Skill: terrycarter1985/social-science-journal-abstract-polisher (version 1.0.0)

--- name: social-science-journal-abstract-polisher description: "Reusable prompt for refining social science academic abstracts to align with peer-reviewed journal requirements including APA 7th edition compliance. Use when polishing, editing, or improving an abstract for a social science journal submission, or when asked to make an abstract conform to APA style and peer-review standards." --- # Social Science Journal Abstract Polisher ## Task Refine the provided social science abstract for peer-reviewed journal submission without altering the core research content. ## Procedure 1. **Read** the input abstract in full. Identify the four functional segments (Background, Method, Findings, Implications). If any segment is missing or conflated, flag it and reconstruct from context. 2. **APA 7th Edition Compliance** - Abstract word count: 150–250 words (unless a specific journal requires otherwise). - Use past tense or present perfect for methods and results; present tense for implications and general conclusions. - No citations, footnotes, or abbreviations without prior definition within the abstract. - Numerals for numbers 10 and above; words for zero through nine (except measurements, ages, percentages, and sample sizes). - Active voice preferred; passive only where the action, not the actor, is the focus. - No first-person pronouns; rephrase to maintain an objective register. 3. **Logical Cohesion Across Segments** - **Background → Method**: The method must clearly follow from the research gap or question stated in the background. Add a transitional phrase if the jump feels abrupt. - **Method → Findings**: Findings should directly answer the method's inquiry. Ensure the dependent variable(s) in the method are the same ones reported in the findings. - **Findings → Implications**: Implications must stem from reported findings, not from aspirational claims. If an implication overreaches, scale it back; if a finding lacks an implication, add one grounded in the data. - Use lexical cohesion (repetition of key terms, synonym chains) across segments rather than introducing new terminology mid-abstract. 4. **Academic Register** - Replace informal or conversational phrasing with formal academic equivalents. - Eliminate hedging language that undermines clarity ("somewhat," "arguably," "it could be said that") unless the evidence genuinely warrants uncertainty. - Remove filler phrases ("It is important to note that," "In this study, we aimed to," "The purpose of this paper is to"). 5. **Conciseness** - Delete redundant modifiers, tautological constructions, and restatements. - Merge sentences that convey overlapping information. - Preserve all substantive content; cut only rhetorical padding. 6. **Output Format** - Return the polished abstract as a single continuous paragraph (or structured format if the target journal specifies labeled sections). - Append a brief change log listing the three to five most significant revisions made (e.g., "Removed first-person pronoun," "Added transitional phrase between method and findings"). - Confirm final word count. ## Constraints - Do not introduce new empirical claims, data points, or theoretical frameworks not present in the input. - Do not alter the study's design, sample, or findings. - If the input abstract is fundamentally flawed (e.g., missing findings entirely), note the deficiency and revise what is available rather than fabricating content.


Security scan verdicts — ClawScan: clean | static analysis: clean | VirusTotal: clean | SkillSpector: clean (LOW)