Post-Publication Discussion

JOURNAL POLICY / PUBLICATION ETHICS

Post-Publication Discussion Policy

A commitment to constructive scholarly dialogue, transparent evaluation, and the continuing integrity of the published record.

APLIKATIF — Journal of Research Trends in Social Sciences and Humanities

Our commitment

APLIKATIF: Journal of Research Trends in Social Sciences and Humanities recognizes that scholarly evaluation continues after publication. The journal welcomes constructive discussion, critical commentary, and evidence-based responses to published articles as part of its commitment to academic transparency, scholarly accountability, and the integrity of the published record.

This policy is informed by the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) concerning post-publication discussion and correction of the scholarly record.

01 / SCOPE & PARTICIPATION

Scope of Post-Publication Discussion

Readers, researchers, and other members of the scholarly community may submit comments or critiques concerning articles published in APLIKATIF. Discussions may address research methods, data analysis, interpretation of findings, theoretical arguments, or other substantive issues affecting the accuracy and scholarly contribution of a published article.

Comments should contribute to scholarly understanding, provide reasoned criticism, or seek clarification of specific aspects of the published work.

02 / HOW TO PARTICIPATE

Submission of Comments

Post-publication comments should be submitted to the editorial office at jurnalaplikatif@gmail.com, with the subject line “Post-Publication Discussion – [Article Title]”.

Submissions should include:

The commenter’s name, institutional affiliation (if applicable), and contact information.
The title and DOI or URL of the article being discussed.
A clear explanation of the issue or argument, supported by relevant evidence or scholarly references.
A declaration of any potential conflicts of interest.

Scholarly conduct

Comments must be professionally written, evidence-based, and respectful. Personal attacks, defamatory statements, and unsupported allegations will not be considered for publication.

03 / FAIR EVALUATION

Editorial Assessment

The editorial team will assess submitted comments for relevance, academic merit, evidentiary support, and potential implications for the published article.

Where necessary, the Editor-in-Chief may consult an appropriate associate editor or independent expert to evaluate substantive or methodological concerns.

The journal may decline comments that are irrelevant, repetitive, unsupported, or inconsistent with its publication ethics standards. Editorial decisions will be based on the scholarly merits of the issues raised.

04 / BALANCED DIALOGUE

Authors’ Right to Respond

When a substantive critique is considered suitable for further discussion, the editorial team will normally invite the corresponding author of the original article to provide a response.

Authors are expected to address the specific concerns raised through scholarly reasoning and relevant evidence. The editorial team will communicate an appropriate response period, taking into account the nature and complexity of the issues.

If the authors decline or fail to respond, the editorial team may continue its assessment and consider publication of the critique without an author response.

05 / TRANSPARENT EXCHANGE

Publication of Discussions and Responses

Comments that provide a meaningful contribution to academic discussion may be published as a Letter to the Editor, scholarly commentary, or other appropriate editorial correspondence, subject to editorial assessment.

Responses from the original authors may also be published to facilitate transparent academic exchange.

Where such correspondence is published, the journal will identify the article concerned and provide links between the original article and the related discussion or response.

Publication of a comment or response does not necessarily indicate that the journal endorses the interpretation presented by either party.

06 / PROTECTING THE RECORD

Corrections and Research Integrity Concerns

If a post-publication discussion identifies a potentially significant error, omission, or concern about the reliability of published findings, the editorial team will assess whether further action is warranted.

Concerns involving suspected research or publication misconduct will be handled under the journal’s Publication Ethics Policy and applicable COPE guidance. Such concerns may require additional evidence, consultation with relevant parties, or further investigation.

Depending on the findings, appropriate editorial action may include a correction, an expression of concern, or a retraction. Any formal post-publication notice will be clearly identified and linked to the original article to preserve the transparency of the scholarly record.

07 / ETHICAL OVERSIGHT

Editorial Independence and Confidentiality

All post-publication discussions will be handled fairly and independently, without discrimination based on the academic position, institutional affiliation, or background of the individuals involved.

Editors with relevant conflicts of interest must withdraw from handling the matter. Confidential information, including sensitive personal data and information associated with allegations of misconduct, will be protected throughout the editorial process.

APLIKATIF encourages responsible scholarly criticism and considers post-publication discussion an essential part of maintaining the accuracy, credibility, and continuing development of scientific knowledge.

Editorial pathway