Post-Publication Discussions Policy

Post-Publication Discussion

JSQ: Jurnal Studi Al-Qur'an

In brief: Readers may submit a Letter to the Editor about a published JSQ article. If the letter is accepted, the original authors are invited to write a Reply. Both are published with their own DOI and linked to the original article. Errors are handled as corrections, and suspected misconduct is handled separately.

1. Scope of Discussion

A Letter to the Editor must relate directly to an article published in JSQ and may address:

• Research methods, data, analysis, or findings
• The interpretation of Qur'anic verses, tafsir, or hadith, including alternative exegetical readings
• The accuracy of sources, citations, translation, or transliteration
• Limitations not adequately discussed, or the implications of the findings for Qur'anic education
• Replication or validation of the study in another context

This channel is not for:

• Appeals against decisions on unpublished manuscripts
• General complaints about the journal's services
• Personal, institutional, sectarian, or political disputes
• Defamatory statements or unsupported accusations
• Requests for citations without a valid scholarly reason, or presenting substantial new research

2. How to Submit a Letter

Send the letter to jurnalstudialquran@unj.ac.id with the subject line "Post-Publication Discussion – [Article Title]". Please include:

• The title, DOI, and issue of the article being discussed
• A clear description of the issue, with scholarly reasoning, evidence, and references
• The names, affiliations, and contact details of all letter authors
• Statements on conflict of interest, funding, and any use of AI tools (see Conflict of Interest and AI Policy)

Letters must be original, written in a professional and respectful tone, and not under consideration elsewhere. Citations follow the same footnote style as JSQ articles. There is no fixed deadline for submitting a letter, but readers are encouraged to write as soon as possible after publication.

3. Editorial Assessment

• Letters are acknowledged within 7 working days and assessed by the Editor-in-Chief or an editor without a conflict of interest.
• The editor checks whether the letter is within scope, substantive, supported by evidence, and objective, or whether it should be handled through another policy.
• Letters may be declined without further review if they lack a scholarly argument, merely express disagreement, repeat issues already answered, or contain personal attacks.
• For complex technical or methodological claims, the editor may seek an external review and may ask for revisions, supporting data, or clarification.
• If the article was written or handled by a member of the editorial team, the discussion is assigned to an independent editor.

4. Authors' Right of Reply

• When a letter is accepted, the original authors are invited to submit a Reply, normally within 30 days.
• Authors are not required to agree with the letter. Legitimate scholarly disagreement, including differing exegetical views, may remain.
• If the authors do not reply, the letter may still be published with a note that they were invited to respond.
• A discussion is normally limited to one Letter and one Reply. Further exchanges are considered only if they offer substantial new evidence.

5. Publication

• Accepted Letters and Replies are published as separate items, each with its own title, metadata, and DOI, normally in the next available issue.
• Where possible, the Letter and Reply are published together and linked to each other and to the original article.
• They are open access under the same CC BY 4.0 license as other JSQ content.

6. Errors and Suspected Misconduct

• Errors: If a letter reveals an error in the article, the editors assess whether it affects the findings. The error is addressed through the Correction, Retraction, and Withdrawal Policy. A letter does not replace a formal correction.
• Misconduct: Concerns about fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, or undisclosed conflicts of interest must not be raised as a public letter. Report them confidentially under the Research Misconduct policy. The editors may pause a letter while such concerns are assessed.

7. Discussion on External Platforms

Comments on social media, forums, or external review platforms may be considered if they are credible and verifiable. However, they are not treated as formal notification to the journal. To receive a formal response, please contact the editorial office directly.

Commitment to Open Scholarly Exchange

Concerns about how a discussion was handled may be sent to the Editor-in-Chief and are dealt with as described in the Ownership and Management Information page. Disagreement with an editorial or scholarly judgment alone is not grounds for reconsideration.