技能 职场通用 艺术公报投稿预审指南

艺术公报投稿预审指南

v20260724
artbull-submission
这是为艺术公报(The Art Bulletin)作者准备的最终投稿预审清单。它详细指导作者如何检查和修正手稿、摘要、插图、封面等所有文件,确保符合期刊要求的双盲匿名化、文件格式(必须为Word)、字数限制和学术规范,防止稿件因格式问题被退回。
获取技能
475 次下载
概览

Submission Preflight (artbull-submission)

The last check before e-mailing the submission to the.art.bulletin@collegeart.org (or via a large-file transfer service). The Art Bulletin is double-blind and accepts Microsoft Word only — no PDFs, because PDFs cannot be anonymized for review. The most common avoidable failures are broken anonymity, a PDF submission, and an over-length manuscript. Verify volatile specifics on the official page first.

When to trigger

  • "Submitting this week" — last pass before sending the files
  • Confirming the file set, caps, and anonymization
  • Checking that permissions are at least underway (see artbull-images-and-permissions)

Process facts (verify volatile items on the official page)

  • Owner / publisher: College Art Association (CAA) / Taylor & Francis (Routledge).
  • Submission: electronic only — e-mail (the.art.bulletin@collegeart.org) or large-file transfer; Microsoft Word, not PDF.
  • Review model: double-blind — strip all author-identifying information from text and notes.
  • Article length: up to 16,000 words including endnotes (待核实; confirm current cap).
  • Abstract: no more than 100 words; biographical statement ≤ 50 words on the cover sheet.
  • Illustrations: maximum 20 images with captions in a single Word file ≤ 10 MB at submission; high-resolution files supplied promptly on acceptance.
  • Style: The Chicago Manual of Style, endnotes (CMOS ch. 14); 12-pt, double-spaced.
  • Permissions: the author secures and pays for reproduction rights and photography (fair use per the CAA code).
  • Fee: no submission fee stated; optional open-access APC under T&F Open Select after acceptance (confirmed as the model 2026-06-22; the APC amount is set by Taylor & Francis — check the live T&F page if choosing open access).

Preflight checklist

Files (separate Word files)

  • Manuscript (Word, 12-pt, double-spaced, endnotes)
  • Abstract (≤ 100 words)
  • Illustrations file (single Word file ≤ 10 MB, ≤ 20 images with captions)
  • Separate captions/list-of-illustrations file
  • Cover sheet (author, ≤ 50-word bio, contact, word count)

Anonymity (double-blind)

  • No author name/affiliation/acknowledgments in manuscript or notes
  • Self-citations neutralized (no "as I argued in…")
  • Submitted as Word, not PDF (so the office can anonymize)
  • Identifying file metadata stripped (document properties)

Length, style & images

  • Article ≤ ~16,000 words including endnotes
  • Chicago notes/endnotes; "Figure n" references consistent; full credit-line captions
  • Permissions secured or clearly underway; high-res image plan ready for acceptance

Anti-patterns

  • Submitting a PDF (cannot be anonymized — breaks the process)
  • Leaving author identifiers in text, notes, or file metadata
  • Over 16,000 words once endnotes are counted; abstract over 100 words
  • More than 20 illustrations or an illustration file over 10 MB
  • Treating permissions as a post-acceptance problem only

Desk-reject and return-without-review triggers at this venue

The College Art Association's quarterly can return a manuscript before review when the form makes review impossible or the fit is wrong.

Trigger Why it stops the paper here Preflight fix
Submitted as PDF A PDF cannot be anonymized for double-blind review Submit Microsoft Word only
Author identifiers / metadata Names, "as I argued in…," or document properties reveal the author Strip from text, notes, and properties pane
Over length Endnotes counted push the manuscript past the cap Trim apparatus; recount with endnotes included

Worked vignette: the preflight that caught three silent failures

Suppose an author is ready to e-mail an article on a Baroque ceiling program. The preflight finds three problems invisible in a casual read. The document properties still carry the author's name from a re-save — a metadata leak that would breach the double-blind process. The word count "passed" only because the author forgot the endnotes, whose dense apparatus pushes the total over the long-form cap. And the illustrations were spread across two Word files, not the single file the office expects, with one over the size limit. None of these touches the argument, yet all three could trigger a return without review; the author clears the metadata, recounts and trims the notes, and consolidates the plates into one file.

Calibration anchor (hedge where uncertain)

  • The most common avoidable failures here are a PDF submission, broken anonymity (text, notes, or metadata), and an over-length manuscript once endnotes are counted — verify every volatile cap on the journal's current submission guidelines, and stage the author-funded high-resolution images for acceptance.

Output format

【Files】manuscript · abstract · illustrations · captions · cover sheet — all Word? [Y/N]
【Anonymized】text + notes + metadata clean; Word not PDF? [Y/N]
【Length】words incl. endnotes ≤ 16,000? abstract ≤ 100? bio ≤ 50? [Y/N]
【Illustrations】≤ 20 images, file ≤ 10 MB? [Y/N]
【Style】Chicago endnotes + captions/credit lines? [Y/N]
【Permissions】secured/underway + high-res plan? [Y/N]
【Next】await decision → artbull-revision-and-response on R&R

Supplementary resources

信息
Category 职场通用
Name artbull-submission
版本 v20260724
大小 6.03KB
更新时间 2026-07-28
语言