Skills Product & Business Annual Reviews Commissioned Article Submission Checklist

Annual Reviews Commissioned Article Submission Checklist

v20260724
arecon-submission
This comprehensive checklist guides authors through the final preflight stages of submitting a commissioned article to Annual Reviews of Economics (ARE). It ensures compliance with the publisher's specific requirements, including conflict-of-interest disclosure, data reproducibility for meta-analyses, systematic coverage documentation, and adherence to the unique house style. It is crucial for authors delivering an invited review, not for unsolicited submissions.
Get Skill
96 downloads
Overview

Delivery Preflight (arecon-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 any quantitative synthesis (meta-analysis) the review itself reports

Process facts (检索于 2026-06;以官网为准 — re-confirm on the Annual Reviews author pages)

  • Publisher / venue. ARE is published by Annual Reviews (nonprofit), founded 2009, as an annual volume; it is a review series, distinct from JEL (AEA survey of record), JEP (non-technical), and Handbook chapters. Articles are commissioned by the Editorial Committee; 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).
  • Open access. Volumes are published open access under the Subscribe-to-Open (S2O) model (2023–2025 converted; 2026 in production), under a Creative Commons license — there is no author-facing APC under S2O (检索于 2026-06;以官网为准). Do not treat S2O as a pay-to-publish APC.
  • 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).
  • Reproducibility of the review itself. A pure review reports no new data. The transparency obligation bites on your systematic coverage (a documented, near-PRISMA-style account of how the literature was searched and selected, from arecon-literature-synthesis) and on any meta-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 (numbered/name style distinct from AEA author-year) 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 limits are 待核实 — confirm on the author pages; typical published reviews run ~25–40 pages (检索于 2026-06;以官网为准).

Preflight checklist

Article & files

  • This is a commissioned/invited article delivered in the invited-article workflow (not a cold submission)
  • Manuscript complete; references complete and accurate (house style applied at production)
  • Title page: title, complete author affiliations, keywords; abstract in review style
  • Figures meet current specs; reproduced exhibits have permission and attribution

Transparency

  • Systematic-coverage account documented (search strategy, inclusion/exclusion) — near-PRISMA where applicable
  • Any meta-analysis the review reports: data + code reproducible and depositable

Declarations

  • Conflict-of-interest / potential-bias disclosure prepared per Annual Reviews policy
  • Funding sources stated
  • AI not listed as an author

Volatile re-confirms

  • Exact length/abstract limits, current reference style, figure specs, disclosure format, S2O/OA status — re-checked on the Annual Reviews author pages (检索于 2026-06)

Anti-patterns

  • Treating ARE 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 systematic review with no documented search

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 checked on Annual Reviews pages? Y/N
【Next step】deliver to Annual Reviews → arecon-review-process for what to expect

Supplementary resources

Info
Name arecon-submission
Version v20260724
Size 3.69KB
Updated At 2026-07-28
Language