The publication of an article in Rabbani: Jurnal Pendidikan Agama Islam, which is peer-reviewed, is a crucial part of developing a coherent and respected body of knowledge. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the authors' work and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles uphold and embody the scientific method. Therefore, it is essential to agree upon ethical standards of behavior expected of all parties involved in the publishing process: authors, journal editors, reviewers, publishers, and the broader community.

Publication Decision

The editors of Rabbani: Jurnal Pendidikan Agama Islam are responsible for deciding which of the submitted articles should be published. The validation of the work in question and its significance to researchers and readers should always drive these decisions. Editors may be guided by the journal’s editorial board policies and constrained by applicable legal requirements regarding defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. Editors may also consult with other editors or reviewers in making their decisions.

Fair Play

In evaluating manuscripts for their intellectual content, editors do not consider the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, citizenship, or ideological stance.

Confidentiality

Editors 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 advisors, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in the editor's own research without the written consent of the author.

Reviewer Responsibilities

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and, through editorial communication with the author, may also help the author improve the manuscript.

Timeliness

Any selected reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that a prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and withdraw from the review process.

Confidentiality

Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not show or discuss the manuscript with others except as authorized by the editor.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers should express their views clearly and support them with sound arguments.

Acknowledgment of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument has been previously reported should be accompanied by the appropriate citation. Reviewers should also bring to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under review and any other published work 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 associated with the manuscript.

Author Responsibilities

Reporting Standards

Authors of original research reports must present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. The underlying data should be represented accurately in the manuscript. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Knowingly making false or inaccurate statements constitutes unethical behavior and is unacceptable.

Originality and Plagiarism

Authors must ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if they have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited.

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.

Acknowledgment 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 are included, that none are inappropriately omitted, 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 conflicts of interest that might be construed as influencing 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 their 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 manuscript.