Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

Focus

At-Taqaddum is a journal that focuses on theoretical and empirical studies on continuous quality improvement, either through planning, implementation, internal monitoring and evaluation, self-evaluation, auditing, benchmarking, and dissemination of ideas both in general and in an Islamic perspective.

Scope

Institutional Quality
Organizational and Company Quality
Quality of Governance
Quality of Education
Quality and Scientific Development
Quality of Service and User or Consumer Satisfaction
Standards, Reform, Accountability, Accreditation, Assessment, and Audit

Section Policies

Articles

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process

At-Taqaddum is a journal that implements the peer review process. Each manuscript go through a fair, double blind peer-review process. All manuscripts submitted to this journal must follow focus and scope, and author guidelines of this journal. The submitted manuscripts must address scientific merit or novelty appropriate to the focus and scope. All manuscripts must be free from plagiarism contents. All authors are suggested to use plagiarism detection software to do the similarity checking. Editors check the plagiarism detection of articles in this journal by using a Turnitin software. The research article submitted to this journal will be peer-reviewed at least 2 (two) or more expert reviewers. The reviewers give scientific valuable comments improving the contents of the manuscript. Final decision of articles acceptance will be made by Editors according to reviewers comments. Publication of accepted articles including the sequence of published articles will be made by Editor in Chief by considering sequence of accepted date and geographical distribution of authors as well as thematic issue.

Publication Frequency

This journal published twice in a year

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.

Archiving

This journal utilizes the LOCKSS system to create a distributed archiving system among participating libraries and permits those libraries to create permanent archives of the journal for purposes of preservation and restoration. More...

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

At-Taqaddum is a peer-reviewed journal, available in print and online and published twice a year. This statement clarifies ethical behaviour of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in this journal, including the author, the chief editor, the Editorial Board, the peer-reviewer and the publisher Institute for Quality Assurance (LPM) UIN Walisongo. The article submitted has not yet been published elsewhere, original, unpublished and not under review for possible publication in other journal. This statement is based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

The Guideline for Journal Publication

The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed At-Taqaddum is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. 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. It is therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the society.

Institute for Quality Assurance (LPM) UIN Walisongo as publisher of At-Taqaddum takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing seriously 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.

Publication decisions

The editor of At-Taqaddum is 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. The editors may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Fair play

An editor at any time evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

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.

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.

Duties of Reviewers

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.

Promptness

Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.

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.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees 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 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.

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 c onnected 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.

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 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.

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.

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.

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.

Screen for Plagiarsm

All manuscripts must be free from plagiarism contents. All authors are suggested to use plagiarism detection software to do the similarity checking. Editors check the plagiarism detection of articles in this journal by using a Turnitin software.

Reference Manager

The manuscript that is registered must use the manager's reference application Mendeley

Revenue Sources, Advertising, and Direct Marketing Policy

Revenue Sources

Some of the operations of At-Taqaddum are funded by the State (the Ministry of Religious Affairs Republic of Indonesia), through Daftar Isian Pelaksanaan Anggaran (DIPA) of Universitas Islam Negeri Walisongo Semarang, Indonesia.

Advertising

At-Taqaddum does not accept advertising from any parties.

Direct Marketing

In promoting the journal and publications to the public, At-Taqaddum attempts to avoid actions detrimental to other parties (e.g., spreading spam) and to avoid misleading information between prospective authors and the publishers.

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 at https://publicationethics.org/misconduct and https://www.elsevier.com/about/policies/publishing-ethics.

Retraction

Papers published in At-Taqaddum will be considered for retraction if:

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)
the findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper cross-referencing, permission, or justification (i.e., cases of redundant publication)
they constitute plagiarism
they involve unethical research

The mechanism of retraction follows the Retraction Guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), which can be accessed at https://publicationethics.org/files/retraction%20guidelines.pdf