Author Guidlines

The guidelines for authors converge in manuscript templates.

Manuscript Template of Muttaqien; Indonesian Journal of Multidiciplinary Islamic Studies available in three versions. For authors, please download the following link.

1) Manuscript Template (English version)

2) Manuscript Template (Bahasa Indonesia version)

3) Manuscript Template (Arabic Version)

Manuscript Assessment Process
Any accepted manuscript will be reviewed by at least two reviewers, plus editorial comments. The author must revise the manuscript according to the comments of the reviewer and editors. The editor team will process it for later publication. Please go to the Peer Review Process page for peer review process diagrams.

Any accepted manuscript will be reviewed by at least two reviewers, plus editorial comments. The author must revise the manuscript according to the reviewer and editor's comments. The editor team will process it for later publication. Articles to be submitted to this journal must contain the following writing rules:

  • Information of article

Title: no more than 16 words; Author(s) name: is entirely written without any title; Institution: is wholly stated, including the institution name; Corresponding author: includes name & email address.

  • Abstract

An abstract is a brief, comprehensive summary of the article's contents; it allows readers to survey the contents of an article quickly, and, like a title, it enables persons interested in the document to retrieve it from abstracting and indexing databases. Most scholarly journals require an abstract. Please review the instructions to authors or the journal's web page to which you plan to submit your article for any journal-specific instructions. A well-prepared abstract can be the most important single paragraph in an article. Most people have their first contact with an article by seeing just the abstract, usually compared to several other abstracts, as they do a literature search. Readers frequently decide, based on the abstract, whether to read the entire article. The abstract needs to be dense with information. By embedding keywords in your abstract, you enhance the user's ability to find it. Stay within the abstract word limit of the journal to which you submit your article. Word limits vary from journal to journal and typically range from 100 to 150 words.

Keywords: low case, comma, paper template, abstract, keywords, introduction

  • Introduction

This template is designed to assist the Author in preparing the manuscript; it is an exact representation of the format expected by the editor. To use this template, please save this MS Word file to your document, then copy and paste it here. To copy and paste the text to this template document, please use “Special Paste” and choose “Unformated Text”.

All papers submitted to the journal should be written in good English. Authors for whom English is not their native language are encouraged to have their papers checked before submission for grammar and clarity. International Editing and Asia Editing can provide English language and copyediting services. The work should not have been published or submitted for publication elsewhere. The official language of the manuscript to be published in Muttaqien: Indonesian Journal of Multidiciplinary Islamic Studies is Indonesian, Arabic, and English.

In the Introduction, the Authors should state the objectives of the work at the end of the introduction section. Before the objective, the Authors should provide an adequate background and concise literature survey to record the existing solutions/method, to show which is the best of previous research, to show the main limitation of the previous research, to show what you hope to achieve (to solve the limitation) and to show the scientific merit or novelties of the paper. Avoid a detailed literature survey or a summary of the results.

  • Method

Materials and methods should allow readers to reproduce the experiment. Could you provide sufficient detail to enable the work to be copied? A reference should indicate published methods; only relevant modifications should be described. Refrain from repeating the details of established methods.

Identify Subsections

It is conventional and reasonable to divide the Method section into labeled subsections. These usually include a section describing the participants or subjects and a paragraph describing the procedures used in the study. The latter section often consists of a description of (a) any experimental manipulations or interventions used and how they were delivered-for example, any mechanical apparatus used to deliver them; (b) sampling procedures and sample size and precision; (c) measurement approaches (including the psychometric properties of the instruments used); and (d) the research design. If the study design is complex or the stimuli require a detailed description, additional subsections or subheadings to divide the subsections may be warranted to help readers find specific information.

Could you include the information essential to understand and replicate the study in these subsections? Insufficient detail leaves the reader with questions; too much detail burdens the reader with irrelevant information. Please consider using appendices and a website for more detailed information.

Participant (Subject) Characteristics

Appropriate identification of research participants is critical to the science and practice of psychology, particularly for generalizing the findings, making comparisons across replications, and using the evidence in research syntheses and secondary data analyses. If humans participated in the study, report the eligibility and exclusion criteria, including any restrictions based on demographic characteristics.

Research Design

Could you write the research design in the Method section? Were subjects placed into manipulated conditions, or were they observed naturalistically? How were participants assigned to conditions through random assignment or some other selection mechanism if multiple conditions were created? Was the study conducted as a between-subject or a within-subject design?

  • Result and Discussion

Results should be clear and concise. The results should summarize (scientific) findings rather than provide data in great detail. Please highlight differences between your results or findings and the previous publications by other researchers.

The discussion should explore the significance of the results of the work, not repeat them. A combined Results and Discussion section is often appropriate. Avoid extensive citations and discussion of published literature.

In discussion, it is the most essential section of your article. Here, you get the chance to sell your data. Could you make the debate correspond to the results but not reiterate them? Often, it should begin with a summary of the leading scientific findings (not experimental results). The following components should be covered in the discussion: How do your results relate to the original question or objectives outlined in the Introduction section (what)? Do you provide an interpretation scientifically for each of your results or findings presented (why)? Are your results consistent with what other investigators have reported (what else)? Or are there any differences?

After presenting the results, you can review and interpret their implications, especially concerning your original hypotheses. Here, you will examine, analyze, and qualify the results and draw inferences and conclusions. Emphasize any theoretical or practical consequences of the results. (When the discussion is relatively brief and straightforward, some authors prefer to combine it with the Results section, creating a section called Results and Discussion.)

Open the Discussion section with a clear statement of the support or nonsupport for your original hypotheses, distinguished by primary and secondary hypotheses. If hypotheses were not supported, offer post hoc explanations. Just to let you know, similarities and differences between your results and the work of others should be used to contextualize, confirm, and clarify your conclusions. Refrain from reformulating and repeating points already made; each new statement should contribute to your interpretation and the reader's understanding of the problem.

Your interpretation of the results should take into account (a) sources of potential bias and other threats to internal validity, (b) the imprecision of measures, (c) the overall number of tests or overlap among tests, (d) the effect sizes observed, and (e) other limitations or weaknesses of the study. If an intervention is involved, could you discuss whether it was successful, the mechanism by which it was intended to work (causal pathways), and alternative mechanisms? Also, the barriers to implementing the intervention and the fidelity with which the intervention or manipulation was implemented in the study, that is, any differences between the manipulation as planned and as the manipulation was executed, will be discussed.

Acknowledge the limitations of your research and address alternative explanations of the results. Discuss the generalizability, or external validity, of the findings. This critical analysis should consider differences between the target population and the accessed sample. For interventions, discuss characteristics that make them more or less applicable to circumstances not included in the study, how and what outcomes were measured (relative to other measures that might have been used), the length of time to measurement (between the end of the intervention and the measurement of outcomes), incentives, compliance rates, and specific settings involved in the study as well as other contextual issues.

Please just end the Discussion section with a reasoned and justifiable commentary on the importance of your findings. This concluding section may be brief or extensive, provided it is tightly reasoned, self-contained, and not overstated. In this section, you might briefly return to a discussion of why the problem is essential (as stated in the introduction), what more significant issues, those that transcend the particulars of the subfield, might hinge on the findings, and what propositions are confirmed or disconfirmed by the extrapolation of these findings to such overarching issues.

  • Conclusion

Conclusions should answer the objectives of the research. Tells how your work advances the field from the present state of knowledge. Without clear Conclusions, reviewers and readers will find it difficult to judge the work and whether or not it merits publication in the journal. Do not repeat the Abstract or list experimental results. Could you provide a clear scientific justification for your work and indicate possible applications and extensions? I suggest future experiments and highlight those underway.

  • References

Effendi, M. R. (2021). TEOLOGI ISLAM Potret Sejarah dan Perkembangan Pemikiran Mazhab Kalam. Literasi Nusantara.  ←Book

Rachman, N. A., & Effendi, M. R. (2023). Pendampingan Pembentukan Komunitas Remaja (Koja) dalam Meningkatkan Kualitas Generasi Muda Islam di Perum Panorama Purwakarta. Satwika: Jurnal Pengabdian Kepada Masyarakat3(1), 9 - 17. ←Journal

Narulita, S., Aminah, A., & Suminar, M. Z. A. (2019, October). STRATEGIES FOR INCREASING RELIGIOUS LITERACY THROUGH SOCIAL MEDIA. In Proceeding ASEAN Youth Conference. ←Conference Proceeding.

Taufiqurrochman. 2015. " Model Belajar Bahasa Arab Mandiri Berbasis Website”, Laporan Penelitian UIN Maulana Malik Ibrahim Malang. ←Report

Ardiansyah, A.A. (2019). Al Hiwār fī Qishati al Nabī Yūsuf fī al Qurān al Karīm (Dirāsah Balāghiyyah wa Ilm al Lughah al Ijtima’ī). [Tesis, UIN Sunan Gunung Djati Bandung]. ←Thesis (Skripsi/Tesis/Disertasi)

Busuu Developer. “Manfaat busuu Premium”, Diakses pada 25 Mei 2022. ←Website

Any accepted manuscript will be reviewed by at least two reviewers, plus editorial comments. The author must revise the manuscript according to the reviewer and editor's comments. The editor team will process it for later publication. The review process can be separately described, as shown below.