The abstract must be written in English and presented in a structured format, with a maximum of 150 words.

The abstract should include the following components:

• Introduction: brief background of the study
• Aim: objective of the research
• Materials and Methods: research design, participants/data, and analysis
• Results: key findings, including specific results where applicable (e.g., statistical values, effect sizes, or key themes)
• Conclusion: main conclusion
• Implication: theoretical or practical contribution

The abstract must be concise, clear, and reflect the main contribution of the study. Abbreviations and citations should be avoided.

This section should provide a concise yet critical overview of the research background, supported by recent and relevant literature ( from the last 10 years, with at least 10 peer-reviewed journal articles). The introduction must not merely summarize prior studies, but synthesize them to establish the current state of the art and identify clear research gaps.

Authors are required to:

1. Present the background of the problem, highlighting its urgency and relevance.
2. Review the state of the art, by synthesizing key findings from recent studies 
3. Identify the research gap, by critically showing limitations, inconsistencies, or underexplored areas in existing studies.
4. Clearly state the novelty (original contribution) of the study, explaining how it addresses the identified gap.
5. Formulate the research objective and/or hypothesis at the end of the introduction.

The literature review should function as an argument that justifies the novelty and contribution of the study, rather than a descriptive summary. Avoid the use of secondary citations.

This segment should inform readers of the materials and methods that the authors have used for the research. Please ensure that sufficient information has been given to allow for repetition of the research.

• Explain the research design and data, including sources, sampling, participant characteristics, and data collection procedures.
• Describe instruments or data collection protocols, including:
  • validity and reliability (quantitative), or
  • interview guides, observation procedures, and researcher role (qualitative).
• Explain the data analysis in a clear and operational manner, including:
  • Data preparation: cleaning, transcription, coding, or handling missing/incomplete data
  • Analytical approach:
    • statistical tests/models (quantitative), or
    • qualitative approach (e.g., thematic analysis, grounded theory, phenomenology)
  • Step-by-step procedures:
    • Rigor and validation:
      • quantitative: assumption testing, reliability, validity,
      • qualitative: credibility, dependability, confirmability, triangulation
  • Tools/software used (if applicable)
  • Justification of analytical choices, supported by methodological references
• Ensure transparency and reproducibility, so the study can be evaluated and, where applicable, replicated.
• Support the methodology with at least 5 recent (last 10 years) peer-reviewed references.
• Follow relevant reporting standards (e.g., COREQ, JARS APA).

Please use reporting guidelines referred by global academic community such as found here. 

This section should critically interpret the study findings in relation to existing literature and relevant demographic or contextual factors. The discussion must go beyond a mere repetition or description of the results.

Authors are required to:

1. Focus on interpreting the findings, rather than restating statistical, descriptive, or themes results.
2. Situate the findings within the state of the art, by comparing and contrasting them with at least 10 recent (last 10 years) peer-reviewed journal articles that are directly relevant to the study.
3. Highlight agreements, contradictions, or extensions of previous research, and explain possible reasons for these patterns (e.g., methodological differences, cultural context, sample characteristics).
4. Clearly demonstrate the novelty and contribution of the findings, by explaining how they advance, refine, or challenge existing knowledge.
5. Discuss theoretical and practical implications, particularly how the findings inform theory development, policy, or applied practice.
6. Address the strengths and limitations of the study in a balanced and critical manner, including methodological, contextual, and analytical considerations.
7. Avoid redundancy, ensuring that the discussion does not duplicate the results section, but instead provides deeper analytical insight.

The discussion should function as a critical dialogue between the study findings and existing knowledge, leading to a clear articulation of the study’s contribution to the field.

All reference results referred to in the article text must use primary references. We will usually expect a minimum of 10 to 25 references primarily to journal papers, depending on the length of the paper. The reference uses the APA 6^th Edition. Cite references in the text by name and year in parentheses.

Because tables and figures supplement the text, all tables and figures should be referenced in the text. The author also must explain what the reader should look for when using the table or figure. The reference table and figure use the APA 6^th Edition.