The quality of a journal is not defined by abstract and manipulatable citation metrics, but by its editorial integrity (trustworthiness and fairness), procedural transparency (justice), and its tangible impact on the Ummah (brotherhood and mutual cooperation). DIsJ Rating & Predicate is built upon the following three pillars:
Pillar A: Editorial & Management Integrity (Weight: 35%)
This pillar focuses on managerial professionalism, time effectivity, and resistance against managerial capitalism.
- Desk Review Time: A metric evaluating a journal’s efficiency and professionalism during the desk review stage. A shorter turnaround time signifies higher effectiveness and professional integrity. Conversely, excessive delays constitute Zalim (injustice) toward authors, as they are deprived of the opportunity to seek alternative publication venues. Such stagnant decisions can jeopardize an author’s career progression, graduation, and the temporal relevance (expiration) of their research data. The maximum duration for a desk review is established at 30 days. To ensure accountability, journals are required to publicly display their ‘Time to First Decision’ statistics on their website.
Review Time: An indicator of the depth and rigor of the peer-review process. While a sufficient duration signifies a more stringent evaluation, excessive delays are considered inefficient and may hinder scholarly communication. To maintain Amanah (integrity) and avoid Zalim (injustice), the ideal review duration is established between 30 and 180 days. Reviews completed in under 30 days are suspected of being superficial (lacking depth and indicative of predatory behavior), while those exceeding 180 days are deemed negligent of the author’s rights.
Production Time: A metric reflecting the professionalism and efficiency of the editorial production team. A shorter duration signifies superior performance. Conversely, delaying the publication of a manuscript that has already been deemed suitable for release constitutes an act of Zalim (injustice). Such delays not only jeopardize the author’s career progression and student graduation but also obstruct the advancement of knowledge, thereby causing detriment to the Ummah. The maximum reasonable timeframe for the production phase (typesetting, proofreading, and online assignment) is established at 30 days.
Editorial Endogeneity Ratio: A metric indicating potential conflicts of interest within the editorial board. This ratio serves as a measure of Amanah (trustworthiness) and Adil (justice) in editorial management, assessing the proportion of articles authored by the journal’s own editors or board members. A lower index is preferred, as it signifies higher objectivity and minimal internal bias. To maintain scholarly integrity, the maximum acceptable threshold is established at 10% of the total articles published annually.
Institutional Endogeneity Ratio: A metric indicating potential institutional bias. To uphold high scholarly standards and the principle of Adil (justice), journals must avoid over-publishing manuscripts originating from their own host institutions. A higher ratio risks fostering scientific nepotism—often driven by unprofessional “favoritism for colleagues or students”—which unfairly disadvantages external authors and undermines the spirit of Ukhwah (brotherhood). Conversely, a lower ratio signifies a broader national or international reach, ensuring a more objective peer-review process free from internal favoritism. The maximum safe threshold is established strictly at 15% of the total articles published annually.
- Special Issue Ratio: An indicator of potential academic capitalism. A lower ratio relative to regular annual articles is preferred, as it signifies a commitment to scholarly integrity over commercial interests. To uphold the principle of Amanah (trustworthiness) and prevent the commercialization of science, the maximum threshold is established at 25% of the total annual publication volume.
Publication Volume Stability: An indicator of potential academic capitalism, especially for journals charging Article Processing Charges (APC). A consistent and reasonable publication volume per issue signifies a commitment to quality over commercial profit. Sudden and excessive spikes in the number of published articles often indicate a ‘quantity over quality’ approach, which is a betrayal of editorial Amanah (integrity). To maintain rigorous quality control, a 20% tolerance threshold is established for annual volume fluctuations.
APC Ratio: An indicator of potential academic capitalism. It measures professional integrity in balancing publication fees with scholarly contribution. Charging fees above the subject area average signifies a shift toward commercial profit over Khidmah (service) and Qana’ah (contentment). To prevent the commercial exploitation of knowledge, journals must maintain reasonable fees that do not burden authors or the Ummah. A ±25% tolerance threshold relative to the subject area average is established to accommodate normal operational cost variations.
Pillar B: Scholar & Content Integrity (Weight: 30%)
This pillar evaluates the intrinsic quality of the published research and the scholarly conduct of its contributors. It ensures that the knowledge disseminated is not only technically sound but also aligns with the principles of Amanah (academic honesty) and provides meaningful advancement to the global body of knowledge.
- Aims and Scope Alignment: An indicator of the editorial team’s integrity and professionalism during the desk review process. It ensures that only manuscripts strictly relevant to the journal’s predefined fields are considered for further evaluation. To uphold Amanah (trustworthiness), editors must strictly reject out-of-scope submissions to prevent academic opportunism and “publishing factories” that accept any paper for financial gain. A strict 5% tolerance threshold is established to accommodate genuine interdisciplinary studies.
Author Discrimination Index: An indicator of institutional fairness and the principle of Al-Musawah (equality). Journals must evaluate all authors based strictly on scholarly merit rather than geographic origin, institutional affiliation, or authorship quantity. Practices such as systemically prioritizing international authors over local ones, offering exclusive APC waivers solely based on foreign nationalities, or mandating multi-authorship are considered discriminatory. While collaboration is highly encouraged to facilitate knowledge transfer and Ukhwah (brotherhood), journals must not marginalize ‘Single Authors,’ as many groundbreaking scientific discoveries originate from rigorous individual contemplation.
Data Sharing: An indicator of the authors’ transparency and reproducibility regarding their research data. A willingness to share raw data signifies scientific openness and allows for independent peer verification. To uphold the principle of Amanah (trustworthiness), researchers must ensure that their empirical findings are reproducible and built upon authentic evidence.
AI Tools Disclosure: An indicator of the authors’ honesty and transparency, reflecting the principles of Sidq (truthfulness) and Amanah (trustworthiness). Full disclosure regarding the utilization of artificial intelligence tools in the research, data analysis, or writing process demonstrates high ethical standards and academic integrity. While AI may serve as a supportive instrument, authors remain fully accountable for the accuracy and originality of the final work, ensuring it remains a product of genuine human intellectual effort.
Similarity Index: An indicator of the published manuscripts’ originality and strict adherence to Al-Amanah al-Ilmiyyah (academic integrity). It measures the textual overlap with existing published literature to detect potential plagiarism. A lower index signifies higher originality and a commitment to honest, authentic scholarship. To uphold the highest academic standards, the maximum acceptable average similarity threshold for a journal is established strictly at 20%.
Pillar C: Social & Global Impact (Weight: 35%)
This pillar evaluates the journal’s contribution to society and its tangible influence on global well-being. It shifts the focus from abstract academic metrics to real-world outcomes, embodying the principles of Ukhwah (brotherhood) and Ta’awun (mutual cooperation) by ensuring that knowledge serves as a catalyst for positive social change and the betterment of the Ummah.
Editorial Diversity: An indicator of tangible social and global impact, evaluating the journal’s active contribution to building scholarly networks, facilitating knowledge transfer, and strengthening the bonds of Islamic Brotherhood (Ukhwah Islamiyah). This metric measures the geographic and institutional diversity of the journal’s editorial board, strictly excluding board members originating from the journal’s own host institution. The diversity is evaluated across three distinct geopolitical tiers based on classical Arabic linguistic classifications of external entity representation:
National Editorial Diversity (Weight: 15%): Measures collaboration with external national institutions to enhance the domestic academic community.
- Islamic Editorial Diversity (Weight: 50%): Measures cross-border collaboration within Islamic countries to strengthen fraternal bonds (Ukhwah Islamiyah) within the international Muslim scholarly community
- Global Editorial Diversity (Weight: 35%): Measures global outreach with scholars beyond Islamic countries to foster universal human brotherhood (Ukhwah Bashariyah)
Author Diversity: An indicator of the journal’s tangible impact from the authors’ perspective, reflecting how effectively the journal facilitates global knowledge sharing, academic progression, and student graduation. Similar to editorial diversity, this metric measures the geographic and institutional distribution of the published authors annually, strictly excluding authors affiliated with the journal’s own host institution. The author diversity is categorized into three geopolitical tiers based on classical Arabic linguistic classifications of external entity representation:
- National Author Diversity (Weight: 15%): Measures the journal’s impact on the domestic academic community.
- Islamic Author Diversity (Weight: 50%): Measures the journal’s impact across Islamic countries, strengthening the bonds of Islamic Brotherhood (Ukhwah Islamiyah).
- Global Author Diversity (Weight: 35%): Measures the journal’s global outreach and contribution to universal humanity (Ukhwah Bashariyah)
Article Collaborations: An indicator of the journal’s tangible impact in fostering knowledge transfer and breaking academic insularity. It strengthens the bonds of Islamic Brotherhood (Ukhwah Islamiyah) and universal human cooperation through cross-institutional and cross-border research partnerships, promoting collective scholarly growth. This indicator evaluates the density of co-authored research across three distinct geopolitical levels based on classical Arabic linguistic classifications of collaborative volume per year:
- National Collaborations (Weight: 15%): Measures co-authored research between different institutions within the domestic country.
- Islamic Collaborations (Weight: 50%): Measures cross-border co-authored research among Islamic countries, reinforcing solidarity within the Muslim scientific community.
- Global Collaborations (Weight: 35%): Measures cross-border co-authored research extending beyond Islamic countries to facilitate global knowledge integration.
- Cross-Regional Islamic Research Focus: An indicator of the journal’s tangible impact in bridging the research gap among Islamic countries. This metric fosters the principle of Ta’awun (mutual assistance), where researchers from more established academic environments assist in addressing unsolved challenges in developing Islamic regions. Such collaborations provide researchers with broader global insights while facilitating a genuine transfer of knowledge.
Calculating Rating Score & Predicate
Each pillar consists of several indicators (i). The pillar score is the average of the indicator scores within it.
SP = ∑i/n
(n = number of indicators in that pillar)
Pillar A (8 Indicators): (i1+i2+i3+i4+i5+i6+i7+i8) / 8
Pillar B (5 Indicators): (i1+i2+i3+i4+i5) / 5
Pillar C (5 Indicators): (i1+i2+i3+i4) / 4
The final value is multiplied by the weight you determined at the beginning for each pillar.
DIsJ Rating Score = (SPA x 0.35) + (SPB x 0.30) + (SPC x 0.35)
Weight Description:
- Pillar A (0.35): Editorial & Management Integrity (Trustworthy & Fair).
- Pillar B (0.30): Scholar & Content Integrity (Sidq & Al-Amanah al-Ilmiyyah).
- Pillar C (0.35): Social & Global Impact (Ukhwah & Ta’awun).
Predicate
- Mumtaz: DIsJ Rating Score 0.75 – 1.00 (A premier hub for Islamic countries strategic collaboration)
- Jayyid Jiddan: Rating Score 0.50 – 0.74 (Strong intra-Islamic nations’ scholarly networks)
- Jayyid: Rating Score 0.25 – 0.45 (Emerging journals establishing Islamic nations’ ties)
- Maqbul: Rating Score 0.00 – 0.24 (Journals focused on national research foundations)