Type the Title of Your Manuscript

[The title no more than 20 words]

Author
Institution
Email
(Font: Georgia)

ABSTRACT (ABSTRACT: NO MORE THAN 200 WORDS)

The abstract should stand alone, which means that no citation in the abstract.
The abstract should concisely inform the reader of the manuscript’s purpose, its
methods, its findings, and its value. The abstract should be relatively nontechnical,
yet clear enough for an informed reader to understand the manuscript’s
contribution. The manuscript’s title, but neither the author’s name nor other
identification designations, should appear on the abstract page. An abstract between
160-200 words.

Keywords: We would like to encourage you to list your keywords in this section
(6-8 words).

INTRODUCTION
What is the purpose of the study? Why are you conducting the study? The
main section of an article should start with an introductory section, which provides
more details about the paper’s purposes, motivation, research methods, and findings.
The introduction should be relatively nontechnical, yet clear enough for an informed
reader to understand the manuscript’s contribution.

LITERATURE REVIEW
The literature review represents the theoretical core of an article. In this
section, we will discuss the purpose of a literature review. We will also consider how
one should go about to find appropriate literature on which to base a literature
review and how this information should be managed. Finally, we will answer four
questions that first-time researchers often battle with when compiling a literature
review.
These questions are: which aspects should I include in a literature review?;
how should I go about synthesizing information in a literature review?; how should I
structure a literature review? what writing style should I use when compiling a
literature review?

1
 2nd ICONIEB 2023

The purpose of a literature review is to “look again” (re + view) at what other
researchers have done regarding a specific topic (Leedy & Ormrod 2005:70). A
literature review is a means to an end, namely to provide background to and serve as
motivation for the objectives and hypotheses that guide your own research (Perry et
al. 2003:660)
A good literature review does not merely summarise relevant previous
research. In the literature review, the researcher critically evaluates, re-organizes and
synthesizes the work of others (Leedy & Ormrod, 2005:84). In a sense, compiling a
literature review is like making a smoothie or fruit shake: The end product is a
condensed mix that differs totally in appearance from the individual ingredients used
as inputs. The key to a successful literature review lies in your ability to “digest”
information from different sources, critically evaluate it and resent your conclusions
in a concise, logical and reader-friendly” manner.
First-time researchers often naively believe everything they read or are scared
to criticize the work of others. However, academic research is all about critical
inquiry! It is, therefore, extremely important that you critically evaluate the material
that you read. Do you agree with the arguments and conclusions of other
researchers? If you disagree, why? Can you identify contradictory arguments or
findings? How could one explain these contradictions? Do the findings of previous
studies apply in all contexts or are the findings context-specific? What are the
criticisms against the conceptual models or measurement approaches discussed in
the literature? Which limitations should be considered when interpreting the results
of previous research?
You have to carefully read the most recent available literature to identify
specific gaps, inconsistencies and/or controversies that may form the basis of your
own research. Always show that you have considered an issue from several angles
and that you are aware of the arguments for and against a specific point of view.
Many researchers in services marketing, for example, use the SERVQUAL
measurement scale without considering existing criticisms against it.
To compile a proper literature review, one has to overcome three specific
challenges, namely: finding appropriate literature on a specific topic, managing the
information, and presenting a logical, synthesized, and reader-friendly review of the
current knowledge relating to a specific topic. Consider the following search
strategies: Blackwell Synergy; Proquest Data Basis; EBSCOhost (Business Source
Premier and Business Source Premier); Emerald; Taylor and Francis; Infotrac; Wiley
Interscience; and others open access journal using Google Scholar.

RESEARCH METHOD
The research method section describes the steps followed in the execution of
the study and also provides a brief justification for the research methods used (Perry
et al., 2003:661). It should contain enough detail to enable the reader to evaluate the
appropriateness of your methods and the reliability and validity of your findings.
Furthermore, the information should enable experienced researchers to replicate
your study (American Psychological Association, 2001:17).
The methodology section typically has the following sub-sections:

● Sampling (description of the target population, research context, and units of

analysis; sampling; and respondent profile)
● Data collection

● Measures (Alternatively: Measurement)

RESULTS
The results section summarizes the data collected for the study in the form of
descriptive statistics and also reports the results of relevant inferential statistically
analysis (e.g., hypothesis tests) conducted on the data. You need to report the results
in sufficient detail so that the reader can see which statistical analyses were
conducted and why, and to justify your conclusions. Mention all relevant results,
including those that are at odds with the stated hypotheses (American Psychology
Association 2001: 20).
There is no fixed recipe for presenting the findings of a study. We will,
therefore, first consider general guidelines and then turn our attention to options for
reporting descriptive statistics and the results of the hypothesis test.

Reporting Research Results

You should present your findings as concisely as possible and still provide
enough detail to adequately justify your conclusions, as well as enable the reader to
understand exactly what you did in terms of data analysis and why.
You may assume that the reader has a working knowledge of basic statistics
(i.e., typically the contents covered in a 1 st statistics course). It is, therefore, not
necessary to discuss basic statistical procedures in detail. You may, however, have to
explain advanced multivariate statistical methods (e.g., repeated measures ANOVA,
two- or –way ANOVA, multiple regression analysis, and factor analysis) in nen-
technical terms. Figures and Tables (detached from main of the manuscript) often
allow one to present findings in a clear and concise manner.
Example:

Insert Table 1 Here

Insert Figure 1 Here

3
 2nd ICONIEB 2023

DISCUSSION
In many ways, it is the most important section in an article (Feldman,
2004:4). Because it is the last thing a reader sees, it can have a major impact on the
reader’s perceptions of the article and the research conducted (Summers 2001:411).
Different authors take different approaches when writing the discussion section.
According to Feldman (2004:5), Perry et al. 2003: 658), and Summers 2001:
411412), the discussion section should:
- Restate the study’s main purpose
- Reaffirm the importance of the study be restating its main contributions
- Summarize the results in relation to each stated research objective or
hypothesis without introducing new material
- Relate the findings to the literature and the results reported by other
researches
- Provide possible explanations for unexpected or non-significant findings
- Discuss the managerial implications of the study
- Highlight the main limitations of the study that could influence its internal
and external validity
- Discuss insightful (i.e., non-obvious) directions or opportunities for future
research on the topic
The discussion section should not merely restate the findings reported in the
result section or report additional findings that have not been discussed earlier in the
article. The focus should instead be on highlighting the broader implications of the
study's findings and relating these back to previous research. Make sure that the
conclusions you reach follow logically from and are substantiated by the evidence
presented in your study (Varadarajan 1996: 5).

CONCLUSION
In this section, the author presents brief conclusions from the results of
research with suggestions for advanced researchers or general readers. A conclusion
may review the main points of the paper, do not replicate the abstract as the
conclusion.

Not only does the author write down the major flaws and limitations of the
study, which can reduce the validity of the writing, thus raising questions from the
readers (whether, or in what way), the limits in his studies may have affected the
results and conclusions. Limitations require critical judgment and interpretation of
their impact. The author should provide the answer to the question: is this a problem
with error, method, validity, and or otherwise?
 Writing an academic article is a challenging but very fulfilling endeavor.
Hopefully, the guidelines presented here will enable you to write your first academic
article with relative ease. Students, however, often underestimate the time required
to produce a “polished” first effort. You cannot write a proper research article in a
weekend or even a week. It is, therefore, extremely important to allow yourself
enough time –at least three to four weeks—to work on the successive draft.

LIMITATION
It is for sure that your research will have some limitations and it is normal.
However, it is critically important for you to be striving to minimize the range of
scope of limitations throughout the research process. Also, you need to provide the
acknowledgement of your research limitations in conclusions chapter honestly.

It is always better to identify and acknowledge shortcomings of your work,

rather than to leave them pointed out to your by your dissertation assessor. While
discussing your research limitations, don’t just provide the list and description of
shortcomings of your work. It is also important for you to explain how these
limitations have impacted your research findings.

Your research may have multiple limitations, but you need to discuss only
those limitations that directly relate to your research problems. For example, if
conducting a meta-analysis of the secondary data has not been stated as your
research objective, no need to mention it as your research limitation.

REFERENCES

Each manuscript must include a reference list containing only the quoted work and
using the Mendeley, EndNote, or Zotero tool. Each entry should contain all the data
needed for unambiguous identification. With the author-date system, use the
following format recommended by Harvard-Anglia.

The basics of a Reference List entry for a journal article:

● - Single author. The surname is followed by first initials.
- More than 1 authors, first author [the surname is followed by first initials],
second author and so on [initial for first name is followed the surname)
● Year of publication of the article.

● Article title (dot).

● Journal title (in italics).

● Number of journal volume.

● Issue number of journal (in parentheses).

5
 2nd ICONIEB 2023

● Page range of article

Example:
Perry , C., D. Carson, and A. Gilmore. 2003. Joining conversation: Writing for EJM’s
editors, reviewers and readers requires planning, care, and persistence.
European Journal of Marketing 37 (5/6): 653-557.
Leedy, P. D., and J. E. Omron. 2005. Practical Research: Planning and Design (8th
ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Merril Prentice Hall.
Summers, J. O., 2001. Guideline for conducting research and publishing in
marketing: From conceptualization through the review process. Journal of
the Academy of Marketing Science 29 (4): 405-415.
Feldman, D. C., 2004. The devil is in the details: Converting good research into
publishable articles. Journal of Management 30 (1): 1-6.