Bjps Writing Style

---
name: bjps-writing-style
description: Use when drafting or polishing a British Journal of Political Science (BJPS) manuscript so it reads for a broad, international political-science audience, follows Cambridge's house (Harvard author-date) style, and fits the word caps (Research Articles ~10,000 words; Letters ~4,000; abstract <= 150 words). Tightens prose and format; it does not invent content.
---

# Writing Style (bjps-writing-style)

A BJPS paper must be readable by a political scientist outside its subfield and outside its country of
study, formatted to **Cambridge's house style** (Harvard author-date referencing), and disciplined to
the word cap. This skill is about reaching a broad, international readership and respecting the format
— not about generating claims.

## When to trigger

- Drafting the introduction, framing the contribution, or final polish
- Over the word cap and needing to cut without losing the argument
- Writing the **≤ 150-word abstract**
- Aligning citations/headings/format to Cambridge's house style before submission

## Reach the broad, international reader

1. **Front-load the contribution.** By the end of the introduction the reader knows the question, the
   argument, the evidence, and why it matters to political science broadly. Don't make a generalist
   dig for the "so what."
2. **Don't assume the country context.** A reader unfamiliar with your case should follow the paper;
   gloss country-specific institutions and acronyms on first use.
3. **Minimize subfield jargon** or define it on first use; an IR reader should follow a behaviour paper.
4. **Argument-first prose.** Lead with claims; use evidence to support them. Avoid "the data show…"
   without saying what they show and why it matters.
5. **Signpost.** Clear section structure so a reader can navigate the argument.

## Format to Cambridge house style

- **Citations**: **Harvard author-date** in text (e.g., `(Elster 1983, 174)`); reference list with the
  Cambridge format (`Elster J (1983) Explaining Technical Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.`).
  Keep one consistent style (manage with Zotero/BibTeX). References excluded from the word count.
- **Manuscript prep**: double spacing, ≥ 12-point type, generous margins; accepted in **MS Word or
  LaTeX** (待核实 current specifics).
- **Anonymize**: BJPS is **double-blind** — no author names/affiliations/acknowledgments or funding
  notes in the manuscript, no obvious self-references ("as we showed in…"), strip identifying file
  metadata, and prepare a separate title page.
- **Abstract**: **≤ 150 words**, stating question, approach, and finding.

## Fit the word cap (Research Article ~10,000; Letter ~4,000; caps 待核实)

- Move balance tables, full specs, and extended robustness to the **online appendix**.
- Cut throat-clearing and literature dumps; engage the debate, not every paper (see
  `bjps-literature-positioning`).
- Tighten footnotes — keep them substantive.
- Prefer one decisive figure to three redundant tables.

## Anti-patterns

- A subfield- or country-insider intro that never states wide significance
- Burying the contribution in the middle of the paper
- An abstract over 150 words or one that hides the finding
- Mixed citation styles; acknowledgments or self-references that break anonymity
- Padding a Letter toward Article length

## Output format

```
【Contribution stated by end of intro?】[Y/N]
【Reads past subfield + country?】jargon/institutions glossed? [Y/N]
【Abstract】word count (≤150)
【Word count】Article ~10,000 / Letter ~4,000?
【Harvard author-date + anonymized】[Y/N]
【Next】bjps-transparency-and-data
```

## Writing for two readers at once (BJPS-specific)

Every paragraph in the introduction has two readers: the specialist who knows the frontier, and the
generalist from another subfield or country who must be told why it matters. Satisfy both — name the
frontier *and* the broad stake. A common failure is writing only for the specialist (the paper reads as
parochial) or only for the generalist (the paper reads as thin). The fix is the wide-interest sentence
early, followed by the precise contribution against the literature.

## Calibration anchors (hedged)

- BJPS is **international**: do not assume the reader knows your country's institutions, parties, or
  acronyms — gloss them on first use without padding the word count.
- House style is **Harvard author-date**, not APSA or Chicago-generic; keep one consistent style, and
  remember references are excluded from the word count while footnotes and exhibits are not (待核实 exact
  counting rule on the live page).

## Supplementary resources

- [`../../resources/worked-examples/01-introduction.md`](../../resources/worked-examples/01-introduction.md) — a before→after BJPS-style introduction
- [`../../resources/official-source-map.md`](../../resources/official-source-map.md) — word/abstract caps, Cambridge house style, anonymity