Post-Publication Discussion

The Journal of Halal Industry Studies encourages constructive, evidence-based scholarly discussion of published articles. Such discussions are handled fairly and in accordance with COPE guidance on post-publication discussion.

1. Scope of Discussion
The journal accepts comments, critiques, letters to the editor, and responses concerning the methods, data, analysis, interpretation, or conclusions of published articles. Submissions must be relevant, supported by reasoned argument or evidence, and written in professional language. Personal attacks and unsupported allegations may be rejected.

2. Submission and Editorial Assessment
Submissions must identify the article being discussed, clearly explain the concern, and include supporting evidence or references where available. They should be sent to the editorial office using the official contact details on the journal’s website.

An editor will assess the submission’s relevance, evidential basis, and scholarly contribution. The editor may request clarification or consult independent experts before making a decision.

3. Right of Reply
If a critique is considered for publication, the authors of the article concerned will normally be invited to respond. The critique and response may be published together or separately. If the authors do not respond within a reasonable period, the editorial office may proceed with its assessment and note that a response was requested.

4. Corrections and Editorial Actions
If a discussion identifies a possible error or raises serious concerns about an article’s reliability, the editorial office will assess the available evidence and determine the appropriate action. This may include a correction, an expression of concern, or retraction, in accordance with COPE guidance on retractions.

5. Publication and Ethical Conduct
Accepted comments and responses may be published in accordance with editorial policy. Any correction or retraction notice will identify the article concerned and explain the reason for the action. All parties are expected to communicate honestly, support their claims with evidence, and maintain a professional discussion focused on the integrity of the scholarly record.