| name | phg-submission |
| description | Use when running the final pre-submission preflight for Progress in Human Geography (PiHG) via SAGE Track — genre selection, double-anonymous preparation, the ~8,000-word inclusive cap, the ~100-word abstract, 5+ keywords, SAGE Harvard style, ORCID, and ethics declarations. Final checks; it does not draft content. |
Submission Preflight (phg-submission)
The last check before pressing submit on SAGE Track. PiHG is double-anonymous and has a short,
inclusive word cap, so the two most common avoidable failures are an under-anonymized manuscript and
an over-length one — plus the fatal misfit of sending an empirical study to a review journal.
Verify volatile specifics on the official pages before relying on them (检索于 2026-07-16；以官网为准).
When to trigger
- "Submitting tomorrow" — last pass before upload
- Unsure which files/metadata SAGE Track expects
- Confirming the essay is a review (not an empirical study), within cap, and anonymized
Process facts (verify volatile items on the official page)
- Owner / publisher: SAGE (PiHG founded 1977 at Edward Arnold).
- Portal: SAGE Track (ScholarOne-based), via the SAGE journal page.
- Genre: free-standing review article (open submission) vs. commissioned Progress Report /
PiHG Lecture (invited — do not submit cold). Confirm the piece is a critical review, not an
empirical study — PiHG does not publish empirical results or detailed cases.
- Review model: double-anonymous peer review. Anonymize the manuscript; provide a separate title page.
- Length: review article ~4,000–8,000 words, incl. endnotes, excl. bibliography. (待核实 — confirm current cap)
- Abstract & keywords: unstructured abstract ~100 words; minimum 5 keywords. (待核实)
- Style: SAGE Harvard author–date referencing, consistent throughout.
- ORCID: SAGE commonly requests ORCID for the submitting author (verify whether mandatory). (待核实)
- Ethics: COPE member; follow SAGE research-integrity and generative-AI policies; disclose per
policy. Positionality/competing-interests statements where relevant.
- Fee: no submission or publication fee stated for standard articles; open-access options handled
by SAGE. (待核实)
Preflight checklist
Genre, fit & length
Abstract, keywords & style
Anonymity (double-anonymous)
Metadata, exhibits & compliance
The misfit trap (PiHG-specific)
The fastest rejection is an empirical paper sent as a review. Before upload, re-confirm: the essay's
spine is an argument about a literature, its conclusion exceeds any single cited work, and there is
no findings section. If any of these fails, this is the wrong journal — do not submit.
File set for SAGE Track (verify current requirements)
- Anonymized main manuscript (no identifiers, clean metadata)
- Separate, non-anonymous title page (authors, affiliations, ORCID, acknowledgments)
- Conceptual figures/exhibits at required resolution (vector where possible)
- Cover letter (genre, intervention, fit); any supplementary material; disclosures per policy
Anti-patterns
- Sending an empirical study "framed as a review" (top desk-reject cause)
- Overrunning the short cap once endnotes are counted
- Leaving author identifiers in text, self-citations, or file metadata
- Topic-only abstract; fewer than 5 keywords; non-Harvard citations
- Submitting an uncommissioned "Progress Report"
Output format
【Genre / fit】review article / Progress Report(invited) · is-a-review-not-a-study? [Y/N]
【Word count】total incl. endnotes vs. ~8,000 cap (excl. bibliography)
【Abstract / keywords】~100-word intervention abstract + 5 keywords? [Y/N]
【Anonymized】text + self-refs + metadata clean? [Y/N]
【Style / ethics】SAGE Harvard + ORCID + disclosures? [Y/N]
【Next】await decision → phg-review-process (what to expect) → phg-rebuttal on revision
Supplementary resources
