---
name: apsr-writing-style
description: Use when drafting or polishing an American Political Science Review (APSR) manuscript so it reads for the whole discipline, follows the APSA Style Manual, and fits the word caps (most Articles < 11,000 words; Research Notes < 7,000; abstract <= 150 words). Tightens prose and format; it does not invent content.
---

# Writing Style (apsr-writing-style)

An APSR paper must be readable by a political scientist outside its subfield, formatted to the **APSA
Style Manual for Political Science**, and disciplined to the word cap. This skill is about reaching the
discipline 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 APSA style before submission

## Reach the whole discipline

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. **Minimize subfield jargon** or define it on first use; an IR reader should follow an Americanist
   paper. Spell out acronyms.
3. **Argument-first prose.** Lead with claims; use evidence to support them. Avoid "the data show…"
   without saying what they show and why it matters.
4. **Signpost.** Clear section structure so a reader can navigate the argument.

## Format to APSA style

- **Citations**: author-date per the APSA Style Manual; keep one consistent style (manage with
  Zotero/BibTeX). References excluded from the word count.
- **Front page**: include the **word count**; corresponding author has an **ORCID iD**.
- **Anonymize**: APSR is **double-anonymous** — no author names/affiliations/acknowledgments in the
  manuscript, no obvious self-references ("as we showed in…"), strip identifying file metadata.
- **Abstract**: **≤ 150 words**, stating question, approach, and finding.

## Fit the word cap (counts include tables/figures/footnotes; excludes references + appendices)

- 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
  `apsr-literature-positioning`).
- Tighten footnotes — they count toward the limit.
- Prefer one decisive figure to three redundant tables.

## Anti-patterns

- A subfield-insider intro that never states general 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 Research Note toward Article length

## Output format

```
【Contribution stated by end of intro?】[Y/N]
【Reads past the subfield?】jargon defined / acronyms spelled? [Y/N]
【Abstract】word count (≤150)
【Word count】articles <11,000 / notes <7,000 (incl. tables/figures/footnotes)?
【APSA style + anonymized + ORCID】[Y/N]
【Next】apsr-transparency-and-data-policy
```

## Supplementary resources

- [`../../resources/official-source-map.md`](../../resources/official-source-map.md) — word/abstract caps, APSA Style Manual, ORCID, anonymity