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).
Scanned 9/5/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill ecj-writing-style --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Ecj Writing Style?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/brycewang-stanford-ecj-writing-style)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
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
```
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!