Retraction Policy

Journal of Responsible AI & Ethics (JRAIE)

The Journal of Responsible AI & Ethics (JRAIE) is committed to maintaining the accuracy, reliability, transparency, and integrity of the scholarly record. Retraction is a serious post-publication action and is considered when substantial evidence indicates that the findings, conclusions, ethical basis, or publication history of an article can no longer be regarded as reliable.

Retraction is not intended to punish authors. Its principal purpose is to inform readers that a published article, or significant parts of its findings, should no longer be considered reliable evidence within the scholarly record.

The journal evaluates potential retractions carefully, fairly, and on a case-by-case basis. Decisions are based on available evidence, the seriousness of the concern, its effect on the reliability of the publication, and the need to maintain an accurate and transparent academic record.

JRAIE follows recognized publication-ethics principles, including relevant guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) concerning retractions, corrections, expressions of concern, and preservation of the scholarly record.

Grounds for Retraction

A published article may be considered for retraction when credible evidence demonstrates that the reliability, originality, ethical acceptability, or validity of the publication has been substantially compromised.

Reasons that may justify retraction include:

Fabrication, falsification, manipulation, or serious unreliability of research findings.
Fabrication or inappropriate modification of research data, results, images, figures, tables, or analytical outputs.
Substantial plagiarism affecting the originality or integrity of the article.
Duplicate or redundant publication without appropriate disclosure.
Unauthorized reuse of previously published research.
Research conducted without required ethical approval.
Serious violations of informed consent, participant protection, or privacy requirements.
Publication of confidential or legally protected information without authorization.
Manipulated or fraudulent peer-review processes.
Fabricated reviewer identities or interference with editorial procedures.
Serious authorship misconduct affecting accountability for the research.
Significant copyright or licensing violations.
Fabricated or misleading artificial intelligence-generated data, references, images, analyses, or research outputs.
Fundamental methodological or analytical errors that invalidate the main conclusions.
Other serious publication or research-integrity concerns.

An error does not automatically require retraction. Where the main findings remain reliable and the issue can be corrected transparently, the journal may issue a correction instead.

Honest Error and Research Misconduct

JRAIE distinguishes, where possible, between intentional misconduct and honest error.

Retraction may still be necessary when an honest mistake substantially affects the reliability of the findings or conclusions.

Where misconduct is suspected but not confirmed, the journal will avoid presenting allegations as established facts. Any public notice will reflect only the evidence available at the time.

Initiation of Retraction Review

A retraction concern may be raised by:

Authors.
Readers.
Reviewers.
Editors.
Institutions.
Funding organizations.
Research-integrity bodies.
Other credible sources.

Concerns should include:

Article identification details.
Description of the concern.
Supporting evidence or documentation.
Relevant institutional or regulatory information where applicable.

Anonymous concerns may be considered when they contain specific and verifiable information.

Preliminary Editorial Assessment

After receiving a concern, the editorial office conducts an initial assessment to determine whether the matter involves:

A minor correctable error.
A significant reliability concern.
A possible ethical violation.
A matter requiring institutional investigation.
A concern insufficiently supported by evidence.

The Editor-in-Chief or an independent editor without a conflict of interest should oversee the assessment.

Where the Editor-in-Chief has a conflict, the matter will be transferred to another qualified editorial representative.

Author Notification and Response

Before making a retraction decision, the journal will normally contact the corresponding author and, where appropriate, other authors.

Authors may be requested to provide:

Explanations.
Original research data.
Analytical files.
Ethics approval documentation.
Consent information.
Supporting research materials.
Authorship records.
Information regarding AI tools or computational methods.

Authors will be provided a reasonable opportunity to respond.

Failure to respond does not prevent the journal from taking appropriate action when sufficient evidence exists.

Investigation and Institutional Cooperation

The journal recognizes that some investigations require access to information unavailable to the editorial office.

Where appropriate, JRAIE may consult:

Author institutions.
Research-integrity offices.
Ethics committees.
Funding agencies.
Regulatory authorities.
Other relevant organizations.

The journal may consider institutional findings when determining appropriate action.

However, the journal may act independently when sufficient evidence exists to protect the integrity of the scholarly record.

Independent Expert Assessment

For complex cases, the journal may seek confidential advice from qualified experts.

Expert consultation may be used for issues involving:

Statistical analysis.
Artificial intelligence systems.
Machine-learning models.
Synthetic datasets.
Image analysis.
Research methodology.
Ethical concerns.
Legal or privacy matters.

Experts must disclose relevant conflicts of interest and maintain confidentiality.

Expression of Concern

Where serious concerns exist but a final decision cannot yet be reached, JRAIE may publish an Expression of Concern.

This may occur when:

An institutional investigation is ongoing.
Evidence remains incomplete.
Serious reliability concerns exist.
Conflicting information requires further evaluation.

An Expression of Concern does not represent a final finding of misconduct.

Following completion of the assessment, the journal may issue:

Correction.
Retraction.
Removal of Expression of Concern.
Other appropriate editorial action.

Retraction Decision

A retraction decision is based on the reliability and significance of available evidence.

The final decision is normally made by the Editor-in-Chief or an authorized editor after considering:

Available evidence.
Author responses.
Expert opinions.
Institutional findings where applicable.

Retraction decisions are not influenced by:

Author reputation.
Institutional status.
Citation impact.
Commercial interests.
Financial considerations.

The primary consideration is protection of the scholarly record.

Author Agreement and Retraction

Author agreement is not required when evidence demonstrates that retraction is necessary.

The retraction notice may state whether:

Authors agreed with the decision.
Authors disagreed with the decision.
Authors could not be contacted.

Disagreement does not prevent the journal from correcting the published record.

Retraction Notice

Every retraction must be accompanied by a clearly identifiable Retraction Notice.

The notice should include:

Article title.
Author names.
Journal details.
DOI or permanent identifier.
Date of retraction.
Clear statement that the article has been retracted.
Reason for retraction.
Party responsible for initiating the action where appropriate.
Author agreement status where applicable.

Example:

Retraction Notice: This article has been retracted because [reason for retraction]. The decision was made following evaluation of available evidence and according to the journal’s publication-ethics procedures. The original article remains available with a clear retraction notice linked to the publication record.

The notice must remain permanently accessible and form part of the scholarly record.

Status of Retracted Articles

A retracted article will normally remain available as part of the historical publication record.

The article will be clearly marked as:

Retracted

The retraction notice will be prominently linked with the original article.

Where technically possible, the electronic version may contain a visible retraction label or watermark.

The journal does not normally delete retracted articles.

Removal of Published Content

Complete removal of an article is reserved for exceptional circumstances, including:

Legal requirements.
Serious privacy violations.
Confidential information disclosure.
Immediate risk of harm.
Unlawful publication.

Where removal occurs, the journal should retain a bibliographic record or explanatory notice where legally permissible.

Correction Instead of Retraction

Retraction is not appropriate when an issue can be corrected without affecting the reliability of the research.

Corrections may address:

Minor numerical errors.
Author affiliation mistakes.
Incorrect references.
Figure or table labeling errors.
Limited errors that do not affect conclusions.

The journal selects corrective action according to the seriousness of the issue.

Artificial Intelligence-Related Retraction

Because JRAIE focuses on responsible artificial intelligence research, additional attention is given to AI-related integrity concerns.

Retraction may be considered when AI is used to:

Create fabricated research data.
Generate false findings.
Produce misleading images or evidence.
Create unverifiable references.
Misrepresent synthetic data as real-world evidence.
Manipulate peer-review or editorial processes.

The use of AI assistance alone is not a reason for retraction. The concern is whether AI use compromises transparency, reliability, or research integrity.

Authorship Issues

Authorship disputes alone do not automatically require retraction.

Where possible, authorship problems may be corrected through:

Authorship correction.
Contributor clarification.

Retraction may be required when authorship problems are connected with:

Fraud.
Unauthorized publication.
False contributions.
Serious accountability failures.

Appeals Against Retraction

Authors may appeal a retraction decision when they believe:

Important evidence was overlooked.
Procedures were not followed.
New relevant evidence is available.

Appeals must provide specific evidence and reasoning.

An appeal does not automatically remove or suspend a retraction notice.

Post-Retraction Metadata

Where possible, JRAIE will update article metadata to reflect retracted status.

The journal may communicate changes to:

DOI registration services.
Indexing databases.
Repositories.
Scholarly communication platforms.

Citation of Retracted Articles

Retracted articles should not normally be cited as valid evidence.

If cited for historical or research-integrity purposes, the retracted status should be clearly indicated.

Confidentiality During Retraction Proceedings

Retraction investigations are handled confidentially.

Information is shared only with individuals who require access for legitimate editorial, ethical, institutional, or legal purposes.

Public notices provide necessary transparency while avoiding unnecessary disclosure of confidential information.

Responsibility for Research Integrity

Authors, editors, reviewers, and readers share responsibility for protecting the integrity of the scholarly record.

JRAIE encourages responsible reporting of concerns and cooperation with appropriate investigations.

Preservation of the Scholarly Record

The Journal of Responsible AI & Ethics (JRAIE) seeks to ensure that retractions are transparent, identifiable, permanent, and properly linked with affected publications.

The purpose of retraction is not to erase publication history but to ensure that readers understand the current reliability status of published research.

Through responsible correction and retraction practices, JRAIE aims to maintain trust, accountability, and integrity in scholarly communication.