Author Guidelines and Manuscript Submission Requirements

1. General Author Guidelines

The African Journal for Empirical Research (AJERNET) welcomes original, high-quality scholarly manuscripts that contribute to the advancement of empirical knowledge across disciplines within the journal's aims and scope.

Authors are expected to adhere to internationally recognized standards of academic writing, research integrity, ethical conduct, and scholarly publishing. All manuscripts submitted to AJERNET must meet 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 contemporary academic, scientific, policy, or professional discourse.

2. Originality and Scientific Rigor: Submitted manuscripts must present original research or scholarly contributions supported by sound theoretical foundations, appropriate research methodologies, systematic analysis, and credible evidence.

3. Research Quality and Contribution: Manuscripts should demonstrate a clear contribution to existing knowledge. Research findings must be reliable, adequately supported by evidence, and appropriately interpreted. Where generalizability or transferability is claimed, authors must provide sufficient methodological justification.

4. Clarity and Academic Writing: Manuscripts must be written in clear, coherent, and grammatically correct academic English. Authors should ensure logical organization, consistency in terminology, and appropriate use of scholarly language.

5. Referencing and Citation Standards: All manuscripts must follow a recognized referencing style consistently throughout the document. AJERNET recommends the American Psychological Association (APA), 7th edition, although Harvard and Chicago referencing styles may be accepted where appropriate.

6. Data Sources and Research Transparency: Authors must clearly identify primary and secondary data sources, describe the procedures used to obtain and analyze the data, and provide sufficient methodological details to support the transparency and reproducibility of the research.

7. Peer Review Compliance: Manuscripts are subjected to the journal's double-blind peer review process. Authors must cooperate with the editorial team and respond appropriately to reviewers' comments and recommendations.

8. Research Ethics and Integrity: Authors must comply with applicable ethical standards, including obtaining ethical approval where required, securing informed consent from research participants, protecting confidentiality, and disclosing potential conflicts of interest.

9. Originality and Publication Status: Manuscripts must not have been previously published or be under consideration for publication in another journal. Any related publications, preprints, or overlapping submissions must be disclosed to the editorial office.

10. Authorship and Contributions: All listed authors must have made substantial scholarly contributions to the research, reviewed and approved the final manuscript, and agreed to its submission. Individuals who do not qualify for authorship should be acknowledged appropriately.

11. Accuracy and Authenticity of References: Authors must ensure that all references are authentic, complete, accurate, and verifiable. Fabricated references, nonexistent publications, inaccurate citations, and misleading digital object identifiers (DOIs) are strictly prohibited.

12. Use of Artificial Intelligence: Manuscripts must reflect the authors' original intellectual contributions. AI-generated research content presented as original scholarship is not accepted. Authors must disclose any use of artificial intelligence tools in preparing their manuscripts, where applicable. Language-editing tools may be used to improve grammar and clarity, provided that the authors retain responsibility for the accuracy, originality, and integrity of the submitted work.

13. Submission and Publication Agreement: By submitting a manuscript, authors confirm that they have read, understood, and agreed to the journal's editorial policies, peer review procedures, publication ethics requirements, copyright provisions, and applicable publication terms.

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

AJERNET reserves the right to return manuscripts that do not comply with these requirements for correction before they proceed to peer review.

2. Manuscript Submission Procedure

AJERNET accepts manuscripts exclusively through its online submission system, which is hosted on the Open Journal Systems (OJS) platform.

All manuscripts must be submitted electronically in Microsoft Word-compatible formats, preferably .docx.

2.1 Online Submission

Authors should follow the procedure outlined below:

Step 1: Registration and Login

Authors must register for an account on the AJERNET online 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 online 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

Authors should upload the manuscript in the prescribed format and ensure that the document complies with the journal's formatting and structural requirements.

Where necessary, supplementary materials, research instruments, ethical approval documentation, or other supporting files may be uploaded.

Step 5: Entering Manuscript Metadata

Authors must provide accurate manuscript information, including:

• Full manuscript title and abstract.

• Names of all contributing authors.

• Institutional affiliations of all authors.

• Valid email addresses and corresponding author details.

• ORCID identifiers, where available.

• Relevant keywords.

• Any additional information requested by the submission system.

The information entered into the submission system must correspond with the details provided in the manuscript.

Step 6: Confirmation and Submission

Authors should review all uploaded documents and manuscript metadata before completing the submission.

Upon successful submission, the system will generate an electronic acknowledgment and assign a unique manuscript reference number or submission identification number.

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

Step 7: Editorial Screening and Peer Review

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

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

Authors will receive subsequent communication from the editorial office regarding the manuscript's progress, revision requirements, and editorial decisions.

2.2 Submission Portal

Manuscripts should be submitted through the official AJERNET online submission platform:

AJERNET Online Submission Portal:
https://ajernet.net/ojs/index.php/ajernet/index

Authors are encouraged to retain their submission reference numbers for future correspondence.

3. Manuscript Formatting and Page Layout

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

3.1 File Format

Manuscripts must be prepared and submitted in Microsoft Word format (.doc or .docx), with .docx being the preferred format.

Manuscripts involving complex mathematical equations or statistical notation may be prepared using LaTeX. However, authors should contact the editorial office regarding acceptable submission arrangements and any additional source files required.

3.2 Manuscript Length

The manuscript should not exceed 20 pages, including tables, figures, references, and appendices, unless prior approval has been obtained from the editorial office.

Authors should present their arguments concisely while providing sufficient detail to ensure methodological transparency and scholarly completeness.

3.3 Font Type and Size

All manuscripts 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
Headings and subheadings	11 pt
References	11 pt
Tables and figures	10–11 pt, as appropriate

The manuscript title and major section headings should be presented in bold.

Authors should maintain consistent formatting for headings and subheadings throughout the manuscript.

3.4 Line Spacing

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

Authors should avoid unnecessary blank lines and excessive paragraph spacing.

3.5 Page Size, Orientation, and Margins

Manuscripts must be formatted using the following page specifications:

• Paper size: A4 (210 × 297 mm).

• Page orientation: Portrait.

• Left margin: 1.5 inches (3.81 cm).

• Right margin: 1 inch (2.54 cm).

• Top margin: 1 inch (2.54 cm).

• Bottom margin: 1 inch (2.54 cm).

Landscape orientation may be used for exceptionally wide tables or figures where necessary, subject to editorial approval.

3.6 Page Numbering

All manuscript pages must be numbered consecutively.

Page numbers should be positioned at the bottom center of each page.

The bottom margin should not contain any additional information, including footnotes, decorative elements, or unnecessary text.

Where explanatory notes are essential, authors should incorporate the information into the main text or use an appropriate alternative approved by the editorial office.

3.7 Author Information

The manuscript must clearly indicate:

• Full names of all authors.

• Complete institutional affiliations.

• Country of institutional affiliation.

• Valid email address of the corresponding author.

• ORCID identifiers, where available.

Authors must ensure that their names and affiliations are accurate and consistently presented.

To preserve the integrity of double-blind peer review, the editorial office may require a separate title page and an anonymized manuscript for reviewers.

3.8 Keywords

Each manuscript must include three to six keywords that accurately represent its principal concepts, variables, geographical focus, or research themes.

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

3.9 Language and Proofreading

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

Before submission, authors should carefully proofread their manuscripts to eliminate spelling mistakes, grammatical errors, punctuation inconsistencies, and typographical errors.

Authors are encouraged to use Microsoft Word's spelling and grammar tools or reputable language-editing applications, such as Grammarly, where appropriate.

The use of language-editing tools does not relieve authors of responsibility for the accuracy and quality of their manuscripts.

3.10 Tables and Figures

Tables and figures 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 are legible and of sufficient quality for publication.

Tables and figures should follow the formatting conventions of the referencing style adopted in the manuscript.

3.11 Referencing Consistency

Authors must use one recognized referencing style consistently throughout the manuscript.

AJERNET recommends APA 7th edition.

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

3.12 Published Articles as Formatting Guides

Authors are encouraged to consult recently published articles in AJERNET to familiarize themselves with the journal's presentation, organization, and formatting conventions.

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

4. REQUIRED STRUCTURE OF THE MANUSCRIPT

Manuscripts submitted to AJERNET should generally follow the structure outlined below. Authors should adapt the structure where necessary to reflect the nature of their research while maintaining scholarly coherence and methodological rigor.

4.1 Manuscript Title

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

A suitable title should be:

• Clear, concise, and informative.

• Grammatically correct.

• Consistent with the objectives and findings of the study.

• Free from unnecessary abbreviations and excessive technical terminology.

Authors should avoid overly broad or ambiguous titles.

The title should be presented in bold, Times New Roman, 12-point font.

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.

Authors are responsible for ensuring that the order of authorship and institutional information has been agreed upon by all contributors before submission.

4.3 Acknowledgments (Optional)

Authors may acknowledge individuals, institutions, organizations, 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 maintain 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.

The abstract should generally contain the following components:

a) Background and Research Problem

Briefly introduce the research 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, sampling procedures, sample size, data collection methods, and analytical techniques.

e) Key Findings

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

f) Conclusion

State the principal conclusion derived from the research findings.

g) Recommendations

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

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 main research themes.

4.6 Introduction

The introduction should establish the 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 historical, theoretical, empirical, or contextual foundations of the study.

3. Highlight the significance of the research 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.

Authors should avoid unnecessary repetition, unsupported generalizations, and excessively lengthy background discussions.

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 issue, research gap, or unresolved question that motivated the study.

It should explain:

• The existing situation or established 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 or existing interventions.

• The need for the present investigation.

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

Authors should avoid presenting broad societal challenges without clearly identifying the specific research problem.

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, or phenomena being investigated.

4. Be measurable or investigable through the selected research 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 (Where Applicable)

Quantitative 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 the expected relationships or differences between variables.

• Be testable using appropriate statistical procedures.

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

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 research problem and objectives.

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

The literature review should generally contain the following subsections.

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 or concepts.

5. Identify important strengths and limitations of the theory.

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

Theoretical discussions should be analytical rather than purely descriptive.

Authors should avoid including theories that have no clear relationship to the study.

5.2 Empirical Review

The empirical review should critically examine previous studies that have investigated similar research problems, variables, 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 and sampling procedures, where relevant.

• 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.

Preference should be given to credible, relevant, and reasonably recent peer-reviewed literature, while foundational studies may be included where necessary.

5.3 Conceptual Review and Conceptual Framework (Where Applicable)

The conceptual review should define and clarify the principal concepts and variables examined in the study.

Where appropriate, authors should develop a conceptual framework illustrating the 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 in the accompanying text.

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.

The section should generally include the following components.

6.1 Research Approach and Design

State whether the study employed a quantitative, qualitative, or mixed-methods approach.

Identify the specific research design, such as a cross-sectional survey, case study, experimental design, longitudinal design, phenomenological study, or other appropriate design.

Explain why the selected approach and design were suitable for addressing the research objectives.

6.2 Study Area or Research Context

Describe the geographical, institutional, organizational, or social setting in which the study was conducted.

Provide relevant contextual information necessary for understanding the research environment.

6.3 Target Population

Clearly define the population from which the study participants, observations, or units of analysis were drawn.

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 or units of analysis.

Authors should explain whether probability or non-probability sampling methods were employed and justify their suitability.

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, such as information power, purposive selection, or data saturation where applicable.

6.5 Data Sources and Data Collection Methods

Identify whether the research relied on primary data, secondary data, or a combination of both.

Describe the instruments and procedures used to collect data, including questionnaires, interviews, focus group discussions, observations, document reviews, experiments, or other relevant techniques.

Authors should explain how the selected methods addressed the research objectives.

6.6 Validity, Reliability, and Trustworthiness

Quantitative studies should explain the procedures used to assess the validity and reliability of research instruments.

Where applicable, authors may report pilot testing, expert assessment, internal consistency measures, or other appropriate procedures.

Qualitative studies should describe measures adopted to strengthen credibility, dependability, confirmability, and transferability.

Mixed-methods studies should address the relevant quality criteria for each component.

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, including the statistical software used where applicable.

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

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

The selected analytical techniques must correspond to the research objectives, hypotheses, 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.

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 implications.

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

7.1 Presentation of Results

Authors should present findings logically and support them with appropriate empirical 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.

Statistical findings should be interpreted accurately and reported with sufficient detail to support the conclusions.

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, including the day, month, and year where available and ethically permissible, should be provided.

Identifying details must be withheld where their disclosure could compromise participant confidentiality.

Mixed-methods studies should clearly present both quantitative and qualitative findings and explain how the evidence relates across the two components.

Authors should avoid unnecessary duplication of information between tables, figures, and narrative descriptions.

7.2 Discussion of Findings

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

6. Discuss the practical, policy, methodological, or theoretical implications of the results.

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

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

Authors should avoid making claims that are not adequately supported by the study findings.

Where results and discussion are presented under a combined heading, the distinction between reporting findings and interpreting them must remain clear.

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 research 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 in the conclusion.

The conclusion should not merely reproduce the abstract or repeat the results without synthesis.

9. RECOMMENDATIONS

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. Policy development or reform.

2. Institutional or organizational practices.

3. Professional or technical interventions.

4. Improvements in research methodology.

5. Theoretical development.

6. Areas requiring further investigation.

Authors should clearly identify the stakeholders or institutions responsible for implementing relevant recommendations.

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

Suggestions for future research should be based on identified research gaps, methodological limitations, or emerging questions arising from the findings.

10. REFERENCES

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

AJERNET recommends the American Psychological Association (APA), 7th edition. Harvard or Chicago referencing styles may also be accepted where appropriate, provided that one style is applied consistently.

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, in accordance with the selected referencing style.

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

AJERNET is committed to maintaining high standards of scholarly 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:

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

• Fabrication or falsification of research data.

• Manipulation or misrepresentation of research findings.

• Fabricated references or misleading citations.

• Duplicate or redundant publication without appropriate disclosure.

• Unauthorized use of copyrighted materials.

• Undisclosed conflicts of interest.

• Inappropriate authorship attribution.

• Unethical treatment of research participants.

• Misrepresentation of ethical approvals or research permissions.

• 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

AJERNET 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 scholarly 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 scholarly 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

AJERNET publishes scholarly articles under an open-access model intended to promote the accessibility and dissemination of research.

Authors retain copyright in their published work, subject to the journal's publication and licensing terms.

Published articles are made available under the Creative Commons Attribution–NonCommercial (CC BY-NC) licence.

Under this licence, users may share and adapt published material for noncommercial purposes, provided that appropriate credit is given to the original authors, the source of publication is acknowledged, and the applicable licence conditions are observed.

Commercial reuse requires separate permission from the relevant copyright holder.

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

14. FINAL MANUSCRIPT CHECKLIST

Before submitting a manuscript to AJERNET, 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 and figures 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.

15. IMPORTANT NOTICE TO AUTHORS

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

Compliance with the journal's formatting, methodological, 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 scholarly integrity of a manuscript rests with its authors.

AJERNET 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 AJERNET online submission portal or through our designated email address [editor.ajernet@gmail.com, editor@ajernet.net]

African Journal for Empirical Research (AJERNET)
AJER Publishing