Post-Publication Discussion Policy

Jurnal Studi Hadis Nusantara (JSHN) welcomes constructive academic discussion concerning articles published in the journal. The purpose of post-publication discussion is to promote scholarly dialogue, identify potential errors, clarify academic arguments, and maintain the integrity of the published scholarly record.

All discussions must be based on academic evidence, sound reasoning, and professional conduct.

1. Eligibility

Post-publication discussions may be submitted by authors, researchers, academics, institutions, practitioners, and other readers with a legitimate scholarly interest in the published article.

Contributors should provide their full name, institutional affiliation where applicable, and valid contact information. Anonymous comments are not accepted as formal post-publication discussions.

2. Scope of Discussion

JSHN accepts comments concerning:

  • Research methodology and analytical procedures.

  • Interpretation of findings and conclusions.

  • Hadith, sanad, matn, textual, historical, or hermeneutical arguments.

  • Theoretical and interdisciplinary perspectives.

  • Factual, citation, or bibliographic errors.

  • Research ethics and academic integrity.

  • Authorship and originality.

  • Other substantive academic issues related to the published article.

Comments must not contain personal attacks, discriminatory or defamatory statements, offensive language, or unsupported allegations.

Concerns regarding serious research misconduct will be handled according to the journal's Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement and relevant publication ethics standards.

3. Submission

Post-publication comments should be submitted to the journal through its official editorial communication channels.

A submission should include:

  1. Contributor's name, affiliation, and contact information.

  2. Title and authors of the article being discussed.

  3. DOI or permanent article URL.

  4. A clear description of the academic issue or concern.

  5. Relevant supporting evidence or references.

  6. A declaration of any potential conflict of interest.

Comments should generally be concise and focused on substantive academic issues.

Submission of a comment does not guarantee publication.

4. Editorial Assessment

All submissions are subject to editorial assessment. The Editor may:

  • Request clarification or revision from the contributor.

  • Invite the original author to respond.

  • Consult reviewers, Editorial Board members, or independent experts when necessary.

  • Accept, request revision, or reject the submitted comment.

Editors with a conflict of interest must not participate in the relevant editorial decision.

The journal may reject comments that do not meet academic, ethical, or professional standards.

5. Authors' Response

Authors whose articles are discussed will be given a reasonable opportunity to respond to substantive academic comments.

Authors are expected to:

  • Respond objectively and professionally.

  • Provide evidence or references where appropriate.

  • Clarify methodological, theoretical, or interpretive issues.

  • Acknowledge genuine errors or limitations when identified.

  • Cooperate with the editorial team when further clarification or investigation is required.

Authors must not retaliate against individuals who raise legitimate academic concerns.

6. Publication of Discussion

Accepted discussions may be published as a Letter to the Editor, scholarly commentary, or another appropriate form of academic communication.

Where appropriate, the original author's response may be published together with or linked to the discussion.

Published comments will be linked to the relevant article to facilitate transparency and further scholarly engagement.

The publication of a post-publication comment does not automatically require modification of the original article.

7. Confidentiality and Ethical Protection

All post-publication discussions must respect research ethics, privacy, confidentiality, and applicable legal requirements.

Contributors must not disclose confidential personal data, research participant information, unpublished materials, private correspondence, or other sensitive information without appropriate authorization.

The journal will protect unpublished correspondence and submitted materials during the editorial assessment process, subject to legitimate editorial, ethical, or legal requirements.

8. Possible Editorial Actions

Post-publication discussion may result in further editorial action when a substantive issue is identified.

Depending on the circumstances, JSHN may:

  • Issue a Correction for errors that do not invalidate the main findings.

  • Publish an Expression of Concern when serious concerns exist but available evidence is insufficient for a final conclusion.

  • Retract an Article when substantial evidence demonstrates that the publication is unreliable or affected by serious ethical or research integrity violations.

  • Conduct Further Investigation when additional evidence or expert assessment is required.

Any correction, expression of concern, or retraction will be clearly identified and linked to the affected article.

9. Editorial Independence and Record Keeping

Decisions concerning post-publication discussions are based on academic merit, evidence, and publication ethics principles.

Editorial decisions must not be influenced by the author's or contributor's affiliation, nationality, academic position, seniority, financial interests, or personal relationships.

JSHN maintains appropriate records of post-publication discussions, editorial assessments, author responses, consultations, and final decisions in accordance with confidentiality and institutional requirements.

JSHN follows recognized publication ethics principles, including relevant Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidance, in handling post-publication discussions and related editorial actions.