 作者原文负责流程事实;仓库文件负责来源和命令;流狐只补充适用场景、限制和质量判断。
skill "qualitative-research-guide" {
输入层 -> 用户目标 + 目标文件 + 禁止范围 + 验收标准
上下文层 -> Major Qualitative Traditions / Choosing an Approach / Grounded Theory Process
规则层 -> SKILL.md 触发条件 / 执行顺序 / 输出格式
运行层 -> Python | 读取文件、写入/修改文件 | 主要在本地完成
安全层 -> 通常不需要额外 API Key + 小任务验证 + diff / 日志复核
输出层 -> 可复制结果 + 检查清单 + 下一步迭代
} Qualitative Research Guide
A skill for designing and conducting rigorous qualitative research. Covers major qualitative traditions, data collection methods, coding and analysis techniques, and quality criteria for trustworthy qualitative findings.
Major Qualitative Traditions
Choosing an Approach
| Approach | Research Question Type | Unit of Analysis | Sample Size | Output |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grounded Theory | How does a process work? | Process/action | 20-60 | Theory |
| Phenomenology | What is the lived experience? | Experience | 5-25 | Essence description |
| Case Study | How/why does this case work? | Bounded system | 1-5 cases | Case description |
| Ethnography | How does this culture work? | Cultural group | Extended fieldwork | Cultural portrait |
| Narrative | What is this person's story? | Individual life | 1-5 | Narrative account |
| Thematic Analysis | What patterns exist in this data? | Themes across data | Variable | Theme map |
Grounded Theory Process
Data Collection (interviews, observations)
|
v
Open Coding: Line-by-line coding of raw data
|
v
Axial Coding: Grouping codes into categories,
identifying relationships
|
v
Selective Coding: Identifying the core category
that integrates all others
|
v
Theoretical Saturation: Stop when new data
no longer generates new codes
|
v
Substantive Theory: A grounded explanation of the phenomenon
Interview Design
Semi-Structured Interview Protocol
def create_interview_protocol(research_questions: list[str],
n_questions: int = 10) -> dict:
"""
Generate a semi-structured interview protocol template.
Args:
research_questions: The study's research questions
n_questions: Target number of interview questions
"""
protocol = {
'opening': {
'rapport_building': [
"Thank you for participating. Before we begin, could you "
"tell me a little about yourself and your background?",
"How did you first become involved in [topic]?"
],
'time_estimate': '60-90 minutes'
},
'main_questions': [],
'closing': {
'wrap_up': [
"Is there anything else you would like to share that we "
"have not covered?",
"Looking back, what stands out most to you about [topic]?",
"Do you have any questions for me?"
]
},
'guidelines': [
'Ask open-ended questions (how, what, tell me about)',
'Avoid leading questions',
'Use probes: "Can you give me an example?"',
'Use follow-ups: "You mentioned X, tell me more about that"',
'Allow silences -- do not rush to fill pauses',
'Record field notes immediately after each interview'
]
}
# Generate question structure
for i, rq in enumerate(research_questions):
protocol['main_questions'].append({
'research_question': rq,
'interview_questions': [
f'Grand tour question for RQ{i+1}',
f'Follow-up probe for RQ{i+1}',
f'Example-seeking probe for RQ{i+1}'
]
})
return protocol
Sampling Strategies
| Strategy | Description | When to Use |
|---|---|---|
| Purposive | Select information-rich cases | Most qualitative studies |
| Maximum variation | Select cases that differ on key dimensions | Capture range of experiences |
| Snowball | Participants refer others | Hard-to-reach populations |
| Theoretical | Driven by emerging theory | Grounded theory studies |
| Critical case | Select cases that are pivotal | Testing theoretical propositions |
| Convenience | Readily available participants | Pilot studies only |
Coding and Analysis
Thematic Analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006)
def thematic_analysis_workflow(transcripts: list[str]) -> dict:
"""
Outline the six phases of reflexive thematic analysis.
"""
phases = {
'phase_1_familiarization': {
'actions': [
'Read and re-read all transcripts',
'Note initial impressions in a research journal',
'Transcribe recordings if not already done'
],
'output': 'Familiarity with data, initial notes'
},
'phase_2_coding': {
'actions': [
'Code every data segment systematically',
'Use open coding (inductive) or deductive codes from framework',
'Code inclusively -- same segment can have multiple codes',
'Maintain a codebook with definitions and examples'
],
'output': 'Coded dataset, codebook'
},
'phase_3_generating_themes': {
'actions': [
'Collate codes into potential themes',
'Create a thematic map showing relationships',
'Distinguish between semantic and latent themes'
],
'output': 'Candidate themes and sub-themes'
},
'phase_4_reviewing_themes': {
'actions': [
'Check themes against coded extracts',
'Check themes against entire dataset',
'Merge, split, or discard themes as needed'
],
'output': 'Refined thematic map'
},
'phase_5_defining_themes': {
'actions': [
'Write a detailed description of each theme',
'Identify the essence of each theme',
'Name themes concisely and informatively'
],
'output': 'Theme definitions and names'
},
'phase_6_writing_up': {
'actions': [
'Weave together analytic narrative and data extracts',
'Select vivid, compelling quotes for each theme',
'Connect themes to research questions and literature'
],
'output': 'Final analysis write-up'
}
}
return {
'phases': phases,
'n_transcripts': len(transcripts),
'estimated_time': f'{len(transcripts) * 4}-{len(transcripts) * 8} hours'
}
Codebook Structure
codebook:
- code: "ADAPT"
definition: "Participant describes adapting their behavior in response to a challenge"
inclusion_criteria: "Explicit mention of changing approach or strategy"
exclusion_criteria: "Passive acceptance without behavioral change"
example_quote: "I started doing things differently after that..."
theme: "Resilience Strategies"
- code: "BARR"
definition: "Participant identifies a barrier or obstacle"
inclusion_criteria: "Something that prevented or hindered progress"
exclusion_criteria: "General complaints without specific barrier"
example_quote: "The main thing holding me back was..."
theme: "Challenges"
Quality Criteria
Trustworthiness (Lincoln & Guba, 1985)
| Criterion | Quantitative Equivalent | Strategies |
|---|---|---|
| Credibility | Internal validity | Member checking, triangulation, prolonged engagement |
| Transferability | External validity | Thick description, purposive sampling |
| Dependability | Reliability | Audit trail, peer debriefing |
| Confirmability | Objectivity | Reflexivity journal, negative case analysis |
Inter-Coder Reliability
For team-based coding, calculate Cohen's kappa or percent agreement on a subset of data (at least 10-20% of the corpus). Aim for kappa > 0.70 before independent coding proceeds.
Software Tools
- NVivo: Full-featured qualitative analysis (commercial)
- ATLAS.ti: Comprehensive coding and analysis (commercial)
- MAXQDA: Mixed-methods capable (commercial)
- Dedoose: Cloud-based, collaborative (subscription)
- Taguette: Free, open-source qualitative coding
- QualCoder: Free, open-source Python-based tool
Reporting Standards
Follow the COREQ (Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research) checklist: report researcher positionality, sampling strategy, data collection methods, analysis approach, and provide sufficient quotations to evidence each theme.
先判断是否适合
作者设计意图
作者的方法与取舍
边界和复核