Author Guidelines

Yupa: Historical Studies Journal is a peer-reviewed scholarly journal dedicated to historical studies, historiography, philosophy and theory of history, history of education, and history education. These Author Guidelines explain the journal scope, manuscript structure, formatting requirements, ethical declarations, submission preparation, review process, and final publication preparation.

Authors must read these guidelines carefully before submitting a manuscript. Manuscripts that do not meet the journal’s minimum editorial requirements may be returned to the author before peer review.

1. Journal Scope

Yupa: Historical Studies Journal publishes original research articles and literature-based studies that contribute to historical knowledge, historical interpretation, historiography, philosophy and theory of history, history of education, and history education.

Manuscripts submitted to Yupa must clearly fit at least one of the following scope areas:

Historiography and Historical Studies
Studies on historical sources, historical narratives, historical events, historical processes, historical interpretation, local history, social history, cultural history, economic history, political history, public history, military history, intellectual history, environmental history, and related historical disciplines.
Philosophy and Theory of History
Studies on historical thought, historical explanation, historical consciousness, historical methodology, historical process, and theoretical approaches to interpreting the past.
History of Education
Studies on educational systems, educational institutions, educational policies, educational ideas, curriculum development, educational practices, educational figures, and educational change in historical perspective.
History Education
Studies on historical literacy, historical thinking, history teaching, heritage education, digital history learning, museum-based learning, textbooks, teachers, curriculum, instructional media, classroom practices, and history learning processes.

Manuscripts that are purely descriptive, lack historical analysis, do not engage with relevant sources or scholarly literature, or are unrelated to historical studies and history education may be declined before peer review.

2. Types of Manuscripts

Yupa primarily accepts original research articles and literature-based studies that make a clear scholarly contribution to historical studies or history education.

Yupa may consider manuscripts using historical, qualitative, quantitative, mixed-methods, classroom/action research, survey, experimental, content analysis, literature-based, historiographical, or conceptual approaches, provided that the manuscript clearly contributes to the journal’s scope.

Authors should avoid submitting manuscripts that are merely descriptive reports, teaching notes, opinion essays, or literature summaries without a clear scholarly argument and contribution.

3. Manuscript Language

Manuscripts may be submitted in Indonesian or English. However, authors should note that Yupa is oriented toward international readability and final publication quality.

Accepted manuscripts must be prepared in clear academic English where required by the journal’s final publication policy. Authors submitting manuscripts in Indonesian may be required to provide an English version during revision or final publication preparation.

The following elements must be written in English:

Article title, where required for indexing and metadata purposes;
Abstract;
Keywords.

The manuscript must use clear, formal, and grammatically accurate academic language. Authors are responsible for ensuring the quality of language before submission. Manuscripts with language problems that significantly reduce readability may be returned for revision before peer review.

4. Manuscript Template

Authors must prepare the manuscript using the official Yupa Manuscript Template.

The manuscript should follow the journal’s official structure, format, and section order. Authors should not change the main layout, heading structure, font system, footer, watermark, page margin, or visual format of the official template.

The manuscript should contain the following elements:

Title;
Author information;
Abstract;
Keywords;
Introduction;
Method;
Results and Discussion;
Conclusion;
Acknowledgement, if applicable;
Funding Statement, if applicable;
Conflict of Interest;
AI Use Disclosure, if applicable;
References.

Authors should use the official manuscript template as the basis for submission. The editorial team may adjust the manuscript format during the editorial and final publication process.

5. General Manuscript Format

Authors should follow the format provided in the official Yupa Manuscript Template.

In general, the manuscript should use:

A4 paper size;
the margin settings already defined in the official template;
the font style and size defined in the official template;
single spacing unless the template defines otherwise;
justified alignment for body text;
consistent heading and subheading format;
editable tables, not screenshots;
properly captioned figures, maps, charts, and illustrations.

Authors should not remove the journal watermark, footer, header, or fixed visual elements in the official template.

6. Title

The title must be concise, informative, and relevant to the article’s historical focus.

The title should reflect one or more of the following elements:

the historical problem;
the main object of study;
the historical period;
the geographical location;
the main concept;
the central argument or finding.

The title should not exceed 16 words.

Authors should avoid titles that are too broad, vague, rhetorical, or not directly connected to the manuscript’s main argument.

7. Author Information

The manuscript should include accurate author information according to the journal template.

Author information should include:

full name of each author;
institutional affiliation;
city and country of institution;
corresponding author email;
ORCID, if available.

The corresponding author is responsible for communication with the editorial team during submission, review, revision, copyediting, proofreading, and publication.

Author names, affiliations, email addresses, ORCID, acknowledgements, funding information, and other identifying information may be removed or anonymized by the editorial team before the manuscript is sent for double-blind peer review.

8. Abstract

The abstract must be written in English in a single paragraph.

The abstract must not exceed 200 words. The recommended length is 150–180 words.

The abstract should function as a stand-alone summary of the article. It should allow readers to understand the topic, scope, approach, findings, and significance of the article without reading the full manuscript.

A good abstract should clearly state:

Background or historical problem: the context or issue addressed by the article;
Research objective: the specific purpose of the study;
Method, approach, or source base: how the study was conducted or what sources were used;
Main findings: the most important results or argument of the article;
Implication or scholarly contribution: why the findings matter for historical studies, historiography, history education, or related fields.

The abstract should not include citations, unexplained abbreviations, unsupported claims, long general background, repetition of the full article title, or details that are not central to the article.

9. Keywords

Authors must provide 3–5 keywords or short key phrases in English.

Keywords should be separated by semicolons.

Keywords should reflect the main topic, historical period, location, concept, source type, method, or field of study.

Authors should avoid using only words that already appear in the title. Keywords should support indexing, discoverability, and thematic relevance.

Example:

local history; historical memory; East Kalimantan; history education; oral history

10. Introduction

The Introduction should present the historical problem or research question addressed by the article.

The Introduction should include the following elements:

Context: the historical background or issue that frames the study;
Research problem: the specific problem, question, or issue being examined;
Historiographical positioning or scholarly positioning: relevant previous studies or scholarly debates;
Research gap: what has not been sufficiently addressed by previous scholarship;
Objective: the specific aim of the article;
Originality: what makes the study different or meaningful;
Contribution: how the article contributes to historical knowledge, historiography, history education, or related fields.

The Introduction should not be written merely as a list of previous studies. Previous studies should be used to position the manuscript’s argument within the relevant scholarly discussion.

The final part of the Introduction should clearly state the article’s objective, central argument, and contribution.

11. Method

The Method section should explain clearly how the research was conducted and why the selected method is appropriate for the article’s research problem.

Yupa accepts manuscripts using historical, qualitative, quantitative, mixed-methods, classroom/action research, survey, experimental, content analysis, literature-based, historiographical, or conceptual approaches, as long as the method is relevant to historical studies, historiography, philosophy and theory of history, history of education, or history education.

Authors should avoid merely naming a method without explaining how the method was applied in the study.

11.1 Historical Studies and Historiographical Research

For historical studies, the Method section should explain:

the historical method or approach used;
the source base;
periodization;
historical context;
analytical framework or historiographical perspective;
how sources were identified;
how sources were selected;
how sources were verified or evaluated;
how sources were contextualized;
how sources were interpreted.

Where relevant, authors should distinguish between primary sources and secondary sources.

Possible source types include archival records, oral history interviews, newspapers, government documents, textbooks, manuscripts, photographs, maps, policy documents, published primary sources, scholarly books, and journal articles.

11.2 Qualitative Research

For qualitative research, the Method section should explain:

the research design or approach;
the research setting or context;
participants, informants, documents, cases, classrooms, institutions, or communities studied;
data collection techniques, such as interviews, observation, document analysis, classroom observation, focus group discussion, or archival reading;
data analysis procedures, such as thematic analysis, content analysis, discourse analysis, narrative analysis, historical interpretation, or other relevant analytical procedures;
steps taken to ensure credibility, trustworthiness, triangulation, or analytical reliability where relevant;
ethical considerations, consent, research permission, or access permission where required.

11.3 Quantitative Research

For quantitative research, the Method section should explain:

the research design;
population and sample;
sampling technique;
research variables or indicators;
research instruments;
validity and reliability of instruments where relevant;
data collection procedures;
data analysis techniques, including statistical tests, models, or software used where relevant;
ethical considerations where required.

11.4 Mixed-Methods Research

For mixed-methods research, the Method section should explain:

the mixed-methods design used;
the qualitative and quantitative components of the study;
the sequence of data collection and analysis;
the priority or weight given to qualitative and quantitative data;
how qualitative and quantitative findings are integrated;
why a mixed-methods approach is necessary for answering the research question;
ethical considerations where required.

11.5 History Education, Classroom, and Action Research

For history education, classroom-based, or action research manuscripts, the Method section should explain:

the educational context or classroom setting;
participants or learning subjects;
research design, such as case study, classroom action research, quasi-experiment, survey, or mixed-methods design;
learning materials, instructional media, curriculum documents, textbooks, or interventions studied;
data collection techniques, such as tests, questionnaires, observation, interviews, learning documents, or student work analysis;
data analysis procedures;
ethical considerations, school permission, participant consent, or classroom research approval where relevant.

11.6 Literature-Based, Conceptual, and Historiographical Studies

For literature-based studies, conceptual articles, or historiographical studies, the Method section should explain:

the type of literature, documents, or sources reviewed;
the criteria for selecting literature or sources;
the scope of literature or sources, including period, theme, region, or discipline where relevant;
the analytical framework used;
how the literature or sources were categorized, compared, interpreted, or synthesized;
the contribution of the analysis to historical studies, historiography, theory of history, history of education, or history education.

The Method section should be written in full sentences, not as bullet points. The method should be sufficiently clear so that readers and reviewers can understand how the evidence, data, or sources were handled and how the findings were produced.

12. Results and Discussion

The Results and Discussion section should develop the article’s main argument through evidence, interpretation, and engagement with relevant historiography or scholarly literature.

Results and discussion may be combined into one integrated section, as is common in humanities journals. For history education or empirical education studies, authors may also organize findings according to research questions, themes, variables, cycles, cases, or analytical categories.

This section should:

present the main evidence, data, or findings;
interpret the evidence or data analytically;
connect findings to the central argument;
engage with relevant historical debates, educational debates, or previous studies;
show how the findings answer the research question;
explain the scholarly significance of the findings.

Each subsection should contribute directly to the central argument of the article.

Every major claim should be supported by relevant evidence, citation, data, or source-based interpretation.

Authors should avoid descriptive or chronological narration without analytical purpose. A chronological structure may be used when appropriate, but it must support the analysis rather than replace it.

Subheadings may be used when needed. Subheadings should reflect analytical themes, historical periods, actors, institutions, places, concepts, variables, cases, cycles, or processes.

13. Tables

Tables should be used only when they support the analysis.

Tables should not be used merely to display information that can be explained more clearly in prose.

Table requirements:

Tables must be editable Word tables, not screenshots.
Table titles should be placed above the table.
Source notes or explanatory notes should be placed below the table.
Each table must be numbered consecutively.
Each table must be referred to in the main text.
Each table must be discussed or interpreted in the main text.

14. Figures, Images, Maps, and Illustrations

Figures, photographs, maps, charts, and illustrations should be inserted near the first relevant mention in the text.

Figure requirements:

Figures must be clear and readable.
Each figure must be numbered consecutively.
Each figure must have a caption below the figure.
Each figure must be referred to in the main text.
Each figure must be interpreted or explained in the main text.
Images, maps, photographs, and archival materials must be legally usable and properly credited.

Acceptable figure types may include historical maps, archival photographs, document excerpts, timelines, graphs, charts, conceptual diagrams, learning media illustrations, or data visualization.

15. Conclusion

The Conclusion should answer the research question clearly and directly.

The Conclusion should synthesize the main findings, state the article’s concluding argument, explain the article’s contribution, indicate broader implications where appropriate, and mention limitations or future research opportunities where relevant.

The Conclusion should not simply repeat the Introduction. It should not mechanically summarize the article section by section. Instead, it should present a concise final argument based on the analysis.

16. Acknowledgement

The Acknowledgement section is optional.

Authors may use this section to acknowledge funding support, institutional support, archival assistance, research permits, fieldwork support, oral history participants, technical assistance, editorial assistance, or other forms of scholarly support.

If there is nothing to acknowledge, this section may be removed.

For manuscripts undergoing double-blind review, acknowledgements that reveal author identity may be removed or anonymized by the editorial team before the manuscript is sent to reviewers.

17. Funding Statement

Authors must disclose funding sources where applicable.

If the research received external funding, authors should state the funding body and grant number where available.

If the research received no external funding, authors may state:

This research received no external funding.

18. Conflict of Interest

Authors must disclose any potential conflict of interest.

If there is no conflict of interest, authors may state:

The author(s) declare no conflict of interest.

If a conflict of interest exists, it must be disclosed clearly.

19. AI Use Disclosure

If generative AI tools were used for language editing, translation, formatting, or technical assistance, authors must disclose the type of assistance.

AI tools must not be listed as authors.

AI tools must not be used to fabricate data, sources, citations, interpretations, historical evidence, research data, interview results, statistical results, or references.

Authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, and integrity of the manuscript.

Example statement if AI tools were used:

The author(s) used generative AI tools only for language editing and proofreading. The author(s) reviewed and verified all content and remain fully responsible for the manuscript.

Example statement if AI tools were not used:

No generative AI tools were used in the preparation of this manuscript.

20. References and Citation Style

References must follow APA Style 7th edition.

Authors must ensure that:

all in-text citations appear in the reference list;
all reference-list entries are cited in the manuscript;
references are complete and accurate;
DOI or stable URL is included where available;
references are formatted consistently;
uncited sources are removed;
unverifiable references are not included;
fabricated references are not included.

Authors are encouraged to use reference managers such as Zotero, Mendeley, or EndNote.

Examples:

Journal article:
Surname, A. A. (2023). Title of article. Journal Title, 9(2), 101–120. https://doi.org/xx.xxx/yyyy

Book:
Surname, B. B. (2021). Title of book. Publisher.

Book chapter:
Surname, C. C. (2022). Chapter title. In D. D. Editor (Ed.), Book title (pp. 55–72). Publisher.

21. Similarity Screening and Plagiarism Policy

All submitted manuscripts are subject to similarity screening before review and before publication.

The maximum similarity limit is 20%. Manuscripts with excessive similarity may be returned to the author for revision or rejected, depending on the editorial assessment.

The manuscript must not contain plagiarism, self-plagiarism without proper citation and justification, fabricated data, fabricated sources, manipulated evidence, unverifiable historical claims, unethical use of images, unethical use of archives, or unethical use of interview materials.

Authors are responsible for ensuring that all quoted, paraphrased, translated, or adapted materials are properly cited.

22. Originality and Publication Ethics

The manuscript must be original and must not have been previously published or be under consideration by another journal.

Authors are responsible for ensuring that the manuscript follows ethical standards in research and publication.

If the research involves interviews, oral history, human participants, private archives, classroom research, students, teachers, sensitive materials, or restricted documents, authors should disclose relevant ethics approval, consent, research permits, school permission, institutional permission, or access permissions where applicable.

Authors must ensure that all contributors who meet authorship criteria are listed as authors and that all listed authors have approved the submitted version of the manuscript.

23. Peer Review Process

All submitted manuscripts undergo editorial screening.

Manuscripts that pass the initial editorial screening may proceed to double-blind peer review. Yupa uses a peer-review process involving at least two reviewers.

Before the manuscript is sent to reviewers, the editorial team may remove or anonymize author-identifying information, including author names, affiliations, email addresses, ORCID, acknowledgements that reveal identity, funding details that reveal identity, institutional identifiers, and self-identifying statements.

The original manuscript with author identity remains for editorial records only. The anonymized version is used for reviewer-facing evaluation.

24. Editorial Screening

At the initial editorial screening stage, the editor may assess:

fit with Yupa’s scope;
clear historical or history education focus;
completeness of article structure;
quality of title;
quality of abstract and keywords;
initial scholarly substance;
clarity of method, source base, data, or research design;
strength of argument and contribution;
citation and reference readiness;
language quality;
compliance with the Yupa manuscript template;
readiness for peer review.

Manuscripts may be returned to authors before peer review if they do not meet the journal’s minimum editorial requirements.

25. Revision Process

If revision is requested, authors must revise the manuscript according to editorial and reviewer comments.

Authors may be asked to submit a revised manuscript, a response to reviewer or editor comments, and additional files or clarification if required.

Authors should respond to each revision point clearly and professionally. If an author disagrees with a comment, the author should provide a reasoned academic explanation.

For initial editorial revision, the standard revision deadline is 7 days from the date of the editorial decision, unless otherwise stated by the editor.

26. Final Publication Preparation

After acceptance, the editorial team will prepare the article for final publication using the official Yupa Final Publication Template.

Final publication metadata may include author names, affiliations, corresponding author, ORCID, article history, page range, DOI, how-to-cite information, funding statement, conflict of interest statement, AI use disclosure, and final references.

The Yupa DOI follows this format:

https://doi.org/10.30872/yupa.v[volume]i[issue].[article-id]

27. Submission Checklist

Before submitting the manuscript, authors must ensure that:

The manuscript fits the scope of Yupa: Historical Studies Journal.
The manuscript has a clear historical or history education focus, research problem, source base, data, method, and scholarly contribution.
The manuscript has not been previously published and is not currently under consideration by another journal.
The manuscript follows the official Yupa Manuscript Template.
The title is concise, informative, and does not exceed 16 words.
The abstract is written in English, in one paragraph, and does not exceed 200 words.
The manuscript includes 3–5 keywords in English.
The manuscript includes Introduction, Method, Results and Discussion, Conclusion, and References.
The Introduction explains the research problem, historiographical or scholarly context, research gap, objective, originality, and contribution.
The Method explains the research design, source base, data, periodization, participants, instruments, analytical framework, or historical approach as relevant to the study.
The manuscript explains how sources, data, literature, participants, documents, or cases were selected, evaluated, contextualized, and analyzed.
The Results and Discussion section is analytical and evidence-based, not merely descriptive.
Every major claim is supported by evidence, citation, data, or source-based interpretation.
The Conclusion answers the research question and explains the article’s contribution.
All in-text citations appear in the reference list.
All reference-list entries are cited in the manuscript.
References follow APA Style 7th edition.
DOI or stable URL is included for references where available.
Tables, if any, are editable, numbered, titled, cited in the text, and discussed in the article.
Figures, maps, photographs, or illustrations, if any, are captioned, credited, cited in the text, and legally usable.
Funding information has been disclosed where relevant.
Conflict of interest has been disclosed where relevant.
Ethics approval, research permit, classroom research permission, oral history consent, interview consent, or participant consent has been disclosed where relevant.
AI use has been disclosed where relevant.
AI tools are not listed as authors and were not used to fabricate data, sources, citations, interpretations, historical evidence, statistical results, or references.
The manuscript is original and does not contain plagiarism, fabricated sources, fabricated evidence, fabricated data, or unverifiable historical claims.
The manuscript does not exceed the journal’s similarity limit.
The author agrees that the manuscript may undergo editorial screening and double-blind peer review.
The author understands that the editorial team may anonymize the manuscript before sending it to reviewers.