jbf-writing-style

Writing Style (jbf-writing-style)

When to trigger

• The manuscript is technically complete but reads slowly
• Results paragraphs describe coefficients without interpretation
• References, keywords, highlights, or declarations need Elsevier/JBF polish

Style principles

• Lead with the finance question before the method.
• State the design plainly: what variation, what unit, what controls, and why it is credible.
• Translate coefficients into economics: basis points, assets, loan spreads, capital ratios, abnormal returns, default probabilities.
• Use active, compact prose. Avoid "it is worth noting" and long literature throat-clearing.
• Keep claims bounded to the design and sample.

Results paragraph pattern

Table X tests [claim]. Column (Y) includes [fixed effects/controls] and clusters
standard errors by [level]. A one-standard-deviation increase in [treatment] is
associated with [magnitude] change in [outcome], equal to [economic benchmark].
The estimate is robust to [key check], supporting [mechanism].

Elsevier/JBF submission style notes

• First submission has no strict reference-format requirement if references are complete and consistent; prepare for JBF's proof-stage numbered Elsevier reference style.
• Prepare 1-7 English keywords; keep JEL codes as useful finance metadata rather than a verified hard requirement.
• Highlights are encouraged; make them 3-5 result-forward bullets, each no more than 85 characters.
• Declare generative-AI use when applicable.
• Keep anonymization intact under double-anonymized review.

Common fixes

• Replace "significant" with the effect size and confidence interval.
• Move dataset details from the introduction into data/methods unless they create the contribution.
• Give every acronym on first use.
• Put limitations before the referee finds them.

Abstract calibration for JBF

A JBF-ready abstract typically runs four to six sentences: question, setting and data, design, headline magnitude in finance units, and one bounded implication. The current Guide caps the abstract at 250 words.

[Question] Does X friction change Y bank/market outcome?
[Setting] data + period + unit (e.g., bank-quarter Call Reports, 2005-2019)
[Design] the variation in one clause (staggered adoption / threshold / exposure)
[Result] magnitude with units (basis points, pp of assets, capital-ratio points)
[Implication] one sentence, inside the identified margin

Worked rewrite (illustrative)

Before: "The coefficient on the regulation dummy is negative and significant at the 1% level, confirming our hypothesis."

After: "Following adoption, treated banks cut commercial lending by 0.9 percentage points of assets (illustrative), about one quarter of average pre-period loan growth, consistent with a liquidity-hoarding channel and concentrated among banks below the median deposit franchise."

The rewrite names the unit, the benchmark, the mechanism, and the heterogeneity in one sentence — the cadence JBF results sections reward.

Banking terminology hygiene

• Distinguish CET1, Tier 1, and total capital ratios; never write "capital ratio" alone where the Basel definition matters.
• Define the NPL ratio (nonperforming loans over gross loans) and the delinquency threshold used.
• State whether the Z-score uses rolling or full-sample volatility, with the construction in the variable appendix.
• Report spreads in basis points and balance-sheet effects in percentage points of assets; never mix the two in one paragraph without labels.

Introduction pacing for JBF

• Page 1: question, setting, design, and the headline magnitude in finance units.
• Page 2: mechanism evidence and the two or three literature deltas.
• Keep any roadmap paragraph to three sentences or fewer; JBF readers skip longer ones.

Prose pushbacks JBF referees make

• "I cannot tell which results are causal." → label each claim causal, predictive, or descriptive in the text itself.
• "The policy section reads like advocacy." → tie every recommendation to an estimated margin and its boundary.
• "Variable definitions are scattered." → consolidate into one appendix table and reference it from every exhibit.

Finance-result sentence

Use this pattern for every headline result:

In [sample/design], [shock or treatment] changes [finance outcome] by [magnitude in finance units],
relative to [benchmark], consistent with [mechanism] and bounded by [main limitation].

This prevents significance-only prose and forces the mechanism into the result paragraph.

Output format

[Section] abstract / introduction / data / results / conclusion
[Main edit] ...
[Magnitude wording] ...
[Claim boundary] ...
[Submission polish] keywords / optional JEL / highlights / declarations
[Next step] jbf-submission