Academic Paper Writer
Purpose
This skill helps economists draft, structure, and polish academic papers with proper conventions for economics journals. It provides templates for different paper types and guidance on academic writing style.
When to Use
- Starting a new research paper from scratch
- Restructuring an existing draft
- Writing specific sections (introduction, literature review, conclusion)
- Preparing papers for journal submission
Instructions
Step 1: Identify Paper Type
Ask the user:
- Is this empirical or theoretical?
- What is the target journal/audience?
- What stage is the paper at? (outline, first draft, revision)
- What sections need help?
Step 2: Follow the IMRAD Structure
For empirical papers, use:
- Introduction - Motivation, research question, contribution
- Literature Review - Related work and positioning
- Data & Methods - Sources, sample, empirical strategy
- Results - Main findings with tables/figures
- Discussion - Interpretation, mechanisms, limitations
- Conclusion - Summary and implications
Step 3: Apply Economics Writing Conventions
- First paragraph should state the research question and main finding
- Use present tense for established facts, past tense for your findings
- Be precise with causal language (effect vs. association)
- Cite heavily in the literature review
- Lead with results in the results section
Example Output: Introduction Template
\section{Introduction}
% Hook - Why does this matter?
[TOPIC] is a fundamental question in economics, with implications for
[POLICY AREA] and [BROADER RELEVANCE]. Despite extensive research,
we still lack clear evidence on [SPECIFIC GAP].
% Research question
This paper asks: [RESEARCH QUESTION IN PLAIN LANGUAGE]?
Specifically, we examine whether [PRECISE FORMULATION OF THE QUESTION].
% Preview of answer
We find that [MAIN RESULT IN ONE SENTENCE]. This effect is
[economically significant / modest / heterogeneous], with
[QUANTITATIVE SUMMARY: e.g., "a one standard deviation increase
in X associated with a Y percent increase in Z"].
% Methodology (brief)
To identify this effect, we exploit [IDENTIFICATION STRATEGY:
natural experiment / RCT / instrumental variable / RDD].
Our data come from [DATA SOURCE], covering [TIME PERIOD]
and [SAMPLE SIZE] observations.
% Contribution / Related literature
Our paper contributes to several strands of literature.
First, we extend the work of \citet{Author2020} by [EXTENSION].
Second, we provide new evidence on [MECHANISM/CHANNEL] that
complements \citet{OtherAuthor2019}. Finally, our findings
have implications for [POLICY/FUTURE RESEARCH].
% Roadmap
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows.
Section~\ref{sec:background} provides background and reviews
related literature. Section~\ref{sec:data} describes our data
and empirical strategy. Section~\ref{sec:results} presents our
main findings. Section~\ref{sec:robustness} discusses robustness
checks. Section~\ref{sec:conclusion} concludes.Example Output: Results Section Template
\section{Results}
\label{sec:results}
% Lead with the main finding
Table~\ref{tab:main} presents our main results. Column (1) shows
the baseline OLS specification without controls. The coefficient
on [TREATMENT VARIABLE] is [POINT ESTIMATE] (s.e. = [SE]),
statistically significant at the [1/5/10] percent level.
% Add controls incrementally
In column (2), we add [CONTROL SET 1]. The point estimate
[increases/decreases slightly/remains stable] to [ESTIMATE].
Column (3) includes [CONTROL SET 2] and adds [FIXED EFFECTS].
Our preferred specification in column (4) includes [FULL CONTROLS]
and yields [FINAL ESTIMATE].
% Interpret magnitude
To gauge economic significance, note that [INTERPRETATION].
A one standard deviation increase in [X] is associated with
a [Y] percent [increase/decrease] in [OUTCOME], or roughly
[COMPARISON TO MEAN/OTHER BENCHMARK].
% Brief mention of mechanisms/heterogeneity if relevant
Table~\ref{tab:hetero} explores heterogeneity by [DIMENSION].
We find that the effect is [larger/concentrated among]
[SUBGROUP], suggesting that [INTERPRETATION].
\begin{table}[htbp]
\centering
\caption{Main Results: Effect of X on Y}
\label{tab:main}
\begin{tabular}{lcccc}
\hline\hline
& (1) & (2) & (3) & (4) \\
& OLS & + Controls & + FE & Preferred \\
\hline
Treatment & 0.052*** & 0.048*** & 0.041** & 0.039** \\
& (0.012) & (0.011) & (0.015) & (0.016) \\
\\
Controls & No & Yes & Yes & Yes \\
Fixed Effects & No & No & Yes & Yes \\
Cluster SE & No & No & No & Yes \\
\\
Observations & 10,000 & 9,850 & 9,850 & 9,850 \\
R-squared & 0.05 & 0.12 & 0.35 & 0.35 \\
\hline\hline
\multicolumn{5}{l}{\footnotesize Notes: * p<0.10, ** p<0.05, *** p<0.01.} \\
\multicolumn{5}{l}{\footnotesize Standard errors in parentheses.} \\
\end{tabular}
\end{table}Example Output: Conclusion Template
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec:conclusion}
% Restate question and answer
This paper examined [RESEARCH QUESTION]. Using [METHOD/DATA],
we found that [MAIN FINDING]. This result is robust to
[ROBUSTNESS CHECKS].
% Implications
Our findings have several implications. For policy, they suggest
that [POLICY IMPLICATION]. For theory, they provide support for
[THEORETICAL MECHANISM] and challenge [ALTERNATIVE VIEW].
% Limitations (brief, honest)
Several limitations warrant mention. First, [LIMITATION 1:
e.g., external validity]. Second, [LIMITATION 2: e.g.,
data constraints]. Future research could address these by
[SUGGESTION].
% Future directions
This paper opens several avenues for future work.
[DIRECTION 1]. [DIRECTION 2]. We hope our findings
stimulate further research on [BROADER TOPIC].Writing Tips
For Introductions
- First sentence should grab attention - not "This paper examines..."
- State your contribution clearly - what's new about this paper?
- Be specific about magnitudes - don't just say "large effect"
- Acknowledge limitations preemptively in the last paragraph
For Results
- Lead with numbers - put the coefficient in the first sentence
- Interpret economically - what does a 0.05 coefficient mean?
- Guide the reader through tables column by column
- Don't oversell - distinguish statistical from economic significance
For Conclusions
- Don't introduce new results - synthesize what you've shown
- Be honest about limitations - reviewers will find them anyway
- End on the contribution - remind readers why this matters
Common Pitfalls
- ❌ Burying the main result in the middle of the paper
- ❌ Using "significant" without specifying statistical or economic
- ❌ Over-claiming causality without proper identification
- ❌ Literature review that's just a list of papers
- ❌ Conclusion that's just a summary
References
- Cochrane (2005) Writing Tips for PhD Students
- Shapiro (2019) How to Give an Applied Micro Talk
- Thomson (2011) A Guide for the Young Economist
Changelog
v1.0.0
- Initial release with introduction, results, and conclusion templates