Corrections and Retractions Policy

The Journal of Responsible AI & Ethics (JRAIE) is committed to maintaining the accuracy, reliability, transparency, and integrity of the scholarly record. Published articles form part of the permanent academic literature, and any material error, ethical concern, or integrity issue identified after publication should therefore be addressed through an appropriate and clearly documented editorial process.

JRAIE distinguishes among corrections, retractions, expressions of concern, and other post-publication notices according to the nature, seriousness, and evidentiary status of the issue. Editorial action is determined on a case-by-case basis after consideration of the available evidence, the effect of the concern on the reliability of the article, and the need to provide readers with an accurate understanding of the publication record.

The journal's approach to post-publication amendments is informed by recognized principles of publication ethics, including relevant guidance issued by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Purpose of the Policy

The purpose of this policy is to establish a transparent procedure for addressing errors and integrity concerns discovered after publication.

The policy is intended to:

Preserve the accuracy of the scholarly record.
Correct material errors without unnecessarily removing valid research.
Identify publications whose findings can no longer be relied upon.
Inform readers when significant concerns remain unresolved.
Maintain transparent links between original articles and subsequent editorial notices.
Provide authors with a fair opportunity to respond to concerns.
Ensure that post-publication actions are proportionate to the nature and seriousness of the issue.

Post-publication action is intended to correct the literature rather than to punish authors.

Reporting an Error or Concern

Authors, readers, reviewers, editors, institutions, research-integrity officers, or other parties may notify the journal of a potential error or integrity concern relating to a published article.

A report should, where possible, identify the article concerned and provide sufficient information to allow the journal to understand and assess the issue.

Concerns may relate to factual errors, analytical mistakes, data problems, authorship, plagiarism, duplicate publication, ethical approval, competing interests, image manipulation, fabricated or falsified information, unreliable findings, or other matters that could affect the accuracy or integrity of the scholarly record.

The journal will assess credible concerns regardless of whether they are raised by a named or anonymous source. However, sufficiently detailed information is generally required before meaningful editorial assessment can occur.

Initial Editorial Assessment

When a potential post-publication issue is reported, the journal will conduct an initial assessment to determine its nature, seriousness, and potential effect on the reliability of the article.

The assessment may consider:

Whether the concern is supported by identifiable evidence.
Whether the issue affects a limited part of the article or the work as a whole.
Whether the principal findings and conclusions remain reliable.
Whether the matter represents an honest error or a possible integrity concern.
Whether specialist advice is required.
Whether the authors or their institution should be contacted.
Whether immediate notice to readers is warranted.

Not every error requires a formal correction. Minor typographical or formatting errors that do not affect interpretation, attribution, indexing, or the scientific meaning of the article may be corrected administratively where appropriate.

Author Notification and Opportunity to Respond

Where a material concern is identified, the corresponding author and, where appropriate, the other authors will normally be informed and given a reasonable opportunity to respond.

Authors may be requested to provide explanations, original data, analytical files, research records, ethics documentation, authorship information, source material, or other evidence relevant to the concern.

The journal will consider the authors' response together with the available evidence. Failure of an author to respond does not prevent the journal from taking appropriate action when sufficient information is otherwise available.

Corrections

A correction may be issued when an error or omission affects the accuracy, interpretation, presentation, or completeness of a published article but does not invalidate the article's principal findings or conclusions.

Examples may include:

Material factual errors.
Incorrect values in a table or graph.
Errors in statistical reporting that do not invalidate the principal findings.
Incorrect author affiliation or attribution requiring formal correction.
Missing or incorrect acknowledgment or funding information.
Errors in figures, captions, references, or supplementary material that materially affect interpretation.
An omitted disclosure or statement that should form part of the permanent publication record.
Other significant mistakes for which correction is sufficient to restore the accuracy of the article.

A correction notice should clearly identify the original article, describe the information being corrected, provide the corrected information, and be linked to the published article.

The original article may also contain a visible indication that a correction has been issued.

Author Corrections and Editorial Corrections

A correction may arise from an error identified by an author, editor, publisher, or another party.

Where the authors identify an important error in their own work, they are expected to notify the journal promptly.

The journal may also issue a correction independently when an error originates during editorial or production processing.

Regardless of the source of the error, the purpose of the correction is to ensure that readers can identify both the original publication and the subsequent amendment transparently.

Minor Errors

Minor errors that do not materially affect the meaning, interpretation, metadata, attribution, or reliability of an article may not require a formal correction notice.

Examples may include inconsequential spelling, punctuation, or formatting errors that do not alter scholarly content.

The journal will determine whether a formal notice is necessary based on the significance of the error and its potential effect on readers or bibliographic records.

Retraction

A retraction is considered when the journal determines that the findings, conclusions, integrity, or legitimacy of a published article have been fundamentally compromised and can no longer be considered reliable.

Retraction may be appropriate where there is evidence of:

Fabrication or falsification of data or results.
Serious manipulation of research materials, images, analyses, or records.
Major errors that invalidate the principal findings or conclusions.
Substantial plagiarism.
Redundant or duplicate publication that materially compromises the scholarly record.
Research conducted or reported in serious violation of applicable ethical requirements.
Fraudulent authorship, peer-review manipulation, or another serious publication-integrity violation.
Findings that are unreliable because of serious methodological or analytical defects.
Unauthorized publication or infringement that materially affects the legitimacy of the article.
Another fundamental problem that makes continued reliance on the publication inappropriate.

Retraction decisions are based on the reliability and integrity of the published record rather than solely on whether misconduct has been formally established.

COPE's current guidance similarly identifies unreliable findings, serious publication misconduct, plagiarism, and unethical research among circumstances in which retraction may be warranted.

Retraction Due to Honest Error

Retraction does not necessarily indicate misconduct.

An article may require retraction when an honest methodological, computational, analytical, or data-related error is discovered after publication and the error renders the central findings unreliable.

Where possible, the retraction notice should distinguish between honest error and established misconduct so that the reason for editorial action is communicated accurately and fairly.

Retraction Notice

Where an article is retracted, JRAIE will publish a clearly identified retraction notice.

The notice should normally:

Identify the retracted article by title and relevant bibliographic details.
Be clearly labeled as a retraction.
State who is retracting the article where appropriate.
Explain the principal reason for the retraction.
Distinguish confirmed findings from unresolved allegations where relevant.
Avoid unsupported or unnecessarily defamatory statements.
Remain freely accessible.
Be linked to the original article.

The purpose of the notice is to provide readers with sufficient information to understand why the article should no longer be relied upon.

Treatment of the Retracted Article

A retracted article should ordinarily remain available as part of the scholarly record rather than being deleted from the journal website.

The article should be clearly marked to indicate that it has been retracted, and a prominent link should direct readers to the retraction notice.

This approach preserves the history and transparency of the scholarly record while preventing readers from mistaking the article for valid, unretracted research.

Removal of Published Content

Complete removal of an article is different from retraction and should occur only in exceptional circumstances.

Removal may be considered where continued public availability would create a serious legal, privacy, safety, confidentiality, or other compelling concern that cannot adequately be addressed through retraction alone.

Where an article must be removed, the journal should ordinarily retain a bibliographic record or explanatory notice stating that the content has been removed and, where legally permissible, the general reason for removal.

Article removal should not be used merely to conceal errors, misconduct, or editorial problems.

Expressions of Concern

An Expression of Concern may be issued when the journal has credible reasons to question the reliability or integrity of an article but sufficient evidence is not yet available to justify a correction or retraction.

An Expression of Concern may be appropriate where:

A serious investigation is ongoing.
Available evidence is inconclusive.
An institutional investigation has been substantially delayed.
There are significant concerns regarding data, ethics, authorship, or integrity that cannot yet be resolved.
Conflicting evidence prevents a reliable final determination.
Readers should be alerted while further information is being obtained.

COPE describes an Expression of Concern as a mechanism that may serve as an interim notice and later be followed by a correction, retraction, or other final outcome.

Expression of Concern Notice

An Expression of Concern should clearly identify the article concerned and describe the nature of the unresolved issue to the extent that this can be done responsibly.

The notice should not present unverified allegations as established facts.

Where the matter is subsequently resolved, the journal should update the scholarly record through an appropriate correction, retraction, clarification, or notice indicating that the concern has been resolved.

Retraction with Partial Validity

Where a problem affects only a limited portion of an article and the remainder of the findings remain reliable, the journal will determine whether a correction is sufficient.

The journal will generally avoid describing a fundamentally unreliable article as valid merely because some individual portions remain unaffected.

The appropriate action will depend on whether readers can continue to rely on the article's central findings after the affected material has been corrected.

Addenda and Clarifications

In limited circumstances, additional information may be published as an addendum or clarification where it materially improves readers' understanding of an article without correcting an error that would require a formal correction.

Such notices should not be used to introduce new research findings that would normally require independent editorial evaluation or a separate publication.

Authorship Corrections

Requests to add, remove, or rearrange authors after publication will be considered in accordance with the journal's Authorship Criteria and applicable publication-ethics procedures.

Where an authorship change is approved, a formal correction notice may be issued so that the modification is transparent and permanently connected to the original publication.

The journal will not ordinarily alter published authorship silently where the change affects scholarly attribution or accountability.

Funding and Conflict-of-Interest Corrections

Where a relevant funding source, competing interest, or disclosure was omitted or reported incorrectly, the journal may issue a formal correction if the information is material to the interpretation or transparency of the published work.

More serious nondisclosure that raises concerns regarding research integrity may require additional investigation before the appropriate editorial response is determined.

Institutional Investigations

Certain allegations of research misconduct require investigative authority and access to evidence beyond that available to the journal.

Where appropriate, JRAIE may contact an author's institution, research organization, ethics committee, funding agency, or other responsible authority and request an investigation or relevant findings.

The journal may consider institutional findings when determining whether a correction, retraction, Expression of Concern, or other editorial notice is warranted.

The journal nevertheless retains responsibility for decisions concerning its own published record.

Retraction When Authors Disagree

Author agreement is desirable but is not required for the journal to issue a correction, retraction, or Expression of Concern when sufficient evidence supports editorial action.

Where authors disagree with a retraction, the notice may indicate the authors' position where relevant and appropriate.

The journal's primary responsibility is to maintain the integrity and reliability of the scholarly record.

Author-Initiated Retraction Requests

Authors who discover that their published work contains a serious error that makes its principal findings unreliable should contact the journal promptly.

An author request for retraction will be evaluated through the same editorial process applied to other post-publication concerns.

Retraction will not automatically be granted merely because an author wishes to withdraw an article after publication. The journal must determine the appropriate action necessary to maintain an accurate and transparent publication record.

Previously Cited or Indexed Articles

Retraction does not erase the historical existence of an article.

Published notices and article labeling should enable readers, indexing services, libraries, databases, and citation systems to identify the article's current status.

Where technically appropriate and available, relevant metadata should be updated to indicate that an article has been corrected, retracted, or otherwise subject to a formal post-publication notice.

DOI and Bibliographic Record

Where an article has been assigned a DOI or other persistent identifier, that identifier should ordinarily remain associated with the publication record after correction or retraction.

Retraction is not intended to create a new historical record in which the original publication disappears. Instead, the published record should transparently identify the relationship among the article and any subsequent correction, retraction, or other editorial notice.

Appeals Concerning Corrections or Retractions

Authors may submit a reasoned appeal concerning a proposed or published correction, retraction, or Expression of Concern.

An appeal should provide substantive evidence demonstrating why the editorial action should be reconsidered.

Where appropriate, the journal may seek independent editorial or subject-matter advice from individuals who were not responsible for the original post-publication decision.

An appeal does not automatically suspend or reverse an editorial notice where maintaining that notice is necessary to protect readers and the scholarly record.

Complaints from Third Parties

Post-publication concerns raised by readers or other third parties should be communicated in good faith and should, where possible, be supported by specific evidence.

The journal will not normally disclose confidential correspondence, reviewer identities, personal information, or investigatory material merely because a complaint has been submitted.

Complaints made for harassing, retaliatory, or clearly non-scholarly purposes may be handled differently from legitimate research-integrity concerns.

Confidentiality and Fairness

Investigations concerning post-publication issues will be handled with appropriate confidentiality.

Information will generally be shared only with individuals or organizations whose involvement is reasonably necessary to evaluate or resolve the concern.

The journal seeks to avoid premature conclusions and will distinguish allegations from established findings.

At the same time, confidentiality will not prevent the journal from informing readers when credible evidence indicates that a published article may be unreliable.

Timeliness

JRAIE seeks to address significant post-publication concerns without unnecessary delay.

Complex cases may require consultation with authors, reviewers, independent experts, institutions, ethics bodies, or other relevant organizations and may therefore require additional time.

Where a prolonged investigation concerns an issue that could materially affect reliance on a published article, an Expression of Concern may be considered while the matter remains unresolved.

Transparency of Post-Publication Notices

Corrections, retractions, and Expressions of Concern should be clearly identified as editorial notices and should remain accessible as part of the permanent journal record.

Notices should be sufficiently detailed to explain the nature of the editorial action without disclosing unnecessary confidential or personal information.

The journal will seek to ensure that readers can readily identify whether a published article has been subject to a material post-publication change.

No Silent Substantive Changes

JRAIE does not support silently replacing or materially altering published scholarly content when the change affects interpretation, findings, attribution, or the integrity of the record.

Substantive amendments should ordinarily be documented through an appropriate published notice.

Minor technical changes that do not affect scholarly meaning may be handled administratively where appropriate.

Relationship With Other Journal Policies

This policy should be read together with the journal's:

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement
Research Misconduct Policy
Authorship Criteria
Plagiarism Policy
Conflict of Interest Policy
Complaints and Appeals Policy
Article Withdrawal Policy
Research Data Sharing Policy
Data Availability Policy

Where an issue falls within more than one policy, JRAIE will apply the relevant provisions together to determine an appropriate and proportionate editorial response.

Commitment to the Integrity of the Scholarly Record

The Journal of Responsible AI & Ethics (JRAIE) regards post-publication correction as an essential component of responsible scholarly publishing.

The journal seeks to correct honest errors transparently, retract publications that can no longer be relied upon, alert readers when serious concerns remain unresolved, and preserve a clear documentary relationship between the original publication and subsequent editorial actions.

Corrections and retractions are therefore treated not as mechanisms for concealing problems, but as formal processes for protecting the accuracy, transparency, and continuing reliability of the scholarly record.