@research-copilot/plugin 1.1.17 → 1.1.19

package/dist/skills/research-proposal/references/DOMAIN_TEMPLATES.md

@@ -0,0 +1,518 @@
+# Domain-Specific Templates
+
+Guidance for adapting research proposals to different academic domains.
+
+---
+
+## Overview: Domain Differences
+
+| Dimension | STEM | Humanities | Social Sciences |
+|-----------|------|------------|-----------------|
+| **Length** | Shorter (2,000-3,000) | Longer (3,000-10,000) | Medium (2,500-4,000) |
+| **Focus** | Methodology, experiments | Theory, interpretation | Methods + theory |
+| **Hypothesis** | Explicit, testable | Research questions | Both used |
+| **Literature** | Recent (5 years) | Broader historical | Mix |
+| **Citations** | APA | MLA/Chicago | APA/Chicago |
+| **Voice** | Passive preferred | Active acceptable | Mixed |
+
+---
+
+## STEM Domain (Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics)
+
+### Structural Emphasis
+
+```
+STEM Proposal Structure (~2,500 words)
+
+Abstract                    150-200 words   (6%)
+Introduction               400-500 words   (18%)
+  - Background/Motivation  150 words
+  - Problem Statement      150 words
+  - Objectives/Hypotheses  100 words
+Literature Review          400-500 words   (18%)
+  - State of the Art       300 words
+  - Research Gap           200 words
+Methodology                600-800 words   (28%)    ← HEAVY EMPHASIS
+  - Research Design        150 words
+  - Materials/Equipment    150 words
+  - Experimental Protocol  200 words
+  - Data Analysis          200 words
+  - Validation             100 words
+Timeline                   200 words       (8%)
+Expected Outcomes          300 words       (12%)
+  - Scientific Contribution 150 words
+  - Publications Plan       100 words
+  - Potential Applications  50 words
+References                 30-50 citations
+```
+
+### Key Characteristics
+
+**Hypothesis-Driven**
+- State clear, testable hypotheses
+- Define variables (independent, dependent, controlled)
+- Specify expected outcomes
+
+```markdown
+**Hypothesis 1:** [Independent variable] will [effect] [dependent variable]
+when [conditions].
+
+**Hypothesis 2:** The proposed [method] will achieve [metric] performance
+compared to [baseline].
+```
+
+**Technical Precision**
+- Exact specifications for equipment/software
+- Detailed protocols with parameters
+- Quantifiable success metrics
+
+**Preliminary Results**
+- If available, include pilot study data
+- Demonstrate feasibility
+- Show you have necessary skills
+
+### Methodology Section Template (STEM)
+
+```markdown
+## 3. Methodology
+
+### 3.1 Research Design
+
+This research employs a [quantitative/experimental/computational] approach
+to investigate [research questions]. The study comprises [N] phases:
+[Phase 1], [Phase 2], and [Phase 3].
+
+### 3.2 Materials and Equipment
+
+The following resources are required:
+- **Hardware**: [specific equipment, models, specifications]
+- **Software**: [programs, versions, licenses]
+- **Materials**: [reagents, samples, datasets]
+- **Facilities**: [lab access, computing resources]
+
+### 3.3 Experimental Protocol
+
+**Phase 1: [Name]**
+1. [Step 1 with parameters]
+2. [Step 2 with parameters]
+3. [Expected output]
+
+**Phase 2: [Name]**
+[Similar detailed steps]
+
+### 3.4 Data Analysis
+
+Data will be analyzed using [software/method]. Specifically:
+- [Analysis 1]: [technique] to measure [metric]
+- [Analysis 2]: [statistical test] to evaluate [hypothesis]
+
+Statistical significance will be set at p < 0.05.
+
+### 3.5 Validation
+
+To ensure validity:
+- [Validation method 1]
+- [Validation method 2]
+- Comparison with [benchmark/baseline]
+```
+
+### STEM-Specific Language
+
+**Technical verbs:**
+- analyze, characterize, synthesize, optimize
+- validate, calibrate, quantify, measure
+- implement, develop, deploy, integrate
+
+**Precision phrases:**
+- "with a precision of ±X%"
+- "under controlled conditions of [parameters]"
+- "achieving [metric] > [threshold]"
+- "statistically significant at p < 0.05"
+
+---
+
+## Humanities Domain (History, Philosophy, Literature, Languages, Arts)
+
+### Structural Emphasis
+
+```
+Humanities Proposal Structure (~4,000 words)
+
+Abstract                    250-300 words   (7%)
+Introduction               600-800 words   (18%)
+  - Context/Significance   300 words
+  - Central Argument       200 words
+  - Research Questions     200 words
+Literature Review          1000-1500 words (30%)    ← HEAVY EMPHASIS
+  - Theoretical Framework  400 words
+  - Historiography/Field   600 words
+  - Positioning            300 words
+Methodology                400-600 words   (12%)
+  - Sources/Archives       200 words
+  - Analytical Approach    200 words
+  - Interpretive Framework 200 words
+Chapter Outline            400-500 words   (12%)    ← UNIQUE TO HUMANITIES
+Timeline                   200-300 words   (6%)
+Significance               400-500 words   (12%)
+References                 50-100 citations
+```
+
+### Key Characteristics
+
+**Argument-Driven**
+- Central thesis or argument
+- Research questions, not hypotheses
+- Interpretive rather than predictive
+
+```markdown
+**Central Argument:**
+This dissertation argues that [thesis statement]. By examining [sources/texts],
+this research demonstrates how [phenomenon] reveals [insight] about [broader
+significance].
+
+**Research Questions:**
+1. How did [historical actors/texts] [action/represent] [phenomenon]?
+2. What [factors/discourses] shaped [development/interpretation]?
+3. In what ways does [case study] illuminate [broader theoretical issue]?
+```
+
+**Theoretical Sophistication**
+- Engage with major theorists
+- Position within intellectual traditions
+- Critical analysis of theory itself
+
+**Source-Based**
+- Primary sources (archives, texts, artifacts)
+- Language requirements
+- Access and travel considerations
+
+### Literature Review Template (Humanities)
+
+```markdown
+## 2. Literature Review
+
+### 2.1 Theoretical Framework
+
+This research draws on [theoretical tradition] as articulated by [key
+theorists]. [Theorist A]'s concept of [concept] provides a framework for
+understanding [aspect of research]. However, [Theorist B] offers a
+complementary perspective, arguing that [alternative view].
+
+Building on these foundations, this study employs [specific theoretical
+lens] to analyze [research focus]. This approach is particularly suited
+to [justification] because [reasons].
+
+### 2.2 Historiography / State of the Field
+
+Scholarly attention to [topic] has evolved considerably over the past
+[timeframe]. Early studies, such as [Author (Year)], focused primarily
+on [aspect], establishing [finding/interpretation].
+
+The field underwent significant transformation with [Author (Year)]'s
+influential work, which challenged [previous assumption] by demonstrating
+[new insight]. Subsequent scholars have built on this foundation,
+exploring [development 1], [development 2], and [development 3].
+
+More recently, scholars have turned to [new approach/topic]. [Author
+(Year)] examines [specific focus], while [Author (Year)] investigates
+[related area]. These studies reveal [emerging themes/debates].
+
+### 2.3 Research Gap and Positioning
+
+Despite this rich body of scholarship, significant questions remain
+unexplored. First, [gap 1]. Second, [gap 2]. Third, [gap 3].
+
+This dissertation addresses these gaps by [approach]. Unlike previous
+studies that [limitation], this research [differentiation]. By [method],
+this study offers new insights into [contribution].
+```
+
+### Chapter Outline (Unique to Humanities)
+
+```markdown
+## Provisional Chapter Outline
+
+**Chapter 1: Introduction**
+Introduces the central argument, contextualizes the study, and outlines
+the dissertation structure.
+
+**Chapter 2: [Thematic Title]**
+Examines [topic/period/text] to establish [foundational argument].
+Primary sources: [list key sources]
+
+**Chapter 3: [Thematic Title]**
+Analyzes [topic/period/text] to demonstrate [developing argument].
+Primary sources: [list key sources]
+
+**Chapter 4: [Thematic Title]**
+Investigates [topic/period/text] to explore [complicating factors].
+Primary sources: [list key sources]
+
+**Chapter 5: Conclusion**
+Synthesizes findings, articulates contributions, and suggests directions
+for future research.
+```
+
+### Humanities-Specific Language
+
+**Interpretive verbs:**
+- argue, contend, posit, suggest
+- examine, analyze, interrogate, explore
+- illuminate, reveal, demonstrate, trace
+
+**Analytical phrases:**
+- "close reading of [text] reveals..."
+- "situating [phenomenon] within [context] allows us to see..."
+- "this analysis complicates the prevailing narrative by..."
+- "reading [source] against [context] demonstrates..."
+
+---
+
+## Social Sciences Domain (Sociology, Psychology, Economics, Political Science)
+
+### Structural Emphasis
+
+```
+Social Sciences Proposal Structure (~3,000 words)
+
+Abstract                    200-250 words   (7%)
+Introduction               500-600 words   (18%)
+  - Background             200 words
+  - Problem Statement      200 words
+  - Research Questions     150 words
+Literature Review          600-800 words   (22%)
+  - Theoretical Framework  250 words
+  - Empirical Review       350 words
+  - Research Gap           200 words
+Methodology                600-800 words   (25%)    ← BALANCED EMPHASIS
+  - Research Design        150 words
+  - Sampling/Participants  150 words
+  - Data Collection        200 words
+  - Data Analysis          200 words
+  - Ethics                 100 words
+Timeline                   200-250 words   (7%)
+Significance               300-400 words   (12%)
+References                 40-60 citations
+```
+
+### Key Characteristics
+
+**Question-Driven with Theoretical Grounding**
+- Clear research questions
+- Hypotheses when appropriate (quantitative)
+- Theory guides but doesn't dominate
+
+```markdown
+**Research Questions:**
+1. What is the relationship between [variable A] and [variable B] among
+   [population]?
+2. How do [participants] experience/perceive [phenomenon]?
+3. To what extent does [factor] mediate/moderate the relationship between
+   [X] and [Y]?
+
+**Hypotheses (if quantitative):**
+H1: [Variable A] is positively/negatively associated with [Variable B].
+H2: The relationship between [X] and [Y] is moderated by [Z].
+```
+
+**Mixed Methods Common**
+- Often combines quantitative and qualitative
+- Sequential or concurrent designs
+- Triangulation valued
+
+**Ethical Emphasis**
+- Human subjects considerations
+- IRB/ethics approval process
+- Informed consent, confidentiality
+
+### Methodology Template (Social Sciences)
+
+```markdown
+## 3. Methodology
+
+### 3.1 Research Design
+
+This study employs a [quantitative/qualitative/mixed methods] design.
+[If mixed: The study follows a [sequential/concurrent] [explanatory/
+exploratory] design, beginning with [phase 1] followed by [phase 2].]
+
+The [design type] approach is appropriate because [justification based
+on research questions].
+
+### 3.2 Participants and Sampling
+
+**Population:** [Define target population]
+
+**Sample:** [N] participants will be recruited using [sampling strategy].
+Inclusion criteria: [list]. Exclusion criteria: [list].
+
+**Sample size justification:** Based on [power analysis/saturation
+principle/similar studies], [N] participants are required to [detect
+effect/achieve saturation].
+
+### 3.3 Data Collection
+
+**Quantitative:** [Surveys/experiments/secondary data]
+- Instrument: [name/description]
+- Variables measured: [list with operationalization]
+- Procedure: [step-by-step process]
+
+**Qualitative:** [Interviews/focus groups/observation]
+- Protocol: [semi-structured/structured, duration]
+- Topics covered: [list]
+- Recording: [audio/video, transcription process]
+
+### 3.4 Data Analysis
+
+**Quantitative analysis:**
+- Descriptive statistics for [variables]
+- [Statistical test] to examine [hypothesis 1]
+- [Statistical test] to examine [hypothesis 2]
+- Software: [SPSS/R/Stata]
+
+**Qualitative analysis:**
+- [Thematic/content/discourse] analysis
+- Coding approach: [inductive/deductive/hybrid]
+- Software: [NVivo/Atlas.ti/manual]
+
+### 3.5 Ethical Considerations
+
+This research will be conducted in accordance with [ethical guidelines].
+IRB/Ethics approval will be obtained from [institution].
+
+Key considerations:
+- **Informed consent:** [process]
+- **Confidentiality:** [data storage, anonymization]
+- **Potential risks:** [identified risks and mitigation]
+- **Vulnerable populations:** [if applicable, special protections]
+```
+
+### Social Sciences-Specific Language
+
+**Research verbs:**
+- investigate, examine, explore, assess
+- compare, evaluate, measure, test
+- understand, interpret, explain, predict
+
+**Methodological phrases:**
+- "using a [design] approach"
+- "drawing on a [sampling] sample of [N] participants"
+- "employing [analysis method] to identify..."
+- "controlling for [confounding variables]"
+
+---
+
+## Citation Style Quick Reference
+
+### APA (7th Edition) - STEM, Social Sciences
+
+**Journal article:**
+```
+Author, A. A., & Author, B. B. (Year). Title of article. Journal Name,
+Volume(Issue), pages. https://doi.org/xxxxx
+```
+
+**Book:**
+```
+Author, A. A. (Year). Title of work: Subtitle. Publisher.
+```
+
+**In-text:**
+- (Author, Year) or Author (Year)
+- (Author et al., Year) for 3+ authors
+
+### MLA (9th Edition) - Humanities (Literature, Languages)
+
+**Journal article:**
+```
+Author Last, First. "Article Title." Journal Name, vol. #, no. #, Year,
+pp. #-#.
+```
+
+**Book:**
+```
+Author Last, First. Title of Book. Publisher, Year.
+```
+
+**In-text:**
+- (Author page) or Author argues "quote" (page)
+
+### Chicago (17th Edition) - History, some Humanities
+
+**Notes-Bibliography (Humanities):**
+```
+Footnote: Author First Last, Title of Book (Place: Publisher, Year), page.
+Bibliography: Author Last, First. Title of Book. Place: Publisher, Year.
+```
+
+**Author-Date (Sciences):**
+```
+(Author Year, page)
+Author, First. Year. Title. Place: Publisher.
+```
+
+---
+
+## Language Output Considerations
+
+### English Proposals
+
+- Maintain consistent British or American English
+- Formal academic register
+- Active voice acceptable, passive common in methods
+- "We" for multi-author, "This study" for distance
+
+### Chinese Proposals (中文)
+
+**学术语体特征:**
+- 使用书面语，避免口语化表达
+- 适当使用四字成语和学术术语
+- 保持客观语气，避免主观判断词
+- 使用"本研究"而非"我"
+
+**常用学术表达:**
+
+| 功能 | 中文表达 |
+|------|----------|
+| 引出背景 | 随着...的发展，...日益受到关注 |
+| 指出问题 | 然而，...仍存在以下问题 |
+| 陈述目标 | 本研究旨在...；本文拟探讨... |
+| 方法说明 | 采用...方法，对...进行分析 |
+| 预期贡献 | 研究结果将有助于...；有望为...提供参考 |
+
+**参考文献格式 (GB/T 7714-2015):**
+```
+期刊: 作者. 题名[J]. 刊名, 年, 卷(期): 起止页码.
+专著: 作者. 书名[M]. 出版地: 出版者, 出版年.
+```
+
+---
+
+## Domain-Specific Checklist
+
+### STEM Checklist
+- [ ] Hypotheses are specific and testable
+- [ ] Variables clearly defined and operationalized
+- [ ] Methods section includes specific parameters
+- [ ] Equipment/software versions specified
+- [ ] Validation approach described
+- [ ] Preliminary data included (if available)
+- [ ] Realistic within lab capabilities
+
+### Humanities Checklist
+- [ ] Central argument clearly stated
+- [ ] Theoretical framework articulated
+- [ ] Engagement with key scholars demonstrated
+- [ ] Primary sources identified and accessible
+- [ ] Chapter outline provided
+- [ ] Language requirements addressed
+- [ ] Archive/field access confirmed
+
+### Social Sciences Checklist
+- [ ] Research questions linked to theory
+- [ ] Sampling strategy justified
+- [ ] Instruments described or referenced
+- [ ] Analysis appropriate for question type
+- [ ] Ethics considerations addressed
+- [ ] Limitations acknowledged
+- [ ] Practical significance articulated