Post-Publication Policies

MULTI DISCERE JOURNAL · AFTER PUBLICATION

Post-Publication Policies

Scientific discussion, corrections, expressions of concern, and retractions help maintain a reliable published record.

Post-Publication Discussion Corrections Expressions of Concern Retractions Editorial Handling Procedure Appeals, Confidentiality, and Records

01Post-Publication Discussion

MDJ accepts evidence-based comments, scholarly criticisms and requests for clarification concerning material already published. Send the article title, DOI or stable URL, a description of the issue and evidence to the journal through its official Contact page. Editorial staff assess whether the submission is a scholarly exchange, an error report, or a research-integrity allegation.

Comments must be reasoned, respectful and relevant to the research.
Authors may be asked for a reasoned response, and editors may seek independent specialist advice.
When appropriate and editorially approved, a comment, response or clarification may be published as a linked journal notice or other permitted format.
A challenge to interpretation alone does not normally justify retraction if the original findings and methods remain reliable.
Claims of research misconduct are handled under Publication Ethics.

02Corrections

A formal correction is appropriate where an error, omission or relevant update should be recorded permanently but the core findings remain reliable. Examples include a substantial metadata error, incorrect labeling, an error in a table that does not invalidate the findings, or a necessary authorship correction.

Each correction notice should state the original article title and DOI (where available), explain the change, show the date of correction and be linked bidirectionally to the original article. Corrections must not be used to conceal fundamentally unreliable results. Trivial typographical changes may be addressed without a formal notice when they do not affect meaning or attribution.

03Expressions of Concern

An Expression of Concern may be issued when serious, credible questions have arisen about a published article but the available evidence is inconclusive or an investigation cannot be completed promptly. It warns readers of the unresolved issue without prematurely establishing misconduct. The notice should identify the affected work, describe the uncertainty to the extent appropriate and be revisited as evidence develops.

04Retractions

A published article may be retracted when editors determine that its findings or conclusions are substantially unreliable due to major error, fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, unethical research, extensive redundant publication or another serious problem affecting the scholarly record. Retraction is a means of correcting the literature, not a punishment, and does not by itself establish intentional misconduct.

Visibility of the scholarly record. A retracted article normally remains discoverable, prominently labeled as retracted, with a public explanatory notice. The article and notice should link to each other. Neither the article nor its bibliographic history should silently disappear from the archive.

Retraction notices should identify the article, explain the grounds and responsible decision maker, indicate whether authors agree when relevant, and state the notice publication date. DOI metadata and article landing pages should be updated where technically available.

05Editorial Handling Procedure

Receive report

Classify issue

Determine whether clarification, correction, misconduct investigation, or urgent reader warning is warranted.

Hear relevant parties

Invite the authors and other relevant parties to provide evidence and comment, subject to justified exceptions.

Evaluate independently

Manage conflicts and consult other experts or institutions where specialised fact-finding is required.

Determine action

Choose a correction, expression of concern, retraction, explanatory reply, or no notice based on evidence.

Publish linked notice

Publish a clear, dated notice and update the article record while preserving discoverability.

06Appeals, Confidentiality, and Records

An author or complainant may request reconsideration by submitting material new evidence or identifying a significant procedural error through the official contact channel. An editor with a conflict of interest must not assess the case. Editorial correspondence is documented and treated confidentially where appropriate. Public notices must communicate what readers need to know without unnecessarily exposing personal information.

The policy follows the distinction between correction, expression of concern and retraction described in the COPE Retraction Guidelines (2025).