Islamic Digital Religion and Intelligent Media generally follows the standards and guidelines set by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), particularly regarding misconduct and fraud and the appropriate procedures for handling such cases. COPE provides a code of conduct with best practices and flowcharts outlining the steps publishers and editors should take to identify and prevent the publication of articles involving research misconduct.

If the publisher or editors become aware of any allegations of research misconduct, they are responsible for addressing these allegations appropriately, following the recommendations in the "Dealing with Misconduct" section of The COPE Report 1999 (page 46). The journal also adheres to the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing defined by COPE and the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ). The policies below implement these principles.

Authors are required to adhere to the international standards of academic authorship ethics outlined by COPE. Authorship should be based on the following four criteria — and anyone meeting all four should be acknowledged as an author.

Contributors who do not meet the full authorship criteria will be acknowledged in the appropriate section. We encourage researchers, particularly early-career scholars, to consult COPE's authorship guidelines for ethical practices and dispute handling.

Authorship should be determined before submission. Any request for change — addition, removal, or reordering of author names — must be approved by all listed authors, including those being added or removed. The corresponding author must submit an Authorship Change Form with signed consent from all authors and a rationale for the modification. Requests submitted after publication will be reviewed; if approved, a Correction Notice will be issued.

The journal upholds the highest standards of academic integrity and only considers original, unpublished scholarly work. Submitting a manuscript signifies that the work has not been published elsewhere and is not under review in another journal or publication.

Plagiarism is the use of text, data, or findings from another source without proper acknowledgement; self-plagiarism is the unauthorized reuse of an author's own previously published content without appropriate citation or disclosure. Both are serious violations. All submissions are screened with plagiarism detection tools so that text recycling, improper citation, or duplication are identified before publication. Authors uncertain about best practices may consult academic-integrity guidelines from reputable institutions such as MIT, Stanford University, the University of Toronto, and Université Paris-Saclay.

Duplicate or redundant publication occurs when an author submits or publishes substantially the same work in multiple venues without proper cross-referencing, including overlapping assumptions, data, discussions, or conclusions. If an article was previously published in another language, the original source must be fully disclosed at submission. An abstract that appeared in a conference proceeding may still be submitted, provided the prior publication is fully cited. Where previously published content is found without proper attribution or permission, the Editors-in-Chief will contact the authors for clarification and follow COPE's official guidelines.

Authors may upload their Author's Original Manuscript (AOM) to a non-commercial preprint server (e.g., arXiv, PeerJ Preprints, HAL) at any stage before acceptance, provided the platform allows authors to retain full copyright and re-use rights. A citation linking to the original preprint must be included at submission or during review. Once published, authors are encouraged to update the preprint with a link to the final published article. The journal does not consider manuscripts already formally published or under active review elsewhere.

The journal adheres to a double-blind peer review process; neither authors nor reviewers know each other's identity, and the Editorial Office removes all identifying information before review. Each manuscript is reviewed by one, two, or more independent reviewers. If an Editor or Editorial Board member is a (co-)author, they are excluded from evaluation and decision-making on that submission. Reviews are fair, independent, objective, and constructive; only scientifically sound, original, and relevant articles receive positive recommendations. The Editor-in-Chief holds full authority over acceptance or rejection. Reviewers maintain confidentiality, declare conflicts of interest (and are withdrawn if any exists), and may suggest relevant published work the authors overlooked.

INITIAL DECISION

A resubmitted revision is re-evaluated by the Editor-in-Chief or an Editorial Board member, who may either return it to the original reviewers or make a final decision on publication.

The journal follows COPE guidelines on appeals to editorial decisions and complaints about peer review. To appeal, submit an appeal letter through the online editorial system addressed to the Editor-in-Chief, including:

◦  A detailed explanation of the disagreement, addressing the Editor's and/or reviewers' comments.
◦  Any new information or data for consideration.
◦  Evidence of potential technical errors in the review assessment, if applicable.
◦  Documentation of a potential reviewer conflict of interest, if relevant.

Appeals are reviewed per COPE's principles; the Editor-in-Chief may consult additional independent experts. Until a final decision is reached, authors must not submit the manuscript elsewhere. The Editorial Board's decision on appeals is final.

Authors, editors, and reviewers must disclose any potential conflict of interest that could affect the integrity of the publication process. A conflict may arise from financial, academic, political, or personal ties that could influence interpretation, even unintentionally. All authors must declare potential conflicts at submission; if published, this is disclosed to readers. Authors confirm they retain full control over their data.

Reviewers inform the journal of any conflict affecting objectivity and are replaced with an independent reviewer if needed.
Editors disclose conflicts that may compromise fairness; if an editor submits their own work, an independent editor manages the review.

The journal follows COPE's guidelines on suspected undisclosed conflicts and reserves the right to request further information and take necessary action, including retraction where a conflict has significantly influenced the research.

The journal encourages best practices in data sharing to enhance transparency, reproducibility, and impact. Authors are strongly encouraged to provide supporting datasets, supplementary files, and research code, and to include a Data Availability Statement indicating whether data is publicly accessible and where. A waiver may be requested where confidentiality, security, or privacy concerns (e.g., human subjects) apply. Datasets referenced in the work — the authors' own or others' — should be cited in the reference list. The journal defines data-sharing policies in consultation with editors, academic societies, and relevant stakeholders.

The journal emphasizes strict adherence to ethical laws and regulations in research and academic publishing. Authors must include an ethical statement issued by their institution, particularly where a study involves human participants, including vulnerable or protected groups. Reviewers must maintain confidentiality and must not disclose or use manuscript data for personal gain.

Research involving human participants must obtain informed consent from the individuals involved, or from a responsible guardian (e.g., parents or legal guardians for minors or vulnerable populations). Identifying details — names, initials, institutional affiliations, or other personal information — must not be published unless scientifically necessary and with written consent. Where identifying details are inessential they must be omitted; where privacy is uncertain, consent must still be obtained (note that blurring faces does not sufficiently guarantee anonymity). If identifying characteristics are modified for privacy (e.g., in interviews or case studies), the modifications must not alter the scientific meaning and must be clearly stated. Authors must also acknowledge assistance in manuscript preparation and disclose funding sources.

For research involving human subjects, authors must ensure all procedures comply with the ethical standards of the relevant institutional or national ethics committee. Where compliance is uncertain, authors must explain their approach and provide evidence that the ethics committee explicitly approved any questionable aspects of the study.

◦  The manuscript and any supporting documents are the author's original intellectual property, with copyright not transferred to another party.
◦  The manuscript is free of plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, or manipulated citations and complies with the journal's authorship policies.
◦  Permission has been obtained to reproduce any copyrighted tables, figures, data, or text from third parties.
◦  Authors fully retain copyright and may modify, redistribute, repost, or archive any version of their work.
◦  Authors maintain the confidentiality of all communications received during review and editing.

◦  All review comments and reports remain the intellectual property of the reviewer or editor.
◦  Reviewers and editors maintain confidentiality regarding review communications.
◦  All manuscripts, revisions, and drafts are kept confidential except the final published version.

Accepted manuscripts, galleys, and supporting documents are licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 (CC BY-SA 4.0) upon acceptance. The license is indicated on the front page of each online article and within each issue of the printed edition.

Reporting Violations. Any suspected violation of this policy should be reported to the Editor-in-Chief through the Ethics Complaints and Appeals process.

The journal facilitates post-publication discussion and corrections per COPE's core practices. Post-publication comments are welcomed through the journal's official discussion channels for constructive scholarly dialogue.

All post-publication corrections, retractions, and expressions of concern are clearly documented and made accessible to maintain the credibility and reliability of the journal's academic record.