Step 1: Submission / 第一步：投稿

Authors submit manuscripts through the journal's online submission system. The corresponding author is responsible for coordinating the submission and ensuring that manuscript files, author information, metadata, ethical declarations, funding information, and supplementary materials are complete and accurate.

作者通过本刊在线投稿系统提交稿件。通讯作者负责协调投稿，并确保稿件文件、作者信息、元数据、伦理声明、基金信息及补充材料完整、准确。

For manuscript categories normally subject to double-anonymous review, authors must prepare an anonymized main manuscript and supply identifying information separately in accordance with the Author Guidelines and Manuscript Preparation requirements. Names, affiliations, acknowledgments, identifying references to the authors' own work, and relevant document metadata should be checked before submission.

对通常采用双匿名评审的稿件类别，作者须按照《投稿须知》及《稿件准备要求》提交匿名化正文，并单独提供身份信息。投稿前应检查姓名、所属机构、致谢、可能暴露身份的作者自引及相关文件元数据。

Manuscripts sent directly by email are not ordinarily considered formal submissions unless the editorial office specifically requests or authorizes that arrangement. Submission does not imply acceptance for editorial screening, external review, or publication.

除编辑部特别要求或授权外，直接通过电子邮件发送的稿件通常不视为正式投稿。成功提交稿件并不意味着已经通过编辑初审、获准外审或获得录用。

Step 2: Administrative Check / 第二步：形式审查

Following submission, the editorial office conducts an administrative check to determine whether the materials are sufficiently complete and technically suitable for initial editorial assessment. This check concerns compliance with submission requirements and does not constitute a substantive scholarly review.

投稿后，编辑部开展形式审查，判断材料是否足够完整，并具备进入编辑初审的技术及文件条件。形式审查主要涉及投稿规范，不构成实质性学术评价。

Incomplete or improperly prepared submissions may be returned for correction before editorial screening. Authors should distinguish an administrative request for missing materials from a decision requiring scholarly revision.

材料不完整或不符合准备要求的投稿，可能在编辑初审前退回作者补充或修正。作者应区分补交材料的行政要求与需要进行学术修改的编辑决定。

Step 3: Initial Editorial Screening / 第三步：编辑初审

The editorial office or responsible editor assesses the manuscript's relevance to CRoPT's aims and scope, originality, academic significance, conceptual clarity, quality of argumentation, ethical compliance, and suitability for the selected article category.

编辑部或负责编辑评估稿件与 CRoPT 宗旨及范围的契合程度、原创性、学术意义、概念清晰度、论证质量、伦理合规性，以及是否适合所选文章类别。

A manuscript may be declined without external peer review if it falls outside the journal's scope, does not demonstrate sufficient scholarly contribution, has substantial methodological or argumentative weaknesses, raises serious ethical concerns, or does not satisfy essential submission requirements.

如果稿件不符合本刊范围、缺乏足够学术贡献、存在重要方法或论证缺陷、引发严重伦理疑虑，或未满足必要投稿要求，编辑部可不送外部同行评审而直接退稿。

The screening process should evaluate scholarly merit without discrimination based on nationality, institutional prestige, political affiliation, or agreement with a particular philosophical or ideological position. Critical engagement with competing political ideas is a legitimate part of the journal's scholarly scope.

初审应依据学术价值进行，不得因国籍、机构声望、政治归属或是否赞同某一哲学与意识形态立场而实施歧视。对不同政治思想的批判性讨论属于本刊正当的学术范围。

Step 4: Reviewer Assignment / 第四步：审稿人分配

Manuscripts requiring external peer review are assigned to reviewers with appropriate expertise in the subject matter, research tradition, methodology, language, or relevant scholarly literature. The responsible editor considers reviewer independence and the suitability of their expertise for evaluating the specific manuscript.

需要外部同行评审的稿件，将分配给在相关主题、研究传统、方法、语言或学术文献方面具有适当专长的审稿人。负责编辑应同时考虑审稿人的独立性，以及其专业背景是否适合评价具体稿件。

Reviewers are expected to disclose actual, potential, or reasonably perceived conflicts of interest before accepting an invitation. Relevant interests may include financial relationships, close personal or professional connections, recent collaboration, supervisory relationships, or direct academic competition.

审稿人应在接受邀请前披露实际、潜在或可合理认为存在的利益冲突。相关利益可能包括财务关系、密切个人或职业联系、近期合作、指导关系或直接学术竞争。

A reviewer who cannot provide an independent assessment should decline the invitation or notify the editorial office. The editor may select a replacement reviewer or adopt another appropriate independent assessment arrangement.

无法开展独立评估的审稿人应拒绝邀请或通知编辑部。负责编辑可另行选择审稿人，或采用其他适当的独立评估安排。

Step 5: Peer Review / 第五步：同行评审

CRoPT uses external double-anonymous peer review for manuscript categories normally requiring independent scholarly assessment. Other categories may be evaluated through editorial review, external peer review, or a combination of the two, as appropriate to their scholarly content and applicable article-type requirements.

对通常需要独立学术评价的稿件类别，CRoPT 采用外部双匿名同行评审。其他类别可根据其学术内容及适用的文章类型要求，采用编辑评审、外部同行评审或两者结合的方式。

Double-Anonymous Review / 双匿名评审

Under double-anonymous review, the journal does not ordinarily disclose the authors' identities to reviewers or the reviewers' identities to authors during the review process. The editorial office manages identifying information separately and expects participants to respect the confidentiality of the arrangement.

在双匿名评审中，本刊通常不向审稿人披露作者身份，也不向作者披露审稿人身份。编辑部单独管理身份信息，并要求参与人员遵守相关保密安排。

Double-anonymous review reduces the disclosure of identifying information but cannot guarantee that identities are impossible to infer. Public preprints, previously circulated conference papers, distinctive research materials, or other publicly available information may sometimes permit identification.

双匿名评审能够减少身份信息的直接披露，但不能保证身份在任何情况下均无法被推断。公开预印本、已经传播的会议论文、具有明显特征的研究材料或其他公开信息，有时仍可能使相关身份被识别。

Step 6: Review Criteria / 第六步：评审标准

Reviewers are asked to evaluate manuscripts according to the relevant scholarly standards and expectations of the manuscript category. The following criteria provide a common basis for assessment, with appropriate differences between empirical, theoretical, historical, textual, and interpretive research.

审稿人应依据相应文章类别的学术标准与要求进行评价。以下标准提供共同评估基础，同时应适当考虑实证研究、理论研究、历史研究、文本研究与解释性研究之间的方法差异。

Reviewers should provide specific, reasoned, and constructive comments. Where a manuscript engages controversial political doctrines, historical interpretations, or philosophical positions, the review should assess the quality of the scholarly argument and evidence rather than require agreement with the reviewer's own theoretical or ideological preferences.

审稿意见应具体、具有理由且富于建设性。当稿件涉及具有争议的政治学说、历史解释或哲学立场时，审稿人应评价其学术论证与证据质量，而不应要求作者服从审稿人自身的理论或意识形态偏好。

Reviewers should distinguish identifiable analytical weaknesses from legitimate differences of scholarly judgment and should avoid discriminatory, personal, or otherwise inappropriate remarks.

审稿人应区分可以明确识别的分析缺陷与正常的学术判断分歧，并避免歧视性、人身化或其他不当评论。

Step 7: Reviewer Recommendations / 第七步：审稿建议

Reviewers may provide recommendations concerning the manuscript's suitability for publication and any revisions required. Recommendations help inform editorial judgment but do not constitute binding acceptance or rejection decisions.

审稿人可以就稿件是否适合发表及所需修改提出建议。审稿建议用于支持编辑判断，但并不构成具有约束力的录用或退稿决定。

The responsible editor evaluates the reasoning, scholarly substance, and consistency of reviewer reports. Conflicting recommendations may require further editorial judgment or additional assessment, but disagreement between reviewers does not automatically require another review round.

负责编辑应评估审稿意见的理由、学术内容及彼此之间的一致性。相互矛盾的审稿建议可能需要进一步编辑判断或补充评估，但审稿人意见不同并不自动要求增加评审轮次。

Final editorial decisions are based on the available reviews, editorial assessment, journal scope, scholarly standards, and relevant ethical requirements.

最终编辑决定以现有评审意见、编辑评价、本刊范围、学术标准及相关伦理要求为依据。

Step 8: Editorial Decision / 第八步：编辑决定

After reviewing the relevant assessments, the responsible editor or editorial office communicates an editorial decision to the corresponding author. Depending on the manuscript category and stage of evaluation, the decision may take one of the following forms.

完成相关评估后，负责编辑或编辑部向通讯作者发送编辑决定。根据稿件类别及评审阶段，决定可采用以下形式。

A revision invitation does not guarantee acceptance. The editorial office may identify essential issues that must be addressed before the manuscript can proceed, while authors retain the opportunity to explain reasoned disagreement with reviewer suggestions.

修改邀请不保证录用。编辑部可指出稿件继续处理前必须解决的重要问题，作者亦可就不同意的审稿建议提供具有学术依据的解释。

Step 9: Revision by Authors / 第九步：作者修改

When revision is requested, authors should submit a revised manuscript together with a point-by-point response to the editorial and reviewer comments. The response should explain the changes made and identify their location in the revised manuscript.

当编辑部要求修改时，作者应提交修改稿及针对编辑和审稿意见的逐条回复。回复应解释已完成的修改，并注明相应内容在修改稿中的位置。

Where authors disagree with a suggestion, they should explain their position with appropriate scholarly reasoning, references, evidence, or methodological justification. An alternative response may be acceptable where it adequately addresses the underlying academic concern.

如果作者不同意某项建议，应通过适当的学术论证、文献、证据或方法说明解释其立场。只要能够充分回应相关学术问题，采用其他合理处理方式亦可接受。

Revision periods depend on the nature of the requested changes. Author revision is generally planned within an indicative range of 2–6 weeks, but the actual deadline is specified in the editorial decision letter. Authors needing additional time should contact the editorial office before that deadline where practicable.

修改期限取决于所要求的修改内容。作者修改通常按约 2–6 周的参考范围安排，但实际截止日期以编辑决定信为准。如需延期，作者应尽可能在截止日期之前联系编辑部。

Authors should ensure that revisions remain consistent with the journal's ethical, citation, anonymization, and AI-use disclosure requirements. New data, analyses, or substantially altered claims introduced during revision may require additional verification or review.

作者应确保修改稿继续遵守本刊伦理、引用、匿名化及 AI 使用披露要求。修改过程中新增的数据、分析或发生重大变化的论点，可能需要补充核验或评审。

Step 10: Reassessment and Final Decision 第十步：复审与最终决定

Revised manuscripts may be assessed by the responsible editor, returned to the original reviewers, or submitted to additional reviewers depending on the extent of revision, the remaining scholarly concerns, and the requirements of the manuscript category.

修改稿可根据修改幅度、尚未解决的学术问题及相应文章类别的要求，由负责编辑直接评价、送原审稿人复审，或交由其他审稿人评估。

Where the reassessment can be completed by the editorial office without additional external review, a further decision is normally planned within approximately 1–3 weeks after receipt of the complete revised materials. This interval is an indicative target.

如果修改稿无须再次外审、可由编辑部直接完成复核，通常计划在收到完整修改材料后约 1–3 周内作出进一步决定。该时间属于参考目标。

Where another external review round is necessary, reassessment may take longer. The editorial office should allow sufficient time for independent scholarly evaluation and should not treat the shorter editor-only reassessment period as an automatic deadline for externally reviewed revisions.

如果需要再次外部同行评审，复审时间可能延长。编辑部应为独立学术评价保留必要时间，不应将较短的编辑直接复核周期自动适用于需要外审的修改稿。

The responsible editor considers the revised manuscript, author responses, outstanding concerns, and any new assessments before reaching a decision. Acceptance is confirmed only through the journal's formal editorial communication.

负责编辑应综合修改稿、作者回复、尚未解决的问题及新增评审意见作出决定。只有本刊正式编辑通知确认录用时，稿件才视为获得正式录用。

Step 11: Acceptance and Publication Procedures 第十一步：录用与出版手续

Following formal acceptance, authors may be required to complete the necessary publication procedures. Depending on the article and its applicable requirements, these may include final author and metadata confirmation, copyright and licensing declarations, verification of funding and conflict-of-interest information, and payment of an APC where applicable.

稿件正式录用后，作者可能需要完成必要的出版手续。根据文章及适用要求，相关事项可包括最终作者与元数据确认、版权及许可声明、基金与利益冲突信息核对，以及适用情况下的 APC 支付。

Manuscript submission and scholarly peer review do not require advance APC payment. Where an APC applies, the journal's published APC and Waiver Policy governs the relevant amount, exemptions, reductions, and payment arrangements after formal acceptance.

稿件提交及学术同行评审不要求预先支付 APC。对于需要支付 APC 的文章，其适用金额、豁免、减免及正式录用后的付款安排，以本刊公布的《文章处理费与减免政策》为准。

Completion of publication procedures does not authorize substantive alteration of a manuscript without appropriate editorial handling. Any remaining changes affecting the scholarly argument, evidence, authorship, or interpretation require appropriate review or confirmation.

完成出版手续并不意味着可以未经适当编辑处理而实质性改变稿件。涉及学术论证、证据、作者署名或解释的后续重大修改，仍须接受适当审查或确认。

Step 12: Production and Proofing / 第十二步：制作与校对

Once the necessary post-acceptance requirements have been completed, the manuscript proceeds through applicable production activities. These may include copyediting, formatting, bibliographic and metadata checks, citation-style adjustments, layout preparation, full-text processing, and final publication checks.

完成必要的录用后手续后，稿件进入适用的出版制作阶段。相关工作可包括文字编辑、格式调整、书目及元数据核对、引文格式调整、版面制作、全文处理与最终出版检查。

Authors may be asked to review proofs before publication. Proof corrections should normally address typographical errors, formatting issues, inaccurate metadata, broken references, or limited factual inaccuracies. Substantial changes to arguments, findings, interpretation, or authorship require separate editorial consideration.

作者可能需要在出版前核对校样。校样修正通常应针对排印错误、格式问题、不准确的元数据、失效的参考链接或有限的事实性错误。对论证、研究结果、解释或作者署名的重大改变，须另行接受编辑审查。

Production and proofing are generally planned within approximately 2–4 weeks after formal acceptance and completion of the required publication procedures. The actual duration may vary with file readiness, author corrections, production complexity, and editorial workload.

制作与校对通常计划在正式录用及完成必要出版手续后约 2–4 周内开展。实际所需时间可能因文件准备、作者校对、制作复杂程度及编辑工作量而变化。

Completion of production does not itself determine the online publication date. Publication follows the journal's annual issue arrangements and applicable final editorial approval.

制作完成本身不直接决定文章的在线正式发表日期。正式出版仍须遵循本刊年度期次安排及适用的最终编辑确认程序。

Step 13: Publication / 第十三步：正式出版

Following formal acceptance, completion of applicable publication procedures, production, proofing, and final checks, articles are published online according to the journal's publication schedule.

稿件正式录用，并完成适用出版手续、制作、校对及最终检查后，文章按照本刊出版安排在线正式发表。

Acceptance of a manuscript does not guarantee its inclusion in the immediately forthcoming annual issue. The actual issue assignment depends on completion of the required review and production stages, the applicable editorial schedule, and the readiness of the publication materials.

稿件获得录用并不保证一定编入即将出版的年度期次。实际期次安排取决于评审与制作手续是否完成、适用的编辑出版计划，以及出版材料的准备情况。

Published articles are made freely accessible online according to the journal's Open Access and Copyright and Licensing policies. The published record should identify the article, authors, publication details, applicable license, and DOI or other persistent identifier where assigned.

已发表文章依照本刊《开放获取政策》及《版权与许可政策》在线免费开放访问。正式出版记录应注明文章、作者、出版信息、适用许可，以及已分配的 DOI 或其他持久标识符。

Publication dates and bibliographic information should reflect the actual published record. Planned issue dates should not be represented as evidence that a specific article has already been published.

发表日期与书目信息应反映实际出版记录。计划中的期次日期，不应被用作某篇文章已经完成正式发表的证明。

Expected Timeline / 预计处理周期

The following periods are indicative planning ranges for the main editorial and publication stages. They are not guaranteed processing deadlines or measured historical averages, and not every manuscript passes through every stage in the same way.

以下时间为主要编辑与出版环节的参考规划范围，不构成保证处理期限，也不代表根据历史数据计算的平均值。不同稿件的实际处理路径可能有所差异。

The timeframes provided in this policy are intended to assist planning and do not guarantee acceptance, completion of review by a particular date, inclusion in a specific issue, or publication within a fixed number of weeks.

本政策所列时间用于协助投稿规划，不保证稿件录用、评审必然在指定日期前完成、一定编入特定期次，或在固定周数内正式发表。

Confidentiality / 保密原则

Manuscripts submitted for review are treated as confidential scholarly materials. Editors, reviewers, and editorial personnel must not disclose, circulate, reproduce, cite, or use unpublished manuscripts or associated research information for unauthorized personal, academic, professional, financial, or competitive purposes.

提交评审的稿件被视为保密学术材料。编辑、审稿人及编辑工作人员不得未经授权披露、传播、复制、引用或利用未发表稿件及相关研究信息，以获取个人、学术、职业、财务或竞争性利益。

Access to manuscript information should be limited to persons involved in legitimate editorial assessment, peer review, production, ethics enquiries, or other authorized journal procedures. Disclosure outside these purposes requires an appropriate basis and compliance with relevant confidentiality and legal obligations.

稿件信息的访问应限于参与正当编辑评估、同行评审、出版制作、伦理核查或其他获授权期刊程序的人员。超出上述目的的披露，须具有适当依据并遵守相关保密及法律义务。

Reviewers and editors must not upload confidential manuscripts, substantial extracts, reviewer reports, or private editorial correspondence to unauthorized AI services. Any permitted use of technical assistance must comply with the journal's AI and Research Integrity Policy and applicable data-protection requirements.

审稿人及编辑不得将保密稿件、重要内容片段、审稿报告或私人编辑通信上传至未经授权的 AI 服务。允许的技术辅助仍须遵守本刊《人工智能与研究诚信政策》及适用的数据保护要求。

Reviewer anonymity and confidentiality should be respected in the communication of editorial decisions, subject to applicable law and any necessary authorized integrity investigation.

编辑决定的沟通过程应维护审稿人匿名性及保密原则，同时遵守适用法律及必要的获授权出版诚信调查要求。

Research Integrity During Review 评审过程中的研究诚信

If reviewers or editors identify credible concerns involving plagiarism, duplicate publication, fabricated or manipulated evidence, unreliable references, inappropriate citation practices, serious ethical deficiencies, undisclosed material conflicts of interest, or improper AI use, the editorial office may initiate appropriate checks under the journal's Publication Ethics and related policies.

如果审稿人或编辑发现具有合理依据的抄袭、重复发表、证据伪造或操控、不可靠参考文献、不当引用、严重伦理缺陷、未披露的重大利益冲突或不当 AI 使用等问题，编辑部可依据《出版伦理》及相关政策开展适当核查。

The journal may request clarification, original source materials, relevant data or research records, ethical approval or exemption information, authorship explanations, or other documentation appropriate to the concern. Requests must respect legitimate privacy, confidentiality, copyright, and data-access restrictions.

本刊可根据问题性质要求提供澄清、原始资料、相关数据或研究记录、伦理批准或豁免信息、作者署名解释或其他适当文件。核查要求须尊重正当的隐私、保密、版权及数据访问限制。

Automated similarity assessments, AI-detection indicators, and other screening tools may assist investigation but should not be treated as conclusive evidence of misconduct without contextual verification. The journal should distinguish established facts from allegations and normal academic disagreement.

自动化文本相似性评估、AI 检测指标及其他筛查工具可以辅助核查，但未经结合具体情况验证，不应被视为认定学术不端的决定性证据。本刊应区分已证实事实、尚待核查的指控及正常学术分歧。

Where serious concerns are substantiated, the journal may request corrections, suspend assessment, return the manuscript, or reject the submission as appropriate. Editorial measures should correspond to the evidence and seriousness of the issue.

如果严重问题获得证实，本刊可根据具体情况要求修正、暂停评审、退回稿件或作出退稿决定。相关编辑措施应与证据及问题严重程度相适应。

Appeals / 申诉

Authors may appeal an editorial decision where they have reasonable grounds to believe that a material procedural error, significant factual misunderstanding, unmanaged conflict of interest, or failure to consider important evidence affected the outcome.

如果作者有合理理由认为重大程序错误、重要事实误解、未妥善管理的利益冲突或未考虑关键证据的情况影响了编辑结果，可以提出申诉。

Appeals must identify the disputed decision, explain the specific grounds for reconsideration, and provide supporting evidence where available. Mere dissatisfaction with criticism, reviewer disagreement, or rejection is not sufficient to establish a procedural defect.

申诉须明确受到争议的决定、具体重新审查理由，并尽可能提供支持证据。仅对批评、审稿分歧或退稿结果不满意，不足以证明存在程序缺陷。

Appeals are reviewed under the journal's Complaints and Appeals Policy. Where a relevant conflict exists, the journal should arrange an appropriate independent assessment by a person who does not have the conflict. A successful procedural appeal may lead to reconsideration or further review but does not automatically result in acceptance.

申诉依照本刊《投诉与申诉政策》审查。如存在相关利益冲突，应由不存在该冲突的人员进行适当的独立评价。程序申诉获得支持，可能导致重新考虑或补充评审，但不自动意味着稿件被录用。

Appeals and concerns about reviewer or editor conduct may be submitted to the editorial office through the designated contact channel: [email protected].

申诉以及对审稿人或编辑行为的相关问题，可通过本刊指定渠道联系编辑部： [email protected]。

Final Responsibility / 最终责任

The journal's designated responsible editor or editorial office retains responsibility for manuscript assessment and final editorial decisions. Reviewer recommendations are considered as part of the scholarly assessment, while editorial decisions must also reflect journal scope, originality, academic contribution, ethical requirements, and publication standards.

本刊指定的负责编辑或编辑部对稿件评价及最终编辑决定承担责任。审稿建议属于学术评价依据之一，编辑决定还须综合考虑期刊范围、原创性、学术贡献、伦理要求及出版标准。

Editors and reviewers must act with professional integrity, disclose relevant conflicts, respect confidentiality, and evaluate submissions without inappropriate personal, institutional, financial, or ideological influence. Editorial board members who submit manuscripts must not participate in the editorial assessment of their own work.

编辑与审稿人须遵守职业诚信、披露相关利益冲突、维护保密原则，并避免受到不当个人、机构、财务或意识形态因素的影响。编委会成员投稿时，不得参与对本人稿件的编辑评估。

The journal may decline manuscripts at an appropriate stage where applicable scholarly, ethical, editorial, or technical requirements are not met. After formal acceptance, any serious newly identified concern should be handled through a justified editorial or publication-integrity procedure rather than an unexplained change of status.

如果稿件不符合适用的学术、伦理、编辑或技术要求，本刊可在适当阶段作出退稿决定。正式录用后如发现新的重大问题，应通过具有正当依据的编辑或出版诚信程序处理，而不应无说明地变更稿件状态。

Related Journal Policies / 相关期刊政策

For further information on submission preparation, manuscript categories, ethical responsibilities, AI use, conflicts of interest, publication charges, and appeals, consult the journal's Author Guidelines, Manuscript Preparation, Article Types, Publication Ethics, AI and Research Integrity Policy, Conflict of Interest Policy, APC & Waiver Policy, and Complaints and Appeals.

有关稿件准备、文章类别、伦理责任、AI 使用、利益冲突、出版费用及申诉的详细要求，请参阅本刊 《投稿须知》、 《稿件准备要求》、 《文章类型》、 《出版伦理》、 《人工智能与研究诚信政策》、 《利益冲突政策》、 《文章处理费与减免政策》 及 《投诉与申诉政策》。