Post-Publication Discussion and Corrections Policy

The Journal of Integrated Social Sciences and Wellbeing (JISSAW) recognizes that research is an evolving conversation. We are committed to maintaining the integrity of the scholarly record even after publication, in strict alignment with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines.

1. Post-Publication Discussion

We encourage constructive academic dialogue regarding articles published in JISSAW. Readers may submit "Letters to the Editor" or formal commentaries if they wish to critique methodologies, offer alternative interpretations of data, or highlight ethical concerns (e.g., questioning the sampling bias in a sociological survey).

  • Process: Comments are reviewed by the Editorial Board. If accepted, the original authors are given the opportunity to publish a formal Reply.
  • Goal: To foster open debate on critical issues like public health policy, social equity, and educational reform.

2. Corrections (Errata and Corrigenda)

Honest errors are a natural part of science. If an error is discovered that does not invalidate the study’s main conclusions, we will publish a notice linked to the original article.

  • Corrigendum: Issued when the error was made by the authors (e.g., a miscalculation in a demographic table or a missing funding acknowledgment).
  • Erratum: Issued when the error was introduced by the journal during production (e.g., a labeling error in a figure).
  • Action: The original article is not removed. A note is added to the metadata, and the PDF may be updated with a footnote explaining the change.

3. Retraction Policy

Retractions are reserved for serious breaches that invalidate the results or violate ethical standards. JISSAW strictly follows COPE’s Retraction Guidelines.

  • Grounds for Retraction:
    • Data Fabrication: Evidence that data was invented or manipulated (e.g., falsified survey responses).
    • Plagiarism: Significant appropriation of others' work without attribution.
    • Unethical Research: Evidence that the study violated human rights or lacked necessary ethical approval (e.g., unauthorized data collection from vulnerable populations).
    • Duplicate Publication: The findings were previously published elsewhere without proper disclosure.

4. Retraction Process

  1. Investigation: The Editor-in-Chief initiates an investigation, potentially consulting independent experts or the author’s institution.
  2. Outcome: If misconduct is proven, a Retraction Notice is published.
  3. Visibility:
    • The original article remains accessible online for the historical record but is clearly marked with a "RETRACTED" watermark on every page of the PDF.
    • The DOI remains active but links to the Retraction Notice.
    • The retraction is reported to indexing databases (e.g., Scopus, DOAJ) to update the scientific record.