Post-Publication Discussion

1. Policy Statement

Jurnal Ilmu Olahraga dan Pendidikan Jasmani (e-ISSN: 3025-8502) recognizes that the publication of an article is not the end of the scientific process, but rather the beginning of broader academic discourse. We encourage researchers, practitioners, and readers to engage in constructive, objective, and evidence-based post-publication discussions regarding the articles published in our journal. The editorial board, led by the Editor-in-Chief, is committed to providing a transparent platform for scholarly debate, ensuring that any significant corrections, critiques, or extensions of published work are properly addressed and documented in accordance with COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines.

2. Mechanisms for Discussion

Readers who wish to raise substantive scientific concerns, critiques, or valuable insights regarding a published article may do so through the following mechanism:

  • Letters to the Editor: Readers can submit a formal "Letter to the Editor" via the Open Journal Systems (OJS) submission portal or by emailing the editorial office directly.

  • The letter must explicitly state the title and DOI of the article in question (DOI Prefix: 10.55681).

3. Guidelines for Submission

To ensure that post-publication discussions remain productive and professionally rigorous, all submitted critiques must adhere to the following criteria:

  • Scientific and Objective: The critique must focus strictly on the scientific content, methodology, data interpretation, or ethical aspects of the published article within the fields of sport sciences and physical education.

  • Evidence-Based: Claims made in the discussion must be supported by empirical evidence, logical academic argumentation, or relevant scholarly references.

  • Professional Tone: Defamatory language, ad hominem attacks, or derogatory remarks directed at the authors will not be tolerated and will result in the immediate rejection of the correspondence.

  • Timeliness: While there is no strict deadline for scholarly debate, readers are encouraged to submit their critiques in a timely manner following the article's publication.

4. The Right of Reply (Author's Response)

In the spirit of fairness and balanced academic debate, if a "Letter to the Editor" is deemed scientifically valid and accepted for publication, the editorial board will forward the critique to the corresponding author of the original article. The original authors will be granted the "Right of Reply" and invited to draft a formal response (Author's Reply).

5. Editorial Moderation and Publication

  • Both the Letter to the Editor and the Author's Reply will undergo editorial evaluation and, if necessary, rapid peer review.

  • If accepted, both documents will ideally be published together in the upcoming journal issue, cross-referenced to each other, and linked directly to the original article’s metadata and DOI.

  • The Editor-in-Chief reserves the final right to edit the correspondence for length, clarity, and tone, or to reject submissions that do not meaningfully contribute to the scientific discourse.

6. Potential Outcomes of Post-Publication Discussion

If a post-publication discussion brings to light genuine, significant errors in the original article's data, methodology, or ethical compliance, the editorial board will initiate a formal investigation. Depending on the severity of the findings, this may result in the publication of a formal Correction (Erratum/Corrigendum), an Expression of Concern, or a Retraction, strictly following the journal's policies on Research Misconduct and Corrections.