Submission Preflight (ci-submission)
The last check before pressing submit on Editorial Manager (editorialmanager.com/ci/). CI's most
common avoidable failures are a manuscript over the 9,500-word cap (because notes were not counted)
and images that are embedded, low-resolution, or uncleared. Verify volatile specifics on the official
page before relying on them.
When to trigger
- "Submitting tomorrow" — last pass before upload
- Unsure which files / format Editorial Manager expects
- Confirming the chosen format's cap is met and images are prepared correctly
Process facts (verify volatile items on the official page)
- Publisher: University of Chicago Press (journal founded 1974).
- Portal: Editorial Manager (
editorialmanager.com/ci/); special-issue proposals may go to
cisubmissions[at]gmail.com.
- Review model: peer-reviewed; reviewed by the editors-in-chief in consultation with the
editorial team.
- Formats & caps: Article ≤ 9,500 words (includes discursive notes and all bibliographical
information); Critical Response ≤ 3,000 words; Review ≤ 500 words.
- Manuscript file: Microsoft Word.
- Citations: footnotes roughly following The Chicago Manual of Style, 17th ed., numbered
consecutively; no works-cited list.
- Images: separate 300 ppi JPEG/TIFF files, not embedded; author secures permissions before
publication.
- Multiple submission: not accepted — not under consideration elsewhere.
- Fee: no separate submission fee listed in the checked submissions instructions; optional Gold
open access fee $2,500 (confirmed on the CI submissions page 2026-06-22), requested at
submission or no later than acceptance when relevant. Re-verify the fee before submission.
- Abstract: no separate abstract requirement is listed in the checked submissions instructions.
Preflight checklist
Format & length
Citations & apparatus
Images & permissions
Policy & files
Anti-patterns
- Forgetting that notes count — a body-only count under 9,500 but a total over it
- Embedding images, supplying low-resolution files, or leaving permissions uncleared
- Adding a works-cited list or using author-date instead of footnotes
- Submitting to CI and another journal at once
- Budgeting for a submission fee that is not charged
Submission readiness pass for Critical Inquiry
Use this as a second-pass capability check. First lock the object, theoretical stakes, interpretive turn, and permission/citation discipline; then test whether the manuscript addresses humanities reviewers who expect a strong interpretive intervention rather than an empirical-results narrative.
- Primary move: Verify portal, article type, anonymity, declarations, files, data/code, and current source-map facts; return blockers before formatting advice.
- Decision ledger: return
claim / evidence / blocker / next edit rows so the next pass can patch the manuscript directly.
- Neighbor test: compare against PMLA for literary-field reach, New Literary History for theory/history, Representations for historically grounded cultural analysis; if the neighboring outlet has the stronger audience claim, recommend re-routing before polishing.
- Verification floor: before submission-ready advice, re-open
resources/official-source-map.md for volatile rules and name any live-check fact that could change the recommendation.
Output format
【Format】Article / Response / Review (cap met incl. notes? Y/N)
【Word count】total incl. notes + all bibliographical info
【Citations】Chicago 17th footnotes, no works-cited list? [Y/N]
【Manuscript file】Microsoft Word? [Y/N]
【Images】separate 300 ppi JPEG/TIFF + permissions? [Y/N]
【Single submission】not elsewhere? [Y/N]
【Next】await decision → ci-revision-and-response
Supplementary resources
1---2name: ci-submission3description: Use when running the final pre-submission preflight for Critical Inquiry (CI) via Editorial Manager — format selection, the 9,500-word limit (including discursive notes and all bibliographical information), Microsoft Word manuscript, Chicago (17th ed.) footnotes with no works-cited list, separate 300 ppi JPEG/TIFF images with author-secured permissions, and the no-simultaneous-submission rule. Final checks; it does not draft content.4---56# Submission Preflight (ci-submission)78The last check before pressing submit on **Editorial Manager** (`editorialmanager.com/ci/`). CI's most9common avoidable failures are a manuscript over the **9,500-word** cap (because notes were not counted)10and images that are embedded, low-resolution, or uncleared. Verify volatile specifics on the official11page before relying on them.1213## When to trigger1415- "Submitting tomorrow" — last pass before upload16- Unsure which files / format Editorial Manager expects17- Confirming the chosen format's cap is met and images are prepared correctly1819## Process facts (verify volatile items on the official page)2021- **Publisher:** University of Chicago Press (journal founded 1974).22- **Portal:** **Editorial Manager** (`editorialmanager.com/ci/`); special-issue proposals may go to23 `cisubmissions[at]gmail.com`.24- **Review model:** peer-reviewed; reviewed by the **editors-in-chief in consultation with the25 editorial team**.26- **Formats & caps:** **Article ≤ 9,500 words** (**includes discursive notes and all bibliographical27 information**); **Critical Response ≤ 3,000 words**; **Review ≤ 500 words**.28- **Manuscript file:** **Microsoft Word**.29- **Citations:** footnotes roughly following **The Chicago Manual of Style, 17th ed.**, numbered30 consecutively; **no works-cited list**.31- **Images:** **separate 300 ppi JPEG/TIFF** files, not embedded; **author secures permissions** before32 publication.33- **Multiple submission:** **not accepted** — not under consideration elsewhere.34- **Fee:** no separate submission fee listed in the checked submissions instructions; optional **Gold35 open access** fee **$2,500** (confirmed on the CI submissions page 2026-06-22), requested at36 submission or no later than acceptance when relevant. Re-verify the fee before submission.37- **Abstract:** no separate abstract requirement is listed in the checked submissions instructions.3839## Preflight checklist4041### Format & length42- [ ] Format chosen and its cap met (Article ≤ 9,500 / Response ≤ 3,000 / Review ≤ 500)43- [ ] Word count **includes discursive notes and all bibliographical information**44- [ ] Manuscript is a **Microsoft Word** file4546### Citations & apparatus47- [ ] Chicago (17th ed.) **footnotes**, numbered consecutively; **no works-cited list**48- [ ] Notes are lean enough to stay within the word cap4950### Images & permissions51- [ ] Images as **separate 300 ppi JPEG/TIFF** files (not embedded), with caption + **credit line**52- [ ] **Permissions secured** by the author for all published images5354### Policy & files55- [ ] **Not** submitted simultaneously elsewhere56- [ ] Original work; manuscript appropriate to CI's interdisciplinary remit57- [ ] Special-issue proposal routed correctly (if applicable)5859## Anti-patterns6061- Forgetting that notes count — a body-only count under 9,500 but a total over it62- Embedding images, supplying low-resolution files, or leaving permissions uncleared63- Adding a works-cited list or using author-date instead of footnotes64- Submitting to CI and another journal at once65- Budgeting for a submission fee that is not charged666768## Submission readiness pass for Critical Inquiry6970Use this as a second-pass capability check. First lock the object, theoretical stakes, interpretive turn, and permission/citation discipline; then test whether the manuscript addresses humanities reviewers who expect a strong interpretive intervention rather than an empirical-results narrative.7172- **Primary move:** Verify portal, article type, anonymity, declarations, files, data/code, and current source-map facts; return blockers before formatting advice.73- **Decision ledger:** return `claim / evidence / blocker / next edit` rows so the next pass can patch the manuscript directly.74- **Neighbor test:** compare against PMLA for literary-field reach, New Literary History for theory/history, Representations for historically grounded cultural analysis; if the neighboring outlet has the stronger audience claim, recommend re-routing before polishing.75- **Verification floor:** before submission-ready advice, re-open `resources/official-source-map.md` for volatile rules and name any live-check fact that could change the recommendation.7677## Output format7879```80【Format】Article / Response / Review (cap met incl. notes? Y/N)81【Word count】total incl. notes + all bibliographical info82【Citations】Chicago 17th footnotes, no works-cited list? [Y/N]83【Manuscript file】Microsoft Word? [Y/N]84【Images】separate 300 ppi JPEG/TIFF + permissions? [Y/N]85【Single submission】not elsewhere? [Y/N]86【Next】await decision → ci-revision-and-response87```8889## Supplementary resources9091- [`../../resources/external_tools.md`](../../resources/external_tools.md) — portal, file formats, image specs, Chicago tooling92- [`../../resources/official-source-map.md`](../../resources/official-source-map.md) — official CI URLs behind every fact in this pack
brycewang-stanford