Publication Ethics & Malpractice Statement
Articles submitted to AJIS are subject to a rigorous double-blind peer-review process. All articles will be anonymized while under review and all reviews will be treated confidentially. At least two reports per manuscript are collected. A third review will be solicited if the first two differ substantially.
The blind peer review/publication process includes:
- The Author writes a research manuscript and submits it online through the "Open Journal Systems"
- The Editors do the initial screening and assign scholars in their area of expertise for blind reviews
- The Reviewers review the manuscript according to the guidelines provided and verify the quality of the research
- The Reviewers return the manuscript to the Editors with a recommendation to reject, revise or accept it (see below “Editorial decisions are made as follows”)
- The Editors draft a decision and send it to the Author with the Reviewers' feedback
- The Author implements the recommended changes and sends it back to the Editors
- The Editors make a final decision to either reject it or send it to publication
Editorial decisions are made as follows:
- Accept manuscript as submitted without further revisions.
- Accept manuscript after revisions based on reviewers’ comments. Authors shall be given 4 weeks for minor revisions.
- Request major revisions. Only one round of major revisions will be allowed. The revised manuscript needs to address all suggested revisions which should be completed within 8 weeks. Discretionary extensions may be granted in agreement with the Co-Editors. The revised manuscript will be returned to the reviewer for further comments.
- Reject and encourage resubmission: The manuscript has serious flaws but could potentially make an original contribution. Authors will be encouraged to re-submit a fully revised manuscript.
- Reject: The manuscript is academically flawed and makes no original contribution.
Authorship of the article: The authors named on the submitted manuscript must be significant contributors to the conception, design, and interpretation of the research. Any contributors who do not qualify for authorship should be acknowledged and the nature of their contribution to the research clearly outlined. An author submitting an article that has multiple authors must verify that all co-authors have approved the final version of the article and have agreed to its submission for publication.
Originality, plagiarism, and acknowledgment of sources: Authors must submit entirely original works and appropriately quote and/or cite the work and/or words of others. Authors must list all references cited in the manuscript.
Disclosure and conflict of interest: Authors must disclose in their manuscript any financial support received or other substantive conflict of interest that may be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project must be disclosed. Authors must not publish the same research in more than one journal.
Participation in the peer-review and editorial process: Authors will participate in the peer review and editorial process and are expected to collaborate with the Co-Editors in the production of the final published version of their manuscript. They will be expected to implement revisions, where required, and give their approval of the version to be published. The author should not identify oneself in any form in the body of the article, in order to ensure complete anonymity.
Ensuring accuracy and integrity of the article: Authors will be accountable for ensuring the accuracy or integrity of all and any part of their work. They will be expected to provide corrections for any inadvertent errors in published articles. Corrections will be a separate publication linked to the original paper. A note announcing that an updated version was uploaded will also be added to the article and to the abstract page. For more serious errors and malpractice, the article will be retracted. This means complete removal. This measure will be taken only in cases of gross ethical misconduct, such as plagiarism. Potential retractions will be fully investigated by the Editorial Team, who will seek the expert support of the Editorial Board. Final approval of the retraction will be made by the Editor-in-Chief.
Qualifications: Reviewers shall be experts in the relevant fields. Reviewers must hold a PhD or a senior academic post and must have recent publications in the field of the submitted manuscript. Any selected reviewer who feels unqualified to review the manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible must notify the editor and excuse oneself from the review process.
Disclosure and conflict of interest: Reviewers must declare any conflict of interest for the consideration of the Editorial Team. Reviewers cannot have published with the authors in the past five years.
Contribution to editorial decisions: Reviewers assist the Editorial Team in making editorial decisions and may also serve the author in improving the article. The reviewers’ obligations include: (1) indicating the originality and significance of the article to the relevant field; and (2) pointing out any relevant published work not yet cited by the author.
Standards of objectivity: Reviews should be conducted respectfully and objectively. Personal criticism of the author is disallowed. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Confidentiality: Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shared or discussed with others except as authorized by the Editorial Team.
Editorial Team Responsibilities
The Editorial Team: The Editorial Team includes the Editor-in-Chief, Co-Editors, Assistant Editor, Book Review Editor, the Editorial Board, and the International Advisory Board. For the full names and contact details of the Editorial Team, Editorial Board, and International Advisory Board, please visit our website.
The Editor-in-Chief holds ultimate responsibility for the Journal and its quality. S/he is not directly involved in the editorial process, which is the responsibility of the Co-Editors. As the head of the Editorial Team, the Editor-in-Chief will assist the Team with strategic decisions about the Journal's scope, reach, and profile. The initial term for the Editor-in-Chief position is three years and can be renewed.
Editorial Board Members will occasionally be asked to review one or two manuscripts per year. They will be approached for input or feedback regarding the AJIS’s editorial policy and regulations. Their main role is to promote the Journal and raise its profile within the academic community. The initial term for an Editorial Board membership is three years and can be renewed.
Manuscript Review: Once a manuscript is submitted, it is received by the Co-Editors who will: determine whether the manuscript is appropriate and within the scope of the Journal, assign reviewers to assist in the evaluation of the manuscript, coordinate a final editorial decision, communicate with the review team and author, manage revisions and copyediting, schedule accepted manuscripts for final publication, and resolve any issues.
Investigating Misconduct: The Co-Editors shall prevent the publication of articles where research misconduct becomes evident before, during and/or after the publication process. The Journal or its Co-Editors shall not (under any circumstances) ignore, encourage, or knowingly allow such misconduct to take place. In the event the Co-Editors are made aware of any allegation of research misconduct, they shall deal with allegations appropriately. Where such misconduct has been proven at any stage, the Journal shall inform the author and retract the article. Where only minor mistakes have been made, publication of corrections online, or in the following issue in the case of a published article, shall be made.
Involvement and cooperation in investigations: The editors should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published article.
Confidentiality: The editors 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. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
When an article is accepted for publication, copyrights of the publication are transferred from the author to the Journal and reserved for the Publisher. Permission will be required from publishers for any work for which the author does not hold copyright and for any substantial extracts from work by other authors. The copyright holder giving permission may instruct the author on the form of acknowledgment to be followed. Alternatively, we recommend following the style: “Reproduced with permission from [author], [book/journal title]; published by [publisher], [year]”.
Plagiarism is a serious form of academic malpractice. It includes copying text, ideas, images, or data, even from an author’s own publications, without crediting the original source.
All text used from another source must be between quotation marks and the original source must be cited. Additionally, language, concepts, ideas, and interpretations drawing from previous studies must explicitly cite the original source.
If plagiarism is detected during the peer review process, the manuscript will be rejected. If plagiarism is detected after publication, a retraction will be made.
AJIS retains copies of all submitted manuscripts and supporting files. A full archival copy of all publications is deposited in electronic format into xxx
The "American Journal of Islam and Society" (AJIS) is committed to maintaining the highest standards of publication ethics following guidelines that are fully consistent with the COPE Principles of Transparency and Best Practice Guidelines and the COPE Code of Conduct.