IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hhs/gunwpe/0295.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Stylebook:Tips on Organization, Writing, and Formatting

Author

Listed:
  • Wicks, Rick

    (Department of Economics, School of Business, Economics and Law, Göteborg University)

Abstract

Fifteen years of copy-editing experience – with theses (both in economics and in several medical fields), journal articles, book chapters and books, conference presentations, government reports, etc. – are distilled here. Papers are often sent to me for “language correction”, but what I usually find is that, far more than that, what they most need is major work on organization, writing, and formatting (including presentation of tables and figures). Even good writers can improve their writing by paying attention to the points herein, I believe. Of course digging deeply into issues of organization, writing, and even formatting improves readability (and thus the probability of being published, read, and cited), but it can also help to improve the quality of the thinking, i.e., the content of the paper. I first review the standard organization of most empirical papers in economics, with suggestions for improvement (including a brief discussion of some issues in reporting of statistical and econometric results). Then I discuss many points of good (and bad) writing (including sections on The Language of Economists and on Overused/Misused Words) as well as points of formatting (including many choices, where – even more than in writing – consistency is the most important rule). Throughout, some differences between Swedish and English practice are discussed, as well as some between American and British practice.

Suggested Citation

  • Wicks, Rick, 2008. "Stylebook:Tips on Organization, Writing, and Formatting," Working Papers in Economics 295, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics, revised 11 Jun 2008.
  • Handle: RePEc:hhs:gunwpe:0295
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/2077/9921
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. McCloskey, Donald N, 1983. "The Rhetoric of Economics," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 21(2), pages 481-517, June.
    2. Kevin Hoover & Mark Siegler, 2008. "Sound and fury: McCloskey and significance testing in economics," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(1), pages 1-37.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tatom, John, 2010. "Financial wellbeing and some problems in assessing its link to financial education," MPRA Paper 26411, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Meszaros, Sandor, 2008. "Theory testing (hypothesis testing) in agricultural economics," Studies in Agricultural Economics, Research Institute for Agricultural Economics, vol. 107, pages 1-13, March.
    3. Tom Engsted, 2009. "Statistical vs. Economic Significance in Economics and Econometrics: Further comments on McCloskey & Ziliak," CREATES Research Papers 2009-17, Department of Economics and Business Economics, Aarhus University.
    4. Wilfred Dolfsma, 2001. "Economists as subjects: Toward a psychology of economists," Forum for Social Economics, Springer;The Association for Social Economics, vol. 30(2), pages 77-88, March.
    5. J. Kornai., 2002. "The System Paradigm," Voprosy Ekonomiki, NP Voprosy Ekonomiki, vol. 4.
    6. Suzuki, Tomo, 2003. "The accounting figuration of business statistics as a foundation for the spread of economic ideas," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 65-95, January.
    7. Thomas Mayer, 2012. "Ziliak and McCloskey's Criticisms of Significance Tests: An Assessment," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 9(3), pages 256-297, September.
    8. Hendrik P. van Dalen, 2003. "Pluralism in Economics: A Public Good or a Public Bad?," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 03-034/1, Tinbergen Institute, revised 18 May 2004.
    9. Luzar, E. Jane, 1990. "Environmental Hazards Of Farming: Thinking About The Management Challenge: Discussion," Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 22(1), pages 1-3, July.
    10. De Geest, Gerrit, 1996. "The debate on the scientific status of law & economics," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 40(3-5), pages 999-1006, April.
    11. John H. Cochrane, 2017. "Macro-Finance," Review of Finance, European Finance Association, vol. 21(3), pages 945-985.
    12. Sujai Shivakumar, 2003. "The Place of Indigenous Institutions in Constitutional Order," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 3-21, March.
    13. Thomas Mayer, 2006. "The Empirical Significance of Econometric Models," Working Papers 620, University of California, Davis, Department of Economics.
    14. Stephen T. Ziliak & Deirdre N. McCloskey, 2013. "We Agree That Statistical Significance Proves Essentially Nothing: A Rejoinder to Thomas Mayer," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 10(1), pages 97-107, January.
    15. Barton, Jared & Pan, Xiaofei, 2022. "Movin’ on up? A survey experiment on mobility enhancing policies," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    16. Weichselbaumer, Doris & Winter-Ebmer, Rudolf, 2003. "Rhetoric in Economic Research: The Case of Gender Wage Differentials," Economics Series 144, Institute for Advanced Studies.
    17. Gillian Hewitson, 2001. "A Survey of Feminist Economics," Working Papers 2001.01, School of Economics, La Trobe University.
    18. Kinda, Romuald, 2010. "Democratic institutions and environmental quality: effects and transmission channels," MPRA Paper 27455, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Hendrik P. van Dalen, 2019. "Values of Economists Matter in the Art and Science of Economics," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(3), pages 472-499, August.
    20. Monique Reid & Stan du Plessis, 2011. "Talking to the inattentive Public: How the media translates the Reserve Bank’s communications," Working Papers 19/2011, Stellenbosch University, Department of Economics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Organization; writing; formatting; tables; figures; sections; headings; English; Swedish; British;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • A10 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - General
    • A20 - General Economics and Teaching - - Economic Education and Teaching of Economics - - - General
    • A30 - General Economics and Teaching - - Multisubject Collective Works - - - General
    • C10 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - General
    • Y10 - Miscellaneous Categories - - Data: Tables and Charts - - - Data: Tables and Charts
    • Y20 - Miscellaneous Categories - - Introductions and Prefaces - - - Introductions and Prefaces

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hhs:gunwpe:0295. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Jessica Oscarsson (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/naiguse.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.