Ethics and Malpractice

The Journal of Muamalat and Islamic Finance Research (JMIFR) is a scholarly publication published by USIM Press at Universiti Sains Islam Malaysia and is subject to a rigorous peer review process. The journal strives to maintain the highest standards of publication ethics and takes proactive steps to prevent any form of publication misconduct. Authors submitting original articles to JMIFR assure that their work is original and does not contain copied or plagiarized content from other sources, thereby complying with the MyCite Selection CriteriaElsevier policies and ethical principles, and the COPE Best Practice Guidelines Journal Editors.


Ethical guidelines for publication in peer-reviewed journals are critical to establishing a coherent and highly respected body of knowledge. The publication of an article in the peer-reviewed The Journal of Muamalat and Islamic Finance Research (JMIFR) reflects the quality of the authors' work and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles are fundamental to strengthening and disseminating the scientific method. Therefore, it is essential to establish a set of ethical standards expected of all parties involved in publication, including authors, journal editors, reviewers, publishers, and the Society.

As the publisher of JMIFR, the USIM Press at Universiti Sains Islam Malaysia takes its role in ensuring ethical practices at all stages of publication very seriously. The JMIFR recognizes the responsibility to behave ethically and comply with other relevant obligations. 


1.1 Handling of submitted manuscript

Editor-in-Chief 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.

1.2 Decision Quality

The Editor-in-Chef has to provide the Authors with an explanation of the editorial decision on a manuscript.

1.3 Submission by Editorial Board Members

All manuscripts submitted to JMIFR undergo a rigid double-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, JMIFR 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 JMIFR, too many submissions from the JMIFR’s own Editorial Board is not allowed.

1.4 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.


  • Editorial board is composed of a group of renowned experts in the area who serves on the board.
  • Editorial Board members may be asked to contribute to journal content submission
  • Editorial Board members are supporting Editor-in-Chief in handling ethical issues, complaints and appeals regarding the publication standards
  • Editorial Board members are providing guidelines to maintain the journal according to standards.
  • Editorial Board Members are responsible for making decisions on whether to publish papers that have been submitted.
  • Editorial Board Members are accountable to review manuscripts solely based on their intellectual content.
  • Editorial Board Members are providing scientific expertise for the journal.
  • Editorial Board Members are fascinating new authors and submitting high-quality manuscripts.
  • Editorial Board Members are cooperating with the Editor-in-Chief(s) to shape the overall strategy of the journal.
  • Editorial Board Members are serving as a peer review
  • Editorial Board Members are helping to promote high-quality manuscript submission.
  • Editorial Board Members are required to maintain the confidentiality of information relevant to submitted manuscripts.
  • Editorial Board members must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript other than the Editor-in-Chief (s).
  • Editorial Board Members are suggesting topics and authors for commissioned reviews and commentaries
  • Editorial Board Members contribute to the policy, scope, quality, value, and even the journal's reputation.
  • Editorial Board Members should disclose any conflicts of interest.
  • Editorial Board members do not utilise unpublished information disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their research without the authors' explicit written consent.
  • Editorial Board Members assist the Editor-in-Chief(s) in decision making over issues such as plagiarism claims and submissions where reviewers can't agree on a decision.



Reviewers should assess the manuscript sent to them for scope, accuracy, quality, relevance and contribution to the field. They should inform and return the manuscript to the Editor-in- Chief if they decide that the manuscript is not within their field of expertise or that they are not able to complete the review in the stated time.

The manuscript for review is privileged information. Reviewers must treat it as confidential and it should not be retained or copied in whatever means. The manuscript should not be shared with the reviewers’ colleagues without the explicit permission of the Editor-in-Chief. Reviewers and Editor-in-Chief must not make any personal or professional use of the data, arguments, or interpretations (other than those directly involved in its peer review) prior to publication. Such use may constitute as conflict of interest and is an unacceptable behavior.

In cases of suspected misconduct, reviewers should notify the Editor-in-Chief in confidence, and should not share their concerns with other parties.

3.1 Timeliness

Reviewers should be prompt with their reviews. If a Reviewer cannot meet the deadline, he/she should inform the Editor-in-Chief immediately to determine whether a longer time period or another Reviewer should be appointed.

3.2 Double-Blind Peer-Review

JMIFR 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 Editor-in-Chief 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 JMIFR.

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 JMIFR 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.

3.3 Quality of Review

Manuscripts received by JMIFR will be evaluated by the Editorial board that will judge whether a manuscript is of potential interest to the readers of the journal. Manuscripts that are of interest, formatted according to the guideline for Authors and presented fairly well are sent for review. Typically, one or two reviewers are employed. Manuscript may be sent to other specialized experts such as on statistics or a particular technique where a scientist in that particular technique is needed to evaluate it.

Reviewers are assessed on the quality of review and other performance characteristics by the Editor-in-Chief to assure optimal journal quality and performance. These ratings should also contribute to decisions on reappointment to JMIFR’s Editorial Board and to ongoing review requests. Individual performance data on Reviewers are available to the Editor-in-Chief but otherwise kept confidential.

Reviews are expected to be professional, honest, courteous, prompt, and constructive. Reviewers should:

  • identify and comment on major strengths and weaknesses of the experimental design and characterization of the manuscripts,
  • comment accurately and constructively on the quality of the Authors’ interpretation of the data,
  • comment on major strengths and weaknesses of the manuscript, independent of the design, methodology, results, and interpretation,
  • comment on any ethical concerns raised by the study, or any possible evidence of substandard scientific,
  • provide the Authors with useful suggestions to improve the manuscripts, comments constructively on the manuscripts, and
  • provide the Editor-in-Chief with the proper context and perspective to make a recommendation on the acceptability of the manuscript.

The Editor-in-Chief then makes a decision based on the reviewers’ recommendation, as follows:

  • Accept without revisions;
  • Accept with minor revisions to be made by the Authors;

Return to the Authors for major modifications, Authors to revise & resubmit for another round of reviews depending on the request of the reviewers;

  • Reject, with encouragement for resubmission; reasons for rejection must be given by the Editor-in-Chief.
  • Reject Outright, typically on grounds of specialist interest, lack of novelty, insufficient conceptual advance or major technical and/or interpretational problems, or if the work constitutes any unethical publishing behavior. The Editor-in-Chief must give the reasons for the rejection.

Reviewers can recommend for particular course of action. However, the Editor-in-Chief may have to make a decision based on conflicting advice from different reviewers. The most useful reports, therefore, provide the Editor-in-Chief with the information on which a decision should be based.

All reviewers are informed of the journal’s expectations, and Editor-in-Chief will make every effort to assist reviewers in improving the quality of review. The Editor-in-Chief will access the quality of review routinely by ratings of review quality and other performance characteristics periodically.



The Authors should:

  • Submit original work carried out honestly according to scientific standards.
  • Ensure research results do not consist fraudulently or dishonestly, fabricated or falsified.
  • Present a concise and accurate account on how the work was carried out.
  • Ensure enough detail for other researchers to repeat the work.
  • Ensure the data be accurately reported and never fudged.
  • Not leave out problematic data so as to provide a clear story.
  • Not claim originality if others have reported similar work.
  • Certify all information obtained privately
  • Obtained permission from the individual or sources that used in the article.
  • Check their manuscripts for possible plagiarism using any anti-plagiarism software before submitting it to JMIFR to speed up the peer review process.

4.1 Originality

  • Authors must ascertain that the manuscript is their original work and has not been submitted elsewhere simultaneously.
  • The Authors should also declare that the work and its variation have not been published elsewhere prior to submission to JMIFR. Materials from other sources or publications must be appropriately cited or quoted whenever it is used in the submitted manuscript.
  • The Authors must cite the manuscript contains materials that overlap with work which was previously published, or is in-press, or that is under consideration for publication elsewhere.
  • A manuscript that is under review by any other journal must be withdrawn prior to submission to JMIFR.
  • Authors must explicitly cite their own earlier work and ideas, even when the work or ideas are not quoted exactly in the manuscript. If exact sentences or paragraphs that appear in another work by the Authors are included in the manuscript, the material should be reworded and appropriately cited.
  • Authors are not allowed to resubmit a manuscript to JMIFR that was previously reviewed and rejected by JMIFR unless encouraged by the Editor-in-Chief. If an earlier version was previously rejected by JMIFR and the Authors wish to submit a revised version for review, this fact and justifications for resubmission should be clearly written by the Authors to JMIFR’s Editor-in-Chief.


4.2 Plagiarism

Manuscript submitted to JMIFR must not contain any form of plagiarism including self- plagiarism, falsified and fabricated. The Authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and all works and/or words from others must be appropriately cited.

Plagiarism can be in the form of claiming other’s paper as the Author’s own paper and using or paraphrasing substantial parts of a paper without proper credit. Claiming results from other research as Authors’ own is also a form of plagiarism.

JMIFR will judge any case of plagiarism on its limits. If plagiarism is detected by the editorial board member, reviewer, editor etc., in any stage of article process- before or after acceptance then we will alert the same to the author(s) and will ask them to rewrite the content or the to cite the references from where the content has been taken. If more than 30% of the paper is plagiarized - the article may be rejected and the same is notified to the author.

In order to avoid plagiarism Authors should:

  • Keep all records of the source of information,
  • Put quotation marks for any phrase that are used in verbatim and cite the source,
  • Use their own words when summarizing or paraphrasing someone else’s paragraphs together with a proper citation, cite all sources as much as possible when writing a manuscript give proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given, and cite publications that have been influential in determining the reported work.
  • Cite others’ work and ideas explicitly, even if the work or ideas are not quoted exactly or being paraphrased. This applies to previous work published or unpublished in any form.
  • Self-plagiarism can be minimized or avoided by citing Author’s previous publications wherever appropriate.

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 Authors to the attention of the Editor-in-Chief who shall ensure an appropriate action and subsequently bring it to JMIFR’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,
  • Informing the Authors’ institution of the unethical conduct for their further actions.


4.3 Parallel or Multiple Submissions

Authors must not submit:

  • Manuscripts describing essentially the same research results to more than one journal at a time. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal at a time constitutes unethical and unacceptable conduct.
  • Similar manuscript or research results, in whole or in part, to more than one publication simultaneously, or at any time while the manuscript is currently under review.
  • Resubmission of a manuscript after being rejected or withdrawn from another publication is acceptable. Authors may not submit to JMIFR a manuscript that is in whole or in part under review elsewhere, nor submit to another publication a work that is in whole or in part under review at JMIFR.
  • The submitted manuscript must not have been previously published or accepted for publication elsewhere, or under review by other publication, either in whole or in part in any language.

4.4 Publication from Conference Proceedings

JMIFR does not accept any submission of manuscript that has been published in a conference proceeding. However, the Editor-in-Chief may consider publication of unpublished work that has been presented in any forum, particularly if the circulation of the proceeding is limited. Authors must clarify during submission the significant material added in the manuscript that was not included in the proceedings and the proceedings must be properly cited.

4.5 Conflicts of Interest

Authors should avoid conflicts of interest or the appearance of conflicts of interest in his/her research conduct and publication. Conflicts of interest may influence the judgment of Authors, Reviewers, and Editors. Possible conflicts often are not immediately apparent to others. These may be personal, commercial, political, academic, or financial in nature.

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 research results. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed in the manuscript.

4.6 Authorship Conduct

Name of Authors listed in the manuscript should those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the research. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as Co-Authors. Others who have assisted in certain aspects of the research project can be mentioned in the Acknowledgement.

Authors of a manuscript should nominate only one Author as the corresponding Author who is solely responsible for communicating with JMIFR and communication between Co-Authors. Authors included in the authors list must agree to the order of the names and that all Authors agreed with the final form of the manuscript being submitted to JMIFR

4.7 Change of Authorship

Once JMIFR 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. However, changes in the authorship (addition, deletion or rearrangement) can be made during the review process before a manuscript is accepted.

4.8 Affiliation

The affiliation for each Author should be the institution where the majority of the work was performed. If an Author has subsequently transferred to another institution, the new address may also be included in the manuscript.

4.9 Co-Authorship

All Co-Authors should have made significant contributions to the work being written and share accountability for the manuscript. All Authors should agree with the final version of the manuscript before submission to JMIFR.

4.10 Permission and Copyright

Authors should check their manuscripts for the need to obtain permission due to copyright law. This may include permissions for quotations, figures, photographs, artwork or tables taken or modified from other publications or from other sources on the Internet. Authors need to secure the necessary permissions before submission to JMIFR. Permission may be needed from the publisher and the Authors of the published materials. If using own materials that have been published by another publisher, the Authors need to obtain permission from the publisher only. It is the duty of the Authors to obtain the permission and not JMIFR.

4.11 Human, Animal Subjects and Bioethics

Works involving chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use must be clearly identify in the manuscript. The relevant ethic committee must approve manuscripts involving experiments on live vertebrates and/or higher invertebrates. Authors must confirm that all experiments were performed in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations issued by the relevant ethic committee.

The manuscript must include information (methods) section a statement identifying the institutional ethic committee approving the experiments, including any relevant details such as how and why the animal species and model being used can address the scientific objectives and, where appropriate, the study’s relevance to human.

The research should adhere to the guidelines for the care and use of animals in research, the legal requirements of the country in which the work was carried out, and all relevant institutional guidelines.

For experiments involving human subjects, Authors must identify the ethic committee approving the experiments, and include with their submission a statement confirming that informed consent was obtained for all subjects. The reference number of the approval by the committee needs to be stated in the manuscript.

4.12 Manuscript Withdrawal

Authors may write to the Editor-in-Chief requesting for the withdrawal of a manuscript that has been submitted to JMIFR. However, such withdrawal is usually permitted within two weeks from the date of initial submission to the journal. The reason for the withdrawal is required in writing.

In the event that Authors discover a significant error or inaccuracy in their own published work, it is the Authors’ obligation to promptly notify the Editor-in-Chief or publisher to retract or correct the article accordingly.

4.13 Timeliness

Authors should be prompt with their manuscript revisions. If Authors cannot meet the deadline given to complete the revision, they should inform the Editor-in-Chief to request for an extension.

4.14 Reciprocity

Reviewing for journals is a professional activity that provides value for the field as a whole, and should be encouraged. Authors who submit manuscripts to JMIFR are normally expected to reciprocate by accepting an invitation to review manuscripts for the journal.



  • Publisher confirms that journal editors, editorial board members, authors, reviewers, and other stakeholders adopt the best publishing policies and procedures.
  • Publisher supports the publishing and indexing of all journal articles.
  • Publishers ensure that the Editorial team meets production schedules and complete the work on time.
  • Publisher should verify the publication rights and licensing agreement before publication.
  • Publisher working closely with Editor-in-Chief(s) take all necessary steps to clarify things or correct any errors in an article where scientific misconduct, fraudulent publishing, or plagiarism is suspected or confirmed.
  • Publisher should be resolved an erratum, clarification, or the retraction of the concerned work promptly.
  • Publisher and Editor-in-Chief must work together to detect and prevent publishing articles that include research misconduct, and they must never promote and enable research misconduct to occur.
  • Publisher employs ethics panels to recommend publication misconducts, issues related to journal policy and guidelines, and ethics periodically.
  • Publisher is responsible for investigating any potential publishing misconduct and resolving any situations of alleged publishing malpractice.
  • Publisher is responsible for reviewing and updating the journal's policies regularly as required.



6.1 Amendments

Changes can be requested by the Authors of the publication due to a variety of reason. These amendments may fall into one of four categories: erratum, corrigendum, retraction or addendum. 

6.2 Erratum

Erratum is the notification of an important error made by JMIFR during production of the article that affects the publication record or the scientific integrity of the article, or the reputation of the Authors, or JMIFR.

6.3 Corrigendum

Corrigendum is the notification of an important error made by the Authors that affects the publication record or the scientific integrity of the article, or the reputation of the Authors or the journal. All Authors must sign corrigenda submitted for publication.

6.4 Retraction

Retraction is the notification of invalid results. All Co-Authors must sign a retraction specifying the error and stating briefly how the conclusions are affected, and submit it for publication. Retractions are judged according to whether the main conclusion of the article no longer holds or is seriously undermined as a result of subsequent information coming to light of which the Authors were not aware at the time of publication.

Readers who wish to draw attention to published work requiring retraction should write to The Editor-in-Chief who will seek advice from reviewers if they judge that the information is likely to draw into question the main conclusions of the published article. The Authors of the article will be given a chance to give an explanation regarding the query.

6.5 Addendum

Addendum is the notification of a peer-reviewed addition of information to an article, usually in response to readers’ request for clarification.



JMIFR supports editorial independence and will not comment on the decision made by a journal editor, unless there is evidence the article was not handled in accordance with best practice.

If your article has been rejected and you believe there are grounds to appeal the decision, such as new evidence or a reviewer’s misunderstanding of your article, you may appeal the editorial decision.

To do this, you must follow the following process:

  1. The complaint must be submitted in writing to the Managing Editor at
  2. The complaint will be considered by the journal editorial team
  3. The complaint will be acknowledged within 10 days of receipt and we aim to resolve it within 60 days
  4. The decision will be in writing and will be final. You may not appeal more than once about the same article.
  5. For further information on JMIFR’s ethics policies, please refer JMIFR’s Ethics and Malpractice policy in the website or contact



If you have concerns about the way that your article was handled or the editorial management of the journal, i.e. how long it took to make a decision on your article, or a concern about the ethics of the journal, you should contact the Journal Managing Editor at

When you make a complaint, JMIFR will treat you professionally with respect, and in return, we would request that you treat JMIFR staff with the same courtesy. Any abuse or harassment of JMIFR staff or editorial teams will not be tolerated, and your complaint may no longer be considered.

We take all complaints extremely seriously and will aim to provide you with an initial response within 10 days of receipt, and we aim to resolve it within 60 days. If we are unable to resolve it within this time, we will communicate this fully (please note that this does not apply in cases where a correction or retraction notice may be required).