| name | arsoc-submission |
| description | Use when running the final delivery preflight for a commissioned Annual Review of Sociology (ARSoc) review via the Annual Reviews production system — disclosure statements, reference/format compliance, figure permissions, and the transparency of the coverage account or any meta-analysis the review contains. Final checks; it does not draft content or handle the response letter (arsoc-revision). |
Delivery Preflight (arsoc-submission)
When to trigger
- "Delivering soon" — last check before handing the commissioned review to Annual Reviews
- Unsure which files, declarations, and permissions the production system expects
- Confirming reference style, format, and figure specs are Annual Reviews-compliant
- Verifying transparency obligations for the coverage account and any quantitative synthesis the review reports
Process facts (检索于 2026-06；以官网为准 — re-confirm on the Annual Reviews author pages)
- Publisher / venue. ARSoc is published by Annual Reviews (nonprofit), founded 1975 (ISSN 0360-0572 print / 1545-2115 online), as an annual volume; it is a review series, distinct from ASR/AJS (sociology's primary-research flagships), Sociological Theory (theory development), and the sister Annual Reviews of Psychology/Economics. Articles are invitation-led: "experienced researchers are invited by journals' Editorial Committees to write Annual Reviews articles." There is no cold-submission portal for unsolicited manuscripts — delivery happens within the invited-article workflow (检索于 2026-06；以官网为准).
- How a topic gets onto the list / suggesting one. There is no public author-submission portal; the Editorial Committee sets the topic list and issues invitations. The source map records no formal author topic-proposal channel, so if you want to propose a topic or be considered, route it informally to the Editorial Committee (see the Editorial Committee page) — 待核实 whether a formal proposal mechanism exists; confirm on the author pages (检索于 2026-06；以官网为准).
- Review/acceptance bar. Annual Reviews states that review selections are assessed for accuracy, rigor, and balance (检索于 2026-06；以官网为准).
- Editors. Co-editors Douglas S. Massey & Mary C. Waters (co-editors since Aug 2023; verified 2026-06-22 — re-confirm on the Editorial Committee page, editors rotate).
- Open access / fees. Current volumes are published open access under the Subscribe-to-Open (S2O) model: Annual Reviews announced the S2O commitment in 2023 and reports that in 2024 all volumes were successfully published OA. S2O is library/subscriber-funded, not author-funded, so it is not a pay-to-publish APC; treat any author-facing fee as 待核实 on the author pages (检索于 2026-06；以官网为准).
- Disclosure (required). Annual Reviews requires authors to disclose potential sources of bias / conflicts of interest; funding sources are stated. Prepare the disclosure as the author pages specify (检索于 2026-06；以官网为准).
- Transparency of the review itself. A pure review reports no new data. The transparency obligation bites on your coverage account (a documented, near-PRISMA-style search/selection record, from
arsoc-transparency-and-reproducibility) and on any meta-analysis/bibliometric analysis you contribute — its data and code should be reproducible and depositable (检索于 2026-06；以官网为准).
- Reference & format style. Annual Reviews applies its own house format and reference style (distinct from ASA author-date) at production; the production editor copyedits to house style, so the delivered draft need not pre-conform, but reference data must be complete and accurate (检索于 2026-06；以官网为准).
- Figures / permissions. Confirm figure specs and secure permission for any reproduced exhibit (检索于 2026-06；以官网为准).
- Length / abstract limits. Exact word/abstract/keyword limits are 待核实 and are not asserted from the source map — they are article-specific delivery facts set by the current author resources and your editor correspondence; confirm there rather than assuming a number (检索于 2026-06；以官网为准).
Preflight checklist
Article & files
Transparency
Declarations
Volatile re-confirms
Anti-patterns
- Treating ARSoc like a journal with a cold-submission portal — it is invited; deliver through the commissioned workflow
- Treating S2O open access as a pay-to-publish APC (it is not author-funded under S2O)
- Omitting the conflict-of-interest / bias disclosure Annual Reviews requires
- Asserting a length limit, fee, or editor name from memory rather than the live author pages
- Delivering a meta-analysis with no reproducible data/code, or a review with no documented coverage account
Output format
【Article type】commissioned/invited review (not cold submission)? Y/N
【References】complete + accurate (house style at production)? Y/N
【Abstract + front matter】review-style abstract, keywords, affiliations? Y/N
【Transparency】coverage account documented; meta-analysis (if any) reproducible? Y/N
【Disclosure】COI / bias disclosure + funding prepared? Y/N
【Figures】specs met; permissions secured? Y/N
【Volatile re-confirms】length / style / OA / disclosure / editors checked on Annual Reviews pages? Y/N
【Next step】deliver to Annual Reviews → arsoc-revision after the Committee letter
Supplementary resources
