Research Misconduct

JSQ: Jurnal Studi Al-Qur'an

JSQ takes every allegation of research and publication misconduct seriously, whether it concerns a submitted manuscript or a published article. All cases are handled fairly, confidentially, and in line with the guidance and flowcharts of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Guiding Principles

Allegations are assessed on evidence, not on reputation or assumption.
Authors are presumed to have acted in good faith and are always given the opportunity to respond.
Whistle-blowers acting in good faith are protected, and their identity is kept confidential.
JSQ assesses the integrity of content; formal investigation of researchers is the responsibility of their institutions.

1. What Constitutes Research Misconduct

Misconduct includes, but is not limited to:

Fabrication: Inventing data, participants, interviews, sources, or references.
Falsification: Manipulating data, images, or quotations, or selectively omitting results. This includes altering Qur'anic verses, tafsir, or hadith texts, or misattributing a hadith or interpretation to a source.
Plagiarism: Using another person's ideas, words, or work without proper attribution, including paraphrasing without citation, translation plagiarism (e.g., from Arabic or Indonesian into English), and reuse of one's own published work without citation.
Duplicate or Simultaneous Submission: Publishing or submitting the same or substantially overlapping work in more than one journal.
Authorship Misconduct: Gift, guest, ghost, or purchased authorship, or changing the author list without the agreement of all authors.
Undisclosed Conflicts of Interest: Failing to declare interests that could influence the research or its interpretation.
Ethical Violations: Research with human participants (e.g., students or santri) conducted without informed consent or without meeting the Ethical Clearance requirements, or breaches of confidentiality.
Citation and Peer-Review Manipulation: Citation stacking, coercive citation, fake reviewer suggestions, or other attempts to compromise the review process.
Paper-Mill Activity: Buying, selling, or brokering manuscripts or authorship.
Misuse of Generative AI: Undisclosed AI use, or using AI to generate data, results, or non-existent references (see AI Policy).

Note: Honest errors and legitimate differences in interpretation, including differing exegetical views, do not by themselves constitute misconduct, although a correction may still be required.

2. Prevention and Detection

Author Declarations: At submission, authors confirm originality, agreement of all authors, conflicts of interest, funding, ethical approval, and any use of AI.
Similarity Check: Every manuscript is screened before review and before publication. The maximum accepted similarity is 20% (see Plagiarism Screening). A low score does not rule out plagiarism, and a high score is not proof of it.
Editorial Checks: Editors check for inaccurate Qur'anic or hadith citations, non-existent references, data anomalies, and overlap with the authors' previous publications.
Data on Request: Editors may ask for raw data, anonymized interview transcripts, instruments, or ethical clearance documents at any stage.

3. Reporting an Allegation

Anyone may raise a concern, including readers, reviewers, editors, co-authors, and institutions. Please email the Editor-in-Chief at jurnalstudialquran@unj.ac.id with the subject line "Research integrity concern – [Manuscript ID or DOI]". Include a clear description of the concern and specific supporting evidence.

Anonymous reports are considered if they contain specific, verifiable evidence.
Confidentiality: The identity of the person reporting is not disclosed to the authors without consent.
Bad-faith allegations that are knowingly false or malicious are themselves treated as misconduct.

4. Handling Procedure

a. Submitted Manuscripts (Before Publication)

The review or production process is paused, and the Editor-in-Chief is informed.
Editors document the evidence and distinguish minor problems (e.g., limited overlap or missing citations) from serious ones (e.g., substantial plagiarism, fabricated data, or duplicate submission).
The corresponding author is contacted neutrally, with the evidence, and asked to respond within 14–30 days.
If the response is satisfactory, review resumes. Minor problems (e.g., a few missing citations within the 20% similarity limit) are returned for correction. Plagiarism, similarity above 20%, other serious problems, unsatisfactory responses, or no response lead to rejection or withdrawal of the manuscript and possible further action.

b. Published Articles

The report is acknowledged within 7 working days and assessed for credibility within 14 days.
The authors are asked for an explanation and supporting materials within 30 days.
If the explanation is unsatisfactory or the authors do not respond, the case is referred to their institution(s). An Expression of Concern may be published while the matter is pending.
Based on the evidence, the editors decide to take no action, publish a correction, or retract the article, in line with the Retraction and Corrections Policies. All parties are informed of the outcome.

5. Allegations Against Reviewers or Editors

Misconduct by reviewers or editors includes breaching manuscript confidentiality, using unpublished information for personal advantage, uploading manuscripts to AI tools without permission, and failing to declare conflicts of interest. Concerns about reviewers and editors are handled by the Editor-in-Chief. Concerns about the Editor-in-Chief are handled by a senior editorial board member or the publisher, LPPM Universitas Negeri Jakarta. The person concerned takes no part in handling the case.

6. Outcomes and Sanctions

Actions are proportionate to the seriousness of the case, whether it was intentional, and whether it was repeated. One or more of the following may apply:

No action, if the allegation is not substantiated
A letter of explanation and education to the authors
Required revision, rejection, or withdrawal of the manuscript
Correction, expression of concern, or retraction of a published article
Notification of the authors' institution(s), funders, or other affected journals
A ban on submissions for two to five years for serious or repeated misconduct
Removal of a reviewer or editor from the journal

7. Confidentiality and Appeals

Case information is shared only with those who need to know. Authors are not publicly identified unless misconduct has been established and a public notice is needed to correct the record. Authors may appeal a decision within 30 days by writing to the Editor-in-Chief with new evidence. Appeals are reviewed by an editor not involved in the original decision. Case records are kept confidentially for at least five years.