Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

The Rosyada Journal Editorial received articles and book reviews related to our scope in Counseling, Parenting, Psychotherapy and Islamic Psychology.


Section Policies


Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process

Every article published in the Rosyada Journal through the process of double-blind peer-review by peer-reviewer of Rosyada Journal.

Articles submitted are reviewed by the editorial team as the initial process. Editorial team will evaluate the feasibility of the content, focus, and methodology in the article. The articles are then sent to one reviewer at the position Blind Review. Notes from reviewer then sent back to the author to be adapted to the standards of journal writing. Decision of the revised manuscript will be re-evaluated in the meeting of the editorial board. Later, the decision of editor in  the final meeting will be informed to the author.

Editor of Rosyada Journal responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted must be published. Validation of these works and their importance for researchers and readers should always push the decision. The editor can be guided by a policy board of editors of the journal and is limited by law as to be enforced regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism (plagiarism). Editors can confer with other editors or the assessment team in making this decision



Publication Frequency

Rosyada: Islamic Guidance and Counseling is scheduled for publication two times a year, in June and December



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

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Rosyada Journal is a national journal with a peer-reviewed. This journal is published twice a year online by the Faculty of Ushuluddin, Adab dan Dakwah IAIN Ponorogo. This statement explains all parties’ ethical behavior in publishing articles in Rosyada Journal, including authors, editors, and reviewers. This statement is based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Ethical Guidelines Publishing

Article publication in Rosyada journal is an essential building block in developing a coherent network of knowledge and respect. This is a direct reflection of the quality of work of authors and institutions that support them. The articles that were reviewed support and contain the scientific method. Therefore, this is important to approve standard ethical behavior that was hoped to all parties involved in publishing, they are authors, editors, reviewer, publishers, and society.

Ushuluddin, Adab dan Dakwah Faculty IAIN Ponorogo as Rosyada Journal publisher is responsible for escorting all published processes seriously and recognizes responsibility ethic and other responsibilities. Institutions, in addition to being committed to ensuring that reprint advertising and other commercial revenues have no impact or influence on editorial decisions, are also committed to assisting in communication with journal managers and/or other publishers if viewed as useful and necessary.

Publishing Decision

The editor of Rosyada journal is responsible for deciding which articles to publish. The validation of that article and its importance to the researcher and reader should always drive the decision. Editors can be guided by the policies of the journal's board of editors and limited by legal provisions as to be enforced regarding defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. Editors can consult with other editors or assessment teams in making this decision.

Fair Treatment

Editors always judge the manuscript based on its intellectual content regardless of the author's race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, nationality, or political philosophy.


Editors may not disclose any information about the manuscript submitted except to the author, editor, reviewer, and publisher.

Notices and Conflicts of Interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in submitted manuscripts may not be used in the editor's research without the author's agreement written consent.

Contributions to Editorial Decision

Assessment from the reviewer helps an editor in making the editorial decision. Besides that, editorial communication with authors can help the author to improve their writing.


Any selected reviewer who feels unqualified to assess the research reported in the manuscript or knows that his or her quick review will be unlikely to have to notify the editor and free himself from the assessment process.


Every manuscript accepted for judging should be treated as a confidential document. That document cannot be presented or discussed with others except unless authorized by the editor.

Objectivity Standards

Review processes or assessments must be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is not justified. Appraisers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Source Recognition

Assessors must identify relevant published work that is not cited by the author. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument has been previously reported must be accompanied by a relevant quote. An assessor should also ask the editor to pay attention to the similarity or overlap between the assessed manuscript and other published writings.

Notices and Conflicts of Interest

Confidential information or argument obtained through the expert reviewer partners’ assessment should be kept confidential and should not be used for personal interest. Assessors cannot weigh manuscripts where they have interest conflict stemming from relationships or connections of a competitive nature, cooperation, or otherwise with any author, company, or institution related to the written.

Reporting Standard

The author has to present an accurate report from the journal result that was made and an objective discussion about the significance. Main data have to be represented accurately in text. Written text has to include details and enough references to allow others to repeat the research. Fraudulent or intentionally inaccurate statements constitute unethical and unacceptable behavior.

Originality and Plagiarism

Authors have to ensure that they have written entirely original and they have quoted or cited correctly when they have used the research or opinion from others

Double Publishing, Repeating or Concurrent

An author in general should not publish a manuscript that essentially describes the same research in more than one major journal or publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously is unethical and unacceptable behavior.

Source Recognition

Reasonable recognition for others' work should always be given. The authors should cite publications that have an effect in determining the nature of the reported work.

Authorship of Writing

Authorship should be limited to those who make an important contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of reported studies. All persons who make important contributions must be listed as co-authors. If other people are participating in certain important aspects of the research project, they must be recognized or listed as contributors. The right author must ensure that all appropriate co-authors are included in the writing and that all co-authors have seen and agreed to the final version of the writing and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Notices and Conflicts of Interest

Authors have to inform in their manuscript of any financial conflict or another substantive conflict that may be influenced by the result or interpretation of the manuscript. All financial support for the project must be informed.

Fundamental Errors in Published Journal

If the author finds any significant error or inaccuracy in the manuscript so the author should inform the editor or journal publisher promptly. Therefore, the author works together with the editor to retract or correct the writing.