Research Ethics

Publication Ethics

The Jordan Journal of Islamic Studies is a peer-reviewed international journal funded by the Scientific Research and Innovation Support Fund – Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research – Jordan. This statement clarifies the ethical behavior of all parties involved in publishing an article in this journal, including the author, the chief editor, the Editorial Board, the peer-reviewer, and the publisher (Deanship of Scientific Research, Al al-Bayt University). This statement is based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication

Publishing an article in a peer-reviewed journal such as the Jordan Journal of Islamic Studies is crucial for establishing a coherent and esteemed knowledge network. It directly reflects the quality of authors' work and the organizations that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and represent the scientific method. It is therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in publishing: the authors, the journal editors, the peer reviewers, the publisher, and the society.  

Deanship of Scientific Research, Al al-Bayt University, as the publisher of the Jordan Journal of Islamic Studies, takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing extremely seriously, and the Journal recognizes its ethical and other responsibilities. The Journal policy is committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint, or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. In addition, the Deanship of Scientific Research, Al al-Bayt University, and the Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful and
necessary.

Publication decisions

The editor of the Jordan Journal of Islamic Studies 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 consult other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Objectivity

An editor at any time evaluates 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 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 dealt with 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 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 behavior and are unacceptable.

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 (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

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 behavior and is unacceptable.

Acknowledgment 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, analysis, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included in 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.

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.

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, the author should promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

Plagiarism Checker

The Jordan Journal of Islamic Studies uses Turnitin's plagiarism detection software to detect similarities between article manuscripts and the final versions of articles ready for publication. A maximum of 30% similarity is allowed in the submitted papers. If we find more than 30% similarity, the article will be returned to the author for correction and resubmission.

Papers must be original, unpublished, and not pending publication elsewhere. Any material taken verbatim from another source needs to be clearly identified as different from the present original text by (1) indentation, (2) use of quotation marks, and (3) identification of the source.

Any text of an amount exceeding fair use standards (herein defined as more than two or three sentences or the equivalent thereof) or any graphic material reproduced from another source requires permission from the copyright holder and, if feasible, the original author(s) and also requires identification of the source; e.g., previous publication.

When plagiarism is identified, the Editor in Chief is responsible for the review of this paper and will agree on measures according to the extent of plagiarism detected in the paper, in agreement with the following guidelines:

Level of Plagiarism

Minor Plagiarism

A small sentence or short paragraph of another manuscript is plagiarized without any significant data or ideas taken from the other papers or publications.

Punishment: A warning is given to the authors and a request to change the manuscript and properly cite the original sources.

Intermediate Plagiarism

A significant data, paragraph, or sentence of an article is plagiarized without proper citation to the original source.

Punishment: The submitted article is automatically rejected.

Severe Plagiarism

A large portion of an article is plagiarized, which involves reproducing original results (data, formulations, equations, laws, statements, etc.), ideas, and methods presented in other publications.

Punishment: The paper is automatically rejected, and the authors are forbidden to submit further articles to the journal.

 

Statement on the Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI)

For Authors

JJIS recognizes that generative AI can improve the efficiency of scientific writing by enhancing language, grammar, structure, and generating references, text, images, or other content. JJIS does not allow the declaration of (co)authorship involving generative AI.

Authors should also keep in mind that they are fully responsible for any improper use of AI tools or services. Consequently, they need to be aware of potential risks such as producing factually incorrect texts or references, plagiarism, fabrication, and biases, and must carefully review and edit the final output.

JJIS will not reject submissions solely because they disclose the use of generative AI. However, if the Editor finds that AI was used without disclosure during the submission process, or if AI is used improperly—such as producing inaccurate content, plagiarism, or incorrect attribution to sources—the Editor reserves the right to reject the submission at any stage of publication.

In any case, JJIS requires authors to declare their use of generative AI by including a statement in a separate section before the references of the manuscript prior to submitting it to the journal. The following text should be used for this declaration.

During the preparation of this work, the author(s) utilized [the AI TOOL / SERVICE] to [REASON]. The author(s) confirm that they reviewed and edited the final output as necessary and assume full responsibility for the published manuscript’s content.

 

For Reviewers

Peer review is a human-centered academic responsibility. Generative AI or AI-assisted tools should not be used to evaluate scientific work or support review decisions, as these methods may produce inaccurate, incomplete, or biased assessments and might threaten author confidentiality, intellectual property rights, or data privacy. Reviewers are fully responsible for the integrity, accuracy, and originality of their reports.

 

For Editors

Editorial review and decision-making are human responsibilities. Generative AI should not be employed to assess scientific content, make judgments, or influence editorial decisions, because these technologies may generate inaccurate, incomplete, or biased results. Editors maintain full responsibility for the integrity and results of the editorial process.

JJIS maintains strict confidentiality during the editorial review of submitted manuscripts. Editors must not upload any part of a submission or related correspondence (including decision or notification letters) to generative AI tools; doing so might compromise author confidentiality, intellectual property rights, or data privacy.