academic-editorial-judgmentlisted

# Academic Editorial Judgment ## The Problem Complex editorial style rules require judgment, not pattern-matching: ``` Rule: "Use past tense for completed research, present for ongoing implications" Bad (mechanical): Find all verbs, check tense Good (judgment): Does this describe what was done (past) or what it means (present)? ``` APA7, Chicago, MLA — all have context-dependent rules. ## The Solution Apply critical thinking to editorial decisions: ### 1. Identify the Rule's Intent | Rule | Surface Form | Actual Intent | |------|--------------|---------------| | Past tense for methods | "We analyzed..." | Completed actions | | Present for conclusions | "Results show..." | Ongoing validity | | Active voice | Subject-verb-object | Clarity, attribution | ### 2. Check Context Before Applying ```markdown ❌ Mechanical: "Change all 'is' to 'was'" ✅ Judgment: "Is this describing what IS true, or what WAS done?" Example: - "The sample was collected..." ✅ Past (completed action) - "The effect is significant..." ✅ Present (ongoing validity) - "Figure 1 shows..." ✅ Present (the figure currently shows) ``` ### 3. Preserve Author Voice Don't "fix" intentional style choices: - Regional spellings (behaviour/behavior) - Disciplinary conventions - Established terminology ## Decision Tree ``` 1. Is this a hard rule (spelling, citation format)? → Apply mechanically 2. Is this a judgment call (tense, voice, word choice)? → Check context → Consider author intent → App