Template: Data Research (Original Data Study) skill
Template ID: data-research
by AgriciDaniel·MIT license·★ 2,219 Stars on the repo·GitHub ↗
Files of Template: Data Research (Original Data Study)
AgriciDaniel/
Show the full text375 lines
Template: Data Research (Original Data Study)
Template ID: data-research Target Length: 2,000-3,000 words Content Type: Original data study with visualizations and actionable findings Primary Search Intent: Informational ("study," "data," "statistics," "research," "benchmark")
When to Use This Template
Use this template when:
- You have original data from surveys, experiments, tool analysis, or proprietary sources
- The study reveals findings that challenge assumptions or fill knowledge gaps
- You can present specific numbers, percentages, and comparisons
- Search queries include "statistics," "data," "study," "research," "benchmark," "how many"
- The data is unique enough that other sites will want to cite it (link-building potential)
Do NOT use this template for:
- Step-by-step instructions (use tutorial)
- Timely event commentary (use news-analysis)
- Reference/FAQ content (use faq-knowledge)
- Analysis based entirely on someone else's data (write a news-analysis instead)
Value Note: This is the highest-value template for AI citations and backlinks. Original data is a top-tier information gain signal. Invest extra time in methodology and visualization quality.
Title Format
[Study Title]: We Analyzed [N] [Things] - Key Findings
Examples:
- "AI Code Review Study: 10,000 Pull Request Findings"
- "Blog SEO Benchmark: Lessons From 500 Technical Blogs"
- "Developer Tooling Survey: What 2,000 Engineers Reported"
Title Rules:
- Include the specific sample size (N) - this is your credibility signal
- Name what was analyzed (pull requests, blogs, engineers, etc.)
- "We Analyzed/Studied/Surveyed" establishes original research
- Use a specific finding-led promise instead of generic reveal phrasing
- Keep under 70 characters for SERP display when possible
Alternative Title Formats:
- "[N] [Things] Analyzed: [Key Finding] ([Year] Study)"
- "The State of [Topic]: [N]-[Unit] Analysis"
- "[Topic] by the Numbers: Insights from [N] [Things]"
Section-by-Section Structure
TL;DR Box (60 words)
[ANSWER-FIRST] Present the 3 most important findings as headline-style data points. Every sentence should contain a number.
> **TL;DR:** We analyzed [N] [things] and found [Finding 1 with specific number].
> [Finding 2 with specific number]. Most surprisingly, [Finding 3 with specific number].
> [One-sentence implication for the reader].
Rules:
- Every sentence must contain a data point (number, percentage, comparison)
- Lead with the most surprising or impactful finding
- Include "most surprisingly" or equivalent to hook readers
- This box will be the most-cited part of the study - make it quotable
Key Findings (200-300 words)
[ANSWER-FIRST] Present 5-7 headline findings as bullet points. Each bullet is a self-contained, citable data point.
## Key Findings
[ANSWER-FIRST] Our analysis of [N] [things] over [time period] revealed [N] key patterns.
[VISUAL: horizontal-bar chart showing the top 5-7 findings ranked by magnitude or importance]
1. **[Finding as a stat]:** [One sentence of context]. ([N]% of [sample])
2. **[Finding as a stat]:** [One sentence of context]. ([N]% of [sample])
3. **[Finding as a stat]:** [One sentence of context]. ([N]% of [sample])
4. **[Finding as a stat]:** [One sentence of context]. ([N]% of [sample])
5. **[Finding as a stat]:** [One sentence of context]. ([N]% of [sample])
6. **[Finding as a stat]:** [One sentence of context]. ([N]% of [sample])
7. **[Finding as a stat]:** [One sentence of context]. ([N]% of [sample])
Rules:
- Each bullet must be self-contained - citable without context
- Bold the data point, follow with one sentence of context
- Order by magnitude of impact or surprise, not by study order
- Include the visual chart immediately - readers want the overview first
Methodology (200-300 words)
[ANSWER-FIRST] State exactly what you studied, how you studied it, and why the reader should trust the results.
## Methodology
[ANSWER-FIRST] We analyzed [N] [things] collected from [source] between [start date] and [end date] using [analysis approach].
### Data Source
[Where the data came from, how it was collected, any selection criteria]
[INFO-GAIN: proprietary data source or unique collection method - this is what makes the study unreproducible and therefore valuable]
### Sample
| Parameter | Value |
|-----------|-------|
| Sample size | [N] |
| Time period | [Start] to [End] |
| Source | [Where from] |
| Selection criteria | [How items were chosen] |
| Exclusions | [What was filtered out and why] |
### Analysis Approach
[1-2 paragraphs on how the data was analyzed - tools used, statistical methods, categorization approach]
### Limitations
- [Limitation 1]: [How it might affect findings]
- [Limitation 2]: [How it might affect findings]
- [Limitation 3]: [How it might affect findings]
Rules:
- Be transparent about limitations - this builds credibility
- The [INFO-GAIN] here is your unique data source or method
- Include enough detail that another researcher could evaluate (not necessarily reproduce) the study
- State exclusion criteria explicitly - readers will ask about selection bias
FLOW evidence triple (required for every statistic in this template):
- Year anchor in prose: write "In 2026, ..." or "As of Q1 2026, ..." BEFORE the number, not in a parenthetical.
- Inline citation: name the publisher AND the document or report title.
- References and retrieval notes: include the full URL plus
retrieved YYYY-MM-DDfor every cited source without duplicating inline citations as a raw source dump.
Drop unverifiable stats. Replace contradicted stats with verified alternatives. Reference: skills/blog/references/flow-alignment.md.
Finding Sections (300-400 words each, 4 findings)
Each finding is an H2 phrased as a question. Follow this structure for each:
## [Finding as a Question]?
[ANSWER-FIRST] [State the finding as a specific statistic in the opening sentence. E.g., "78% of technical blogs that rank on page one use..."]
[2-3 paragraphs of detailed analysis:]
**The data:**
[VISUAL: chart appropriate to the finding - vary chart types across findings]
Suggested chart types per finding:
- Finding 1: Horizontal bar chart (comparison)
- Finding 2: Line chart (trend over time)
- Finding 3: Scatter plot (correlation)
- Finding 4: Stacked bar chart (composition)
**What this means:** [Interpretation of the data - what pattern does this reveal?]
**How this compares:** [Comparison to industry benchmarks, prior research, or conventional wisdom]
| This Study | Industry Benchmark | Difference |
|------------|--------------------|------------|
| [Our finding] | [Benchmark] | [Delta] |
[STAT: supporting data point from an external source that validates or contrasts with the finding]
**Practical implication:** [What should the reader do differently based on this finding?]
[INTERNAL-LINK: link to content that helps the reader act on this finding]
Rules for finding sections:
- Always open with the data point - never bury the lead
- Each finding must have its own visualization (vary chart types)
- Compare to a benchmark or prior research for context
- End with a practical implication - "so what?" for the reader
- Vary chart types across findings - don't use the same chart 4 times
Surprises & Outliers (150-200 words)
[ANSWER-FIRST] Highlight findings that were unexpected or that challenge common assumptions. This section builds credibility - it shows you followed the data rather than confirming a narrative.
## Surprises & Outliers
[ANSWER-FIRST] [N] findings contradicted our initial hypotheses or conventional wisdom.
**Surprise 1: [Counter-intuitive finding]**
We expected [expected result], but the data showed [actual result]. [Brief explanation of why this might be the case].
**Surprise 2: [Outlier or anomaly]**
[Description of the outlier and what it might indicate]
[INFO-GAIN: honest reflection on what was unexpected - this demonstrates intellectual rigor and makes the study more trustworthy]
> **What this tells us:** [1-2 sentence meta-insight about what the surprises reveal]
Rules:
- Include at least 2 surprises or outliers
- Be honest about what contradicted expectations
- Offer a hypothesis for the surprise, but flag it as speculation
- This section is often the most-shared part of a data study
Limitations & Future Research (100-150 words)
[ANSWER-FIRST] Acknowledge what this study does not cover and what questions remain open.
## Limitations & Future Research
[ANSWER-FIRST] This study has [N] key limitations that readers should consider when applying these findings.
**What this study doesn't cover:**
- [Limitation 1]: [Brief explanation]
- [Limitation 2]: [Brief explanation]
**Open questions for future research:**
- [Question 1]
- [Question 2]
- [Question 3]
[STAT: if applicable, reference a related study that addresses one of these gaps]
Rules:
- This section builds trust - be genuinely transparent
- Distinguish between limitations (things that weaken the findings) and scope boundaries (things outside the study's intent)
- Suggest specific future research directions (you may write those follow-ups)
Implications & Recommendations (200-300 words)
[ANSWER-FIRST] Translate findings into specific, actionable recommendations for the reader.
## Implications & Recommendations
[ANSWER-FIRST] Based on our findings, [audience] should [highest-priority recommendation].
### For [Audience Segment 1]:
1. **[Recommendation]:** Based on [Finding], [specific action]. [Expected impact].
2. **[Recommendation]:** Based on [Finding], [specific action]. [Expected impact].
### For [Audience Segment 2]:
1. **[Recommendation]:** Based on [Finding], [specific action]. [Expected impact].
2. **[Recommendation]:** Based on [Finding], [specific action]. [Expected impact].
[INTERNAL-LINK: link to tutorial or guide content that helps implement these recommendations]
[VISUAL: summary infographic or decision matrix if applicable]
Rules:
- Tie every recommendation directly to a specific finding (cite it)
- Be specific enough that the reader can take action
- Segment recommendations by audience if the study has broad appeal
- Include expected impact where possible
FAQ (3-5 Questions)
[ANSWER-FIRST] for each question. Anticipate questions about methodology, applicability, and specific findings.
## Frequently Asked Questions
### How was this data collected?
[ANSWER-FIRST] [Direct answer in 1-2 sentences]. See our [Methodology](#methodology) section for full details.
### Does this apply to [specific audience/context]?
[ANSWER-FIRST] [Direct answer with scope clarification]. [Any caveats].
### How does this compare to [previous study/industry benchmark]?
[ANSWER-FIRST] [Direct comparison with specific numbers]. [Key difference explained].
[STAT: comparative data point]
### Can I cite this research?
[ANSWER-FIRST] Yes. Please cite as: [Your name/org], "[Study Title]," [Publication name], [Date]. [Link to this page].
### When will this data be updated?
[ANSWER-FIRST] [Direct answer with timeline or conditions for update].
FAQ Rules:
- Include a methodology question (most common reader concern)
- Include a scope/applicability question
- Include a citation question (encourage backlinks)
- Answers should be 40-60 words for Featured Snippet optimization
Data Appendix
## Data Appendix
### Summary Data Table
| [Category] | [Metric 1] | [Metric 2] | [Metric 3] |
|------------|-------------|-------------|-------------|
| [Row 1] | [Value] | [Value] | [Value] |
| [Row 2] | [Value] | [Value] | [Value] |
| [Row 3] | [Value] | [Value] | [Value] |
| ... | ... | ... | ... |
**Download raw data:** [Link to CSV/spreadsheet if applicable]
**Citation format:**
> [Your name/org]. "[Study Title]." [Publication name], [Date]. [URL].
Rules:
- Include a summary data table at minimum
- Offer raw data download if possible (increases backlink potential)
- Provide a citation format (makes it easy for others to reference)
- Include the date prominently (data studies have a shelf life)
Content Checklist
Before publishing, verify:
- Title includes specific sample size (N)
- TL;DR contains 3 data points and is under 60 words
- Key Findings has 5-7 self-contained, citable bullet points
- Methodology section includes sample size, time period, source, and limitations
- At least 1 [INFO-GAIN] in methodology (proprietary data/method)
- 4 Finding sections, each with a unique chart type
- Every finding opens with a specific data point (answer-first)
- Every finding includes a benchmark comparison
- Every finding ends with a practical implication
- At least 4 [VISUAL] markers with varied chart types
- At least 3 [STAT] markers with external data points
- Surprises section includes 2+ counter-intuitive findings
- Limitations are honestly stated
- Recommendations are tied to specific findings
- At least 3 [INTERNAL-LINK] zones
- FAQ includes methodology and citation questions
- Data appendix with summary table and citation format
- All data verified and calculations double-checked
| 1 | # Template: Data Research (Original Data Study) |
| 2 | |
| 3 | **Template ID:** data-research |
| 4 | **Target Length:** 2,000-3,000 words |
| 5 | **Content Type:** Original data study with visualizations and actionable findings |
| 6 | **Primary Search Intent:** Informational ("study," "data," "statistics," "research," "benchmark") |
| 7 | |
| 8 | ## When to Use This Template |
| 9 | |
| 10 | Use this template when: |
| 11 | You have original data from surveys, experiments, tool analysis, or proprietary sources |
| 12 | The study reveals findings that challenge assumptions or fill knowledge gaps |
| 13 | You can present specific numbers, percentages, and comparisons |
| 14 | Search queries include "statistics," "data," "study," "research," "benchmark," "how many" |
| 15 | The data is unique enough that other sites will want to cite it (link-building potential) |
| 16 | |
| 17 | Do NOT use this template for: |
| 18 | Step-by-step instructions (use tutorial) |
| 19 | Timely event commentary (use news-analysis) |
| 20 | Reference/FAQ content (use faq-knowledge) |
| 21 | Analysis based entirely on someone else's data (write a news-analysis instead) |
| 22 | |
| 23 | **Value Note:** This is the highest-value template for AI citations and backlinks. Original data is a top-tier information gain signal. Invest extra time in methodology and visualization quality. |
| 24 | |
| 25 | |
| 26 | |
| 27 | ## Title Format |
| 28 | |
| 29 | |
| 30 | [Study Title]: We Analyzed [N] [Things] - Key Findings |
| 31 | |
| 32 | |
| 33 | **Examples:** |
| 34 | "AI Code Review Study: 10,000 Pull Request Findings" |
| 35 | "Blog SEO Benchmark: Lessons From 500 Technical Blogs" |
| 36 | "Developer Tooling Survey: What 2,000 Engineers Reported" |
| 37 | |
| 38 | **Title Rules:** |
| 39 | Include the specific sample size (N) - this is your credibility signal |
| 40 | Name what was analyzed (pull requests, blogs, engineers, etc.) |
| 41 | "We Analyzed/Studied/Surveyed" establishes original research |
| 42 | Use a specific finding-led promise instead of generic reveal phrasing |
| 43 | Keep under 70 characters for SERP display when possible |
| 44 | |
| 45 | **Alternative Title Formats:** |
| 46 | "[N] [Things] Analyzed: [Key Finding] ([Year] Study)" |
| 47 | "The State of [Topic]: [N]-[Unit] Analysis" |
| 48 | "[Topic] by the Numbers: Insights from [N] [Things]" |
| 49 | |
| 50 | |
| 51 | |
| 52 | ## Section-by-Section Structure |
| 53 | |
| 54 | |
| 55 | |
| 56 | ### TL;DR Box (60 words) |
| 57 | |
| 58 | [ANSWER-FIRST] Present the 3 most important findings as headline-style data points. Every sentence should contain a number. |
| 59 | |
| 60 | |
| 61 | > **TL;DR:** We analyzed [N] [things] and found [Finding 1 with specific number]. |
| 62 | > [Finding 2 with specific number]. Most surprisingly, [Finding 3 with specific number]. |
| 63 | > [One-sentence implication for the reader]. |
| 64 | |
| 65 | |
| 66 | **Rules:** |
| 67 | Every sentence must contain a data point (number, percentage, comparison) |
| 68 | Lead with the most surprising or impactful finding |
| 69 | Include "most surprisingly" or equivalent to hook readers |
| 70 | This box will be the most-cited part of the study - make it quotable |
| 71 | |
| 72 | |
| 73 | |
| 74 | ### Key Findings (200-300 words) |
| 75 | |
| 76 | [ANSWER-FIRST] Present 5-7 headline findings as bullet points. Each bullet is a self-contained, citable data point. |
| 77 | |
| 78 | |
| 79 | ## Key Findings |
| 80 | |
| 81 | [ANSWER-FIRST] Our analysis of [N] [things] over [time period] revealed [N] key patterns. |
| 82 | |
| 83 | [VISUAL: horizontal-bar chart showing the top 5-7 findings ranked by magnitude or importance] |
| 84 | |
| 85 | 1. **[Finding as a stat]:** [One sentence of context]. ([N]% of [sample]) |
| 86 | 2. **[Finding as a stat]:** [One sentence of context]. ([N]% of [sample]) |
| 87 | 3. **[Finding as a stat]:** [One sentence of context]. ([N]% of [sample]) |
| 88 | 4. **[Finding as a stat]:** [One sentence of context]. ([N]% of [sample]) |
| 89 | 5. **[Finding as a stat]:** [One sentence of context]. ([N]% of [sample]) |
| 90 | 6. **[Finding as a stat]:** [One sentence of context]. ([N]% of [sample]) |
| 91 | 7. **[Finding as a stat]:** [One sentence of context]. ([N]% of [sample]) |
| 92 | |
| 93 | |
| 94 | **Rules:** |
| 95 | Each bullet must be self-contained - citable without context |
| 96 | Bold the data point, follow with one sentence of context |
| 97 | Order by magnitude of impact or surprise, not by study order |
| 98 | Include the visual chart immediately - readers want the overview first |
| 99 | |
| 100 | |
| 101 | |
| 102 | ### Methodology (200-300 words) |
| 103 | |
| 104 | [ANSWER-FIRST] State exactly what you studied, how you studied it, and why the reader should trust the results. |
| 105 | |
| 106 | |
| 107 | ## Methodology |
| 108 | |
| 109 | [ANSWER-FIRST] We analyzed [N] [things] collected from [source] between [start date] and [end date] using [analysis approach]. |
| 110 | |
| 111 | ### Data Source |
| 112 | |
| 113 | [Where the data came from, how it was collected, any selection criteria] |
| 114 | |
| 115 | [INFO-GAIN: proprietary data source or unique collection method - this is what makes the study unreproducible and therefore valuable] |
| 116 | |
| 117 | ### Sample |
| 118 | |
| 119 | | Parameter | Value | |
| 120 | |-----------|-------| |
| 121 | | Sample size | [N] | |
| 122 | | Time period | [Start] to [End] | |
| 123 | | Source | [Where from] | |
| 124 | | Selection criteria | [How items were chosen] | |
| 125 | | Exclusions | [What was filtered out and why] | |
| 126 | |
| 127 | ### Analysis Approach |
| 128 | |
| 129 | [1-2 paragraphs on how the data was analyzed - tools used, statistical methods, categorization approach] |
| 130 | |
| 131 | ### Limitations |
| 132 | |
| 133 | - [Limitation 1]: [How it might affect findings] |
| 134 | - [Limitation 2]: [How it might affect findings] |
| 135 | - [Limitation 3]: [How it might affect findings] |
| 136 | |
| 137 | |
| 138 | **Rules:** |
| 139 | Be transparent about limitations - this builds credibility |
| 140 | The [INFO-GAIN] here is your unique data source or method |
| 141 | Include enough detail that another researcher could evaluate (not necessarily reproduce) the study |
| 142 | State exclusion criteria explicitly - readers will ask about selection bias |
| 143 | |
| 144 | **FLOW evidence triple (required for every statistic in this template):** |
| 145 | |
| 146 | Year anchor in prose: write "In 2026, ..." or "As of Q1 2026, ..." BEFORE the number, not in a parenthetical. |
| 147 | Inline citation: name the publisher AND the document or report title. |
| 148 | References and retrieval notes: include the full URL plus `retrieved YYYY-MM-DD` for every cited source without duplicating inline citations as a raw source dump. |
| 149 | |
| 150 | Drop unverifiable stats. Replace contradicted stats with verified alternatives. Reference: `skills/blog/references/flow-alignment.md`. |
| 151 | |
| 152 | |
| 153 | |
| 154 | ### Finding Sections (300-400 words each, 4 findings) |
| 155 | |
| 156 | Each finding is an H2 phrased as a question. Follow this structure for each: |
| 157 | |
| 158 | |
| 159 | ## [Finding as a Question]? |
| 160 | |
| 161 | [ANSWER-FIRST] [State the finding as a specific statistic in the opening sentence. E.g., "78% of technical blogs that rank on page one use..."] |
| 162 | |
| 163 | [2-3 paragraphs of detailed analysis:] |
| 164 | |
| 165 | **The data:** |
| 166 | |
| 167 | [VISUAL: chart appropriate to the finding - vary chart types across findings] |
| 168 | |
| 169 | Suggested chart types per finding: |
| 170 | - Finding 1: Horizontal bar chart (comparison) |
| 171 | - Finding 2: Line chart (trend over time) |
| 172 | - Finding 3: Scatter plot (correlation) |
| 173 | - Finding 4: Stacked bar chart (composition) |
| 174 | |
| 175 | **What this means:** [Interpretation of the data - what pattern does this reveal?] |
| 176 | |
| 177 | **How this compares:** [Comparison to industry benchmarks, prior research, or conventional wisdom] |
| 178 | |
| 179 | | This Study | Industry Benchmark | Difference | |
| 180 | |------------|--------------------|------------| |
| 181 | | [Our finding] | [Benchmark] | [Delta] | |
| 182 | |
| 183 | [STAT: supporting data point from an external source that validates or contrasts with the finding] |
| 184 | |
| 185 | **Practical implication:** [What should the reader do differently based on this finding?] |
| 186 | |
| 187 | [INTERNAL-LINK: link to content that helps the reader act on this finding] |
| 188 | |
| 189 | |
| 190 | **Rules for finding sections:** |
| 191 | Always open with the data point - never bury the lead |
| 192 | Each finding must have its own visualization (vary chart types) |
| 193 | Compare to a benchmark or prior research for context |
| 194 | End with a practical implication - "so what?" for the reader |
| 195 | Vary chart types across findings - don't use the same chart 4 times |
| 196 | |
| 197 | |
| 198 | |
| 199 | ### Surprises & Outliers (150-200 words) |
| 200 | |
| 201 | [ANSWER-FIRST] Highlight findings that were unexpected or that challenge common assumptions. This section builds credibility - it shows you followed the data rather than confirming a narrative. |
| 202 | |
| 203 | |
| 204 | ## Surprises & Outliers |
| 205 | |
| 206 | [ANSWER-FIRST] [N] findings contradicted our initial hypotheses or conventional wisdom. |
| 207 | |
| 208 | **Surprise 1: [Counter-intuitive finding]** |
| 209 | We expected [expected result], but the data showed [actual result]. [Brief explanation of why this might be the case]. |
| 210 | |
| 211 | **Surprise 2: [Outlier or anomaly]** |
| 212 | [Description of the outlier and what it might indicate] |
| 213 | |
| 214 | [INFO-GAIN: honest reflection on what was unexpected - this demonstrates intellectual rigor and makes the study more trustworthy] |
| 215 | |
| 216 | > **What this tells us:** [1-2 sentence meta-insight about what the surprises reveal] |
| 217 | |
| 218 | |
| 219 | **Rules:** |
| 220 | Include at least 2 surprises or outliers |
| 221 | Be honest about what contradicted expectations |
| 222 | Offer a hypothesis for the surprise, but flag it as speculation |
| 223 | This section is often the most-shared part of a data study |
| 224 | |
| 225 | |
| 226 | |
| 227 | ### Limitations & Future Research (100-150 words) |
| 228 | |
| 229 | [ANSWER-FIRST] Acknowledge what this study does not cover and what questions remain open. |
| 230 | |
| 231 | |
| 232 | ## Limitations & Future Research |
| 233 | |
| 234 | [ANSWER-FIRST] This study has [N] key limitations that readers should consider when applying these findings. |
| 235 | |
| 236 | **What this study doesn't cover:** |
| 237 | - [Limitation 1]: [Brief explanation] |
| 238 | - [Limitation 2]: [Brief explanation] |
| 239 | |
| 240 | **Open questions for future research:** |
| 241 | - [Question 1] |
| 242 | - [Question 2] |
| 243 | - [Question 3] |
| 244 | |
| 245 | [STAT: if applicable, reference a related study that addresses one of these gaps] |
| 246 | |
| 247 | |
| 248 | **Rules:** |
| 249 | This section builds trust - be genuinely transparent |
| 250 | Distinguish between limitations (things that weaken the findings) and scope boundaries (things outside the study's intent) |
| 251 | Suggest specific future research directions (you may write those follow-ups) |
| 252 | |
| 253 | |
| 254 | |
| 255 | ### Implications & Recommendations (200-300 words) |
| 256 | |
| 257 | [ANSWER-FIRST] Translate findings into specific, actionable recommendations for the reader. |
| 258 | |
| 259 | |
| 260 | ## Implications & Recommendations |
| 261 | |
| 262 | [ANSWER-FIRST] Based on our findings, [audience] should [highest-priority recommendation]. |
| 263 | |
| 264 | ### For [Audience Segment 1]: |
| 265 | |
| 266 | 1. **[Recommendation]:** Based on [Finding], [specific action]. [Expected impact]. |
| 267 | 2. **[Recommendation]:** Based on [Finding], [specific action]. [Expected impact]. |
| 268 | |
| 269 | ### For [Audience Segment 2]: |
| 270 | |
| 271 | 1. **[Recommendation]:** Based on [Finding], [specific action]. [Expected impact]. |
| 272 | 2. **[Recommendation]:** Based on [Finding], [specific action]. [Expected impact]. |
| 273 | |
| 274 | [INTERNAL-LINK: link to tutorial or guide content that helps implement these recommendations] |
| 275 | |
| 276 | [VISUAL: summary infographic or decision matrix if applicable] |
| 277 | |
| 278 | |
| 279 | **Rules:** |
| 280 | Tie every recommendation directly to a specific finding (cite it) |
| 281 | Be specific enough that the reader can take action |
| 282 | Segment recommendations by audience if the study has broad appeal |
| 283 | Include expected impact where possible |
| 284 | |
| 285 | |
| 286 | |
| 287 | ### FAQ (3-5 Questions) |
| 288 | |
| 289 | [ANSWER-FIRST] for each question. Anticipate questions about methodology, applicability, and specific findings. |
| 290 | |
| 291 | |
| 292 | ## Frequently Asked Questions |
| 293 | |
| 294 | ### How was this data collected? |
| 295 | |
| 296 | [ANSWER-FIRST] [Direct answer in 1-2 sentences]. See our [Methodology](#methodology) section for full details. |
| 297 | |
| 298 | ### Does this apply to [specific audience/context]? |
| 299 | |
| 300 | [ANSWER-FIRST] [Direct answer with scope clarification]. [Any caveats]. |
| 301 | |
| 302 | ### How does this compare to [previous study/industry benchmark]? |
| 303 | |
| 304 | [ANSWER-FIRST] [Direct comparison with specific numbers]. [Key difference explained]. |
| 305 | |
| 306 | [STAT: comparative data point] |
| 307 | |
| 308 | ### Can I cite this research? |
| 309 | |
| 310 | [ANSWER-FIRST] Yes. Please cite as: [Your name/org], "[Study Title]," [Publication name], [Date]. [Link to this page]. |
| 311 | |
| 312 | ### When will this data be updated? |
| 313 | |
| 314 | [ANSWER-FIRST] [Direct answer with timeline or conditions for update]. |
| 315 | |
| 316 | |
| 317 | **FAQ Rules:** |
| 318 | Include a methodology question (most common reader concern) |
| 319 | Include a scope/applicability question |
| 320 | Include a citation question (encourage backlinks) |
| 321 | Answers should be 40-60 words for Featured Snippet optimization |
| 322 | |
| 323 | |
| 324 | |
| 325 | ### Data Appendix |
| 326 | |
| 327 | |
| 328 | ## Data Appendix |
| 329 | |
| 330 | ### Summary Data Table |
| 331 | |
| 332 | | [Category] | [Metric 1] | [Metric 2] | [Metric 3] | |
| 333 | |------------|-------------|-------------|-------------| |
| 334 | | [Row 1] | [Value] | [Value] | [Value] | |
| 335 | | [Row 2] | [Value] | [Value] | [Value] | |
| 336 | | [Row 3] | [Value] | [Value] | [Value] | |
| 337 | | ... | ... | ... | ... | |
| 338 | |
| 339 | **Download raw data:** [Link to CSV/spreadsheet if applicable] |
| 340 | |
| 341 | **Citation format:** |
| 342 | > [Your name/org]. "[Study Title]." [Publication name], [Date]. [URL]. |
| 343 | |
| 344 | |
| 345 | **Rules:** |
| 346 | Include a summary data table at minimum |
| 347 | Offer raw data download if possible (increases backlink potential) |
| 348 | Provide a citation format (makes it easy for others to reference) |
| 349 | Include the date prominently (data studies have a shelf life) |
| 350 | |
| 351 | |
| 352 | |
| 353 | ## Content Checklist |
| 354 | |
| 355 | Before publishing, verify: |
| 356 | |
| 357 | [ ] Title includes specific sample size (N) |
| 358 | [ ] TL;DR contains 3 data points and is under 60 words |
| 359 | [ ] Key Findings has 5-7 self-contained, citable bullet points |
| 360 | [ ] Methodology section includes sample size, time period, source, and limitations |
| 361 | [ ] At least 1 [INFO-GAIN] in methodology (proprietary data/method) |
| 362 | [ ] 4 Finding sections, each with a unique chart type |
| 363 | [ ] Every finding opens with a specific data point (answer-first) |
| 364 | [ ] Every finding includes a benchmark comparison |
| 365 | [ ] Every finding ends with a practical implication |
| 366 | [ ] At least 4 [VISUAL] markers with varied chart types |
| 367 | [ ] At least 3 [STAT] markers with external data points |
| 368 | [ ] Surprises section includes 2+ counter-intuitive findings |
| 369 | [ ] Limitations are honestly stated |
| 370 | [ ] Recommendations are tied to specific findings |
| 371 | [ ] At least 3 [INTERNAL-LINK] zones |
| 372 | [ ] FAQ includes methodology and citation questions |
| 373 | [ ] Data appendix with summary table and citation format |
| 374 | [ ] All data verified and calculations double-checked |
| 375 |
Discussion
Browse more free Claude skills.