Post Publication Policy

 

1. Introduction

JISA (Jurnal Informatika dan Sains) recognizes that scholarly communication continues beyond the publication of an article. Post-publication discussion provides an opportunity for readers, researchers, authors, and other members of the academic community to raise questions, exchange perspectives, clarify findings, and identify potential errors or concerns in published research.

JISA welcomes constructive, evidence-based, and respectful discussion of articles published in the journal. Such discussion supports scientific transparency, encourages critical evaluation, and contributes to the continued development and reliability of scholarly knowledge.

2. Scope of Post-Publication Discussion

Post-publication discussion may address matters including, but not limited to:

  • Questions concerning the methods, data, analysis, interpretation, or conclusions of a published article.

  • Requests for clarification of the research design, findings, or reported results.

  • Constructive criticism or alternative interpretations supported by relevant evidence.

  • Identification of potential errors, inconsistencies, or limitations that may affect the interpretation of an article.

  • Concerns regarding research integrity, publication ethics, or the reliability of published findings.

Comments should be relevant to the published work, supported by appropriate reasoning or evidence, and expressed in a professional and respectful manner.

3. Submission of Comments and Concerns

Readers and other interested parties may submit comments, questions, or concerns regarding published JISA articles through the journal's official contact information.

Submissions should, where possible, include:

  • The title, DOI, or URL of the article concerned.

  • A clear description of the question, criticism, or concern.

  • Supporting evidence, references, data, or other relevant documentation.

  • The submitter's name and institutional affiliation, where applicable.

Anonymous submissions may be considered when they contain sufficient information and evidence to allow a meaningful assessment. The journal may request additional information when necessary to evaluate a submission.

4. Editorial Assessment

The editorial team will assess submitted comments and concerns to determine their relevance, scholarly value, accuracy, and compliance with the journal's policies.

The assessment may consider whether the submission:

  • Addresses a substantive scholarly issue related to the published article.

  • Provides sufficient reasoning or evidence to support the concern.

  • Is presented in a professional and constructive manner.

  • Raises a matter that requires clarification, author response, expert consultation, or further investigation.

Where necessary, JISA may consult the original authors, independent experts, or relevant members of the editorial board. The journal may decline submissions that are irrelevant, unsupported, defamatory, abusive, or inconsistent with scholarly discussion and publication ethics.

5. Author Responses

Where a submitted comment raises substantive questions about a published article, JISA may invite the original authors to respond.

Authors are encouraged to provide clear, evidence-based responses to relevant questions or criticisms. Depending on the nature of the discussion and the journal's editorial assessment, the comment and response may be considered for publication as separate scholarly contributions or presented through another appropriate communication format.

The editorial team determines whether a comment or response is suitable for publication, taking into account scholarly relevance, accuracy, fairness, and the journal's publication policies. Submission of a comment or response does not guarantee publication.

6. Editorial Actions Following Discussion

Post-publication discussion may identify issues that require further editorial attention. Depending on the evidence and circumstances, JISA may take appropriate action, including:

  • Requesting clarification from the authors.

  • Publishing a comment, author response, or editorial note.

  • Issuing a correction when an error in a published article requires formal correction.

  • Publishing an expression of concern when credible issues remain unresolved.

  • Considering retraction when the reliability or integrity of an article is seriously compromised.

Any action involving a published article will be handled in accordance with JISA's Publication Ethics, Allegations of Research Misconduct, and Correction and Retraction Policy.

A comment or criticism alone does not automatically establish that an article is incorrect or that misconduct has occurred. Editorial action will be based on the available evidence and an appropriate assessment of the matter.

7. Fairness, Confidentiality, and Professional Conduct

JISA seeks to ensure that post-publication discussion is conducted fairly, objectively, and respectfully. Individuals involved in assessing comments must disclose relevant conflicts of interest and should not participate in decisions where their impartiality may reasonably be questioned.

Confidential information received during an editorial assessment will be handled responsibly and shared only as appropriate for the evaluation of the matter, subject to applicable ethical, legal, and institutional requirements.

The journal does not permit the use of post-publication discussion to harass individuals, make unsupported personal allegations, or promote misleading claims unrelated to the scholarly content under consideration.

8. Transparency and the Scholarly Record

When a post-publication comment, response, or editorial notice is published, JISA aims to provide appropriate links to the article concerned and related materials so that readers can understand the discussion in context.

Where a correction, expression of concern, or retraction is warranted, the journal will follow its applicable editorial procedures and communicate the action transparently to readers.

Through this policy, JISA seeks to support constructive scholarly dialogue while preserving the accuracy, integrity, and reliability of the published scholarly record.