Submissions

Submission Preparation Checklist

As part of the submission process, authors are required to check off their submission's compliance with all of the following items, and submissions may be returned to authors that do not adhere to these guidelines.

The submission has not been previously published, nor is it before another journal for consideration (or an explanation has been provided in Comments to the Editor).
The submission file is in OpenOffice, Microsoft Word, or RTF document file format.
Where available, URLs for the references have been provided.
The text is single-spaced; uses 11 font size (for paragraphs); employs italics, rather than underlining (except with URL addresses); and all illustrations, figures, and tables are placed within the text at the appropriate points, rather than at the end.
The text adheres to the ethical, stylistic and bibliographic requirements outlined in the Author Guidelines.
The instructions in ensuring a blind review have been adhered.

Author Guidelines

EJOSSAH INFORMATION FOR AUTHORS AND GUIDELINES

Peer Review

For research articles, EJOSSAH operates a double-blind anonymized peer review, meaning that the author's identity is hidden from reviewers, and the reviewers' identities are hidden from authors. The Editors have oversight of the reviewers' and the authors' names.

Manuscript Size

The word limit for research articles ranges from 4500 words and a maximum of 7500 words, including references. However, a maximum of 2,500 words is the limit for contributions like book reviews and short communications.

Originality

EJOSSAH publishes articles based on original research using primary empirical data, including surveys, in-depth interviews, key informant interviews, focus group discussions (FGD), archives, newspapers, and government and non-governmental organization documents or articles developed by using secondary data. In the latter's case, the author should clearly outline his/her fresh/new contribution or a new reinterpretation of the existing literature.

Ethical Considerations

Authors should disclose any conflict of interest related to the manuscript on a separate page before the references. They should also confirm that submissions are unpublished and not under review elsewhere.

Manuscript Preparation

Authors should adhere to the following guidelines in preparing their manuscripts before submission.

Manuscript submission

Authors should submit thier manuscripts in the following procedure

Submission file

This file should contain the manuscript's title, abstract, and keywords followed by the body bart of the manuscript and references.The manuscript abstract should come next to the title. It should not be more than 250. The abstract should be followed by keywords that convey the manuscript's content. Check that the text of your manuscript is blinded i.e. make sure to remove any infomation reaviling author identity. To remove author information from the file properties, the corresponding author of the submitted file must clean author information in the document properties of the file with the following procedure:

starting in File, on the main menu bar, and clicking on the sequence: File > Info > Check for issues > Inspect document > Inspect > Remove personal information from file while saving > OK > Save.

Structure

depending on the type of research, contains the introduction/background, literature review, methods, results, discussion, conclusion, and, if relevant, recommendations. It should also incorporate the references of sources that are cited in the manuscript. Book reviews and short communications should have their unique outline and organization.

Introduction/Background: Articles should begin with an introduction/background. There is no standard format, but the introduction/background should concisely present the rationale of the manuscript, the problem statement, the kind of research (methods), and a brief overview of the article. Any pertinent background knowledge that readers would benefit from before reading the article should be made available to them. It also establishes the position of the manuscript within the field of study the article deals with.

After the introduction/background, the manuscript could be divided into a maximum of three or four sections. These could be organized in different ways depending on the nature of the article's problem and the kind of research methods adopted by the author. Some of the possibilities for dividing the article include the following.

For articles developed using quantitative methods – the article could have the following structures:

Methods: The methods section should clarify what was done and how it was done, justify the design, sample size, and sampling procedures and explain how the results were processed in order to answer the research question. Direct and systematic writing is used in science. As a result, the structure of the methods section should include the following: a description of the study's materials, an explanation of how those materials were prepared, a description of the research protocol, an explanation of how measurements were taken and calculations were made, and a statement of the statistical tests that were used to analyze the data. In the case of a qualitative study, how the data is obtained, analyzed, triangulated, and presented should be clearly indicated.

Result: In an empirical research article, the Results (sometimes referred to as Findings) section outlines the findings of the researcher(s) after data analysis. Even if the results contradict the hypothesis or research question, its primary goal is to use the data gathered to address the research question(s) given in the background. The results section should also include other significant findings, patterns, or insights from examining the raw data.

Discussion: The discussion goes over the results and places them in the context of the entire study. The reader can see the links between each component of the research report since it brings together all the sections that came before it. The author should perform the three crucial tasks of interpretation, analysis, and explanation in the discussion section. In addition to explaining the significance of the research findings and how they fit into the body of existing knowledge, a thriving discussion section will be open and honest about the study's limitations.

Conclusion: After reading the article, the reader is supposed to understand from the conclusion why your research should be important to them. A conclusion synthesizes essential elements, not just a review of your arguments or a restatement of your research problem and if relevant recommendations or areas of future research are indicated.

For articles developed using qualitative methods – the article could have the following structures:

For articles developed using qualitative and mixed research methods, authors could structure the parts of their articles as follows. As noted above, the introduction/background contains the basic arguments like the problem statement, the article's position in the literature and methods for data collection and analysis. The rest of the article could be divided in accordance with the following:

Chronological:

Authors could organize their articles in chronological order to explain historical processes and developments.

The comparative examination:

Authors who use comparative methods could select some of the major issues/themes used for the comparison of cases (stories) and structure their articles accordingly.

The thematic structure:

Authors identify themes which are broadly representative of the issues addressed in their research and structure their articles accordingly.

EJOSSAH style

Texts should be written in Times New Roman. Text font size should varry depending on the hierrarchical structure of the texts in the manuscript (e.g., 14 for the title of the manuscript, 12 for primary topics in the manuscript, 11 for secondary topics in the title as well as 11 for paragraph texts with in the manuscript)

Quotations

EJOSSAH adheres to the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (APA Style) version 7. Therefore APA manual version 6, direct quotations of more than 40 words should be indented 0.5" from both sides of the margin. If the direct quote is less than 40 words, it should be in inverted commas " ".

Diagrams and Tables

They should be numbered consecutively in the order of their appearance in the manuscript. Each table and figure should also have a caption. The caption should be placed below in the case of figures and above in the case of tables. It is preferred to place them within the text at appropriate points rather than at the end. The source for tables and figures should be duly acknowledged. All table formats should be as per APA manual version 6.

Citations and References

Authors cite references in the manuscript text, they should follow the appropriate APA style. References should also agree with the APA style and should be listed alphabetically by the author's last name at the end of the manuscript. However, Ethiopian authors should be referred to by their first names. Please note some examples below.

Journal Article with DOI

Herbst-Damm, K. L., & Kulik, J. A. (2005). Volunteer support, marital status, and
The survival times of terminally ill patients. Health Psychology, 24, 225-229. doi:10.1 037/0278-6133.24.2.225

Journal Article with or without DOI

Light, M.A., & Light, I. H. (2008). The geographic expansion of Mexican immigration in the United States and its implications for local law enforcement. Law Enforcement Executive Forum Journal, 8(1), 73-82.

Teshale T. (2008). Modernity eurocentrism and radical politics in Ethiopia 1961-1991. African Identities, 6(4), 345–371.

The entire book, the print version

Shotton, M.A. (1989). Computer addiction? A study of computer dependency. London, England: Taylor & Francis.

The electronic version of the print book

Shotton, M. A. (1989). Computer addiction? A study of computer dependency! [DX Reader version]. Retrieved from http://www.ebookstore.tandf.co.uk/html/index.asp

Articles

Section default policy

Copyright Notice

COPYRIGHT NOTICE

The College of the Social Sciences of Addis Ababa University owns the copyright of the articles.

The content is free to read and licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-NoDerivs (CC BY-NC-ND).

PUBLICATION ETHICS AND PUBLICATION MALPRACTICE STATEMENT

The journal required all contributors, authors, reviewers, editors, and associate editors to adhere to its best-practice standards for moral conduct. This is a list of essential points.

Duties of editors

Fair Play and Editorial Independence

Without considering the author's background, including gender, ethnic origin, citizenship, religion, political philosophy, or institutional affiliation, editors evaluate submitted manuscripts solely based on academic merit and relevance to the journal's scope. Government policies or those of any other external organizations have no bearing on the decisions to edit and publish. The whole editorial content of the journal, as well as the date of its publication, are completely under the control of the Editor-in-Chief and Duputy-Editor-in-Chief.

Confidentiality

Other than the corresponding author, potential reviewers, reviewers, associate editors, and the publisher, editors and associate editors will not reveal any information about a submitted article to anyone else.

Discloser and Conflict of Interest

Without the authors' written approval, editors and associate editors will not use unpublished information revealed in a submitted manuscript for their own research. Editors will maintain the confidentiality of any privileged information or ideas they acquire while working on the manuscript, and they will not exploit them for their own benefit. Editors will ask associate editors to handle manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest stemming from collaborative, competitive, or other relationships/connections with any of the authors, businesses, or institutions associated with the papers.

Publication Decision

All submitted manuscripts that are being considered for publication go through peer review by at least two subject-matter experts. Based on the validity of the work, its significance to researchers and readers, the reviewers' comments, and any current legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism, the Editor-in-Chief and Deputy Editor-in-Chief determine which of the manuscripts submitted to the journal will be published. While making this choice, the Editor-in-Chief and Deputy Editor-in-Chief may consult with associate editors.

Involvement and cooperation in the investigation

When ethical issues with a submitted manuscript or published paper are brought up, editors (together with associate editors) will take appropriate action. Even if an act of unethical publishing behavior is found years after publication, it will still be investigated. If further inquiry reveals that the ethical concern is valid, the journal will publish a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other remarks that may be pertinent.

Duties of reviewers

Contribution to editorial decisions

Peer review helps editors make editorial decisions and may help authors improve their submissions through editorial interactions with editors. The core of scientific endeavor is peer review, which is a crucial element of formal scholarly communication. All academics who want to contribute to the scientific method must undertake a reasonable amount of revision.

Promptness

If the selected and invited potential reviewer feels unqualified to review the research presented in a manuscript or realizes that it will be impossible to complete the review promptly should notify the editors right away and decline the invitation; hence, substitute reviewers can be recruited.

Confidentiality

Any manuscripts submitted for review are confidential and must be kept as such; they cannot be shared with or shown to anyone unless the Editor-in-Chief and/or Deputy Editor-in-Chief has given permission (only in specific circumstances). This is true for invited reviewers who choose not to participate in the review.

Standards of objectivity

Reviews should be undertaken impartially, remarks made with clarity and justification, and then used by the writers to enhance their articles. It is wrong to criticize the authors personally.

Acknowledgment of sources

Reviewers should point out pertinent published works that the authors have not cited. Any claim based on an observation, deduction, or argument already recorded in another publication needs to be supported by the appropriate citation. A reviewer should also let the editors know if they have any personal knowledge of any significant similarities or overlaps between the article being considered and any other material (published or unpublished).

Disclosure and conflict of interest

Any invited referee who has relationships or connections with any of the authors, businesses, or institutions related to the manuscript and the work described therein that could be construed as competitive, cooperative, or other relationships or connections should immediately notify the editors to declare their relationships or connections and decline to review so that substitute reviewers can be contacted.

Peer reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of any confidential information or ideas they receive and must not exploit it for their own personal gain. A reviewer may not conduct their own research using unpublished material disclosed in a submitted publication without the authors' express written agreement. This holds true for invited reviewers who also turn down the review invitation.

Duties of authors

Reporting standards

Original research writers should give a truthful account of the work done and the outcomes, followed by a dispassionate appraisal of the study's relevance. The manuscript should include enough specifics and citations to allow other authors to duplicate the work. In contrast to editorial "opinion" or perspective, review articles should be truthful, impartial, and complete. It is inappropriate and unethical to submit inaccurate statements deliberately.

Originality and plagiarism

Writers must ensure that all works they write and submit are wholly original, and if they borrow someone else's ideas or words, they must properly credit them. Moreover, publications that significantly impacted the description of the work reported in the manuscript should be referenced. Plagiarism can take many different forms, such as "passing off" another author's paper as the author's own, copying or paraphrasing significant portions of another paper without giving due credit, or claiming the findings of other people's studies. All forms of plagiarism are forbidden and represent unethical publishing behavior.

Multiple, duplicate, redundant, or concurrent submission/publication

It is not advisable to publish papers reporting essentially the same study in more than one journal or principal publication. As a result, authors shouldn't submit work that has previously been accepted by or published in another publication. The simultaneous submission of a paper to multiple journals is unethical publishing practice and is not accepted.

If certain requirements are met, publishing some papers (such as clinical guidelines and translations) in more than one journal may be justified. Secondary publishing, which must represent the same information and interpretation of the source document, requires the approval of the authors and editors of the relevant journals. The secondary publication must include a citation to the initial reference.

Authorship of the manuscript

Only those people who are able to accept responsibility for the content publicly and who meet the following authorship criteria should be recognized as authors in the manuscript: (i) made substantial contributions to the idea, planning, carrying out, data collection, analysis, or interpretation of the study; (ii) wrote the manuscript or contributed in critical revision to assure its intellectual content; and (iii) had a chance to review and approve the final version of the paper before agreeing to submit it for publication. All people who contributed significantly to the work described in the article but did not meet the requirements for authorship (e.g., technical support, writing, editing aid, general support) should be acknowledged in the "Acknowledgements" section after receiving their written consent. The corresponding author is responsible for making sure that the author list includes all appropriate coauthors (as defined above) and excludes any ineligible ones. They should also confirm that all coauthors have viewed the final draft of the paper and agreed to its submission for publication.

Disclosure and conflict of interest

At the earliest opportunity, authors should disclose any conflicts of interest that could be interpreted as influencing the results or their interpretation of the manuscript. Typically, this is done when the author has statements in their manuscript and submits a disclosure form during submission. Authors are expected to disclose financial issues, including funding, grant, consultancy, honoraria, membership, employment, stock ownership or other equity interests and paid expert testimony or patent-licensing agreements, as well as non-financial ones like ties to other people or organizations, affiliations, knowledge of the subject matter or materials, or beliefs in them. Authors are expected to disclose all funding sources (that include grant numbers or other reference numbers, if any).

Acknowledgment of sources

Writers must get the specific written consent of the author(s) of the workers engaged in these services before using any information they learn while performing confidential services, such as reviewing grant applications or manuscripts. Writers must make sure that they have appropriately recognized the work of others and must list any sources that had a significant impact on how the reported work was defined. Without the source's express, written consent, information collected informally (via conversation, correspondence, or discussions with third parties) cannot be utilized or reported.

Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects

The authors must make it explicit in the manuscript whether the work uses any techniques, chemicals, or tools that have any special risks inherent in their usage. The article should contain a statement to the effect that all procedures were carried out following applicable laws and institutional rules and that the appropriate IRB has approved them if the work involves the use of animals or human volunteers. For experiments involving human subjects, authors must also declare in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained. Human participants' private rights must always be respected.

Peer Review

Authors must actively engage in the peer review process and quickly respond to editors' requests for further information, raw data, clarifications, and documentation of ethics approval, patient consent, and copyright clearances. If a first decision of "revisions necessary" is made, authors should promptly, methodically, and point-by-point responses to the reviewers' remarks before editing and resubmitting their work to the journal within the specified deadline.

Fundamental errors in published works

The authors are responsible for swiftly telling the journal's editors or publisher of any material errors or inaccuracies in their own published work and working with them to either withdraw the manuscript or correct it in an erratum. The authors must promptly fix or retract the manuscript or offer proof to the journal editors that it is accurate if a third party informs the editors or publisher that the manuscript contains a serious error or inaccuracy.

Publishers’ duties

Handling of unethical Publishing behavior

In order to find and prevent the publication of articles that contain research misconduct, the editors and associate editors must collaborate. The publisher and editors will take all necessary steps to clarify the situation and amend the article in cases of suspected or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication, or plagiarism. This encompasses the prompt publication of a correction, an update, or, in the worst case, the retraction of the defective work. This wrongdoing must not ever be supported or knowingly allowed to happen.

Access to journal content

This is an open-access journal where all the published journal articles are freely accessible to readers. The journal digital archive guarantee accessibility. Authors are not expected to pay any fee in the entire process of the journal publication.

Open access policy

Ethiopian Journal of the Social Sciences and Humanities (EJOSSAH) employs the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License. The license allows users to copy, distribute and transmit an article provided that the author is attributed, the material is used for non-commercial purposes and is not modified. EJOSSAH retains copyright of the Article with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0) License. However, the editorial board will consider request for republishing.

PRIVACY STATEMENT

The names and email addresses entered in this journal site will be used exclusively for the stated purposes of this Journal and will not be made available for any other purpose or to any other party.

SUBMISSION OF MANUSCRIPT

Contributions should be submitted online using the following link:

http://ejol.aau.edu.et/index.php/EJSSH/about/submissions

For further inquiries, the journal address is the following.

Ethiopian Journal of the Social Sciences and Humanities (EJOSSAH)

College of Social Sciences

P.O. Box: 1176

Addis Ababa University

Privacy Statement

The names and email addresses entered in this journal site will be used exclusively for the stated purposes of this journal and will not be made available for any other purpose or to any other party.