Post-Publication Discussion

Post-Publication Discussion and Corrections Policy

Journal CERITA (Creative Education of Research in Information Technology and Artificial Informatics) strongly believes that scientific discourse does not end upon the publication of an article. The journal encourages post-publication discussion, constructive debates, and scholarly critiques from readers, researchers, and the global academic community to maintain the integrity and quality of published research.

1. Mechanisms for Post-Publication Discussion

To facilitate robust and transparent academic dialogue, Journal CERITA provides several formal pathways for post-publication discussion:

  • Letters to the Editor / Commentaries: Readers can submit formal letters, brief commentaries, or technical critiques regarding specific articles published in the journal. These submissions must be sent via email to the Editorial Office at [email protected].
  • Author Responses: If a submitted critique or commentary is found to be valid and substantial by the Editorial Board, it will be shared with the original authors. The authors will be given an opportunity to provide a formal, written point-by-point response or clarification.
  • Linked Publication: To ensure transparency, both the accepted commentary from the reader and the formal response from the author will undergo editorial review and, if approved, will be published together in a subsequent issue, explicitly linked to the original article page.

2. Handling Errors, Corrections, and Amendments

Journal CERITA adheres strictly to the guidelines established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) when managing post-publication modifications to the scientific record. If honest errors, ethical concerns, or inaccuracies are identified after publication, the journal will issue one of the following notices:

  • Correction / Erratum: Issued if a small, unintentional error (e.g., a typo in an author's name, a mislabeled figure axis, or an omitted reference) is discovered that does not compromise the core scientific findings or validity of the research. A formal correction note will be publicly appended to the article metadata page.
  • Expression of Concern: Published by the Editor-in-Chief if there is strong, unresolved prima facie evidence of research misconduct, data manipulation, or ownership disputes, but the investigation is still ongoing or inconclusive.
  • Article Retraction: Enforced in severe cases of proven misconduct, extensive plagiarism, data fabrication, or major scientific flaws that completely invalidate the paper's conclusions. Retractions are handled transparently, and a detailed retraction notice will be publicly linked to the original article in accordance with COPE Retraction Guidelines.

3. Guidelines for Submitting Critiques

All post-publication submissions must meet the following professional standards:

  • The critique must be objective, respectful, and focused strictly on the scientific, technical, or methodological substance of the published article. Personal attacks or defamatory remarks will be rejected instantly.
  • The submitter must explicitly disclose any potential conflicts of interest (financial or non-financial) related to the critique or the original research.
  • The critique must include comprehensive supporting data, evidence, or citations to justify the arguments raised.