The last gate before SAGE Track. CPS desk-screens on fit and basics, so a clean, correctly anonymized, within-limit package avoids an avoidable bounce. Run this checklist against the live SAGE author instructions before you click submit — volatile specifics change.
| Component | Requirement (检索于 2026-06；以官网为准) |
|---|---|
| Portal | SAGE Track (ScholarOne) — reuse an existing account if you have reviewed/authored within the past year |
| Anonymized manuscript | Identifying info removed from the main file (sent to reviewers) |
| Title page (separate) | Authors, affiliations, contact, acknowledgments — kept off the review file |
| Word count | Article max 11,000 words; references, tables, figures excluded |
| Abstract | Unstructured, ~150 words between title and body |
| References | APA-style author-date (SAGE house); in-text and list agree |
| ORCID | Required for the submitting author; co-authors encouraged to link before acceptance |
| Data availability statement | Required — available where / why not shared |
| Replication materials | Quantitative papers: staged for the CPS Dataverse (gates final acceptance) |
| Pre-analysis plan | Optional, anonymized, as supplementary material |
| Supplementary / online appendix | Robustness grids and secondary material |
Before the formatting checklist, ask whether the review file still reads like a CPS paper after anonymization:
| Gate | Pass condition | Bounce risk |
|---|---|---|
| Comparative claim | The abstract and introduction state what travels across cases, regions, regimes, or time | A single-country result is submitted with only a broad comparative promise |
| Rival explanation | The design names the strongest comparative rival and shows how the evidence adjudicates it | Robustness appears as generic controls, not a debate-specific test |
| Scope condition | The manuscript says where the argument should and should not generalize | The contribution is framed as universal without leverage |
| Evidence-package fit | Supplemental files and replication materials support the comparative claim | Appendices contain unreferenced analyses or non-anonymized materials |
If any gate fails, route back before submission. A perfectly formatted paper can still be returned or desk-rejected if the comparative contribution is invisible.
【Portal】SAGE Track (ScholarOne) — account ready? [Y/N]
【Anonymized】main file clean + separate title page? [Y/N]
【Length】words / 11,000 (refs/tables/figures excluded)
【Abstract】unstructured ~150 words? [Y/N]
【Comparative leverage visible?】claim + rival + scope condition stated? [Y/N]
【References】APA author-date, in-text=list? [Y/N]
【ORCID】submitting author linked? [Y/N]
【Data availability statement】present? [Y/N]
【Dataverse package】staged (quant)? [Y/N/NA]
【Next】cps-rebuttal (after a decision)
templates/checklist.md — copy-paste submission preflight checklist../../resources/official-source-map.md — SAGE Track, length, abstract, ORCID, and data-policy facts../../resources/external_tools.md — reference managers and anonymization tooling