Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement
Tanfidziya is a journal aims to be a leading peer-reviewed platform and anauthoritative source of information. We publish original research papers, reviewarticles, and case studies focused on Arabic Education and Islamic guidance as wellas related topics that have neither been published elsewhere in any language nor isit under review for publication anywhere. This following statement clarifies theethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in thisjournal, including the author, the editor, the reviewer, and the publisher.
Duties of Authors
1.Reporting Standards:
Authors should present an accurate account of theoriginal research performed as well as an objective discussion of itssignificance. Researchers should present their results honestly and withoutfabrication, falsification or inappropriate data manipulation. A manuscriptshould contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicatethe work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethicalbehavior and are unacceptable. Manuscripts should follow the submissionguidelines of the journal.
2.Originality and Plagiarism:
Authors must ensure that they have writtenentirely original work. The manuscript should not be submitted concurrentlyto more than one publication unless the editors have agreed to co-publication.Relevant previous work and publications, both by other researchers and theauthors’ own, should be properly acknowledged and referenced. The primaryliterature should be cited where possible. Original wording taken directly frompublications by other researchers should appear in quotation marks with theappropriate citations.
3. Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publications:
The Author should notin general submit the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently.It is also expected that the author will not publish redundant manuscripts or manuscripts describing same research in more than one journal. Submittingthe same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutesunethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Multiple publicationsarising from a single research project should be clearly identified as such andthe primary publication should be referenced
4. Acknowledgment of Sources:
Authors should acknowledge all sources ofdata used in the research and cite publications that have been influential indetermining the nature of the reported work. Proper acknowledgment of thework of others must always be given.
5. Authorship of the Paper:
The authorship of research publications shouldaccurately reflect individuals’ contributions to the work and its reporting.Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significantcontribution to conception, design, execution or interpretation of the reportedstudy. Others who have made the significant contribution must be listed asco-authors. In cases where major contributors are listed as authors whilethose who made less substantial, or purely technical, contributions to theresearch or to the publication are listed in an acknowledgment section.Authors also ensure that all the authors have seen and agreed to thesubmitted version of the manuscript and their inclusion of names as co-authors.
6. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest:
All authors should clearly disclose intheir manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest thatmight be construed to influence the results or interpretation of theirmanuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should bedisclosed.
7. Fundamental Errors in Published Works:
If the author discovers asignificant error or inaccuracy in the submitted manuscript, then the authorshould promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with theeditor to retract or correct the paper.
Duties of Editor
1. Publication Decisions:
Based on the review report of the editorial board,the editor can accept, reject, or request modifications to the manuscript. Thevalidation of the work in question and its importance to researchers andreaders must always drive such decisions. The editors may be guided by thepolicies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legalrequirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringementand plagiarism. The editors may confer with other editors or reviewers inmaking this decision. Editors have to take responsibility for everything theypublish and should have procedures and policies in place to ensure the qualityof the material they publish and maintain the integrity of the publishedrecord.

2.Review of Manuscripts:
Editor must ensure that each manuscript is initiallyevaluated by the editor for originality. The editor should organize and usepeer review fairly and wisely. Editors should explain their peer reviewprocesses in the information for authors and also indicate which parts of thejournal are peer reviewed. The Editor should use appropriate peer reviewersfor papers that are considered for publication by selecting people withsufficient expertise and avoiding those with conflicts of interest.
3.Fair Play:
The editor must ensure that each manuscript received by thejournal is reviewed for its intellectual content without regard to sex, gender,race, religion, citizenship, etc. of the authors. An important part of theresponsibility to make fair and unbiased decisions is the upholding of theprinciple of editorial independence and integrity. Editors are in a powerfulposition by making decisions on publications, which makes it very importantthat this process is as fair and unbiased as possible.
4.Confidentiality:
The editor must ensure that information regardingmanuscripts submitted by the authors is kept confidential. Editors shouldcritically assess any potential breaches of data protection and patientconfidentiality. This includes requiring properly informed consent for theactual research presented, consent for publication where applicable.
5.Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest:
The editor of the Journal will not useunpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript for his ownresearch without written consent of the author. Editors should not be involvedin decisions about papers in which they have a conflict of interest
Duties of Reviewers
1.Confidentiality:
Information regarding manuscripts submitted by authorsshould be kept confidential and be treated as privileged information. Theymust not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by theeditor.
2.Acknowledgment of Sources:
Reviewers must ensure that authors haveacknowledged all sources of data used in the research. Reviewers shouldidentify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Anystatement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previouslyreported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. The reviewersshould notify the journal immediately if they come across any irregularities,have concerns about ethical aspects of the work, are aware of substantialsimilarity between the manuscript and a concurrent submission to anotherjournal or a published article, or suspect that misconduct may have occurredduring either the research or the writing and submission of the manuscript;reviewers should, however, keep their concerns confidential and notpersonally investigate further unless the journal asks for further informationor advice.

3.Standards of Objectivity:
Review of submitted manuscripts must be doneobjectively and the reviewers should express their views clearly withsupporting arguments. The reviewers should follow journals’ instructions onthe specific feedback that is required of them and unless there are goodreasons not to. The reviewers should be constructive in their reviews andprovide feedback that will help the authors to improve their manuscript. Thereviewer should make clear which suggested additional investigations areessential to support claims made in the manuscript under consideration andwhich will just strengthen or extend the work
4.Disclosure and Conflict of Interest:
Privileged information or ideasobtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used forpersonal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in whichthey have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, orother relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, orinstitutions connected to the papers. In the case of the double-blind review, ifthey suspect the identity of the author(s) notify the journal if this knowledgeraises any potential conflict of interest.
5.Promptness:
The reviewers should respond in a reasonable time-frame. Thereviewers only agree to review a manuscript if they are fairly confident theycan return a review within the proposed or mutually agreed time-frame,informing the journal promptly if they require an extension. In the event thata reviewer feels it is not possible for him/her to complete review ofthe manuscript within stipulated time then this information must becommunicated to the editor so that the manuscript could be sent to anotherreviewer.