Post-Publication Discussion Policy

Didaktika Biologi: Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan Biologi recognizes post-publication discussion as an important part of scholarly communication. The journal encourages constructive academic dialogue, critical evaluation, and the exchange of ideas regarding research findings published in the journal.

Post-publication discussion provides opportunities for readers, researchers, educators, and authors to raise questions, provide comments, challenge interpretations, and contribute additional perspectives on published articles. Such discussions are expected to strengthen scientific knowledge, encourage academic collaboration, and maintain the quality of scholarly communication.

01. Scope of Post-Publication Discussion

Post-publication discussion refers to scholarly comments, questions, critiques, or responses concerning articles that have been formally published in Didaktika Biologi.

Discussions may address the following aspects:

• Research methodology, design, and data analysis.
• Interpretation of research findings and conclusions.
• Theoretical perspectives and conceptual frameworks.
• Research implications for biology education, teaching practices, and learning development.
• Limitations of the research and opportunities for further investigation.
• Additional evidence, perspectives, or relevant research findings that contribute to scholarly understanding.

02. Submission of Comments and Discussions

Readers and researchers who wish to comment on a published article may submit their comments or discussion materials to the editorial office through the journal's official communication channels.

Submissions should:

• Clearly identify the published article being discussed, including its title, authors, and DOI or article URL, where available.
• Present a clear academic argument supported by relevant evidence, references, or scholarly reasoning.
• Focus on the scientific content, methodology, interpretation, or implications of the published work.
• Use respectful, objective, and professional language.
• Include the contributor's name and institutional affiliation, where applicable.
• Disclose any relevant conflicts of interest related to the discussion.

The editorial team may provide additional instructions regarding the format, length, and submission requirements for discussion materials.

03. Editorial Evaluation

All submitted comments and discussion materials are subject to editorial evaluation before publication. The editorial team will assess whether the submission is relevant, academically appropriate, evidence-based, and consistent with the journal's publication ethics standards.

The editorial assessment may consider:

• Relevance to the article being discussed.
• Scientific or academic contribution to the discussion.
• Clarity, accuracy, and quality of supporting arguments.
• Appropriate use of references and supporting evidence.
• Compliance with ethical standards and disclosure requirements.

The editor may request revisions, seek an independent academic opinion, accept the submission for publication, or decline it when the material does not meet the journal's requirements.

04. Right of Reply

Authors whose published articles are subject to substantial academic criticism or comments will normally be given an opportunity to respond.

Responses should address the issues raised in the discussion objectively and provide relevant explanations, evidence, or references where appropriate. The journal may publish the original comment and the author's response together or in a related publication format to facilitate balanced scholarly dialogue.

The editorial team is responsible for ensuring that the discussion and response are handled fairly and that neither party is given an inappropriate editorial advantage.

05. Ethical Standards for Discussion

All participants in post-publication discussion are expected to maintain academic integrity, professional conduct, and respect for differing scholarly perspectives.

The following practices are not acceptable:

• Personal attacks, harassment, discriminatory language, or defamatory statements.
• Unsupported allegations of misconduct presented as established facts.
• Plagiarism or unauthorized use of other people's work.
• Fabrication or falsification of evidence, data, or references.
• Comments intended primarily to damage the reputation of authors rather than contribute to scholarly discussion.
• Undisclosed conflicts of interest that may compromise the credibility of the discussion.

The journal reserves the right to request revisions or decline discussion materials that violate these standards.

06. Relationship with Corrections and Retractions

Post-publication discussion does not automatically result in a correction, retraction, or other formal editorial action. Comments and responses are intended primarily to facilitate academic dialogue and critical evaluation of published research.

However, if a discussion raises credible concerns about the accuracy, reliability, or ethical integrity of a published article, the editorial team may conduct a separate assessment in accordance with the journal's Correction and Retraction Policy.

Where necessary, the journal may request additional information, consult independent experts, or contact the relevant institutions to assess the concerns raised.

07. Publication and Accessibility

Accepted comments and responses may be published as separate discussion contributions or in another appropriate format determined by the editorial team.

Published discussion materials should be clearly linked to the original article whenever technically possible. The journal aims to make such materials accessible to readers to support transparency, traceability, and continued scholarly engagement.

08. Editorial Responsibility

The editorial team is responsible for managing post-publication discussions fairly, independently, and transparently. The editor-in-chief or an assigned editor will oversee the evaluation and publication of discussion materials in accordance with this policy.

Didaktika Biologi may revise this policy when necessary to reflect developments in scholarly communication, publication ethics, and editorial practices.