Submissions

Author Guidelines

Acta Mongolica is a peer-reviewed, open-access, interdisciplinary journal published by the Institute for Mongolian Studies, National University of Mongolia, with an emphasis on Mongolian Studies in the social sciences and humanities, including the fields of linguistics, culture, religion, anthropology, archaeology, socio-political studies, economics and international studies. It accepts either APA style or submissions that meet the following requirements.

Submission Requirements

Articles and book reviews shall be original and consist of title, author name(s), affiliation(s) (including ORCID, email), abstract, keywords, main sections, conclusion, acknowledgement, endnotes, and references.

Formats and style

1. British or American English are acceptable for articles and book reviews as long as there is consistency.
2. Length of article should not exceed 10,000 words.
3. Fonts and Font sizes: Use Times New Roman 11 pt. for text: 10 pt.; for abstracts: 9 pt. for footnotes. Use a single space. Do not use hyperlinks in the document.
4. Foreign words in roman script
5. Italicise foreign words. Example: The term of soyoltoi (cultured) is used......disciplinarians of the main assembly (Tib: tshogs chen dge bsgos rnams) of Ikh Khüree
6. Headings and subheadings: Headings should be in bold, non-italicised, left-aligned. Subheadings should be in bold italics, aligned left.
7. Block quotes: Quotations longer than two sentences should be given in a separate paragraph. The paragraph should not be italicised. Use a single space. The paragraph should be separated from the main text by a one-line space above and below the quotation.
8. Ellipses: When words are omitted in a quotation, it should be marked by three dots.
9. Citations: Please use an author/date/page system in parentheses in the text, with fuller references in the bibliography. Give full bibliographic information in the section of Reference. Use a semicolon (;) for multiple authors in alphabetical order and a comma (,) for the same author. Example: (Bold 2000; Tsend 1989) (Bold 1989, 2020; Tsend 1989)
10. If it is important to indicate the original date of publication, the original date is listed in square brackets before the newer publication. Example: (Damdinsüren [1959] 2017)
11. The sequent page numbers will be provided with n-dash. Example: (Damdinsüren 1973: 13-9) not (Damdinsüren 1973: 13-19) (Damdinsüren 1973: 271-79)
12. Do not use ibid in the text except in the footnote.
13. Footnote: Use 9 pt. for the footnote. Footnote numbers are placed after any punctuation: Example: ...published in 1980.5.  ...can be added
14. Superscript: Please do not use superscript. Not 2nd but 2nd.
15. File format: MS Word for Windows.
16. Tables and Figures: Tables, figures and charts should be numbered sequentially with Arabic numbers aligned in the centre. Please provide high-resolution images with a requirement of 300 dpi for photographs and 600 dpi for text or drawings. It is the author’s responsibility to seek permission to reproduce any materials subject to copyright. Example:
17. Reference examples: Figure 1. Cham dance in Ulaanbaatar (photo by author 2018); Figure 2. Jebtsundamba Khutugtu in young age (© National Archives of Mongolia); Figure 3. Maitreya thangka (courtesy of the Fine Art Museum)
18. A reference should be placed at the end of the text, containing all sources cited in alphabetical order of authors and chronological order of publications.
19. Use a, b, c, etc, after the year of publication when the author has published different works in the same year. Example: Damdinsüren, Tsend. 1959 a. Damdinsüren, Tsend. 1959 b.
20. For a non-English title, please provide an English translation after the original title in the square bracket []. The translation is not italicised. Example: Boldbaatar, J. 2010. Mongolyn Burhany shashny lam huvrag [Monks of Mongolian Buddhism]. Ulaanbaatar: Soyombo Printing.
21. In case of author’s surname is not provided or found in the reference, put the initials. Example: Damdinsüren, Ts.
22. If the publisher is unknown, use n.p. Example: Ulaanbaatar: n.p.
23. Reprinted Books in Reference: The original publication date is listed first in parentheses. Example: Damdinsüren, Tsend (1959) 2017.
24. Acronyms should be capitalised without separating dots, unless they appear in a citation. Example: ABCP, UK, MPR.
25. Numbers: Spell out numbers from one to nine and use numbers above 10. Example: Nine people, not 9 people, 1 million, not one million, etc.
26. Percentages use numbers and the word 'per cent'. Example: 5 per cent but large number of percentages use % sign.

REVIEWER'S GUIDELINE

Editors will send an email to two reviewers containing the article's abstract, title, and link to "Acta Mongolica". The reviewers will be given two weeks to accept or reject the review request. Whenever the reviewers agree to review, the system will provide the full article for review and request that they complete it within four weeks.

Please provide detailed feedback on the manuscript, including positive comments, constructive feedback, and linguistic alterations, and make a recommendation.

Ethical guidelines:

1. Reviewers must give unbiased consideration to each manuscript submitted. They should judge each on its merits, without regard to race, religion, nationality, gender, seniority, or institutional affiliation of the author(s).
2. Reviewers must declare any conflict of interest before agreeing to review a manuscript. This includes any relationship with the author(s) that may bias their review.
3. Reviewers must keep the peer review process confidential. They must not share information or correspondence about a manuscript with anyone outside of the peer review process without the explicit permission of the editor.
4. They must not enter unpublished manuscript files, images, or information into databases or tools that do not guarantee confidentiality, are accessible to the public, and/or may store or use this information for their own purposes (for example, generative AI tools like ChatGPT).
5. Reviewers must prepare their report themselves, unless they have the journal's permission to involve another person. They must also not impersonate others during the review process.
6. Reviewers must not use artificial intelligence tools, including LLMs such as ChatGPT, to generate manuscript review reports.
7. Reviewers should provide a constructive, comprehensive, evidence-based, and appropriately substantial peer review report. Reviewers are responsible for ensuring any references included within their report are accurate and verifiable.
8. Reviewers must avoid making statements in their report which might be interpreted as questioning any person’s reputation.
9. Reviewers should make every reasonable effort to submit their report and recommendation on time. They should inform the editor if this is not possible.
10. Reviewers should call to the journal editor’s attention any significant similarity between the manuscript under consideration and any published paper or submitted manuscripts of which they are aware.

Review guideline:

1. Your comments must be suitable to send to the author. Please make constructive suggestions, seek clarification on any unclear points, and ask for further elaboration. Remember that authors welcome both positive feedback and constructive criticism.
2. If the paper reports original research, comment on whether the methods are appropriate and whether the work was carried out to the standards expected within your field.
3. Note any aspects that you are unable to assess, whether this is due to a lack of clarity or because it is outside your expertise.
4. You should suggest ways the author can improve clarity, conciseness, and the quality of the presentation.
5. Confirm whether you feel the subject of the paper is sufficiently interesting to justify its length. If you recommend shortening, specify the specific areas where you think it is required.
6. It’s not the reviewer’s job to edit the paper for spelling, grammar, etc., but it is helpful if you can note specific points where the technical meaning is unclear.
7. You may disagree with the author’s opinions, but you should allow them to argue their case, provided their evidence supports it.
8. Reviewers are not expected to detect research integrity concerns in manuscripts, but your expertise may allow you to spot potential issues that editorial staff or the editor have missed. If you suspect misconduct, please let the publisher or the editor know as soon as possible.

Report and recommendation writing form

Your report serves two key functions and shall be divided into two sections:

1. To provide the editor with the information necessary for a publication decision.
2. To offer constructive feedback to the author for improving their manuscript.

Begin with a concise summary of the paper—its aims, methodology, and principal findings—as you understand them, followed by your overall evaluation. Direct all criticism toward the work, not the author, and maintain a professional, objective tone throughout.

Providing Constructive Feedback, please include three sections:

• Frame comments so the author clearly understands the specific actions needed to improve the paper.
• Use clear, straightforward language. Avoid vague or overly negative statements and refrain from rhetorical or emotional expressions.
• Ensure all feedback is relevant, actionable, and contributes to the manuscript’s improvement.

Recommendations to the Editor

After evaluating the manuscript, make one of the following recommendations:

• Accept: Suitable for publication without changes.
• Minor Revision: Ready for publication after small, clearly specified revisions.
• Major Revision: Requires substantial revision (e.g., deeper analysis, broader literature review, or rewritten sections).
• Reject: Unsuitable for publication in this journal or requires revisions too extensive for further consideration.

If recommending rejection, indicate—confidentially if necessary—whether the decision stems from limited contribution or significant methodological flaws. This helps the editor make an informed judgment.