About the Journal

Focus and Scope

JOURNAL OF ISLAMIC ART AND ARCHITECTURE (JIAA) is an open access journal that publishes peer-reviewed articles on Art and Islamic architecture. The articles that can be published in this journal is about architecture from the Islamic value perspective. It can discuss:

1. Art and Architecture 
2. Theory in Islamic Architecture 
3. Islamic Values in Architecture 
4. Architectural Design Sustainability
5. Art of Islamic Culture
6. Art of Architecture and Local Wisdom 
7. Art Architecture Heritage

Peer Review Process

Paper submitted in the Journal of Islamic Art and Architecture will be reviewed by some expert of Islamic Architecture from several universities in different countries (double-blind review). It will take for about a month to conduct the review. Every paper submitted will be scanned for plagiarism before it is sent to the reviewer.

To be published in this Journal, a paper should meet general criteria:

• The paper submitted in the journal must be original, unpublished work, and not under consideration for publication elsewhere.
• Provides strong evidence for its conclusions.
• Should be a research result or literature studies in Islamic Architecture field
• Ideally, interesting to researchers in Islamic Architecture field and other related disciplines

Publication Frequency

Journal of Islamic Art and Architecture (JIAA) is published twice a year (April and October).

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.

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statements

Journal of Islamic Art and Architecture (JIAA) is published twice a year by the Department of Islamic Art and Architecture, Faculty of Ushuluddin and Humanities, State Islamic University (UIN) Walisongo Semarang Indonesia as a double blind-reviewed journal. The journal is available online and as printed version. This section highlights the ethical conduct expected by all parties taking part in the process of publishing any article in this journal (i.e., authors, editor-in-chief, editorial board, reviewers, and publisher).

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement 

The publication of an article in Journal of Islamic Art and Architecture (JIAA) echoes the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Each article is peer reviewed. The reviewers critically evaluate its content and check whether it adheres to scientific standards. All parties involved in the publication process must act ethically.  In its role as publisher the Faculty of Ushuluddin and Humanities is solely responsible for supervising all stages of publication and recognizes its ethical and professional responsibilities. The publisher is strongly committed to guarantee that advertising, reprinting, and other commercial expenses have no impact or influence on editorial decisions.  

Publication decisions

The editors of Journal of Islamic Art and Architecture (JIAA) decide which of articles submitted to the journal should be published based on their authentication as original contributions and their significance to the wider research community. The editors and reviewers are guided by the policies of the journal’s editorial board and controlled by such legal requirements as in force regarding libel, copyright violation, and plagiarism. 

Fair play

In giving any appraisal of manuscripts for their intellectual content the editors must not be influenced by ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, citizenship, or the political views of the authors.

Confidentiality

The editors and any editorial staff must not make any information related toa submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Unpublished materials concealed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own research without the direct written approval of the author.

Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to editorial decisions

Peer review helps the editorial team to make their decisions and may assist the author in improving the paper through editorial communications.

Promptness

Any nominated referees who think that they are inappropriate, due to their lack of skill, insight, or knowledge to review the research work reported in a manuscript should notify the editor and excuse themselves from the review process.

Confidentiality

Any manuscripts received for review must be regarded as private and confidential documents. They must not be shared or discussed with third parties except with the editor’s knowledge and approval.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be carried out objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should state their views clearly and present supporting arguments.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Reviewers should recognize and ascertain a relevant published work which has not been quoted by the authors. Relevant citations should be provided for any statement from observation, derivation, or argument that has been previously reported. Furthermore, the reviewers and editors have to be concerned with any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscripts under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Any private data or confidential information found during the peer review must be kept off the record and not be used for individual benefit. Reviewers must be objective and should not evaluate manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the connected authors, companies, or institutions.

Duties of Authors

Reporting standards

Reports or original research should be presented accurately and objectively, and primary data should be demonstrated truthfully. Each paper should include the necessary information and references to allow others to copy the work. Deceitful or significantly inaccurate statements are inexcusable and regarded as unethical.

Originality and Plagiarism

The authors must confirm that they have written completely original works. If the authors have used the works and/or words of others, they must be appropriately cited or quoted.

Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication

Authors must not submit the same manuscript or manuscripts that present in essence the same research work to more than one journal or primary publication. Any such act is not tolerated and deemed as violating ethical publishing behavior.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be provided. Authors must make explicit mention of publications that are prominent in defining the nature of the reported work.

Authorship

Original authorship involves those researchers who have accomplished a major contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of a reported study. All those who meet these criteria should be listed as co-authors. If others have taken part in certain essential aspects of the research project, they should be approved or recognized as contributors. The corresponding authors are responsible for making sure that all appropriate co-authors are properly acknowledged, have viewed and accepted the final form of the paper, and have agreed upon its submission for publication.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

All authors are committed to reveal in their manuscript any financial or other basic conflict of interest that may have influenced the results or interpretation of their research work as presented in the manuscript. All basis of financial sustenance for the project should be unveiled.

Fundamental errors in published worksWhen authors find a significant mistake or error in their own published work, it is their duty to promptly report this to the journal editor or publisher. They must cooperate with the editor to withdraw or correct the paper accordingly.

Allegation of Research Misconducts

Research misconduct refers to fabrication, falsification, citation manipulation, or plagiarism in producing, performing, or reviewing research and in writing it up, or in the reporting of research results. When authors are found to have been involved in research misconduct or other serious irregularities involving articles that have been published in scientific journals, the editors have the responsibility to ensure the accuracy and integrity of the scientific records.

In cases of suspected misconduct, the editors and editorial board will use the best practices of COPE and Allegations of research errors, falsification, and fabrication by Elsevier to assist them in resolving any complaint and addressing the misconduct fairly. This will include an investigation of the allegation by the editors. A submitted manuscript that is found to contain such misconduct will be rejected. In cases where a published paper is found to involve such misconduct, a retraction will be published and linked to the original article.

The first step in such a process involves determining the validity of the allegation and assessing whether it is consistent with the definition of research misconduct. This also involves determining whether the individuals alleging misconduct have relevant conflicts of interest. 

If scientific misconduct or the presence of other substantial research irregularities is a possibility, the allegations will be shared with the corresponding author, who, on behalf of all of the co-authors, will be requested to provide a detailed response. After the response is received and evaluated, additional reviews and involvement of experts (such as statistical reviewers) may be needed. For cases in which it is unlikely that misconduct has occurred, clarifications, additional analyses, or both, published as letters to the editor, and often including a correction notice and correction to the published article, are sufficient. 

Institutions are expected to conduct an appropriate and thorough investigation of allegations of scientific misconduct. Ultimately, authors, journals, and institutions have an important obligation to ensure the accuracy of scientific records. By responding appropriately to concerns about scientific misconduct, and taking necessary actions based on the evaluation of such concerns, such as corrections, retractions with replacement, or retractions, Psikohumaniora: Jurnal Penelitian Psikologi will continue to fulfill its responsibilities of ensuring the validity and integrity of the scientific record.

The explanation of Allegation of Research Misconducts follows the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), and Allegations of research errors, falsification, and fabrication by Elsevier, which can be accessed here.

Retraction

Papers published in Psikohumaniora: Jurnal Penelitian Psikologi will be considered for retraction if:

1. there is clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (e.g., data fabrication) or honest error (e.g., miscalculation or experimental error)
2. the findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper cross-referencing, permission, or justification (i.e., cases of redundant publication)
3. they constitute plagiarism
4. they involve unethical research

The mechanism of retraction follows the Retraction Guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), which can be accessed here.