Writing Style (jeea-writing-style)

When to trigger

• The abstract or intro buries the question and the answer
• A general-interest reader cannot tell what the paper establishes by the end of page one
• The intro leads with machinery (the estimator or the model's solver) instead of the question
• Prose is correct but the lesson does not travel

The JEEA writing bar

JEEA is general interest, so the writing must make both the substantive question and the result legible early to an economist outside the subfield. The introduction arc that works: question → why it is hard (clean identification needed, or a disciplined model) → approach → headline result with its uncertainty → mechanism → contribution & lesson → brief roadmap. Two house rules: the headline estimate appears early with units and a standard error / confidence set, never a significance asterisk, and the abstract is short and answer-first (state the finding, not just the topic). This is a late-stage polish — write the intro last, after identification, the model, and robustness have settled.

The introduction arc

1. Question first. A non-specialist economist should grasp the question in the first sentence — not the estimator, not the solver.
2. Why it is hard. The obstacle (identification, or a tension a model resolves) in one or two sentences.
3. Approach. Data + design, or the model, in a paragraph — legible to a generalist.
4. Headline result with uncertainty. The number, with units and a standard error / confidence set, in the first breath (no asterisks).
5. Mechanism. Why the result holds, in words.
6. Contribution & lesson. What is new and what travels beyond the setting; state the scope limit.
7. Brief roadmap. One or two sentences, not a section-by-section recital.

Prose discipline

• Answer-first abstract. Lead with the finding and the lesson, not "this paper studies…".
• Plain economic English. Define notation when first used; keep the intuition in words alongside the math.
• Cut throat-clearing ("has been studied extensively"); every sentence in the intro should advance the argument.
• Calibrated claims. State what the paper does and does not establish; over-claiming is punished by general-interest referees.
• No significance asterisks in the prose — write the magnitude and its standard error into the sentence.

Checklist

• First paragraph states the question + the headline result + its uncertainty (no asterisks)
• Both substance and approach are legible to a non-specialist by end of page one
• Abstract is answer-first and concise
• Intro arc complete: question → hardness → approach → result → mechanism → contribution → roadmap
• Claims calibrated; scope limit stated
• Intro written last, after the analysis settled

Abstract craft

The abstract is the co-editor's first (and sometimes only) read, so it must do the general-interest work:

1. Sentence 1 — the question, in plain language a non-specialist grasps.
2. Sentence 2 — the approach, in a phrase (design or model), not jargon.
3. Sentence 3 — the headline finding with its magnitude (and, where natural, its uncertainty) — the answer, not the topic.
4. Sentence 4 — the lesson/contribution that travels beyond the setting.

Avoid "this paper studies / examines / investigates" openings; lead with what you found. Keep it within the JEEA author-guideline length (confirm on the live OUP page).

Worked vignette (illustrative)

A draft abstract reads: "This paper studies the relationship between trade exposure and local labor markets using regional data and a fixed-effects approach." It names the topic and the method but never the finding. The JEEA-grade rewrite: "Does import competition cost local jobs, or just reshuffle them? Using a region's pre-existing industry mix as exposure, we find a 10 percentage-point rise in import penetration lowers manufacturing employment by 2.4 points (s.e. 0.5) with no offsetting service-sector gain — so the adjustment is reallocation away from work, not across it." Question, approach, magnitude with uncertainty, and lesson, in four sentences, no asterisks.

Anti-patterns

• Leading the intro with the estimator or the model's solver instead of the question
• An abstract that names the topic but never states the finding
• "Significant at the 1% level (***)" anywhere — JEEA forbids significance asterisks; report the SE/CI
• Over-signposting ("Section 2… Section 3…") doing the work the argument should do
• Throat-clearing and a survey-style literature recital in the intro
• Over-claiming a general lesson the result does not support
• Jargon in the abstract that a non-specialist co-editor cannot parse

Output format

【Abstract】answer-first, finding stated? [Y/N]
【First paragraph】question + result + uncertainty (no asterisks)? [Y/N]
【Intro arc】question→hardness→approach→result→mechanism→contribution→roadmap? [Y/N]
【Claims】calibrated + scope limit? [Y/N]
【Next step】jeea-replication-package