- Focus and Scope
- Section Policies
- Peer Review Process
- Open Access Policy
- Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement
- Policy of Screening for Plagiarism
- Article Retraction
Focus and Scope
Focus and Scope
Al-Adab is a peer-reviewed journal on Middle Eastern and Islamic Studies. This journal is published by the Arabic Literature Program, Faculty of Cultural Sciences, Universitas Gadjah Mada. Editors welcome scholars, researchers and practitioners of Middle Eastern and Islamic Studies to submit scholarly articles to be published through this journal. All articles will be reviewed by experts before accepted for publication. Each author is solely responsible for the content of published articles.
This journal encompasses original research articles, review articles, and short communications, including:
- Teaching Arabic as a Foreign Language
- Arabic Linguistic
- Arabic Literature
- Arabic Culture
- Middle Eastern Thought
- Middle Eastern History
- Middle Eastern Islamic Culture
- Middle Eastern Islamic History
Section Policies
Articles
 Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
Peer Review Process
Al-Adab reviewing policies are:
All manuscripts submitted to this journal (Al-Adab) must follow Focus and Scope and Author Guindelines of this journal. The submitted manuscripts must fulfil scientific merit or novelty appropriate to the focus and scope of this journal.
All manuscrips submitted to this journal must be written in good English or Arabic. Authors for whom English is not their native language are encouraged to have their paper checked before submission for grammar and clarity. The work must not have been published or submitted for publication elsewhere.
All submitted manuscripts must be free from plagiarism contents. All authors are suggested to use plagiarism detection softaware to do the similarity checking (please use Turnitin to check the similarity). Editors will also check the similarity of manuscripts in this journal by using a Turnitin software.
The submitted manuscripts to this journal will be peer-reviewed at least 2 (two) expert reviewers from Peer-Reviewers Team. The reviewers give scientific valuable comments improving the contents of the manuscript. The review process used in this journal is double blind peer reviews.
Final decision of manuscript acceptance is solely made by Editor in Chief (together with Editorial Board if required for consideration) according to reviewers critical comments. The final decision of manuscript is solely based on the Editor and Editorial Board final review which considering peer-reviewers comments (but not solely by Reviewer).
Publication of accepted articles including the assigning the article to published issue will be made by Editor in Chief by considering sequence of accepted date and geographical distribution of authors as well as thematic issue.
Reviewing process will consider novelty, objectivity, method, scientific impact, conclusion, and references.
The Editor shall inform you of the results of the review as soon as possible, hopefully between 1 - 2 months. Please notice that may be paper submissions to Al-Adab the duration of the review process can be up to 3 months.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 Publication Malpractice Statement
Publication decisions
The editor is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published.
The editor 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 editor 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.
Acknowledgement 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.
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.
Policy of Screening for Plagiarism
Plagiarism screening will be conducted by OJS Editorial Board using Grammarly Plagiarism Checker and CrossCheck plagiarism screening service powered by Plagiarism Checker.Com & Turnitin
Article Retraction
Infringements of professional ethical codes (such as multiple submission, bogus claims of authorship, plagiarism, fraudulent use of data, or the like) is forbidden in Al-Adab. Occasionally, a retraction will be used to correct errors in submission or publication. The retraction of an article by its authors or the editor under the advice of members of the scholarly community has long been an occasional feature of the learned world. Standards for dealing with retractions have been developed by a number of library and scholarly bodies, and this best practice is adopted for article retraction by Al-Adab.
The editor will investigate deeply about the infringements of professional ethical codes. The Al-Adab Editorial Member will notify the Author(s) about the alleged violation along with its proof and offer the options that can be executed by the Author(s). If the Editor is unable to contact the author within the prescribed period, the Editor will discuss with other Editor and Editorial Advisory Board about this problem.
The standard of article retraction in Al-Adab are:
- A statement (letter) of article retraction, entitled "Retraction: (article title)", signed by the Author(s) and/or Editors and (minimum 1) Editorial Advisory Board.
- The retracted letter will be issued by the Al-Adab. Editorial Member in two languages (Indonesian and English).
- The letter of this article (along with evidence, comments, criticism, or request from the member(s) of the scientific community) is placed on the previous page of the article with the same page number as the first page of the article and given the additional code "ed-1" for the first page of the letter and so on (e.g., 56-ed-1, 56-ed-2, etc.).
- The original version of the article will be given a "Retracted" watermark or stamp and placed after the letter. This new PDF file is made to replace the original PDF file article.
- The abstract of the article on the Al-Adab's website is replaced with a statement about retracted of the article because violating the ethical code and/or Al-Adab policy while the keyword of the article is deleted.