Post-Publication & Appeals

J

Data Sharing and Reproducibility

J

Post-Publication Discussions and Corrections

J

Complaints and Appeals

This section consolidates topics that were previously presented separately into a unified framework designed to promote transparency in research reporting, to facilitate scholarly dialogue after publication, and to ensure a fair and accountable editorial process. It covers policies on data sharing and reproducibility, post-publication discussions and corrections, and the management of appeals and complaints.

Data Sharing and Reproducibility

Transparent data reporting and reproducible research are critical for scientific credibility, collaboration, and progress. ALSE encourages authors to adopt open science practices by making their data and methods as accessible and verifiable as possible.

Data Availability

Authors are required to include a Data Availability Statement in their manuscript, specifying:

Whether data supporting the findings are available;
Where and how the data can be accessed (e.g., public repositories, institutional archives, supplementary materials);
Any restrictions or conditions on access (e.g., confidentiality, licensing, ethical concerns).

Where appropriate, authors should deposit data in recognised, discipline-specific repositories (e.g., Dryad, Figshare, Zenodo) and provide persistent identifiers such as DOIs or accession numbers. If data cannot be shared publicly, then authors must justify this limitation and indicate how readers could request access to the data

Reproducibility

To enhance reproducibility, authors should:

Describe methods and materials with sufficient detail to allow replication;
Include protocols, workflows, and analytical code as supplementary materials or in repositories;
Use standard terminology and validated methods when available;
Disclose any software, databases, or hardware dependencies necessary to replicate the results.

The journal supports initiatives such as the Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable (FAIR) Data Principles and open peer review of datasets, when appropriate.

Post-Publication Discussions and Corrections

The journal recognises that scholarly communication does not end at the moment of publication. Ongoing dialogue, scrutiny, and correction are essential to the self-correcting nature of science. To support this, the journal offers mechanisms for post-publication engagement, as well as formal correction of the record when necessary.

Post-Publication Discussion

Readers, authors, and reviewers are encouraged to engage in critical, constructive discussions about published content. These may take the form of:

Letters to the editor;
Comments submitted through the journal’s online platform;
Follow-up articles that expand upon, replicate, or critically evaluate published findings.

All post-publication commentary is reviewed by the editorial team and may be subject to peer review. Authors of the original article will be given the opportunity to respond to substantive comments.

The journal promotes transparent scholarly discourse, provided that all contributions are respectful, evidence-based, and aligned with academic standards.

Corrections and Retractions

The editorial team is committed to maintaining the integrity and accuracy of the scientific record. In accordance with the COPE Retraction Guidelines, the journal will issue:

Corrections (Errata or Corrigenda) when minor errors are identified that do not alter the overall findings or conclusions:

- A distinction is made between erratum (editorial error) and corrigendum (author’s error);
- Minor changes, typographical or formatting corrections, are permitted during the proofreading stage; substantial additions or corrections are permitted only through a corrigendum;
- Errata and corrigenda are assigned their own DOI and explicit links to the original article, and are published as separate documents;
- The decision on the form of correction is the prerogative of the Editor-in-Chief, who consults with the editorial board where appropriate.

Retractions when errors or misconduct compromise the validity or reliability of the published work (e.g., plagiarism, data fabrication, falsification, duplicate publication, undisclosed conflicts of interest):

- Retractions are initiated when authors, readers, peer reviewers, academic editors, editorial board members or research institutions notice major errors or violations of ethical or legal provisions;
- The issue is brought to the attention of the Editorial Board, which investigates in consultation with the authors and, if applicable, with the relevant institutions;
- If it is found that the complaint is justified, a document is published promptly, even if authors or institutions do not cooperate
- specifying the reasons and the party responsible for retraction, and the outcome of the investigation. The document is assigned its own DOI;
- The published article is not deleted but will be clearly and explicitly labelled as retracted in both the HTML and PDF versions.
- Retracted articles are indexed and linked to the original article in the databases in which the journal is indexed.
- If it is found that several articles are affected by the same misconduct, batch retractions are published.
- A notification will be published in the first available print issue after the retraction, stating the title of the article in question, the authors, the reference, the reason for the retraction and the party requesting the retraction.

Expressions of concern when potential issues are under investigation but not yet resolved. They may:

- They are initiated by the Editor-in-Chief when there are suspicions of serious ethical or methodological problems but the evidence is insufficient to justify a retraction. When the situation objectively requires it, the members of the Editorial Board are consulted;
- They are published promptly as a separate document with its own DOI and a link to the original article and remain visible until a final editorial decision;
- They remain visible on the site in HTML and PDF format until the investigation is completed;
- If the suspicions are confirmed, the article is retracted, otherwise, the expression of concern is removed.

Each notice will:

Be linked to the original article;
Be freely accessible;
Clearly explain the nature of the issue and the reason for the editorial action;
Be published promptly upon verification of the facts.

Authors, readers, and third parties may notify the editorial office of potential issues requiring correction. The editorial board will handle such cases with objectivity, confidentiality, and adherence to ethical standards.

These provisions have been updated in line with the latest changes to the Retractions and Expression of Concern guideline COPE, August 2025.

Complaints and Appeals

The journal ensures that all stakeholders – authors, reviewers, and readers – have access to a fair, transparent, and timely process for raising concerns or challenging editorial decisions. Complaints and appeals are treated seriously and are handled in accordance with the COPE guidelines.

Appeals of Editorial Decisions

Authors have the right to appeal editorial decisions when they believe that:

The peer review process was not conducted fairly;
A conflict of interest may have influenced the outcome;
The rejection was based on a misunderstanding of the manuscript’s content or significance.

Appeals must be submitted in writing to the editorial office, clearly stating the grounds for the appeal and providing relevant supporting information. Appeals are reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief or an independent senior editor who was not involved in the original decision.

Editorial decisions after appeal are final and communicated in a timely and respectful manner.

Other Complaints

Complaints may relate to:

Alleged ethical misconduct (e.g., plagiarism, authorship disputes, data falsification);
Editorial bias, procedural irregularities, or conflicts of interest;
Post-publication issues, such as errors or concerns not previously addressed.

All complaints should be submitted through the journal’s official communication channels. The editorial office will acknowledge receipt, investigate the matter, and provide a response as soon as reasonably possible. Where appropriate, cases may be referred to the publisher, ethics committee, or COPE for further guidance.

The journal is committed to ensuring that all complaints are handled: