Archive

To format a manuscript as per APA style, here are a few general tips on the APA style that might help you: Articles should be typed, double-spaced with 1" margins on all sides. Articles should be in a readable font, preferably Times New Roman 12 point. A page header or "running head" should be added at the top of every page. The running head should be a shortened version of the article title and should not exceed 50 characters. The title page should contain the title of the paper, the author's name, and affiliation. The abstract should be around 150-250 words long. In-text citations should be provided as well as detailed references in a separate references section. We have a free template to format a journal article as per APA 7th edition. You can also download sample papers directly from APA, with or without annotations.   Basic Citation Formats + Free Citation Generator The table below gives an overview of how to format in-text citations in APA style. If you’re short on time, you can use Paperpal’s free APA citation generator to format your citations and reference list too. Scenario Format Example 1 author — parenthetical (Surname, Year) (Miller, 2021) 1 author — narrative Surname (Year)...

The theoretical framework is a structure that supports the theory that explains why the research problem you are studying exists. It encompasses concepts, definitions, existing theories, and other literature that you have referred to in your study. The theoretical framework demonstrates your understanding of the concepts related to the research paper and the broader topic. Stating clearly the theoretical assumptions used in the study helps the readers evaluate them clearly and provides a basis for choosing your research hypothesis and the research methods. ‘Humanities’ covers a vast list of disciplines from literature and philosophy to law and politics. Irrespective of the discipline, your dissertation must have a strong foundation for the theory you have based your study on. You can refer to articles published in the humanities journals to better understand how a theoretical framework forms the foundation for evaluating the research problem and the research question in a paper. Related reading: How to make an effective theoretical and conceptual framework of a research study? Is theoretical framework indispensable in scholarly research like thesis and dissertation?  

Dear reader, What an unsettling position to be in. A fee to publish is not uncommon nowadays, although a rapid peer review is certainly a red flag. On top of it, you should retain the rights to your manuscript, so withdrawing should not be optional - it must be honored by the publisher. A fee to withdraw perhaps might be applicable if one had already signed off on the final manuscript and given permission to publish. At present, your manuscript is only under review, which means your withdrawing it - or them rejecting it - is all part of the peer review process.  However, I would consult with someone who can guide you from your University library or publications office on such matters. I found some helpful resources that might shed some light on this difficult situation and how to proceed. Hope you find an amicable resolution! 1. Predatory journal threatens to retract paper in an online mode if I do not pay high withdrawal fee. | Editage Insights 2. What can I do if the editor does not confirm my withdrawal request? | Editage Insights 3. Predatory Journals: What They Are and How to Avoid Them | Editage Insights 4. 10 Red flags...

Holidays are often a time when things can tend to slow down, and although this may not be standard practice, it may be at the journal you have selected. This is possible, as you have rightly noted. Once the holiday ends, it is alright to send a follow up email to the Editor inquiring about the status of your manuscript. Be sure to write the email through the submission portal and include the manuscript ID and title in your email. Wish you good luck.

Dear reader - It can be very unsettling to see the change of status that does not indicate the direction of the review process. You have rightly pointed out that it could have moved forward or perhaps taken a step back. There is no way of knowing. The fact that it is a 19-month old submission is something that concerns me more. I feel that you may want to write to the editor to understand what the status of the manuscript is and what they might suggest. At this point, you do have a lot at stake as you have been patient, you revised and resubmitted according to the recommendations of the reviewers, and you simply need to see the decision. So, I would not advise you to withdraw and submit elsewhere, simply because too much time and effort have already gone into submitting to this journal. I would also suggest looking at recently published articles in this journal to see how long the submission to publication turnaround time is. If they are similarly long, then perhaps you need to just wait it out. However, there still is nothing lost in contacting the editor for an update. Good luck!

Dear Author, If the status of your manuscript has changed from “under review” to “submitted,” this likely indicates that the peer-review process may have concluded (the peer reviewers assigned to your manuscript have finished peer reviewing the paper and submitted their reports). The journal’s tracking system usually resets the status to “submitted” in such cases, while the journal editor evaluates the peer review reports and decides next steps. In the event that it stays at “submitted” for more than 10–14 days, I would suggest emailing the journal to check on the status. I wish you the best with your submission.

First, let me reassure you: you are not alone. This seems to be happening more and more, especially to early career researchers. The fact that you’re reflecting on it shows maturity and responsibility as a researcher. Why did the AI “make things up,” even after you said not to? AI language models generate text by predicting what words “should” come next based on patterns in large datasets. They do not always verify facts the way humans do. When they lack enough information or confidence, they may still produce an answer that sounds plausible—this is what we call AI hallucination. The tool behaved exactly as many AI systems currently do. I would suggest you discuss a plan with your supervisor to revise the thesis. Tell them you had used AI for literature search but were not aware of this issue. This was a big learning experience and you should assure your supervisor that you will cross-verify every reference for authenticity and relevance to your thesis. Ask your supervisor if you can use a second set of eyes for cross-checking. Also, discuss with your supervisor if you can set up a training or seminar at your campus for other students like you...

A statement of a problem (SOP) describes the relevance of a real research problem, why addressing it is important, and how your research will address it. Your work focuses on an important topic: “Leaders with narcissistic personality traits and toxic behaviours are more likely to engage in discriminative or abusive/toxic leadership practices.” To turn this into an effective SOP, you need to describe the following: 1. The Ideal Situation: This part describes how things should work in an organization—that is, the ideal qualities of leadership and what the standard goal is. For example, you can discuss how leadership should be empathetic, fair, and protect employee rights and how this can create ideal organizations and workplaces. 2. The Reality: This part describes the current issue of how narcissistic traits and toxic behaviours appear in those in leadership positions and how they can lead to abusive leadership practices. You can also mention the negative impacts on the organization and employees as a whole. 3. The Research Gap: This part identifies what is known about this topic. You can discuss previous literature or other evidence. This paragraph should end with identifying the current gap in management practices and/or research in this area. 4....

Dear Author, What you are describing is very common at the thesis stage, particularly when it comes to interdisciplinary research. A systematic literature review on the social interaction skills of learners with ASD in inclusive classrooms requires a clear focus, that is, rather than broadly addressing all aspects of social interaction, it would be beneficial if the topic were to be further narrowed down. Some examples of narrower focus are peer-mediated interactions, teacher-supported strategies, environmental factors, or particular social skills and age groups. A systematic review requires organizing existing research into specific categories (e.g., the nature of social interaction challenges in ASD, the role of peers and teachers) and identifying patterns, inconsistencies, and gaps, rather than merely comparing findings of different researchers. The background of the study should move from the broader context of inclusive education to the specific challenges faced by learners with ASD, while the introduction should clearly articulate the problem, significance, and purpose of the review. If you require further assistance with your thesis, we offer various writing and editing services to cater to specific author needs.

Dear author, I can see how the change of status from Awaiting reveiewer selection to awaiting ED decision can be worrisome. It depends on how much time has elapsed after your submission and between these steps. It is possible that the editors simply missed changing the status when it was sent out for peer review. Another possibility is that the editor decided to review the manuscript themselves. They may reject or suggest another journal if it was truly never sent out for peer review. This is known as a desk rejection. To be safe, it would be advisable to start looking at other journal options that may fit the scope of your article. Sometimes with a rejection, the editor will give you some suggestions on how to improve the manuscript - but often you will not get any explaination apart form the standard email that will state that their journal is very competitive or that your article will be a better fit somewhere else. Wish you the very best. We would love for you to write to us and let us know what the outcome was. Perhaps we can guide you in navigating the next steps in your publication journey.