Back to Details

case-justification

Compare original and translation side by side

🇺🇸

Original

English
🇨🇳

Translation

Chinese

Case Justification Writer

案例合理性撰写工具

You help sociologists write case justification sections (also called "Case Background," "Research Setting," or "The [Site Name] Context") for interview-based journal articles. Your guidance is grounded in systematic analysis of 32 articles from Social Problems and Social Forces.
你将帮助社会学者为基于访谈的期刊文章撰写案例合理性部分（也可称为“案例背景”“研究场景”或“[研究地点]背景”）。你的指导基于对《Social Problems》和《Social Forces》期刊中32篇文章的系统性分析。

When to Use This Skill

何时使用该Skill

Use this skill when users want to:
  • Draft a new case justification section from scratch
  • Restructure an existing section that's too long, too short, or poorly matched to the study type
  • Determine the appropriate level of contextualization for their case
  • Ensure the section matches genre conventions for interview-based research
  • Position the case section correctly relative to the theory section
This skill assumes users have selected their research site and can describe its key features. The case justification section contextualizes the empirical setting for readers.
当用户有以下需求时，可使用本Skill：
  • 从零开始撰写案例合理性部分
  • 重构现有内容过长、过短或与研究类型不匹配的案例合理性部分
  • 确定案例的合适语境化程度
  • 确保该部分符合访谈类研究的体裁规范
  • 正确定位案例部分与理论部分的相对位置
本Skill假设用户已选定研究地点，并能描述其关键特征。案例合理性部分用于为读者呈现实证研究场景的语境信息。

Connection to Other Skills

与其他Skill的关联

SkillPurposeKey Output
interview-analystAnalyze qualitative dataCoding structure, findings
interview-writeupWrite findings sectionsDraft findings
methods-writerWrite methods sectionsDraft methods
case-justificationWrite case/setting contextDraft case justification
interview-bookendsWrite intros/conclusionsDraft bookends
This skill handles the case background that typically appears between the theory section and methods section.
Skill用途核心产出
interview-analyst分析质性数据编码结构、研究发现
interview-writeup撰写研究发现部分发现内容草稿
methods-writer撰写研究方法部分方法内容草稿
case-justification撰写案例/研究场景背景案例合理性部分草稿
interview-bookends撰写引言/结论首尾部分草稿
本Skill负责处理通常位于理论部分与方法部分之间的案例背景内容。

Core Principles (from Genre Analysis)

核心原则（基于体裁分析）

Based on systematic analysis of 32 case justification sections:
基于对32篇案例合理性部分的系统性分析，得出以下核心原则：

1. Position Determines Function

1. 位置决定功能

  • 88% position AFTER theory - the case illustrates or tests theoretical claims
  • 12% position BEFORE theory (Policy-Driven only) - the case motivates the theoretical framework
  • Position is not a stylistic choice; it signals the relationship between case and theory
  • 88%的部分被置于理论部分之后——案例用于阐释或检验理论主张
  • 12%的部分被置于理论部分之前（仅适用于政策驱动型研究）——案例用于构建理论框架的动因
  • 位置选择并非风格偏好，而是用于传递案例与理论之间的关系

2. Phenomenon-Site-Link Openings Dominate (50%)

2. “现象-地点关联”式开篇占主导（50%）

Half of all case justification sections open by connecting the phenomenon to the site:
"With the formalization of a labor-export policy in the mid-1970s, the Indonesian government entered the labor brokerage industry."
Other openings: Geographic-Introduction (19%), Institutional-Description (16%), Research-Setting (9%), Historical-Periodization (6%)
半数案例合理性部分以关联研究现象与研究地点的方式开篇：
“随着1970年代中期劳务输出政策的正式化，印度尼西亚政府进入了劳务经纪行业。”
其他开篇类型：地理介绍（19%）、机构描述（16%）、研究场景说明（9%）、历史分期（6%）

3. Single Subsection Is the Norm (75%)

3. 单一子部分为常态（75%）

Most case justification sections use exactly one subsection heading. Multiple subsections signal Deep Historical (episodes) or Comparative (sites) clusters.
大多数案例合理性部分仅使用一个子部分标题。多子部分通常意味着属于深度历史类（按阶段呈现）或比较类（多研究地点）集群。

4. Implicit Transitions Dominate (66%)

4. 隐性过渡占主导（66%）

Two-thirds of sections end without explicit transition language. The structural break to Methods carries readers forward. Explicit transitions are rare except in Comparative sections with integrated methods content.
三分之二的部分结尾无明确过渡语，通过转向方法部分的结构断点引导读者阅读。除了整合方法内容的比较类部分外，明确过渡语较为少见。

5. Tables Signal Comparative Treatment

5. 表格是比较类研究的标志

71% of Comparative sections include tables; all other clusters rarely or never use tables. If you have a table, you probably have a Comparative section.
71%的比较类部分包含表格；其他集群极少或从不使用表格。若你的内容包含表格，则大概率属于比较类部分。

Key Statistics (Benchmarks)

关键统计数据（基准）

Corpus Overview

语料库概述

MetricValue
Total articles32
Median word count765
Range264-3,210
Single subsection75%
Position after theory88%
指标数值
文章总数32
中位数字数765
字数范围264-3,210
单一子部分占比75%
置于理论部分之后的占比88%

Cluster Distribution

集群分布

ClusterN%Word Target
Standard Context1134%700-1,000
Comparative722%1,000-1,500
Minimal Context516%300-500
Deep Historical516%1,500-2,500
Policy-Driven413%650-900
集群数量占比目标字数
标准语境类1134%700-1,000
比较类722%1,000-1,500
极简语境类516%300-500
深度历史类516%1,500-2,500
政策驱动类413%650-900

Opening Move Distribution

开篇类型分布

Opening TypePrevalence
Phenomenon-Site-Link50%
Geographic-Introduction19%
Institutional-Description16%
Research-Setting9%
Historical-Periodization6%
开篇类型占比
现象-地点关联50%
地理介绍19%
机构描述16%
研究场景说明9%
历史分期6%

Justification Strategy Distribution

合理性策略分布

StrategyPrevalence
Intrinsic-Interest38%
Theoretical-Fit22%
Empirical-Extremity16%
Variation-Leverage16%
Access-Driven9%
策略占比
内在研究价值38%
理论适配性22%
实证极端性16%
差异利用16%
数据可得性驱动9%

The Five Clusters

五大集群

Case justification sections cluster into five recognizable styles:
ClusterTarget WordsPrevalenceKey FeatureWhen to Use
Minimal300-50016%Brief, efficientWell-known site, mixed-methods
Standard700-1,00034%Balanced contextDEFAULT for single-site studies
Deep Historical1,500-2,50016%Chronological narrativeMovement studies, periodization
Comparative1,000-1,50022%Parallel sites, tablesMulti-site comparisons
Policy-Driven650-90013%BEFORE theoryPolicy IS the phenomenon
Default: Standard Context. Choose other clusters only when specific triggers apply.
See 
clusters/
directory for detailed profiles with benchmarks, signature moves, and templates.
案例合理性部分可分为五种可识别的风格：
集群目标字数占比核心特征适用场景
极简类300-50016%简洁高效研究地点广为人知、混合方法研究
标准类700-1,00034%语境平衡单地点研究的默认选择
深度历史类1,500-2,50016%按时间顺序叙事运动研究、历史分期研究
比较类1,000-1,50022%多地点平行呈现、含表格多地点比较研究
政策驱动类650-90013%置于理论部分之前政策本身即为研究现象
默认选择：标准语境类。仅当存在特定触发因素时，才选择其他集群。
详见
clusters/
目录下的详细介绍，包含基准数据、标志性写法及模板。

Workflow Phases

工作流程阶段

Phase 0: Assessment

阶段0：评估

Goal: Gather study information and select the appropriate cluster.
Process:
  • Collect case details (site, population, context, justification)
  • Apply decision tree to identify cluster
  • Confirm cluster selection with user
  • Note any special considerations
Guide: 
phases/phase0-assessment.md
Pause: User confirms cluster selection before drafting.
目标：收集研究信息并选择合适的集群。
流程:
  • 收集案例细节（研究地点、研究人群、语境、合理性依据）
  • 应用决策树确定集群
  • 与用户确认集群选择
  • 记录特殊考量因素
指引文档：
phases/phase0-assessment.md
暂停点：需用户确认集群选择后再进入撰写阶段。

Phase 1: Drafting

阶段1：撰写

Goal: Write the complete case justification section following cluster template.
Process:
  • Follow cluster-specific structure and word allocation
  • Include required components for the cluster
  • Use appropriate rhetorical patterns from corpus
  • Position correctly (before or after theory)
Guides:
  • phases/phase1-drafting.md
    (main workflow)
  • clusters/
    (cluster-specific templates)
  • techniques/opening-moves.md
    (how to start)
  • techniques/justification-strategies.md
    (how to justify)
  • techniques/transitions.md
    (how to end)
Output: Complete case justification section draft.
Pause: User reviews draft.
目标：遵循集群模板完成案例合理性部分的撰写。
流程:
  • 遵循集群特定结构及字数分配
  • 包含该集群要求的必要组件
  • 使用语料库中的合适修辞模式
  • 置于正确位置（理论部分之前或之后）
指引文档:
  • phases/phase1-drafting.md
    （主工作流程）
  • clusters/
    （集群特定模板）
  • techniques/opening-moves.md
    （开篇写法）
  • techniques/justification-strategies.md
    （合理性论证策略）
  • techniques/transitions.md
    （结尾过渡方式）
产出：完整的案例合理性部分草稿。
暂停点：需用户审阅草稿。

Phase 2: Revision

阶段2：修订

Goal: Calibrate against benchmarks and polish.
Process:
  • Verify word count against cluster target
  • Check required components are present
  • Assess transition type
  • Polish prose
  • Final quality check
Guide: 
phases/phase2-revision.md
Output: Revised case justification section with quality memo.
目标：对照基准数据校准内容并润色。
流程:
  • 核对字数是否符合集群目标
  • 检查必要组件是否齐全
  • 评估过渡类型是否合适
  • 润色文字
  • 最终质量检查
指引文档：
phases/phase2-revision.md
产出：修订后的案例合理性部分及质量说明。

Cluster Decision Tree

集群决策树

To identify which cluster fits your study:
START
  |
  v
[Does your case context need to PRECEDE your theoretical framework?]
(Is the policy/institutional context itself the phenomenon you will theorize about?)
  |
  +-- YES --> POLICY-DRIVEN CLUSTER
  |           Position: BEFORE theory
  |           Target: 650-900 words
  |
  +-- NO (or unsure) --> Continue
        |
        v
[Do you have MULTIPLE RESEARCH SITES that you will compare?]
(Two or more locations, organizations, or cases studied in parallel?)
  |
  +-- YES --> COMPARATIVE CLUSTER
  |           Parallel structure, tables
  |           Target: 1,000-1,500 words
  |
  +-- NO (single site) --> Continue
        |
        v
[Is HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT central to your case?]
(Must you trace multiple episodes, periods, or phases?)
  |
  +-- YES --> DEEP HISTORICAL CLUSTER
  |           Chronological organization
  |           Target: 1,500-2,500 words
  |
  +-- NO --> Continue
        |
        v
[Is your case WELL-KNOWN and requires MINIMAL introduction?]
(Famous site, mixed-methods design, phenomenon over site, space constraints?)
  |
  +-- YES --> MINIMAL CONTEXT CLUSTER
  |           Brief, efficient
  |           Target: 300-500 words
  |
  +-- NO --> STANDARD CONTEXT CLUSTER (DEFAULT)
             Balanced single-site context
             Target: 700-1,000 words
可通过以下决策树确定适合你研究的集群：
START
  |
  v
[你的案例语境是否需要置于理论框架之前？]
(政策/机构语境本身是否即为你要理论化的现象？)
  |
  +-- 是 --> 政策驱动类集群
  |           位置：理论部分之前
  |           目标字数：650-900
  |
  +-- 否（或不确定） --> 继续
        |
        v
[你是否有多个需比较的研究地点？]
(是否有两个或以上平行研究的地点、机构或案例？)
  |
  +-- 是 --> 比较类集群
  |           平行结构、含表格
  |           目标字数：1,000-1,500
  |
  +-- 否（单地点） --> 继续
        |
        v
[历史发展是否为你的案例核心？]
(是否必须追溯多个阶段、时期？)
  |
  +-- 是 --> 深度历史类集群
  |           按时间顺序组织内容
  |           目标字数：1,500-2,500
  |
  +-- 否 --> 继续
        |
        v
[你的案例是否广为人知且只需极简介绍？]
(研究地点知名、混合方法设计、研究重点为现象而非地点、篇幅受限？)
  |
  +-- 是 --> 极简语境类集群
  |           简洁高效
  |           目标字数：300-500
  |
  +-- 否 --> 标准语境类集群（默认）
             平衡的单地点语境
             目标字数：700-1,000

Cluster Profiles

集群介绍

Reference these guides for cluster-specific writing:
GuideClusterTriggers
clusters/minimal.md
Minimal Context (16%)Well-known site, mixed-methods, space constraints
clusters/standard.md
Standard Context (34%)DEFAULT - typical single-site study
clusters/historical.md
Deep Historical (16%)Movement study, chronological development central
clusters/comparative.md
Comparative (22%)Multiple sites, parallel data collection
clusters/policy.md
Policy-Driven (13%)Policy IS the phenomenon, BEFORE theory
参考以下文档获取集群特定撰写指引：
文档集群触发因素
clusters/minimal.md
极简语境类（16%）研究地点广为人知、混合方法研究、篇幅受限
clusters/standard.md
标准语境类（34%）默认选择——典型单地点研究
clusters/historical.md
深度历史类（16%）运动研究、历史发展为核心
clusters/comparative.md
比较类（22%）多研究地点、平行数据收集
clusters/policy.md
政策驱动类（13%）政策即为研究现象、置于理论部分之前

Technique Guides

技巧指引

GuidePurpose
techniques/opening-moves.md
Five opening types with examples
techniques/justification-strategies.md
Five justification strategies with examples
techniques/transitions.md
Transition patterns by cluster
文档用途
techniques/opening-moves.md
五种开篇类型及示例
techniques/justification-strategies.md
五种合理性论证策略及示例
techniques/transitions.md
各集群的过渡模式

Component Prevalence by Cluster

各集群组件占比

ComponentMinimalStandardHistoricalComparativePolicy
Geographic Context40%82%80%86%75%
Historical Background40%64%100%57%75%
Policy/Legal Context20%64%80%43%100%
Demographic Profile0%45%40%71%50%
Institutional Description20%45%60%71%75%
Sampling Rationale60%36%20%57%0%
组件极简类标准类深度历史类比较类政策驱动类
地理语境40%82%80%86%75%
历史背景40%64%100%57%75%
政策/法律语境20%64%80%43%100%
人口特征0%45%40%71%50%
机构描述20%45%60%71%75%
抽样依据60%36%20%57%0%

Prohibited Moves

禁忌写法

Across All Clusters

所有集群通用禁忌

  • Opening with "In this section, I will describe..."
  • Using "As mentioned above..." or similar metadiscourse
  • Using "My research setting is..." (dive into substance instead)
  • Over-signposting structure
  • 以“在本节中，我将介绍...”开篇
  • 使用“如前文所述...”或类似元话语
  • 使用“我的研究场景是...”（直接切入实质内容）
  • 过度标注结构

Cluster-Specific Prohibitions

集群特定禁忌

ClusterNever Do
MinimalInclude tables, trace historical development, exceed 500 words
StandardUse multiple subsections, position before theory
Deep HistoricalBrief treatment, skip chronological arc, position before theory
ComparativeTreat sites as undifferentiated, omit variation-leverage statement
Policy-DrivenPosition after theory, treat policy as background
集群禁止做法
极简类使用表格、追溯历史发展、字数超过500
标准类使用多个子部分、置于理论部分之前
深度历史类简略处理、跳过时间顺序、置于理论部分之前
比较类将研究地点视为无差异、省略差异利用说明
政策驱动类置于理论部分之后、将政策视为背景内容

Model Recommendations

模型推荐

PhaseModelRationale
Phase 0: AssessmentSonnetDecision tree application
Phase 1: DraftingSonnetFollowing templates, prose generation
Phase 2: RevisionSonnetCalibration checking, polish
阶段模型理由
阶段0：评估Sonnet应用决策树
阶段1：撰写Sonnet遵循模板、生成文字
阶段2：修订Sonnet校准检查、润色

Starting the Process

启动流程

When the user is ready to begin:
  1. Ask about the case:
    "What is your research site? Please describe the location, population, and key contextual features that matter for your study."
  2. Ask about study characteristics:
    "Is this a single site or multiple sites? Is historical development central to your case? Does the policy/institutional context need to precede your theory section? Are there space constraints?"
  3. Identify cluster:
    Apply the decision tree and recommend a cluster with rationale.
  4. Confirm and proceed to Phase 0 to formalize the assessment.
当用户准备开始时：
  1. 询问案例信息:
    “你的研究地点是什么？请描述与研究相关的地点、人群及关键语境特征。”
  2. 询问研究特征:
    “这是单地点还是多地点研究？历史发展是否为案例核心？政策/机构语境是否需要置于理论部分之前？是否有篇幅限制？”
  3. 确定集群:
    应用决策树并给出集群推荐及理由。
  4. 确认并进入阶段0，正式开展评估。

Key Reminders

核心提示

  • Standard is the default: Most single-site interview studies fit Standard Context. Choose other clusters only when triggers apply.
  • Position matters: Policy-Driven is the ONLY cluster positioned BEFORE theory. All others go AFTER.
  • Tables signal comparison: If you're including a table, you're probably doing Comparative.
  • Implicit transitions are normal: 66% of sections just end; the structural break carries readers forward.
  • Word counts matter: Reviewers notice sections that are too thin or bloated. Match your cluster.
  • Phenomenon-Site-Link is versatile: This opening works across all clusters (50% prevalence).
  • 标准类为默认选择：大多数单地点访谈研究适合标准语境类。仅当存在特定触发因素时，才选择其他集群。
  • 位置至关重要：政策驱动类是唯一需置于理论部分之前的集群。其他所有集群均置于理论部分之后。
  • 表格是比较类的标志：若你使用表格，则大概率属于比较类研究。
  • 隐性过渡为常态：66%的部分直接结尾，通过结构断点引导读者阅读。
  • 字数很重要：审稿人会注意内容过薄或过冗长的部分。请匹配集群的字数要求。
  • 现象-地点关联式开篇通用性强：该开篇类型适用于所有集群（占比50%）。