Retraction Policy

CORRECTIONS AND RETRACTION POLICY

The scientific journal “Acta Academiae Beregsasiensis. Economics” is committed to maintaining the highest standards of academic integrity, accuracy, and scholarly reliability in its published materials. The Editorial Board acknowledges that, even with rigorous peer review, errors, inaccuracies, or violations of ethical publishing principles may occasionally be identified after publication.

The Editorial Board adheres to a clear, transparent, and fair procedure for making changes to published materials in accordance with the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), ensuring that the full history of updates is preserved.

1. Corrections to Published Articles

The Editorial Board distinguishes three categories of corrections depending on the nature and significance of the changes:

T – Technical Correction

Minor changes that do not affect the scholarly content or conclusions of the article: correction of stylistic inaccuracies, clarification of author names or affiliations, formatting or technical adjustments. Applied directly to the electronic version with a brief note at the end of the publication, without a separate announcement on the website.

Applied when: the errors do not affect the content and are not misleading to readers.

C – Public Correction (Corrigendum / Erratum)

Applied when errors that do not alter the scientific results but may mislead readers are identified: incorrectly labelled tables or figures, outdated or inaccurate data, numbering or wording errors. The Editorial Board publishes a separate correction notice (Corrigendum — if the error is the authors’, Erratum — if editorial). The original article is marked “Corrected” with a link to the notice.

Applied when: errors are noticeable to readers but do not alter the scholarly conclusions.

U – Editorial Update

Applied when, after publication, a need arises for a substantial clarification or addition to the results — for example, due to new data or a reassessment of conclusions. Accompanied by the publication of a separate “Editorial Update Notice” explaining the reasons for and nature of the changes. The article header is marked “Corrected” with a link to the notice.

Applied when: the changes are significant but do not cast doubt on the reliability of the main findings.

All three types of correction are recorded in the journal’s editorial archive, ensuring full transparency and the preservation of the historical integrity of the scholarly record.

2. Expression of Concern

It is an intermediate instrument between a correction and a retraction. The Editorial Board may publish one if:

  • serious concerns about possible misconduct have been received, but the investigation has not yet been concluded;
  • the available evidence is inconclusive or insufficient to reach a final decision;
  • the institution where the research was conducted is conducting its own investigation.

An Expression of Concern is published in the current issue of the journal and on the website, and upon conclusion of the investigation, is replaced by a correction, a retraction, or is withdrawn with an appropriate explanation.

3. Grounds for Retraction

The Editorial Board reserves the right to retract a published article where the following has been established:

  • evidence of violations of research or scholarly ethics that were not apparent at the peer review stage;
  • disputes concerning authorship (inclusion or exclusion of authors without their consent);
  • critical errors that make it impossible to confirm the reliability of the main findings;
  • duplication (self-plagiarism) – republication of a previously published work without proper attribution or the rights holder’s permission;
  • an undisclosed conflict of interest that may have affected the objectivity of the results or conclusions;
  • false information regarding the sources of research funding;
  • other serious violations of academic integrity.

4. Retraction Procedure

The Editorial Board adheres to a clear and transparent retraction procedure that guarantees the objectivity, impartiality, and openness of all decisions.

  1. Initiation: The procedure may be initiated by the author(s), the Editorial Board, reviewers, representatives of the institution where the research was conducted, or any person who has identified possible violations. The notification must contain a clear rationale and, where possible, documentary evidence.
  2. Initial assessment: The Editor-in-Chief, together with the Editorial Board, conducts a preliminary assessment. If the complaint is substantiated, an internal investigation is initiated. Where insufficient grounds exist, the complainant receives an official notification with an explanation.
  3. Editorial investigation: The Editorial Board conducts an independent review of the facts, consulting reviewers or external experts where necessary. The article’s author(s) are informed of the commencement of the investigation and given the opportunity to provide explanations or counter-arguments.
  4. Decision: Following analysis of the reliability of the submitted materials, the Editorial Board issues a decision: confirmation that no violations occurred; a correction or publication of an Expression of Concern; or full retraction of the publication.
  5. Official retraction notice: Upon a decision to retract, an official retraction notice is published in the current issue and on the journal’s website. It states: the full bibliographic details of the article; the reason for retraction (without disclosing confidential information); and the date of the decision.
  6. Marking the retracted article: All versions of the retracted article are marked “RETRACTED”. The original text remains accessible with an appropriate warning to preserve the integrity of the historical scholarly record. Complete removal of the text is permitted only in exceptional circumstances (defamation, copyright infringement, court order); in such cases, bibliographic information remains on the website with an explanation of the reasons for removal.
  7. Notification of indexing databases and partners: The Editorial Board notifies the relevant indexing databases (Crossref, Google Scholar, DOAJ, etc.) with updated metadata to prevent incorrect citation of the retracted work.

5. Transparency and Accountability

The retraction of a publication is not a punitive measure, but rather a mechanism for upholding academic integrity and trust in science. All retraction decisions are taken collectively, documented, accompanied by a public notice, and are transparent and open to scrutiny by the scholarly community.

6. Relationship with Other Policies

The retraction initiation procedure is closely linked to the journal’s Complaints Policy. Any person who has grounds to believe that a published article requires investigation or retraction may use the official complaints procedure described in the relevant section.