Submission Preflight (eursr-submission)
The last check before submitting through ScholarOne Manuscripts (mc.manuscriptcentral.com/esr).
ESR is double-blind, so the most common avoidable failure is an under-anonymized manuscript; the
second is a missing or vague Data Availability Statement. Verify volatile specifics (caps, policy
dates, editors, any fees) on the official OUP/ESR page first.
When to trigger
- "Submitting tomorrow" — last pass before upload
- Unsure what ScholarOne expects (anonymous manuscript + DAS + replication readiness)
- Confirming the caps are met, the manuscript is anonymous, and the data statement is in place
Process facts (verify volatile items on the official page)
-
Owner / publisher: flagship journal of ECSR (European Consortium for Sociological Research, a
non-profit under German law hosted at the WZB Berlin), published by Oxford University Press. Scope:
sociology with a quantitative emphasis.
-
Editor-in-Chief: Prof. Fabrizio Bernardi (National University of Distance Education, UNED)
(verified 2026-06-22 via ECSR, OUP, and Wikipedia; re-confirm the full team/term on the live
Editorial Board page, as offices rotate).
-
Portal: ScholarOne Manuscripts,
mc.manuscriptcentral.com/esr.
-
Review model: double-blind — the manuscript must be completely anonymous; you may cite
your own work but not in identifying wording.
-
Length: Articles around 8,000 words including endnotes and references (tables and figures
excluded); longer papers are considered, but reviewers judge whether the contribution justifies the
length. (Some renderings cite a stricter cap — confirm the current figure; 待核实.)
-
Abstract: ≤200 words, no identifying information; keywords as requested.
-
Format / style: English; author-date citations (e.g., "(Gans, 1962)") per OUP/ESR conventions.
-
Data Availability Statement: required for every manuscript (policy applies to submissions from
5 Sep 2022).
-
Replication package: for statistical/computational work, submissions from 1 Jan 2025 must
deposit a package as a condition of publication (assemble it now; typically required at conditional
acceptance). Qualitative work is exempt. Restricted/confidential data are accommodated via
shareable code plus a documented access path (no need to deposit the raw data itself).
-
Article types: research Articles, Comments/Replies, and Data Briefs.
-
Fees: no submission fee (verified 2026-06-22); an open-access APC applies only if OA is chosen.
OUP sets the exact ESR APC on its live charges page and does not publish a stable figure — confirm the
current amount and any read-and-publish/transformative-agreement waiver there. Acceptance rate, time-to-first-decision, and reviewer count are not verified in
the source map — check the live OUP/ESR page; do not quote a figure.
Preflight checklist
Type & length
Anonymity (double-blind review)
Format & files
Transparency & ethics
Avoidable returns at the ESR desk
| Trip-wire |
Consequence |
Fix before upload |
| Author names / identifying acknowledgments in the file |
anonymity broken |
strip them; use system fields |
| "in our prior study" wording |
de-anonymizes the author |
neutralize to "in a prior study" |
| Endnotes/references left out of word count |
over the target on recount |
count text + endnotes + references |
| No / vague Data Availability Statement |
desk return under policy |
name archive, version, access condition |
| Statistical paper, no package plan |
stalls at conditional acceptance |
assemble the package now |
Worked micro-example (illustrative)
An author preps a comparative panel paper for ScholarOne upload.
Body + endnotes + references: 8,140 words → near ~8,000; brief justification added for the extra
Abstract: 192 words, no institutions named → within ≤200
Anonymity sweep: 4 self-citations reworded; acknowledgments removed; document properties cleared
DAS: ESS open + register via DUA, code provided → drafted
Package: master.R + harmonization + README + seed=2026, deposited on Zenodo (statistical → not exempt)
Caps verified on a recount including endnotes and references, a clean anonymity sweep, and the data
statement plus package ready — the most common avoidable returns pre-empted before upload.
Editor pushback → ESR-specific fix
-
"We could identify the authors." → Re-run the anonymity sweep on wording, acknowledgments, funding
lines, and metadata; identifiers belong only in the ScholarOne fields.
-
"Over length." → Recount with endnotes and references; prune citation strings and endnotes, or argue
the contribution justifies the length (hand to
eursr-writing-style).
-
"Data statement insufficient." → Name the archive/provider, data version, and exact access condition
(hand to
eursr-transparency-and-data).
Calibration anchors
-
Anonymity is the highest-frequency failure. At a double-blind journal, an under-anonymized file is
the most common avoidable cause of a return.
-
Endnotes and references count. ESR's target includes them — budget for them early.
-
The DAS and package are gating, not optional. A required data statement and (for statistical work)
a replication package are part of the submission posture; treat volatile dates/figures as provisional
and verify live.
Anti-patterns
- Leaving author names, affiliations, or identifying acknowledgments in the manuscript
- Treating endnotes/references as outside the word count — they count toward ~8,000
- Abstract over 200 words
- A missing or vague Data Availability Statement
- Submitting elsewhere while under ESR review
Output format
【Type】Article (~8,000) / Comment-Reply / Data-Brief — cap met or length justified? [Y/N]
【Anonymous】no identifiers + self-refs neutralized + metadata clean? [Y/N]
【Abstract】word count (≤200), non-identifying?
【Style】English + author-date consistent? [Y/N]
【DAS + package】statement drafted + package ready (or exemption noted)? [Y/N]
【Next】await decision → eursr-rebuttal on R&R
Supplementary resources
