--- name: ecj-writing-style description: Use when polishing the prose of a The Economic Journal (EJ) manuscript into its clear, generalist-legible, economics-first register. Tightens voice, structure, and citation/format house style; it does not fix the economic argument itself (see ecj-theory-model / ecj-identification). --- # Writing Style & House Conventions (ecj-writing-style) ## When to trigger - The draft is wordy, hedged, or buries the result under qualifications - Prose explains procedure before establishing economic purpose - A reader outside your subfield gets lost; the writing assumes too much - This is the **late polish** stage — identification and model are already sound ## The EJ voice: exposition is part of the contribution EJ prose must be **clear, precise, and legible to a broad international readership**. EJ has long valued *clear exposition* alongside substance: a generalist economist should follow the argument; a specialist should find it rigorous. This is the journal's distinguishing register — at EJ, an unreadable paper underperforms its own substance, so the writing earns real weight in the decision. The writing carries an argument; every paragraph advances the economic case, and the economic intuition is stated in words before the algebra. Register rules: - Lead with the economics, then the method. "Higher entry costs reduce competition; we estimate this using..." not "We run a regression of price on entry cost." - State results plainly. Replace "our findings appear to suggest a potentially meaningful relationship" with "entry costs raise prices by X%." - Write for the generalist: define field-specific terms on first use; do not assume the reader knows your subfield's acronyms. - Active voice for what the paper does; reserve hedging for genuine uncertainty. - Define notation once, use it consistently; explain each equation's economic content in prose. - Cut throat-clearing ("It is important to note that...", "In this paper, we will..."). ## Structure conventions - **Sections**: Introduction → (Model / Theory) → Data / Institutional setting → Empirical strategy → Results → Mechanisms / Robustness → (Counterfactuals) → Conclusion. Order theory before empirics when the model leads. - **Introduction** does the heavy lifting (see `ecj-literature-positioning`): question, why a generalist cares, what is known, the gap, what you do, findings and the broad lesson. - **Conclusion** states what economics learned and the portable lesson — not a summary of every table. - **Short paper** (AER:Insights-style): compress hard to <6,000 words and 5 exhibits (verified 2026-06-20) — every sentence earns its place; one clean idea, no scaffolding. - Footnotes for genuine asides, not for results that belong in the text. ## House-style format - **References: author-date** style, with an alphabetized then chronological reference list. Cite datasets and replication packages where relevant. - Submit as a **single PDF** including appendices (verified 2026-06-20). Equations numbered and referenced as "equation (3)." - Abstract: state the question, what you do, the headline magnitude, and the broad implication. The accepted-author guide caps the abstract at **100 words**, so keep it concise. - JEL classification codes and keywords are requested at submission via Editorial Express. - Accepted-author metadata asks for a short title of **40 characters or fewer** and keywords of **20 characters or fewer each**. - Acknowledge all sources of research funding in the manuscript (EJ requirement). ## Checklist - [ ] Each paragraph advances the economic argument; throat-clearing removed - [ ] Results stated plainly with magnitudes, hedging reserved for real uncertainty - [ ] Economics stated before method in every key passage - [ ] Written for a generalist — subfield jargon defined or removed - [ ] Every equation has a sentence of economic interpretation - [ ] Citations are author-date and consistent; reference list complete - [ ] Conclusion states the portable economic lesson, not a table-by-table recap - [ ] Funding acknowledged; JEL codes and keywords prepared - [ ] (Short paper) within the word/exhibit budget - [ ] Abstract <=100 words; short title and keywords within accepted-author limits ## Anti-patterns - Hedged, passive prose that obscures a result the evidence actually supports - Method-first writing that makes the reader hunt for the economics - Writing for the subfield — unexplained jargon that a generalist cannot follow (EJ's core failure mode) - Equations dropped in with no verbal economic interpretation - A conclusion that recaps every table instead of stating what was learned - Padding a short paper past its budget, or starving a full-length argument of needed exposition ## Output format ``` 【Voice】economics-first, generalist-legible, unhedged where warranted? [y/n + fixes] 【Hedging removed】list of softened claims tightened 【Jargon】defined/removed for a generalist? [y/n] 【Equations interpreted】all have prose meaning? [y/n] 【Citation style】author-date; references alphabetical/chronological; data citations included? 【Length mode】full-length / short paper (budget respected? [y/n]) 【Conclusion】states portable lesson? [y/n] 【Next】ecj-referee-strategy ```