Author Guidelines

Manuscripts must be written in clear, professional, and academically appropriate English. Authors are responsible for grammar, spelling, terminology, clarity, and readability. Manuscripts whose language substantially affects scholarly interpretation may be returned for language improvement before editorial evaluation.

Authors should ensure that the following requirements have been met before submitting a manuscript:

Manuscripts should be prepared in Microsoft Word format (.doc or .docx) and submitted electronically through the JODIGO Online Journal System (OJS). Authors are responsible for ensuring that names, affiliations, email addresses, manuscript metadata, keywords, funding information, and supplementary files are complete and accurate.

The abstract should concisely describe the research problem, objective, methodological or analytical approach, principal findings, and major governance or policy contribution. The abstract should normally contain 150–250 words. References, extensive background information, and undefined abbreviations should be avoided.

Authors should provide 4–7 keywords representing the principal concepts of the study. Keywords should support accurate indexing and international discoverability.

The Introduction should establish the institutional, administrative, political, social, technological, or policy context of the research. Authors should critically engage with relevant international literature, identify a clear research gap or governance problem, state the objective or research question, and explain why the study matters for digital governance.

Manuscripts should engage critically with relevant scholarship rather than provide a descriptive list of previous studies. Where appropriate, authors should identify and apply a theoretical, conceptual, institutional, governance, administrative, or policy framework that supports interpretation of the research problem and findings.

The Methods section should describe the research design, study context, participants or units of analysis, sampling procedures, data sources, instruments, data-collection methods, analytical techniques, software or computational tools, validation procedures, and ethical considerations where applicable. The description should allow readers to evaluate the validity, reliability, transparency, and reproducibility of the study.

Results or findings should be presented clearly, logically, and objectively. Tables, figures, models, maps, diagrams, or other visualizations may be used where they improve understanding. Authors should avoid unnecessary duplication between text, figures, and tables.

The Discussion should interpret the findings rather than simply repeat them. Authors should relate findings to the research questions, theoretical framework, and previous scholarship, and explain their implications for governance, public administration, institutional development, public policy, digital public services, accountability, participation, or citizen-government relations.

The Conclusion should directly address the objectives of the study and summarize its principal scholarly contribution. Where appropriate, authors should identify implications for governance, policy, institutional practice, public administration, or digital-service development. Limitations and recommendations for future research may also be included.

Research involving government databases, administrative records, public-service data, interviews, surveys, citizen data, public employees, digital platforms, or other potentially sensitive materials must comply with applicable ethical, institutional, legal, confidentiality, and data-protection requirements.

Studies involving artificial intelligence, algorithmic governance, automated public decision-making, predictive systems, risk scoring, biometric technologies, or related systems should describe relevant data sources, model assumptions, validation procedures, limitations, and potential biases where applicable. Authors should discuss relevant implications for fairness, explainability, transparency, accountability, privacy, and public rights.

Research involving government cybersecurity, vulnerabilities, critical digital infrastructure, authentication systems, or sensitive public information should balance scholarly transparency with responsible disclosure. Manuscripts should avoid unnecessary operational details that could create disproportionate risks to public systems, institutions, or users.

Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made substantial scholarly contributions to the work. For multi-author manuscripts, authors are encouraged to provide a contribution statement identifying individual roles in conceptualization, methodology, investigation, data analysis, software, interpretation, writing, reviewing, supervision, or project administration.

All funding sources, research grants, government support, institutional assistance, consultancy funding, or other financial support related to the study should be disclosed clearly. Individuals or organizations that contributed to the research but do not qualify for authorship may be acknowledged separately.

Authors must disclose financial, professional, institutional, commercial, advisory, political, or personal relationships that could reasonably be perceived as influencing the research. If no competing interests exist, authors may state: “The authors declare no conflict of interest.”

JODIGO uses the American Psychological Association (APA), 7th Edition referencing style. Every reference cited in the manuscript must appear in the reference list, and all listed references must be cited in the text.

Authors are strongly encouraged to use reference-management software such as Mendeley, Zotero, or EndNote. References should prioritize relevant peer-reviewed international scholarship and authoritative primary sources. Government reports, legislation, regulations, policy documents, and institutional sources should be cited accurately where they form part of the analysis. DOI information should be included where available.

Authors should provide sufficient information to support evaluation and verification of the research. Where appropriate and legally or ethically permissible, authors are encouraged to make datasets, analytical code, questionnaires, interview protocols, indicators, coding schemes, models, prompts, or supplementary research materials available through appropriate repositories or upon reasonable request.

Restrictions arising from privacy, confidentiality, national or institutional security, government data regulations, intellectual property, contractual obligations, or ethical requirements should be stated clearly.

Manuscripts that pass initial editorial screening will normally undergo double-blind peer review by at least two qualified reviewers. Reviewers evaluate originality, scholarly relevance, theoretical or conceptual quality, methodology, research integrity, clarity, policy or governance contribution, and alignment with the journal's aims and scope.

Authors invited to revise a manuscript should normally provide:

Accepted manuscripts proceed to copyediting, layout, proofreading, and publication. Corresponding authors may be asked to verify page proofs before publication. Proof corrections should normally be limited to typographical, formatting, metadata, or production errors. Substantial changes to the accepted scholarly content require editorial approval.