Post-Publication Discussion

1. Policy Overview PRIMER: Jurnal Ilmiah Multidisiplin recognizes that the publication of an article is not the end of the scientific process, but rather the beginning of broader academic discourse. We are committed to fostering open, objective, and constructive debate regarding the empirical findings, methodologies, and theoretical frameworks published in our journal. To ensure the continuous integrity and advancement of multidisciplinary knowledge, the journal provides formal mechanisms for post-publication discussion and critique, operating in alignment with the Core Practices of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

2. Mechanisms for Internal Discussion (Letters to the Editor and Commentaries) Readers and scholars who wish to critique, debate, or provide substantial supplementary insights regarding a specific article published in PRIMER are encouraged to submit a formal "Letter to the Editor" or a "Commentary" through our Open Journal Systems (OJS).

• Scientific Merit: Submissions must be evidence-based, scientifically rigorous, and directly relevant to the published article.

• Tone and Professionalism: Critiques must maintain a professional and objective tone. Ad hominem attacks, defamatory language, or unsubstantiated allegations will result in immediate rejection.

• Timeliness: While there is no strict deadline for post-publication discourse, we encourage scholars to submit their critiques in a timely manner following the original article's publication.

3. The Author's Right to Respond If a Letter to the Editor or Commentary raises substantial scientific criticisms, the editorial board will forward the critique to the corresponding author of the original article. The original authors will be given a fair opportunity to draft a formal "Author's Reply."

• Both the critique and the reply will undergo editorial review (and peer review, if deemed necessary by the Editor-in-Chief).

• If accepted, the critique and the corresponding Author’s Reply will ideally be published simultaneously in the same issue to provide readers with a balanced perspective.

4. External Discussion Platforms PRIMER acknowledges that vibrant post-publication discussions frequently occur on external platforms (such as PubPeer, academic blogs, social media, and institutional repositories).

• While the editorial board does not actively monitor all external platforms, we take substantive, evidence-based critiques raised in these forums seriously if they are brought to our attention.

• Whistleblowers or readers highlighting potential fatal errors or ethical breaches on external platforms are encouraged to contact the editorial office directly with verifiable evidence so that a formal investigation can be initiated.

5. Actions Arising from Post-Publication Discourse Post-publication discussions may occasionally reveal significant errors, methodological flaws, or ethical violations in the original article. Depending on the severity and validity of the issues raised, the editorial board may take the following actions:

• Correction (Erratum/Corrigendum): Issued if the discussion reveals an honest error that affects the article's details but does not invalidate the core findings.

• Expression of Concern: Issued if the discussion raises serious concerns about the article's integrity, but the investigation is ongoing or inconclusive.

• Retraction: Executed if the post-publication critique proves that the article's findings are completely unreliable due to major methodological flaws, data fabrication, or severe ethical misconduct.

6. Editorial Independence The Editor-in-Chief retains full authority over the acceptance, rejection, and moderation of all post-publication discussions submitted to the journal. The editorial team ensures that all debates are handled fairly, transparently, and without undue influence from institutional or commercial interests.