Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

Afkaruna invites scholars and researchers to publish scholarly articles on the study of Muslims and Islamic thoughts, practices, beliefs, institutions, and civilizations that present original findings, ideas, perspectives, or concepts that result from interdisciplinary (either textual, empirical, or digital) research in Islamic studies (with an emphasis on Islamic reform movements and thoughts), area studies (especially Southeast Asia), social sciences, and humanities. The issues are intended for both regional and global readership and publish two times a year (June and December).

 

Section Policies

Articles

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Book Review

Checked Open Submissions Unchecked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

Research Report

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

Determination of the article published in the Afkaruna is carried out through double-blind peer-review by considering two main aspects: relevance and contribution of articles. Every article that goes to the editorial staff will be selected through Initial Review processes by Editorial Board. Then, the manuscript will be sent to at least two reviewers. The double-blind peer-review process is adopted to ensure that the manuscript selection is carried out objectively. Editors and reviewers would provide constructive feedback on the manuscript evaluation results to the author(s). The detailed review process is explained as the following:

1. Before submission, the author must finalize the registration processes.

2. Editor in chief will perform an initial review emphasized the following critical points:

  • Suitability of the draft compared to the focus and scope of the journal
  • Significance and novelty of the draft.
  • Compliance with the author guidelines.
  • Plagiarism checking by Turnitin.
  • Decisions by the editor in chief during the initial review are as follows:
  • Rejected after the peer-review process: The manuscript will be sent back to the author with comments attached to the manuscript.
  • Revision required: The manuscript is sent back to the author with a comment attached. These comments will direct the author to revise a few things before reuploading the document via the OJS system.
  • Accepted for the further peer-review process: The manuscript will be sent to the section editor to be assigned to the reviewers.

4. Next, the section editor will assign each manuscript to at least two reviewers. During the review processes, the manuscript will be reviewed using a double-blind peer-review process.

5. Reviewers will then provide comments with the following recommendations:

  • Accepted
  • Minor Revision
  • Major Revision
  • Rejected

6. The section editor and editor in chief will consider the recommendations and comments of reviewers before making the following decisions:

  • Rejected: the manuscript will not proceed further for publication.
  • Accepted: no revisions to the manuscript.
  • Minor Revisions: the manuscript must be revised according to the comments from reviewers.
  • Major Revisions: the manuscript must undergo major revisions according to the comments from reviewers.

7. After the section editor and editor-in-chief receive the manuscript, it will be sent to copyediting for drafting and editing before being sent back to the author for an overall review.

8. If changes required by authors with major and minor revisions are made prior to sending back to the system, the editor section will determine whether or not to proceed to the next revision process.

9. If the manuscript is rejected by the section editor and editor in chief, the author will be notified that the manuscript failed for publication. This decision is followed by the attached detailed comments.

10. After the layout is complete, the Letter of Agreement (LoA) will be sent to the author along with the final version of the manuscript.


Note :

The manuscript review process for desk evaluation takes one week in maximum. Manuscript that passes this stage can be seen from its status in OJS that is changed from "Awaiting Assignment" to "In Review". Meanwhile, substantive review by section editor and reviewer usually takes four to eight weeks. This review period depends on the editors and reviewers' duration in reviewing the manuscript. If the author(s) does not get confirmation from the Afkaruna for a long time, the author(s) can confirm by email at jurnal_afkaruna@umy.ac.id.

 

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.

This journal is open access journal which means that all content is freely available without charge to users or / institution. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to full text articles in this journal without asking prior permission from the publisher or author. This is in accordance with Budapest Open Access Initiative

Hasil gambar untuk Budapest Open Access Initiative  

Budapest Open Access Initiative

An old tradition and a new technology have converged to make possible an unprecedented public good. The old tradition is the willingness of scientists and scholars to publish the fruits of their research in scholarly journals without payment, for the sake of inquiry and knowledge. The new technology is the internet. The public good they make possible is the world-wide electronic distribution of the peer-reviewed journal literature and completely free and unrestricted access to it by all scientists, scholars, teachers, students, and other curious minds. Removing access barriers to this literature will accelerate research, enrich education, share the learning of the rich with the poor and the poor with the rich, make this literature as useful as it can be, and lay the foundation for uniting humanity in a common intellectual conversation and quest for knowledge.

For various reasons, this kind of free and unrestricted online availability, which we will call open access, has so far been limited to small portions of the journal literature. But even in these limited collections, many different initiatives have shown that open access is economically feasible, that it gives readers extraordinary power to find and make use of relevant literature, and that it gives authors and their works vast and measurable new visibility, readership, and impact. To secure these benefits for all, we call on all interested institutions and individuals to help open up access to the rest of this literature and remove the barriers, especially the price barriers, that stand in the way. The more who join the effort to advance this cause, the sooner we will all enjoy the benefits of open access.

The literature that should be freely accessible online is that which scholars give to the world without expectation of payment. Primarily, this category encompasses their peer-reviewed journal articles, but it also includes any unreviewed preprints that they might wish to put online for comment or to alert colleagues to important research findings. There are many degrees and kinds of wider and easier access to this literature. By "open access" to this literature, we mean its free availability on the public internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself. The only constraint on reproduction and distribution, and the only role for copyright in this domain, should be to give authors control over the integrity of their work and the right to be properly acknowledged and cited.

While  the peer-reviewed journal literature should be accessible online without cost to readers, it is not costless to produce. However, experiments show that the overall costs of providing open access to this literature are far lower than the costs of traditional forms of dissemination. With such an opportunity to save money and expand the scope of dissemination at the same time, there is today a strong incentive for professional associations, universities, libraries, foundations, and others to embrace open access as a means of advancing their missions. Achieving open access will require new cost recovery models and financing mechanisms, but the significantly lower overall cost of dissemination is a reason to be confident that the goal is attainable and not merely preferable or utopian.

To achieve open access to scholarly journal literature, we recommend two complementary strategies. 

I.  Self-Archiving: First, scholars need the tools and assistance to deposit their refereed journal articles in open electronic archives, a practice commonly called, self-archiving. When these archives conform to standards created by the Open Archives Initiative, then search engines and other tools can treat the separate archives as one. Users then need not know which archives exist or where they are located in order to find and make use of their contents.

II. Open-access Journals: Second, scholars need the means to launch a new generation of journals committed to open access, and to help existing journals that elect to make the transition to open access. Because journal articles should be disseminated as widely as possible, these new journals will no longer invoke copyright to restrict access to and use of the material they publish. Instead they will use copyright and other tools to ensure permanent open access to all the articles they publish. Because price is a barrier to access, these new journals will not charge subscription or access fees, and will turn to other methods for covering their expenses. There are many alternative sources of funds for this purpose, including the foundations and governments that fund research, the universities and laboratories that employ researchers, endowments set up by discipline or institution, friends of the cause of open access, profits from the sale of add-ons to the basic texts, funds freed up by the demise or cancellation of journals charging traditional subscription or access fees, or even contributions from the researchers themselves. There is no need to favor one of these solutions over the others for all disciplines or nations, and no need to stop looking for other, creative alternatives.


Open access to peer-reviewed journal literature is the goal. Self-archiving (I.) and a new generation of open-access journals (II.) are the ways to attain this goal. They are not only direct and effective means to this end, they are within the reach of scholars themselves, immediately, and need not wait on changes brought about by markets or legislation. While we endorse the two strategies just outlined, we also encourage experimentation with further ways to make the transition from the present methods of dissemination to open access. Flexibility, experimentation, and adaptation to local circumstances are the best ways to assure that progress in diverse settings will be rapid, secure, and long-lived.

The Open Society Institute, the foundation network founded by philanthropist George Soros, is committed to providing initial help and funding to realize this goal. It will use its resources and influence to extend and promote institutional self-archiving, to launch new open-access journals, and to help an open-access journal system become economically self-sustaining. While the Open Society Institute's commitment and resources are substantial, this initiative is very much in need of other organizations to lend their effort and resources.

We invite governments, universities, libraries, journal editors, publishers, foundations, learned societies, professional associations, and individual scholars who share our vision to join us in the task of removing the barriers to open access and building a future in which research and education in every part of the world are that much more free to flourish.

February 14, 2002
Budapest, Hungary

Leslie Chan: Bioline International
Darius Cuplinskas: Director, Information Program, Open Society Institute
Michael Eisen: Public Library of Science
Fred Friend: Director Scholarly Communication, University College London
Yana Genova: Next Page Foundation
Jean-Claude Guédon: University of Montreal
Melissa Hagemann: Program Officer, Information Program, Open Society Institute
Stevan Harnad: Professor of Cognitive Science, University of Southampton, Universite du Quebec a Montreal
Rick Johnson: Director, Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition (SPARC)
Rima Kupryte: Open Society Institute
Manfredi La Manna: Electronic Society for Social Scientists 
István Rév: Open Society Institute, Open Society Archives
Monika Segbert: eIFL Project consultant 
Sidnei de Souza: Informatics Director at CRIA, Bioline International
Peter Suber: Professor of Philosophy, Earlham College & The Free Online Scholarship Newsletter
Jan Velterop: Publisher, BioMed Central

 

Archiving

This journal utilizes the LOCKSS system to create a distributed archiving system among participating libraries and permits those libraries to create permanent archives of the journal for purposes of preservation and restoration. More...

 

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

DUTIES OF EDITOR

Publication Decisions

For all submitted manuscripts being considered for publication, all editors of Afkaruna: Indonesian Interdisciplinary Journal of Islamic Studies need to make sure that publications undergo peer review by at least two expert field reviewers. It is the responsibility of the Principal Editor to decide which of the manuscripts submitted to the journal would be published. This decision will be based on the importance of the publication to readers, the validation of the publication, the reviewers' comments, and legal requirements currently in force regarding copyright infringements, libel, and plagiarism. This decision can also be made with the Editor deliberating with other reviewers and editors.

Fair Play

The major factors’ editors use to evaluate submitted manuscripts is on the basis of academic merit – clarity, importance, originality, validity, and study’s – as well as its relevance to the scope of the journal without any consideration to the ethnicity, political philosophy, sexual orientation, authors’ race, gender, citizenship, institutional affiliation, or religious beliefs. No government policies or agencies outside the journal determine or influence the decision to publish or edit any publication. Full authority over the timing and the full editorial content of the publication of any content is in the hands of the Principal Editor.

Confidentiality

Under no circumstances should the editor or any member of his editorial staff disclose information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the publishers, corresponding authors, reviewers, potential reviewers, and other editorial advisers as appropriate.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Without the written consent of the author, Editors would not disclose unpublished information about a submitted manuscript to anyone for any reason whatsoever. Every of the privileged information received by the editor from the manuscript received must be kept confidential without any misconduct for personal reasons. For any manuscript where an editor feels that he/she has a conflict of interest, from collaborative, competitive, or other reasons with the author or institution in charge of a paper, another member of the editorial board should be put in charge of it.

Management of Unethical Behaviors

The editors and the publishers should take approachable measures to tackle ethical complaints related to a submitted manuscript or even a published article. Every unethical publishing behavior would be examined even when discovered after a publication. This is why Afkaruna: Indonesian Interdisciplinary Journal of Islamic Studies has intellectual Property rights experts as members of the Ethics Advisory Board.

DUTIES OF AUTHOR

Reporting Standards

Original research authors are required to present an accurate account of their work and the results, followed by an unbiased dialogue about the significance of the work. There should be sufficient details and references which allow replication of the work by others. On the other hand, review articles should be comprehensive and accurate, while perspective pieces or editorial pieces should be identified as such. Any incorrect statements constitute unacceptable behaviors. 

Data Access and Retention

For every submitted paper, authors need to provide connecting raw data for editorial reviews. This would also be accompanied by the provision of public access, and the data used for such paper should be retained for a reasonable time after publication.

Originality and Plagiarism

Every author is required to provide only original content, and it is required that the works and words of others should be well cited and quoted. For whatever form of plagiarism, from paraphrasing and copying another author's paper – without attribution to passing off another person's work as your own, it is regarded as unethical publishing behavior, and this is unacceptable. Every manuscript would be checked using a plagiarism checker – Turnitin – to ensure every article is original and authentic. To make sure you understand, every submitted article would be accompanied by a statement from the author certifying that the publication is free from plagiarism of any form.

Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publications

For papers talking about the same research, publication in more than one journal or primary publication is unacceptable. Therefore, any manuscript that has already been published should not be submitted by any author as this is deemed unethical publishing behavior, which is unacceptable.

Acknowledgment of Sources

For every work of others used by authors, there is a need for proper acknowledgment and also the citing of publications that have prompted the determining of the nature of the reported work. Every privately obtained information – either from third-party discussions, correspondence, or conversation – should and must be must not be reported without the explicit written permission from the source. Under no circumstances should authors make use of information derived in the course of providing confidential information such as grant applications and referring manuscripts except with the written permission of the authors of such works provided in these services.

Authorship of the Paper

Only individuals who have significant contributions in the design, conception, execution, and explanation of the reported study should be highlighted as part of Authorship. Every person who has contributed in one way or the other should be listed as co-authors. Those who have made contributions in practical aspects of the research should be highlighted as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all co-authors have seen and approved the paper's final version agreeing to the submission and resulting publication.

Fundamental Errors in Published Works

Whenever an author discovers a noteworthy error in his/her published work, the author needs to promptly notify the publisher or the journal editor where the paper would be retracted and corrected. If a third-party entity notices the error, the author is required to retract the publication and make the necessary corrections or give the necessary information of the correctness of the edited paper.

Declaration of Competing Interest

Every personal and financial relationship with other individuals and organizations should be disclosed by the author to prevent them from being perceived as trying to unsuitably influence their work. Every financial support source for the research and preparation of your article should be disclosed and the role of any sponsor(s), if any, in the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data in the writing and decision to submit a publication. This should be stated otherwise if the funding source(s) has no involvement in influencing the publication. There must be a declaration of competing interests by authors in their paper template/manuscript.

Image Integrity

The enhancement, movement, removal, obscurity, and introduction of a specific feature in an image is unacceptable. The adjustment of contrast, color balance, and color balance of an image are acceptable if these actions do not obscure or eliminate any information on the original image. The manipulation of an image for clarity is acceptable, but anything other than that would be termed as scient ific, ethical abuse, and this would be dealt with accordingly. Graphic image policies applied by relevant journals, such as providing images as supplementary material or the deposition of images to a suitable repository, should be complied with by authors.

DUTIES OF REVIEWERS

Collaboration of Editorial Decisions

The making of editorial decisions and the improvement of the paper through editorial communication is the job of peer review. This task is one of the most important aspects of the review section of the company.

Promptness

Any selected referee who knows that his/her prompt review would not be possible or feels unqualified to review research should notify the editor and therefore excuse himself from the review and editorial process.

Confidentiality

Every manuscript received for review is a private document and should be treated as a confidential document. It should not be shown or discussed by other experts for any reason whatsoever.

Standards of Objectivity

Every review should be conducted objectively. Every view of the reviewer should be highlighted clearly with supporting facts rather than personal criticisms.

Acknowledgment of Sources

Every relevant and published work not cited by the reviewer should be identified by the reviewer. For every statement that a derivation, argument, or statement has been previously reported, there should be an accompanying relevant citation. It should be brought to the attention of the editor if there is a similarity between the manuscript in consideration and any other publication of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Ideas or privileged information obtained via peer reviews should remain confidential rather than using it for personal advantages. Reviewers should avoid considering manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest resulting from collaborative, competitive, or relationships with other companies, authors, or organizations connected to the papers.

 

Plagiarism Policy

Within Afkaruna: Indonesian Interdisciplinary Journal of Islamic Studies, plagiarism is explicitly interdicted. The Turnitin plagiarism checker will be used to evaluate the similarity of a manuscript to others. Editors will follow up on the results to decide possible cases of plagiarism, and a similarity report will be provided to the authors. The following are some of the actions taken by the Editorial Board, including:

1. Similarity index above 40%: in this case, the article was rejected due to bad paraphrasing or quotation, leading to outright rejection.

2. Similarity index within 10-40%: in this case, the publication is sent to the author for correction and revision. Authors need to provide the correct citation for similar places and the correct paraphrase for the quote.

3. Similarity index less than 10%: corrections or citations may be required, and all outsourced text must be appropriately cited.

In the second and third cases, the authors must carefully revise the article, especially when quoting and paraphrasing. When examining submitted articles, there must be a Turnitin report showing NO PLAGIARISM or less than 10% plagiarism.

 

Copyright Notice

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  • The copyright of the accepted for publication articles shall be assigned to Afkaruna: Indonesian Interdiciplinary Journal of Islamic Studies as the publisher of the journal. The intended copyright includes the rights to publish articles in various forms (including reprints).
  • Afkaruna: Indonesian Interdiciplinary Journal of Islamic Studies maintain the publishing rights of the published articles.
  • Authors are permitted to republish or disseminate published articles by sharing the link/DOI of the article at Afkaruna: Indonesian Interdiciplinary Journal of Islamic Studies. Authors are allowed to use their articles for any legal purposes deemed necessary without written permission from Afkaruna: Indonesian Interdiciplinary Journal of Islamic Studies with an acknowledgment of initial publication to this journal.

 

Creative Commons License

Afkaruna: Indonesian Interdiciplinary Journal of Islamic Studies is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

 

Publication Frequency

Afkaruna: Indonesian Interdisciplinary Journal of Islamic Studies publishes issue bianually in June and December.

 

R-W-C-R-R Policy

ARTICLE RETRACTION

At Afkaruna: Indonesian Interdisciplinary Journal of Islamic Studies, we have a commitment to maintaining the integrity of the academic record, so there are times when there is a need to retract articles. An article would be retracted for the following reasons:

  • If there are major scientific errors, that will invalidate the article conclusion. An example is when there is evidence that that the findings in the article is unreliable either due to an honest error – a miscalculation or experimental error or as a result of misconduct – data fabrication.
  • If the research and resulting findings have already been posted elsewhere without appropriate cross-referencing, justification, or permission – the case of a redundant publication.
  • If there are plagiarism issues – the use of the words used in another publication without giving credit – or inappropriate authorship.

To make sure that retractions are handled to the best practice of publications, and also in accordance with COPE retraction guidelines, Afkaruna: Indonesian Interdisciplinary Journal of Islamic Studies make use of the following retraction process:

  • Any article which requires potential retraction should be brought to the notice of the journal editor.
  • Once this is done, the journal editor would follow the guidelines according to the COPE flow chat – this includes the evaluations of the answers given by the author of the article t certain questions.
  • The editor's findings are then sent over to the Ethics Advisory Board before any action can be taken. This step is put in place to ensure a consistent approach to these situations in accordance with the best practices of the industry.
  • The decision on whether or not the publication is going to be retracted or not is communicated to the author and other relevant bodies such as the Author's institution if necessary.
  • When all this is concluded, a retraction statement is posted online and then published in the next available issue of the journal – we are going to be giving detailed information on this step as we move on.

Note: if the author retains copyright for an article, this does not qualify them for the right to retract it after publication. The integrity of the public scientific record is important, and COPE's Retraction Guidelines still apply in such cases.

ARTICLE WITHDRAWAL

It is not in the jurisdiction of an author to withdraw a submitted manuscript. This is because referees, editors, and publishers have spent a lot of time editing and processing the submitted manuscript leaving the sudden retraction a waste of valuable resources. Before an author submits a manuscript, through our OJS, the author is required to provide the following checklist:

  • If the author requests the removal or withdrawal of his/her manuscript when it is still in the peer-reviewing process, there would be a fine of $150 USD per manuscript.
  • If the author wants to withdraw the article after being accepted for publication, the author would be asked to pay $200 USD per manuscript.
  • If the article has been published as “Article in Press” – articles which have accepted for publication although not formally coming without the complete package – that has errors, or has violated the Journal publishing ethics guideline as viewed by editors, or has been discovered to be a duplicate to another published article, or maybe it has been Withdrawn from the Afkaruna website. The author would be fined a total of $250 USD per manuscript. The term "Withdrawn" means that the article's content has been replaced with a PDF of HTML page stating that the article has been withdrawn.
  • If the author refuses to pay the penalty at any point, the author, alongside any affiliation linked to him/her, would be blacklisted for publication for three years.
  • If there is a request to withdraw a manuscript by the author, an official letter signed by the corresponding agency leader and the author must be sent to the Principal Editor.

ARTICLE CORRECTION

Issuing a correction is considered by Afkaruna: Indonesian Interdisciplinary Journal of Islamic Studies if the following happens:

  • A small section of a reliable publication reports flawed data, which misleads due to an honest error.
  • The Contributor list or Author is incorrect (e.g., a deserving author has been omitted, and likewise, a person who is not worthy of authorship criteria has been included.

Corrections to peer-reviewed content fall into one of these three categories:

  • Publisher correction (erratum): this helps to notify readers of a major error made by a publishing staff that negatively impacts a publication record or the scientific veracity of the article, or the reputation of the Journal or authors.
  • Author correction (corrigendum): this also helps to notify a reader of an error made by an author, which negatively impacts the scientific integrity of a publication record or the reputation of the author of the journal.
  • Addendum: this is where there is an addition to the article by the author to explain inconsistencies and expand the existing work or explain or update the information in the main work.

Deciding whether a correction should be issued is made by the editor of a journal, and this sometimes comes with advice from Reviewers or Editorial Board Members. Handling Editors would contact the Authors of the concerned paper with a clarification request, but the final decision on a correction is required, and if so, which type rests on the editors.

ARTICLE REMOVAL

There might be a need to remove a published article from an online platform in a limited number of cases. This would only occur if an article is defamatory or infringes the legal rights of others, or we have good reason to believe that the publication would cause certain court orders. In such situations, while the metadata of the article will be retained, the text would be will be replaced with another screen, which points out that the article has been removed to prevent any legal complications.

ARTICLE REPLACEMENT

At a point, an author of an original paper may wish to remove or retract the flawed original and replace it with another corrected version. Under these circumstances, the retraction procedure would be followed, with the difference stating that the article retraction notice would contain a link to the – corrected – re-published article alongside the history of the document.