Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

The publication of an article in a peer reviewed journal is an essential model for our journal JOIPAD. It is necessary 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 and the publisher.

PUBLICATION DECISIONS

The editor of JOIPAD is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The editor 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 editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

FAIR PLAY

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.

CONFIDENTIALITY

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Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.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.

PROMPTNESS

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.

CONFIDENTIALITY

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

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 behavior 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 behavior 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.

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.

Allegations of Research Misconduct

Research misconduct includes fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, citation manipulation, and other unethical practices in conducting, reviewing, or reporting research.

JOIPAD: Journal of Islamic Philanthropy and Disaster takes all allegations of research misconduct seriously and handles them in accordance with the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

When misconduct is suspected, the editorial team will assess the allegation, notify the relevant authors, and provide them with an opportunity to respond. Independent experts or the authors' affiliated institutions may be consulted when necessary.

If misconduct is confirmed, JOIPAD will take appropriate action, which may include manuscript rejection, publication of a correction or retraction, and notification of the relevant institution, depending on the severity and nature of the case.

All allegations will be handled fairly, confidentially, and objectively, with due consideration for all parties involved. JOIPAD is committed to safeguarding research integrity, transparency, and the accuracy of the scholarly record.

Post-Publication Discussions and Corrections

JOIPAD: Journal of Islamic Philanthropy and Disaster welcomes post-publication discussions, critical comments, and corrections to ensure the accuracy and integrity of its published content.

Readers may submit comments, clarifications, or concerns regarding published articles to the Editor-in-Chief. The editorial team will assess each submission for its relevance, academic merit, and appropriateness for publication.

Where appropriate, submissions may be published as Letters to the Editor, and the original authors may be invited to respond through a Reply to the Letter to the Editor.

If errors or inaccuracies are identified in a published article, JOIPAD will take appropriate action, which may include publishing a correction, issuing an expression of concern, or retracting the article, depending on the nature and severity of the issue. All post-publication matters will be handled transparently and in accordance with the journal's publication ethics policies and relevant COPE guidance.

Correction, Retraction, and Withdrawal Policy

JOIPAD: Journal of Islamic Philanthropy and Disaster is committed to maintaining the accuracy, transparency, and integrity of the scholarly record. This policy follows the principles and best practices of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and applicable scholarly publishing standards.

1. Correction

If an error is identified in a published article that does not invalidate its findings or conclusions, JOIPAD may publish a correction notice. Examples include typographical errors, incorrect author names or affiliations, and other inaccuracies that require correction. The correction notice will be linked to the original article, which will remain available in the journal archive.

2. Expression of Concern

If credible concerns arise regarding the reliability or ethical integrity of a published article while an investigation is ongoing or remains inconclusive, the Editor-in-Chief may issue an Expression of Concern. This notice informs readers of the concerns until the investigation is completed and a final decision is reached.

3. Retraction

JOIPAD may retract a published article when there is clear evidence that its findings are unreliable or that serious publication or research misconduct has occurred. Grounds for retraction include, but are not limited to:

Plagiarism, including substantial unattributed reuse of the authors' own previously published work.

Duplicate or redundant publication without appropriate disclosure.

Fabrication or falsification of research data.

Serious violations of research ethics.

Major errors that invalidate the article's findings or conclusions.

The Editor-in-Chief will assess the case, provide the authors with an opportunity to respond, and conduct further inquiries or consult relevant institutions or independent experts when necessary.

If retraction is warranted, JOIPAD will publish a retraction notice stating the article's title, authors, reason for retraction, and date of retraction. The original article will generally remain accessible to preserve the scholarly record and will be clearly marked as retracted, including appropriate notices on the article's PDF and online version.

4. Withdrawal

Authors may request the withdrawal of a submitted manuscript before publication by submitting a formal written request to the Editor-in-Chief, explaining the reasons for withdrawal. The request must be agreed upon by all authors.

Withdrawal requests will be assessed by the editorial team, taking into account the manuscript's status and the applicable publication ethics requirements. Withdrawal may be permitted in cases of serious errors, ethical concerns, or other valid reasons. It will not ordinarily be permitted solely to facilitate simultaneous submission to another journal or to circumvent the peer-review process.

Once a manuscript has been accepted or published, withdrawal is generally not permitted. Any subsequent action will be considered under the journal's correction, expression of concern, or retraction procedures, as appropriate.

JOIPAD reserves the right to take appropriate editorial action in cases of unjustified withdrawal or breaches of publication ethics, following a fair assessment of the circumstances.

5. Editorial Responsibility

All cases involving corrections, expressions of concern, retractions, or withdrawal requests will be handled fairly, confidentially, and transparently, in accordance with COPE guidance and JOIPAD's publication ethics policies. The final decision rests with the Editor-in-Chief or the authorized editorial body, as appropriate.