Review Policy

REVIEW POLICY

Al-Manar: Jurnal Kajian Alquran dan Hadis

1. Peer Review Policy

Al-Manar: Jurnal Kajian Alquran dan Hadis implements a double-blind peer review system to ensure the academic quality, originality, methodological rigor, and scholarly contribution of manuscripts submitted for publication.

The journal publishes scholarly works on Qur’anic and Hadith studies from a wide range of perspectives and methodological approaches. Its scope includes linguistic, literary, and thematic studies of the Qur’an and Hadith; Qur’anic exegesis and Hadith commentary; the Qur’an, Hadith, and other traditions; methods and approaches to Qur’anic and Hadith studies; the societal Qur’an and Hadith; and Qur’anic translation.

The journal is committed to conducting a fair, objective, confidential, and academically rigorous review process. Editorial decisions are based on the scholarly quality and relevance of manuscripts, their originality and contribution to Qur’anic and Hadith studies, and their compliance with research integrity and publication ethics.

2. Initial Editorial Screening

All submitted manuscripts undergo an initial assessment by the editorial team before being sent for external peer review. The initial screening evaluates:

The manuscript's relevance to the journal's focus and scope.
Its originality and potential contribution to Qur’anic and Hadith studies.
Its compliance with the journal's author guidelines and manuscript template.
The clarity of its research questions, objectives, theoretical framework, and methodology.
The adequacy and accuracy of citations and references.
Its compliance with publication ethics and research integrity standards.

The editorial team may conduct similarity checks using appropriate plagiarism-detection tools and examine potential ethical concerns.

Manuscripts that fall outside the journal's scope, fail to meet basic scholarly requirements, or raise substantial ethical concerns may be rejected at the initial screening stage. Manuscripts that meet the preliminary requirements proceed to external peer review.

3. Double-Blind Peer Review Process

Manuscripts that pass the initial editorial screening are evaluated by at least two independent reviewers with relevant expertise in the subject matter of the manuscript.

The journal applies a double-blind review system in which the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from each other throughout the review process. Authors must submit manuscripts prepared for anonymous review, and the editorial team takes reasonable measures to remove identifying information before manuscripts are sent to reviewers.

Reviewers assess manuscripts independently and provide critical, constructive, and evidence-based feedback. The review focuses on the following criteria:

Originality and scholarly contribution: The significance, novelty, and contribution of the manuscript to the development of Qur’anic and Hadith studies.
Research questions and argumentation: The clarity of the research problem, the coherence of the central argument, and the consistency of the conclusions with the stated objectives.
Theoretical and methodological rigor: The appropriateness of the theoretical framework, research design, analytical methods, and interpretive procedures.
Engagement with primary sources: The accuracy and critical use of relevant Qur’anic verses, Hadith texts, classical and contemporary commentaries, manuscripts, and other pertinent primary sources, as applicable.
Interpretive validity: The adequacy of textual analysis, contextual interpretation, and engagement with relevant scholarly traditions and alternative interpretations.
Literature review: The relevance, currency, and critical engagement with previous scholarship.
Analysis and discussion: The depth of analysis, strength of supporting evidence, and contribution of the findings or arguments to the field.
Academic presentation: The clarity, coherence, organization, and scholarly quality of the manuscript.
Citation and referencing: The accuracy, consistency, and adequacy of citations and bibliographic information.
Research and publication ethics: Compliance with applicable ethical standards, including appropriate attribution, research transparency, and the responsible use of sources and data.

For manuscripts focusing on Hadith, reviewers may assess the accuracy of Hadith references, the treatment of sanad and matn where relevant, the use of Hadith criticism, and the appropriateness of the methods employed. For manuscripts focusing on Qur’anic interpretation, reviewers may assess the accuracy of Qur’anic references, engagement with tafsir literature, linguistic and contextual analysis, and the coherence of the interpretive approach.

The specific criteria applied depend on the manuscript's subject, methodology, and research objectives.

4. Editorial Decisions

Based on the reviewers' reports and an independent editorial assessment, the journal may issue one of the following decisions:

Accept: The manuscript is suitable for publication without substantive revisions, subject to necessary editorial and production adjustments.
Minor Revision: The manuscript requires limited revisions to improve clarity, accuracy, presentation, or other aspects that do not substantially alter its central argument.
Major Revision: The manuscript requires substantial improvements in its theoretical framework, methodology, source analysis, interpretation, argumentation, or scholarly presentation. Resubmission does not guarantee acceptance.
Reject: The manuscript does not meet the journal's requirements for originality, scholarly quality, methodological rigor, relevance, or ethical compliance.

The final editorial decision rests with the Editor-in-Chief or an authorized editor. Reviewers provide expert recommendations, while the editor evaluates the reports, the manuscript, and the applicable editorial standards before making a decision.

If reviewers' recommendations differ substantially, the editor may invite an additional independent reviewer or undertake further assessment before reaching a decision.

5. Revision and Resubmission

Authors required to revise their manuscripts must submit a revised version within the deadline communicated by the editorial team.

Authors are expected to provide a point-by-point response to the reviewers' comments, explaining how each concern has been addressed. If a recommendation is not adopted, the authors must provide a clear academic justification.

Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation, particularly when major revisions have been requested. The editor may assess minor revisions directly when appropriate.

Failure to submit a revision within the specified period, without prior communication or an approved extension, may result in the manuscript being closed or treated as withdrawn.

6. Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers are selected based on their academic expertise, research experience, and familiarity with the relevant areas of Qur’anic and Hadith studies.

Reviewers are expected to:

Evaluate manuscripts objectively, fairly, and within the agreed timeframe.
Maintain the confidentiality of manuscripts and all materials associated with the review.
Provide clear, constructive, and evidence-based comments.
Identify relevant scholarly works that have not been adequately acknowledged, where appropriate.
Notify the editor of substantial similarities with other publications or potential research-integrity concerns.
Disclose actual or potential conflicts of interest before accepting a review assignment.
Decline a review if they lack the necessary expertise, cannot meet the agreed deadline, or have a conflict that may compromise their impartiality.

Reviewers must not use unpublished material or information obtained through peer review for personal research, professional advantage, or any purpose unrelated to the evaluation of the manuscript.

7. Confidentiality and Anonymity

All manuscripts submitted for review are treated as confidential documents. Editors and reviewers must not disclose manuscript contents, review reports, editorial discussions, or information about the review process to unauthorized parties.

Authors and reviewers must communicate with each other only through authorized editorial channels. Direct attempts to influence reviewers or circumvent the review process are not permitted.

The journal takes reasonable measures to preserve anonymity throughout the double-blind review process. However, anonymity cannot be guaranteed in every circumstance, particularly when a manuscript is publicly available as a preprint or contains information that may reveal the author's identity.

8. Conflicts of Interest

Editors and reviewers must disclose any actual, potential, or reasonably perceived conflicts of interest that could compromise the impartiality of the review process.

Conflicts may arise from personal relationships, institutional affiliations, financial interests, recent or ongoing research collaborations, academic competition, or other circumstances that could influence professional judgment.

Individuals with relevant conflicts of interest must not participate in the assessment or editorial decision-making process unless the conflict can be appropriately managed under the journal's policies.

Where the handling editor or Editor-in-Chief has a conflict of interest, the manuscript must be assigned to an independent editor who can oversee the review and decision-making process impartially.

9. Research Integrity and Publication Ethics

Al-Manar is committed to maintaining high standards of research integrity and publication ethics.

Concerns involving plagiarism, duplicate publication, data fabrication, data falsification, inappropriate authorship, citation manipulation, undisclosed conflicts of interest, or other forms of research misconduct will be assessed in accordance with the journal's publication ethics procedures.

When concerns arise, the editorial team may request clarification or supporting documentation, suspend the review process, seek independent advice, or reject the manuscript where justified. Relevant parties will be given an appropriate opportunity to respond when necessary.

The journal may refer to the guidance of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) when addressing publication-ethics concerns.

10. Review Timeline

The duration of the peer review process depends on reviewer availability, the complexity of the manuscript, the number of review rounds, and the time required for authors to complete revisions.

The editorial team seeks to process manuscripts efficiently without compromising the quality, independence, or integrity of peer review. Authors will receive editorial decisions and relevant communications through the journal's online submission system.

Any review timeline published by the journal should reflect its actual editorial practices and operational capacity.

11. Appeals and Complaints

Authors may appeal an editorial decision if they believe that it resulted from a significant factual error, a demonstrable procedural irregularity, or a material misunderstanding of the manuscript.

An appeal must be submitted through the journal's official communication channels and must clearly explain the grounds for reconsideration. Disagreement with a reviewer's scholarly opinion alone does not automatically constitute sufficient grounds for an appeal.

Appeals will be assessed by the Editor-in-Chief or, where appropriate, an independent editor who was not responsible for the original decision. Additional expert advice may be sought when necessary. The outcome will be communicated to the author and will normally be final.

Complaints concerning reviewer conduct, editorial procedures, or publication ethics will be handled confidentially and assessed according to the nature of the concern.

12. Editorial Independence and Fairness

The journal maintains editorial independence and makes publication decisions on the basis of scholarly merit, originality, relevance, methodological rigor, and ethical compliance.

Editorial decisions must not be influenced by authors' academic rank, institutional affiliation, nationality, personal relationships, or other considerations unrelated to the quality of the manuscript.

All participants in the review process are expected to uphold academic integrity, confidentiality, fairness, and mutual respect.

Policy Statement: By submitting a manuscript to Al-Manar: Jurnal Kajian Alquran dan Hadis, authors acknowledge that their submissions are subject to the journal's editorial screening, double-blind peer review procedures, revision requirements, and publication ethics policies.