Retraction Policy | Global Scholar Publications

⛔ Retraction Policy

🎯 Purpose of the Retraction Policy

The purpose of this Retraction Policy is to protect readers, researchers, authors, institutions, and the wider scholarly community from relying on published research that is materially unreliable, unethical, plagiarised, duplicated, fabricated, manipulated, or otherwise compromised.

Global Scholar Publications uses retraction as a transparent scholarly-record mechanism rather than as a disciplinary or punitive measure. The objective is to ensure that readers can clearly distinguish reliable publications from articles that should no longer be regarded as dependable evidence.

This policy helps Global Scholar Publications:

• identify published articles whose findings or publication history have become seriously unreliable;
• correct the scholarly record transparently;
• protect readers from misleading, unethical, or compromised research;
• distinguish retraction from correction, withdrawal, expression of concern, and exceptional article removal;
• preserve article identity, DOI, citation history, and publication records wherever possible;
• communicate appropriately with authors, institutions, funders, reviewers, and readers;
• maintain consistent publication ethics standards across the publisher's journal portfolio;
• support responsible research and scholarly communication.

📘 Meaning of Retraction

Retraction is the formal identification of a published article as unreliable, seriously unethical, substantially duplicated, plagiarised, or otherwise compromised to an extent that the article should no longer be relied upon as part of the valid scholarly record.

Retraction does not normally mean that the article is silently deleted. The article generally remains identifiable in the scholarly record and is clearly marked as retracted, with a prominent retraction notice explaining the reason for the action.

The purpose of maintaining the retracted article record is to preserve transparency, publication history, citation relationships, and the integrity of the scholarly record while preventing readers from treating the article as reliable research.

⚖️ Principles Governing Retractions

Global Scholar Publications expects all retraction decisions to be guided by evidence, fairness, transparency, proportionality, independence, and protection of the scholarly record.

The principal principles include:

• retraction should normally be used when correction is insufficient to protect the scholarly record;
• the reason for retraction should be stated clearly and factually;
• the retraction notice should remain permanently linked to the affected article;
• the article DOI and publication history should normally be preserved;
• authors should normally be given an opportunity to respond to substantive concerns;
• author disagreement does not prevent retraction when sufficient evidence establishes that retraction is necessary;
• the publisher should avoid speculative, defamatory, or unsupported allegations;
• decisions should be independent of nationality, institutional reputation, citation count, publication charges, commercial interests, or author status;
• retraction should primarily protect readers and the scholarly record rather than punish authors.

🔍 Scope of This Publisher-Level Policy

This policy applies to all journals published by Global Scholar Publications and covers articles that have entered the published scholarly record, including research articles, review articles, case studies, technical papers, short communications, methodological papers, and other published scholarly content where post-publication action may be required.

Individual journals may maintain additional editorial policies that complement this publisher-level policy. However, all journals within the Global Scholar Publications portfolio are expected to apply consistent fundamental principles of research integrity, publication ethics, transparency, and correction of the scholarly record.

📚 Global Scholar Publications Journal Portfolio

This Retraction Policy applies across the following journals published by Global Scholar Publications:

Concerns relating to a particular article may be reviewed by the relevant journal's editorial team in coordination with Global Scholar Publications where publisher-level oversight is appropriate.

🔎 Sources of Retraction Concerns

A potential retraction concern may be brought to the attention of Global Scholar Publications or the relevant journal by:

• authors or co-authors;
• editors and editorial board members;
• peer reviewers;
• readers and researchers;
• research institutions and universities;
• ethics committees;
• funders or sponsors;
• other journals or publishers;
• copyright holders;
• regulatory, legal, or research-integrity authorities;
• other individuals or organizations possessing credible evidence.

A concern should identify the affected article and explain the issue clearly. Supporting evidence, documentation, data, correspondence, or other relevant material should be provided whenever available.

👨‍🔬 Author Responsibility for Reporting Serious Errors

Authors have an ongoing responsibility to protect the reliability of their published work. Authors should promptly notify the relevant journal or Global Scholar Publications when they discover a serious error, unreliable finding, ethical problem, duplicate publication, authorship issue, fabricated data, manipulated material, or another circumstance that may require post-publication action.

Where a serious problem is identified, authors should provide:

• the article title and DOI;
• a clear description of the problem;
• supporting data or documentation;
• an assessment of the results or conclusions affected;
• the views of co-authors where available;
• information about relevant institutional or funder investigations;
• a proposed corrective action where appropriate.

🚨 Grounds for Retraction

An article may be considered for retraction when reliable evidence demonstrates that the publication is seriously unreliable, unethical, plagiarised, duplicated, manipulated, or otherwise compromised.

Possible grounds for retraction include:

• fabrication or falsification of research data;
• major errors that invalidate the principal findings or conclusions;
• substantial plagiarism or intellectual misappropriation;
• duplicate or redundant publication;
• serious image manipulation or visual misrepresentation;
• fabricated, manipulated, or compromised peer review;
• research conducted without required ethical approval or informed consent;
• fraudulent authorship or submission without legitimate author approval;
• serious undisclosed conflicts of interest affecting research reliability;
• substantial copyright infringement;
• fabricated references, data, images, results, or other serious misuse of artificial intelligence;
• serious privacy, legal, safety, or security concerns;
• other circumstances that materially undermine the reliability or integrity of the published record.

📊 Unreliable Findings and Major Errors

Retraction may be appropriate when errors in research design, data collection, calculations, statistical analysis, simulation, software, experimental procedures, methodology, or interpretation make the principal findings unreliable.

Examples may include:

• central results that cannot be supported by the original data;
• major mathematical or statistical errors;
• analysis of an incorrect dataset or sample;
• software or coding errors that invalidate the conclusions;
• research designs that cannot support the reported claims;
• material misrepresentation of methodology;
• errors that cannot be adequately corrected without replacing the central scholarly contribution.

Minor errors that do not affect the reliability of the main findings should generally be addressed through a correction rather than retraction.

🚫 Fabrication and Falsification

Fabrication involves inventing data, observations, experiments, participants, measurements, results, or other research materials that did not exist. Falsification involves changing, omitting, manipulating, or selectively presenting research information in a misleading manner.

Serious examples include:

• creating false datasets;
• altering experimental measurements;
• deleting results without legitimate scientific justification;
• duplicating samples, experiments, or images;
• misrepresenting sample sizes or experimental conditions;
• manipulating statistical outputs to support predetermined conclusions;
• presenting simulated or generated results as genuine observations.

📄 Plagiarism and Misappropriation

Retraction may be required where substantial portions of a published article reproduce another person's text, ideas, data, figures, code, methods, designs, results, or conclusions without appropriate attribution, permission, or disclosure.

Limited citation or attribution errors may sometimes be corrected. However, extensive plagiarism or serious misappropriation of another researcher's intellectual contribution may require retraction and other appropriate action under the publisher's publication ethics framework.

🔁 Duplicate and Redundant Publication

Retraction may be considered when substantially the same research, data, figures, analysis, or conclusions have been published more than once without transparent disclosure, appropriate citation, or editorial approval.

Duplicate or redundant publication may include:

• publication of substantially the same manuscript in multiple journals;
• translation and republication without appropriate disclosure;
• repeated publication of substantially the same dataset as new research;
• substantial overlap with an earlier article without meaningful new contribution;
• simultaneous publication resulting from duplicate submission.

Where necessary, Global Scholar Publications may communicate with other publishers or journals to establish the publication history and determine appropriate corrective action.

🖼️ Image Manipulation and Visual Misrepresentation

Retraction may be necessary when manipulated, duplicated, fabricated, synthetic, or misleading images materially affect the reliability of a published article.

Serious concerns may include:

• adding or deleting scientific features;
• reusing the same image to represent different experimental conditions;
• combining images without appropriate disclosure;
• cropping material to conceal contradictory evidence;
• altering contrast, brightness, or other features to misrepresent results;
• presenting AI-generated or synthetic images as authentic research evidence;
• using images from unrelated research without disclosure.

👨‍⚖️ Compromised or Fabricated Peer Review

An article may be retracted when the peer review process was fabricated, manipulated, impersonated, or otherwise compromised in a manner that undermines the validity of the editorial decision.

Examples may include:

• false reviewer identities;
• fabricated reviewer contact details;
• author-controlled reviewer accounts;
• undisclosed reviewer conflicts that materially affected the decision;
• coordinated peer review manipulation;
• fraudulent or automatically generated reviewer reports presented as independent expert assessment.

👥 Serious Authorship Misconduct

Retraction may be considered when authorship misconduct fundamentally compromises author responsibility, consent, ownership, or the integrity of the publication.

Examples may include:

• submission without the knowledge or approval of legitimate authors;
• fraudulent use of another researcher's name;
• misappropriation of research contributions combined with fraudulent authorship;
• false institutional affiliation used to create misleading credibility;
• authorship associated with fabricated or stolen research;
• an unresolved ownership dispute that makes lawful publication impossible.

Limited authorship or affiliation errors that do not affect research reliability may instead be handled through an appropriate correction.

⚠️ Ethical Approval and Informed Consent Failures

Retraction may be required when research involving humans, animals, confidential records, regulated systems, restricted materials, or other protected subjects was conducted without essential approval, consent, permission, or legal authority.

Serious concerns may include:

• absence of required ethics approval;
• fabricated ethics committee documentation;
• lack of informed consent where consent is required;
• unauthorised use of confidential institutional, personal, or commercial data;
• research that exposed participants, communities, animals, or systems to unacceptable risk;
• material misrepresentation of regulatory or institutional approval.

🤖 Serious Misuse of Artificial Intelligence

Global Scholar Publications recognises that artificial intelligence can assist researchers and authors but must not be used in ways that compromise research integrity or publication reliability. Retraction may be considered where inappropriate AI use materially undermines the authenticity, reliability, originality, or ethical basis of a published article.

Serious examples may include:

• fabricated data or experimental results;
• invented references or DOI information supporting central claims;
• AI-generated figures presented as genuine research evidence;
• substantial plagiarism concealed through automated rewriting;
• unverified AI-generated technical or scientific conclusions presented as validated findings;
• disclosure of confidential manuscript, participant, or proprietary information through inappropriate AI systems;
• AI-generated content submitted without meaningful human responsibility, verification, and validation.

©️ Copyright, Privacy and Legal Concerns

An article may be retracted or, in exceptional circumstances, removed when it contains serious copyright infringement, unlawfully disclosed confidential information, significant privacy violations, legally restricted material, defamatory content, or other material that cannot lawfully or ethically remain publicly available.

Where only a limited portion of the publication is affected and the scholarly record can be adequately protected, correction or another proportionate action may be considered instead.

🔍 Initial Assessment of a Retraction Concern

When Global Scholar Publications or one of its journals receives a credible post-publication concern, an initial assessment may be conducted to determine:

• whether the concern relates to a published article;
• whether sufficient evidence has been provided;
• whether the matter falls within the responsibility of the journal or publisher;
• whether immediate reader notification is necessary;
• whether authors, institutions, reviewers, funders, or other parties should be contacted;
• whether the concern can be resolved through correction or another post-publication action;
• whether further technical, ethical, statistical, legal, or subject-specific assessment is necessary.

📨 Information Requested During an Investigation

Depending on the nature of the concern, the journal or publisher may request:

• original research data and records;
• laboratory or experimental records;
• source images and relevant metadata;
• statistical calculations and analysis files;
• software, source code, simulation files, or computational records;
• ethical approval and informed consent documentation;
• author contribution information;
• copyright and permissions documentation;
• submission and peer review records;
• institutional or funder findings;
• funding and conflict-of-interest information;
• other documentation necessary to assess the reliability of the publication.

👨‍🔬 Author Opportunity to Respond

Authors are normally given an opportunity to respond to substantive concerns and provide relevant evidence before a final retraction decision is made.

Authors should respond:

• promptly;
• professionally;
• with complete and accurate documentation;
• without altering, destroying, or concealing relevant research records;
• with the knowledge of co-authors where appropriate.

Failure to respond, refusal to cooperate, or disagreement with the concern does not prevent Global Scholar Publications from taking appropriate action when sufficient evidence is available.

🏢 Institutional and Funder Investigations

Universities, research institutions, ethics committees, employers, funders, regulators, and other responsible bodies may be better positioned to investigate certain allegations, particularly those involving research records, employment relationships, laboratory conduct, authorship ownership, institutional approval, or financial misconduct.

Global Scholar Publications may:

• refer serious concerns to an appropriate institution or responsible authority;
• request information regarding an ongoing investigation;
• consider formal institutional or funder findings;
• issue an expression of concern while awaiting relevant findings;
• make an independent publication decision based on the evidence available to the publisher.

👨‍⚖️ Independent Expert Review

Global Scholar Publications or the relevant journal may consult independent experts where specialised technical, statistical, methodological, ethical, legal, image-related, engineering, medical, scientific, or other subject expertise is required.

Independent experts may be asked to assess:

• whether the published findings remain reliable;
• whether identified errors can be corrected;
• whether data or images show evidence of manipulation;
• whether the research methodology supports the reported conclusions;
• whether the article creates significant safety, privacy, or security concerns;
• whether the available evidence supports retraction.

⚠️ Expression of Concern Before Retraction

An Expression of Concern may be issued when serious questions exist about an article but the available evidence is incomplete, disputed, or subject to an institutional, legal, regulatory, or other investigation.

An expression of concern may be appropriate when:

• the reliability of an article is uncertain;
• authors provide materially conflicting explanations;
• essential original data are unavailable;
• an institutional investigation is delayed;
• readers need to be warned while the investigation continues;
• the publisher cannot yet determine whether correction or retraction is required.

✏️ When Correction Is Preferred

Retraction should not be used where a limited and transparent correction can adequately repair the scholarly record and the article's principal findings remain reliable.

Correction may be more appropriate when:

• a limited calculation error does not affect the conclusions;
• an incorrect figure can be replaced with authentic supporting material;
• an author name or affiliation requires correction;
• a funding or conflict-of-interest declaration was omitted;
• a reference or attribution error is correctable;
• a methodological clarification is required;
• the central research contribution remains valid.

The publisher or relevant journal may therefore choose correction, clarification, expression of concern, or another proportionate action instead of retraction where appropriate.

✅ Retraction Decision Process

The final decision to retract an article is made by the relevant journal in accordance with this publisher-level policy, with Global Scholar Publications providing publisher-level oversight where appropriate.

The decision may consider:

• the available evidence;
• author responses and supporting documentation;
• editorial and peer review records;
• independent expert assessments;
• institutional, funder, or regulatory findings;
• the effect of the concern on article reliability;
• whether correction can adequately protect the scholarly record;
• the need to protect readers and future researchers.

Retraction decisions should not be influenced by an author's nationality, institutional reputation, academic position, citation count, publication charges, commercial relationship, or other irrelevant considerations.

🧾 Contents of a Retraction Notice

A retraction notice should be clear, factual, accessible, and permanently connected to the affected publication.

Where applicable, the notice may identify:

• the article title;
• the authors;
• the journal citation;
• the DOI;
• the reason or reasons for retraction;
• who initiated or requested the retraction;
• whether the authors agree with the decision;
• the date of retraction;
• relevant institutional or research-integrity findings;
• a clear statement that the article should no longer be relied upon as valid research.

🖊️ Author-Initiated and Editor-Initiated Retractions

A retraction may be initiated by:

• all authors;
• one or more authors;
• the journal editor;
• the publisher;
• a research institution or research-integrity body;
• another responsible authority.

The retraction notice should identify the initiating party where appropriate and indicate whether the authors agreed with the final decision.

🚫 Retraction Without Author Agreement

Author agreement is desirable but is not a prerequisite for retraction when reliable evidence demonstrates that retraction is necessary to protect readers and maintain the integrity of the scholarly record.

If authors disagree with the decision or fail to respond within a reasonable period, Global Scholar Publications or the relevant journal may proceed with retraction and may state the authors' disagreement or non-response in the retraction notice where appropriate.

🔗 Linking the Retraction Notice and Original Article

The retraction notice should be directly linked to the original article, and the article record should prominently identify and link to the retraction notice.

Where technically possible, the article record should clearly display:

• that the article has been retracted;
• the date of retraction;
• a prominent link to the retraction notice;
• a visible warning on the HTML and PDF versions;
• the preserved DOI and citation history.

📄 Treatment of the Retracted Article

The full text of a retracted article will normally remain accessible with a prominent retraction notice or watermark, unless exceptional legal, privacy, safety, or security circumstances require removal or restricted access.

Maintaining the article record helps preserve the scholarly publication history and allows readers to understand what was originally published and why it was subsequently retracted.

A retracted article should not:

• appear as a valid and uncorrected publication;
• be silently removed from the scholarly record;
• lose its connection to the retraction notice;
• continue to be promoted as reliable research.

🔖 DOI and Metadata After Retraction

The original DOI will normally remain active and should continue to resolve to the article record containing the retracted status and relevant retraction information.

Where applicable, Global Scholar Publications may update publication metadata supplied to:

• Crossref;
• indexing and abstracting services;
• institutional and subject repositories;
• libraries and discovery systems;
• citation databases;
• digital archiving platforms;
• other relevant scholarly information systems.

📚 Repository and Archived Copies

Authors, institutions, repositories, libraries, and archive managers should update records of retracted publications whenever practicable so that the retracted status is visible and readers are directed to the official retraction notice.

Repository copies should, where technically possible:

• display the retracted status clearly;
• link to the official retraction notice;
• avoid distributing the article without a retraction warning;
• preserve the historical publication record where appropriate;
• update metadata and version information.

📣 Citations of Retracted Articles

Retracted articles should not normally be cited as reliable evidence for current research conclusions. When citation is necessary for discussion of publication history, research integrity, scholarly criticism, systematic review of retractions, or related academic purposes, the citation should clearly indicate that the article has been retracted.

🗑️ Exceptional Article Removal

Complete removal of an article's publicly accessible content is considered only in exceptional circumstances. Retraction and removal are therefore treated as distinct post-publication actions.

Exceptional removal may be considered in circumstances such as:

• a court or legally binding order;
• serious privacy or confidentiality violations;
• immediate and substantial safety risks;
• defamatory or unlawful material;
• security-sensitive information whose continued availability creates serious harm;
• content that creates unacceptable risks to protected research participants;
• other exceptional circumstances where continued public access is legally or ethically inappropriate.

Where possible, the bibliographic record and an appropriate removal or retraction notice should remain accessible so that the publication history is not silently erased.

🔄 Replacement of a Retracted Article

In rare circumstances, an article may be retracted and replaced when the original publication contains serious errors but a thoroughly corrected version remains scientifically meaningful and appropriate for publication.

Any replacement should:

• be clearly identified as a replacement or new publication;
• remain linked to the original retraction notice;
• explain the relationship between the original and replacement versions;
• undergo appropriate editorial assessment and peer review where required;
• preserve rather than conceal the original publication history.

📢 Appeals Against Retraction

Authors may appeal a retraction decision when they believe that the decision was based on materially incorrect evidence, overlooked documentation, a significant procedural error, factual inaccuracies in the notice, or circumstances demonstrating that correction would adequately protect the scholarly record.

An appeal may be considered where:

• evidence was interpreted incorrectly;
• important data or documentation were overlooked;
• a material procedural error occurred;
• the retraction notice contains factual inaccuracies;
• new evidence demonstrates that correction may be sufficient;
• new institutional findings materially change the circumstances.

Appeals should provide substantive new evidence or identify a material error in the decision rather than simply repeat an earlier disagreement. Where appropriate, an appeal may be reviewed by an editor or qualified expert who was not directly involved in the original decision.

🛠️ Enforcement of the Retraction Policy

The action taken by Global Scholar Publications or the relevant journal depends on the seriousness of the concern, the available evidence, the reliability of the findings, the nature of the ethical issue, and the stage of the investigation.

Possible actions may include:

• requesting clarification or original research records;
• publishing a correction;
• issuing an expression of concern;
• retracting the article;
• removing content in exceptional circumstances;
• updating DOI and publication metadata;
• notifying relevant institutions, funders, ethics committees, publishers, or authorities;
• reviewing future submission or editorial participation where serious or repeated misconduct warrants further action.

🌟 Why the Retraction Policy Matters

A clear publisher-level Retraction Policy demonstrates that responsibility for research integrity continues after an article has been published. Retraction provides an important mechanism for protecting readers from unreliable findings while ensuring that serious publication problems are addressed openly rather than hidden or silently removed.

Because Global Scholar Publications publishes journals covering science, technology, multidisciplinary research, biology, pharmacy, chemistry, life sciences, engineering, medicine, dentistry, and related fields, maintaining the reliability of the published record is an essential responsibility across the entire journal portfolio.

This Retraction Policy helps Global Scholar Publications:

• identify unreliable or unethical publications;
• protect readers, researchers, and the wider scholarly community;
• distinguish retraction from correction, withdrawal, and expression of concern;
• preserve transparent DOI and publication records;
• address plagiarism, duplicate publication, fabrication, falsification, and peer review manipulation;
• respond appropriately to serious authorship and ethical concerns;
• coordinate with institutions, funders, repositories, and other publishers where necessary;
• maintain accurate indexing and repository records;
• strengthen confidence in responsible scholarly publishing.

🔗 Related Global Scholar Publications Policies

Authors, reviewers, editors, readers, institutions, and other stakeholders are encouraged to review the relevant editorial and publishing policies of Global Scholar Publications for a complete understanding of research integrity, publication ethics, peer review, authorship, plagiarism, artificial intelligence, data sharing, corrections, withdrawal, and post-publication management.

🚀 Submit Responsible and Reliable Research

📚 Journal Portfolio Covered by This Policy