Post Publication Discussion
Sustainable: Accounting Journal provides opportunities for post-publication academic discussion as part of its commitment to scholarly integrity, transparency, and the advancement of knowledge in the field of accounting.
Post-publication discussion allows readers, researchers, and academics to submit scholarly responses, constructive criticism, clarifications, or additional information concerning previously published articles. Through this mechanism, the journal encourages an objective, professional, and evidence-based exchange of ideas.
- Scope of Discussion
Post-publication discussion may include:
- Clarification of concepts, theories, research methods, data analyses, or interpretations of findings presented in published articles.
- Academic criticism of arguments, findings, conclusions, or research implications.
- Presentation of additional empirical evidence, references, or theoretical perspectives relevant to the article.
- Identification of possible errors in data, calculations, analyses, citations, or the reporting of research findings.
- Responses concerning the relevance and application of research findings to economic, business, management, and accounting practices.
- Information regarding suspected research or publication ethics violations that require editorial attention.
- Submission of Responses and Comments
Readers who wish to respond to a published article may contact the editorial team of Sustainable: Jurnal Akuntansi through the journal's official email address or follow the comment submission procedures available on the journal's website.
Each response must clearly identify the article being discussed, including its title, author names, year of publication, and DOI or article link, if available. Responses must include relevant arguments, adequate supporting evidence, and scholarly references where necessary.
The editorial team may invite the authors of the article concerned to provide a response or clarification. Where appropriate, the response and the authors' reply may be considered for publication as a separate scholarly communication in accordance with the journal's editorial policies.
- Editorial Review Process
All submitted responses, comments, and replies will be evaluated by an editor to assess their academic relevance, quality of argumentation, adequacy of evidence, and consistency with the journal's scope.
The editor may request an independent peer review if a response requires more in-depth methodological, statistical, theoretical, or substantive evaluation. The decision to publish a response or reply rests with the editor and is based on academic considerations and publication ethics.
Responses that are irrelevant, inadequately supported by evidence, contain personal attacks, or violate publication ethics may be rejected. This process is conducted fairly, objectively, and proportionately, without discrimination against differing academic viewpoints.
- Authors' Right of Reply
Authors whose articles are the subject of discussion will be given a reasonable opportunity to respond to relevant criticism, comments, or questions. Authors' replies must be professional, evidence-based, and focused on the academic substance of the discussion.
If both the response and the reply meet the journal's editorial standards, the journal may publish them separately or together to provide readers with a balanced understanding of the issues discussed. An author's failure to respond within the period specified by the editor does not automatically invalidate a response that otherwise meets the publication requirements.
- Corrections, Retractions, and Allegations of Publication Ethics Violations
If post-publication discussion reveals possible substantive errors, data integrity concerns, plagiarism, manipulation of research findings, or other ethical violations, the editorial team will conduct an examination based on the available evidence and provide the relevant parties with an opportunity to clarify the matter.
Where necessary, the journal may issue a correction, an Expression of Concern, or a retraction notice, depending on the nature and severity of the problem and the outcome of the examination. Such decisions will follow the journal's publication ethics policies and the relevant principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
Post-publication discussion does not automatically result in an article being corrected or retracted. All editorial actions must be based on careful evaluation, sufficient evidence, and fair procedures.
- Ethics of Academic Discussion
All parties involved in post-publication discussion are expected to maintain appropriate standards of academic communication by:
- Presenting criticism objectively, respectfully, and on the basis of scholarly evidence.
- Avoiding personal attacks, insults, discrimination, or allegations unsupported by evidence.
- Respecting intellectual property rights and providing appropriate source citations.
- Disclosing relevant conflicts of interest.
- Maintaining the confidentiality of non-public information obtained through the editorial process.
- Avoiding the dissemination of misleading information about articles, authors, or editorial procedures.
- Transparency and Documentation
Sustainable: Jurnal Akuntansi strives to maintain transparency in handling post-publication discussions. Where responses, replies, corrections, or editorial notices are published, they will be linked to the relevant article whenever possible so that readers can understand the context of the discussion and the development of the publication's status.
The editorial team will document all procedures relating to post-publication discussions and suspected integrity issues in accordance with the journal's confidentiality policies and documentation requirements.
Through this policy, Sustainable: Jurnal Akuntansi encourages an open, responsible, and constructive culture of scholarly discussion to improve publication quality and strengthen trust in published research.
