Sample and research question
The purposive sample contains five submission guides researched on : JMIS, EJIS, JAIS, IEEE TKDE, and the Journal of Operations Management. They were selected because the contemporaneous guide work exposed cross-surface dependencies, not because they represent all journals or publishers.
What counts as a separate source
A source is a distinct official URL published by the journal, society, publisher, or its author center. Navigation wrappers and duplicate mirrors do not create another source. A page counts only when it resolves a material author decision that another mapped page does not settle on its own.
Journal overview
The journal-level page that establishes subject scope, audience, department, or content-type boundaries.
Author workflow
The page that controls files, formatting, declarations, submission mechanics, or author-facing requirements.
Policy or editorial
A society, publisher, or journal surface that resolves review policy, disclosure, genre, or contribution framing.
Counting required and supporting surfaces
A surface is marked required when removing it leaves at least one core launch decision unresolved. A surface is supporting context when it sharpens contribution or editorial fit without controlling the minimum administrative submission job. That distinction is why the Journal of Operations Management maps three useful pages but counts two as required for the core job.
- All five sampled journals needed at least two required official surfaces.
- Four of five needed three required surfaces.
- The result describes this sample only; it is not a publisher-wide rate.
Evidence, classification, and access
Official URLs and their visible instructions are sourced evidence. Source roles, decision-area labels, required-surface judgments, and the cross-journal interpretation are Manusights classifications. They are displayed separately so another researcher can inspect the evidence and disagree with the classification.
A blocked automated request is not treated as a broken page, a changed rule, or missing evidence. A verified change requires a second manual source review with preserved before/after evidence.
Maintenance and correction policy
The typed dataset, public CSV, canonical guide owners, source URLs, and aggregate study claims are checked together by the guarded SEO preflight. It fails closed if those representations diverge. Source access limitations trigger review rather than silent removal.
- Recheck sources at least every 120 days or sooner when a guide is materially revised.
- Preserve the prior observation before recording a verified rule change.
- Do not infer changes from redirects, temporary blocks, or missing markup alone.
- Publish corrections with the affected journal, source, date, and corrected classification.
To report a correction, use the Manusights contact page and include the journal, official source, and the specific field that needs review.
Limitations
- The sample is small, purposive, and concentrated in information systems, computing, and management.
- Source fragmentation can change when publishers redesign or consolidate their author guidance.
- URL accessibility was checked on 26 August 2026; content was not reclassified without a full manual evidence review.
- The map does not reproduce full author instructions, predict editorial decisions, or replace the live official pages.
- No backlink, citation, ranking, or traffic outcome is implied by publishing the study.
Open study file
Inspect the source paths directly
Download the CSV with journal owners, required-source counts, official URLs, decision areas, and review date.