Peer Review Process
After submit inventions have made a preliminary review of the manuscript by the editor MUAMALAH. Editor will decide whether the manuscript in accordance with the scope and focus and proper to give to the reviewer. Sometimes, editors may recommend revision before submitting for review. This initial review of activities usually takes a week.
Submissions that pass the initial review will be assigned to at least two reviewers (double-blind peer review). Before the articles review by reviewers, i'ts will be screened on Plagiarism Checker, and Based on the review and paliarism checker, editor will first make editorial decisions. There are five possible editorial decisions (1) the manuscript is accepted, (2) be amended, (3) re-submit, (4) is sent to another publisher, or (5) is rejected.
Typically, the time frame of delivery to the first editor of the average results of 6-8 weeks.
The time to reach a final decision depends on the number of reviews rotation, perceptive writer etc. Typically, the time frame of delivery by an average of 3-4 months a final decision.
The total turnaround time for publishing a manuscript depends (additionally to the factors mentioned above) on the submission date, the journal's publication schedule, authors' adherence to the publication guidelines etc. Reviewed and accepted submissions are published with MUAMALAH after 3-4 months on average.
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.
Publication Ethics of MUAMALAH
This statement clarifies ethical behaviour of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in our journals, including the authors, the editors, the peer-reviewers and the publisher Sharia Faculty Of IAIN Metro. This statement is based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.
Ethical Guideline for Journal Publication
The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed GUIDENA Journal 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 important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the authors, the journal editors, the peer reviewers, the publisher and the society.
Institut Agama Islam Negeri (IAIN) Metro and Department of Guidance and Counseling as publisher of this Journal takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing extremely seriously and we recognize our ethical and other responsibilities. We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. In addition, the IAIN Metro and Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful and necessary.
The editors of the MUAMALAH Journal are 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.
An editor at any time evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.
Duties of Reviewers
Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.
Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
Standards of Objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Acknowledgement of Sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
Duties of Authors
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 behaviour 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
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.
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 manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
Acknowledgement of Sources
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. 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 paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects
If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
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.
Corrections and Retractions
In certain cases when there is a serious error or suspected violations, MUAMALAH will publish a correction and retraction.
In the case of serious errors that affect the article by way of material (but not completely cancel the results), or significantly interfere with the reader's understanding or evaluation of the article, MUAMALAH publish corrections records related to the published article. This article is published will be left unchanged.
In accordance with the “Retraction Guidelines” by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) MUAMALAH will retract a published article if
- there is clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (e.g. data fabrication) or honest error (e.g. miscalculation),
- the findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper crossreferencing, permission or justification (i.e. cases of redundant publication),
- it constitutes plagiarism,
- it reports unethical research.
If an investigation is underway which may result in the revocation of an article MUAMALAH can choose to remind readers to publish an expression of concern.
MUAMALAH: Jurnal Hukum is published twice in a year, January-June Period, and July-December period. Articles can be submitted at any time.