Post-Publication Discussion

1. General Principles

The Journal of Tourism Sustainability (JTOS), published by Politeknik Negeri Bandung, recognizes that scholarly evaluation continues after an article has been published.

JTOS encourages constructive, evidence-based, and respectful academic discussion concerning published research. Post-publication discussion contributes to scientific progress, strengthens research transparency, and supports the reliability of the scholarly record.

This policy establishes procedures for submitting, evaluating, responding to, and publishing scholarly comments, corrections, and other communications concerning articles published in JTOS.

The policy is informed by the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), particularly those concerning post-publication discussions, corrections, and research integrity.

2. Scope of Post-Publication Discussion

JTOS welcomes scholarly discussion concerning the theoretical, methodological, empirical, and practical contributions of published articles.

Post-publication discussions may address:

Theoretical arguments, conceptual frameworks, and scholarly interpretations.
Research design, methodology, sampling, measurement, and analytical procedures.
The validity, reliability, and interpretation of research findings.
The implications of published research for sustainable tourism, tourism destinations, communities, businesses, and policymaking.
Data transparency, research reproducibility, and methodological limitations.
Factual, numerical, bibliographical, or other publication errors.
Potential concerns regarding research integrity, publication ethics, or conflicts of interest.

Differences in scholarly interpretation or legitimate academic disagreement do not automatically constitute research misconduct.

3. Forms of Post-Publication Communication

JTOS may facilitate post-publication discussion through the following forms of communication:

3.1 Letters to the Editor

A Letter to the Editor may present constructive criticism, methodological observations, alternative interpretations, or substantive questions concerning a previously published JTOS article.

Letters should identify the relevant article and present arguments supported by appropriate scholarly evidence.

3.2 Author Responses

Authors of the original article may be invited to respond to substantive comments or criticisms.

Responses should address the scholarly issues raised and provide relevant explanations, supporting evidence, or methodological clarification.

3.3 Scholarly Commentaries

JTOS may consider scholarly commentaries that extend theoretical discussions, evaluate research implications, or provide additional perspectives on previously published findings.

Acceptance of commentaries is subject to editorial assessment and, where appropriate, independent peer review.

3.4 Corrections and Clarifications

Readers and authors may report factual, methodological, bibliographical, or presentation errors identified after publication.

When an error materially affects the published record but does not invalidate the overall reliability of the research, JTOS may publish a formal correction.

4. Submission of Post-Publication Comments

Readers, researchers, authors, and other interested parties may submit post-publication comments through the official JTOS editorial communication channel.

Editorial Office:
Journal of Tourism Sustainability (JTOS)
Politeknik Negeri Bandung
Email: jtos@polban.ac.id

The email subject should indicate:

Post-Publication Discussion: [Article Title or DOI]

Submissions should include:

The title, author(s), publication year, and DOI or URL of the article concerned.
The name, affiliation, and contact information of the correspondent.
A clear description of the scholarly comment, question, criticism, or identified error.
Relevant supporting evidence, references, or documentation.
Disclosure of any relevant conflicts of interest.

JTOS may request additional information when necessary to evaluate the submission.

5. Editorial Assessment

All post-publication submissions will undergo preliminary assessment by the Editor-in-Chief or a designated editor.

The editorial assessment will consider:

Relevance to the published article.
Scientific and scholarly significance.
Clarity and accuracy of the arguments.
Adequacy of supporting evidence.
Professional and respectful language.
Compliance with publication ethics.
Potential conflicts of interest.

The editorial team may request revision, clarification, additional documentation, or independent expert review.

JTOS reserves the right not to publish submissions containing personal attacks, defamatory statements, discriminatory language, unsupported allegations, or content unrelated to scholarly discussion.

6. Authors' Right to Respond

When a submitted discussion raises substantive questions or criticism concerning a published article, JTOS will ordinarily invite the original authors to provide a response.

Authors will be given a reasonable opportunity to address the issues raised and provide supporting explanations.

The editorial team may publish the scholarly comment and the authors' response together or as linked publications, where appropriate.

Failure of the original authors to respond does not automatically prevent the publication of a well-supported scholarly comment or necessary editorial notice.

7. Corrections to Published Articles

JTOS is committed to maintaining an accurate and reliable scholarly record.

When a significant error is identified after publication, the editorial team will assess whether a formal correction is necessary.

Corrections may address:

Incorrect numerical values or statistical information.
Errors in tables, figures, or supplementary materials.
Incorrect bibliographical or citation information.
Errors in author information or publication metadata.
Other inaccuracies that require public clarification.

Minor typographical corrections that do not affect scientific interpretation may be managed through appropriate editorial procedures.

Material corrections will ordinarily be accompanied by a transparent correction notice linked to the original publication.

Published corrections should clearly identify the affected article and explain the nature of the correction.

8. Research Integrity Concerns

Post-publication discussions may identify concerns involving:

Plagiarism or redundant publication.
Fabrication or falsification of research data.
Manipulation of figures or research findings.
Misrepresentation of authorship.
Undisclosed conflicts of interest.
Ethical violations involving research participants.
Other serious publication integrity concerns.

Such allegations will be assessed under the JTOS Allegations of Research Misconduct Policy and relevant COPE guidance.

The journal may request clarification, supporting documentation, or cooperation from the authors' affiliated institutions when necessary.

The submission of an allegation does not establish that research misconduct has occurred.

9. Expressions of Concern and Retractions

When serious questions arise regarding the reliability or integrity of a published article, JTOS may consider additional editorial action.

9.1 Expression of Concern

An expression of concern may be issued when substantial integrity concerns remain unresolved and readers need to be informed while further assessment or investigation continues.

9.2 Retraction

A published article may be retracted when reliable evidence demonstrates that its findings are unreliable or that serious ethical violations warrant retraction.

Retraction notices will identify the original article and explain the reasons for retraction.

Retracted articles will ordinarily remain accessible with clear identification of their retracted status to preserve the transparency of the scholarly record.

Editorial action will be proportionate to the concern identified and guided by applicable publication ethics standards.

10. Transparency and Accessibility

JTOS seeks to ensure that significant post-publication discussions and editorial notices are accessible to the scholarly community.

When published, Letters to the Editor, author responses, corrections, expressions of concern, and retraction notices should be linked to the original article where technically feasible.

Relevant notices should clearly identify the associated publication and provide sufficient information for readers to understand the nature of the discussion or editorial action.

Publications and notices will be managed in accordance with applicable copyright, licensing, and editorial policies.

11. Confidentiality and Fairness

JTOS will handle post-publication concerns fairly, independently, and professionally.

Confidential information obtained during editorial assessment will be protected as appropriate.

Editors involved in post-publication assessment must disclose relevant conflicts of interest and withdraw from decision-making when their impartiality may be compromised.

JTOS will distinguish legitimate academic criticism from allegations of misconduct and ensure that editorial responses are proportionate to the available evidence.

12. Editorial Decision and Appeals

The Editor-in-Chief or designated editor is responsible for determining whether post-publication correspondence is suitable for publication or requires further editorial action.

Parties directly affected by an editorial decision may submit a reasoned request for reconsideration, supported by relevant evidence or clarification.

When practicable, appeals will be evaluated by an editor or representative who was not directly responsible for the original decision.

The journal will maintain appropriate documentation of significant discussions, editorial assessments, and related decisions.

13. Policy Review

JTOS may periodically review and update this policy to reflect developments in scholarly communication, publication ethics, and post-publication research evaluation.

The journal remains committed to facilitating open scholarly discussion while protecting the integrity and reliability of published research.

Post-Publication Discussion Statement

JTOS welcomes constructive, evidence-based academic discussion of published research and supports transparent correction of the scholarly record when necessary.

Scholarly disagreement is a legitimate part of scientific progress. Post-publication discussion must be conducted with academic integrity, professional respect, and appropriate supporting evidence.