A guideline of the journal publication code of ethics largely based upon the principles upheld by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). COPE outlines standards for good behaviour and solutions to ethical issues faced by Authors, Editors and Reviewers. The Journal publication code of ethics has been designed to safeguard the integrity of the journal and to ascertain all published materials are of the highest scientific and ethical standard. Authors, Editors and Reviewers can use these guidelines when discharging their task and duties. Any ethical issue and question, which concerns The Journal, can be addressed to the Chief Editor. This code of ethics applies to manuscripts submitted to the Journal. The Editorial Board revises it from time to time.

Code of Ethics for Authors

Originality
Have the responsibility of ensuring only new and original work is submitted.
Must not reproduce work that has been previously published in other journals.
Must not submit any articles that are being reviewed or considered by the journal to other journals simultaneously.
Are only allowed to publish their work elsewhere after receiving a formal rejection from the journal or if their request to withdraw their work is officially accepted by the journal.
Must inform the Chief Editor or the publisher of any inaccuracy of data in their published work so that correction or retraction of article can be done.
Should make significant contributions and be held accountable for any shortcoming in their work.

Plagiarism
Authors should submit only original work that is not plagiarized and has not been published or being considered elsewhere.  Appropriate software may be used by the editorial office to check for similarities of submitted manuscripts with existing literature. Inclusion of fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements are unacceptable. Work and/or words from other publications must be appropriately cited or quoted.

Reporting
Authors should state their results clearly, honestly, and without fabrication, falsification, or inappropriate data manipulation. The methods used in the work should be clearly and unambiguously described so that the findings can be repeated and confirmed by other researchers.

Conflicts of Interest
A statement on conflict of interest must be included in the manuscript if authors receive any support that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Authorship and Collaboration
Name of authors listed in a paper should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the report. Only those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the work must be listed as contributors in the acknowledgement. It is the duty of the corresponding author to ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper. All co-authors must approve the final version of the paper and agree to the version of the paper before submission.

Example:

Authors’ Contributions
This article was the result of a significant scientific contribution in the research done by three authors including in the concept and design of the research article, Zuraini; Methodology, Noraini; Analysis and interpretation of research data, Khadher Ahmad; The authors who made meaningful contributions to the data curation, writing-original draft preparation, writing- review and editing, completion, and final editing, Wahid.

Sumbangan Pengarang
Konseptualisasi, Mohd Farhan Md Ariffin; metodologi, Fadlan Mohd Othman; kesahan, Mohd Nazri Ahmad; analisis formal, Mohd Farhan Md Ariffin dan Ibrahim Adham Mohd Rokhibi; penelitian, Mohd Farhan Md Ariffin; sumber, Ibrahim Adham Mohd Rokhibi; penulisan-persediaan draf asal, Mohd Farhan Md Ariffin; penulisan-suntingan, semua pengarang; pemerolehan dana, Geran Penyelidikan Islam (PP-2030-111). Semua pengarang telah membaca dan bersetuju menerima versi manuskrip yang diterbitkan.

Once the Journal accepts a manuscript for publication, amendments in the authorship in the form of addition, deletion or rearranging the order of the names are no longer allowed. But changes in the authorship (addition, deletion, or rearrangement) can be made during the review process before a manuscript is accepted.

Multiple or Redundant
Authors should not publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research output in more than one journal or primary publication. A similar manuscript should not be submitted to more than one journal concurrently as this constitutes as unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

Code of Ethics for Reviewers

Responsibilities
Must disclose any competing interest before agreeing to review a submission.
May refuse to review any submission due to a conflict of interest or inadequate knowledge.
Review all submissions objectively, fairly, and professionally.
Reveal any ethical misconduct encountered while reviewing to the Chief Editor for further action.
Should ensure the originality of a submission and be alert to any plagiarism and redundant publication.
Must not discuss the content of the submission without permission.
Adhere to the time allocated for the review process. Requests for extension to review the submission is at the discretion of the Chief Editor.

Double blind peer review
The Journal follows a double-blind peer-review process, whereby the Authors do not know reviewers and vice versa. Peer review is fundamental to the scientific publication process and the dissemination of knowledge. Peer reviewers are experts chosen by the Chief Editor to provide assessment of a written research manuscript, with the aim of improving the reporting of research and identifying the most appropriate and highest quality material for The Journal.

Authors should respect the confidentiality of the review process and should not reveal themselves to Reviewers, and vice versa. Reviewers should avoid doing or saying anything that could identify them to the Authors of a manuscript they are reviewing or reviewed. Regular reviewers selected for The Journal should meet minimum standards regarding their background in the research field, publication of articles and formal training.

Reviewers are experts in the scientific topic addressed in the manuscripts they review and are selected for their objectivity and scientific knowledge. Individuals who have a major competing interest in the subject of the manuscript are not appointed as reviewers for such manuscript.

Code of Ethics for Editorial Board

Handling of submitted manuscript.
Chief Editor should evaluate the merit of a manuscript as soon as it is received. An acknowledgement with a reference number must be sent to the Authors once the manuscript is received. Manuscript deemed to be in good order must be sent to reviewers without delay.

Decision Quality
The Chief Editor must provide the Authors with an explanation of the editorial decision on a manuscript. Chief Editor should write high-quality editorial letters that integrate reviewers’ comments and offer additional suggestions to the Author.

Submission by Editorial Board Members
All manuscripts submitted to The Journal undergo a rigid single-blind review process including those received from the Editorial Board members. In addition, when making editorial decisions about peer reviewed articles where an editor is an Author or is acknowledged as a contributor, The Journal will ensure that the affected editors exclude themselves from the publication process including the review process and decision on the manuscript. Although editors are allowed to submit manuscript to The Journal, too many submissions from the Journal’s own Editorial Board are not allowed.

Handling Conflict of Interest by the Editors
When editors are presented with manuscript where their own interests may influence their ability to make an unbiased editorial decision, they should hand over the handling of the manuscript to a suitably qualified editor in the board. The Editorial Board will appoint a suitable member to handle the manuscripts objectively, fairly, and professionally free of personal biases that may affect his/her judgments.

Duties of Advisory Board
Act as ambassadors for the journal.
Continuously support and promote the journal.

Ethics on Post Publication

Amendments
Authors may request that the content of their article be changed to ensure that the article is not misrepresented. The requested changes include the following:

An erratum is issued to correct errors in the journal’s publications during production that impact the overall scholarly integrity of an article.

A corrigendum is used when serious errors or omissions are discovered after publication that could affect the interpretation or scholarly validity and integrity of a paper.

A retraction is the formal removal of a published article from the journal. This usually occurs when serious ethical concerns, corrupted data, plagiarism, or other serious flaws invalidate the results or compromise the integrity of the article.

An addendum is an additional component or extension to a published article. It contains new information or data that supplements the original publication without changing the main findings.

Approval from all authors is required.

Penalties and Sanctions

The Journal’s Editorial Board has the sole responsibility and authority to determine the proper sanction.

Plagiarism is a scientific misconduct and is an unacceptable violation of publication ethics. The Journal takes scientific misconduct seriously and will be dealt with promptly and fairly.  The Chief Editor, Editorial Boards, and the Reviewers are the primary means of detecting plagiarism in manuscripts submitted to The Journal.  Given the serious nature of a charge of plagiarism, it is required that confidentiality be maintained throughout the process. The charge of plagiarism, supporting materials and outcome are only to be made known to those persons who are involved in the review process.

Due process and confidentiality are important in all cases of alleged plagiarism, falsification, and other unethical conduct. Such cases will be handled according to the Publication Code of Ethics of the Editorial Board.

In cases where the Editorial Board determined that an unethical conduct occurred, the manuscript will be rejected. If the article has been published, it will be retracted promptly. The Authors may be barred from submitting to The Journal for a period (one to three years) depending on the nature of the misconduct.

The Journal reserves the right to evaluate issues of misconduct such as plagiarism and redundancy, etc. on a case-by-case basis.

Consequences
Authors: Any work in the manuscript that has been proven to contain any form of plagiarism, falsification, fabrications, or omission of significant material constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.  Editor and/or reviewers shall report cases of suspected unethical publishing behavior of the Author(s) to the attention of the Chief Editor who shall ensure an appropriate action and subsequently bring it to The Journal’s Editorial Board for a suitable action below depending upon the severity of the case:

Notice to the Author(s) involved,
Rejection of the manuscript,
Retraction of article that has been published with appropriate notice in the website and the following hardcopy issue of The Journal.
Ban from submission to The Journal for a period, normally up to 3 years.
Informing the Authors’ institution of unethical conduct for their further action.

Editorial Board members: Journal reputation depends heavily on the conduct and fairness of its Board members. The Editorial Board members shall always demonstrate their dedicated efforts to this effect. Complainants shall bring cases of suspected members’ misconduct to the attention of the Chief Editor who shall ensure that the relevant documentation substantiating an unacceptable violation of publication ethics is made available to the Journal’s Editorial Board for a suitable action.  Any member who holds an editorial office at The Journal with proven unethical conduct will be dismissed from that office. Additionally, penalties would typically include sanctions as in the case of Authors found guilty.