Post-Publications Discussion

1. Policy Statement

Journal Mahasiswa: Jurnal Ilmiah Penalaran dan Penelitian Mahasiswa supports the principles of transparency, accountability, and academic integrity in scholarly communication. The journal recognizes that academic discussion and critical evaluation should continue after an article has been published.

In accordance with the Core Practices of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), particularly the practice concerning Post-Publication Discussions and Corrections, the journal provides opportunities for readers, researchers, authors, and members of the academic community to submit comments, questions, critiques, and scholarly responses regarding published articles.

Post-publication discussion is intended to encourage constructive academic debate, clarify scientific findings, identify potential errors, and maintain the accuracy and reliability of the scholarly record.

2. Scope of Post-Publication Discussion

Post-publication discussion may address matters related to previously published articles, including:

1. Research methodology, design, and analytical approaches.

2. Interpretation of research findings and conclusions.

3. Theoretical perspectives and conceptual arguments.

4. Accuracy of data, evidence, tables, figures, and references.

5. Research limitations and alternative interpretations.

6. Relevant developments in the literature that may affect the interpretation of published findings.

7. Potential errors, omissions, or inconsistencies in published articles.

The journal welcomes evidence-based academic criticism and alternative scholarly perspectives that contribute to the advancement of knowledge.

3. Submission of Comments and Scholarly Responses

Readers, researchers, and other members of the academic community may submit comments or scholarly responses concerning articles published in Journal Mahasiswa.

Submissions may take the form of:

a. Letter to the Editor

A scholarly communication presenting questions, comments, or constructive criticism regarding a previously published article.

b. Scholarly Commentary

An academic discussion providing alternative interpretations, additional evidence, or critical analysis of the findings and arguments presented in a published article.

c. Author Response

A formal response prepared by the original author(s) to address questions, comments, or criticisms raised concerning their published work.

All submissions must be relevant to the journal's scope and demonstrate academic value, clarity, and scholarly integrity.

4. Requirements for Submitted Comments

Submissions for post-publication discussion should meet the following requirements:

1. Clearly identify the published article being discussed, including its title, author(s), publication details, and DOI or article URL, where available.

2. Present specific and relevant academic arguments.

3. Provide supporting evidence, references, or explanations where appropriate.

4. Use professional, respectful, and objective language.

5. Focus on the scientific content rather than personal criticism of the authors.

6. Disclose any relevant financial, professional, institutional, or personal competing interests.

7. Include the contributor's name, institutional affiliation, and valid contact information.

Submissions containing personal attacks, unsupported allegations, discriminatory language, or irrelevant material may be declined or returned for revision.

5. Editorial Assessment and Review

All submissions for post-publication discussion are evaluated by the editorial team to determine their relevance, academic significance, and suitability for publication.

The editorial assessment may involve the following procedures:

1. Initial Assessment: The editorial team examines the submitted comment for relevance, clarity, supporting evidence, and compliance with publication ethics.

2. Consultation with Original Authors: Where appropriate, the original author(s) are invited to provide a response to the comments or criticisms.

3. Additional Expert Evaluation: The editor may consult independent subject experts or external reviewers when the discussion involves complex scientific, methodological, or technical matters.

4. Editorial Decision: The editorial team determines whether the submission should be accepted, revised, rejected, or handled through another appropriate editorial procedure.

5. Communication: The editorial decision and relevant explanations are communicated to the parties involved.

The original author(s) must be given a reasonable opportunity to respond to substantive criticisms before the journal makes a final editorial decision, where appropriate.

The journal aims to handle all submissions fairly, consistently, and without unnecessary delay.

6. Publication of Accepted Discussions

Accepted comments, letters to the editor, scholarly critiques, and author responses may be published through the journal's official website as part of its scholarly communication activities.

Where appropriate, published discussions and responses will be linked to the original article to facilitate access and maintain the connection between the discussion and the publication being examined.

The publication of a comment does not automatically imply that the original article is incorrect or invalid. Academic disagreement and alternative interpretations are recognized as normal and valuable components of scholarly discourse.

The editorial team retains the authority to determine the appropriate format and publication arrangements for accepted discussions.

7. Handling of Errors and Concerns in Published Articles

When a post-publication discussion identifies a potential error or concern affecting a published article, the editorial team will assess the matter in accordance with the journal's publication ethics policies and relevant COPE guidance.

Depending on the nature and significance of the issue, appropriate editorial actions may include:

a. Correction (Erratum or Corrigendum)

A correction may be issued when an error or omission is identified in a published article but does not invalidate the overall findings or conclusions.

b. Expression of Concern

An Expression of Concern may be published when substantial concerns regarding the reliability or integrity of a published article remain unresolved, particularly while further assessment or investigation is ongoing.

c. Retraction

A retraction may be considered when there is clear evidence that the published findings are unreliable due to major errors, research misconduct, plagiarism, data fabrication, data falsification, or other serious ethical violations.

All corrections, expressions of concern, and retractions are handled in accordance with the journal's Correction and Retraction Policy and relevant COPE guidelines.

8. Editorial Independence and Fair Treatment

All post-publication discussions are handled independently and objectively by the editorial team.

Editorial decisions are based on the academic merit, supporting evidence, relevance, and ethical considerations of the submitted material.

The journal does not allow institutional affiliation, professional position, nationality, personal relationships, or financial considerations to influence the evaluation of post-publication discussions.

Editors who have actual or potential conflicts of interest must declare such conflicts and withdraw from the relevant decision-making process.

Both the contributors submitting criticisms and the original authors are treated fairly and are given appropriate opportunities to present their academic positions.

9. Confidentiality and Research Integrity

The journal maintains the confidentiality of unpublished correspondence, submitted materials, and editorial communications throughout the assessment process.

Information concerning allegations of research misconduct or other sensitive ethical matters is handled through the journal's Research Misconduct and Publication Ethics procedures.

The journal distinguishes legitimate academic disagreement from allegations involving possible research misconduct. Such allegations are assessed separately and may require further consultation with relevant institutions or research ethics bodies.

10. Preservation of the Scholarly Record

Journal Mahasiswa is committed to preserving the accuracy, transparency, and integrity  of its published scholarly record.

Published articles will not be substantially altered or removed without an appropriate editorial decision and a transparent publication notice, except where removal is legally or ethically necessary.

Any correction, Expression of Concern, or retraction will be clearly identified and linked to the affected article whenever technically possible.

The journal aims to ensure that readers can identify the current status of published articles and understand any subsequent editorial actions.

 

Journal: Journal Mahasiswa: Jurnal Ilmiah Penalaran dan Penelitian Mahasiswa

Publisher: School of Informatics and Computer Management (STMIK Provisi)

Policy Reference: COPE Core Practices – Post-Publication Discussions and Corrections