Use when revising prose, the abstract, or the introduction of an American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics (AEJ: Macro) manuscript for AEA house style and the broad-interest macro arc. Late-stage polish on framing and clarity; it does not fix identification, the model, or exhibits.
Scanned 9/5/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill aejmac-writing-style --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Aejmac Writing Style?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/brycewang-stanford-aejmac-writing-style)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: aejmac-writing-style
description: Use when revising prose, the abstract, or the introduction of an American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics (AEJ: Macro) manuscript for AEA house style and the broad-interest macro arc. Late-stage polish on framing and clarity; it does not fix identification, the model, or exhibits.
---
# Writing Style (aejmac-writing-style)
## When to trigger
- The introduction leads with the model block or the estimator, not the macro question
- The abstract is over 100 words or buries the headline quantity
- A general macroeconomist cannot tell from page 1 what is measured and why it matters
- The prose is technically correct but the idea does not land
## The AEJ: Macro writing bar
AEJ: Macro is **broad-interest**, so the writing must make the macro question and the headline quantity legible to a *general* macroeconomist early — before the DSGE notation or the SVAR machinery. Follow **AEA house style** (active voice, plain prose, quantities with units, standard errors / bands reported). The hard constraint to design around: the **abstract is ≤100 words** (检索于 2026-06;以官网为准) — far tighter than most economics journals — so every word in it must earn its place.
## The AEJ: Macro introduction arc
1. **The macro question + headline quantity, in the first breath.** "How much does a monetary tightening lower output?" — then the number with units and uncertainty, e.g., "we find a 100 bp shock lowers output by 0.6% (90% band [0.2, 1.0]) at its peak."
2. **Why it is hard.** The identification or quantification obstacle (anticipation, simultaneity, short samples; or what disciplines the model).
3. **The approach.** Data + design (SVAR/LP/narrative) and/or model (DSGE/HANK) — in one paragraph, after the question, not before it.
4. **The result restated with mechanism and uncertainty.** What drives the number; carry the band into any counterfactual.
5. **Contribution + lesson with scope.** What general macroeconomists learn; where it holds and where it does not.
6. **Brief roadmap.** One or two sentences, not a section-by-section recital.
## The ≤100-word abstract
- Sentence 1: the macro question.
- Sentence 2–3: the approach (one clause) and the **headline quantity with uncertainty**.
- Sentence 4: the mechanism or policy lesson.
- Cut: literature, method jargon, signposting. At ≤100 words there is no room for throat-clearing.
## Prose discipline
- **Quantities, not adjectives.** "Large" → "0.6% at peak." Report SEs/bands in the sentence where the number appears.
- **Active voice, short sentences.** AEA house style favors plain prose.
- **Define before you deploy** notation; minimize symbols in the intro.
- **One idea per paragraph**; topic sentence first.
- **Policy relevance stated, not implied** — AEJ: Macro readers want the decision-relevant takeaway.
## Checklist
- [ ] Abstract ≤100 words, with the headline quantity and its uncertainty
- [ ] First paragraph states the macro question and the number (units + band/SE)
- [ ] Approach appears after the question, not before it
- [ ] Mechanism and scope/limits stated; no over-claiming
- [ ] Active voice, AEA plain style; quantities not adjectives
- [ ] Roadmap is one or two sentences
- [ ] A general macroeconomist could state your contribution after reading page 1
## Anti-patterns
- Leading the intro with the model's equations or the estimator (reads as a field/methods paper)
- An abstract over 100 words, or one with no number in it
- "Significant effects" with no point estimate or band in the abstract/intro
- Over-signposted roadmap doing the argument's job
- Subfield jargon on page 1 that a general macro reader cannot parse
- Burying the policy lesson in the conclusion
## Worked vignette: before → after first sentence (illustrative)
- **Before:** "We build a medium-scale New Keynesian DSGE model with financial frictions and estimate it by Bayesian methods to study monetary transmission." (machinery first; no question, no number)
- **After:** "How much of a recession does a surprise monetary tightening cause, and through which channel? Using high-frequency policy surprises in a proxy-VAR, we find a 100 bp shock lowers output by 0.6% (90% band [0.2, 1.0]) at its peak, two-thirds of it through investment." (question + quantity + uncertainty + mechanism, in the first breath)
> For a full before→after introduction in AEJ: Macro house style, see [`../../resources/worked-examples/01-introduction.md`](../../resources/worked-examples/01-introduction.md).
## Output format
```
【Abstract word count】 ≤100? [Y/N] (current: __)
【First-paragraph test】question + quantity + uncertainty present? [Y/N]
【Arc】question → why hard → approach → result+mechanism → contribution+scope → roadmap? [Y/N]
【Style】active voice, quantities-not-adjectives, SEs/bands in sentences? [Y/N]
【Next step】aejmac-replication-package
```
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!