Use when drafting or polishing a Public Opinion Quarterly (POQ) manuscript so it reads for a public-opinion and survey-methodology audience and fits the type caps (Original Article ≤ 6,500 words of text and notes; Research Note < 3,000; Polls in Context ≤ 2,500). POQ word counts cover text and notes but exclude figures, tables, references, and appendices. Tightens prose and format; it does not invent content.
Scanned 6/6/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill poq-writing-style --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Poq Writing Style?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/brycewang-stanford-poq-writing-style)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: poq-writing-style
description: Use when drafting or polishing a Public Opinion Quarterly (POQ) manuscript so it reads for a public-opinion and survey-methodology audience and fits the type caps (Original Article ≤ 6,500 words of text and notes; Research Note < 3,000; Polls in Context ≤ 2,500). POQ word counts cover text and notes but exclude figures, tables, references, and appendices. Tightens prose and format; it does not invent content.
---
# Writing Style (poq-writing-style)
A POQ paper must be readable by both substantive opinion scholars and survey methodologists, and
disciplined to the cap for its type. The word count covers **text and notes** but **excludes figures,
tables, references, and appendices** — so the AAPOR disclosure appendix and exhibits do not count
against you. This skill is about reaching the POQ audience and respecting format — not 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 abstract (confirm the current requirement — 待核实 on exact cap)
- Aligning citations and format before submission
## Reach the POQ audience
1. **Front-load the contribution.** By the end of the introduction the reader knows the question, the
data, the finding, and whether the contribution is to **opinion theory, current opinion, or survey
validity**. Do not bury the "so what."
2. **Name the methodological move plainly.** State the survey design and the error source you address;
POQ readers expect to see coverage/nonresponse/wording/mode/weighting handled, not glossed.
3. **Define jargon on first use.** A communication scholar should follow a methods paper and vice
versa; spell out acronyms (AAPOR, TSE, RR, DEFF, AMCE, MRP) on first appearance.
4. **Argument-first prose.** Lead with claims; use design-based evidence to support them. Avoid "the
data show…" without saying what they show and why it matters.
## Format & front matter
- **Citations**: keep one consistent reference style (manage with Zotero/BibTeX); references excluded
from the word count.
- **Disclosure**: ensure the **"Appendix A: Disclosure Elements"** is present and referenced (see
`poq-survey-design-and-measurement`); it does not count toward the cap.
- **Anonymize**: POQ is **double-blind** — no author names/affiliations/acknowledgments in the
manuscript, no obvious self-references, strip identifying file metadata.
- **Data Availability Statement**: plan the DAS for the endmatter (see `poq-transparency-and-data-policy`).
## Fit the type cap (text + notes; excludes figures, tables, references, appendices)
- Move detailed methods, full specifications, and extended robustness to **appendices** (excluded).
- Cut throat-clearing and literature dumps; engage the debate, not every paper (see
`poq-literature-positioning`).
- Tighten footnotes — they **count** toward the limit (notes are in the cap).
- Prefer one decisive trend figure to three redundant tables.
## Anti-patterns
- An intro that never states whether the contribution is to opinion or to survey methods
- Burying the methodological move (how error was handled) deep in the paper
- Padding a Research Note (< 3,000) or Polls in Context (≤ 2,500) toward Article length
- Acknowledgments or self-references that break double-blind anonymity
- Putting disclosable methods in long footnotes (which count) instead of Appendix A (which does not)
## Output format
```
【Contribution stated by end of intro?】opinion / current-opinion / survey-validity [Y/N]
【Methodological move named?】error source + design plain? [Y/N]
【Abstract】present + within current requirement (待核实)
【Word count】Article ≤6,500 / Note <3,000 / Polls ≤2,500 (text + notes)?
【Anonymized + DAS planned + Appendix A referenced】[Y/N]
【Next】poq-transparency-and-data-policy
```
## Supplementary resources
- [`../../resources/external_tools.md`](../../resources/external_tools.md) — reference managers and writing tooling
- [`../../resources/official-source-map.md`](../../resources/official-source-map.md) — type caps, what the word count includes, double-blind anonymity
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!