Login or Register to make a submission.

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 a 12-point font; 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 stylistic and bibliographic requirements outlined in the Author Guidelines.
  • having responsible and recommended colleagues that suitable with our journal and want to join as reviewer? Now, you can recommend us by typing down their name down below (the candidates must have at least master degree). Format. Name:... Email:... Whatsapp:...

Publish with Penerbit Goodwood


Manuscripts should be submitted by one of the authors of the manuscript through our Open Journal System (OJS), the manuscript submission system for our journals. We only accept Word (.doc, .docx, .odt, .rtf, .txt) files. Special characters should not be included in the file name of the main manuscript file. Submissions by anyone other than one of the authors will not be accepted. The submitting author takes responsibility for the manuscript during submission and peer review. For technical help, please contact

Terms of submission

Manuscripts must be submitted on the understanding that they have not been published elsewhere and are only being considered by this journal. The submitting author is responsible for ensuring that the article’s publication has been approved by all the other coauthors. It is also the submitting author's responsibility to ensure that the article has all necessary institutional approvals. Only an acknowledgment from the editorial office officially establishes the date of receipt. Further correspondence and proofs will be sent to the author(s) before publication, unless otherwise indicated. It is a condition of submission that the authors permit editing of the manuscript for readability. All inquiries concerning the publication of accepted manuscripts should be addressed to All submissions are bound by Penerbit Goodwood's terms of service.

Peer review

All submitted articles are subject to assessment and peer review to ensure editorial appropriateness and technical correctness.

Research published in the journal must be:

  • Scientifically valid – adhering to accepted community standards of research.
  • Technically accurate in its methods and results.
  • Representative of a specific advance, or replication, or null/negative result, which is worthy of publication.
  • As reproducible as possible – sharing underlying data, code, and supporting materials wherever able.
  • Ethically sound and transparent — adhering to best practice with respect to animal and human studies, consent to publish, and clear declaration of potential conflicts of interests, both real and perceived.

Editors of the Penerbit Goodwood journal will decide promptly whether to accept, reject or request revisions of referred papers based on the reviews and editorial insight of the supporting journals. Also, Editors will have the option of seeking additional reviews when needed. The authors will be advised when Editors decide, further review is required. Submitted articles will be first review by the editor for the topic and writing style according to the guidelines. All manuscripts are subject to double-blind peer-review, both the reviewer and author identities are concealed from the reviewers, and vice versa, throughout the review process to meet standards of academic excellence. In short, the steps are:

  1. Manuscript Submission (by author).
  2. Manuscript Check and Selection (by manager and editors). 
  3. Editors have a right to directly accept, reject, or review. Prior to further processing steps, plagiarism check using Turnitin is applied for each manuscript.
  4. Manuscript Reviewing Process (by reviewers).
  5. Notification of Manuscript Acceptance, Revision, or Rejection (by editor to author based on reviewers comments).
  6. Paper Revision (by author)
  7. Revision Submission based on Reviewer Suggestion (by author) with the similar flow to point number 1. 
  8. If the reviewer seems to be satisfied with revision, notification for acceptance (by editor). 
  9. Galley proof and publishing process.

The steps point number 1 to 5 are considered as 1 round of the peer-reviewing process (see the grey area in the figure). The editor or editorial board considers the feedback provided by the peer reviewers and arrives at a decision. The following are the most common decisions:

  1. Accepted, as it is. The journal will publish the paper in its original form;
  2. Accepted by Minor Revisions, the journal will publish the paper and asks the author to make small corrections (let authors revised with stipulated time);
  3. Accepted by Major Revisions, the journal will publish the paper provided the authors make the changes suggested by the reviewers and/or editors (let authors revised with stipulated time);
  4. Resubmit (conditional rejection), the journal is willing to reconsider the paper in another round of decision making after the authors make major changes;
  5. Rejected (outright rejection), the journal will not publish the paper or reconsider it even if the authors make major revisions.


In the spirit of sharing findings through our open science mission, emphasis is not placed on novelty, interest, or perceived impact. Replication studies, particularly of research published in this journal, are encouraged.

In order for an article to be accepted for publication, the assigned editor will first consider if the manuscript meets the minimum editorial standards and fits within the scope of the journal. If an article is considered suitable for the journal, the editor will ideally solicit at least two external peer reviewers (who will remain anonymous to the authors unless they choose to disclose their identity by signing the review report) to assess the article before confirming a decision to accept. Decisions to reject are at the discretion of the editor.

Our research integrity team will occasionally seek advice outside standard peer review, for example, on submissions with serious ethical, security, biosecurity, or societal implications. We may consult experts and the editor before deciding on appropriate actions, including but not limited to: recruiting reviewers with specific expertise, assessment by additional editors, and declining to further consider a submission.

Concurrent submissions

In order to ensure sufficient diversity within the authorship of the journal, authors will be limited to having three manuscripts under review at any point in time. If an author already has three manuscripts under review in the journal, they will need to wait until the review process of at least one of these manuscripts is complete before submitting another manuscript for consideration. This policy does not apply to editorials or other non-peer-reviewed manuscript types.

Article processing charges

The journal is open access. Some journals apply Article processing charges (APCs) to allow the publisher to make articles immediately available online to anyone to read and reuse upon publication.


Penerbit Goodwood supports the deposition of manuscripts in preprint servers, and does not consider this to compromise the novelty of the results. Articles based on content previously made public only on a preprint server, institutional repository, or in a thesis will be considered. The preprint should be cited.



Preregistration of studies

Authors are encouraged to indicate whether the conducted research was preregistered in an independent, institutional registry (e.g., Preregistration of studies involves registering the study design, variables, and treatment conditions prior to conducting the research.

Preregistration of analysis plans

Authors are encouraged to indicate whether or not the conducted research was preregistered with an analysis plan in an independent, institutional registry (e.g., Preregistration of studies involves registering the study design, variables, and treatment conditions. Including an analysis plan involves specification of sequence of analyses or the statistical model that will be reported.


Prior to publication, an ORCID iD must be provided for the corresponding author(s). If you already have an ORCID iD, you will be asked to provide it. If you haven’t registered with ORCID yet, we’ll help you create an iD at the point of submission. The ORCID is not required for submission, or for peer review, but we will not be able to publish your article online until an ORCID iD is provided.

Article types

The journal will consider the following article types:

Research articles

Research articles should present the results of an original research study. These manuscripts should describe how the research project was conducted and provide a thorough analysis of the results of the project. Systematic reviews may be submitted as research articles.


A review article provides an overview of the published literature in a particular subject area.


Manuscript should be uploaded to the open journal system and arranged completely based on the Penerbit Goodwood’s template paper containing title, authors, affiliation and email, abstract, keywords, introduction, literature review, methods, results, discussion, conclusion, acknowledgment and references. Besides, the manuscript should be typed in A4-size paper, in a single column, and 1.0 single space line, 11 point Times New Roman font. Margins on all four sides are 2,5 cm.

Manuscript title

The title of the paper should be concise, clear and informative describing the contents of the research with a maximum 12 words. Avoid abbreviations and formula as possible.


The abstract comes after title page in the manuscript. The abstract must be written between 180-250 words and divided into purpose, methods, results, limitation, contribution, and novelty. References should be avoided. Also, non-standard or uncommon abbreviations should be avoided.


The keywords should be avoiding general and plural terms and multiple concepts. These keywords will be used for indexing purposes. Keywords should not be less than 3 words and not be more than 5 words or phrases.

  1. Introduction

Provide the background of the study concisely. In this section, the author/s should discuss the research problem in apparent sentences. Also, discuss the motivation of the study. Provide in-text references in APA style for all the facts that are presented here.

  1. Literature review and hypothesis development

Related work of previous researchers should be presented. Minimum 10-15 good and at least in the last 5 years works should be presented. This section can be merged with the introduction section as well. Here, the author(s) can discuss the research gap that this study is going to cover. Provide in-text citation in APA style. For more detailed guidelines of citation please visit:

  1. Research methodology

Present the materials, methods, survey, questionnaire etc., used for the study.  Author/s should explain whether this study is experimental, review study, or simulation-based or survey-based. Discuss software and hardware used during the study with their brand names. Mention all research conditions, assumptions, and theories followed. This section should be easy enough for any reader to repeat the study under similar conditions. 

  1. Results and discussions

Provide logical and scientific analysis of the study's findings—present pieces of evidence to support your analysis by citing the work of earlier researchers or existing theories.

  1. Conclusion

Conclusion should consist of conclusion, limitation, and suggestion.


The conclusion should be written in apparent structures. It should explain how the objectives of the study are accomplished.


No study covers all aspects of the research problem. The author/s should discuss the limitations or gaps of this study.


Provide suggestions based on the findings and limitations of this study.


The author/s should present a list of acknowledgments at the end. Any financial or nonfinancial support for the study should be acknowledged.


It is highly recommended to use reference tools such as EndNote, Mendeley, Zotero, and etc.

  1. All references must be in APA style. For more detail, kindly visit:
  2. Attach at least 15 references and 50% is in the last 5 years.
  3. 50% of references are highly recommended from primary sources.
  4. The references should be sorted in ascending order.

SIMO uses the author-date style referred from APA style format. Every in-text citations must have a corresponding references and vice versa. When the citation is in the beginning of the sentence or paragraph, it should be written seperated from the year e.g. Harris (2020) stated that.... or, if the sentence begins with 'according to, as stated by, etc', the citation also has to be written seperated from the year; only the year in the bracket e.g. according to Harris (2020)...
While in the end of the paragraph or sentence, the author/s' name and the year should in the bracket e.g. .......(Harris, 2020).

Example of referencing style:


Gambles, I. (2009). Making the business case: Proposals that succeed for projects that work. Farnham, England: Ashgate.

Book chapter

Easton, B. (2008). Does poverty affect health? In K. Dew & A. Matheson (Eds.), Understanding health inequalities in Aotearoa New Zealand (pp. 97–106). Dunedin, New Zealand: Otago University Press.


with doi:
Li, S., & Seale, C. (2007). Learning to do qualitative data analysis: An observational study of doctoral work. Qualitative Health & Research, 17, 1442–1452.

no doi:
Bartlett, R. P. (2009). Going private but staying public: Re-examining the effect of Sarbanes-Oxley on firms going-private decisions. The University of Chicago Law Review, 76, 7–39. Retrieved from

Conference proceeding

Olsson, S., & Stirton, N. (Eds.). (1996). Women and leadership: Power and practice: International conference, 1996. Palmerston North, New Zealand: Massey University.


author, no date:
Flesch, R. (n.d.). How to write plain English. Retrieved April 12, 2009, from

corporate author:
Department of Internal Affairs. (n.d.). History of daylight saving. Retrieved October 29, 2012, from

no author:
Rugby World Cup 2011 pools announced. (2008). Retrieved May 1, 2009, from


Date formatting

Penerbit Goodwood recommends writing dates out fully to avoid confusion with different all-numeral date styles. For example, 11/10/2018 could be 10 November 2018 or 11 October 2018 depending on the reader, therefore, the date should be written out in full. For example, the date September 1, 2018 should be used rather than 01/09/2018 or 09/01/2018.

Units of measurement

Units of measurement should be presented simply and concisely using the International System of Units (SI).

Preparation of figures

Upon submission of an article, authors should include all figures and tables in the PDF file of the manuscript. Figures and tables should not be submitted in separate files. If the article is accepted, authors will be asked to provide the source files of the figures. Each figure should be supplied in a separate electronic file. All figures should be cited in the manuscript in a consecutive order. Figures should be supplied in either vector art formats (Illustrator, EPS, WMF, FreeHand, CorelDraw, PowerPoint, Excel, etc.) or bitmap formats (Photoshop, TIFF, GIF, JPEG, etc.). Bitmap images should be of 300 dpi resolution at least unless the resolution is intentionally set to a lower level for scientific reasons. If a bitmap image has labels, the image and labels should be embedded in separate layers.

Maps. Hindawi Limited remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps. For reasons of consistency, authors are requested to use accepted standard maps as the basis for map figure drawing, for example using the latest standard base-map of Map Press. Responsibility for maps rests with the author and it is their responsibility to also provide any copyright or licence information when using maps that are not owned or created by the author (e.g. Google Maps, etc.)

Preparation of tables

Tables should be cited consecutively in the text. Every table must have a descriptive title and if numerical measurements are given, the units should be included in the column heading. Vertical rules should not be used.

Supplementary materials

Supplementary materials are the additional parts to a manuscript, such as audio files, video clips, or datasets that might be of interest to readers. Authors can submit one file of supplementary material along with their manuscript through the manuscript submission system. If there is more than one file, they can be uploaded as a .ZIP file.

A section titled supplementary material should be included before the references list with a concise description for each supplementary material file. Supplementary materials are not modified by our production team. Authors are responsible for providing the final supplementary material files that will be published along with the article.


Corrected proofs must be returned to the publisher within two to three days of receipt. The publisher will do everything possible to ensure prompt publication.

Copyright and permissions

Authors retain the copyright of their manuscripts, and all open access articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided that the original work is properly cited.

The use of general descriptive names, trade names, trademarks, and so forth in this publication, even if not specifically identified, does not imply that these names are not protected by the relevant laws and regulations. The submitting author is responsible for securing any permissions needed for the reuse of copyrighted materials included in the manuscript.

While the advice and information in this journal are believed to be true and accurate on the date of its going to press, neither the authors, the editors, nor the publisher can accept any legal responsibility for any errors or omissions that may be made. The publisher makes no warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein.

Reporting guidelines

Authors are strongly encouraged to use appropriate reporting guidelines when preparing and submitting manuscripts, to maximize transparency and reproducibility. Our editors and reviewers are also encouraged to use them in the review process. Completed checklists should be provided in the supplementary files on submission. We particularly encourage the use of:

  • CONSORT for randomized controlled trials
  • TREND for non-randomized trials
  • PRISMA for systematic review and meta-analyses
  • CARE for case reports
  • STROBE for observational studies
  • STREGA for genetic association studies
  • SRQR for qualitative studies
  • STARD for diagnostic accuracy studies
  • ARRIVE for animal experiments

Ethical guidelines

In any studies on human or animal subjects, the following ethical guidelines must be observed. For any experiments on humans, all work must be conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki (1964). Manuscripts describing experimental work that carries a risk of harm to human subjects must include a statement that the experiment was conducted with the human subjects’ understanding and consent, as well as a statement that the responsible ethics committee has approved the experiments. In the case of any animal experiments, the authors must provide a full description of any anesthetic or surgical procedure used, as well as evidence that all possible steps were taken to avoid animal suffering at each stage of the experiment.


Authors may appeal if they feel that the decision to reject was based on: i) a major misunderstanding over a technical aspect of the manuscript; or ii) a failure to understand the scientific advance shown by the manuscript. Appeals requesting a second opinion without sufficient justification will not be considered. To lodge an appeal, please contact the journal by email, quoting your manuscript number. Appeals will only be considered from the original submitting author.