Author Guidelines and Paper Submission

AUTHOR GUIDELINES AND MANUSCRIPT SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

1. GENERAL AUTHOR GUIDELINES

Science Mundi is an international, peer-reviewed, open-access scholarly journal published by AJER Publishing. The journal is committed to advancing scientific knowledge through the publication of original, high-quality research, theoretical contributions, methodological innovations, and interdisciplinary scholarship.

Science Mundi welcomes empirical studies, experimental investigations, theoretical research, systematic reviews, and interdisciplinary contributions addressing scientific, technological, environmental, educational, social, economic, and developmental challenges within the journal's aims and scope.

The journal encourages submissions employing quantitative, qualitative, mixed-methods, experimental, computational, and other scientifically appropriate approaches, provided that the research demonstrates originality, methodological rigor, ethical compliance, and a clear contribution to existing knowledge.

All manuscripts submitted to Science Mundi must comply with the following requirements:

1. Relevance to the Journal's Scope: Manuscripts must fall within the journal's stated aims and scope and demonstrate clear relevance to scientific knowledge, technological advancement, policy development, or professional practice.

2. Originality and Scientific Contribution: Manuscripts must present original research findings, theoretical insights, methodological developments, or critical syntheses of existing scholarship. Authors must clearly demonstrate how their work contributes to the advancement of knowledge.

3. Scientific and Methodological Rigor: Research must employ appropriate and adequately justified methodologies. Research designs, sampling procedures, experimental protocols, data collection methods, and analytical techniques must be consistent with the study objectives.

4. Research Quality and Reliability: Findings must be supported by credible empirical evidence, sound theoretical reasoning, systematic analysis, or valid experimental results. Claims concerning generalizability, transferability, or scientific significance must be appropriately justified.

5. Clarity of Academic Writing: Manuscripts must be written in clear, coherent, and grammatically correct academic English. Authors should ensure logical organization, consistency in terminology, appropriate scientific expression, and accurate presentation of technical information.

6. Referencing and Citation Standards: Authors must use a recognized academic referencing style consistently throughout the manuscript. APA 7th edition is the preferred referencing style for Science Mundi.

7. Research Transparency and Reproducibility: Authors must provide sufficient methodological information to enable readers to understand, evaluate, and, where applicable, reproduce the research procedures, experimental protocols, computational analyses, or statistical results.

8. Data Sources and Research Documentation: Authors must clearly identify primary and secondary data sources and provide accurate information concerning research instruments, datasets, experimental materials, analytical software, and other relevant research resources.

9. Peer Review Compliance: All manuscripts are subject to editorial screening and double-blind peer review. Authors must cooperate with the editorial office and respond appropriately to reviewers' comments and recommendations.

10. Research Ethics: Authors must comply with applicable ethical standards, including obtaining ethical approval where required, securing informed consent, protecting participant confidentiality, ensuring responsible treatment of research subjects, and disclosing potential conflicts of interest.

11. Originality and Publication Status: Manuscripts must not have been previously published or be under simultaneous consideration by another journal. Any related publications, preprints, or overlapping submissions must be disclosed.

12. Authorship Responsibility: All listed authors must have made substantial scholarly contributions, reviewed and approved the final manuscript, and agreed to its submission.

13. Authenticity of References: All references must be accurate, complete, authentic, and independently verifiable. Fabricated references, nonexistent publications, misleading citations, and false DOIs are strictly prohibited.

14. Artificial Intelligence and Research Integrity: Manuscripts must represent the authors' original intellectual contributions. AI-generated research presented as original scholarship is not accepted. Authors must disclose any use of artificial intelligence tools in manuscript preparation, where applicable. Language-editing tools may be used to improve grammar and clarity, provided that the authors retain full responsibility for the accuracy and integrity of the work.

15. Publication Agreement: Submission confirms that the authors have read, understood, and agreed to the journal's editorial policies, publication ethics requirements, copyright provisions, peer review procedures, and applicable publication terms.

16. Compliance with Editorial Instructions: Authors must carefully address all editorial and reviewer comments. Where a copyedited manuscript is provided, corrections must be made directly in the designated document unless otherwise instructed.

Science Mundi reserves the right to return manuscripts that do not comply with these requirements before they proceed to external peer review.

2. MANUSCRIPT SUBMISSION

Science Mundi accepts manuscripts electronically through its official Open Journal Systems (OJS) submission platform.

Authors must submit their manuscripts through the journal's online submission system.

2.1 Online Submission Procedure

Step 1: Registration and Login

Authors must register for an account on the Science Mundi submission portal. Previously registered authors should log in using their existing credentials.

Step 2: Initiating a New Submission

After logging in, authors should access the submission section and select the option to begin a new manuscript submission.

Step 3: Reviewing Submission Requirements

Authors must carefully read the submission checklist, author guidelines, copyright statement, and publication policies before proceeding.

Step 4: Uploading the Manuscript

Manuscripts must be uploaded in Microsoft Word-compatible formats, preferably .docx.

For manuscripts containing complex mathematical equations, statistical notation, or computational models, authors may use LaTeX where permitted by the editorial office.

Supplementary materials, datasets, research instruments, experimental protocols, ethical approval documentation, or other supporting files may be uploaded where necessary.

Step 5: Entering Manuscript Metadata

Authors must provide accurate manuscript information, including:

• Full manuscript title.

• Abstract and keywords.

• Full names of all contributing authors.

• Institutional affiliations.

• Valid email addresses.

• Corresponding author details.

• ORCID identifiers, where available.

• Relevant subject classifications, where applicable.

• Additional information requested by the submission system.

All metadata must correspond with the information provided in the manuscript.

Step 6: Submission Confirmation

Authors must review the uploaded files and manuscript metadata before completing the submission.

Upon successful submission, the system generates an electronic acknowledgment and assigns a unique manuscript reference number.

The acknowledgment is ordinarily sent to the email address associated with the author's account.

Step 7: Editorial Screening and Peer Review

The editorial office conducts an initial assessment to determine whether the manuscript meets the journal's scope, formatting, originality, ethical, methodological, and scholarly quality requirements.

Manuscripts that satisfy the initial screening requirements proceed to the appropriate editorial and peer review stages.

Authors will receive subsequent communication regarding editorial decisions and revision requirements.

2.2 Online Submission Portal

All manuscripts must be submitted through the official Science Mundi online submission platform:

Science Mundi Online Submission Portal:

https://sciencemundi.net/ojs/index.php/scimundi/index

Authors should retain their submission reference numbers for future correspondence.

3. PAPER FORMAT AND PAGE LAYOUT

All manuscripts submitted to Science Mundi must comply with the following formatting requirements.

3.1 File Format

Manuscripts must be prepared and submitted in Microsoft Word format (.doc or .docx).

The preferred format is .docx, which facilitates editorial review, copyediting, and manuscript production.

Manuscripts involving complex mathematical or scientific notation may be prepared using LaTeX, subject to the journal's submission requirements.

3.2 Manuscript Length

Manuscripts should not exceed 20 pages, including references, tables, figures, and appendices, unless otherwise approved by the editorial office.

Authors should present their arguments concisely while providing sufficient information to ensure methodological transparency, scientific accuracy, and scholarly completeness.

3.3 Font Type and Size

All manuscripts prepared in Microsoft Word must use Times New Roman throughout the document.

The prescribed font sizes are as follows:

Manuscript Component	Font Size
Manuscript title	12 pt
Author names	11 pt
Institutional affiliations	10 pt
Abstract	10 pt
Keywords	10 pt
Main body text	11 pt
Section headings and subheadings	11 pt
References	11 pt
Tables and figures	10–11 pt

The manuscript title and major section headings should appear in bold.

Authors must maintain consistent formatting throughout the manuscript.

3.4 Line Spacing

The entire manuscript must use single line spacing, including the abstract, main text, tables, references, and appendices.

Unnecessary blank lines and excessive paragraph spacing should be avoided.

3.5 Page Size, Orientation, and Margins

Manuscripts must follow these page specifications:

• Paper size: A4 (210 × 297 mm).

• Orientation: Portrait.

• Left margin: 1.5 inches.

• Right margin: 1 inch.

• Top margin: 1 inch.

• Bottom margin: 1 inch.

Landscape orientation may be used for exceptionally wide tables, figures, or scientific illustrations where necessary.

3.6 Page Numbering

All manuscript pages must be numbered consecutively.

Page numbers must appear at the bottom center of each page.

No additional information, including footnotes, should appear in the bottom margin.

3.7 Author Information

The manuscript title page must clearly indicate:

1. Full names of all authors.

2. Complete institutional affiliations.

3. Country of institutional affiliation.

4. Corresponding author's email address.

5. ORCID identifiers, where available.

For double-blind peer review, authors may be required to submit a separate title page and an anonymized manuscript.

3.8 Keywords

Each manuscript must include three to six keywords representing the principal concepts, variables, scientific methods, geographical focus, or research themes.

Keywords should appear immediately below the abstract and be separated by semicolons.

3.9 Language and Proofreading

Manuscripts must be written in clear, grammatically correct academic English.

Authors should carefully proofread their manuscripts to eliminate spelling mistakes, grammatical errors, punctuation inconsistencies, typographical errors, and inaccurate scientific terminology.

Microsoft Word's spelling and grammar tools or reputable language-editing applications, such as Grammarly, may be used to improve clarity.

Authors remain responsible for the accuracy and quality of their manuscripts.

3.10 Mathematical Equations and Scientific Notation

Manuscripts containing mathematical expressions, statistical formulas, or scientific notation must ensure that:

1. Mathematical symbols and variables are clearly defined.

2. Equations are accurately presented and appropriately numbered where necessary.

3. Mathematical notation is consistent throughout the manuscript.

4. Variables, constants, parameters, and operators are distinguishable.

5. Equations are correctly referenced in the text.

6. Mathematical derivations are logically presented.

7. Assumptions underlying mathematical or statistical models are explicitly stated.

8. Symbols and abbreviations are explained when first introduced.

Authors should use Microsoft Word's equation editor or appropriate LaTeX mathematical typesetting facilities.

Equations should not be submitted as low-resolution screenshots.

3.11 Tables, Figures, and Scientific Illustrations

Tables, figures, graphs, diagrams, photographs, and other scientific illustrations must be relevant, clearly presented, and appropriately integrated into the manuscript.

Authors must ensure that:

1. All tables and figures are numbered consecutively.

2. Each table and figure has a clear, descriptive title.

3. Tables and figures are referred to appropriately in the main text.

4. Data presented in tables and figures are accurate and consistent with the narrative.

5. Sources are acknowledged where information has been adapted or reproduced.

6. Tables are editable and not unnecessarily presented as screenshots.

7. Figures and scientific illustrations are legible and of sufficient quality for publication.

8. Graphs contain appropriately labeled axes, units of measurement, and legends where applicable.

Tables and figures should follow the formatting conventions of APA 7th edition or the journal's approved scientific presentation requirements.

3.12 Referencing Consistency

Authors must use APA 7th edition consistently throughout the manuscript unless another referencing style has been expressly approved by the editorial office.

All in-text citations must correspond to entries in the reference list, and all reference-list entries must be cited in the manuscript.

3.13 Published Articles as Formatting Guides

Authors are encouraged to consult recently published Science Mundi articles for guidance on manuscript organization, presentation, and formatting.

However, the current author guidelines take precedence over formatting practices observed in previously published articles.

4. REQUIRED STRUCTURE OF THE MANUSCRIPT

Manuscripts submitted to Science Mundi should generally follow the structure outlined below.

Authors may adapt the structure where necessary to reflect the nature of their research while maintaining scientific coherence, methodological rigor, and scholarly completeness.

4.1 Manuscript Title

The title must accurately reflect the central focus, variables, scientific problem, population, or context of the study.

A suitable title should be:

• Clear, concise, and informative.

• Grammatically correct.

• Consistent with the objectives and findings.

• Free from unnecessary abbreviations and excessive technical terminology.

For experimental, mathematical, or computational research, the title should identify the principal scientific problem, analytical method, or application under investigation.

4.2 Author Names and Institutional Affiliations

The full names of all contributing authors must appear below the manuscript title.

Each author's institutional affiliation should include the relevant department or school, institution, and country.

The corresponding author's email address must be clearly indicated.

ORCID identifiers should be provided where available.

4.3 Acknowledgments (Optional)

Authors may acknowledge individuals, institutions, organizations, laboratories, or funding bodies that provided assistance during the research process.

Acknowledgments should recognize contributions that do not meet the criteria for authorship.

Funding support should be disclosed accurately, including grant numbers where applicable.

To preserve anonymity during double-blind peer review, identifying acknowledgments may be withheld from the version sent to reviewers.

4.4 Abstract

Every manuscript must include a concise, informative, and self-contained abstract.

The abstract should provide an accurate summary of the research without requiring readers to consult the full manuscript.

For empirical and experimental studies, it should generally contain the following components:

a) Background and Research Problem

Briefly introduce the scientific context and identify the principal problem or knowledge gap addressed by the study.

b) Research Objective

Clearly state the main objective or purpose of the research.

c) Theoretical Foundation

Identify the principal theory or theoretical framework guiding the study, where applicable.

d) Research Methodology

Summarize the research approach, design, study population or experimental units, sampling procedures, sample size, data collection methods, experimental protocols, and analytical techniques.

e) Key Findings

Present the most significant findings, including relevant statistical results, experimental observations, mathematical outcomes, or qualitative themes where appropriate.

f) Conclusion

State the principal conclusion derived from the research findings.

g) Recommendations or Implications

Provide a brief statement of the main scientific, practical, policy, or theoretical recommendations arising from the study.

For theoretical, mathematical, computational, and review-based manuscripts, the abstract should emphasize the research problem, analytical approach, principal contributions, and implications.

The abstract should be written as a single coherent paragraph unless otherwise instructed by the editorial office.

It should not contain unnecessary citations, tables, figures, or unexplained abbreviations.

4.5 Keywords

Provide three to six keywords immediately after the abstract.

Keywords should be specific, relevant, and representative of the manuscript's principal scientific concepts, methods, or research themes.

4.6 Introduction

The introduction should establish the scientific context, significance, and rationale for the study.

It should progressively move from the broader research context to the specific issue being investigated.

The introduction should:

1. Provide sufficient background information on the research topic.

2. Explain the theoretical, empirical, experimental, or contextual foundations of the study.

3. Highlight the significance of the scientific problem.

4. Identify relevant developments and existing knowledge.

5. Establish the justification for conducting the study.

6. Provide a logical transition to the statement of the problem.

The introduction should be supported by current, relevant, and verifiable scholarly references.

4.7 Statement of the Problem

The statement of the problem must clearly articulate the specific scientific issue, research gap, methodological limitation, or unresolved question that motivated the study.

It should explain:

• The existing situation or established scientific knowledge.

• The expected or desired situation.

• The discrepancy, challenge, or knowledge gap.

• Evidence demonstrating the existence and significance of the problem.

• Limitations of previous research, models, methods, or interventions.

• The need for the present investigation.

The problem statement should be concise, logically developed, and supported by credible evidence.

4.8 Research Objectives

The manuscript must clearly state the general objective and specific objectives of the study.

The general objective should reflect the overall purpose of the research.

Specific objectives should:

1. Be clearly defined and logically organized.

2. Be consistent with the manuscript title and problem statement.

3. Identify the principal variables, concepts, scientific processes, or phenomena being investigated.

4. Be measurable or investigable through the selected methodology.

5. Provide a framework for organizing the literature review, methodology, results, and conclusions.

Specific objectives should be numbered consecutively.

Where appropriate, research questions may be presented alongside or immediately after the objectives.

4.9 Research Hypotheses or Scientific Propositions (Where Applicable)

Studies involving hypothesis testing should clearly state the relevant research hypotheses.

Hypotheses must:

• Be derived from the theoretical framework or existing empirical literature.

• Be consistent with the research objectives.

• Identify expected relationships or differences between variables.

• Be testable using appropriate analytical procedures.

Where relevant, authors should distinguish between null and alternative hypotheses.

Theoretical and mathematical studies may instead present scientific propositions, conjectures, lemmas, or theorems.

Exploratory and qualitative studies are not required to formulate hypotheses unless justified by their research design.

5. LITERATURE REVIEW

The literature review should critically examine existing scholarship relevant to the scientific problem and research objectives.

Authors should go beyond merely summarizing previous publications by evaluating theoretical arguments, comparing empirical findings, examining experimental results, identifying methodological limitations, and establishing the contribution of the present study.

5.1 Theoretical Review

The theoretical review should identify and critically discuss the theory or theories underpinning the study.

Authors should:

1. State the name of each theory and identify its original proponent and development.

2. Explain the principal assumptions and propositions of the theory.

3. Demonstrate how the theory relates to the research problem and objectives.

4. Discuss the theory's relevance to the study variables, concepts, or scientific processes.

5. Identify important strengths and limitations.

6. Explain how the theory informs the methodology, analytical framework, or interpretation of findings.

For mathematical and computational studies, the theoretical review may examine established mathematical principles, statistical models, scientific laws, or computational frameworks.

5.2 Empirical Review

The empirical review should critically examine previous studies investigating similar research problems, variables, methods, or contexts.

The review should be organized according to the specific research objectives or major study themes.

For each relevant study, authors should consider:

• Author(s) and year of publication.

• Research context or geographical location.

• Research objectives.

• Methodological approach and research design.

• Population, sampling procedures, or experimental conditions.

• Principal findings.

• Limitations and identified research gaps.

• Relevance to the present investigation.

Authors should synthesize the reviewed literature by comparing areas of agreement, disagreement, and inconsistency across studies.

The empirical review must demonstrate how the present study addresses an identifiable gap in existing scholarship.

5.3 Conceptual Review and Conceptual Framework (Where Applicable)

The conceptual review should define and clarify the principal concepts, variables, or scientific processes examined in the study.

Where appropriate, authors should develop a conceptual framework illustrating proposed relationships among independent, dependent, mediating, moderating, or control variables.

The framework should:

1. Identify the principal study variables or concepts.

2. Demonstrate the relationships proposed in the research.

3. Be consistent with the research objectives and hypotheses.

4. Be informed by the theoretical and empirical literature.

5. Provide a logical basis for data collection and analysis.

Conceptual frameworks should be clearly labeled and adequately explained.

Purely theoretical or mathematical studies are not required to include a conventional conceptual framework unless relevant to the research.

6. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

The methodology section must provide sufficient information to enable readers to understand, evaluate, and, where appropriate, replicate the research procedures.

Authors should describe and justify the methodological decisions adopted in the study.

6.1 Research Approach and Design

State whether the study employed a quantitative, qualitative, mixed-methods, experimental, theoretical, computational, or other appropriate scientific approach.

Identify the specific research design and explain why it was suitable for addressing the research objectives.

6.2 Study Area or Research Context

Describe the geographical, institutional, laboratory, organizational, environmental, or scientific setting in which the study was conducted.

Provide relevant contextual information necessary for understanding the research environment.

6.3 Target Population or Experimental Units

Clearly define the population, research subjects, experimental units, observations, or units of analysis.

Where applicable, indicate the total population size and explain the characteristics relevant to the research.

6.4 Sampling Procedures and Sample Size

Describe the sampling techniques used to select participants, observations, specimens, or experimental units.

Authors should justify the suitability of the selected procedures.

The sample size should be clearly stated.

Where statistical sample size determination was used, authors should identify the relevant formula, its source, the parameters applied, and the resulting sample size.

Sample size calculations must be accurate and consistent with the reported population and final sample.

For qualitative studies, authors should justify the sample size using appropriate methodological considerations.

For experimental studies, authors should explain sample allocation, replication, and other relevant design considerations.

6.5 Data Sources and Data Collection Methods

Identify whether the research relied on primary data, secondary data, experimental observations, computational outputs, or a combination of these.

Describe the instruments and procedures used to collect data.

Where applicable, provide information on laboratory equipment, experimental protocols, questionnaires, interviews, observations, document reviews, simulations, or other relevant techniques.

6.6 Validity, Reliability, and Research Quality

Authors should explain the procedures used to ensure the accuracy, validity, reliability, or trustworthiness of the research.

Depending on the study, these may include:

• Pilot testing.

• Instrument validation.

• Reliability assessment.

• Calibration of equipment.

• Experimental controls.

• Replication procedures.

• Data quality checks.

• Statistical diagnostics.

• Model validation.

• Qualitative credibility and trustworthiness procedures.

The selected quality assurance measures must be appropriate to the research design.

6.7 Data Analysis Procedures

Clearly describe the techniques used to process, analyze, and interpret the collected data.

For quantitative studies, authors should identify relevant descriptive and inferential statistical procedures.

For qualitative studies, authors should explain the analytical approach, such as thematic analysis, content analysis, or another appropriate method.

For experimental and computational studies, authors should describe the analytical models, algorithms, software, numerical procedures, and relevant validation techniques.

Mixed-methods studies should explain how quantitative and qualitative findings were integrated.

The selected analytical techniques must correspond to the research objectives and nature of the data.

6.8 Ethical Considerations

Authors must describe the ethical safeguards implemented during the research.

Where applicable, the methodology should address:

• Ethical approval from a recognized institutional or regulatory body.

• Research authorization and relevant permissions.

• Informed consent from participants.

• Voluntary participation and the right to withdraw.

• Confidentiality, anonymity, and privacy protection.

• Secure handling and storage of research data.

• Protection of vulnerable participants.

• Ethical treatment of animals or other research subjects, where applicable.

• Compliance with relevant laboratory, environmental, and safety regulations.

Where formal ethical approval was not required, authors should provide an appropriate explanation.

7. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The results and discussion sections must present a clear, systematic, and objective account of the study findings and their scientific implications.

Results should be organized according to the research objectives, questions, hypotheses, or experimental procedures.

7.1 Presentation of Results

Authors should present findings logically and support them with appropriate empirical, experimental, mathematical, or computational evidence.

For quantitative studies, results may include:

1. Response rates and relevant participant characteristics.

2. Descriptive statistics.

3. Tables and figures summarizing the findings.

4. Correlation and regression analyses, where applicable.

5. Hypothesis-testing results.

6. Relevant measures of statistical significance, effect size, and uncertainty.

For qualitative studies, authors should present clearly developed themes supported by relevant participant quotations, observations, or documentary evidence.

Where interview quotations are used, appropriate participant identifiers and interview dates should be provided where available and ethically permissible.

For experimental and computational studies, results may include:

1. Experimental measurements and observations.

2. Model outputs and simulations.

3. Mathematical or statistical results.

4. Comparative performance analyses.

5. Validation and verification results.

6. Sensitivity and uncertainty analyses.

Results must be presented accurately and with sufficient detail to support the conclusions.

7.2 Discussion of Findings

The discussion should critically interpret the findings in relation to the research objectives, theoretical framework, and existing scientific literature.

Authors should:

1. Explain the meaning and significance of the principal findings.

2. Compare the results with relevant previous studies.

3. Identify areas of agreement and disagreement with existing literature.

4. Explain possible reasons for unexpected or contradictory findings.

5. Relate the findings to the theoretical or conceptual framework.

6. Discuss the scientific, practical, technological, policy, or methodological implications.

7. Acknowledge important limitations affecting the interpretation of the findings.

The discussion must demonstrate scholarly analysis rather than merely repeating the results.

8. CONCLUSIONS

The conclusion should provide a concise synthesis of the principal findings and explain how they address the research objectives.

Authors should:

• Summarize the major conclusions supported by the study.

• Demonstrate how the findings respond to the scientific problem.

• Highlight the study's contribution to knowledge.

• Explain the broader implications of the findings where appropriate.

• Acknowledge significant limitations where necessary.

Conclusions must be based on the evidence presented in the results and discussion sections.

Authors should avoid introducing new findings, unsupported claims, or unnecessary literature citations.

9. RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH

Recommendations must arise directly from the research findings and conclusions.

They should be practical, specific, achievable, and relevant to the research context.

Depending on the nature of the study, recommendations may address:

1. Scientific or technological improvements.

2. Policy development or reform.

3. Institutional or organizational practices.

4. Professional or technical interventions.

5. Improvements in research methodology.

6. Theoretical development.

7. Areas requiring further investigation.

For theoretical, mathematical, experimental, or computational studies, recommendations may focus on future applications, model improvements, methodological refinements, or unresolved scientific questions.

Recommendations should be presented in coherent academic prose rather than unsupported general statements.

10. REFERENCES

All manuscripts must include a complete and accurately formatted reference list.

Science Mundi recommends APA 7th edition as its preferred referencing style.

10.1 General Referencing Requirements

Authors must ensure that:

1. Every in-text citation has a corresponding entry in the reference list.

2. Every reference-list entry is cited in the manuscript.

3. References are arranged alphabetically by the surname of the first author.

4. Author names, publication years, article titles, journal titles, volume numbers, issue numbers, page ranges, and other bibliographic details are accurate.

5. DOIs are included where available and are valid and functional.

6. References are drawn from authentic and verifiable scholarly sources.

7. The referencing style is applied consistently throughout the manuscript.

8. Unnecessary numbering, incomplete entries, and duplicated references are removed.

9. Sources are cited accurately without misrepresenting their findings or conclusions.

10. The reference list contains no fabricated publications, authors, journal titles, or DOIs.

10.2 Reference Verification

Authors are responsible for independently verifying the authenticity and accuracy of every reference before submission.

References should be checked against reliable sources, including publisher websites, journal databases, DOI registration records, and institutional repositories.

The submission of manuscripts containing fabricated references, misleading citations, or nonexistent sources constitutes a serious breach of publication ethics.

Such manuscripts may be returned for correction or rejected, depending on the nature and severity of the concerns.

10.3 Citation and Reference Consistency

Authors must ensure consistency between in-text citations and the reference list.

For manuscripts using APA 7th edition, authors should follow the prescribed rules for author–date citations, multiple authors, direct quotations, electronic sources, and DOI presentation.

Reference management software may be used to assist with formatting, but authors remain responsible for verifying the accuracy of the resulting citations and bibliographic entries.

11. RESEARCH ETHICS AND PUBLICATION INTEGRITY

Science Mundi is committed to maintaining high standards of scientific integrity and responsible academic publishing.

All authors are expected to comply with internationally recognized principles of publication ethics, including relevant guidance issued by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

The journal does not tolerate:

1. Plagiarism or unattributed reproduction of another person's work.

2. Fabrication or falsification of research data.

3. Manipulation or misrepresentation of scientific findings.

4. Fabricated references or misleading citations.

5. Duplicate or redundant publication without appropriate disclosure.

6. Unauthorized use of copyrighted materials.

7. Undisclosed conflicts of interest.

8. Inappropriate authorship attribution.

9. Unethical treatment of research participants or subjects.

10. Misrepresentation of ethical approvals or research permissions.

11. Undisclosed or inappropriate use of artificial intelligence in manuscript preparation.

The editorial office may screen submitted manuscripts using appropriate similarity-detection and research-integrity assessment tools.

Where ethical concerns are identified, the journal may request clarification, supporting documentation, or revisions.

Serious concerns may result in rejection, withdrawal of editorial consideration, or appropriate post-publication action in accordance with the journal's established policies.

Authors must cooperate fully with legitimate editorial inquiries concerning research integrity.

12. PEER REVIEW AND EDITORIAL DECISIONS

Science Mundi operates a double-blind peer review system, under which the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from one another during the review process.

12.1 Initial Editorial Screening

Upon submission, manuscripts undergo preliminary assessment to determine their suitability for the journal.

The assessment may consider:

• Relevance to the journal's scope.

• Originality and scientific contribution.

• Research methodology and scientific rigor.

• Clarity of academic writing.

• Compliance with formatting requirements.

• Authenticity of references.

• Research ethics and publication integrity.

Manuscripts that do not meet the minimum submission requirements may be returned to authors for correction before external peer review.

12.2 External Peer Review

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to qualified reviewers with expertise relevant to the research topic.

Reviewers evaluate the scientific quality, originality, methodological soundness, clarity, significance, and overall contribution of the manuscript.

12.3 Editorial Decisions

Following assessment and peer review, the editorial office may issue one of the following decisions:

1. Accept: The manuscript is suitable for publication, subject to any necessary final editorial processing.

2. Accept Subject to Minor Revisions: The manuscript is acceptable in principle but requires limited corrections before final approval.

3. Major Revisions Required: Substantial changes are necessary before the manuscript can be reconsidered.

4. Return to Author: The manuscript requires correction of significant technical, structural, methodological, or editorial issues before further consideration.

5. Reject: The manuscript does not meet the journal's scholarly, ethical, or editorial requirements.

Acceptance is subject to satisfactory completion of all required editorial procedures.

12.4 Revision Requirements

Authors receiving revision requests must carefully address all reviewer and editorial comments.

Where a copyedited Word document is supplied, authors must make the required corrections directly in the provided document, unless otherwise instructed.

Authors should ensure that all requested corrections have been addressed before resubmitting the revised manuscript.

Failure to address substantive editorial concerns may delay publication or result in further revision requests.

13. COPYRIGHT, OPEN ACCESS, AND PUBLICATION TERMS

Science Mundi operates as an open-access scholarly journal committed to promoting the accessibility and dissemination of scientific research.

Published articles are made freely available to readers, subject to the journal's applicable copyright and licensing provisions.

Authors retain copyright in their published work, subject to the terms of the applicable publication agreement.

Authors are responsible for ensuring that they have obtained the necessary permissions to reproduce copyrighted materials, including figures, tables, images, photographs, and substantial extracts from previously published works.

The specific conditions governing the reuse, distribution, reproduction, and adaptation of published articles are determined by the licence stated on the journal's official copyright and licensing pages.

By submitting a manuscript, authors confirm that they have the necessary rights and permissions to publish the work and agree to the journal's applicable publication terms.

14. ARTICLE PROCESSING CHARGES

Science Mundi operates an open-access publishing model supported by applicable Article Processing Charges (APCs).

Authors should consult the journal's official APC policy for information regarding current charges, payment procedures, and any available waivers or discounts.

Article processing charges are payable only after the manuscript has been accepted for publication and the editorial office has issued the relevant payment instructions.

Payment of an APC does not guarantee manuscript acceptance and does not influence editorial decisions or peer review outcomes.

The editorial assessment and peer review processes remain independent of financial considerations.

15. FINAL MANUSCRIPT SUBMISSION CHECKLIST

Before submitting a manuscript to Science Mundi, authors should verify that:

1. The manuscript falls within the journal's aims and scope.

2. The research is original and has not been submitted simultaneously to another journal.

3. The manuscript follows the prescribed formatting and page layout requirements.

4. The title accurately reflects the study.

5. Author names, affiliations, and contact details are accurate.

6. The abstract adequately summarizes the objectives, methodology, findings, conclusions, and recommendations.

7. Three to six relevant keywords are provided.

8. The introduction and problem statement clearly establish the research gap.

9. The research objectives are clearly stated and aligned with the study.

10. The theoretical and empirical literature reviews are sufficiently developed.

11. The methodology is clearly explained and appropriately justified.

12. The results are presented systematically and correspond to the research objectives.

13. The discussion critically interprets the findings in relation to existing scholarship.

14. The conclusions and recommendations are supported by the findings.

15. All tables, figures, equations, and scientific illustrations are appropriately numbered, titled, and cited.

16. All references are authentic, complete, and verifiable.

17. All in-text citations correspond to the reference list.

18. Ethical approvals, participant consent, and relevant disclosures have been addressed.

19. Any use of artificial intelligence tools has been appropriately disclosed.

20. The manuscript has been carefully proofread and is ready for editorial assessment.

Manuscripts that do not comply with these requirements may be returned to authors for correction before further editorial processing.

16. IMPORTANT NOTICE TO AUTHORS

Authors are strongly encouraged to read these guidelines carefully before submitting manuscripts to Science Mundi.

Compliance with the journal's formatting, methodological, scientific, ethical, and referencing requirements facilitates efficient editorial assessment and helps minimize unnecessary delays during peer review and publication.

The responsibility for the originality, accuracy, authenticity, and scientific integrity of a manuscript rests with its authors.

Science Mundi reserves the right to request additional information, supporting documentation, or manuscript corrections where necessary to safeguard the quality and integrity of its publications.

All manuscripts must be submitted through the official Science Mundi online submission portal or our designated email addresses [sciencemundi@gmail.com, editor@sciencemundi.net].

Science Mundi
AJER Publishing