Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

Al-Mada: Jurnal Agama, Sosial, dan Budaya is a peer-reviewed academic journal published by the Institute for Research and Community Service (LPPM), Institut KH Abdul Chalim, Mojokerto, Indonesia. This statement establishes the ethical responsibilities of all parties involved in the publication process, including authors, editors, editorial board members, peer reviewers, and the publisher.

The journal is committed to maintaining academic integrity, editorial independence, transparency, fairness, and accountability throughout the submission, peer-review, and publication processes. This policy is informed by the principles and guidance of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), particularly its Core Practices and guidance on publication misconduct.

The publisher recognizes its responsibility to support ethical publishing practices and to ensure that editorial decisions are based on scholarly merit, originality, relevance, and research integrity. Advertising, reprints, institutional interests, or other commercial considerations must not improperly influence editorial decisions.

1. Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication

Publication in a peer-reviewed journal contributes to the advancement and dissemination of scholarly knowledge. Maintaining the reliability of the academic record requires the cooperation of authors, editors, reviewers, and the publisher.

All parties involved in the publication process are expected to observe the following principles:

  • Honesty and accuracy in research and scholarly communication.

  • Originality and appropriate acknowledgment of sources.

  • Fair, impartial, and confidential peer review.

  • Transparency regarding authorship, funding, and competing interests.

  • Respect for research participants, ethical requirements, and applicable legal obligations.

  • Prompt and responsible correction of errors or unreliable published material.

The journal will address suspected ethical violations fairly and consistently, following its published policies and relevant publication ethics guidance.

2. Allegations of Research Misconduct

Research misconduct includes fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, citation manipulation, inappropriate manipulation of research materials or images, and other serious practices that compromise the integrity or reliability of research or scholarly publication.

The journal takes allegations of research misconduct seriously, whether they arise before or after publication. Allegations may be submitted by authors, reviewers, readers, institutions, or other concerned parties through the journal's official communication channels.

2.1. Initial Assessment

Upon receiving an allegation, the editor or an appropriate editorial representative will assess whether the concern is sufficiently specific and supported by information that warrants further examination.

The initial assessment will consider the nature of the allegation, the evidence provided, its relevance to research or publication integrity, and any potential conflicts of interest affecting the parties involved.

Unsubstantiated allegations will not automatically be treated as established misconduct.

2.2. Investigation and Author Response

Where further examination is warranted, the editorial team may request explanations, supporting documents, original data, research records, or other relevant information from the corresponding author.

The author will be given a reasonable opportunity to respond to the concerns. Where necessary, the journal may consult independent experts, reviewers, research integrity specialists, or the relevant institution.

The journal will maintain appropriate confidentiality throughout the process and will seek to protect the rights of all parties while ensuring a fair assessment of the evidence.

2.3. Editorial Actions

Depending on the findings and the stage of publication, the journal may:

  1. Request clarification or additional evidence.

  2. Require appropriate revisions or corrections.

  3. Reject the manuscript if serious misconduct is established.

  4. Suspend editorial processing while a relevant concern is being investigated.

  5. Publish an Expression of Concern when significant concerns about a published article remain unresolved.

  6. Publish a correction or retract a published article when justified by the evidence.

  7. Notify the author's institution, employer, funder, or other relevant body when appropriate.

The journal will distinguish between suspected misconduct and misconduct supported by sufficient evidence. Institutional investigations may be requested when necessary, particularly in complex cases requiring access to research records or institutional authority.

The purpose of these procedures is to protect the integrity of the scholarly record, not to impose arbitrary punishment.

3. Conflict of Interest

A conflict of interest, also referred to as a competing interest, arises when financial, professional, institutional, personal, or other relationships could influence, or reasonably be perceived to influence, the conduct of research, its interpretation, peer review, or editorial decisions.

3.1. Authors

Authors must disclose all relevant financial and non-financial competing interests that could reasonably be perceived as affecting their research or manuscript.

Relevant disclosures may include research funding, employment, consultancy, financial interests, personal relationships, institutional affiliations, intellectual property interests, or other circumstances that could affect the objectivity of the work.

All sources of financial support must be acknowledged. If no competing interests exist, authors should provide an explicit declaration stating that there are no competing interests to disclose.

3.2. Editors and Editorial Board Members

Editors and editorial board members must disclose any competing interests that could affect their handling of a manuscript.

An editor who has a conflict of interest must not participate in the evaluation or decision-making process for the affected manuscript. The manuscript will be assigned to an independent editor or another appropriately qualified editorial representative.

Editorial decisions must remain independent of personal relationships, institutional affiliations, financial interests, or other external pressures.

3.3. Peer Reviewers

Reviewers must disclose any actual or potential competing interests before accepting a review assignment. They should decline the invitation if a conflict could compromise their impartiality.

Reviewers must not use unpublished information obtained through peer review for personal, professional, or financial advantage.

3.4. Handling Undisclosed Conflicts

If a previously undisclosed conflict of interest is identified, the editorial team will assess its potential impact on the research, review process, or editorial decision.

Depending on the circumstances, the journal may request a disclosure, arrange an independent reassessment, publish a correction, or take other appropriate action to preserve the integrity of the scholarly record.

4. Post-Publication Discussion

Al-Mada: Jurnal Agama, Sosial, dan Budaya recognizes that scholarly discussion may continue after an article has been published. Constructive criticism, alternative interpretations, methodological discussion, and evidence-based challenges contribute to academic progress.

The journal welcomes substantive post-publication comments concerning the accuracy, methodology, interpretation, originality, or scholarly significance of published articles.

4.1. Submission of Post-Publication Comments

Readers and researchers who wish to comment on a published article should submit their comments to the editorial office through the journal's official communication channels.

Submissions should:

  • Identify the article under discussion.

  • Present a clear and evidence-based argument.

  • Cite relevant scholarly sources where appropriate.

  • Maintain a professional and respectful tone.

  • Disclose any relevant competing interests.

Comments must contribute meaningfully to scholarly discussion. Personal attacks, defamatory statements, unsupported accusations, and irrelevant material will not be considered for publication.

4.2. Editorial Assessment

The editorial team will assess whether a proposed comment is relevant, sufficiently substantiated, and appropriate for scholarly publication. The journal may seek independent peer review when necessary.

Where a comment raises substantive concerns about a published article, the original author may be invited to respond. The response may be published alongside the comment or through another appropriate editorial format.

The journal will seek to provide a fair opportunity for scholarly exchange without guaranteeing publication of every submitted comment or response.

4.3. Outcomes of Post-Publication Discussion

Depending on the nature of the issue, post-publication discussion may result in:

  1. Publication of a scholarly comment or response.

  2. A request for clarification from the original author.

  3. Publication of a correction.

  4. An Expression of Concern while a significant issue is being investigated.

  5. Retraction of the article if substantial evidence demonstrates that it is unreliable or otherwise warrants retraction.

Post-publication comments do not automatically establish research misconduct. Editorial action will be based on the evidence, the seriousness of the concern, and the need to maintain an accurate scholarly record.

5. Correction and Retraction Policy

The journal is committed to preserving the accuracy, transparency, and integrity of the scholarly record. When errors, omissions, ethical violations, or other problems are identified in a published article, the editorial team will determine the appropriate action based on the nature and significance of the issue.

Corrections and retractions are intended to ensure that readers can identify and understand the status of the published record. They are not intended primarily as punitive measures against authors.

5.1. Corrections

A correction may be issued when a published article contains an error or omission that requires amendment but does not invalidate the overall findings or principal conclusions.

Examples include:

  • Incorrect author names, affiliations, or contribution statements.

  • Errors in tables, figures, references, or other published information.

  • Minor factual, typographical, or analytical errors that affect the accuracy of the article.

  • Inaccuracies in funding or competing-interest disclosures.

The editorial team will assess the significance of the error and determine whether a formal correction notice is necessary.

Correction notices will clearly identify the affected article and explain the nature of the correction. The original article will remain accessible, with an appropriate link or notice indicating that a correction has been published.

5.2. Retractions

A retraction may be necessary when a published article is found to be unreliable or seriously compromised.

Grounds for retraction may include:

  • Clear evidence of data fabrication or falsification.

  • Serious methodological or analytical errors that invalidate the findings or conclusions.

  • Plagiarism or substantial unattributed duplication.

  • Redundant publication without appropriate justification or disclosure.

  • Unethical research practices that undermine the validity or ethical acceptability of the work.

  • Compromised peer review or other serious publication process manipulation.

  • Other substantiated circumstances that substantially undermine confidence in the article.

A retraction may be considered whether the underlying problem resulted from deliberate misconduct or an honest error. The decision will focus on the reliability and integrity of the published work.

5.3. Retraction Procedure

Before issuing a retraction, the editorial team will assess the available evidence and, where appropriate, seek explanations from the authors and relevant institutions.

Authors will normally be given an opportunity to respond to the concerns. However, the journal may proceed with an appropriate editorial action when the available evidence justifies it, even if an author does not respond or disagrees with the proposed action.

A retraction notice will:

  • Clearly identify the retracted article, including its title and authors.

  • Explain the reasons for retraction in a factual and transparent manner.

  • Be linked to the original article.

  • Remain publicly accessible to readers.

  • Identify the retracted article's status in the journal's online publication record.

The original article will ordinarily remain accessible in the scholarly record with a clear retraction notice or status label, rather than being silently removed. Any exceptional removal or restriction will be considered only when justified by legal, privacy, safety, or other compelling requirements.

5.4. Expression of Concern

When credible concerns arise about a published article but the available evidence is insufficient to reach a final decision, the journal may publish an Expression of Concern.

This notice informs readers that an issue affecting the reliability or integrity of the article is under examination. It will be linked to the original article and updated or followed by an appropriate outcome, such as a correction, retraction, or statement that the concern has been resolved, when the circumstances permit.

5.5. Editorial Independence

Decisions concerning corrections, Expressions of Concern, and retractions will be based on the evidence and the need to maintain the integrity of the scholarly record.

The publisher, commercial considerations, institutional interests, or personal relationships must not improperly influence these decisions. Where an editor has a relevant conflict of interest, the matter will be handled by an independent editorial representative.

6. Publication Decisions

The editor-in-chief, or an appropriately delegated editor, is responsible for deciding which manuscripts are suitable for publication in Al-Mada: Jurnal Agama, Sosial, dan Budaya.

Editorial decisions are based on the manuscript's relevance to the journal's focus and scope, originality, academic quality, methodological rigor, contribution to scholarship, peer-review reports, and compliance with publication ethics.

Editors may consult reviewers and other editorial advisers when making decisions. They must also comply with applicable legal requirements, including those relating to copyright, defamation, privacy, and research ethics.

Editorial decisions must not be influenced improperly by the authors' race, gender, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, nationality, political views, institutional affiliation, or personal relationships.

7. Complaints and Appeals

The journal provides a process for handling complaints and appeals concerning editorial decisions, peer review, publication ethics, and the conduct of editorial staff or reviewers.

Complaints should be submitted in writing to the editorial office and should include a clear explanation of the issue and any supporting evidence.

The journal will assess complaints fairly and impartially. Where appropriate, the matter may be referred to an independent editor or another qualified person who has no relevant conflict of interest.

Appeals against editorial decisions must provide substantive reasons, such as a material factual misunderstanding, a significant procedural irregularity, or relevant information that was not adequately considered during the initial assessment.

The journal will communicate the outcome of its assessment to the complainant where appropriate. All complaints and appeals will be handled in accordance with the journal's policies and relevant publication ethics guidance.

8. Fair Play and Editorial Independence

Editors must evaluate manuscripts on their scholarly merits without discrimination based on authors' personal characteristics, beliefs, nationality, institutional affiliation, or other irrelevant factors.

Editorial decisions must be independent of commercial interests, advertising, sponsorship, or pressure from the publisher, institutions, or other external parties.

The publisher supports the editorial team's responsibility to maintain appropriate academic standards and to protect the integrity of the journal's published content.

9. Confidentiality

Editors, editorial staff, and reviewers must treat submitted manuscripts and related communications as confidential.

Information about a manuscript may be shared only with individuals directly involved in its evaluation or publication, such as the corresponding author, assigned reviewers, relevant editorial advisers, and the publisher where necessary.

Unpublished material disclosed in a manuscript must not be used in an editor's or reviewer's own research without the author's explicit written permission.

Confidential information may be disclosed when required by applicable law or when necessary to address a substantiated research integrity concern, subject to appropriate safeguards.

10. Duties of Reviewers

10.1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer review assists editors in assessing the quality, originality, validity, and relevance of submitted manuscripts. Reviewers should provide constructive feedback that helps authors improve their work.

10.2. Promptness

Reviewers who are unable to complete a review within the requested period, or who feel unqualified to evaluate the manuscript, should promptly notify the editor and decline the invitation where appropriate.

10.3. Confidentiality

Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not share, reproduce, or discuss them with unauthorized individuals.

10.4. Objectivity

Reviews must be objective, respectful, and supported by clear reasoning. Personal criticism of authors is inappropriate.

10.5. Acknowledgment of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited and notify the editor of substantial similarities or overlaps with other works of which they are aware.

10.6. Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers must disclose relevant competing interests and decline assignments where their impartiality could reasonably be compromised by financial, professional, personal, or institutional relationships.

11. Duties of Authors

11.1. Reporting Standards

Authors must present an accurate account of their research and an objective discussion of its significance. Research data, methods, results, and interpretations must be reported honestly and transparently.

Fabricated, falsified, or knowingly misleading statements are unacceptable.

11.2. Data Access and Retention

Authors should retain research data and supporting records for a reasonable period, subject to applicable ethical, legal, privacy, and institutional requirements.

Where appropriate and practicable, authors may be asked to provide relevant data or documentation to support editorial assessment or the verification of published findings.

11.3. Originality and Plagiarism

Authors must ensure that submitted manuscripts are original and that all ideas, words, data, and materials derived from other sources are appropriately acknowledged.

All submissions are subject to the journal's plagiarism policy and relevant editorial screening procedures.

11.4. Multiple or Concurrent Submission

Authors must not submit the same manuscript simultaneously to more than one journal. Manuscripts must not contain previously published material presented as original work without proper acknowledgment and justification.

11.5. Authorship and Contributions

Authorship must reflect genuine scholarly contributions. All listed authors must satisfy the journal's authorship criteria, approve the submitted version, and accept responsibility for their contributions.

Individuals who have contributed to the work but do not meet the authorship criteria should be acknowledged appropriately where their permission has been obtained.

11.6. Disclosure of Funding and Competing Interests

Authors must disclose relevant funding sources and financial or non-financial competing interests that could reasonably be perceived as influencing their research or its interpretation.

11.7. Fundamental Errors in Published Work

Authors who discover a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work must promptly notify the editorial office and cooperate in determining whether a correction, Expression of Concern, or retraction is necessary.

11.8. Use of Artificial Intelligence

Authors remain responsible for the accuracy, originality, and integrity of their manuscripts, including content developed with the assistance of artificial intelligence tools.

AI tools must not be listed as authors. Any disclosure required under the journal's AI policy must be made, and authors must verify the accuracy of AI-assisted text, data analysis, citations, and references.

12. Ethical Oversight

Research involving human participants, animals, sensitive personal information, or other ethically significant activities must comply with applicable ethical standards, institutional requirements, and relevant laws.

Where required, authors must obtain appropriate ethical approval and informed consent and provide supporting documentation upon request.

Authors must explain how confidentiality, privacy, participant welfare, and data protection have been addressed when these considerations are relevant to the research.

Research involving potentially hazardous materials, chemicals, equipment, or procedures must identify relevant risks and describe appropriate safeguards where necessary.

13. Publisher Responsibilities

The publisher, the Institute for Research and Community Service (LPPM), Institut KH Abdul Chalim, Mojokerto, Indonesia, supports the journal's commitment to ethical publishing and academic integrity.

The publisher is responsible for supporting appropriate editorial systems and procedures, while respecting editorial independence. Commercial, institutional, or other non-academic considerations must not improperly determine whether a manuscript is accepted, rejected, corrected, or retracted.

The publisher will cooperate with the editorial team in addressing substantiated concerns about publication ethics and maintaining the integrity of the scholarly record.

14. Contact Information

Questions, complaints, or reports concerning publication ethics and research integrity may be directed to the editorial office of Al-Mada: Jurnal Agama, Sosial, dan Budaya.

Email: almada@uac.ac.id

The journal will assess concerns in accordance with its editorial policies and applicable principles of publication ethics. Where appropriate, the journal will follow relevant guidance issued by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

COPE resources: