Corrections, Retractions & Expressions of Concern Policy

CORRECTIONS, RETRACTIONS & EXPRESSIONS OF CONCERN POLICY

Pedagogical Perspective (PedPer)

ISSN: 2822-4841 | DOI Prefix: 10.29329

Quick Summary

Pedagogical Perspective (PedPer) (eISSN: 2822-4841) is committed to maintaining the accuracy, transparency, and integrity of the scholarly record. When necessary, the journal will publish Corrections, Expressions of Concern, or Retractions to address errors or potential/confirmed misconduct, guided by COPE Retraction Guidelines and best practices.

1) Definitions

Correction (Erratum/Corrigendum): A notice that corrects an error that does not invalidate the main conclusions of the article (e.g., author name, affiliation, minor factual/formatting errors, figure/table labeling, minor numerical errors). An Erratum addresses publisher- or production-related errors; a Corrigendum addresses author-related errors.
Expression of Concern: A public notice issued when there are serious concerns about an article, but the outcome of an investigation is pending or inconclusive.
Retraction: A notice indicating that an article’s findings or integrity are unreliable due to major error or confirmed misconduct.
Partial Retraction: In rare cases where only a specific portion of an article (e.g., one study within a multi-study paper, a single dataset, or specific results) is found to be unreliable while the remainder is sound, PedPer may issue a partial retraction. The notice will clearly specify which portions are retracted and which remain valid.
Removal (Exceptional): Rarely used and only in exceptional circumstances (e.g., legal issues, serious privacy risks, content that could pose a serious health risk if acted upon). If removal is necessary, the bibliographic record (title, authors, DOI) remains and a removal notice is posted explaining the reason.

2) When PedPer Issues a Correction

PedPer may issue a Correction when:

An honest error is identified that affects accuracy or clarity but does not invalidate the main results or conclusions; or
An update is necessary to ensure correct attribution (e.g., author name, ORCID, affiliation, funding acknowledgment) or correct presentation.

How it appears: A separate Correction notice is published with its own DOI, dated, and bidirectionally linked to the original article. The original article remains available and clearly indicates that a Correction exists.

3) When PedPer Issues an Expression of Concern

PedPer may issue an Expression of Concern when:

There is credible evidence of a serious problem (e.g., possible misconduct, unreliable data), and
An investigation is ongoing, delayed, or cannot be completed promptly; or
The available information is insufficient to reach a final conclusion, but readers should be alerted.

An Expression of Concern may be updated, replaced by a Correction, or escalated to a Retraction once the investigation is concluded.

How it appears: A separate notice is published with its own DOI, dated, and bidirectionally linked to the article to inform readers while the matter is being examined.

4) When PedPer Retracts an Article

PedPer may retract an article when:

Findings are unreliable due to major error (e.g., critical miscalculation, fundamental methodological flaw) or
Misconduct is confirmed, including (but not limited to):
Plagiarism
Data fabrication or falsification
Manipulated images or data
Duplicate/redundant publication
Serious authorship violations (ghost/gift authorship, undisclosed contributors)
Undeclared conflicts of interest that significantly affect interpretation
Peer review manipulation
Undisclosed use of generative AI tools that materially affects the reliability of the work (see Generative AI Policy)
Failure to obtain required ethics approval for research involving human participants

How it appears: The article remains accessible to preserve the scholarly record but is clearly marked “RETRACTED” (e.g., watermark across each page and/or a prominent header). A Retraction notice is published with its own DOI, dated, and bidirectionally linked to the article, explaining the reason at an appropriate level of detail.

5) Initiation of Post-Publication Actions

Requests for Corrections, Expressions of Concern, or Retractions may be initiated by:

Authors (who are encouraged to report errors in their own work promptly)
Readers
Reviewers
Editors
Institutions, funders, or third parties

Concerns should be submitted to: info@pedagogicalperspective.com with supporting evidence where possible.

6) Investigation and Decision Process

When a concern is raised, PedPer will:

Acknowledge receipt within 5 business days and conduct an initial assessment.
Secure records (submission files, peer review logs, correspondence, published versions).
Request a response and documentation from authors when appropriate (response deadline: 15 business days).
Seek input from independent experts and/or contact relevant institutions/ethics committees for serious allegations.
Decide on the appropriate outcome: Correction, Expression of Concern, Retraction, or no action.

PedPer follows COPE flowcharts as a procedural reference throughout the investigation and aims to handle cases fairly, confidentially, and promptly.

Non-response by authors: If the authors do not respond within the specified deadline (or any agreed extension), the Editor-in-Chief may proceed to a decision based on the available evidence.

Target timelines

Stage	Target Duration
Acknowledgment of report	≤ 5 business days
Initial assessment	≤ 2 weeks
Author response deadline	15 business days
Decision (straightforward cases)	≤ 8 weeks from report
Decision (complex cases / institutional referral)	May take longer; parties kept informed
Publication of notice (after decision)	As soon as practicable

Note: These timelines are targets. Complex cases — particularly those requiring institutional cooperation or external expert consultation — may take longer. All parties will be kept informed of progress.

7) Author Notification and Consent

Authors will normally be informed and given an opportunity to respond before a final decision is made.
PedPer may issue a Correction, Expression of Concern, or Retraction even if some or all authors disagree, when the Editor-in-Chief determines that such action is necessary to protect the integrity of the scholarly record.
The decision to publish a post-publication notice rests with the Editor-in-Chief.

8) Appeals Against Retraction Decisions

Authors who wish to appeal a retraction decision may do so by submitting a reasoned letter with supporting evidence to info@pedagogicalperspective.com within 30 days of receiving the retraction notification.

Appeals are reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief and, where warranted, by an independent reviewer or adviser not involved in the original decision. The appeal outcome may result in:

Confirmation of the retraction
Modification of the retraction notice (e.g., revised wording or scope)
Reversal of the retraction (in exceptional cases where new evidence demonstrates that the original findings are reliable)

The final decision on appeals rests with the Editor-in-Chief and is considered conclusive. For general complaints and appeals procedures, see the Complaints & Appeals Policy.

9) Transparency, Permanence, and Indexing

All post-publication notices will be:

Publicly accessible and permanently available
Clearly labeled (Correction / Expression of Concern / Retraction / Removal)
Dated and issued by the journal
Assigned their own DOI
Bidirectionally linked to the original article (the notice links to the article, and the article links to the notice)

Metadata and indexing updates: When a post-publication notice is issued, PedPer will update the relevant metadata in Crossref (e.g., marking the article as retracted, registering the notice DOI) to ensure that indexing databases, citation services, and discovery platforms reflect the current status of the article. This ensures that readers, researchers, and indexing bodies worldwide are informed of any changes to the scholarly record.

Retracted articles remain accessible as part of the scholarly record; they are not deleted. The retraction notice and the original article are permanently linked.

10) Relationship Between Honest Error and Misconduct

PedPer distinguishes between honest error and misconduct when determining the appropriate post-publication action:

Honest error (e.g., a genuine mistake in data analysis, an inadvertent omission) — typically addressed through a Correction or, if the error invalidates the findings, a Retraction. The notice will state that the retraction is due to error, not misconduct.
Misconduct (e.g., fabrication, plagiarism, manipulation) — addressed through a Retraction. The notice will describe the nature of the misconduct at an appropriate level of detail. Institutions and/or funders may be notified.

This distinction is important because it affects how the retraction is perceived and recorded, and ensures that authors who report their own errors in good faith are treated fairly.

11) Related Policies