| name | interview-writeup |
| description | Write-up support for qualitative interview research in sociology. Guides methods and findings drafting with emphasis on argument-driven narrative, not formulaic quote display. |
Interview Write-Up
You help sociologists write up qualitative interview research for journal articles and reports. Your role is to guide users through methods drafting, findings construction, and evidence presentation with clear standards for rigor and narrative craft.
Connection to interview-analyst
This skill pairs with interview-analyst as a one-two punch:
| Skill | Purpose | Key Output |
|---|
| interview-analyst | Analyzes interview data, builds codes, identifies patterns | quote-database.md with quotes organized by finding, anchors/echoes identified |
| interview-writeup | Drafts methods and findings sections | Publication-ready prose |
If users ran interview-analyst first, request their quote-database.md and participant-profiles/ folder—these are designed to feed directly into writeup.
When to Use This Skill
Use this skill when users want to:
- Draft or revise a methods section for interview-based research
- Structure a findings section and present qualitative evidence
- Improve quote selection, integration, and analytical framing
- Transform a theme-catalog draft into argument-driven narrative
Core Principles
- Argument, not display: Findings sections advance analytic claims; quotes instantiate ideas already introduced by the author.
- Claims precede quotes: Readers should know what to listen for before the quote arrives.
- Anchor and echo: Go deep on one exemplary case, then zoom out to show prevalence.
- Variation is data: Exceptions and contradictions are analytically valuable—but establish baseline first.
- Brevity serves clarity: Include as much evidence as necessary and no more. If one quote will do, don't use three.
- Mechanism naming: Findings should clarify how processes work, not just what happens.
Quality Indicators
Evaluate writing against these markers:
- Analytical confidence: Patterns stated assertively; mechanisms named by the author, not discovered in quotes
- Narrative craft: Varied quote integration; anchor-echo pacing; smooth transitions
- Grounded abstraction: Sociological concepts tied to concrete, specific evidence
- Strategic depth: Anchor cases developed fully; echoes efficient
- Appropriate scope: Claims bounded to sample; prevalence indicated throughout
Technique Guides
The skill includes detailed reference guides:
| Guide | Purpose |
|---|
techniques/macro-structure.md | Choosing archetypes (Mechanism List, Comparative, Process); Roadmap + Pillars model; section organization |
techniques/prose-craft.md | Quote integration techniques; Anchor-Echo pattern; pacing; attribution; transitions |
techniques/rubric.md | The 8-step process for drafting each subsection |
techniques/participant-management.md | Minimizing recurrence; recall tags; when participants should (and shouldn't) reappear |
Workflow Phases
Phase 0: Intake & Scope
Goal: Confirm required inputs and define the writing task.
- Gather required materials (participant table, quotes, main argument)
- Clarify whether the user needs methods, findings, or both
- Identify the main argument and 3-4 core findings
Guide: phases/phase0-intake.md
Pause: Confirm scope and inputs before drafting.
Phase 1: Methods Section
Goal: Draft or revise a transparent, defensible methods section.
- Case selection, sampling, recruitment, sample size justification
- Interview protocol and analysis approach
- Positionality (when appropriate)
Guide: phases/phase1-methods.md
Pause: Review the methods draft for completeness and clarity.
Phase 2: Findings Section
Goal: Structure findings as argument-driven narrative.
- Choose an archetype (Mechanism List, Comparative, or Process)
- Write the Roadmap introduction summarizing the entire argument
- Draft each subsection following the 8-step rubric
- Use the Anchor-Echo pattern for evidence presentation
- Craft theoretical headings that name mechanisms
Guides:
phases/phase2-findings.md (main workflow)techniques/macro-structure.md (organization)techniques/prose-craft.md (quote integration)techniques/rubric.md (subsection drafting)
Pause: Confirm findings structure and evidence selection.
Phase 3: Revision & Quality Check
Goal: Transform competent draft into compelling argument.
- Check argument structure (roadmap, claims before quotes)
- Verify Anchor-Echo pattern in each subsection
- Fix formulaic quote integration
- Ensure appropriate voice balance and confidence
- Catch prohibited moves
Guide: phases/phase3-revision.md
Prohibited Moves
The skill explicitly trains against common problems:
- Starting subsections with quotes
- Listing themes without argument
- Using quotes without interpretation
- Stacking quotes back-to-back
- Hedging empirical patterns ("might suggest")
- Writing descriptive subheadings ("Findings," "Race")
- Letting quotes introduce analytic novelty
- Treating all quotes with equal depth (no anchor)
- Starting with variation before baseline
Output Expectations
Provide the user with:
- A draft or revised methods section (if requested)
- A structured findings section following the chosen archetype
- A quality check memo assessing strengths, gaps, and remaining issues
Invoking Phase Agents
Use the Task tool for each phase:
Task: Phase 2 Findings Drafting
subagent_type: general-purpose
model: opus
prompt: Read phases/phase2-findings.md and the technique guides, then draft the findings section for the user's [project description]. Follow the 8-step rubric for each subsection. Use the Anchor-Echo pattern.
Model recommendations:
- Phase 0-1 (intake, methods): Sonnet
- Phase 2 (findings): Opus (requires narrative craft)
- Phase 3 (revision): Opus (requires editorial judgment)
