Corrections and Retractions Policy

General Provisions

The Publishing House of the Institute of Agriculture of the Carpathian Region strives to ensure the highest reliability and integrity of published materials. We recognize that situations may arise during the publication process that require corrections to published material or, in some cases, its retraction. This policy establishes transparent procedures for such cases in accordance with international standards of scientific publishing and recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Types of Corrections

1. Publisher's Error (Erratum)

Definition: Correction of a significant error made by the publisher or editorial office during the publication process.

Examples: • Technical errors in typesetting • Errors in article metadata • Errors in file uploading • Errors in author name or affiliation introduced by the editorial office

Procedure: Published in the next available journal issue with clear reference to the original article. The electronic version of the original article is updated with indication of changes made and reference to the erratum.

2. Corrigendum (Author's Correction)

Definition: Correction of a significant error made by the author(s) in the submitted manuscript.

Examples: • Incorrect values or units of measurement • Errors in calculations or methodology • Minor errors in data or their interpretation that do not affect main conclusions • Errors in textual description, figures, tables • Incorrect references

Procedure: Authors must submit a correction request with detailed description of the error and necessary changes. After review by the editorial board, the corrigendum is published with clear reference to the original article. The electronic version of the original article is updated with indication of changes made and reference to the corrigendum.

3. Addendum

Definition: Additional information to a published article that does not change main conclusions but provides important clarification or expansion.

Examples: • Additional data confirming conclusions • Additional methodological details • Additional explanations • Information that became available after publication

Procedure: Authors submit a request for addendum publication with justification. The addendum is reviewed and, if approved, published with clear reference to the original article.

4. Expression of Concern

Definition: Official notification by the editorial office about doubts regarding the reliability or integrity of a published article when investigation is ongoing or definitive conclusions cannot be made.

Examples: • Serious suspicions about data reliability • Suspicions about unethical research conduct • Discovery of potential conflict of interest that was not disclosed • Inability to conduct full investigation due to lack of cooperation from authors or institutions

Procedure: The editorial office publishes an expression of concern with clear explanation of reasons and description of investigation measures being taken. After investigation completion, the expression of concern is either withdrawn, transformed into a retraction, or remains if final clarity cannot be established.

Publication Retractions

Grounds for Retraction

1. Detection of significant errors or falsifications:

  • Data falsification or fabrication • Fraudulent use of data • Incorrect statistical analyses that substantially change interpretation and conclusions

2. Violation of ethical norms:

  • Absence of necessary approvals from ethics committees • Absence of informed consent from research participants • Violation of rights and welfare of research participants

3. Violation of publication ethics:

  • Plagiarism (including self-plagiarism) • Duplicate publication • Manipulation of the review process • Unacceptable authorship practices (ghost authorship, gift authorship, other serious violations of authorship principles) • Conflict of interest that was not disclosed and significantly affected the publication

4. Legal issues:

  • Copyright infringement • Violation of legislative norms • Court decisions requiring retraction

5. Other serious violations that undermine trust in scientific literature

Retraction Procedure

1. Initiation of retraction:

  • Retraction may be initiated by authors, editorial office, institution where authors work, or other interested parties • All retraction requests are reviewed by the editorial board

2. Investigation:

  • The editorial office conducts thorough investigation of all circumstances • Consultation with experts in the relevant field when necessary • Request for information from authors, their institutions, and other relevant parties

3. Retraction decision:

  • Decision is made by the editor-in-chief or special committee • Decision is based on collected evidence and in accordance with COPE recommendations

4. Author notification:

  • Authors are informed about the retraction decision and its reasons • Authors are given opportunity to respond to allegations

5. Publication of retraction notice:

  • Retraction notice is published in print and electronic versions of the journal • Notice contains title of retracted article, author names, retraction reasons, and who initiated the retraction • Retraction notice is linked to the original article in electronic databases

6. Marking of retracted article:

  • Electronic version of original article is marked as "Retracted" • Prominent link to retraction notice is added • Original article text remains accessible but with clear retraction marking

7. Informing indexing databases:

  • Editorial office informs all indexing databases about the retraction

Partial Retraction

In exceptional cases, when only part of a publication contains problematic data or incorrect statements, partial retraction may be considered. This procedure is applied when:

  1. Problematic elements can be clearly separated from the rest of the research
  2. Main results and conclusions remain justified without problematic elements
  3. Authors provide convincing evidence of reliability of remaining data

Partial retraction procedure is similar to full retraction, with detailed specification of which parts of the publication are retracted and for what reasons.

Article Replacement

In rare cases, when an article contains significant errors but authors can provide reliable corrected data and results, the editorial office may consider replacing the original article with a corrected version. For this:

  1. Corrected version undergoes full review process
  2. Replacement notice is published with detailed explanation of changes made
  3. Original version remains accessible with clear marking as "Replaced"

Responsibilities of Parties

Author Responsibilities

  1. Notify the editorial office about detected errors in their publications
  2. Cooperate with the editorial office in investigating suspicions about errors or misconduct
  3. Provide comprehensive information for corrections
  4. Initiate retraction of their own work if serious errors or violations are discovered

Editorial Office Responsibilities

  1. Ensure fair and transparent process for reviewing correction or retraction requests
  2. Conduct thorough investigation of suspected violations
  3. Act promptly when problems with published materials are discovered
  4. Ensure clear marking of corrections and retracted publications
  5. Follow COPE recommendations and other international standards

Institutional Responsibilities

  1. Conduct investigations of research misconduct allegations against their employees
  2. Provide editorial office with investigation results
  3. Facilitate investigations initiated by the editorial office

Timing and Publicity

  1. Timeliness: All correction or retraction requests are reviewed in the shortest possible time
  2. Transparency: All information about corrections and retractions is public and accessible
  3. Permanence: Correction and retraction notices are preserved permanently and remain accessible to readers

Prevention of Need for Corrections and Retractions

To reduce the need for corrections and retractions, the journal implements the following preventive measures:

  1. Thorough review process
  2. Plagiarism checking of all submitted manuscripts
  3. Clear instructions for authors regarding ethical standards
  4. Requirement for conflict of interest declaration
  5. Requirement for authors to provide data supporting results upon editorial request
  6. Regular training of editors and reviewers on identifying problematic manuscripts

Final Provisions

The Publishing House of the Institute of Agriculture of the Carpathian Region is committed to maintaining the integrity of scientific literature and trust in it. This policy is regularly reviewed and updated in light of evolving scientific publishing standards and COPE recommendations.

The Publishing House of the Institute of Agriculture of the Carpathian Region reserves the right to make changes to this policy. All changes will be announced on the official website.