Writing Style (demog-writing-style)
A Demography paper must be readable by a demographer outside its component, formatted to the journal's
loosely APA house style, and disciplined to the word and front-matter limits. This skill is about
reaching population scientists 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 <= 200-word abstract, 3-5 highlights, or selecting <= 5 keywords
- Aligning citations/headings/format to the journal's house style before submission
Reach population science
- Front-load the contribution. By the end of the introduction the reader knows the population
question, the data and method, the finding, and why it matters for demography broadly. Don't make a
migration scholar dig for the "so what" in your fertility paper.
- Define component-specific jargon on first use; a mortality reader should follow a family-
demography paper. Spell out acronyms and data-source names.
- Quantity-first prose. Lead with the demographic quantity and its magnitude (a difference in e0,
a parity-progression ratio, a net flow), then interpret it. Avoid "the model shows…" without
saying what changed and by how much.
- Signpost. Clear section structure so a reader can follow data -> method -> result -> meaning.
Format to the house style
- References: loosely APA (author-date); keep one consistent style (manage with Zotero/BibTeX).
Articles recommend <= 75 references; Notes/Commentaries <= 15. References excluded from the
word count.
- Front matter: abstract <= 200 words; up to 5 keywords/phrases; 3-5 highlights, each a
complete sentence <= 85 characters including spaces.
- Spelling: Merriam-Webster conventions.
- Anonymize: review is double-blind — avoid self-identifying references ("as we showed in…")
and strip identifying file metadata (see
demog-submission).
Fit the limits (main-text counts exclude abstract, keywords, footnotes, acknowledgments, references)
- Move full life tables, sensitivity grids, and extended results to the online appendix.
- Cut throat-clearing and literature dumps; engage the demographic conversation, not every paper (see
demog-literature-positioning).
- Prefer one decisive figure (a Lexis surface, an age schedule) to three redundant tables.
- Keep within the table/figure limit (~8 for Articles, 4 for Notes — see
demog-tables-figures).
Anti-patterns
- A component-insider intro that never states general interest to demographers
- Burying the contribution in the middle of the paper
- An abstract over 200 words, or highlights that exceed 85 characters
- Mixed citation styles; self-references that break double-blind anonymity
- Padding a Research Note toward Article length
Calibration anchor: write the population process, not the association
Demography, the open-access flagship of the Population Association of America at Duke University Press,
reads as population science when the prose names a process — fertility, mortality, migration, family
formation, or compositional change — and the quantity that measures it. Two illustrative rewrites
(language invented to show the move):
| Drafted as a generic association |
Rewritten as a population process |
| "Education is associated with lower mortality (HR 0.78)." |
"Among women aged 50-69, the college-educated face ~22% lower age-specific death rates, widening the e0 gap by ~2.1 years (illustrative)." |
| "Migrants have higher fertility." |
"Newly arrived migrants show elevated period TFR, but a tempo correction suggests catch-up timing, not higher quantum (illustrative)." |
The left column could appear in any health or labor journal; the right column states the demographic
quantity, the population, and the age/period logic a demographer expects.
Referee-pushback patterns and the writing fix
- "This reads like an epidemiology paper that happens to use population data." -> Lead the abstract and
intro with the population question and the demographic quantity, not the regression coefficient.
- "A migration scholar could not follow the fertility argument." -> Define component-specific terms
(parity progression, ASFR, tempo/quantum) on first use; spell out every data-source acronym.
- "The contribution to population science is stated only in the conclusion." -> Move the "so what for
demography" sentence into the first paragraph; a Demography reader should not have to dig for it.
- "You report stars but never the magnitude." -> Lead with the demographic quantity and its size,
then interpret it.
Output format
【Contribution stated by end of intro?】[Y/N]
【Reads past the component?】jargon defined / acronyms + data sources spelled? [Y/N]
【Abstract】word count (<= 200); 【Highlights】3-5, each <= 85 chars?
【Keywords】<= 5?
【Word count】Article <= 8,000 / Note <= 4,000 / Commentary <= 2,000 (main text)?
【House style + anonymized】loosely APA + no self-ID refs? [Y/N]
【Next】demog-data-and-reproducibility
Supplementary resources
Source: brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills → Demography-Skills/skills/demog-writing-style/SKILL.md
1---2name: demog-writing-style3description: Use when drafting or polishing a Demography (PAA / Duke University Press) manuscript so it reads for population scientists across components, follows the journal's house style (loosely APA), and fits the limits (Research Articles <= 8,000 words main text; Notes <= 4,000; Commentaries <= 2,000; abstract <= 200 words; up to 5 keywords; 3-5 highlights). Tightens prose and format; it does not invent content.4---567# Writing Style (demog-writing-style)89A Demography paper must be readable by a demographer outside its component, formatted to the journal's10**loosely APA** house style, and disciplined to the word and front-matter limits. This skill is about11reaching population scientists and respecting the format — not about generating claims.1213## When to trigger1415- Drafting the introduction, framing the contribution, or final polish16- Over the word cap and needing to cut without losing the argument17- Writing the **<= 200-word abstract**, **3-5 highlights**, or selecting **<= 5 keywords**18- Aligning citations/headings/format to the journal's house style before submission1920## Reach population science21221. **Front-load the contribution.** By the end of the introduction the reader knows the population23 question, the data and method, the finding, and why it matters for demography broadly. Don't make a24 migration scholar dig for the "so what" in your fertility paper.252. **Define component-specific jargon** on first use; a mortality reader should follow a family-26 demography paper. Spell out acronyms and data-source names.273. **Quantity-first prose.** Lead with the demographic quantity and its magnitude (a difference in e0,28 a parity-progression ratio, a net flow), then interpret it. Avoid "the model shows…" without29 saying what changed and by how much.304. **Signpost.** Clear section structure so a reader can follow data -> method -> result -> meaning.3132## Format to the house style3334- **References**: **loosely APA** (author-date); keep one consistent style (manage with Zotero/BibTeX).35 Articles **recommend <= 75 references**; Notes/Commentaries **<= 15**. References excluded from the36 word count.37- **Front matter**: **abstract <= 200 words**; **up to 5 keywords/phrases**; **3-5 highlights**, each a38 complete sentence **<= 85 characters** including spaces.39- **Spelling**: Merriam-Webster conventions.40- **Anonymize**: review is **double-blind** — avoid self-identifying references ("as we showed in…")41 and strip identifying file metadata (see `demog-submission`).4243## Fit the limits (main-text counts exclude abstract, keywords, footnotes, acknowledgments, references)4445- Move full life tables, sensitivity grids, and extended results to the **online appendix**.46- Cut throat-clearing and literature dumps; engage the demographic conversation, not every paper (see47 `demog-literature-positioning`).48- Prefer one decisive figure (a Lexis surface, an age schedule) to three redundant tables.49- Keep within the **table/figure limit** (~8 for Articles, 4 for Notes — see `demog-tables-figures`).5051## Anti-patterns5253- A component-insider intro that never states general interest to demographers54- Burying the contribution in the middle of the paper55- An abstract over 200 words, or highlights that exceed 85 characters56- Mixed citation styles; self-references that break double-blind anonymity57- Padding a Research Note toward Article length5859## Calibration anchor: write the population process, not the association6061Demography, the open-access flagship of the Population Association of America at Duke University Press,62reads as population science when the prose names a *process* — fertility, mortality, migration, family63formation, or compositional change — and the quantity that measures it. Two illustrative rewrites64(language invented to show the move):6566| Drafted as a generic association | Rewritten as a population process |67|----------------------------------|-----------------------------------|68| "Education is associated with lower mortality (HR 0.78)." | "Among women aged 50-69, the college-educated face ~22% lower age-specific death rates, widening the e0 gap by ~2.1 years (illustrative)." |69| "Migrants have higher fertility." | "Newly arrived migrants show elevated period TFR, but a tempo correction suggests catch-up timing, not higher quantum (illustrative)." |7071The left column could appear in any health or labor journal; the right column states the demographic72quantity, the population, and the age/period logic a demographer expects.7374## Referee-pushback patterns and the writing fix7576- *"This reads like an epidemiology paper that happens to use population data."* -> Lead the abstract and77 intro with the population question and the demographic quantity, not the regression coefficient.78- *"A migration scholar could not follow the fertility argument."* -> Define component-specific terms79 (parity progression, ASFR, tempo/quantum) on first use; spell out every data-source acronym.80- *"The contribution to population science is stated only in the conclusion."* -> Move the "so what for81 demography" sentence into the first paragraph; a Demography reader should not have to dig for it.82- *"You report stars but never the magnitude."* -> Lead with the demographic quantity and its size,83 then interpret it.8485## Output format8687```88【Contribution stated by end of intro?】[Y/N]89【Reads past the component?】jargon defined / acronyms + data sources spelled? [Y/N]90【Abstract】word count (<= 200); 【Highlights】3-5, each <= 85 chars?91【Keywords】<= 5?92【Word count】Article <= 8,000 / Note <= 4,000 / Commentary <= 2,000 (main text)?93【House style + anonymized】loosely APA + no self-ID refs? [Y/N]94【Next】demog-data-and-reproducibility95```9697## Supplementary resources9899- [`../../resources/official-source-map.md`](../../resources/official-source-map.md) — word/abstract caps, highlights, keywords, house style, double-blind anonymity100101---102103**Source:** [`brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills`](https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) → `Demography-Skills/skills/demog-writing-style/SKILL.md`