Post-Publication Discussion

Post-Publication Discussion

Environmental Engineering Journal ITATS (ENVITATS) is committed to promoting open, transparent, constructive, and responsible scholarly communication, including scientific discussion after the publication of research articles.

The Editorial Board of ENVITATS recognizes that scientific evaluation does not end with publication. Constructive academic discussions, critical assessments, methodological questions, and evidence-based comments contribute to the advancement of environmental engineering research and help maintain the accuracy, reliability, and integrity of the scientific literature.

ENVITATS welcomes comments, questions, clarifications, and scholarly critiques from readers, researchers, authors, reviewers, and other interested parties concerning articles published in the journal.

All post-publication discussions must be conducted professionally, objectively, and in accordance with recognized principles of publication ethics.

1. How to Raise a Comment or Concern

Readers, researchers, authors, and other interested parties who identify potential errors, methodological concerns, unclear interpretations, or other scientific issues in published articles are encouraged to contact the ENVITATS Editorial Office.

Comments, questions, and concerns should be submitted in writing to:

Editorial Office of Environmental Engineering Journal ITATS (ENVITATS)

Email: [email protected]

A submission should include the following information, where applicable:

  1. The title of the published article being discussed.

  2. The names of the original author(s).

  3. The article's volume, issue, publication year, and Digital Object Identifier (DOI) or permanent URL.

  4. A clear explanation of the comment, question, criticism, or concern.

  5. Relevant supporting evidence, such as scientific references, datasets, calculations, methodological explanations, or other verifiable information.

  6. The name, affiliation, and contact information of the individual submitting the comment.

  7. A declaration of any relevant competing interests.

Comments should be scientifically relevant, clearly articulated, and supported by appropriate evidence.

Concerns involving suspected plagiarism, data fabrication, falsification, unethical research conduct, or other forms of publication misconduct will be handled in accordance with the journal's Allegation of Research Misconduct and Plagiarism & Retraction Policy.

Scientific disagreement or an alternative interpretation of research findings does not, by itself, constitute research misconduct.

2. Types of Submission

ENVITATS accepts the following types of post-publication discussion concerning previously published articles:

2.1. Letter to the Editor or Scientific Comment

A concise, evidence-based scholarly discussion addressing the content, methodology, interpretation, or scientific contribution of a published article.

Comments may present alternative interpretations, additional scientific perspectives, or constructive criticism that contributes to a better understanding of the research findings.

2.2. Query about Research Data or Methodology

A request for clarification concerning research methods, experimental procedures, sampling techniques, analytical methods, statistical analyses, data interpretation, or research results.

In environmental engineering research, such queries may concern water quality measurements, wastewater treatment performance, air pollution monitoring, solid waste characterization, soil contamination assessments, environmental modeling, or other relevant technical investigations.

2.3. Report of an Error

A notification concerning a possible factual, numerical, methodological, bibliographic, or editorial error in a published article.

Examples include:

  • Incorrect numerical values or measurement units;

  • Errors in equations, calculations, or statistical analyses;

  • Incorrect figures, tables, graphs, or captions;

  • Inconsistencies in experimental results or environmental monitoring data;

  • Inaccurate methodological descriptions;

  • Incorrect references or citations; and

  • Errors in author information or other publication metadata.

2.4. Author Response or Clarification

Authors of published articles may submit responses to scientific comments, criticisms, or questions raised by readers.

Responses should directly address the issues identified and, where appropriate, provide additional scientific explanations, supporting evidence, or clarifications.

The Editorial Board may consider publishing the original comment and the authors' response together when the discussion makes a meaningful contribution to scientific understanding.

3. How the Journal Responds

ENVITATS follows a transparent, fair, and evidence-based editorial procedure when handling post-publication comments and concerns.

3.1. Initial Editorial Assessment

The Editorial Office reviews the submitted comment or concern to determine whether it is relevant to a published article, scientifically substantiated, clearly presented, and professional in tone.

The Editor-in-Chief or an authorized editor determines whether the submission warrants further clarification, scientific evaluation, or formal editorial action.

Comments that are irrelevant, unsupported, defamatory, or inconsistent with publication ethics may be declined.

3.2. Notification and Author Response

When a substantive scientific concern is identified, the editorial team may notify the corresponding author of the published article and invite the author(s) to provide an explanation or response.

Authors are given a reasonable opportunity to address the issues raised and provide relevant supporting information.

The absence of an author response does not automatically invalidate a scientifically substantiated concern.

3.3. Independent Scientific Evaluation

When necessary, the Editor-in-Chief may consult members of the Editorial Board, independent experts, or qualified reviewers to evaluate the scientific relevance and validity of the submitted comment.

The editorial assessment may consider:

  • The accuracy and reliability of research data;

  • The appropriateness of research methods;

  • The validity of experimental procedures and analytical techniques;

  • The consistency of results and conclusions;

  • The relevance of supporting scientific evidence; and

  • The potential implications of the concern for the reliability of the published article.

All assessments must be conducted objectively and without inappropriate influence from personal, financial, professional, or institutional relationships.

3.4. Editorial Decision and Publication of Discussion

Based on the evaluation, the Editorial Board may:

  1. Provide clarification directly to the individual submitting the comment.

  2. Invite the original authors to respond to the scientific concern.

  3. Publish a Letter to the Editor, scholarly comment, or corresponding author response when appropriate.

  4. Publish a correction or addendum when a verified error requires clarification but does not invalidate the principal findings.

  5. Issue an Expression of Concern when serious questions regarding the integrity or reliability of an article remain unresolved.

  6. Retract an article when sufficient evidence demonstrates that its findings or conclusions are unreliable or that serious publication integrity violations warrant retraction.

Formal corrective actions will be conducted in accordance with the journal's Plagiarism & Retraction Policy, Allegation of Research Misconduct Policy, and relevant COPE guidelines.

3.5. Transparency of the Published Record

Corrections, Expressions of Concern, retraction notices, and other formal post-publication updates must be clearly identified and appropriately linked to the original article.

Where technically supported, the journal will update relevant article metadata and DOI records to reflect formal corrections or retractions.

The original published record must not be silently altered in a manner that conceals substantive corrections or changes.

ENVITATS is committed to preserving the transparency, traceability, and integrity of its published scientific literature.

4. Standards for Discussion

ENVITATS encourages respectful, objective, constructive, and evidence-based scientific discussion.

All contributions must focus on the scientific content of the published article rather than the personal characteristics, institutional affiliations, or reputations of its authors.

The journal does not accept or publish:

  • Personal attacks, harassment, or defamatory statements;

  • Discriminatory or offensive comments;

  • Unsupported allegations presented as established facts;

  • Misleading or deliberately manipulated scientific evidence;

  • Promotional material unrelated to the scientific discussion;

  • Comments intended primarily to damage an individual's reputation; or

  • Statements that violate confidentiality, research ethics, copyright, or applicable data protection requirements.

Scientific criticism must be expressed professionally and supported by relevant evidence.

ENVITATS recognizes that legitimate differences in scientific interpretation may occur, particularly in complex environmental engineering studies involving experimental uncertainty, environmental variability, analytical assumptions, and modeling limitations.

Constructive disagreement is welcomed when it contributes to the improvement of scientific knowledge.

Concerns raised through external scholarly discussion platforms may also be considered by the Editorial Board when they are specific, relevant, and supported by verifiable evidence.

The journal reserves the right to moderate discussions and determine whether submitted comments meet the standards required for formal publication.

All editorial decisions related to post-publication discussions must be made fairly, independently, and transparently.

Environmental Engineering Journal ITATS (ENVITATS)

Editorial Board

Institut Teknologi Adhi Tama Surabaya (ITATS), Indonesia