Publication Ethics

Exegesis: Journal of Qur'anic Studies is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics, intellectual integrity, and scholarly quality. Ethical behavior is expected from all participants in the publishing ecosystem: authors, editors, peer reviewers, and the publisher. The following ethical framework outlines the core obligations and responsibilities of each party.

1. Responsibilities of Editors

  • Editorial Independence and Publishing Decisions: The Editor-in-Chief, supported by the Editorial Board, retains ultimate responsibility for selecting which submitted manuscripts will be published. Acceptance decisions are guided purely by academic merit, originality, rigor, and alignment with the journal's focus, regardless of the authors' race, gender, institutional affiliation, or political beliefs.
  • Impartiality and Peer Review Management: Editors oversee an objective double-blind review process. They ensure fair evaluation without bias and maintain strict anonymity between authors and reviewers throughout the editorial workflow.
  • Confidentiality: Editors and editorial staff are strictly prohibited from sharing information about submitted manuscripts with anyone other than the corresponding author, assigned reviewers, and the publisher.
  • Conflict of Interest and Usage of Material: Editors may not use unpublished content or findings from a submitted manuscript for their own research without explicit, written consent from the author.

2. Responsibilities of Authors

  • Originality and Academic Integrity: Authors must submit fully original works. Proper citation and attribution are required for any external ideas, text, or data utilized. Plagiarism in all forms, including verbatim copying, paraphrasing without attribution, and self-plagiarism is unacceptable.
  • Singular Submission: Submitting the same manuscript simultaneously to multiple journals, or publishing redundant research describing identical findings across different venues, is considered unethical behavior.
  • Authorship Qualifications: Authorship must be restricted to individuals who made substantial intellectual contributions to the study's design, analysis, or execution. The corresponding author must ensure all co-authors have reviewed, approved, and consented to the final manuscript submission.
  • Disclosure of Sources and Support: Authors are required to declare all funding sources, institutional backing, and relevant conflicts of interest. Private communications or confidential data must not be cited without formal permission.
  • Correction of Errors: If an author identifies significant errors or inaccuracies in their published article, they are obligated to promptly inform the editorial team and collaborate on issuing an erratum, correction, or retraction.

3. Responsibilities of Peer Reviewers

  • Scholarly Contribution: Reviewers assist the editorial board in making informed decisions and offer constructive, detailed feedback to help authors enhance the quality and clarity of their manuscripts.
  • Timeliness: Selected reviewers who feel unequipped to evaluate a manuscript or foresee delays in completing the review within the requested timeframe must decline the invitation immediately to allow alternative reviewer assignments.
  • Confidentiality: Manuscripts received for review are confidential documents and must not be shared, discussed, or distributed with third parties without prior authorization from the handling editor.
  • Objectivity and Constructive Feedback: Reviews must be executed impartially. Personal comments or ad hominem critiques are strictly improper. Evaluation must be grounded in academic rigor, supported by clear reasoning and literature evidence.
  • Disclosure of Conflicts: Reviewers must recuse themselves from evaluating manuscripts where competitive, collaborative, financial, or personal relationships with any author or institution create a conflict of interest.

4. Screening and Manuscript Withdrawal Policy

  • Similarity and Plagiarism Check: All incoming submissions undergo automated similarity screening prior to peer review. Submissions revealing excessive similarity, uncredited borrowing, or fraudulent data will be rejected immediately.
  • Withdrawal Guidelines: Authors cannot withdraw a manuscript after the peer-review process has officially started, unless a formal written appeal outlining valid academic or legal grounds is submitted and approved by the Editor-in-Chief. Unauthorized withdrawals aimed at submitting the paper elsewhere will be flagged as academic misconduct.