Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Sakina: Journal of Family Studies is dedicated to upholding the highest ethical standards for all participants engaged in the publication process of a peer-reviewed journal, including authors, journal editors, peer reviewers, and the publisher. The journal is committed to adhering to stringent publishing ethics both internally and externally. We articulate the following principles in our Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement, aligning with the standards set by the Committee of Publication Ethics (COPE). Articles that do not meet these standards will be expeditiously removed from publication, even after their initial release. Any instances of suspected plagiarism or duplicate publishing will be promptly reported to the relevant authorities in accordance with our code of conduct. Sakina: Journal of Family Studies employs plagiarism detection software to screen all submitted papers on each occasion.

 Editor Responsibilities:

Accountability and Plagiarism: The editors of a peer-reviewed journal bear the responsibility for determining the suitability of submitted articles for publication. This decision-making process is guided by the policies established by the journal's editorial board and is bound by prevailing legal requirements related to issues such as libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. As part of our standard procedure, all submissions undergo scrutiny using plagiarism detection software, and our acceptance rate is strictly maintained at no more than 20%. Editors may seek input from other editors or reviewers in reaching a decision.

Fair Play: Editors are obligated to assess manuscripts based on their intellectual content, impartially considering factors such as race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

Confidentiality: Editorial staff, including the editor, must maintain strict confidentiality regarding any information pertaining to a submitted manuscript. Disclosure of such information is limited to the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Editors are required to handle privileged information obtained through the peer-review process confidentially, refraining from personal use or advantage. Reviewers should abstain from evaluating manuscripts where conflicts of interest arise from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with any of the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the papers.

Reviewer Responsibilities:

  1. Reviewers are entrusted with maintaining the confidentiality of manuscript information. If there are any grounds for rejecting the publication of a manuscript, reviewers are required to promptly bring this information to the attention of the Editor-in-Chief. The evaluation of manuscripts by reviewers should focus solely on their intellectual content.
  2. Each manuscript undergoes an initial review by the editor. If deemed suitable for publication, it is then subjected to double-blind peer review by two referees. The Editorial Board and at least one independent referee participate in the review process. Decisions on manuscript publication are influenced by the Board's recommendations, and manuscripts submitted by members of the journal's Editorial Board undergo the same review procedure.
  3. Reviewers are instructed to assess manuscripts based on content, disregarding factors such as gender, sexual preference, religious belief, citizenship, ethnic origin, or political philosophy of the authors. Ensuring confidentiality of the manuscript information is paramount for reviewers.
  4. Reviewers are obligated to report to the Editor-in-Chief if they identify any violations in the manuscript. Their evaluations should strive for objectivity, and the results of the review should accurately reflect their opinions on the works.
  5. Reviewers who feel unqualified to review a research manuscript or anticipate difficulties conducting a prompt review are expected to inform the Editor-in-Chief and excuse themselves from the review process.



Reporting standards: Authors should present their results clearly, honestly, and without fabrication, falsification or inappropriate data manipulation. Authors should describe their methods clearly and unambiguously so that their findings can be confirmed by others

Originality, plagiarism and acknowledgement of sources: Authors should adhere to publication requirements that submitted work is original, is not plagiarized, and has not been published elsewhere - fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. If an author has used the work and/or words of others, that this original is been appropriately cited or quoted and accurately reflects individuals’ contributions to the work and its reporting.

Data Access and Retention: Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

Ethics: Authors should only submit papers only on work that has been conducted in an ethical and responsible manner and that complies with all relevant legislation.

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.

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.

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.

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.


Copyright Policy:

Sakina: Journal of Family Studies is published by Islamic Family Law Study Program, Sharia Faculty, Universitas Islam Negeri Maulana Malik Ibrahim Malang and operates as an open-access journal. All articles published within the journal are governed by the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 Generic License. Under this license, the copyright of each article is retained by the respective author.


Retraction Policy:

Journal editors do not have unilateral authority to determine which articles are published. Editorial decisions are made in accordance with the policies set by the journal's editorial board and are bound by legal requirements concerning defamation, copyright infringement, double publishing, and plagiarism. Published articles are intended to remain intact, accurate, and unaltered to the greatest extent possible. However, exceptional circumstances may necessitate the withdrawal or deletion of previously published articles.

The retraction of published articles can be initiated by journal editors, authors, and/or their institutions. In certain situations, retractions may require accompanying apologies for prior errors and expressions of gratitude to those who brought the errors to light. Retracted scientific articles must be accompanied by a statement emphasizing that the original article should not be cited or used as a basis for future research, and its data and conclusions should not be incorporated into subsequent studies.

Article Withdrawal Policy:

Circumstances leading to the withdrawal of an article may arise if the initial version contains errors or if it has been inadvertently submitted simultaneously to both Sakina: Journal of Family Studies and/or another publisher. Additionally, withdrawal may be prompted by violations of scientific code of ethics, including double submissions, false claims of authorship, plagiarism, self-plagiarism, fraudulent use of data, or similar infractions. Upon realizing that their article violates ethical standards, authors are permitted to request the withdrawal of their article by submitting a withdrawal letter to the editorial board of Sakina: Journal of Family Studies.

Article Retraction Policy:

A retraction is initiated in the presence of violations of scientific ethical codes, such as double submissions, false authorship claims, plagiarism, self-plagiarism, fraudulent data use, or other similar infractions. Retractions are also employed to rectify errors in submission or publication. The decision to retract an article is made by the author or editor under the guidance of the Sakina: Journal of Family Studies editorial board.

Retraction processes at Sakina: Journal of Family Studies include the following:

  1. If ethical code infringements are identified before publication, the editor returns the manuscript to the author with a retraction letter from the Chief Editor.
  2. If ethical code infringements are identified after publication, the following mechanisms may occur:
  1. A retraction note titled "Retraction: [article title]" is published in a subsequent issue, signed by the authors and/or the editor, and listed in the contents.
  2. The online article is preceded by a screen containing the retraction note, with a link directing readers to the article itself.
  3. The original article remains unchanged but carries a watermark on each page indicating its "retracted" status.
  4. The HTML version of the document is removed.