A journal receives a critique, or commentary, of an article previously published in the journal. The flowchart offers editors a step by step guide on how to handle this process.
Handling of post publication critiques
Flowchart
Handling of post publication critiques PDF 276 KB
The flowchart has been developed in collaboration with Wiley.
Key points
- Post-publication discussion usually begins with a reader’s critique of an article that a journal has published.
- When a formal critique is received, journals often invite the original authors of the critiqued article to write a reply. The critique and response may be peer reviewed.
- Critiques are often challenging and there are considerations that a journal might face, which are described in the guidance.
- Journals should have a transparent policy for considering critiques.
- Critiques should be reasonable and not contain libellous or defamatory content.
- Critiques should have evidence or data to support the claims.
- Journals must be clear with the authors of the critique and the published article on the timeline and the action to be taken.
- Amendments to the published article may need to be made (eg, correction or retraction).
Related resources
- Dealing with concerns about the integrity of published research COPE discussion document
- Retraction guidelines COPE guidelines
- When to conclude correspondence from reader about errors in a published article case, 2017
- Repeated complaints about a review case discussion
- Addressing ethics complaints from complainants who submit multiple issues discussion document
Core practices:
About this resource
Cite this as
COPE Council. COPE Flowcharts and infographics - Handling of post-publication critiques - English.
https://doi.org/10.24318/o1VgCAih
©2021 Committee on Publication Ethics (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)
https://publicationethics.org
Version history
Version 1: 2021
Full page history
-
29 February 2024
test file uploaded to private dir
-
28 September 2021
First published.