Lahjah Arabiyah: Jurnal Bahasa Arab dan Pendidikan Bahasa Arab is a publication that aspires to be a premier peer-review platform as well as an authoritative source of knowledge. We publish original research papers, review articles, and case studies on Arabic Language Education and Learning themes that have not been published anywhere in any language and are not presently being considered for publication elsewhere. The declarations that follow explain the ethical behavior of all parties engaged in the publication of papers in this journal, including authors, editors, and reviewers.

 

Duties of Authors:
Standard of Reporting: Authors should present an accurate report of the original research conducted as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Researchers must present their results honestly and without falsifying, falsifying, or improper data manipulation. A manuscript must contain sufficient detail and references to allow others to replicate the work. False or intentionally inaccurate statements are unethical and unacceptable behavior. Manuscripts should follow the journal submission guidelines.
Plagiarism and originality: Authors must guarantee that their written papers are entirely unique. The paper may not be submitted to other journals concurrently until the editor makes a choice (accepted or rejected). Previous research and publications, whether by other researchers or the author, must be appropriately recognized and cited. When feasible, the source literature should be mentioned. Original and full words obtained straight from other researchers' works must be surrounded by quote marks and accompanied by the proper reference.
Publication in Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Forms: In general, writers are not permitted to submit the same paper to more than one journal at the same time. It is also intended that the authors would not submit duplicate articles or publications reporting the same study to multiple journals. Submitting the same paper to many journals at the same time is unethical and improper publication activity. Publications resulting from a research study should be clearly defined, and the primary publication should be cited.
Source acknowledgment: Authors should disclose all data sources utilized in the study and mention publications that influenced the nature of the work described. True acknowledgement of the labor of others must always be offered.
Authorship of Papers: Individual contributions to the work and reporting should be appropriately reflected in the authorship of research articles. Authorship should be limited to those who made a major contribution to the research's idea, design, implementation, or interpretation. Others who have contributed significantly must be identified as co-authors. When the primary contributors are named as authors, those who made a less significant, or purely technical, contribution to the research or publication are credited in the acknowledgement section. The author also verifies that all authors have reviewed and accepted the submitted version of the work and that their names have been included as co-authors.
Conflicts of Interest and Disclosure: All authors should explicitly state any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be understood to impact the results or interpretation of their material in their papers. All sources of funding for the project should be mentioned.
Errors in published scientific studies that are fundamental: If the author discovers mistakes or substantial inconsistencies in the submitted article, the author must tell the journal editor or publisher promptly and collaborate with the editor to retract or rectify the study.

 

Duties of Editors:
Decision on Publication: The editorial board can approve, reject, or propose change of the article based on the reviewer's review report. Editors can be led by the editorial board's principles and constrained by the legal requirements that will apply for defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. In reaching the final judgment, the editor may consult with the editorial board or other reviewers. The journal editorial staff must be accountable for everything they publish, and they must have sufficient procedures and policies in place to assure the quality of the submissions published in this journal.
Manuscript Reviewe: Editors must verify that each paper has undergone an initial examination by the editorial board for originality. Editors must arrange and use peer reviews in a fair and smart manner. In the material for authors, editors should describe their peer review procedure and identify which portions of the publication are peer-reviewed.

 

Duties of Reviewers:
Contribution to editorial decisions: Peer reviews help editors make editorial judgments, and editorial interactions with authors can help writers improve their work. Peer review is an important part of formal scientific communication and is crucial to the scientific process.
Promptness: Selected reviewers who believe they are ineligible to examine the research provided in a paper or who are aware that an immediate review is not possible should tell the editor and withdraw from the review process.
Confidentiality: Any paper submitted for evaluation must be kept secret. They may not be shown or discussed with others unless the editor gives permission.
Objectivity standard: Reviews should be performed objectively. The author's critique is unsuitable. Referees must explain their opinions clearly and provide evidence to back them up.
Source acknowledgment: Reviewers must discover relevant published publications that the authors have not mentioned. Any previously published observations, deductions, or arguments must be accompanied with a pertinent quote. Should the audience additionally notify the editor if there is a significant resemblance or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and other published studies about which they have personal knowledge.
Conflicts of interest and disclosure: Unpublished material disclosed in the submitted paper may not be used in the reviewer's study without the authors' prior consent. Peer review privileged information or ideas should be kept secret and not utilized for personal advantage. Reviewers should not evaluate manuscripts that have a competing, collaborating, or other relationship or connection with any of the authors, corporations, or institutions associated with the publications.