Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

IJIK is a multi-disciplinary publication dedicated to the scholarly study of all aspects of Islam and of the Islamic world. Particular attention is paid to works dealing with history, geography, Technologi,  political science, economics, anthropology, sociology, law, literature, religion, philosophy, international relations, environmental and developmental issues, as well as ethical questions related to scientific research. The Journal seeks to place Islam and the Islamic tradition as its central focus of academic inquiry and to encourage comprehensive consideration of its many facets; to provide a forum for the study of Islam and Muslim societies in their global context; to encourage interdisciplinary studies of the Islamic world that are crossnational and comparative; to promote the diffusion, exchange and discussion of research findings; and to encourage interaction among academics from various traditions of learning.

 

Section Policies

Articles

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

Some policies in the review of IJIK:

  1. The reviewers will review the submitted article that follow the guidelines and template of the journal provided.
  2. The review process in this journal employs a double-blind peer-review, which means that both the reviewer and author identities are concealed from the reviewers, and vice versa.
  3. In the review process, the article will be reviewed by at least two reviewers to ensure the quality of the article.
  4. In the review process, the reviewers ensure the quality of the articles of its title, abstract, discussion and conclusion. Besides, the reviewers also address the novelty and its contribution to the scientific discussion and verify the plagiarism and ethics of publication.
  5. The reviewer also provide feedback on whether the article is accepted, rejected or need minor or major revision.

 

Publication Frequency

International Journal of Islamic Khazanah will be published in January And July

 

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

 

Archiving

This journal utilizes the LOCKSS system to create a distributed archiving system among participating libraries and permits those libraries to create permanent archives of the journal for purposes of preservation and restoration. More...

 

Publication Ethics

International Journal of Islamic Khazanah (ISSN 2302-9366 E-ISSN 2302-9781) is a peer-reviewed journal published by UIN Sunan Gunung Djati Bandung. This statement clarifies the ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of posting an article in this journal, including the author, the chief editor, the Editorial Board, the peer-reviewers and the publisher. This statement based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

 

Duties and Ethical Guideline  of Publisher in Internasional Journal of Islamic Khazanah

Ethical Guideline for Journal Publication

The publication of an article in a peer- International Journal of Islamic Khazanah is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore essential to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer-reviewer, the publisher and the society. 

UIN Sunan Gunung Djati Bandung as publisher of International Journal of Islamic Khazanah takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing seriously, and we recognize our ethical and other responsibilities. We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or additional commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. Besides, UIN Sunan Gunung Djati Bandung, and the Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and publishers where this is useful and necessary.

Duties and Ethical Guideline of Chief Editor in Internasional Journal of Islamic Khazanah

  1. Evaluate manuscripts fairly and solely on their intellectual merit.
  2. Ensure confidentiality of manuscripts and not disclose any information regarding manuscripts to anyone other than the people involved in the publishing process.
  3. Has the responsibility to decide when and which articles are to be published.
  4. Actively seek the views of board members, reviewers and authors on how to improve/ increase the image and visibility of the journal.
  5. Give clear instructions to potential contributors on the submission process and what is expected of the authors.
  6. Ensure appropriate reviewers are selected/ identified for the reviewing process.


Duties and Ethical Guideline of Editor  in Internasional Journal of Islamic Khazanah

Publication decisions, The editor of the International Journal of Islamic Khazanah is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editors may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Handling of submitted manuscript

Editor-in-Chief should evaluate the merit of a manuscript as soon as it is received. An acknowledgement with a reference number must be sent to the Authors once the manuscript is received. Manuscript deemed to be in good order must be sent to reviewers without delay.

Decision Quality

The Editor-in-Chef has to provide the Authors with an explanation of the editorial decision on a manuscript. Editor-in-Chief should write high-quality editorial letters that integrate reviewers’ comments and offer additional suggestions to the Author.

Submission by Editorial Board Members

All manuscripts submitted to IJIK undergo a rigid single-blind review process including those received from the Editorial Board members. In addition, when making editorial decisions about peer reviewed articles where an editor is an Author or is acknowledged as a contributor, IJIK Editorial Team will ensure that the affected editors exclude themselves from the publication process including the review process and decision on the manuscript. Although editors are allowed to submit manuscript to The Journal, too many submissions from the Journal’s own Editorial Board is not allowed.

Handling Conflict of Interest by the Editors

When editors are presented with manuscript where their own interests may influence their ability to make an unbiased editorial decision, they should hand over the handling of the manuscript to a suitably qualified editor in the board. The Editorial Board will appoint a suitable member to handle the manuscripts objectively, fairly and professionally free of personal biases that may affect his/her judgments.

 

Duties and Ethical Guideline of Reviewer in Internasional Journal of Islamic Khazanah

Reciprocity

Reviewing journals is a legitimate profession that benefits the entire field and should be promoted. Usually, writers who submit articles to IJIK are expected to receive an invitation to review IJIK articles in the future.

Double-Blind Peer-Review

IJIK follows a double-blind peer-review process, whereby the Authors do not know reviewers and vice versa. Peer review is fundamental to the scientific publication process and the dissemination of knowledge. Peer reviewers are experts chosen by the Editor-in-Chief to provide assessment of a written research manuscript, with the aim of improving the reporting of research and identifying the most appropriate and highest quality material for IJIK.

Authors should respect the confidentiality of the review process and should not reveal themselves to Reviewers, and vice versa. Reviewers should avoid doing or saying anything that could identify them to the Authors of a manuscript they are reviewing or reviewed.

Regular reviewers selected for IJIK should meet minimum standards regarding their background in the research field, publication of articles and formal training

Reviewers are experts in the scientific topic addressed in the manuscripts they review, and are selected for their objectivity and scientific knowledge. Individuals who have a major competing interest in the subject of the manuscript are not appointed as reviewers for such a manuscript.

Quality of Review

Manuscripts received by IJIK will be evaluated by the Editorial board that will judge whether a manuscript is of potential interest to the readers of IJIK. Manuscripts that are of interest, formatted according to the guidelines for Authors and presented fairly well are sent for review. Typically, one or two reviewers are employed. Manuscripts may be sent to other specialized experts such as on statistics or a particular technique where a scientist in that particular technique is needed to evaluate it.

Reviewers are assessed on the quality of review and other performance characteristics by the Editor-in-Chief to assure optimal journal quality and performance. These ratings should also contribute to decisions on reappointment to IJIK Editorial Board and to ongoing review requests. Individual performance data on Reviewers are available to the Editor-in-Chief but otherwise kept confidential.

Reviews are expected to be professional, honest, courteous, prompt, and constructive. A good review includes the following inputs from the reviewers:

  1. identify and comment on major strengths and weaknesses of the experimental design and characterization
  2. comment accurately and constructively on the quality of the Author’s interpretation of the data, including acknowledgment of its
  3. comment on major strengths and weaknesses of the manuscript, independent of the design, methodology, results, and interpretation of the
  4. comment on any ethical concerns raised by the study, or any possible evidence of substandard scientific
  5. provide the Authors with useful suggestions to improve the
  6. comments should be constructive and Personal comments regarding the Authors is not permitted.
  7. comment on the work and not the
  8. provide the Editor-in-Chief with the proper context and perspective to make a recommendation on the acceptability of the

The Editor-in-Chief then makes a decision based on the reviewers’ recommendation, as follows:

  1. Accept without revisions;
  2. Accept with minor revisions to be made by the Authors;
  3. Return to the Authors for major modifications, Authors to revise & resubmit for another round of reviews depending on the request of the reviewers;
  4. Reject, with encouragement for resubmission; reasons for rejection must be given by the Editor-in-Chief
  5. Reject Outright, typically on grounds of specialist interest, lack of novelty, insufficient conceptual advance or major technical and/or interpretational problems, or if the work constitutes any unethical publishing behavior. The Editor-in-Chief must give the reasons for

Reviewers can recommend for particular course of action. However, the Editor-in-Chief may have to make a decision based on conflicting advice from different reviewers. The most useful reports, therefore, provide the Editor-in-Chief with the information on which a decision should be based.

All reviewers are informed of the journal’s expectations, and Editor-in-Chief will make every effort to assist reviewers in improving the quality of review. The Editor-in-Chief will access the quality of review routinely by ratings of review quality and other performance characteristics periodically.

Responsibility of Reviewers

Reviewers should assess the manuscript sent to them for scope, accuracy, quality, relevance and contribution to the field. They should inform and return the manuscript to the Editor-in-Chief if they decide that the manuscript is not within their field of expertise or that they are not able to complete the review in the stated time.

The manuscript for review is privileged information. Reviewers must treat it as confidential and it should not be retained or copied in whatever means. The manuscript should not be shared with the reviewers' colleagues without the explicit permission of the Editor-in-Chief. Reviewers and Editor-in-Chief must not make any personal or professional use of the data, arguments, or interpretations (other than those directly involved in its peer review) prior to publication. Such use may constitute a conflict of interest and is an unacceptable behavior.

In cases of suspected misconduct, reviewers should notify the Editor-in-Chief in confidence, and should not share their concerns with other parties.

Timeliness

Reviewers should be prompt with their reviews. If a Reviewer cannot meet the deadline, he/she should inform the Editor-in-Chief immediately to determine whether a longer time period or another Reviewer should be appointed. Typically, the time to complete a review is four weeks.

 

Duties and Ethical Guideline of Authors in Internasional Journal of Islamic Khazanah

Authors’ Responsibility. Authors should submit original work carried out honestly according to scientific standards. Research results should not have been obtained fraudulently or dishonestly, fabricated or falsified. When writing the Authors should present a concise and accurate account how the work was carried out. There should have enough detail for other researchers to repeat the work. The data should be accurately reported and never fudged. The Authors should not leave out problematic data so as to provide a clear story. The Authors should not claim originality if others have reported similar work. All information obtained privately should not be used without the explicit permission from the individual or source.

Reporting standards, Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical ehavior and are unacceptable.

Data Access and Retention, Authors are asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

Originality and Plagiarism, Authors who submit a manuscript to IJIK, must ascertain that the manuscript is their original work and has not been submitted elsewhere simultaneously. The Authors should also declare that the work and its variation have not been published elsewhere prior to submission to IJIK. Materials from other sources or publications must be appropriately cited or quoted whenever it is used in the submitted manuscript.

If the manuscript contains materials that overlap with work that was previously published, or is in-press, or that is under consideration for publication elsewhere, the Authors must cite this work in the manuscript. The Authors must also inform IJIK Editor-in-Chief of the related work, the Editor-in-Chief may request a copy of the related work.

A manuscript that is under review by any other journal must be withdrawn from the other journal, prior to submission to IJIK.

Authors must explicitly cite their own earlier work and ideas, even when the work or ideas are not quoted exactly in the manuscript. If exact sentences or paragraphs that appear in another work by the Authors are included in the manuscript, the material should be reworded and appropriately cited.

Authors are not allowed to resubmit a manuscript to IJIK that was previously reviewed and rejected by IJIK Reviewer unless encouraged by the Editor-in-Chief to resubmit in the rejection letter. If an earlier version was previously rejected by IJIK, and the Authors wish to submit a revised version for review, this fact and the justification for resubmission should be clearly communicated by the Authors to The Journal's Editor-in-Chief at the time of submission.

To speed up the peer review process, Authors is strongly suggested to submit the manuscripts for publication in IJIK to check their manuscripts for possible plagiarism using any anti-plagiarism software before submitting it to IJIK.

Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication, An author should not, in general, publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same paper concurrently to more than one journal constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

Publication from Conference Proceedings, IJIK does not accept any submission of manuscript that has been published in full in a conference proceeding. This is because novelty is an important criterion for articles published in IJIK. The Editor-in-Chief may consider unpublished work that has been presented in part in any forum, particularly if the circulation of the proceeding is limited. Authors must clarify during submission the significant material that was added in the manuscript that was not included in the proceedings. The proceedings must be properly cited in the submitted manuscript.

Suggestion for Reviewers – Conflict of Interest, When submitting a manuscript to The Journal the Authors are encouraged to recommend up to three possible potential Reviewers. The suggested reviewers must not be from the same institution as the Authors. The Editor-in-Chief is however not bound by these suggestions.

Authors should avoid any possible conflict of interest, or appearance of conflict of interest, in selecting Editors and Reviewers. Authors should not submit a manuscript to an Editor who is not in the same field as an easy way to get published.

Acknowledgement of Sources, Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be provided. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

Authorship of the Paper, Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the article and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Fundamental errors in published works, When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own 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.

Timeliness, Authors should be prompt with their manuscript revisions. If an Author cannot meet the deadline given to complete the revision, he/she should inform the Editor-in-Chief to request for an extension.

 

Ethics on Post Publication

Amendments

Changes can be requested by the Authors of the publication due to a variety of reason. These amendments may fall into one of four categories: erratum, corrigendum, retraction or addendum.

Erratum

Erratum is the notification of an important error made by The Journal during production of the article that affects the publication record or the scientific integrity of the article, or the reputation of the Authors, or of The Journal.

Corrigendum

Corrigendum is the notification of an important error made by the Author(s) that affects the publication record or the scientific integrity of the article, or the reputation of the Authors or the journal. All Authors must sign corrigenda submitted for publication.

Retraction

Retraction is the notification of invalid results. All Co-Authors must sign a retraction specifying the error and stating briefly how the conclusions are affected, and submit it for publication. Retractions are judged according to whether the main conclusion of the article no longer holds or is seriously undermined as a result of subsequent information coming to light of which the Authors were not aware at the time of publication.

Readers who wish to draw attention to published work requiring retraction should write to The Editor-in-Chief who will seek advice from reviewers if they judge that the information is likely to draw into question the main conclusions of the published article. The author of the article will be given a chance to give an explanation regarding the query. (Click)

Addendum

Addendum is the notification of a peer-reviewed addition of information to an article, usually in response to readers’ request for clarification.

 

Research Involving Human Subjects

Authors/researchers who submit research with human subjects have at least followed the rules according to the Helsinki Declaration of 1975 and amended in 2013 (click here). Prior to conducting research, permission must be obtained from the local Institutional Review Board (IRB) or other appropriate ethics committee. Authors/Researchers and articles that will be published in the International Journal of Islamic Khazanah are required to follow the rules below before submitting articles involving human research.

  1. Medical research involving human subjects must conform to generally accepted scientific principles, be based on a thorough knowledge of the scientific literature, other relevant sources of information, and on adequate laboratory and, where appropriate, animal experimentation.
  2. Appropriate caution must be exercised in the conduct of research which may affect the environment, and the welfare of animals used for research must be respected.
  3. The design and performance of each experimental procedure involving human subjects should be clearly formulated in an experimental protocol. This protocol should be submitted for consideration, comment, guidance, and where appropriate, approval to a specially appointed ethical review committee, which must be independent of the investigator, the sponsor or any other kind of undue influence. This independent committee should be in conformity with the laws and regulations of the country in which the research experiment is performed. The committee has the right to monitor ongoing trials. The researcher has the obligation to provide monitoring information to the committee, especially any serious adverse events. The researcher should also submit to the committee, for review, information regarding funding, sponsors, institutional affiliations, other potential conflicts of interest and incentives for subjects.
  4. The research protocol should always contain a statement of the ethical considerations involved and should indicate that there is compliance with the principles enunciated in this Declaration.
  5. Medical research involving human subjects should be conducted only by scientifically qualified persons and under the supervision of a clinically competent medical person. The responsibility for the human subject must always rest with a medically qualified person and never rest on the Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 2001, 79 (4) # World Health Organization 2001 373 subject of the research, even though the subject has given consent. 16. Every medical research project involving human subjects should be preceded by careful assessment of predictable risks and burdens in comparison with foreseeable benefits to the subject or to others. This does not preclude the participation of healthy volunteers in medical research. The design of all studies should be publicly available.
  6. Physicians should abstain from engaging in research projects involving human subjects unless they are confident that the risks involved have been adequately assessed and can be satisfactorily managed. Physicians should cease any investigation if the risks are found to outweigh the potential benefits or if there is conclusive proof of positive and beneficial results.
  7. Medical research involving human subjects should only be conducted if the importance of the objective outweighs the inherent risks and burdens to the subject. This is especially important when the human subjects are healthy volunteers. 19. Medical research is only justified if there is a reasonable likelihood that the populations in which the research is carried out stand to benefit from the results of the research.
  8. The subjects must be volunteers and informed participants in the research project.
  9. The right of research subjects to safeguard their integrity must always be respected. Every precaution should be taken to respect the privacy of the subject, the confidentiality of the patient’s information and to minimize the impact of the study on the subject’s physical and mental integrity and on the personality of the subject. 22. In any research on human beings, each potential subject must be adequately informed of the aims, methods, sources of funding, any possible conflicts of interest, institutional affiliations of the researcher, the anticipated benefits and potential risks of the study and the discomfort it may entail. The subject should be informed of the right to abstain from participation in the study or to withdraw consent to participate at any time without reprisal. After ensuring that the subject has understood the information, the physician should then obtain the subject’s freely-given informed consent, preferably in writing. If the consent cannot be obtained in writing, the non-written consent must be formally documented and witnessed.
  10. When obtaining informed consent for the research project the physician should be particularly cautious if the subject is in a dependent relationship with the physician or may consent under duress. In that case the informed consent should be obtained by a well-informed physician who is not engaged in the investigation and who is completely independent of this relationship.
  11. For a research subject who is legally incompetent, physically or mentally incapable of giving consent or is a legally incompetent minor, the investigator must obtain informed consent from the legally authorized representative in accordance with applicable law. These groups should not be included in research unless the research is necessary to promote the health of the population represented and this research cannot instead be performed on legally competent persons.
  12. When a subject deemed legally incompetent, such as a minor child, is able to give assent to decisions about participation in research, the investigator must obtain that assent in addition to the consent of the legally authorized representative.
  13. Research on individuals from whom it is not possible to obtain consent, including proxy or advance consent, should be done only if the physical/mental condition that prevents obtaining informed consent is a necessary characteristic of the research population. The specific reasons for involving research subjects with a condition that renders them unable to give informed consent should be stated in the experimental protocol for consideration and approval of the review committee. The protocol should state that consent to remain in the research should be obtained as soon as possible from the individual or a legally authorized surrogate.
  14. Both authors and publishers have ethical obligations. In publication of the results of research, the investigators are obliged to preserve the accuracy of the results. Negative as well as positive results should be published or otherwise publicly available. Sources of funding, institutional affiliations and any possible conflicts of interest should be declared in the publication. Reports of experimentation not in accordance with the principles laid down in this Declaration should not be accepted for publication.

 Note: Authors are required to prepare:

  1. An ethical statement can look like this: "Before taking part in the study, all subjects expressed their informed agreement to be included. The research was carried out in conformity with the Declaration of Helsinki, and the protocol was approved by the XXX (Project identification code) Ethics Committee." (upload licensing documents in suplementary file)
  2. The project identification code, date of approval, and name of the ethics committee or institutional review board must all be provided in the article's Section 'Institutional Review Board Statement.

 

Ethics approval for survey design

All participants in non-interventional studies (such as surveys, questionnaires, and social media research) must be thoroughly informed about whether anonymity is guaranteed, why the research is being undertaken, how their data will be used, and whether there are any risks involved. Prior to conducting the study, ethical approval from an appropriate ethics commission must be acquired, as with all human research. If ethical approval is not necessary, authors must either obtain an exemption from the ethics committee or cite local or national legislation stating that this type of study does not require ethical approval. If an exemption has been obtained for a study, the name of the ethics committee that approved it should be listed in Section 'Institutional Review Board Statement,' along with a detailed explanation of why ethical approval was not necessary.

 

Consequences

Authors: Any work in the manuscript that has been proven to contain any form of plagiarism, falsification, fabrications, or omission of significant material constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Editor and/or reviewers shall report cases of suspected unethical publishing behavior of the Author(s) to the attention of the Editor-in-Chief who shall ensure an appropriate action and subsequently bring it to The Journal’s Editorial Board for a suitable action below depending upon the severity of the case:

  1. Notice to the Author(s) involved,
  2. Rejection of the manuscript,
  3. Retraction of article that has been published with appropriate notice in the website and the following hardcopy issue of The
  4. Ban from submission to IJIK for a period of time, normally up to 3
  5. Informing the Authors’ institution of the unethical conduct for their further

Editorial Board members: Journal reputation depends heavily on the conduct and fairness of its Board members. The Editorial Board members shall demonstrate their dedicated efforts to this effect at all times. Complainants shall bring cases of suspected members’ misconduct to the attention of the Editor-in-Chief who shall ensure that the relevant documentation substantiating an unacceptable violation of publication ethics is made available to IJIK Editorial Board for a suitable action. Any member who holds an editorial office at IJIK with proven unethical conducts will be dismissed from that office. Additionally, penalties would typically include the sanctions as in the case of Authors found guilty.

 

Complaint

Authors who may have complaints about their interactions with the IJIK team (Editor and Staff) can send an e-mail to the Editor-in-Chief at ijik@uinsgd.ac.id or ijik2020@gmail.com

 

Disclaimer

The Editors of Internasional Journal of islamic Khazanah and UIN Sunan Gunung Djati Jurnal Journals make every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in its publications. However, the Editors of Internasional Journal of islamic Khazanah and UIN Sunan Gunung Djati Bandung Journals make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness or suitability for any purpose of the Content and disclaim all such representations and warranties whether express or implied to the maximum extent permitted by law.

 

Plagiarism Notices

International Journal of Islamic Khazanah editorial board recognises that plagiarism is not acceptable and therefore establishes the following policy stating specific actions (penalties) upon identification of plagiarism/similarities in articles submitted for publication in IJIK. IJIK will use Turnitin's originality checking software as the tool in detecting similarities of texts in article manuscripts and the final version of articles ready for publication. A maximum of 20% of similarities is allowed for the submitted papers. Should we find more than 20% of the similarity index, the article will be returned to the author for correction and resubmission.

Level of Plagiarism

Minor: A short section of another article is plagiarised without any significant data or idea taken from the other paper.

Action: A warning is given to the authors and a request to change the text and properly cite the original article is made

Intermediate: A significant portion of a paper is plagiarised without proper citation to the original paper.

Action: The submitted article is rejected and the authors are forbidden to submit further articles for one year

Severe: A significant portion of a paper is plagiarised that involves reproducing original results or ideas presented in another publication.

Action: The paper is rejected and the authors are forbidden to submit further articles for five years.

It is understood that all authors are responsible for the content of their submitted paper as they all read and understand IJIK’s Copyright and Licensing Terms. If a penalty is imposed for plagiarism, all authors will be subject to the same penalty.

Note. Acceptance limit is 20% with out references.

 

Reference Management

To guarantee the reference quality of articles and ensure that there are no errors in reference writing, authors are advised to use reference management applications such as: Mendeley, Zotero, Endnote and others.

 

Retraction and/or Corrections

Authors are discouraged from withdrawing submitted manuscripts after it is in the publication process (review, copyedit, layout, etc.,). During the time, IJIK had spent valuable resources besides time spent in the process. Should under any circumstances that the author(s) still request for a withdrawal, author(s) should pay back every effort put into the manuscript processes at an amount of IDR 1.000.000 (US $70). Paid upon official request from the author(s) in an email sent to IJIK’s editor using the same email address used in correspondence.

IJIK’s editors shall consider retracting a publication if:

  1. They have clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of a major error (eg, miscalculation or experimental error) or as a result of fabrication (eg, of data) or falsification (eg, image manipulation);
  2. It constitutes plagiarism;
  3. The findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper attribution to previous sources or disclosure to the editor, permission to republish, or justification (ie, cases of redundant publication);
  4. It contains material or data without authorisation for use;
  5. Copyright has been infringed or there is some other serious legal issue (eg, libel, privacy);
  6. It reports unethical research;
  7. It has been published solely based on a compromised or manipulated peer review process;
  8. The author(s) failed to disclose a major competing interest (a.k.a. conflict of interest) that, in the view of the editor, would have unduly affected interpretations of the work or recommendations by editors and peer reviewers

Notices of retraction would:

  1. Be linked to the retracted article wherever possible (ie, in all online versions);
  2. Clearly identify the retracted article (eg, by including the title and authors in the retraction heading or citing the retracted article);
  3. Be clearly identified as a retraction (ie, distinct from other types of correction or comment);
  4. Be published promptly to minimise the harmful effects;
  5. Be freely available to all readers (ie, not behind access barriers or available only to subscribers);
  6. State who is retracting the article;
  7. State the reason(s) for retraction;
  8. Be objective, factual and avoid inflammatory language

Retractions are not usually appropriate if:

  1. The authorship is disputed but there is no reason to doubt the validity of the findings;
  2. The main findings of the work are still reliable and correction could sufficiently address errors or concerns;
  3. An editor has inconclusive evidence to support retraction or is awaiting additional information such as from an institutional investigation;
  4. Author conflicts of interest have been reported to the journal after publication, but in the editor’s view, these are not likely to have influenced interpretations or recommendations or the conclusions of the article.

IJIK’s editors shall consider issuing an expression of concern if:

  1. they receive inconclusive evidence of research or publication misconduct by the authors;
  2. there is evidence that the findings are unreliable but the authors’ institution will not investigate the case;
  3. they believe that an investigation into alleged misconduct related to the publication either has not been or would not be, fair and impartial, or conclusive;
  4. an investigation is underway but a judgment will not be available for a considerable time

IJIK’s editors shall consider issuing a correction if:

  1. a small portion of an otherwise reliable publication proves to be misleading (especially because of honest error);
  2. the author/contributor list is incorrect (i.e. a deserving author has been omitted or somebody who does not meet authorship criteria has been included);

The mechanism follows the guidelines from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

 

Publication Fees

No fees incurred for article processing, submission, and publication.

Under the condition mentioned above, we are waiving in full for authors from developing countries to submit papers to the International Journal of Islamic Khazanah.

However, should authors or other parties need print/hard copies of the journal, an IDR 200.000/copy should be paid for the printing, binding, and post (Indonesian postal service). Please note that international courier delivery service will cost more and need a separate discussion.

Please send us an email stating your interest in printed copies and receive further details.