Agent Skills
› brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
› popdevr-writing-style
popdevr-writing-style
GitHub用于起草或润色《人口与发展评论》(PDR) 稿件，确保文风清晰、具论说性且面向跨学科读者。协助精简篇幅以符合字数规范，统一引用格式（APA），并执行双盲评审所需的匿名化处理，不生成新内容。
Trigger Scenarios
起草引言、框架贡献或最终润色
文章超字数需精简而不失论点
撰写摘要及选择关键词
提交前对齐期刊格式与引用规范
Install
npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill popdevr-writing-style -g -y
SKILL.md
Frontmatter
{
"name": "popdevr-writing-style",
"description": "Use when drafting or polishing a Population and Development Review (PDR, Wiley \/ Population Council) manuscript so it reads for a broad demography-and-development audience, follows the journal's house conventions (APA-style references; Free Format first round), and fits typical length norms (Research Articles ~8,000–10,000 words). PDR prizes lucid, essayistic prose. Tightens prose and format; it does not invent content."
}
Writing Style (popdevr-writing-style)
A PDR paper must be readable by an economist, an environmental scholar, and a policy reader as well as a demographer, and it should carry the lucid, essayistic register PDR is known for — argument-driven, not just results-reporting. This skill is about reaching a broad readership and respecting the format — not about generating claims.
When to trigger
- Drafting the introduction, framing the contribution, or final polish
- Over typical length and needing to cut without losing the argument
- Writing the abstract and selecting keywords
- Aligning citations and format to the journal's house conventions before submission
Reach a broad population-and-development readership
- Front-load the contribution. By the end of the introduction the reader knows the population question, the development/policy stakes, the data and method, the finding, and why it matters across fields. Don't make an economist dig for the "so what."
- Define field-specific jargon on first use; a development reader should follow a formal-demography argument, and a demographer should follow the development claim. Spell out acronyms and data sources.
- Quantity-first, meaning-second prose. Lead with the demographic quantity and its magnitude (a change in TFR, a life-expectancy gap, a net flow), then interpret it for development/policy. Avoid "the model shows…" without saying what changed and by how much.
- Honor the essay tradition. PDR rewards an argument that reads as a sustained essay — clear thesis, ideas carried through, prose that explains rather than merely reports. Synthetic pieces especially should be a pleasure to read, not a catalog.
- Signpost lightly. Clear structure (question → evidence → meaning) without mechanical roadmaps.
Format to the house conventions (verify current details on the Wiley author page)
- Free Format first round. PDR offers Free Format submission: references may be in any consistent style for the first round, and strict formatting is deferred to revision. Keep one consistent style throughout (manage with Zotero/BibTeX). 待核实 the current Free Format scope.
- House reference style. PDR's house style is APA-style (author–date); apply it at revision.
- Abstract & keywords. Include a concise abstract and keywords; confirm the current abstract word limit on the author page. 待核实.
- Anonymize. Review is double-anonymized — remove all identifying information about all
co-authors; avoid self-identifying references ("as we showed in…") and strip identifying file metadata
(see
popdevr-submission).
Fit the length norms
- Research Articles are typically ~8,000–10,000 words; Notes & Commentary are much shorter. Treat these as norms (confirm any portal cap on the author page). 待核实.
- Move full life tables, sensitivity grids, and extended results to the supporting information.
- Cut throat-clearing and literature dumps; engage the population-and-development conversation, not every
paper (see
popdevr-literature-positioning). - Prefer one decisive figure (an age schedule, a projection fan) to three redundant tables.
Anti-patterns
- An insider intro that never states the cross-field, population-and-development stakes
- Burying the contribution in the middle of the paper
- Catalog prose where PDR expects a sustained argument or essay
- Mixed citation styles; self-references that break double-anonymized review
- Padding a Note toward Article length
Calibration anchor: write the population–development connection, not the bare estimate
PDR, the Population Council's quarterly published by Wiley, reads as a PDR paper when the prose names a population process, its development meaning, and the quantity that links them. Two illustrative rewrites (language invented to show the move):
| Drafted as a bare estimate | Rewritten as a population–development claim |
|---|---|
| "Schooling is associated with lower fertility (−0.4 births)." | "A one-level rise in female schooling lowers completed fertility by ~0.4 births, enough to bring this cohort below replacement and open a two-decade demographic-dividend window (illustrative)." |
| "Urbanization correlates with emissions." | "Rural-to-urban migration raises per-capita emissions in the short run but, by accelerating the fertility transition, lowers projected population-driven emissions by mid-century (illustrative)." |
The left column could appear in any applied journal; the right column states the population quantity, its development consequence, and the time horizon a PDR reader expects.
Referee-pushback patterns and the writing fix
- "This reads like a clean applied estimate that happens to use population data." -> Lead the abstract and intro with the population question and its development/policy stakes, not the coefficient.
- "A non-demographer could not follow the argument." -> Define field terms (TFR, tempo/quantum, dependency ratio) on first use; spell out every data-source acronym.
- "The development meaning is stated only in the conclusion." -> Move the cross-field "so what" sentence into the first paragraph.
- "The essay catalogs the literature instead of arguing." -> Restructure around a thesis carried through the prose; cut summary that does not advance the argument.
Output format
【Contribution + development stakes stated by end of intro?】[Y/N]
【Reads across fields?】jargon defined / acronyms + data sources spelled? [Y/N]
【Abstract + keywords】present, within limits (待核实)? [Y/N]
【Word count】Article ~8,000–10,000 / Note short — within norm? [Y/N]
【House conventions + anonymized】APA-style (at revision) + Free Format + no self-ID refs? [Y/N]
【Next】popdevr-transparency-and-data
Supplementary resources
../../resources/official-source-map.md— length norms, abstract/keywords, Free Format, house style, double-anonymized review
Version History
- 1839142 Current 2026-07-05 14:13
