Data Research Template

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-DD for 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