Publication Ethics

Journal of Educational Inspiration (ALFIHRIS) is an international journal that has gone through a peer-review process. This statement clarifies the ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of publishing articles in this journal as well as allegations of research misconduct, including authors, editor-in-chief, Editorial Board, bestarial partners and publisher (Sekolah Tinggi Ilmu Syariah Nurul Qarnain). This statement is based on the COPE Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication
The publication of an article in the peer-reviewed Journal of Educational Inspiration (ALFIHRIS) is an important building block in the development of a coherent and respected knowledge network. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. Therefore, it is important to agree on the expected standards of ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: authors, journal editors, bestarial partners, ublisher, and the society.  .

Sekolah Tinggi Ilmu Syariah Nurul Qarnain as the publisher of the The Journal of Social Humanities and Education takes its trusteeship over all stages of publishing very seriously, and we are aware of its ethical and other responsibilities. We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprints, or other commercial revenues have no impact or influence on editorial decisions. Sekolah Tinggi Ilmu Syariah Nurul Qarnain and the Editorial Board will assist in communication with other journals and/or publishers if needed.

Alleged Research Violations
Research misconduct means fabrication, falsification, manipulation of citations, or plagiarism in producing, conducting, or reviewing research and writing articles by authors, or in reporting research results. When authors are found to have engaged in research misconduct or other serious irregularities involving articles that have been published in scientific journals, the Editors have a responsibility to ensure the accuracy and integrity of the scientific record.

In cases of alleged misconduct, the Editor and the Board of Editors will use COPE best practices to help them resolve complaints and deal fairly with violations. This will include an investigation of the allegations by the Editorial Board. Submitted manuscripts found to contain such violations will be rejected. In cases where the published paper is found to contain such violations, a retraction may be published and will be linked to the original article.

The first step involves determining the validity of the allegations and assessing whether the allegations are consistent with the definition of research misconduct. This initial step also involves determining whether the individual accused of misconduct has a relevant conflict of interest.

If there is a possibility of scientific misconduct or other substantial research misconduct, then the allegation is presented to the corresponding author, who, on behalf of all co-authors, is asked to provide a detailed response. Once the response has been received and evaluated, additional review and involvement of experts (such as statistical reviewers) may be obtained. For cases where there is little chance of error, clarification, additional analysis, or both, published as a letter to the editor, and often including a notice of correction and improvement in the published article is sufficient.

The Nurul Qarnain College of Sharia Science is expected to conduct appropriate and thorough investigations into allegations of scientific misconduct. Ultimately, authors, journals, and institutions have an important obligation to ensure the accuracy of the scientific record. By responding appropriately to concerns about scientific misconduct, and taking necessary actions based on an evaluation of these concerns, such as correction, retraction with replacement, and retraction, Journal of Educational Inspiration (ALFIHRIS) will continue to fulfill its responsibility to ensure the validity and integrity of the scientific record.

Publication decision
The editor Journal of Educational Inspiration (ALFIHRIS) is responsible for deciding which articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validity of the work concerned and its importance to researchers and readers should always drive such decisions. The editors may be guided by the journal's editorial board policy and constrained by applicable legal requirements regarding defamation, copyright infringement and plagiarism. Editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making these decisions.

Complaints and Appeals
Journal of Educational Inspiration (ALFIHRIS) has a clear procedure for handling complaints against the journal, Editorial Staff, Editorial Board or Publisher. Complaints will be clarified to a respected person in relation to the complaint case. The scope of the complaint covers everything related to the business process of the journal, i.e. editorial process, manipulation of citations found, unfair editors/reviewers, manipulation of peer-review, etc. Complaint cases will be processed in accordance with COPE guidelines. Complaint cases should be sent via email to: humas@stisnq.ac.id

Fair play
Editors at all times evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to the author's race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, nationality, or political philosophy.

Confidentiality
Editors and editorial staff should not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisors, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosures and conflicts of interest
Unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript may not be used in the editor's own research without the written consent of the authors.

Reviewer Duties
Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Peer review assists editors in making editorial decisions and through editorial communication with authors can also assist authors in improving the manuscript.

Timeliness
Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in the manuscript or knows that a prompt review is not possible should inform the editor and excuse himself/herself from the review process.

Confidentiality
Any manuscript received for review should be treated as a confidential document. The manuscript should not be shown or discussed with others unless authorized by the editor.

Objectivity Standard
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of authors is inappropriate. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgment of Sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that 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.

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 consider 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

Reporting standards
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.

Data Access, Retention and Reproducibility
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. Authors are responsible for data reproducibility.

Originality and Plagiarism
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.

Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent 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.

Acknowledgement of Sources
Proper acknowledgement 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.

Authorship and Contributorship of the Article
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.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts 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.

Fundamental errors in published work
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.

Ethical Oversight
If the research work involves chemicals, human, animals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript in order to obey ethical conduct of research using animals and human subjects. If required, Authors must provide legal ethical clearance from association or legal organization. 

If the research involves confidential data and of business/marketing practices, authors should clearly justify this matter whether the data or information will be hidden securely or not. 

Intelectual Property (Copyright Policy)
Journal policy about intelectual property or copyright is declared here.

Peer-Review Process Policy
Peer-Review process/policy is declared here.

Post-Publication Discussions and Corrections
Journal of Educational Inspiration (ALFIHRIS) accepts discussion and corrections on published articles by reader. In case the reader giving discussions and corrections toward a published article, the reader can contact by email to Editor in Chief by explaining the discussions and corrections. If accepted (by Editor in Chief), the discussions and correction will be published in next issue as Letter to Editor. Respected Authors can reply/answer the discussions and corrections from the reader by sending the reply to Editor in Chief. Therefore, Editors may publish the answer as Reply to Letter to Editor.