Author Guidelines

1. General Requirements

Manuscripts submitted to the Journal of Social Transformation and Community Engagement (JSTCE) must be original, scholarly, and relevant to the journal's focus and scope. Manuscripts should address issues related to community engagement, community empowerment, social innovation, and social transformation.

Manuscripts must not have been previously published or simultaneously submitted to another journal.

2. Types of Articles

JSTCE accepts the following types of manuscripts:

Community engagement articles
Community-based research
Participatory Action Research (PAR)
Asset-Based Community Development (ABCD)
Community empowerment studies
Social innovation and transformation studies

3. Manuscript Structure

Manuscripts should generally consist of:

Title
Author Names and Affiliations
Abstract
Keywords
Introduction
Method
Results
Discussion
Implications and Sustainability
Conclusion
Acknowledgments, if applicable
References

The structure may be adjusted according to the characteristics of the study, provided that the manuscript clearly presents the research or community engagement process and its outcomes.

4. Introduction

The Introduction should explain the background and significance of the community or social problem, relevant previous studies, the research or engagement gap, objectives, and the contribution of the study.

Authors should clearly explain why the intervention or community engagement activity was necessary and how it contributes to knowledge and/or social transformation.

5. Method

The Method should clearly describe the approach, community partners or participants, research setting, procedures, instruments or materials, data collection, and data analysis.

JSTCE particularly welcomes Asset-Based Community Development (ABCD), Participatory Action Research (PAR), community-based research, and other participatory approaches.

Authors using ABCD should explain how community assets were identified, mobilized, and developed.

Authors using PAR should explain the participatory cycle, including problem identification, planning, action, observation, reflection, and subsequent action.

The method should demonstrate meaningful community participation throughout the engagement process.

6. Results

The Results should present the findings or outcomes of the research or community engagement program clearly and systematically.

Authors should provide sufficient evidence of changes resulting from the intervention, such as changes in:

knowledge and skills;
community capacity;
behavior or practices;
participation;
economic conditions;
social relationships;
institutional capacity;
community resilience; or
other relevant dimensions of social transformation.

Tables, figures, photographs, or other supporting evidence may be included where appropriate.

7. Discussion

The Discussion should interpret the findings in relation to the research objectives, relevant theories, and previous studies.

Authors should explain what was found, why it occurred, how it relates to previous research, and what contribution the findings make to community engagement and social transformation.

The Discussion should not merely repeat the Results but should provide critical interpretation and broader implications.

8. Implications and Sustainability

Authors should explain the practical implications of the findings for communities, institutions, policymakers, practitioners, or other stakeholders.

Particular attention should be given to the sustainability of the intervention, including community ownership, local leadership, institutional support, partnerships, capacity building, and the continued utilization of community assets.

9. Conclusion

The Conclusion should directly answer the objectives of the study and summarize the main contribution of the research or community engagement program.

The conclusion should not simply repeat the Results. It should highlight the key contribution to community empowerment and social transformation and, where appropriate, provide recommendations for future interventions or research.

10. Authorship

All listed authors must have made substantial contributions to the research and manuscript and must approve the final version before submission.

The corresponding author is responsible for communication with the journal and ensuring that all authors have approved the submission.

Individuals who provide technical, administrative, financial, or other assistance without meeting authorship criteria should be acknowledged appropriately.

11. References

Authors should use relevant and reliable scholarly references. References should preferably include recent publications and primary research sources.

The journal recommends the use of a reference-management tool such as Mendeley, Zotero, or EndNote.

References and citations should follow the journal's prescribed citation style.

12. Research and Publication Ethics

Authors must comply with the journal's policies concerning:

plagiarism and originality;
research misconduct;
authorship and contributorship;
conflicts of interest;
research ethics;
informed consent where applicable;
copyright and licensing; and
responsible use of artificial intelligence.

Authors are responsible for the accuracy and integrity of their submitted manuscripts.

13. Artificial Intelligence

Authors may use AI-assisted tools responsibly for activities such as language improvement, translation, brainstorming, coding, or other appropriate supporting tasks.

AI tools cannot be listed as authors. Authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, integrity, and ethical quality of the manuscript.

Substantive use of generative AI should be disclosed in accordance with the journal's Artificial Intelligence Policy.

14. Similarity Check

All submitted manuscripts are subject to similarity checking using Turnitin or an equivalent plagiarism-detection system.

Authors are encouraged to conduct a similarity check before submission. A similarity score is evaluated in context and does not automatically constitute evidence of plagiarism.

15. Peer Review

All manuscripts that pass the initial editorial screening are evaluated through a double-blind peer-review process by at least two qualified reviewers.

Editorial decisions are based on the manuscript's originality, relevance, methodological rigor, scholarly contribution, and reviewers' recommendations. The final decision rests with the Editor-in-Chief or designated editor. This transparent description of peer review is consistent with international publishing best practice.