Author Guidelines
These author guidelines help authors prepare manuscripts for a double‑blind peer review process. Following them ensures efficient handling and upholds the Social Lens’s commitment to rigorous, socially‑engaged scholarship.
Submissions are accepted on a rolling basis, with no deadline. Only English‑language manuscripts are considered. By submitting, authors affirm that the work is original, has not been previously published, and is not under review elsewhere. All listed authors must confirm authorship and agree to submission. All manuscripts must be submitted through online submission system (click “Make a Submission” on the journal website).
- New users must register for an account.
- Returning users log in to submit or check a submission’s status.
Manuscript Organization
Please submit your manuscript as a standard Microsoft Word document. Social Lens team will handle the final formatting into the journal's specific template. Authors should utilize Chicago style for both in-text citations and the bibliography. The manuscript should be structured with clear headings and subheadings. Original research papers are generally expected to include the following sections.
1. Title
Write the manuscript title in Title Case, left-aligned, and place it at the top of the first page using Times New Roman font. The title should be brief, precise, and reflective of the primary outcome or focus of the study. Avoid unnecessary wording and abbreviations. Creative or engaging titles may be used when appropriate, provided they remain professional and are not misleading, offensive, or controversial. The editorial team reserves the right to revise titles when necessary.
2. Authors and Affiliations
List all authors together, separated by commas. Ensure that author names are accurate and complete, as they will appear in indexing databases and official records. Use superscript numbers to connect authors with their institutional affiliations. Affiliations should include department, institution, university, or organization name along with the country. Indicate the corresponding author(s) using superscript notation and provide the corresponding email address beneath the affiliations.
3. Abstract
The abstract should clearly communicate the importance, originality, and contribution of the study to a broad academic audience. Avoid excessive abbreviations and do not include citations or references in this section. The abstract must be written in English and should not exceed 500 words.
4. Keywords
Authors should include a minimum of five keywords.
5. Introduction
The introduction should provide sufficient background to help readers understand the context and significance of the study. Unlike the abstract, this section should explain why the research problem is important and identify the central issue addressed by the study. Authors should summarize relevant prior studies, highlight existing research gaps, and explain how the current work contributes to the field. Avoid transforming the introduction into an extensive literature review; instead, focus only on the most relevant and directly related studies. A concise and logically structured introduction is preferred. Authors should clearly present the study objectives or research questions, explain the significance and rationale of the study, review only literature directly related to the topic and demonstrate the novelty of the work, identify research gaps or provide a novelty statement and define specialized terminology or abbreviations where necessary.
6. Methods
The methods section should explain in detail how the research was carried out so that readers can assess the reliability of the study and replicate the procedures if needed. Provide clear information regarding the research design, materials, instruments, procedures, analytical techniques, and reasons for selecting them. The details should be sufficient to allow verification of findings without becoming unnecessarily lengthy. Authors should add population and sampling techniques, research instruments or materials used, procedures and relevant timeline, data analysis methods, measures ensuring validity and reliability, statistical techniques employed and scope and limitations of the methods. Transparency in methodology is essential, especially when introducing new methods or adapting existing approaches innovatively.
7. Results and Discussion
This section presents the study findings along with their interpretation. The discussion should explain the meaning and significance of the results, demonstrate how they address the research questions, and relate them to existing scholarship. Rather than repeating the introduction, authors should explain how the findings contribute to advancing understanding in the field. Discussions should remain focused and avoid irrelevant or exaggerated claims. Authors should present the principal findings clearly, explain the significance and implications of the results, compare findings with earlier studies and established theories, discuss similarities or differences with related research, consider alternative interpretations where relevant, highlight practical or theoretical implications, and acknowledge study limitations. Interpretations should remain consistent with the data presented. Avoid unsupported speculation or overstating the impact of the findings.
8. Figures and Tables
Tables and figures should present information clearly and effectively. Captions must be understandable independently of the main text so readers can interpret the visuals without additional explanation. Graphics should be simple yet informative, use of color is acceptable and encouraged where appropriate, visual materials should maintain academic and professional standards, and do not duplicate graphics already explained extensively in the text.
9. Conclusions
The conclusions should explain the overall importance of the research and its broader implications. Rather than merely summarizing the study, this section should synthesize the major findings and demonstrate their relevance. Authors should present conclusions clearly and concisely, emphasize the significance of the study for readers and researchers, relate findings to existing scholarship within a realistic framework, keep the conclusions focused and relevant and avoid repeating the abstract, introducing entirely new arguments, or presenting additional evidence not discussed earlier in the manuscript.
10. References
References must be arranged alphabetically according to the authors’ surnames and listed at the end of the manuscript. Citations of datasets, software, and other research outputs are also encouraged where relevant. All in-text citations should follow the Chicago Author–Date style, for example:(Woodward 1987) or (Schuman and Scott 1987).
Examples of Reference Formats
Journal Articles: Author 1, and Author 2. Year. “Title of Article.” Journal Name 6: 100–110.
Books and Book Chapters: Author 1, and Author 2. 2008. Book Title. Revised edition. Place of Publication: Publisher, 154–196.
Author 1, and Author 2. 2008. “Chapter Title.” In Book Title, edited by Editor 1 and Editor 2, 54–96. Place of Publication: Publisher.
Unpublished or Personal Communications: Author 1, and Author 2. “Title of Unpublished Work.” Journal Name, manuscript submitted for publication.
Author 1 and Author 2. Year. Personal communication.
Conference Proceedings: Author 1, Author 2, and Author 3. Year. “Title of Presentation.” Paper presented at Conference Name, Conference Location, Conference Date.
Thesis or Dissertation: Author 1. Year. Title of Thesis. Degree thesis, University Name, City, Country.
Websites: Author 1, and Author 2. Year. “Title of Webpage.” Website or Journal Name. Available at: URL (accessed Day Month Year).
Because online content may change over time, authors are encouraged to archive webpages using reliable archiving services before citation.
Before final submission, confirm that:
[ ] The manuscript is original, unpublished, and not under review elsewhere.
[ ] The file is a single Word document (blind version + separate title page).
[ ] Permission for any third‑party content is obtained.
[ ] Abstract, keywords, and structured sections are included.
[ ] References follow Chicago Author‑Date style.
[ ] Conflicts of interest are disclosed (if any).
[ ] For human subjects research: informed consent and privacy protection are stated.
[ ] Language is clear, professional, and inclusive.
