Jurnal Pendidikan Akuntansi Indonesia (JPAI) welcomes constructive discussion and reports of errors in published articles. This policy explains how the journal handles post-publication comments, integrity concerns, and changes to the scholarly record. It is informed by COPE guidance and complements JPAI’s Correction and Retraction Policy and Conflict of Interest Policy.

Part 1. Post-Publication Discussion

1.1. Forms of Discussion

• Comment or letter to the editor: A scholarly response that questions, clarifies, or offers an alternative interpretation of a published article.
• Authors’ reply: A response from the authors of the original article.
• Integrity concern: A confidential report of a serious error or suspected misconduct, handled under Part 2.

1.2. Requirements for Comments

Comments should be concise, written in Indonesian or English, and supported by relevant evidence and references. Include the article title and DOI or article link, identify the issue clearly, and disclose any relevant competing interests. References should follow JPAI’s Author Guidelines.

Discussion must address the research rather than the authors personally. Personal attacks, unsupported allegations, and disclosure of confidential information are not acceptable.

1.3. Procedure for Comments

1. Submission: Send the comment to jpai@uny.ac.id with the subject “Comment on: [article title]”.
2. Editorial screening: The editor checks relevance, evidence, tone, and significance, seeking independent advice when needed.
3. Authors’ reply: For comments considered suitable, the original authors are invited to respond, normally within 30 days.
4. Decision and publication: Accepted comments and replies are published together where practicable and linked to the original article. A comment may proceed without a reply, with a note that the authors were invited to respond.
5. Follow-up: Significant errors identified through the discussion are assessed under Part 3.

Part 2. Concerns about Research Integrity

2.1. What Can Be Reported

• Plagiarism, inappropriate text reuse, or duplicate publication.
• Fabrication, falsification, or manipulation of data and images.
• Authorship disputes or undisclosed funding and competing interests.
• Ethical concerns involving consent, confidentiality, or approval where required.
• Citation manipulation, compromised peer review, or paper-mill activity.
• Undisclosed or inappropriate use of generative AI that breaches journal requirements or affects research integrity.

2.2. Handling Procedure

1. Report: Email the article title, DOI or link, a specific explanation, and supporting evidence to the editorial office. Anonymous reports may be considered when supported by concrete evidence.
2. Initial assessment: The journal aims to acknowledge receipt within seven working days. An editor without a conflict of interest assesses the evidence and may consult an independent expert.
3. Author clarification: The editor requests an explanation and relevant records, normally allowing 30 days for a response.
4. Further investigation: Unresolved concerns may be referred to the relevant institution or funder. The journal cooperates with institutional investigations and may issue an expression of concern while the matter remains unresolved.
5. Decision and communication: The editor determines the appropriate action, informs relevant parties as appropriate, and retains a confidential case record.

Part 3. Corrections and Changes to Published Articles

Substantive changes are not made silently. Formal notices identify the affected article, explain the action, and are linked to the original publication. Detailed procedures follow JPAI’s Correction and Retraction Policy.

3.1. Erratum

An erratum corrects a significant error introduced by the journal during editing or production, such as an incorrect table, author detail, or publication metadata.

3.2. Corrigendum

A corrigendum addresses an author error that requires correction but does not invalidate the main findings. Minor spelling or formatting errors normally do not require a notice. Errors that undermine the conclusions are assessed for retraction.

3.3. Changes to Authorship

Requests to add, remove, or reorder authors must explain the reasons and contributions and include written agreement from all affected authors. Approved changes are recorded in a correction. Unresolved disputes are referred to the relevant institution. Personal name changes may be handled confidentially without a public notice.

3.4. Expression of Concern

An expression of concern alerts readers to substantial unresolved questions when evidence is inconclusive or an investigation is ongoing. It is updated when the case is resolved and may be followed by a correction or retraction.

3.5. Retraction

Retraction is considered when findings are unreliable or serious problems arise, including plagiarism, redundant publication, unethical research, compromised peer review, or a major undisclosed competing interest affecting the work or editorial decision.

The editor makes the final decision after considering the evidence and the authors’ response. The article normally remains online, clearly labelled “RETRACTED”, with a watermark on each PDF page and a link to the notice. The notice explains the reason, identifies who is retracting the article, and records the authors’ position where known.

3.6. Exceptional Removal

Full-text removal is reserved for exceptional legal, privacy, rights-related, or serious safety concerns. Bibliographic information and an explanatory notice remain available to the extent legally and ethically permissible.

3.7. Correction Procedure

1. Request: Email the article title and DOI, the location of the error, the proposed correction, and its effect on the conclusions. Author requests should state whether all co-authors agree.
2. Assessment: The editor consults the authors and, where necessary, an expert to determine whether a correction or another action is appropriate.
3. Notice preparation: The journal prepares a factual notice describing the error and correction. Authors are invited to check its accuracy.
4. Publication and updates: The notice is published, assigned a DOI, and linked to the article. Corrected files identify the date and nature of the change. Relevant metadata and indexing records are updated where applicable.

3.8. Example Notice Wording

Part 4. Roles and Responsibilities

• Authors: Report significant errors promptly, provide relevant records when requested, and cooperate with editorial assessments.
• Readers and reviewers: Raise concerns respectfully and provide specific supporting evidence.
• Editors: Handle cases fairly, manage conflicts of interest, invite author responses, and document independent decisions.
• Publisher: Support preservation of the scholarly record, maintain article–notice links, and facilitate metadata and indexing updates.

Sources

• Committee on Publication Ethics. Core practices.
• Committee on Publication Ethics. (2019). Retraction guidelines (Version 2).
• Committee on Publication Ethics. Flowcharts.