J-Dinamika: Jurnal Pengabdian Masyarakat supports constructive scholarly discussion and the responsible exchange of perspectives concerning articles published in the journal. Post-publication discussion contributes to the development of scientific knowledge, the improvement of community service practices, and the maintenance of an accurate and reliable scholarly record.

This policy establishes the principles and procedures for submitting, assessing, and responding to comments, questions, critiques, and other scholarly communications concerning articles published in J-Dinamika. The journal encourages evidence-based discussion that helps readers better understand the methods, implementation processes, findings, limitations, and practical implications of community service activities.

1. Scope of Post-Publication Discussion

Post-publication discussions may address the content, methodology, implementation, interpretation, or practical implications of articles published in J-Dinamika. Relevant contributions may include:

• Scholarly comments or critical evaluations of published articles.
• Questions concerning the methods, implementation procedures, or evaluation of community service activities.
• Clarifications regarding data interpretation, reported outcomes, limitations, or conclusions.
• Discussions of the applicability, reproducibility, sustainability, or potential adaptation of reported community service interventions.
• Evidence-based suggestions for improving community engagement practices, technology implementation, or program evaluation.
• Concerns regarding possible errors, inconsistencies, ethical issues, or other matters that may affect the reliability of a published article.

Discussions should be relevant to the article under consideration and contribute meaningfully to scholarly understanding or the improvement of community service practices.

2. Submission of Comments and Responses

Readers and other interested parties may submit comments or concerns concerning a published article through the journal's official editorial contact channels. Submissions should identify the article concerned and provide a clear explanation of the issue being raised.

Where applicable, submissions should include supporting references, data, documentation, or other evidence that enables the editorial team to assess the substance of the discussion. Comments should distinguish between factual observations, methodological criticism, alternative interpretations, and personal opinions.

The editorial team may invite the original authors to respond to substantive comments or questions. Authors are encouraged to provide clear, evidence-based, and professional responses that address the issues raised.

All submissions and responses are subject to editorial assessment. The journal may decline or request revisions to contributions that are irrelevant, unsupported, inappropriate in tone, defamatory, or inconsistent with the journal's publication policies.

3. Editorial Assessment

The editorial team will evaluate post-publication contributions based on their relevance, clarity, scholarly value, factual basis, and compliance with ethical standards. Where necessary, the editor may consult the original authors, independent experts, or other relevant parties before determining an appropriate response.

In assessing a contribution, the journal may consider:

• Whether the contribution addresses a substantive issue concerning the published article.
• Whether the claims are supported by relevant evidence or appropriate scholarly reasoning.
• Whether the discussion is presented in a fair, respectful, and professionally appropriate manner.
• Whether the matter raises questions about the accuracy, reliability, or ethical integrity of the published record.
• Whether an author response, editorial clarification, correction, or further investigation is appropriate.

Editorial decisions will be made independently and proportionately to the nature of the issue. The journal will not treat disagreement with an author's interpretation, by itself, as evidence of misconduct or grounds for withdrawing an article.

4. Author Responses and Right of Reply

When a post-publication comment raises substantive questions about an article, the editorial team may provide the original authors with an opportunity to respond. The response should address the issues raised directly and provide relevant explanations, evidence, or references where appropriate.

Authors are expected to engage constructively and avoid personal attacks or unsupported allegations. A response may clarify the original methodology, explain limitations, correct a misunderstanding, acknowledge an error, or provide additional context concerning the reported community service activities.

The journal may publish a comment and an author response together, where appropriate, to promote balanced discussion. The decision to publish either contribution will depend on editorial assessment and the journal's available publication arrangements.

5. Corrections and Updates to Published Articles

If post-publication discussion identifies an error or omission that affects the accuracy or interpretation of a published article, the editorial team will assess the matter and determine whether a correction, clarification, or other editorial notice is appropriate.

Minor errors that do not materially affect the article's findings or interpretation may be addressed through an appropriate correction. More substantial concerns may require additional assessment, consultation with the authors, or further investigation before an editorial decision is made.

Any correction or update should clearly identify the affected article and explain the nature of the change. The journal will maintain appropriate links between the original article and the associated editorial notice to preserve transparency and the integrity of the publication record.

6. Concerns Regarding Research or Publication Misconduct

Post-publication comments that raise credible concerns about plagiarism, fabricated or falsified data, manipulated images, misleading reporting of community service activities, authorship misconduct, undisclosed conflicts of interest, or other potential breaches of publication ethics will be handled in accordance with the journal's Allegation of Research Misconduct policy.

Such concerns will be assessed on the basis of available evidence and relevant explanations. Where appropriate, the journal may request additional documentation, consult independent experts, or refer the matter to the relevant institution or competent authority.

When a published article is found to require formal editorial action, the journal may issue a correction, an expression of concern, or a retraction, depending on the nature and seriousness of the findings. A post-publication allegation will not automatically result in the removal or retraction of an article without appropriate assessment.

7. Ethical Standards for Discussion

All participants in post-publication discussions must adhere to principles of academic integrity, professionalism, fairness, and respect. Contributions must not contain harassment, threats, discriminatory language, personal attacks, knowingly false allegations, or the unauthorized disclosure of confidential or personal information.

Comments should focus on the scholarly content and evidence rather than the personal characteristics, institutional position, or professional status of the authors. Relevant conflicts of interest should be disclosed when they may affect the objectivity or perceived impartiality of a contribution.

The journal may decline, edit for clarity, or request revision of contributions that do not meet these standards. Any editorial intervention must preserve the substantive meaning of the contribution and must not be used to suppress legitimate, evidence-based criticism.

8. Publication and Accessibility of Discussions

Where the journal's publishing platform and editorial arrangements permit, accepted post-publication comments and responses may be published electronically and linked to the relevant article. Publication may take the form of a scholarly comment, author response, correction notice, editorial statement, or another appropriate format determined by the editorial team.

Published discussions should be identifiable, citable where applicable, and associated with the article to which they refer. The journal will apply its usual editorial and ethical standards to any contribution considered for publication.

Submission of a comment does not guarantee publication. The editorial team retains responsibility for determining the appropriate format, timing, and suitability of post-publication contributions.

9. Confidentiality and Data Protection

Post-publication discussions must respect the privacy and confidentiality of individuals and communities involved in reported activities. Contributors must not disclose personal data, identifiable photographs, confidential records, or other sensitive information without an appropriate legal or ethical basis.

The journal may redact or decline material that creates an unjustified risk to individuals or communities, while preserving the substantive scholarly value of the discussion wherever possible. Any handling of personal information will be subject to applicable data protection requirements and the journal's privacy policy.

10. Commitment to Scholarly Dialogue

J-Dinamika encourages constructive post-publication discussion as part of the continuing development of scholarly knowledge and community service practice. Through transparent, evidence-based, and respectful engagement, the journal seeks to improve the interpretation of published work, support accountability, and maintain the reliability of the scholarly record.

All post-publication contributions are handled in accordance with this policy and the journal's other applicable editorial and publication ethics policies.

Related policies: Allegation of Research Misconduct; Conflict of Interest Policy; Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement; Corrections and Retractions Policy; and Privacy Statement.