Post Publication Policy

The Indonesian Journal of Islamization Studies (INJAS) welcomes constructive post-publication critiques, comments, and scholarly inquiries from readers, researchers, and the broader scientific community to foster ongoing academic discourse and protect the integrity of published research. Aligned with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines on handling post-publication critiques, INJAS maintains a transparent framework to evaluate and address any legitimate concerns raised regarding the scientific validity, methodology, empirical accuracy, or ethical compliance of articles published in the journal. Submissions of post-publication critiques must be submitted in writing to the editorial office, complete with specific contextual details, clear scientific references, and supporting evidence regarding the article in question.

Upon receipt, the editorial team conducts an initial assessment of the submitted critique to determine its scientific validity, relevance, and severity. If the inquiry presents substantial evidence questioning the integrity or accuracy of the published work, the editorial board initiates a formal evaluation process, engaging independent subject-matter experts, original peer reviewers, or an external advisory panel to ensure an objective review. If the concerns are deemed valid, the corresponding author of the original publication is formally notified and granted a reasonable timeframe to submit a detailed written response, explanations, or supplementary data addressing the raised issues.

Following a thorough evaluation of both the submitted critique and the authors' formal response, the editorial team determines the appropriate resolution in strict adherence to COPE flowcharts. Depending on the nature and extent of the identified issues, corrective outcomes may range from publishing a formal author response or Erratum/Corrigendum to issuing an Expression of Concern or executing a full Article Retraction in severe cases of ethical or scientific breach. All decisions, resolutions, and associated notices are communicated transparently to the scientific community and prominently linked to the original online article, while authors retain the right to submit a formal appeal to an independent appeals committee if procedural unfairness or bias is suspected.