Who Is Responsible for Handling Late Critiques of a Published Article?
When a journal publishes an article, it often outlines specific time frames for submitting a critique or a rebuttal to said article. However, the deadline can arrive a little too soon for some scholars and interested parties, so the academic world is no stranger to late critiques. The problem is knowing how to handle them and, in particular, whose responsibility it is.
There are many different types of critiques that articles receive, and some of them are entirely avoidable. If you’re getting ready to submit a piece of work for publication, check out how we can help you meet the requirements so that your well-researched article is not dead on arrival.
Setting a time limit is often necessary for journals to manage their publication cycles and their review of new work. Once an article is published, it has usually been through numerous revisions and has had more than one pair of eyes on it to ensure that everything is up to standard. With so many people contributing to a single paper, it can sometimes be unclear who is responsible for handling those critiques. Let’s take a look at why both parties (the journal and the author) share this responsibility.
Of course, you also want your article in tip-top shape before peer review, so make sure to polish it in advance—get a quote for our academic proofreading and editing service.
The responsibility of the journal
Academic insights are constantly being gained. Though it’s true that journals should handle all letters to the editor and process formal critiques, it makes sense for those specific types of critiques to remain recent in relation to the piece—typically, journals will set a time frame of three to six months to maintain relevance. Depending on the field, new insights and information can emerge rapidly, and articles may quickly become outdated through no fault of the authors. It doesn’t make sense to process critiques for articles that are already outdated—time limits are necessary to keep the conversation in the field fresh.
Of course, there are exceptions. In case there’s any doubt about the content of an article or the ethics of its author(s), it is the duty of a journal editor to look into the matter, regardless of how much time has elapsed since the publication date. To cover its bases, a journal should always have a very clear protocol for handling misconduct allegations, conflicts of interest, or other common issues that could affect the integrity of the author, the article, and the journal itself. There should be a defined space where certain critiques can be submitted anonymously, and the journal should take them as seriously as allegations with a name attached to them. This doesn’t mean simply taking the allegations at face value—any claims should be diligently studied.
It’s also advisable for journals to allow online comments and responses, whether on their own website or a reputable third-party platform. Due to the nature of online commenting, the time frame for permitting these comments can be indefinite as long as there is some form of expert content moderation. Journals should also encourage readers’ critiques and accept them for publication to emphasize the importance of debate and dissent within academia. Older articles can still make a valuable contribution to the academic discourse, even if certain aspects of them have become outdated.
The responsibility of the author
Contrary to the belief of some scholars, an author’s work doesn’t end once their article has been published. If there are critiques or rebuttals submitted to a journal, the author still needs to review their work and offer a retraction or an apology if the situation warrants it. Failure to do so speaks to a lack of academic integrity.
This is where it gets a bit trickier with time frames. If a complaint is lodged 15 years after an article was published, then it might relate to outdated methodology or something else out of the author’s hands, in which case no public action would be needed. If the complaint is about academic or sexual misconduct, it should be addressed immediately—an author is not absolved of wrongdoing solely on the basis of an arbitrary statute of limitations. Ignoring such allegations will typically make the author look culpable, whether or not that is true, so responding thoughtfully is always the best solution.
If the author is committed to upholding the ethical rules and standards of academia, then they should have done everything possible before publication to ensure that they presented their research as authoritatively and ethically as possible. That includes methods of data collection and approaches to research findings, as well as avoiding plagiarism. If you’re worried you might have accidentally plagiarized some of the content in your piece, get started with our academic plagiarism checker.
The author should work with the journal to publish a corrected version of the article if the research is still relevant, if the critique is found to have merit, or if it’s deemed necessary to officially acknowledge any issues in the original version, be they insensitive viewpoints or outdated technology. An author always carries responsibility for their published works and should make themselves available to post corrected versions when necessary.
Of course, the context and type of the critique should be taken into full consideration, but transparency is key. The author should acknowledge legitimate allegations, and the journal should be open about its review process and issue a retraction when needed. If you want to make sure that your work is airtight before you submit it for publication, use our academic services to minimize the chance of future critiques.