Loading skill
Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →brycewang-stanford/cscw-writing-style
Use when drafting or revising CSCW prose — group-level framing, concepts a field can reuse, participant voice handled with care, theory that earns its keep, and length discipline under the 5,000-12,000-word scrutiny band where contribution is weighed against every page.
Passed 16 of 22 test cases with the skill, and 9 of 22 without it.
and 6 more in the full report
7 fixed9 passed either way6 still failing0 broke
Tokens, turns and time describe resource use, not a dollar price.
One of 7 test cases the skill fixed. Same model, same prompt, with and without the skill.
I am preparing a manuscript for CSCW and would like you to review my draft's introduction and claim sentences. Please evaluate whether my writing effectively frames findings around collective and organizational dynamics rather than individual user behavior, check if my theoretical concepts and quotes are integrated well, and run a structural audit on the opening page.
| Checked | Without skill | With skill |
|---|---|---|
| Evaluates whether the second paragraph states what breaks if the domain is misunderstood rather than claiming little is known. | Missed | Passed |
| Evaluates whether consent posture appears by the end of the introduction. | Missed | Passed |
| Checks whether the subject of the opening claim sentence is a collective entity rather than an individual. | Missed | Passed |
The instructions your model reads when the skill loads.
A CSCW paper is judged by readers from several intellectual traditions at once — ethnographers, statisticians, system builders, social theorists — inside a journal process where the same reviewers may read the paper twice. The prose must therefore do two unusual things: make each tradition's part legible to the others, and hold up under a second, more skeptical read during Revise and Resubmit.
CSCW imposes no formal page limit. The 2026-cycle CFP instead put weight on a band: papers under roughly 5,000 words or over roughly 12,000 words attract extra scrutiny, and a paper whose length is incommensurate with its contribution can be desk rejected. Treat length as a claim you are making: every additional section asserts that the contribution needs it. Practical calibration:
The single most common style failure at this venue is drift back to the individual user. Audit every claim sentence:
| Drifted (individual) | Anchored (collective) |
|---|---|
| "Users struggled to trust the bot's suggestions" | "Teams routed the bot's suggestions through a senior member before acting on them" |
| "Participants felt burnout" | "The moderation team rotated exposure to harmful content to distribute burnout" |
| "People adopted the feature" | "The community renegotiated its norms around what the feature made visible" |
| "The tool improved efficiency" | "The tool redistributed articulation work from editors to contributors" |
If a finding cannot be written in the right-hand register, either the analysis
stopped too early or the paper belongs at a different venue (cscw-topic-selection).
test cases passed, vs 9 / 22 without
Published skills whose descriptions closely match this one, with their headline benchmark lift.
More skills from the same source and nearby in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.