How to Write a Good Paper

# How to Write a Good Paper

## ECON 306 • (Last update: Spring 2023)

### Ryan Safner<br> Associate Professor of Economics <br> <a href="mailto:safner@hood.edu"><i class="fa fa-paper-plane fa-fw"></i>safner@hood.edu</a> <br> <a href="https://github.com/ryansafner/microS23"><i class="fa fa-github fa-fw"></i>ryansafner/microS23</a><br> <a href="https://microS23.classes.ryansafner.com"> <i class="fa fa-globe fa-fw"></i>microS23.classes.ryansafner.com</a><br>

---

# Most Academic Writing is Terrible

.source[Source: [Collegehumor: If Everyone Still Wrote like they did in College](http://www.collegehumor.com/post/6941975/if-everyone-still-wrote-like-they-did-in-college)]

---

# The Purpose of this Guide

1. To improve your writing, researching, and presentation skills.

2. To be able to constructively criticize the writing, research, and presentation of others.
    - Note: This guide is generic enough (although geared towards "research" papers) to cover most forms of papers, and certainly applies to your assignments
    - You will use all of these skills regardless of whether you go into academia, government work, nonprofits, or private industry

.source[Note this is a much more succinct guide than [my original](https://www.dropbox.com/s/ei3hct298ugalt2/paperwriting.pdf?dl=0). See that for an excessive amount detail and clutter.]

---

# The Purpose of a Paper

---

# The Purpose of a Paper

- Everything else is .hi-purple[secondary!]
  - *Inform* reader of new information
  - *Report* new finding,
  - etc.

- **Otherwise, why did you write the paper?**

]

---

# Your Goal for the Assignment

- .hi-purple[Goal is to convince a **general reader**, **NOT** your professor]

- *I* am *NOT* your audience! You're not trying to convince *me* (you might, though)!

- You are the lawyer in the courtroom, trying to make an argument to convince a **jury of your peers**, I am the **judge**
    - I evaluate how well your paper would convince *someone else* and that you are playing by the rules
]

---

# The Means

- A reader must be convinced through the use of an .hi[argument]

- Arguments use .hi-purple[premises] and .hi-purple[reasoning] to support a .hi-purple[conclusion]

- That conclusion is your .hi[thesis] statement
]

---

---

# The Thesis I

- Summarize your entire paper's argument in a single sentence (two at most!)
  - <span class="hi-purple">If you cannot, you *do not* have a thesis</span>
  - Narrow your topic until you can (see section on choosing a topic)

- Your paper is **_NOT_  "about something"**! It should put forth a claim that you attempt to prove or defend

> .green["The current immigration policy makes it too difficult for high-skilled immigrants to contribute to our GDP."]

> .green["The US should adopt an open borders immigration policy."]

> .green["A strong border defense is the most effective deterrent to terrorism."]

]
---

# The Thesis II

- The thesis should be a .hi[claim]:

> .green["Capital punishment is the most efficient deterrent for violent crimes."]

**2. It should be as specific as possible, given the length constraints.**
> .red["Intellectual property law is very complicated."]

> .green["The problems of modern copyright law today stem from the unintended consequences of the Copyright Act of 1976."]
]
---

# The Thesis II

- The thesis should be a .hi[claim]:

.smallest[
**3. It should, in principle or in practice, be testable.**
> .red["Chocolate is better than vanilla."]

> .green["Economic recessions are caused by sunspots."]

> .green["Democratic governments invest less in long term capital projects than autocratic governments."]

**4. Again, it should not be just a description of something.**
> .red["The tariff history of the United States is long and complex."]

> .green["The Smoot-Hawley tariff was one of the leading causes of the Great Depression's severity."]
]

---

---

# Crafting Arguments

- Provide *reasons* why your thesis is plausible, some combination of the following techniques:

1. **Economic Theory**: *what does theory predict?*
2. **Empirical Evidence**: *what do the "facts on the ground" show?*
3. **Case Study**: *one detailed example that proves the rule* 
4. **Statistical Analysis**: *what do data and models suggest?*
5. **Narrative**: *tell us a story can understand & interpret*
 
> "What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence." - Christopher Hitchens
]

---

# Crafting Arguments (for this Assignment)

- Op-eds are *not* research papers (no bibliography, tables, graphs, etc)

- Your argument should be consistent with economic theory (or an explanation of an interesting anomaly)

- You should show what is relevant in the real world

- Case studies are particularly well-suited for Op-eds

- Quick stats and interesting numbers help your argument, but this is not the place for regressions!

- Op-eds at the end of the day are all narratives! Persuade your reader why they should support *your story*

---

# Crafting Arguments: What *NOT*  to do

- .red[Do **NOT** merely provide a section of pros, a section of cons, and then make your mind in the final paragraph]
    - Every semester I will get papers like these, and they're *awful*

- .hi[Don't just tell, *show*!]
    - You must demonstrate explicitly how you examined the evidence and reasoned to reach the conclusion. You cannot pull the conclusion out of the air

- Better to grapple with different aspects of an issue in different paragraphs than a paragraph(s) of random "Pros" and a paragraph(s) of random "Cons"

---

# Using Economic Theory I

- Adopt a positive .hi[means-ends framework]
    - take goals of policy or agents as given
    - critique the *means* used to achieve the above goals

> .green[**Example**:] if you argue for/against the minimum wage: Assume policymakers want to improve income for the poor. Is the minimum wage the *best* means for achieving that end?

- .hi-purple[Nobody cares about how you feel, only what you can defend]
  - Nobody wants to read about why you think they are a bad person
  - Normative claims should be explicit, and backed by theory and evidence
  
---

# Using Economic Theory II

- Ask (and answer) the following questions (as relevant):

1. What is the underlying social problem?
2. What are the *intended* goals of a policy/choice? Who and how is it meant to benefit?
3. What are the *unintended* consequences? Who *actually* benefits and loses and how?
4. How does a policy evolve through time? Does it diverge from original intentions?
5. What are the institutions in place, and how do they affect the incentives of each player?
6. How do changes in constraints change players' incentives?
7. Is this policy robust to knowledge problems and incentive problems?
8. What are the *relevant*, *feasible*, and *comparable* alternative solultions that might be chosen? *NOT UTOPIA.*
9. What are the counterfactuals to the observations we see in the world?

---

# Using Economic Theory III

- Beware prevalent economic fallacies

- **The Nirvana Fallacy**: the alternative to an imperfect system is *NOT* a perfect utopia, it is a relevant, feasible, alternative (imperfect) system

- **The Broken Window Fallacy**: people overestimate the visible and intended consequences of a policy and underestimate the unintended and unseen consequences (such as the opportunity cost)!

---

# Empirical Evidence I

- Apply your theory and/or model to real world scenarios

- .hi-purple[What are the actual institutions that affect individual behavior?]
  - e.g. statutes, laws, local customs, history, religious practices, community norms, shared values, morality

- .hi-purple[How do the conditions "on the ground" channel economic principles?]
  - e.g. if they add additional constraints, affect relative prices, distort incentives for certain choices

- Test any hypotheses, implications, or predictions from theory

---

# Empirical Evidence II

- Good rhetorical devices that can persuade easily:
    - Statistics
    - Graphs
    - Anecdotes and stories

- These examples however should logically follow from your theory, your theory should *not* be created out of these examples!

> "Theory without facts is dogma, facts without a theory are blind" - Immanuel Kant

---

# Empirical Evidence: Be Modest with your Claims I

.pull-left[
.center[
![:scale 60%](https://www.dropbox.com/s/9nv7ewnkokuek3c/smbc1623-1.png?raw=1)
]
]

.pull-right[
.center[
![:scale 60%](https://www.dropbox.com/s/5xdh79z3uwg5n3b/smbc1623-2.png?raw=1)
]
]

---

# Empirical Evidence: Be Modest with your Claims II

.center[
![:scale 35%](https://www.dropbox.com/s/53bske6qzjl8prf/xkcd_1289_simple_answers.png?raw=1)
]

---

# Empirical Evidence: Be Modest with your Claims III

---

# Case Studies I

- .hi[Case study]: a detailed analysis of an example that can provide insight about wider theory

- Must be *relevant*, *generalizable*, not a freak *outlier*

- Don't .hi-purple["cherry-pick"] that parts of examples that support your thesis and ignore parts that contradict it

---

# Case Studies II

- What is the effect of a government banning a product?

The effects of the Prohibition of alcohol in the U.S. (1920-1933)

|    | Before 1920 | After 1920 |
|----|-------------|------------|
| Types of Alchol consumed? | | |
| Quantities consumed? | | |
| How were people exchanging? | | |
| Degree of lawbreaking? | | |

- Control for other variables that affect difference: Great depression, population increase, Smoot-Hawley Tariff, etc.

---

# Case Studies III

]

.source[Safner, Ryan, (2016), "The Perils of Copyright Regulation," *Review of Austrian Economics* 29(2): 121-137]

---

# Statistical Analysis I

.content-box-green[
.green[**Example**:] does writing a longer op-ed get you a better grade on the assignment?
]

---

.quitesmall[
<table>
 <thead>
  <tr>
   <th style="text-align:left;"> Variable </th>
   <th style="text-align:right;"> Obs </th>
   <th style="text-align:right;"> Min </th>
   <th style="text-align:right;"> Q1 </th>
   <th style="text-align:right;"> Median </th>
   <th style="text-align:right;"> Q3 </th>
   <th style="text-align:right;"> Max </th>
   <th style="text-align:right;"> Mean </th>
   <th style="text-align:right;"> Std. Dev. </th>
  </tr>
 </thead>
<tbody>
  <tr>
   <td style="text-align:left;"> Grade </td>
   <td style="text-align:right;"> 462 </td>
   <td style="text-align:right;"> 0 </td>
   <td style="text-align:right;"> 84 </td>
   <td style="text-align:right;"> 90 </td>
   <td style="text-align:right;"> 94 </td>
   <td style="text-align:right;"> 146 </td>
   <td style="text-align:right;"> 87.60 </td>
   <td style="text-align:right;"> 17.06 </td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
   <td style="text-align:left;"> Words </td>
   <td style="text-align:right;"> 462 </td>
   <td style="text-align:right;"> 0 </td>
   <td style="text-align:right;"> 635 </td>
   <td style="text-align:right;"> 766 </td>
   <td style="text-align:right;"> 901 </td>
   <td style="text-align:right;"> 2261 </td>
   <td style="text-align:right;"> 768.54 </td>
   <td style="text-align:right;"> 234.71 </td>
  </tr>
</tbody>
</table>
]

---

---

---

---

# Statistical Analysis IV

.center[
`$$Grade_i=\hat{\beta_0}+\hat{\beta_1}Words_i+u_i$$`
.font60[
.regtable[
<table style="NAborder-bottom: 0; width: auto !important; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" class="table">
 <thead>
  <tr>
   <th style="text-align:left;">   </th>
   <th style="text-align:center;"> Base Model </th>
  </tr>
 </thead>
<tbody>
  <tr>
   <td style="text-align:left;"> Constant </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> 57.692*** </td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
   <td style="text-align:left;">  </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> (2.306) </td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
   <td style="text-align:left;"> Word Count </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> 0.039*** </td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
   <td style="text-align:left;box-shadow: 0px 1px">  </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;box-shadow: 0px 1px"> (0.003) </td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
   <td style="text-align:left;"> N </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> 459 </td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
   <td style="text-align:left;"> Adj. R<sup>2</sup> </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> 0.29 </td>
  </tr>
</tbody>
<tfoot><tr><td style="padding: 0; " colspan="100%">
<sup></sup> + p </td></tr></tfoot>
</table>
]
]
]

What's wrong with this model?

`$$Grade_i=\hat{\beta_0}+\hat{\beta_1}Words_i+\hat{\beta_2}Quality_i+\hat{\beta_3}Topic_i+ \cdots + u_i$$`

---

---

---

---

<table style="NAborder-bottom: 0; width: auto !important; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" class="table">
 <thead>
  <tr>
   <th style="text-align:left;">   </th>
   <th style="text-align:center;"> Base Model </th>
   <th style="text-align:center;"> Base with Controls </th>
   <th style="text-align:center;"> No Zeros </th>
   <th style="text-align:center;"> No Zeros or Pubs </th>
   <th style="text-align:center;"> No Zeros or Pubs, With Controls </th>
  </tr>
 </thead>
<tbody>
  <tr>
   <td style="text-align:left;"> Constant </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> 57.692*** </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> 6.234+ </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> 80.186*** </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> 79.508*** </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> 43.080*** </td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
   <td style="text-align:left;">  </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> (2.306) </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> (3.634) </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> (1.879) </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> (1.308) </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> (2.631) </td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
   <td style="text-align:left;"> Words </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> 0.039*** </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> 0.014*** </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> 0.012*** </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> 0.011*** </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> 0.005*** </td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
   <td style="text-align:left;">  </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> (0.003) </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> (0.002) </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> (0.002) </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> (0.002) </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> (0.001) </td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
   <td style="text-align:left;"> Not Hood </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;">  </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> 3.270** </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;">  </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;">  </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> 0.760 </td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
   <td style="text-align:left;">  </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;">  </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> (1.136) </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;">  </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;">  </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> (0.617) </td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
   <td style="text-align:left;"> Morning </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;">  </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> −1.439 </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;">  </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;">  </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> −0.700 </td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
   <td style="text-align:left;">  </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;">  </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> (1.187) </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;">  </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;">  </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> (0.615) </td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
   <td style="text-align:left;"> Course Grade </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;">  </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> 0.761*** </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;">  </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;">  </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> 0.454*** </td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
   <td style="text-align:left;">  </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;">  </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> (0.044) </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;">  </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;">  </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> (0.029) </td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
   <td style="text-align:left;"> Male </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;">  </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> −1.664 </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;">  </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;">  </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> −0.739 </td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
   <td style="text-align:left;">  </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;">  </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> (1.018) </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;">  </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;">  </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> (0.539) </td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
   <td style="text-align:left;"> On Zoom </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;">  </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> 5.359*** </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;">  </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;">  </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> 2.070** </td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
   <td style="text-align:left;box-shadow: 0px 1px">  </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;box-shadow: 0px 1px">  </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;box-shadow: 0px 1px"> (1.414) </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;box-shadow: 0px 1px">  </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;box-shadow: 0px 1px">  </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;box-shadow: 0px 1px"> (0.737) </td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
   <td style="text-align:left;"> N </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> 459 </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> 458 </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> 448 </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> 416 </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> 416 </td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
   <td style="text-align:left;"> Adj. R<sup>2</sup> </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> 0.29 </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> 0.60 </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> 0.06 </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> 0.09 </td>
   <td style="text-align:center;"> 0.45 </td>
  </tr>
</tbody>
<tfoot><tr><td style="padding: 0; " colspan="100%">
<sup></sup> + p </td></tr></tfoot>
</table>
]
]

.quitesmall[
- Takeaway: for each additional word you write, all else equal, you can expect your grade to increase by between 0.005—0.039 points

- Also: biggest predictor is course grade (proxy for effort/diligence)
]

---

# Reminder: Correlation is Not Causation!

[XKCD: Correlation](https://xkcd.com/552/)
]

]

.pull-right[
.center[
![:scale 60%](https://www.dropbox.com/s/114jbjtdakritv0/smbc2080stats.png?raw=1)

[SMBC](https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/2010-12-01)
]

]

---

# Reminder: Correlation is Not Causation!

[Spurious Correlations](http://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations)
]

---

# Narrative

- At the end of the day, no matter how technical, mathematical, or scientific, .hi-purple[every paper tells a story].

- Formulas, tables, and charts are *worthless* unless we can ascribe meaning to them in the real world.  What do those numbers represent?!

- Describe, in plain english, the intuition behind your theory, what your observations mean, or how a particular event happened.

---

# Dealing with Alternative Explanations

- A good argument recognizes opposing arguments and defends why it is superior, solely on its merits.

- .hi[Be charitable to people who disagree with you.]
  - Accept the *strongest, most plausible* version of your opponents' arguments and argue against *these*
  - Do *not* take the *weast, least reasonable* version and argue against that, that is called <span class="hi-purple">straw-manning</span>

- Recognize that reasonable people disagree for rational reasons - not for irrational reasons (mere opinion, greed, stupidity, evilness, religion, political ideology, etc)

- .hi-purple[For all honest intellectual arguments, always ask yourself, what evidence, however improbable, would convince me of another view?]

- See the [ideological Turing test idea](http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2011/06/the_ideological.html) for more!

---

# Structure of a Paper

---

# Structure of (any) Paper

1. Introduction

2. Literature Review

3. Body
  - Theory/Model
  - Application/Data/Empirics, as appropriate

4. Conclusion, Implications

5. Bibliography

---

# Introduction I

.smaller[
- Avoid grandiose statements that wax philosophical.
> .red[Economists have long wondered about whether financial markets are efficient.]
> .red[Political philosophers have always sought to discover the origin of political authority.]

- Get to your thesis ASAP!  Consider making it the first sentence

- Hook your reader
    - Who cares?  Why is this important?  Why is this relevant? How does this affect people?
		- Statistics and background information can often help

> Over 100 million Americans admit to downloading copyrighted material without permission. Under current federal law, that makes one third of the American public felons.

]
---

# Introduction II

- State your thesis as a claim or fact which you will prove and defend.

- Briefly outline *every* major argument you will make in the body, in the order each will appear.

- Try to link your key ideas to specific evidence.

---

# Introduction III

- Most people do not write enough in their introductions

- Consider the incentives of a (skimming) reader pressed for time
    - If someone only skims your intro, what do you want them to know??
  
- My rough suggestion: make your introduction about 15-20% of your paper:

| Paper Length | Intro Length |
|--------------|--------------|
| 5 pages | 1-1.5 pages |
| 10 pages | 2-2.5 pages |
| 30 pages | 5 pages |

---

# Body

- Depends on the topic and the type of data you use

- Make sure your arguments flow logically from one to another
    - Chronologically?
    - General to specific

- Consider making each separate argument, sub-argument, and example its own paragraph, section, or sub-section (depending on the paper)

---

# Conclusion

- .hi-purple[Avoid repeating the introduction. Summarize it in half as many sentences if necessary]
  - The reader has already read it!
  - Most readers skim two sections of a paper, the introduction and the conclusion

- Instead, describe several **implications** of your argument
  - what have we learned?
  - how can we improve public policy on this issue?
  - what more research needs to be done?

---

# Mechanics: Citations, Length & Style

---

# Citations and Quotes

- Cite at the end of a quote in the same fashion.  Note the punctuation
    - e.g. ``The division of labor is limited by the extent of the market'' (Smith 1776: 87)
    - Indent and single-space long quotes (greater than 4-5 lines) to optimize space.  Use your own judgment.

- A paper that excessively uses long quotations crowds out your own original contributions, and thus, the value (and grade) of your paper will depreciate.

---

# Length

- .hi-purple[As long as it needs to be (to do a good job).]

> "I didn't have time to write a short letter, so I wrote a long one instead." - Mark Twain

- **Occam's Razor**: Between two competing arguments, the shorter and simpler one is best.
]

---

# Style

- Always tailor it to the specific audience (a journal, the popular media, experts, etc)

- At the very least, .hi-purple[assume your audience is an educated High School or college graduate] with some .hi-purple[basic familiarity with your subject area].
    - Do not assume they know anything beyond that level
    - **Do not assume they have taken our class**
    - So make *no* references to our class, my lecture notes, class discussions or inside jokes, etc.

- Explain all buzzwords, jargon, and concepts they would not be familiar with.
  - A brief sentence or two is fine, before moving on to make your actual point

---

# Style (from George Orwell)

Eric Arthur Blair

(George Orwell)

1881-1973
]
]

.right-column[
> The great enemy of clear language is insincerity. When there is a gap between one's real and one's declared aims, one turns as it were instinctively to long words and exhausted idioms, like a cuttlefish spurting out ink.

]

---

# Style (from George Orwell)

Eric Arthur Blair

(George Orwell)

1881-1973
]
]

.right-column[
> (i) Never use a metaphor, simile, or other figure of speech which you are used to seeing in print.
(ii) Never use a long word where a short one will do.
(iii) If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out.
(iv) Never use the passive where you can use the active.
(v) Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word, or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent.
(vi) Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous.

]

---

# How to Research

---

# Choosing a Topic

- One of the hardest parts of writing a paper is choosing a topic (if you aren't assigned one).

- .hi-turquoise[Typical problem]: your topic idea is too broad given the length constraints and level of quality expected.

- Don't write about something that would take a book(s) to explain!

| Topic | Quality | Optimal Length |
|-------|---------|----------------|
| Socialism | Bad | Book(s) | 
| The History of the Soviet Union | Bad | Book |
| The Collapse of the Soviet Union | Better | Book/Long Essay |
| The Effects of *Perestroika* on Soviet citizens | Good | Article |

---

# Choosing a Topic: Search for Puzzles I

- .hi[Why does something work when we would not expect it to?]

- e.g. Why and how do pirates cooperate with each other on a pirate ship if they are each murderous, selfish criminals?

.source[Leeson, Peter, (2007), "[An-arrgh-chy: The Law and Economics of Pirate Organization](http://peterleeson.com/An-arrgh-chy.pdf)," *Journal of Political Economy* 115(6): 1049-1094]

---

# Choosing a Topic: Search for Puzzles II

- .hi[Why does something *not* work when we would expect it to?]

- e.g. Why did FEMA and the Federal Government fail to provide disaster relief after Hurricane Katrina?

.source[Horwitz, Steven, (2007), "[Making Hurricane Response More Effective: Lessons from the Private Sector and the Coast Guard during Katrina](http://mercatus.org/uploadedFiles/Mercatus/Publications/PDF_20080319_MakingHurricaneReponseEffective.pdf)," *Mercatus Policy Series* 17]

---

# Choosing a Topic: Search for Puzzles III

- .hi[Are two seemingly-inconsistent facts we observe actually consistent?]

- e.g. Medieval Europeans used to submerge a suspect's hand in boiling water to determine whether they were innocent or guilty. People are rational.

.source[Leeson, Peter, (2012), "[Ordeals](http://peterleeson.com/Ordeals.pdf)," *Journal of Law and Economics* 55: 691-714. ]

---

# Choosing a Topic: Passion!

- .hi[Do not pick a topic only to please someone] (unless it's required)
  - You will hate the assignment and not write a good paper

- .hi[Pick a topic you are passionate about, or familiar with, or genuinely curious about]
  - You will write much better, it will be easier, and you may even enjoy writing it!

Remember, economics is *NOT* a narrow set of topics (e.g. inflation, stock prices, labor markets), it is a .hi-purple[way of thinking] about the world
  - With a dose of cleverness, you can easily find a way to write about baseball, politics, crowdfunding, pirates, cryptocurrencies, recycling, superheroes, the NFL, video games, contract law, Game of Thrones, the WWE, gender, drugs, sex, rock n roll, etc. (Ask me for examples!)

- Papers out in left field often make for better papers and I want to read these!

---

# Good Writing is Actually *Re*-writing

- Writing is a process, and often collaborative (you need feedback from others to write well)

- The more you edit and rewrite, the better your paper will be

- .hi[The law of conservation of effort]:
`$$E_{total}=E_{author}+E_{reader}$$`
  - The effort your reader must put in is inversely proportional to the amount of effort *you* put in!

- This is why last minute papers are always the worst paper you could possibly write (no time to re-write!)
  - Note: A last minute paper *might* be sufficient for a good grade, but it will be your worst possible writing!

---

# Don't Get Discouraged

.pull-left[
.center[
![:scale 90%](https://www.dropbox.com/s/akegbq42i02gl8y/sciencerage.png?raw=1)
]
]

.pull-right[
.center[
![:scale 50%](https://www.dropbox.com/s/y3fvprtxyuvki24/sciencerage1.png?raw=1)
]
]

---

# Don't Get Discouraged

Albert Enstein

(1870-1924)

]
]

> "If we knew what it was we were looking for, we wouldn't call it research, would we?"

]