collections_bookmark Focus and Scope

FOCUS

Teosofia: Indonesian Journal of Islamic Mysticism is a journal that provides an international scholarly forum for sustained discussion on Islamic Mysticism from Muslim and other religious perspectives.

SCOPE

The subject covers textual or fieldwork studies of Islamic Mysticism with various approaches. This journal warmly welcomes the contributions of scholars from related fields that consider the following topics:

1. Tariqa or Sufi Orders
2. Living Sufism
3. Eco-Sufism
4. Thoughts and Doctrines of Sufism
5. Histories and Area Studies of Sufism
6. Manuscripts of Sufi
7. Arts and Sufism
8. Sufi Healings
9. Interdisciplinary of Islamic Mysticism

create_new_folder Section Policies

Articles

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

device_hub Peer Review Process

Teosofia: Indonesian Journal of Islamic Mysticism follows a double-blind peer review policy by a minimum of two reviewers. The editors will review these manuscripts according to the journal guidelines. These manuscripts will be systematically processed as follows:

Step 1: Authors will automatically get notification of their submission maximum within 24 hours.

Step 2: The manuscripts will be assigned by the editors within seven days. If the articles submitted to the journal are numerous, it will take more time.

Step 3: The editors will assess whether the manuscripts are following the author guidelines or not. The editors will reject the poor manuscript directly.

Step 4: The manuscripts that need minor revision will be resent to the author. The authors must upload the revised version within one week.

Step 5: The revised manuscripts without the authors’ name and affiliation will be forwarded by editors to a minimum of two reviewers. There are two kinds of review procedures, i.e., by filling in a review form or inserting comments directly on the manuscript. The review process takes a maximum of four weeks.

Step 6: The editor will notify the authors if their manuscripts need revision. The authors must upload the revised manuscript within two weeks. If the revised manuscript meets the reviewers’ suggestion, the manuscript is decided to be accepted for publication (copyediting, layout, and proofreading).

event_note Publication Frequency

This journal is published twice a year (April and November).

copyright Open Access Policy

This journal provides an immediate open access to its content on the principle that makes research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

unarchive 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...

bookmark_border Publication Ethics

Teosofia: Indonesian Journal of Islamic Mysticism published twice a year by Faculty of Ushuluddin and Humanities, State Islamic University (UIN) Walisongo Semarang Indonesia, is a double blind-reviewed journal. It has its online and printed version. This section stresses on ethical conduct related to all parties taking part in the act of publishing any article in this journal, i.e., the author, the editor-in-chief, the Editorial Board, the reviewer, and the publisher.

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement
The publication of an article in Teosofia: Indonesian Journal of Islamic Mysticism is an academically critical edifice in the progress of a comprehensible and esteemed network of knowledge. It echoes the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions which support them. Peer-reviewed articles characterize and represent the scientific methods. It is for that reason important to come to an understanding on principles of ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the editor, the reviewer, the publisher, and the society. Faculty of Ushuluddin and Humanities, as the publisher of Teosofia: Indonesian Journal of Islamic Mysticism, is totally responsible for supervision over all publication stages, and recognizes its ethical and other responsibilities. Publisher has to possess a strong commitment to guarantee that advertising, reprinting and other commercial expenses have no impact or influence on editorial decisions.  

Publication decisions

The editors of the Teosofia: Indonesian Journal of Islamic Mysticism are decision makers in picking which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The authentication of the work and its significance to researchers and readers must always lead to such decisions. The editors may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and controlled by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright violation and plagiarism. The editors may discuss with other editors or reviewers in this regard.

Fair play

Editors in giving any appraisal of manuscripts for their intellectual content must not be based on race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

Confidentiality

The editors and any editorial staff must not make any information known with regard 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 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 editor make editorial decisions and may assist the author in improve the paper through the editorial communications with the author.

Promptness

Any nominated referees who think that they are inappropriate, due to their skill, insight, knowledge etc., to review the research reported in a manuscript or sees it is improbable for it is a quick review should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.

Confidentiality

Any manuscripts received for review must be regarded as private documents. They must not be exposed to or conversed with others except the editor has authorized to do so.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be objectively carried out. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should state their views clearly with 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 which had been previously reported should be accompanied by. Furthermore, a reviewer together with editors has 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 hint found through peer review must be held in reserve off the record and not be used for individual benefit. Reviewers must be objective and should not think through 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

Reports or original research as well as the importance of objective discussion should be presented accurately by the Authors. Primary data should be demonstrated truthfully in the paper. A paper should enclose necessary features 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 should confirm that they have written completely original works, and if the authors have used the works and/or words of others which have been appropriately cited or quoted.

Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication

An author should not put out manuscripts which are in essence the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Doing so is regarded intolerable and violates ethical publishing behavior.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be provided. Authors should refer to and mention publications which have been prominent in defining the nature of the reported work.

Authorship of the Paper

With regard to authorship, it only involves those who have accomplished a major contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have been in the criteria should be put on the list as co-authors. Where there are others who have taken part in certain essential aspects of the research project, they should be approved or recognized on the list as contributors. The corresponding authors are responsible for making sure that all appropriate co-authors and inappropriate ones are taken into account on the paper, and that all co-authors have comprehended 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 probably be understood to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All basis of financial sustenance for the project should be unveiled.

Fundamental errors in published works

It is the author’s duty to promptly report the journal editor or publisher and work together with the editor to withdraw or correct the paper when the author finds a significant mistake or error in his/her own published work.

bookmark_border Allegation of Research Misconducts

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

In cases of suspected misconduct, the Editors and Editorial Board will use the best practices of COPE to assist them to resolve the complaint and address 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 contain such misconduct, a retraction can be published and will be linked to the original article.

The first step involves determining the validity of the allegation and an assessment of whether the allegation is consistent with the definition of research misconduct. This initial step 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 are shared with the corresponding author, who, on behalf of all of the co-authors, is requested to provide a detailed response. After the response is received and evaluated, additional review and involvement of experts (such as statistical reviewers) may be obtained. 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 the scientific record. By responding appropriately to concerns about scientific misconduct, and taking necessary actions based on evaluation of these concerns, such as corrections, retractions with replacement, and retractions, Psikohumaniora: Jurnal Penelitian Psikologi journal will continue to fulfill the responsibilities of ensuring the validity and integrity of the scientific record.

Retraction

The papers published in Psikohumaniora: Jurnal Penelitian Psikologi is considered to retract in the publication if :

1. They have 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. it constitutes plagiarism
4. it reports 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.

bookmark_border Revenue Sources, Advertising, and Direct Marketing Policy

Revenue Sources

The operations of Teosofia: Indonesian Journal of Islamic Mysticism is funded by the State (the Ministry of Religious Affairs Republic of Indonesia), i.e., through Daftar Isian Pelaksanaan Anggaran (DIPA) of Universitas Islam Negeri Walisongo Semarang, Indonesia.

Advertising

Teosofia: Indonesian Journal of Islamic does not accept advertising from any parties.

Direct Marketing

In promoting the journal and the results of publications to the public, Teosofia: Indonesian Journal of Islamic tries not to do things detrimental to other parties (e.g., spreading spam) and to avoid misleading information between prospective authors and publishers

bookmark_border Screening for Plagiarism

The articles submitted to Teosofia: Indonesian Journal of Islamic Mysticism will be filtered using Turnitin, which must be a maximum 20% of similarities.

Plagiarism includes:

1. Word for word plagiarism – borrowing another author’s language word-for-word but not putting the language in quotation marks nor citing it correctly.
2. Source plagiarism – using the idea of others without giving enough recognition or mentioning the source explicitly.
3. Plagiarism of authorship – presenting another author's work as one’s own.
4. Self-plagiarism - authors publishing one article in more than one journal by recycling papers. The important thing in self-plagiarism is that when citing one's own work, the new article produced must have significant changes. This means that the article is a small part of the new articles produced. So readers will get new things, which the author pours over new articles from old articles.