DIsJ Index – DIsJ

DIsJ Index & Predicate Framework

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 Ranking & Predicate is built upon the following three pillars:

Pillar A: Editorial & Management Integrity (Weight: 35%)

This pillar focuses on managerial professionalism, time efficiency, and resistance against managerial capitalism.

Submission to First Decision: 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.
- ```
Measurement: 1-(average submission to first decision / 30 days)
```
Acceptance to Publication: 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.
- ```
Measurement: 1-(average acceptance to publication / 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. A lower index is preferred, as it signifies higher objectivity and minimal internal bias. To maintain scholarly integrity, the maximum threshold is established at 10% of the total articles published annually.
- ```
Measurement: 1-max(0, Editorial Endogeneity Ratio - 0.10)
(Note: Any ratio exceeding the 10% threshold will proportionally reduce the final score).
```
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 from their own host institutions. A higher ratio risks fostering scientific nepotism, which unfairly disadvantages external authors and undermines the spirit of Ukhwah (brotherhood). A lower ratio signifies a broader national or international reach, ensuring a more objective peer-review process free from internal favoritism. The maximum threshold is established at 25% of the total articles published annually.
- ```
Measurement: 1-max(0, Institutional Endogeneity Ratio - 0.25)
(Note: Any ratio exceeding the 25% threshold will proportionally reduce the final score).
```
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.
- ```
Measurement: 1-max(0, Institutional Endogeneity Ratio - 0.25)
(Note: A score of 1.0 is maintained for ratios 
25%. Any ratio exceeding this threshold will proportionally reduce the final score).
```
Publication Volume Stability: An indicator of potential academic capitalism, especially for journals charging Article Processing Charges (APC). A consistent and reasonable 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. To maintain stability, a 20% tolerance threshold is established for annual volume fluctuations.
- ```
Measurement: 1-max(0, (current vol. - previous vol. / current vol.) - 0.20)
(Note: A score of 1.0 is maintained if the volume change is 20%. Any fluctuation beyond this threshold will proportionally reduce the score).
```
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. Journals that maintain fees at or below the subject area average are awarded a Perfect Score (1.0), as they are considered to be supporting authors and the global dissemination of knowledge.
- ```
Measurement for journals exceeding the average: 1-(jurnal APC - subject area average /jurnal APC)
```
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), while those exceeding 180 days are deemed negligent of the author’s rights.
- ```
Measurement: Score 1.0: For average durations between 30 and 180 days.
and Score 0: For average durations < 30 days or > 180 days.
```

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, editors must strictly reject out-of-scope submissions to prevent academic opportunism.
- ```
Measurement: 1-(total out-of-scope articles identified by AI Systematic Analysis / total articles per year)
```
Author Discrimination Index: An indicator of institutional fairness and the principle of Al-Musawah (equality). Journals must treat all authors based on scholarly merit rather than geographic origin, institutional affiliation, or authorship quantity. Practices such as prioritizing international authors over local ones, offering exclusive APC waivers only to foreigners, or mandating multi-authorship are considered discriminatory. While collaboration is encouraged to facilitate knowledge transfer and Ukhwah, journals must not marginalize ‘Single Authors,’ as many groundbreaking scientific discoveries originate from rigorous individual contemplation.
- ```
Measurement: Binary scoring (1 for 'Non-Discriminatory' and 0 for 'Discriminatory') based on an audit of journal policies and publication practices.
```

Data Sharing: An indicator of the author’s transparency regarding their research data. A willingness to share data signifies openness and allows for independent verification. To uphold the principle of Amanah (trustworthiness), researchers should ensure that their findings are reproducible and based on authentic evidence.

Measurement: The annual score is derived from the average score of all articles published within the year. Each article is scored on a binary basis:
Score 1.0: For articles that either share their data or provide a legitimate 'Data Availability Statement' (explaining legal, ethical, or safety constraints with concrete evidence).
Score 0: For articles with no data sharing or no valid statement.
Final Score: Total Article Scores / Total Articles per year

AI Tools Disclosure: An indicator of the author’s honesty and transparency, reflecting the principles of Sidq (truthfulness) and Amanah (trustworthiness). Full disclosure regarding the use of AI tools in the research or writing process demonstrates high ethical standards and academic integrity. While AI may serve as a supportive tool, authors remain fully accountable for the accuracy and originality of the final work, ensuring it remains a product of genuine human intellectual effort.
- ```
Measurement: Binary scoring (1 for 'Fully Disclosed' and 0 for 'Undisclosed/Suspected Misuse') based on the inclusion of a formal 'Declaration of AI Tool Usage' section.
```
Similarity Index: An indicator of the manuscript’s originality and adherence to Al-Amanah al-Ilmiyyah (academic integrity). It measures the overlap with existing published works to detect potential plagiarism. A lower index signifies higher originality and a commitment to honest scholarship. To uphold the highest standards, the maximum similarity threshold is established at 20%.
- ```
Measurement: 1-max(0, similarity index/100)-0.20.
(Note: A score of 1.0 is maintained for indices 
20%. Any index exceeding this threshold will proportionally reduce the final score).
```

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 impact, where editorial roles enhance an editor’s academic credit, facilitate knowledge transfer, and strengthen the bonds of Ukhwah Islamiyah. Editorial diversity is categorized as follows:
- National Editorial Diversity: An indicator of the journal’s broader impact. Editorial roles serve as a means to enhance academic credit, facilitate knowledge transfer, and strengthen Islamic fraternal bonds (Ukhwah Islamiah) within the national academic community.
- OIC Editorial Diversity: An indicator of global impact. Editorial roles within OIC member states serve to enhance academic credit, facilitate cross-border knowledge transfer, and strengthen the bonds of Islamic Brotherhood (Ukhwah Islamiyah) within the international scholarly community.
- Global Editorial Diversity: An indicator of global outreach. Editorial roles facilitate knowledge transfer and strengthen the bonds of Islamic Brotherhood toward universal humanity (Ukhwah Bashariyah), fostering collaboration with scholars beyond OIC member states.
- Measurement: Editorial Diversity = (National x 0.15) + (OIC x 0.50) + (Global x 0.35)
  Sub-Indicators
  Weight
  Score 1.0 for Jamak
  Score 0.75 for Mutsanna
  Score 0.25 for Mufrad
  National
  15%
  1.0
  0.75
  0.25
  OIC
  50%
  1.0
  0.75
  0.25
  Global
  35%
  1.0
  0.75
  0.25
Author Diversity: An indicator of the journal’s tangible impact from the author’s perspective. Publication serves as a vital means to enhance academic credit, fulfill graduation requirements, and facilitate global knowledge sharing. Similar to editorial diversity, author diversity is categorized into three levels:
- National Author Diversity: Measures the journal’s impact on the domestic academic community.
- OIC Author Diversity: Measures the journal’s impact across OIC member states, strengthening the bonds of Ukhwah Islamiyah.
- Global Author Diversity: Measures the journal’s global outreach and contribution to universal humanity (Ukhwah Bashariyah).
- ```
Measurement: The scoring and categorization for Author Diversity (National, OIC, and Global) follow the same parameters and weighted formula as Editorial Diversity.
```
Article Collaborations: An indicator of the journal’s tangible impact in fostering knowledge transfer. It strengthens the bonds of Islamic Brotherhood (Ukhwah Islamiyah) through cross-institutional and cross-border research partnerships, promoting collective scholarly growth. This indicator is measured across three levels: National (collaboration between institutions within the same country), OIC (among OIC member states), and Global (beyond OIC states).
- ```
Measurement Formula: Article Collaboration = (National x 0.15) + (OIC x 0.50) + (Global x 0.35)
Scoring Method: Binary scoring (1/0) is applied to each level. A score of 1 is awarded if the journal publishes at least one collaborative article in that category within the evaluation year; otherwise, the score is 0.
```
Cross-Regional OIC Research Focus: An indicator of the journal’s tangible impact in bridging the research gap among OIC member states. This metric fosters the principle of Ta’awun (mutual assistance), where researchers from more established academic environments assist in addressing unsolved challenges in developing OIC regions. Such collaborations provide researchers with broader global insights while facilitating a genuine transfer of knowledge.
- ```
Measurement: Binary scoring (1 for 'Cross-Regional Impact' and 0 for 'No Impact') awarded to journals that publish at least one study where researchers from one OIC country analyze or provide solutions for specific issues in another OIC member state (e.g., an Indonesian researcher investigating economic development in Sudan or Palestine).
```

Calculating Scores per Pillar (SP)

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): (P1+P2+P3+P4+P5+P6+P7+P8) / 8
Pillar B (5 Indicators): (P1+P2+P3+P4+P5) / 5
Pillar C (5 Indicators): (P1+P2+P3+P4+P5) / 5

Calculating the Final Index Value (DIsJ Index)

The final value is multiplied by the weight you determined at the beginning for each pillar.

DIsJ Index = (SA x 0.35) + (SB x 0.30) + (SC x 0.35)

Weight Description:
Pillar A (0.35): Management Integrity (Trustworthy & Fair).
Pillar B (0.30): Content Integrity (Sidq & Al-Amanah al-Ilmiyyah).
Pillar C (0.35): Social & Global Impact (Ukhwah & Ta’awun).

DIsJ Predicate

Predicate	DIsJ Index Range	Description
Mumtaz	75% – 100%	A premier hub for OIC strategic collaboration.
Jayyid Jiddan	50% – 74%	Strong intra-OIC scholarly networks.
Jayyid	25% – 49%	Emerging journals establishing OIC ties.
Maqbul	0% – 24%	Journals focused on national research foundations.

Sub-Indicators	Weight	Score 1.0 for Jamak	Score 0.75 for Mutsanna	Score 0.25 for Mufrad
National	15%	1.0	0.75	0.25
OIC	50%	1.0	0.75	0.25
Global	35%	1.0	0.75	0.25