At JEBO the right question is never "did we run enough checks?" but "for each way this could not be the behavioral mechanism, did we show it survives?" Build a threat → check map. The threats differ sharply across the four archetypes.
| Threat | Check JEBO referees expect |
|---|---|
| Experimenter demand | demand-treatment bounds (de Quidt-style), neutral framing, obfuscated objective |
| Multiple comparisons | pre-registered primary outcome; MHT correction (Romano–Wolf, List–Shaikh–Xu, BH) across arms/outcomes |
| Comprehension / confusion | results hold among subjects passing comprehension checks |
| Order / sequence effects | randomize order; show within-order stability |
| Subject pool / platform | replicate across pools (student vs. Prolific vs. field); attention screens on online samples |
| Bots / inattentive online subjects | attention checks, completion-time filters, duplicate-IP screening |
| Selection / attrition | balance among completers; Lee bounds if differential |
JEBO's distinctive robustness demand is mechanism robustness: even a real, replicable effect can be driven by a different behavioral channel than claimed. Where possible, add a check that separates your mechanism from the leading alternative (a moderation test the rival channel does not predict, a mediation analysis with the caveats stated, or a treatment that shuts the rival channel off).
Run the battery, don't just enumerate it. Full map:
execution-with-mcp. JEBO spans behavioral/experimental and applied micro; randomization inference for experiments, DiD/IV for observational claims.
romano_wolf (step-down FWER) or benjamini_hochberg.oster_delta / sensemakr.wild_cluster_bootstrap (few clusters), twoway_cluster / conley.audit_result(result_id) lists missing checks + the exact
suggest_function for each.etable / did_summary_to_latex from the handle — no retyped numbers.Decisive checks in the body, exhaustive battery in the appendix. JF execution walkthrough.
【Archetype】experiment / observational / simulation
【Threat → check map】
- <threat 1> → <check>
- <threat 2> → <check>
【Multiplicity】primary outcome pre-registered? MHT method:
【Mechanism vs. alternative】<test separating claimed channel from rival>
【Headline stability】<range of estimate across specs + uncertainty>
【Next step】jebo-tables-figures