本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

amanthro-transparency-and-data

Use when handling research ethics, consent, community accountability, and data/transparency for an American Anthropologist (AA) manuscript — informed consent, anonymization, protection of vulnerable interlocutors, heritage and repatriation obligations, and what (and what NOT) to share. At AA this is an ethics-and-accountability skill grounded in the AAA ethics principles and an ethics of care. Plans the ethics and transparency; it does not grant waivers.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(1)

  • SKILL.md5.4 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

Ethics, Consent & Accountability (amanthro-transparency-and-data)

At AA, "transparency" is not primarily a reproducibility package — it is research ethics and accountability. The AAA's Principles of Professional Responsibility (do no harm; obtain informed consent; be open and honest; weigh competing obligations to people, communities, scholarship, and the profession) govern the work, and AA practices an explicit ethics of care in its editorial process. The single most important rule: protecting people can override sharing data. Design ethics in from the start (run this skill early and before submission).

When to trigger

  • Planning consent, anonymization, and accountability into a project (do this early)
  • Working with vulnerable, criminalized, Indigenous, or displaced communities
  • Handling human remains, sacred objects, genetic/biological samples, or cultural heritage
  • Deciding what materials, transcripts, images, or data can — and cannot — be shared
  • Preparing the manuscript's ethics statement before submission

AAA ethics core (anchor every decision here)

  1. Do no harm. Anticipate harm to interlocutors and communities — reputational, legal, physical, cultural — and design to prevent it. When sharing would endanger people, do not share.
  2. Informed consent is ongoing, not a one-time signature: people understand what participation and publication mean, and can withdraw. For media, consent covers that use of that image/recording.
  3. Be open and honest about your role, funders, and purposes with those you study and with readers.
  4. Weigh competing obligations transparently — to people studied, to scholarship, to communities, and to the discipline — and explain how you resolved conflicts.

Anonymization & protection of interlocutors

  • Anonymize people and often places (pseudonyms, composite or masked details) where exposure could cause harm; state your anonymization strategy and its limits.
  • For vulnerable or criminalized communities, treat confidentiality as protective, not optional; consider not collecting or not retaining data that could be subpoenaed or leaked.
  • Images: blur/withhold identifiers per consent; some images should not be published at all (see amanthro-tables-figures).

Heritage, repatriation & biological materials

  • Cultural heritage & sacred objects: respect community authority; some knowledge/objects should not be reproduced or published. Follow NAGPRA and relevant national/Indigenous protocols.
  • Human remains & repatriation: document provenance and descendant-community consent; align with NAGPRA/repatriation obligations; do not present ancestral remains as ungoverned data.
  • Genetic / biological data: community consent (incl. group-level harms), benefit-sharing where appropriate; deposit only where consent and protocols permit.

What about data sharing? (open-but-careful)

  • AA's Wiley compliance row does not impose a journal-specific data-sharing tier; share what you ethically can (e.g., codebooks, non-sensitive materials, analysis details for quantitative subfields) and document why sensitive data are withheld with an access/contact path where appropriate.
  • For biological/archaeological quantitative work, normal reproducibility hygiene applies: documented procedures, pinned versions, seeds — subject to the ethics constraints above. Sharing never trumps consent or community harm. Follow any Research Exchange data-availability prompt at upload.

Anti-patterns

  • Treating ethics as IRB paperwork done once, not an ongoing relationship of care
  • Publishing identifiable details/images that endanger interlocutors to look more transparent
  • Reproducing sacred/heritage materials or ancestral remains against community wishes
  • Extractive research: taking knowledge/samples with no consent, benefit, or accountability
  • A "view from nowhere" that hides funders, role, or competing obligations
  • Sharing sensitive data for reproducibility credit when it exposes people to harm

Output format

【AAA ethics】do-no-harm / consent / honesty / competing-obligations addressed? [Y/N]
【Consent】ongoing + covers publication & media use? [Y/N]
【Anonymization】strategy + limits stated; vulnerable interlocutors protected? [Y/N]
【Heritage/remains/biological】provenance + community authority + repatriation respected? [Y/N/NA]
【Data sharing】what is shared / what is ethically withheld + why
【Next】amanthro-review-process

Supplementary resources

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

Use when packaging AAAI code, data, multimedia appendices, technical appendices, reproducibility evidence, and post-acceptance artifact releases without violating double-blind or immutable-supplement rules.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills1,2482026年9月27日 更新

Use when drafting an AAAI author response (rebuttal) under the single short character-limited author-feedback window, the no-URL rule, no-new-results guidance, AI-generated-review handling, and the AAAI two-phase review process where Phase-2 papers receive one feedback round before SPC/AC discussion.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills1,2482026年9月27日 更新

Use when preparing an accepted AAAI paper for camera-ready source submission to AAAI Press, including proceedings page limits, two-column template compliance, copyright transfer, purchased extra technical pages, deanonymization, registration, oral or poster presentation, and final public artifact release.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills1,2482026年9月27日 更新

Use when designing or auditing AAAI experiments for the broad-AI program committee, including baselines, ablations, statistical significance, robustness, human evaluation, AI-for-Social-Impact and alignment/safety evidence, compute and cost reporting, and reproducibility-checklist alignment for Phase-1 survival.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills1,2482026年9月27日 更新

Use when positioning an AAAI paper's novelty against archival work, contemporaneous arXiv or workshop papers, and AAAI/IJCAI/NeurIPS/ICML/ICLR neighbors across the broad AI scope, while staying inside AAAI's dual-submission and AI-as-source policy constraints and writing a related-work section legible to non-specialist reviewers.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills1,2482026年9月27日 更新

Use when strengthening an AAAI paper's reproducibility checklist (placed after references), experimental traceability, seed and hyperparameter reporting, compute and cost disclosure, dataset access and licensing, code/data ZIP readiness, and the claim-to-evidence map that Phase-1 reviewers use to judge rigor across AAAI's broad AI scope.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills1,2482026年9月27日 更新

brycewang-stanford のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する