Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

This journal contains writings of research results or theoretical studies related to economics, finance and sharia banking.

 

Section Policies

AL-MASHRAFIYAH VOLUME 2 NOMOR 1 2018

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

AL-MASHRAFIYAH VOLUME 1 NOMOR 2 2018

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

AL-MASHRAFIYAH VOLUME 1 NOMOR 1 2017

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Publishing Ethics

The publication of an article in AL-Mashrafiyah: Jurnal Ekonomi, Keuangan dan Perbankan Syariah is support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the journal editors, the peer reviewers, the authors, the publisher and the society.

AL-Mashrafiyah: Jurnal Ekonomi, Keuangan dan Perbankan Syariah, takes its duties of guardianship all stages of the publishing process and we recognize our ethical and other responsibilities. We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions.

Duties of Editors

1. Publication Decisions:

The editor boards journal are responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions.

2. Fair Play:

The editor shall ensure that the peer review process is fair, unbiased, timely. Research articles must typically be reviewed by at least two external and independent reviewers. The editor must keep a good communication with reviewers..

3. 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.

4. Standard of Objectivity and Competing Interests

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Reviewers should be aware of any personal bias they may have and take this into account when reviewing a paper. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

If a reviewer suggests that an author includes citations to the reviewer's (or the associates') work, this must be for genuine scientific reasons and not with the intention of increasing reviewer's citation count or enhancing the visibility of their work (or that of their associates).

 5. Review of Manuscripts:

Editor must ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated by the editor for originality. The editor should organize and use peer review fairly and wisely. Editors should explain their peer review processes in the information for authors and also indicate which parts of the journal are peer reviewed. Editor should use appropriate peer reviewers for papers that are considered for publication by selecting people with sufficient expertise and avoiding those with conflicts of interest.

 

Duties of Reviewers

Reviewer should review and send the review comments in due time period. If the article is not in your area of interest then revert back to editor so that the other reviewers can be approached.

1. 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.

2. Promptness:

Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the assigned manuscript or unable to provide a prompt review should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process

3. 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.

4. Standards of Objectivity:

Reviews should be conducted objectively. There shall be no personal criticism of the author. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments

5. 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.

6. 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 review 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

1. Reporting Standars:

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 behaviour and are unacceptable.

2. 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, if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

3. Originality and Plagiaris:

The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others this must appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism takes many forms, from 'passing off' another's paper as the author's own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another's paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

4. Multiple 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 behaviour and is unacceptable.

5. 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. Information obtained privately, as inconversation, corres-pondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not beused without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.

6. 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.

7. Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects:

If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript.

8. 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.

9. 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. If the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper.

Above all, matters about journal publishing ethics refer to "Peraturan Kepala Lembaga Ilmu Pengetahuan Indonesia Nomor 5 Tahun 2014 Tentang Kode Etika Publikasi Ilmiah" (The Rules of Indonesian Institute of Sciences Regarding of Code of Scientific Publication Ethics).