Publication Ethics
Journal Publication Ethics Guidelines
The publication of an article in the peer-reviewed journal An-Nahdliyyah: Journal of Islamic Studies is a crucial building block in the development of a coherent and respected body of knowledge. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the authors’ work and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. Therefore, it is essential to agree upon standards of ethical conduct expected of all parties involved in the publication process: authors, journal editors, peer reviewers, publishers, and the public.
The Institute for Research and Community Service (LPPM) at INU Tasikmalaya, as the administrator and publisher of the journal An-Nahdliyyah: Journal of Islamic Studies, takes its stewardship of all stages of publication very seriously, and we are mindful of our ethical and other responsibilities. We are committed to ensuring that advertisements, reprints, or other commercial revenue do not impact or influence editorial decisions. Furthermore, LPPM—specifically the Editorial Board—will facilitate communication with other journals and/or publishers when this is beneficial and necessary.
Alleged Research Misconduct
Research misconduct refers to fabrication, falsification, citation manipulation, or plagiarism in the production, conduct, or review of research and the writing of articles by authors, or in the reporting of research results. When an author is found to be involved in research misconduct or other serious irregularities involving an article published in a scientific journal, the Editor has the responsibility to ensure the accuracy and integrity of the scientific record.
In cases of alleged misconduct, the Editor and the Editorial Board will follow COPE best practices to help them resolve complaints and handle such violations fairly. This will include an investigation of the allegations by the Editor. Submitted manuscripts found to contain such misconduct will be rejected. In cases where a published paper is found to contain such misconduct, a retraction may be issued and will be linked to the original article.
The first step involves determining the validity of the allegation and assessing whether it aligns with the definition of research misconduct. This initial step also involves determining whether the individual alleged to have committed the misconduct has any relevant conflicts of interest.
If scientific errors or the presence of other substantial research irregularities are possible, the allegation is shared with the relevant author(s), who, on behalf of all co-authors, are asked to provide a detailed response. Once the response is received and evaluated, additional reviews and expert input (such as from a statistical reviewer) may be sought. In cases where a violation is unlikely, a clarification, additional analysis, or both, published as a letter to the editor—and often accompanied by a correction notice and corrections to the published article—is sufficient.
Institutions are expected to conduct appropriate and thorough investigations into allegations of scientific misconduct. Ultimately, authors, journals, and institutions bear a critical responsibility to ensure the accuracy of the scientific record. By responding appropriately to concerns about scientific errors and taking necessary actions based on an evaluation of the issues—such as corrections, retraction with replacement, and retraction—An-Nahdliyyah: Journal of Islamic Studies will continue to fulfill its responsibility to ensure the validity and integrity of the scientific record.
Publication Decisions
The editor of An-Nahdliyyah: Journal of Islamic Studies is responsible for deciding which articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validity of the work and its significance to researchers and readers must always guide this decision. The Editor may be guided by the journal’s editorial board policies and constrained by applicable legal requirements regarding defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The Editor may consult with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.
Complaints and Appeals
An-Nahdliyyah: Journal of Islamic Studies will have clear procedures for handling complaints against the journal, the Editorial Staff, the Editorial Board, or the Publisher. Complaints will be addressed to the appropriate party regarding the matter in question. The scope of complaints covers everything related to the journal’s business processes, including the editorial process, manipulation of citations, unfair treatment by editors or reviewers, manipulation of the peer-review process, etc. Complaints will be processed in accordance with COPE guidelines. Complaints must be submitted via email to: lp2m@inutas.ac.id
Fair Play
Editors evaluate manuscripts at all times based on their intellectual content, regardless of the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, nationality, or political philosophy.
Confidentiality
Editors and editorial staff must not disclose any information about submitted manuscripts to anyone other than the relevant authors, reviewers, prospective reviewers, other editorial advisors, and the publisher, as appropriate.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
Unpublished material disclosed in submitted manuscripts must not be used in an editor’s own research without the author’s written consent.
Reviewer Responsibilities
Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Peer review assists editors in making editorial decisions and, through editorial communication with authors, can also help authors improve their manuscripts.
Timeliness
Any selected reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or who knows that a timely review is not possible must inform the editor and withdraw from the review process.
Confidentiality
Every manuscript received for review must be treated as a confidential document. They must not be shown or discussed with others unless authorized by the editor.
Standards of Objectivity
Reviews must be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the authors is inappropriate. Reviewers must clearly express their views with supporting arguments.
Citation of Sources
Reviewers must identify relevant published works that have not been cited by the author. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument has been previously reported must be accompanied by the relevant citation. Reviewers must also bring to the editor’s attention any substantial similarities or overlaps between the manuscript under consideration and other published papers of which they are personally aware.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain. Reviewers must not review manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest arising from competition, collaboration, or any other relationship with the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the paper.
Authors’ Responsibilities
Reporting Standards
Authors of original research reports must present an accurate account of the work performed and an objective discussion of its significance. The underlying data must be accurately presented in the journal. The paper must contain sufficient detail and references to allow others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or intentionally inaccurate statements constitute unethical and unacceptable behavior.
Data Access, Retention, and Reproducibility
Authors are requested to provide raw data related to the paper for editorial review and must be prepared to provide public access to such data, if feasible, and in any case must be prepared to retain the data for a reasonable period after publication. Authors are responsible for the reproducibility of the data.
Originality and Plagiarism
Authors must ensure that they have written a work that is entirely original, and if they have used the work and/or words of others, that these have been properly cited or quoted.
Multiple, Redundant, or Simultaneous Publication
An author must not, in general, publish a manuscript describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or major publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously constitutes unethical and unacceptable publishing behavior.
Acknowledgment of Sources
Proper acknowledgment of others’ work must always be provided. Authors must cite publications that have influenced the nature of the reported work.
Article Authorship and Contributors
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All individuals who have made a significant contribution should be listed as co-authors.
Where others have participated in specific substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.
The corresponding author must ensure that all appropriate co-authors are listed in the manuscript and that no inappropriate co-authors are included, and that all co-authors have reviewed and approved the final version of the manuscript and have consented to its submission for publication.
Disclosures and Conflicts of Interest
All authors must disclose in their manuscripts any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be interpreted as influencing the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project must be disclosed.
Fundamental Errors in Published Works
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.
Ethical Oversight
If research involves chemicals, humans, animals, procedures, or equipment that pose unusual hazards inherent in their use, authors must clearly identify these in the manuscript to comply with research ethics guidelines for studies involving human and animal subjects. If required, authors must provide legal ethical approval from a relevant association or organization.
If the research involves confidential data and business/marketing practices, authors must clearly justify whether such data or information will be securely concealed or not.
Intellectual Property (Copyright Policy)
The journal’s policy on intellectual property or copyright is stated here:
https://ojs.inutas.ac.id/index.php/annahdliyah/Hak_Cipta
Peer-Review Process Policy
The peer-review process and policy are outlined here:
https://ojs.inutas.ac.id/index.php/annahdliyah/Proses_PeerReview
Post-Publication Discussion and Corrections
An-Nahdliyyah: Journal of Islamic Studies welcomes discussion and corrections regarding published articles from readers. Should a reader wish to provide discussion or corrections regarding a published article, they may contact the Editor-in-Chief via email, explaining the discussion and corrections. If accepted (by the Editor-in-Chief), the discussion and corrections will be published in the next issue as a Letter to the Editor. The author may respond to the reader’s discussion and corrections by sending a reply to the Editor-in-Chief. The Editorial Board may then publish the response as a Reply to the Letter to the Editor.
