Writing Style (ajps-writing-style)

An AJPS paper must be tightly argued, formatted to one accepted style, disciplined to the word cap, and fully anonymized for double-blind review. This skill is about clarity, format, and the AJPS-specific counting rules — 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/format to APSA or Chicago style before submission

Write tight and lead with the contribution

1. Front-load the contribution. By the end of the introduction the reader knows the question, the

argument, the design, the finding, and why it matters. Do not bury the "so what."

1. Argument-first prose. Lead with claims; use evidence to support them. Avoid "the data show..."

without saying what they show and why it matters.

1. Reach a broad readership. AJPS spans subfields; define niche jargon on first use and spell out

acronyms.

1. Signpost. Clear section structure so a reader can navigate the argument.

Format and the AJPS word-count rule

• Style: APSA Style Manual for Political Science (rev. 2018, updated 2023) or Chicago

Manual of Style (18th ed.) — pick one and apply it consistently; references use authors' full first and last names. Double-spaced, 12-point, >= one-inch margins.

• Abstract: <= 150 words, covering background, hypotheses, methodological approach, findings,

and conclusions.

• Word count (put it on the title page along with the abstract): includes the main body, notes,

parenthetical references, print appendices, and table/figure headers and notes; excludes the title page, abstract, reference list, online Supporting Information, and mathematical notation.

• Articles <= 10,000; Research Notes and Correspondence <= 4,000.

Stay double-blind in the prose

• No author names, affiliations, acknowledgments, funding statements, or conference mentions in the

manuscript.

• Third-person self-citation only — never "as we showed" / "in our prior work."
• Put the abstract and word count on the title page; the manuscript file itself stays anonymous.

Fit the word cap

• Move balance tables, full specs, and extended robustness to the Supporting Information (<= 25 pp for original submissions).
• Tighten footnotes and exhibit notes — they count toward the limit.
• Cut throat-clearing and the literature dump; engage the debate, not every paper (see

ajps-literature-positioning).

Word-budget triage table (where to cut first at AJPS)

| If over the cap... | Cut/move here first | Why it works at AJPS | |--------------------|---------------------|----------------------| | Long literature section | Engage the debate, drop the citation pile | Generalist readership wants the argument, not a survey | | Robustness grids in body | Move to SI (<= 25 pp for original submissions) | SI is excluded from the word count | | Bloated exhibit notes / throat-clearing intro | Tighten notes; front-load the contribution | Headers and notes count; reviewers reward an early "so what" |

Worked micro-example (illustrative)

A first draft runs 11,300 words against the 10,000 cap for an Article (illustrative). The fix: a three-paragraph literature dump collapses into one debate-framing paragraph (-600), two robustness tables move to the SI (-500), and footnotes tighten (-200). The intro is rewritten so its last sentence gives the reader the question, design, finding, and stakes. A self-cite "as we showed in 2021" becomes a third-person citation. Final body lands near 9,900 words, abstract at 138 (illustrative).

Referee-pushback patterns and the venue-specific fix

• "The contribution is buried." -> State the question, argument, design, and finding by the end of the

introduction; AJPS reviewers expect the payoff up front.

• "References mix styles / use last-name-plus-initial." -> Pick APSA or Chicago 18th and apply it

consistently with full first and last names; spell out acronyms for the cross-subfield AJPS audience.

Calibration anchor: AJPS caps Articles at 10,000 words and the abstract at 150, counting notes and exhibit captions but excluding the reference list and online SI; confirm the exact caps and accepted style against the journal's current guidelines.

Anti-patterns

• An abstract over 150 words or one that hides the finding
• Burying the contribution in the middle of the paper
• Mixing APSA and Chicago styles, or last-name-plus-initial references
• Acknowledgments, funding lines, or first-person self-references that break anonymity
• Letting exhibit notes and footnotes silently push the paper over the cap

Output format

【Contribution stated by end of intro?】[Y/N]
【Abstract】word count (<=150), states finding?
【Word count】Article <=10,000 / Note|Correspondence <=4,000 (incl. notes + table/figure captions)?
【Style】APSA or Chicago 18th, applied consistently? full names in refs?
【Anonymized】no names/affiliations/acknowledgments/funding; third-person self-cites? [Y/N]
【Next】ajps-replication-and-verification

Supplementary resources

• ../../resources/official-source-map.md — word/abstract caps, APSA-or-Chicago style, anonymizing rules