Use when polishing prose, abstract, and introduction for a Quarterly Journal of Economics (QJE) manuscript so the big idea lands fast for a general-interest reader. Reflects QJE's house style — long, ambitious, narrative-driven empirical papers. Polishes exposition; it does not change results or design.
Scanned 6/6/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill qje-writing-style --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Qje Writing Style?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/brycewang-stanford-qje-writing-style)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: qje-writing-style
description: Use when polishing prose, abstract, and introduction for a Quarterly Journal of Economics (QJE) manuscript so the big idea lands fast for a general-interest reader. Reflects QJE's house style — long, ambitious, narrative-driven empirical papers. Polishes exposition; it does not change results or design.
---
# Writing Style (qje-writing-style)
## When to trigger
- The prose buries the idea; a reader cannot find the contribution quickly
- The abstract does not state the finding, or leads with method
- The introduction wanders before reaching the question and the result
- Sentences are technical-jargon-dense for a general-interest audience
## QJE house style: ambitious, narrative, long
QJE is read across all of economics, and its papers are characteristically **long, narrative-driven, and ambitious** — there is **no hard page limit**, and an extensive online appendix is the norm. That freedom is a trap: the *body* must still make a **big idea legible to a smart non-specialist** in the first two pages, with the heavy machinery pushed to the appendix. The model is the canonical QJE empirical-micro paper (e.g., Chetty, Hendren, Kline & Saez on mobility, QJE 2014): a sharp question stated plainly, a clean source of variation, a memorable headline number, and a broad lesson — all before the reader hits the data section. Format facts that shape the writing: the **abstract is short (~150 words)**, citations are **author-date (Chicago)**, and double-blind review means the prose must not out the authors. Late-stage skill: only polish once identification and results are settled.
## The introduction arc (QJE template)
1. **The question** — one or two sentences, plain language, stakes clear.
2. **Why it is hard** — the identification problem that has blocked a clean answer.
3. **The setting & variation** — the natural experiment / data that solves it, in one paragraph.
4. **The headline result** — the number, with units, stated early and memorably.
5. **Interpretation & mechanism** — what it means; the conceptual frame in a sentence.
6. **Contribution & broad lesson** — placement in the literature + "beyond this setting."
7. **Roadmap** — brief; do not over-signpost.
## Abstract: state the finding (keep it ~150 words)
- Open with the question and the design in one breath, then **state the result with a number**.
- Close with the broad lesson. No throat-clearing, no "this paper studies the important issue of."
- Keep it to roughly the QJE abstract length (~150 words); a general-interest reader should know what you found from the abstract alone.
## Sentence-level craft
- Active voice; short declaratives for the key claims.
- Define notation once; do not make the reader hold five symbols to parse a sentence.
- Quantify ("raises earnings by 8%") rather than vague intensifiers ("substantially affects").
- Hedge only where the evidence requires it; calibrated confidence reads as competence.
- The license to write long is not a license to wander — every long stretch should earn its place, with technical detail relocated to the online appendix.
## Checklist
- [ ] Abstract states the actual finding with a number, not just the topic, and is ~150 words
- [ ] The question is on page one in plain language
- [ ] The headline result appears early in the introduction, with units
- [ ] The broad lesson ("beyond this setting") is explicit
- [ ] Jargon minimized; a non-specialist top-5 reader can follow the intro
- [ ] Claims are quantified, not vaguely intensified
- [ ] Author-date (Chicago) citations; numbers and units consistent throughout
## Anti-patterns
- An abstract that describes the topic but never states the result (or runs well past ~150 words)
- Leading the intro with method ("We use a Sun–Abraham estimator ...") instead of the question
- "This paper is the first to study the important question of ..." throat-clearing
- Using QJE's no-page-limit freedom to ramble instead of relocating detail to the appendix
- Vague magnitude language ("significantly", "substantially") with no number
- Notation overload in the introduction
## Output format
```
【Abstract verdict】states finding+number, ~150 words? [Y/N] — fix: ...
【Intro arc】question / hardness / variation / result / interpretation / contribution present? [Y/N each]
【Headline number in intro】present + units? [Y/N]
【Broad lesson stated】[Y/N]
【Jargon flags】[...]
【Next step】qje-replication-package or qje-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!