Corrections and Retractions

AIJOSH is committed to maintaining an accurate and trustworthy scholarly record. This policy governs corrections, retractions, expressions of concern, addenda, and exceptional changes to published content.

1. Scope and General Principles

Published articles may require amendment because of errors, omissions, unreliable evidence, or breaches of research and publication ethics.

The journal assesses concerns fairly and takes action according to their significance for the accuracy, interpretation, and integrity of the work. Honest error and misconduct will be distinguished where the evidence permits.

Legitimate scholarly disagreement or subsequent research challenging an earlier interpretation does not automatically justify correction or retraction. Such matters may instead be addressed under the Post-Publication Discussions Policy.

Substantive amendments must be clearly identified and documented. Published content will not be silently replaced to conceal changes.

This policy applies regardless of an article’s publication date. The age of an article does not, by itself, prevent assessment of a credible concern.

2. Reporting Errors and Concerns

Authors, readers, reviewers, and other parties may report significant errors through the official editorial contact details published on the journal’s website.

Reports should include:

The article title, authors, and DOI or publication URL.
The location and nature of the issue.
An explanation of its significance.
Supporting evidence or proposed corrected information, where available.

Authors who discover a significant error in their own work must promptly notify the journal and cooperate in determining the appropriate response.

Anonymous reports may be considered when sufficiently specific and verifiable.

Where a Correction and Retraction Request Form is available, contributors are encouraged to use it. A sufficiently clear report may still be assessed without a completed form.

3. Assessment and Decision-Making

The Editor-in-Chief, or an independent editor where a conflict of interest exists, oversees the assessment.

The journal may request explanations from authors, examine relevant data or source materials, consult independent specialists, or refer concerns to the appropriate institution. Requests for supporting materials must respect confidentiality, participant consent, and legitimate access restrictions.

Authors will ordinarily have an opportunity to respond before a substantive notice is published. Their agreement is not required for justified editorial action.

The journal may act before an institutional investigation concludes when sufficient evidence is available. Substantial unresolved concerns may warrant an interim notice.

Concerns involving the Editor-in-Chief must be referred to Medan Resource Center for independent handling. If publisher personnel are implicated, an external editor or adviser without a relevant conflict will be assigned.

4. Corrections

A correction is appropriate when a significant error or omission affects an article but does not invalidate the work as a whole.

Examples may include:

Inaccurate quotations or mistranslations.
Incorrect references or source attribution.
Errors in tables, figures, calculations, or factual details.
Omissions or inaccuracies in funding and conflicts-of-interest declarations.
Authorship changes approved under the Authorship and Contributorship Policy.

The significance of an error depends on its effect on the article. An error involving a quotation, calculation, or source may require more than a correction if it undermines the central findings or argument.

The journal may use the following labels:

Corrigendum: A correction addressing an error originating from the authors.
Erratum: A correction addressing an error introduced during editorial production or publication.

Substantive corrections are published as separate, citable notices identifying the error and presenting the corrected information. The notice and original article will be linked in both directions.

The original article remains available with a visible notification. If its files are updated, the changes and date will be documented, and the earlier version will be retained in the journal’s records, subject to applicable privacy or legal requirements.

Minor typographical or formatting errors that do not affect meaning may be addressed without a separate notice, with changes recorded internally.

Note: Correction notices are published without charge to authors.

5. Retractions

Retraction informs readers that an article is substantially unreliable or involves serious publication ethics violations warranting this action. Its purpose is to protect the scholarly record rather than punish authors.

Grounds may include:

Substantial errors, fabrication, falsification, or misrepresentation of evidence that undermine the findings or central arguments.
Substantial plagiarism or unauthorized use of material that compromises the article’s integrity.
Redundant publication without adequate disclosure, justification, or acknowledgment.
Serious ethical breaches in the conduct or reporting of research.
Manipulated or compromised peer review that undermines confidence in the publication.
A major undisclosed competing interest that materially affected interpretation or editorial evaluation.

Retraction may be necessary because of misconduct or honest error. Minor errors and authorship disputes alone do not normally justify retraction when the work remains reliable.

Cases involving suspected misconduct are also assessed under the Allegations of Misconduct Policy.

6. Retraction Notices

A retraction notice will:

Be clearly titled “Retraction: [Original Article Title].”
Identify the affected article, including its citation and DOI where available.
Identify who is retracting the article.
Explain the reasons in factual and proportionate language.
Distinguish established findings from unresolved allegations.
Record the authors’ agreement, disagreement, or lack of response where relevant.
Be dated, freely accessible, and linked to the affected article.

The article will ordinarily remain publicly accessible. Its landing page and available full-text files will be clearly marked as retracted, with a link or reference to the retraction notice.

Retraction does not normally involve deletion. The bibliographic record and publication history will be preserved so that readers can identify the article and understand its status.

7. Expressions of Concern

An expression of concern may be issued when substantial, credible doubts exist about an article’s reliability or integrity but the available evidence does not support a definitive outcome.

This may occur when:

An investigation is ongoing or substantially delayed.
Relevant evidence is unavailable or conflicting.
An institution cannot adequately resolve the concern.
Readers need to be alerted while further assessment continues.

The notice will explain the concerns and limitations of the evidence without presenting unproven allegations as established misconduct.

Expressions of concern will be citable and linked to the article. When further evidence becomes available, the journal will publish an appropriate follow-up, such as a resolution notice, correction, or retraction.

If concerns remain unresolved, the notice may remain in place with an explanation. Any later resolution will be documented rather than silently removing the publication history.

8. Addenda and Article Updates

An addendum may be published when additional information is essential to understanding an article but does not correct an error.

Requests must explain the proposed addition and its relevance. Accepted addenda undergo editorial assessment and, where appropriate, external peer review. They are published as separate, citable items linked to the original article.

Substantial new data, expanded analysis, or materially different interpretations normally require a new submission. They will not be incorporated retrospectively into the original article without a clearly documented publication process.

An addendum must not be used to avoid issuing a correction or retraction where either is warranted.

9. Exceptional Removal or Replacement

Removal of published content is considered only in exceptional circumstances, such as a legal requirement, serious infringement of privacy or other rights, or a substantial risk of harm that cannot be adequately addressed through correction or retraction.

Where a limited redaction can adequately address the concern, it may be considered instead of removing the entire article.

Where possible, the bibliographic record will remain available with a notice explaining the removal or redaction, subject to legal and confidentiality requirements.

When honest error renders an article unreliable, the journal may exceptionally consider a corrected replacement following independent assessment and, where appropriate, renewed peer review. Any replacement must explain its relationship to the original article and retraction notice and preserve a transparent publication history.

Authors may not replace a published article merely to improve its presentation, strengthen its argument, or avoid an adverse editorial notice.

10. Discoverability and Record Maintenance

All substantive notices will be clearly labeled, dated, and linked to the affected articles.

The journal will update relevant metadata and take reasonable steps to notify indexing, abstracting, repository, and preservation services. Changes on external platforms remain subject to those services’ procedures.

Authors should update repository records and other copies under their control to identify relevant corrections, expressions of concern, or retractions.

Records of concerns, evidence, correspondence, assessments, and decisions will be retained with appropriate confidentiality.

11. Appeals and Policy Review

Authors may appeal an editorial action in writing by identifying factual errors, procedural concerns, or substantial new evidence. Appeals must be submitted through the journal’s official contact channel.

Where practicable, an independent editor or adviser who was not responsible for the original decision will assess the appeal. The outcome and reasons will be communicated to the appellant.

An appeal does not automatically suspend action necessary to protect readers or the scholarly record. If new evidence warrants changing an earlier decision, the journal will document the outcome transparently.

AIJOSH reviews this policy periodically and consults relevant guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). This policy should be read alongside the Allegations of Misconduct Policy, Post-Publication Discussions Policy, and other applicable editorial policies.

Download: Correction and Retraction Request Form