restat-writing-style

name	restat-writing-style
description	Use when revising the prose of a The Review of Economics and Statistics (REStat) manuscript — especially the abstract and introduction — so the applied question and the estimate land immediately in REStat house style. Polishes framing and prose; it does not change results or identification.

Writing Style (restat-writing-style)

When to trigger

• The introduction buries the question and the estimate under setup and machinery
• The abstract exceeds REStat's limit or does not state the finding
• A reader cannot say, after one paragraph, what was measured and what it matters for
• Prose is in passive throat-clearing mode ("has been studied extensively")

The REStat prose bar

REStat is empirical-first applied economics, so the intro must put the applied question, the design, and the headline estimate (with units and a standard error) on page one. The abstract is ≤100 words (source map refreshed 2026-06-20), in JEL-suitable form — so every word earns its place. The house style is plain, quantitative economics prose: state the number, state the design that earns it, state why an applied audience cares. REStat's measurement tradition means the writing should also make the quality of the data/measurement legible early when that is part of the contribution.

The REStat introduction arc

1. Question + headline quantity, first breath. "When [X] changes, how much does [Y] move?" → "we find [estimate, with units and SE]."
2. Why it is hard / why prior estimates are unreliable. The identification or measurement obstacle, named.
3. Approach. Data + design (DID / RD / IV / shift-share) + what makes the measurement credible — in one paragraph.
4. Result restated with mechanism / interpretation and its uncertainty carried through.
5. Contribution as a delta against named work (from restat-literature-positioning), with scope honestly bounded.
6. Brief roadmap — no over-signposting.

Abstract rules (REStat)

• ≤100 words; live-check the current submission guidelines before upload.
• State the question, the design, and the finding with a number, not just "we study X."
• JEL-suitable: written so it can be classified; keywords/JEL codes accompany the title page.
• No undefined jargon; an applied economist outside your subfield should follow it.

Checklist

• First paragraph states the applied question + the headline estimate (units + SE)
• Abstract ≤100 words and states the finding with a number
• Identification/measurement obstacle named before the machinery
• Approach (data + design + measurement credibility) in one paragraph
• Contribution framed as a delta against named work, scope bounded
• Roadmap brief; no over-signposting; active, plain quantitative prose
• Intro written/finalized AFTER identification and robustness settled

Anti-patterns

• Leading the intro with the estimator or the data-cleaning, not the question (method-first reads like J. Econometrics)
• An abstract that says "we study X" with no number — wasting a ≤100-word budget
• Throat-clearing ("has been studied extensively") and vague stakes
• Burying the headline estimate on page 4
• Over-signposted roadmaps doing the argument's job
• Polishing the intro before the estimate and robustness are final

Abstract micro-edit (illustrative)

• Weak (over budget, no number): "This paper studies the effect of broadband access on rural entrepreneurship. Using a difference-in-differences approach exploiting a staggered rollout, we examine how internet access shapes business formation and discuss policy implications." — says nothing, spends words.
• REStat-shaped (≤100 words, states the finding): "We estimate the effect of rural broadband access on small-business formation using a staggered subsidy rollout and a heterogeneity-robust difference-in- differences design, correcting for measurement error in rollout dates. Access raises new business registrations by 8.1 per 10,000 residents per year (s.e. 1.4), a 14% increase, concentrated where a supplier base already existed. The estimate is robust to alternative estimators and few-cluster inference. Both the estimator and the measurement correction matter, reconciling earlier near-zero estimates." (≈80 words)

Worked example pointer

See ../../resources/worked-examples/01-introduction.md for a before→after REStat-style introduction that executes this arc (fictional, illustrative).

Output format

【Para-1 test】question + estimate (units + SE) present? [Y/N]
【Abstract】word count ≤100? states finding with a number? [Y/N]
【Obstacle named】identification/measurement obstacle before machinery? [Y/N]
【Approach】data + design + measurement credibility in one para? [Y/N]
【Contribution】delta vs named work + bounded scope? [Y/N]
【Prose】active, plain, no throat-clearing? [Y/N]
【Next step】restat-replication-package