Publication Ethics Statement
In general, this journal's publication ethics adhere to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
The statement of the scientific publication code of ethics is a statement of ethics by all parties involved in the scientific journal publication process, namely managers, editors, peer reviewers, and authors. The statement of the scientific publication code of ethics is stipulated in the Regulation of the Head of LIPI No. 5 of 2014 concerning the Code of Ethics for Scientific Publications. The Code of Ethics for Scientific Publications essentially upholds three ethical values in publications:
Neutrality, which is free from conflicts of interest in managing publications;
Fairness, which grants authorship rights to those entitled to be authors; and
Honesty, which is free from duplication, fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism (DF2P) in publications.
ETHICAL STANDARDS FOR EDITORS
1. Publication Decisions
The editor of the Journal of Islamic Economics and Business is responsible for deciding which articles to accept for publication. This decision is based on the validation of the article and its contribution to researchers and readers. In doing so, the Editor is guided by the policies of the editorial board and subject to applicable laws regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The Editor may consult with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.
2. Purpose of Evaluation
Editors evaluate manuscripts based on their intellectual content without discrimination based on religion, ethnicity, race, gender, or other factors.
3. Confidentiality
The Editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about submitted manuscripts to anyone other than the author, reviewers, potential reviewers, and the editorial board.
4. Conflict of Interest
Submitted manuscripts must not be used for the editor's personal advantage without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through double-blind review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Editors must decline to review manuscripts if they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
5. Cooperation in Investigations
The editor must take responsive steps if there are ethical complaints about a received manuscript or published article. The editor may contact the author of the manuscript and consider the complaint. The editor may also communicate further with the institution or agency involved in the research. Once the complaint has been resolved, consideration should be given to correcting the publication, retracting, or making other notes.
ETHICAL STANDARDS FOR REVIEWS
1. Contributions to the Editor's Decision
Blind peer review by reviewers assists the editor in making decisions and can assist the author in improving the article through communication between the reviewer and the author. Peer review is an essential component of formal scientific communication and the scientific approach.
2. Timeliness
If an assigned reviewer feels unqualified to review a manuscript or is unable to review it in a timely manner, the assigned reviewer must immediately notify the editor.
3. Confidentiality
Every manuscript received for review is a confidential document. The manuscript must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
4. Objective
Reviews must be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable. Reviewers should express their opinions clearly and with supporting arguments.
5. Completeness and Originality
Reviewers should identify any sources that have not been cited by the authors. Any statements/arguments made should be accompanied by relevant citations. Reviewers should notify the editor of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under review and any other published work of which they have personal knowledge.
6. Conflict of Interest
Unpublished material must not be used for a reviewer's own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts for review if they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the work.
ETHICAL STANDARDS FOR AUTHORS
1. Writing Standards
Authors should present the discussion and significance of the research in the manuscript. Research data should be presented accurately. The article should be sufficiently detailed and adequately referenced to permit others to replicate the work. Articles containing inaccurate data constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
2. Access to Research Data
Authors may be asked to provide raw data for review and should provide public access to such data, if possible, and should retain the data for a reasonable period after publication.
3. Originality and Plagiarism
Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should ensure that all work is original and, if they have quoted the work and/or words of others, this must be properly cited. Plagiarism takes various forms, including passing off another's work as their own, copying or rewriting substantial portions of another's work without citing the source, and claiming research results conducted by others. Self-plagiarism, or auto-plagiarism, is a form of plagiarism. Auto-plagiarism involves quoting or using sentences from one's own previously published work without citing the source.
4. Article Submission Requirements
Authors may not publish the same manuscript in more than one journal. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal is unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
5. Reference Sources
Authors must cite the sources of each article referenced in the manuscript. Information obtained privately, such as through conversations, correspondence, or discussions with third parties, must not be used or reported without the written permission of the source.
6. Authorship
Authors are those who have made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the article. All parties who have made significant contributions to the writing of the article are listed as co-authors. The corresponding author should ensure that all co-authors have been included in the manuscript, and that all co-authors have read and approved the final version of the manuscript, and have agreed to its submission for publication.
7. Published Errors
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in a published article, it is the author's responsibility to notify the journal editor and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper. If the editor receives information from a third party that a work contains a significant publication error, the author is responsible for promptly retracting or correcting the paper to the editor or providing evidence of the originality of the paper.
