Post Publication Discussion

Kertha Patrika is committed to maintaining the accuracy, transparency, and integrity of the scholarly record. The journal welcomes constructive academic discussions, critical comments, and corrections concerning articles that have already been published. In accordance with the principles and guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) COPE Handling of post-publication critiques, Kertha Patrika provides mechanisms for post-publication discussions and for correcting, revising, or retracting published articles when necessary.

1. Scope of Post-Publication Discussions

Post-publication discussions may be submitted in the form of a Letter to the Editor. Such discussions must be relevant to the article concerned, supported by adequate academic arguments or evidence, and expressed in a professional and respectful manner. Personal attacks, defamatory statements, unsupported allegations, and content unrelated to scholarly discussion will not be accepted.

2. Submission of Discussions and Corrections

Readers who wish to submit a discussion, comment, or correction concerning a published article must contact the editorial team of Kertha Patrika through the journal's official editorial contact channel. The submission must clearly identify the article concerned, including its title, author or authors, year of publication, and DOI or article URL, where available. The submitter must explain the specific issue being raised, provide supporting references or evidence where appropriate, and indicate the clarification or correction being requested.

The Editor may request additional information or supporting documentation when necessary to evaluate the submission. The journal may reject submissions that fall outside the scope of scholarly discussion, lack sufficient academic grounds, contain unsupported allegations, or fail to meet the journal's applicable editorial requirements.

3. Editorial Assessment and Review

Every post-publication discussion or correction is subject to editorial assessment. The Editor-in-Chief, in consultation with the Editorial Board where necessary, will consider the relevance, academic merit, accuracy, clarity, and potential significance of the submission.

If a submission raises credible concerns regarding factual errors, inaccurate citations, research integrity, or other material issues, the Editor may contact the relevant author and request an explanation or supporting evidence. The assessment will be conducted fairly and impartially, taking into account the information available to the journal and the responses of the parties concerned.

4. Authors' Right to Respond

When a post-publication discussion directly criticizes the content, methodology, interpretation, or conclusions of a published article, the original author or authors will ordinarily be given a reasonable opportunity to respond before the Editor makes a final publication decision. The response should address the substantive issues raised and, where appropriate, be supported by relevant academic arguments, references, or evidence.

If accepted, the original discussion may be published as a Letter to the Editor, while the author's response may be published as a Reply to the Letter to the Editor. The Editor will determine the appropriate publication format and timing, taking into account editorial requirements, the relevance of the response, and the need to provide readers with a balanced and informative academic discussion.

The opportunity to respond does not guarantee publication. Both the discussion and the response must meet the journal's editorial and ethical requirements. The Editor may request revisions, clarification, or additional evidence before making a decision.

5. Editorial Decisions and Publication of Discussions

Following assessment, the Editor may accept a discussion or correction for publication, request revisions, or reject the submission with appropriate editorial reasons. Accepted discussions and responses may be published in a subsequent issue or through another publication format supported by Kertha Patrika.

Where practicable, the published discussion and the article under discussion should be clearly linked so that readers can identify and access both contributions. Kertha Patrika aims to facilitate transparent scholarly debate while ensuring that editorial decisions remain independent, fair, and based on academic considerations rather than personal, institutional, or commercial interests.

6. Research Integrity Concerns and Further Editorial Action

If a post-publication submission raises credible concerns regarding suspected plagiarism, data fabrication or falsification, citation manipulation, redundant publication, unethical research, or other potential research integrity violations, the Editor will handle the matter in accordance with the research misconduct policy of Kertha Patrika and the relevant COPE Handling of post-publication critiques guidelines.

The Editor may request an explanation from the author or authors and, where necessary, contact their affiliated institution or another competent body for further investigation. The journal will assess the available evidence before determining the appropriate editorial action. If the assessment indicates that the scholarly record requires formal correction or that the article should no longer be relied upon, Kertha Patrika may issue a correction, an expression of concern, a retraction, or another appropriate notice in accordance with COPE guidelines.