Writing Style (apsr-writing-style)

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.

The flagship register: write for four subfields at once

APSR's readership spans Americanists, comparativists, IR scholars, and political theorists — and the reviewer set will likely cross those lines. A sentence that is efficient shorthand inside one subfield is a stall for the other three. Concrete moves:

• Translate the stakes once. After stating the question in subfield terms, add one sentence recasting it as a general problem of politics — representation, accountability, coalition formation, legitimacy, institutional change. That sentence is what an outside-subfield reviewer quotes back to justify sending the paper out.
• Name the political object, not the dataset. "Legislators facing re-election" travels; "respondents in wave 4" does not.
• Let the prose carry the mechanism. Empirical sections should read as the argument advancing, not as output being narrated. Under an 11,000-word cap, any paragraph that could vanish without weakening the argument belongs in the online appendix.