Post-Publication Discussion and Correspondence Policy

Post-Publication Discussion and Correspondence Policy

Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika (JPM) recognizes post-publication discussion and scholarly correspondence as important components of responsible scholarly communication. The journal provides a formal mechanism through which readers may raise substantive questions, provide scholarly comments, identify possible errors, or offer alternative interpretations concerning articles that have already been published.

Post-publication correspondence is intended to facilitate constructive academic dialogue while maintaining the integrity, accuracy, and reliability of the scholarly record. This policy should be read in conjunction with JPM's other publication ethics policies, including its R-W-C-R-R (Retraction, Withdrawal, Correction, Removal, and Replacement) Policy.

  1. Purpose

The purpose of this policy is to provide a transparent and fair mechanism for post-publication scholarly discussion concerning articles published in Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika (JPM).

Post-publication discussion enables readers and researchers to:

  1. raise substantive questions concerning a published article;
  2. provide evidence-based comments or critiques;
  3. clarify methodological, theoretical, analytical, or interpretive issues;
  4. present alternative interpretations of published findings;
  5. report relevant information that may contribute to further scholarly understanding; and
  6. identify possible errors or concerns that may require editorial consideration.

Post-publication discussion does not constitute a re-review of the original article and does not, by itself, imply that the published article is defective or invalid. Its primary purpose is to facilitate constructive scholarly communication and contribute to the development of the academic record.

  1. Scope of Post-Publication Discussion

Post-publication discussion may concern any substantive scholarly aspect of an article published by JPM, including, but not limited to:

  1. theoretical perspectives or conceptual frameworks;
  2. research questions, hypotheses, or assumptions;
  3. research design and methodology;
  4. mathematical reasoning, definitions, proofs, or arguments;
  5. data collection and analysis;
  6. interpretation of findings;
  7. limitations of the study;
  8. the relationship between the findings and existing literature;
  9. alternative interpretations or explanations;
  10. relevant developments or evidence that have emerged after publication; and
  11. potential factual, methodological, or analytical errors.

Post-publication discussion should be based on scholarly reasoning and, where appropriate, supported by relevant evidence or references.

The following are generally not considered suitable for publication as post-publication correspondence:

  1. personal attacks or criticism directed at authors rather than their scholarly work;
  2. defamatory, libellous, discriminatory, threatening, or offensive statements;
  3. allegations of misconduct that are unsupported by evidence;
  4. comments that are irrelevant to the published article;
  5. promotional or commercial content;
  6. comments that substantially duplicate previously published correspondence; or
  7. submissions that do not provide meaningful scholarly contribution.

Where a submission raises concerns about research misconduct, plagiarism, data fabrication or falsification, unethical research practices, or other serious integrity issues, the Editor-in-Chief may handle the matter under the journal's relevant research integrity and publication ethics procedures rather than treating it solely as scholarly correspondence.

  1. Submission of a Letter to the Editor

Readers who wish to comment on or critique a published article may submit a Letter to the Editor to Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika (JPM).

A Letter to the Editor should:

  1. clearly identify the article being discussed, including its title, authors, publication year, volume, issue, and DOI where available;
  2. clearly state the purpose and main point of the correspondence;
  3. present a concise, focused, and evidence-based scholarly argument;
  4. distinguish factual observations from interpretations or opinions;
  5. provide appropriate references to support substantive claims; and
  6. maintain a professional and respectful academic tone.

Letters should focus primarily on the scientific or scholarly content of the published article rather than on the authors personally.

The Editor-in-Chief may establish reasonable limits concerning length, number of references, figures, tables, and other submission requirements. Submissions that do not meet the journal's basic requirements may be returned to the author for revision or declined before further consideration.

Submission of a Letter to the Editor does not guarantee publication.

  1. Editorial Screening and Review

All Letters to the Editor are subject to editorial screening before publication.

The Editor-in-Chief or a designated editor will assess whether the submission:

  1. falls within the scope of JPM;
  2. concerns a published article or issue relevant to the journal;
  3. provides a meaningful scholarly contribution;
  4. is sufficiently clear and evidence-based;
  5. complies with ethical and professional standards; and
  6. warrants further editorial consideration.

Depending on the nature and complexity of the correspondence, the editor may:

  1. assess the submission editorially without external review;
  2. request independent peer review; or
  3. request clarification or revision from the correspondent.

The editorial process for a Letter to the Editor is not necessarily identical to the peer-review process applied to a research article. The level of review will be determined according to the substance and potential implications of the correspondence.

Where a Letter to the Editor contains substantive criticism of a published article, the original author(s) will normally be given an opportunity to respond before the correspondence is published.

The final decision regarding acceptance, revision, publication, or rejection of a Letter to the Editor rests with the Editor-in-Chief.

  1. Author Response / Reply to Letter to the Editor

When a Letter to the Editor raises substantive questions, criticism, or alternative interpretations concerning a published article, JPM will normally invite the corresponding author or relevant author(s) of the original article to provide a Reply to the Letter to the Editor.

The author response should:

  1. address the substantive points raised in the Letter;
  2. provide appropriate evidence or references where necessary;
  3. clarify misunderstandings or ambiguities when applicable;
  4. acknowledge valid limitations or errors where appropriate; and
  5. maintain a professional and respectful academic tone.

Authors are not required to agree with the correspondent's interpretation. They may explain why they disagree, provided that their response is supported by appropriate scholarly reasoning and evidence.

The original author(s) will normally be given a reasonable opportunity to respond. Failure of an author to respond within the period specified by the journal does not necessarily prevent the journal from publishing the Letter. In such circumstances, the journal may indicate that the author(s) were invited to respond but did not provide a response within the specified period.

An Author Reply may be published together with, or linked electronically to, the corresponding Letter to the Editor and the original article.

  1. Publication of Correspondence

Accepted Letters to the Editor and Author Replies may be published as part of JPM's scholarly record.

Where technically and editorially feasible, the journal will provide clear links among:

Original Article → Letter to the Editor → Author Reply

Published correspondence should be clearly identified as a post-publication communication and should include sufficient bibliographic information to identify the article being discussed.

Publication of a Letter to the Editor does not imply that JPM or its editors endorse all statements or interpretations expressed by the correspondent. Similarly, publication of an Author Reply does not imply that the journal endorses the author's position.

The journal may decline to publish correspondence where the submission does not meet the journal's scholarly, ethical, or editorial standards.

Once published, correspondence becomes part of the journal's scholarly record and may be subject to the journal's policies concerning corrections and editorial integrity.

  1. Corrections and Other Editorial Actions

Post-publication discussion may identify issues that require action beyond scholarly correspondence.

If a Letter to the Editor or subsequent investigation identifies a substantive error, omission, ethical concern, or other issue affecting the integrity of a published article, the Editor-in-Chief will assess the matter in accordance with JPM's publication ethics policies.

Depending on the nature and severity of the issue, the journal may consider appropriate editorial actions, including:

  1. publication of a Correction;
  2. publication of an Expression of Concern, where appropriate;
  3. Retraction of the article;
  4. Withdrawal of an article where applicable;
  5. Removal or Replacement of published content in exceptional circumstances; or
  6. no editorial action where the concern does not affect the reliability or integrity of the published record.

Such actions will be undertaken in accordance with JPM's R-W-C-R-R (Retraction, Withdrawal, Correction, Removal, and Replacement) Policy and applicable publication ethics principles.

Post-publication criticism or disagreement alone is not sufficient grounds for correction or retraction. Editorial action will depend on the nature of the concern, the available evidence, and its potential impact on the integrity of the published record.

  1. Ethical and Professional Standards

All participants in post-publication discussion—including correspondents, authors, editors, and reviewers—are expected to uphold high standards of academic integrity and professional conduct.

Correspondents and authors should ensure that their submissions:

  1. are accurate and made in good faith;
  2. distinguish evidence from speculation;
  3. appropriately acknowledge relevant sources;
  4. avoid plagiarism and misrepresentation;
  5. do not contain defamatory, discriminatory, or abusive statements;
  6. respect confidentiality where applicable; and
  7. disclose relevant conflicts of interest.

The journal reserves the right to decline, edit, or otherwise manage correspondence that violates these standards.

Where allegations of research misconduct or publication ethics violations are raised, the Editor-in-Chief may initiate an appropriate investigation or refer the matter to the relevant institutional or ethical authority where necessary.

The journal will seek to ensure that post-publication discussion remains focused on scholarly content and contributes constructively to the academic record.

  1. Editorial Independence and Conflicts of Interest

Decisions concerning post-publication correspondence are made independently by the Editor-in-Chief or a designated editor based on scholarly, ethical, and editorial considerations.

Editorial decisions will not be influenced by:

  1. the nationality, institutional affiliation, academic status, or personal characteristics of the authors or correspondents;
  2. commercial interests;
  3. political or ideological considerations unrelated to scholarly merit;
  4. the potential impact of the discussion on the reputation of an author, institution, or journal; or
  5. pressure from external parties.

Editors and reviewers involved in evaluating post-publication correspondence must disclose any relevant conflict of interest.

An editor who has a significant conflict of interest with the original article, correspondent, or author(s) should recuse themselves from the relevant editorial decision, and the Editor-in-Chief may appoint another qualified editor to handle the matter.

Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika (JPM) is committed to ensuring that post-publication discussion is conducted fairly, transparently, and in accordance with principles of academic integrity and responsible scholarly communication.