Jpsp writing style
Journal-specific Claude Code/Codex skill packs covering mainstream journals — AER, QJE, Nature, Cell, 管理世界, 经济研究 & 200+ more — your fast track to getting published. ｜ 覆盖主流期刊的 Claude Code/Codex 期刊技能包，从选题、识别策略到表格规范与审稿回复全流程，助你快速发论文。
npx -y skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill jpsp-writing-styleAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
What its author says it does
Copied from the file, not written here
Use when drafting or polishing the prose of a Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (JPSP) manuscript — long-format APA 7th writing that fits the section's capped introduction and discussion, plus a ≤250-word abstract. Guides style and structure; it does not ghost-write the paper.
SKILL.md
5.8 KB, ~1.3k tokens by cl100k_base, as published. Nobody here has run it
Writing Style — Long-Format APA 7th (jpsp-writing-style)
JPSP is long-format, but the introduction and discussion are capped by section, so the craft is disciplined length: a rich, theory-driven narrative that still respects the word budget. This is the opposite of a 2,000-word short report — here you must develop a theory and several studies, yet write tightly enough to fit ASC's 3,500-word or IRGP's 5,000-word intro+discussion limit.
When to trigger
- Drafting the manuscript or tightening it to fit the section's word cap
- Writing the abstract (and any limitations statement)
- Polishing for the APA Publication Manual (7th edition)
Section word rules (verify on the live per-section page — 待核实)
| Section | Intro + discussion cap | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| ASC | introduction + study intros + Discussion + General Discussion ≤ 3,500 words | |
| IRGP | introduction + discussion ≤ 5,000 words total; ≤ 5 studies in main text | results accessible to general statistical readers |
| PPID | "as succinctly as possible" — no fixed cap stated | 待核实 |
| All | abstract ≤ 250 words | a ≤200-word limitations statement may follow the abstract (待核实) |
Tables/figures are embedded and not counted toward the word limit — use exhibits to carry detail.
Writing the long-format manuscript
- Front-load the contribution. State the theoretical advance in the first page; do not make the reader wait for the General Discussion.
- One narrative across studies. Use transitions ("Study 1 established…; Study 2 asks whether…") so the package reads as one argument, not a stapled set.
- Compress method, expand theory. Push procedural detail and complex statistics to tables, notes, and supplements; spend capped words on theory and interpretation.
- Abstract (≤250 words). State the question, the approach (note it is multi-study), the key finding with direction, and the contribution.
- Limitations statement (if required). Cover internal, construct, statistical, and external validity for nonspecialists, within the cap (待核实).
- APA 7th throughout. Bias-free language, author–date citations, headings, statistical notation; inclusive description of samples.
Anti-patterns
- Treating "long-format" as license for a bloated, unfocused introduction
- Blowing the intro+discussion cap by putting method/stats prose where exhibits belong
- An abstract over 250 words, or one that hides the finding
- A General Discussion that introduces new claims the studies never tested
- Studies written as disconnected mini-papers with no through-line
Where the capped words go: a section-by-section budget
The craft at JPSP is allocating a fixed intro+discussion budget across a multi-study narrative. The percentages below are illustrative planning anchors, not journal rules — the only binding figures are the section caps, which you must confirm against the journal's current submission guidelines.
| Manuscript element | Illustrative share of the capped words | What earns the space at JPSP |
|---|---|---|
| Opening contribution statement | ~10% | The theoretical advance, stated on page one |
| Literature/theory setup | ~30% | The gap and the diagnostic hypotheses, not a survey |
| Brief study-to-study transitions | ~15% | "Study 1 established…; Study 2 asks whether…" through-line |
| General Discussion | ~35% | Interpretation, the internal meta-analysis takeaway, scope |
| Limitations statement | ~10% (if required) | Internal/construct/statistical/external validity, for nonspecialists |
Method and complex statistics are not in this budget: push them to embedded tables, notes, and the supplement, which do not count toward the word limit.
Worked example: an ASC abstract under 250 words
Illustrative — invented to model structure, not a real abstract.
A four-sentence skeleton for the gratitude→construal package, fitting comfortably under the 250-word abstract cap: (1) Question — "Does incidental gratitude broaden how abstractly people construe events?" (2) Approach, flagged as multi-study — "Across four preregistered studies (total N = 1,420), we manipulated gratitude and measured construal level." (3) Key finding with direction and magnitude — "Gratitude reliably raised abstract construal (internal meta-analytic d = 0.31, 95% CI [0.18, 0.45]); the effect attenuated under time pressure." (4) Contribution — "These findings identify gratitude as an antecedent of construal and connect emotion to social-cognitive abstraction." Note the multi-study signal in sentence 2 and the pooled effect in sentence 3 — both are what an ASC reviewer scans the abstract for.
Output format
【Section cap】ASC 3,500 / IRGP 5,000 / PPID succinct — intro+discussion within it? [Y/N]
【Abstract】word count (≤250) — question + multi-study approach + finding + contribution
【Limitations statement】present + within cap? (待核实)
【Through-line】studies read as one argument? [Y/N]
【APA 7th】citations, headings, bias-free language? [Y/N]
【Next】jpsp-open-science-and-transparency
Supplementary resources
../../resources/external_tools.md— papaja / apa7 LaTeX, reference managers, APA 7th formatting../../resources/official-source-map.md— per-section word caps and abstract rule