1. General Principles

The Journal of Informatics, Information System, Software Engineering and Applications (INISTA) recognizes that scholarly communication and scientific evaluation continue after the publication of research articles.

INISTA encourages constructive, transparent, and evidence-based discussions of published articles to promote scientific advancement, research accountability, and the integrity of the scholarly record.

Post-publication discussion provides opportunities for readers, researchers, practitioners, and other members of the academic community to raise questions, provide clarifications, offer alternative interpretations, and identify potential errors or limitations in published research.

INISTA follows the principles and guidance of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) in handling post-publication critiques and maintaining the reliability of published scientific literature.

2. Scope of Post-Publication Discussion

INISTA welcomes scholarly discussions related to articles previously published in the journal.

Discussions may address, but are not limited to:

• Research methodologies, experimental procedures, and research design.

• Data collection, preprocessing, analysis, and interpretation.

• Algorithms, computational models, software implementations, and system architectures.

• Experimental results, performance metrics, statistical analysis, and comparative evaluations.

• Reproducibility, replicability, and validation of research findings.

• Interpretation of results, conclusions, and research limitations.

• Potential factual, methodological, or reporting errors.

• Relevant ethical concerns affecting the accuracy or integrity of published research.

Post-publication discussions must focus on the scientific content and contribution of published articles rather than personal criticism of the authors.

3. Forms of Post-Publication Discussion

INISTA facilitates post-publication scholarly communication through the following mechanisms:

3.1. Letter to the Editor

Readers may submit a Letter to the Editor presenting constructive comments, scientific critiques, questions, alternative interpretations, or evidence-based concerns regarding a published article.

Letters must clearly identify the article being discussed and explain the scientific significance of the issues raised.

3.2. Author's Response

Authors of the original published article may be invited to provide a formal response to substantive comments or criticisms.

An Author's Response should address the issues raised, clarify relevant research findings, and provide supporting explanations or evidence where appropriate.

3.3. Editorial Clarification

When necessary, the Editorial Board may provide clarification regarding the publication process, article information, or editorial decisions relevant to a post-publication discussion.

3.4. Correction and Retraction

When a discussion identifies a significant error or raises credible concerns about the reliability or integrity of published research, the matter will be evaluated under INISTA's Correction and Retraction Policy and applicable publication ethics procedures.

4. Submission Guidelines

Readers who wish to initiate a post-publication discussion should submit their comments to the INISTA Editorial Office through the journal's official contact channel.

Formal comments should meet the following requirements:

1. Be written in clear, professional, and academically appropriate English.

2. Be concise, with a maximum length of 1,000 words, excluding references.

3. Include the submitter's full name, institutional affiliation, and valid email address.

4. Identify the published article by its title, author(s), publication year, volume, issue, and DOI or article URL.

5. Clearly explain the question, criticism, or concern being raised.

6. Provide relevant evidence, references, data, or methodological justification where appropriate.

7. Disclose any relevant conflicts of interest.

Comments must be original, scientifically relevant, constructive, and respectful.

Personal attacks, discriminatory statements, defamatory content, commercial advertisements, spam, and unsupported accusations will not be considered for publication.

INISTA may request additional information or clarification before proceeding with editorial evaluation.

5. Editorial Assessment and Review Process

All formal post-publication comments are subject to editorial assessment.

The Editorial Team will evaluate submissions based on their relevance, scientific merit, clarity, supporting evidence, and compliance with publication ethics.

The handling procedure includes:

Step 1 — Initial Assessment

The Editor-in-Chief or an assigned editor examines the submitted comment to determine whether it presents a relevant and substantive scientific issue.

Step 2 — Editorial Evaluation

The editor evaluates the validity and significance of the issues raised. Independent reviewers or subject-matter experts may be consulted when necessary.

Editors or reviewers with relevant conflicts of interest must not participate in the evaluation.

Step 3 — Author Notification

When a comment is considered substantive and suitable for further consideration, the editorial office forwards the relevant issues to the corresponding author of the original article.

Step 4 — Author's Response

The original authors are normally invited to respond within 30 calendar days. Extensions may be granted when justified by the complexity of the issues raised.

Step 5 — Editorial Decision

The editor evaluates the submitted comment and the author's response, where available, and determines the appropriate action.

Possible decisions include:

• Accepting the comment for publication.

• Requesting revisions or additional supporting evidence.

• Publishing a comment together with the author's response.

• Referring the matter for further ethical or scientific investigation.

• Declining comments that do not meet the journal's scholarly or ethical standards.

If the original authors do not respond within the specified period, the editorial team may proceed with its evaluation and may publish a scientifically valid critique without an author response.

Failure to respond does not automatically indicate that the criticism is correct.

6. Publication and Documentation of Discussions

Accepted post-publication comments and author responses may be published as Letters to the Editor, Author Replies, or other appropriate editorial communications.

Where technically feasible, published discussions will be linked to the original article through its DOI or permanent article URL.

The journal will seek to preserve clear connections between the original article and subsequent scholarly discussions so that readers can understand the context and development of the scientific record.

The original published article will not be silently modified in response to a scholarly critique.

Any necessary changes to the published scholarly record must follow the journal's established correction, expression of concern, or retraction procedures.

Publication of a critique does not necessarily indicate that INISTA endorses the interpretation or conclusions expressed by the commenter.

7. Research Integrity and Publication Ethics

INISTA is committed to investigating credible concerns affecting the reliability and integrity of published research.

If a post-publication discussion identifies potential plagiarism, data fabrication, data falsification, substantial methodological errors, unethical research practices, or other serious publication ethics concerns, the Editorial Board will assess the matter according to the journal's relevant policies and COPE guidance.

Depending on the evidence and circumstances, the journal may:

• Request explanations or supporting documentation from the authors.

• Consult independent experts or relevant institutions.

• Publish a correction for errors that do not invalidate the main findings.

• Issue an expression of concern when serious and unresolved questions remain.

• Retract an article when its findings are demonstrated to be unreliable or other grounds for retraction are established.

Scientific disagreement or alternative interpretation alone does not constitute research misconduct and is not sufficient grounds for retraction.

Editorial actions will be proportionate to the nature and severity of the identified concerns.

8. Ethical Conduct and Responsibilities

All participants in post-publication discussions must uphold academic integrity, objectivity, transparency, and professional conduct.

Readers and Commenters are responsible for providing accurate information, substantiating their arguments, and communicating respectfully.

Authors are expected to cooperate with legitimate post-publication inquiries and provide relevant clarifications or supporting documentation when appropriate.

Editors are responsible for ensuring that comments are evaluated fairly, independently, and without inappropriate influence.

The editorial office will handle confidential information responsibly and protect sensitive research information when required.

INISTA reserves the right to decline, close, or moderate discussions that become repetitive, abusive, unsupported, or unrelated to meaningful scientific inquiry.

New and substantive evidence may be considered even after a previous discussion has been closed.

9. Post-Publication Discussion for Archived Articles

INISTA continues to support scholarly discussion and research integrity inquiries concerning articles published on its previous journal platform.

Readers may raise legitimate questions or concerns about archived articles through the official editorial contact channel.

Because the previous journal website serves as an archive of earlier publications, formal comments and editorial correspondence do not require the submission of a new research manuscript through the archived OJS platform.

Where publication of a comment, author response, correction, or other editorial notice is warranted, the Editorial Board will determine an appropriate publication and linking mechanism that preserves the connection to the original article.

There is no fixed time limit for reporting substantial scientific errors or concerns relating to research integrity.

10. Contact Information

Readers and researchers who wish to submit a post-publication comment or raise concerns regarding a published article may contact the INISTA Editorial Office.

Editorial Email: journalofinista@ittelkom-pwt.ac.id

Email Subject: Post-Publication Discussion – [Article Title or DOI]

Journal Website: https://journal.ittelkom-pwt.ac.id/index.php/inista

Contact Page: https://journal.ittelkom-pwt.ac.id/index.php/inista/about/contact

All submitted comments will be handled according to the journal's editorial procedures and applicable publication ethics policies.

References and Ethical Guidelines

This policy is informed by the principles and recommendations of:

• Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE): https://publicationethics.org/

• COPE Guidelines — Handling of Post-Publication Critiques: https://doi.org/10.24318/o1VgCAih

INISTA is committed to maintaining the accuracy, transparency, credibility, and long-term integrity of its published scholarly record.