Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Hikamia: Jurnal Pemikiran Tasawuf dan Peradaban Islam is a peer-reviewed national journal published online twice a year. This statement clarifies the ethical behaviour of all parties involved in publishing an article in this journal, including the authors, the editor-in-chief, the editorial board, peer reviewers, and the publisher. It is based on COPE's Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Publishing Ethics Guidelines

Publishing articles in Hikamia is an important building block in the development of a coherent and respected knowledge network. It directly reflects the quality of the authors' work and of the institutions that support them. Articles are reviewed to ensure they follow sound scientific methods. All parties involved in publishing (authors, editors, peer reviewers, the publisher, and the public) are therefore expected to uphold the standards of ethical behaviour set out below.

Ma'had Aly Idrisiyyah, as publisher of Hikamia, oversees all stages of publishing and acknowledges its ethical and other responsibilities. The publisher ensures that advertising, reprint revenue, and other commercial income have no influence on editorial decisions, and it assists in communication with other journals and publishers when necessary.

Duties of Editors

• Publishing Decision: The editors are responsible for deciding which submitted articles are published. The decision is guided by the validity of the work and its significance for researchers and readers, by the policy of the editorial board, and by legal requirements regarding defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. Editors may consult other editors or reviewers when making a decision.
• Fair Treatment: Editors evaluate manuscripts solely on their intellectual content, without regard to the authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy.
• Confidentiality: Editors and editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the author, reviewers, potential reviewers, and the publisher.
• Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the author's express written consent. Editors must recuse themselves from manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest.

Duties of Reviewers

• Contribution to Editorial Decisions: Peer review assists editors in making editorial decisions and, through editorial communication with the authors, helps authors improve their manuscripts.
• Promptness: A reviewer who feels unqualified to review a manuscript, or who knows that a prompt review will not be possible, must notify the editor and withdraw from the review process.
• Confidentiality: Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents and must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
• Standards of Objectivity: Reviews must be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers must express their views clearly, with supporting arguments.
• Acknowledgement of Sources: Reviewers should identify relevant published work that the authors have not cited. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument has been reported before must be accompanied by the relevant citation. Reviewers should also alert the editor to any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript and other published articles.
• Conflict of Interest: Confidential information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers must not review manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest arising from a competitive, collaborative, or other relationship with any author, company, or institution connected to the article.

Duties of Authors

• Reporting Standards: Authors must present an accurate account of the work performed and an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data must be represented accurately. A manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements are unethical and unacceptable.
• Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must ensure that their work is entirely original and that the work and/or words of others are properly cited or quoted.
• Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication: Authors should not publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal at the same time is unethical and unacceptable.
• Authorship Criteria: Authorship must be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All who have made significant contributions must be listed as co-authors. Others who have participated in substantive aspects of the research must be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author must ensure that all appropriate co-authors are included, that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version, and that they have agreed to its submission for publication.
• Conflicts of Interest and Funding: All authors must disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed as influencing the results or interpretation of the work. All sources of financial support for the project must be disclosed.
• Fundamental Errors in Published Works: If authors discover a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work, they must promptly notify the editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the article.

Allegations of Research Misconduct

Allegations of research misconduct (including plagiarism, data fabrication or falsification, duplicate submission or publication, and authorship disputes) concerning a submitted or published article may be reported to the editorial office at [email protected]. The editor-in-chief will acknowledge the report, request a written explanation from the authors, and, where necessary, consult the editorial board and the authors' institution. The investigation follows COPE flowcharts. Confirmed misconduct may lead to rejection of the submission, correction or retraction of the published article, and notification to the authors' institution. Reports are handled confidentially.

Post-Publication Discussion

Readers may submit comments or criticism on published articles by e-mail to [email protected]. Comments are reviewed by the editors. Relevant comments are forwarded to the authors for a response, and substantive exchanges may be published as a Comment and Reply in a subsequent issue. Discussion must remain academic and respectful.

Corrections, Retractions, and Expressions of Concern

• Correction: errors that do not affect the conclusions of an article are corrected through a published correction notice, and the article is updated with a link to that notice.
• Retraction: an article is retracted when it contains serious errors, plagiarism, fabricated or falsified data, duplicate publication, or ethical violations. A retracted article remains accessible, clearly marked "Retracted", and is accompanied by a retraction notice stating the reason.
• Expression of concern: issued while an investigation into an article is ongoing.

Decisions on corrections and retractions are made by the editor-in-chief following COPE guidelines.