Retraction Policy and Appeal Procedure

The International Journal of Technology, Management and Humanities (IJTMH) is committed to maintaining the highest standards of research integrity and scholarly publishing ethics. In alignment with the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), and other leading bodies, IJTMH has established this comprehensive Retraction Policy and Appeal Procedure to address situations where published articles require correction, expression of concern, or full retraction.

This policy applies to all articles published in IJTMH, including original research articles, review articles, case studies, short communications, and letters to the editor.

RETRACTION POLICY

Definitions and Scope

The following definitions govern the application of this policy:

 

Retraction

A formal withdrawal of a published article from the scientific record, implemented when the findings are found to be unreliable, fraudulent, or when the publication itself is found to violate ethical standards.

 

Correction (Erratum)

A notice published to correct a specific error in an otherwise valid and reliable article. An erratum is issued for honest mistakes that do not affect the article’s overall integrity or conclusions.

 

Expression of Concern

A notice issued when there are credible concerns about an article’s integrity that have not yet been fully investigated or resolved, alerting readers to exercise caution when interpreting the findings.

 

Withdrawal

Removal of an article that has been accepted but not yet formally published, typically applied at the pre-publication stage.

Grounds for Retraction

IJTMH may retract a published article on any of the following grounds:

Research Misconduct

  • Fabrication or falsification of data, figures, images, or results
  • Selective reporting of data to misrepresent findings
  • Manipulation of images beyond what is acceptable for clarity and presentation
  • Undisclosed duplication of the authors’ own previously published work (self-plagiarism)

Plagiarism

  • Copying substantial portions of text, ideas, methods, or results from another author’s work without proper attribution
  • Unacknowledged use of data, concepts, or intellectual property belonging to others

Ethical Violations

  • Failure to obtain required ethical approvals (e.g., Institutional Review Board/Ethics Committee clearance)
  • Failure to obtain informed consent from human subjects where required
  • Violation of animal welfare regulations
  • Undisclosed conflicts of interest that materially affect the integrity of the research

Invalid or Unreliable Findings

  • Major errors in data analysis, methodology, or statistical treatment that fundamentally undermine the conclusions
  • Post-publication discovery that the data or results cannot be reproduced and the authors are unable to provide a satisfactory explanation
  • Flawed experimental design that renders the conclusions invalid

Authorship Misconduct

  • Undisclosed disputes over authorship that could not be resolved
  • Inclusion of individuals who did not meaningfully contribute (guest or gift authorship)
  • Exclusion of individuals who made substantial contributions (ghost authorship)

Duplicate Publication

  • Submission and publication of the same or substantially similar work in more than one journal without prior disclosure and appropriate cross-referencing
  • Redundant publication that misrepresents the novelty of the work

Legal Issues

  • Defamatory content or content that violates applicable laws
  • Infringement of copyright or intellectual property rights
  • Publication in violation of applicable data protection or privacy laws

Retraction Procedure

Initiation of the Retraction Process

A retraction investigation may be initiated by:

  • The authors themselves, upon discovery of a significant error or ethical violation
  • The Editor-in-Chief or Editorial Board, upon receipt of a credible complaint or discovery of concerns
  • Readers, reviewers, or other researchers who submit a formal complaint with documented evidence
  • The authors’ institution(s) following an internal investigation
  • Funding agencies or regulatory bodies

Complaints and notifications should be submitted in writing to: editor@ijtmh.com

Preliminary Assessment

Upon receiving a concern or complaint, the Editor-in-Chief or a designated Associate Editor will:

  1. Acknowledge receipt of the concern within five (5) working days.
  2. Conduct a preliminary assessment to determine whether the concern is credible and falls within the scope of this policy.
  3. Notify the corresponding author(s) of the concern, unless there is a justified reason not to do so (e.g., ongoing institutional investigation).
  4. Determine whether to proceed to a full investigation.

Full Investigation

If the preliminary assessment warrants a full investigation, the Editor-in-Chief will:

  1. Constitute an Investigation Panel comprising at least two members of the Editorial Board and, where appropriate, external subject-matter experts.
  2. Provide the corresponding author(s) with an opportunity to respond to the allegations within fifteen (15) working days.
  3. Review all available evidence, including the submitted manuscript, raw data, correspondence, and any institutional investigation findings.
  4. Seek cooperation from the authors’ institution(s) if misconduct is suspected.
  5. Maintain strict confidentiality throughout the process.

Decision

Following completion of the investigation, the Investigation Panel will recommend one of the following outcomes:

  • No action required – the concern is unfounded
  • Issuance of a Correction (Erratum) for minor, honest errors
  • Publication of an Expression of Concern pending further investigation
  • Full Retraction of the article

The final decision rests with the Editor-in-Chief. All parties will be notified of the outcome within five (5) working days of the decision being made.

Implementation of Retraction

If a retraction is approved, IJTMH will:

  1. Publish a formal Retraction Notice in the next available issue and online, clearly identifying the retracted article by title, authors, volume, issue, page numbers, and DOI.
  2. Add a visible “Retracted” watermark to the original article PDF.
  3. Link the retraction notice to the original article on the journal’s website and all relevant databases.
  4. Notify indexing and abstracting services, including but not limited to Crossref, PubMed/MEDLINE (if applicable), Scopus, and Google Scholar.
  5. Update the article’s metadata in the journal management system.

The retracted article will remain accessible with clear indication of its retracted status in order to maintain an accurate scholarly record. It will not be permanently deleted.

Timeline

IJTMH aims to resolve retraction investigations within ninety (90) calendar days of the initiation of the process. Where institutional investigations are ongoing, this timeline may be extended, and an Expression of Concern may be issued in the interim.

Corrections and Errata

Where an article contains a minor error that does not affect the integrity of the findings or conclusions – such as a typographical error, an incorrect label in a figure, or a minor computational error – IJTMH will publish a Correction (Erratum) rather than a retraction.

Authors who identify such errors in their published work are encouraged to contact the editorial office promptly at editor@ijtmh.com. The correction notice will be published and linked to the original article.

Expression of Concern

IJTMH may issue an Expression of Concern when:

  • Evidence of misconduct is inconclusive pending an ongoing institutional or legal investigation
  • There are reliable indications of unreliable data but the authors’ institution has not completed its investigation
  • A fair investigation cannot be conducted due to lack of cooperation from authors or institutions

An Expression of Concern is a temporary measure and will be reviewed and either withdrawn or converted to a formal retraction upon resolution of the investigation.

Responsibilities

Party

Responsibilities

Authors

Report errors promptly; cooperate fully with investigations; provide raw data upon request; disclose conflicts of interest.

Editor-in-Chief

Oversee the investigation process; ensure procedural fairness; issue final decisions; oversee implementation of retractions.

Editorial Board

Participate in Investigation Panels; provide expert assessment; maintain confidentiality.

Reviewers

Report suspected misconduct to the editorial office; maintain confidentiality of submitted manuscripts.

Publisher (Mripub)

Ensure technical implementation of retraction notices; update databases and indexing services; maintain the integrity of the published record.

 

APPEAL PROCEDURE

IJTMH recognises that retraction decisions and other editorial decisions have significant professional consequences for authors. This section sets out the formal procedure by which authors may appeal such decisions.

Right of Appeal

Authors have the right to appeal the following decisions:

  • A decision to retract a published article
  • A decision to issue an Expression of Concern
  • A decision to reject a manuscript following peer review
  • A decision regarding authorship disputes

Appeals must be submitted in good faith and must be based on substantive grounds as set out in Section 8 below. Appeals submitted solely for the purpose of delay, or without new evidence or substantive arguments, will not be accepted.

Grounds for Appeal

An appeal will only be considered on the following grounds:

  1. A significant procedural error occurred during the investigation that may have materially affected the outcome.
  2. New material evidence has come to light that was not available at the time of the original investigation and which could reasonably affect the decision.
  3. The decision is demonstrably inconsistent with this policy or with established publication ethics guidelines.
  4. There is a clear and material error of fact in the investigation panel’s reasoning or findings.

General dissatisfaction with the outcome, without substantive grounds, does not constitute valid grounds for appeal.

How to Submit an Appeal

Deadline

Appeals must be submitted within thirty (30) calendar days of the date of the written notification of the original decision. Appeals submitted after this period will not be considered unless exceptional circumstances are demonstrated.

Method of Submission

All appeals must be submitted by email to the Editor-in-Chief at: editor@ijtmh.com with the subject line “Formal Appeal – [Article Title / Manuscript ID]”.

Required Documentation

The appeal submission must include all of the following:

  • A completed Appeal Form (available upon request from the editorial office)
  • A clearly written statement specifying the ground(s) of appeal as set out in Section 8
  • A detailed explanation of the reasons for the appeal, including references to relevant evidence
  • All supporting documentation and evidence relied upon (e.g., raw data, correspondence, expert opinions, institutional reports)
  • A statement confirming that the information provided is accurate and complete to the best of the appellant’s knowledge

Incomplete submissions will be returned to the appellant with an opportunity to resubmit within ten (10) working days.

Appeal Process

Acknowledgement

The editorial office will acknowledge receipt of the appeal within five (5) working days.

Eligibility Check

The Editor-in-Chief will first assess whether the appeal meets the basic eligibility criteria (within time limit, submitted on valid grounds). If the appeal is deemed ineligible, the appellant will be informed in writing with reasons.

Appointment of Appeal Panel

If the appeal is deemed eligible, the Editor-in-Chief will appoint an independent Appeal Panel comprising:

  • At least one Senior Editor or Associate Editor who was not involved in the original investigation
  • At least one independent external expert in the relevant subject area
  • Optionally, a publication ethics advisor

No member of the original Investigation Panel will serve on the Appeal Panel. The Appeal Panel will be independent and will conduct a de novo review of the matter.

Review

The Appeal Panel will:

  1. Review the original investigation file, including all evidence considered and the reasons for the original decision.
  2. Review all new evidence and arguments submitted by the appellant.
  3. Invite the other party or parties (if applicable) to provide a written response within fifteen (15) working days.
  4. Assess whether any of the grounds for appeal are substantiated.

 

The Appeal Panel may, at its discretion, request additional information or documentation from any party.

Appeal Decision

The Appeal Panel may reach one of the following decisions:

  • Uphold the original decision – the appeal is dismissed and the original decision stands.
  • Partially uphold the appeal – the original decision is modified (e.g., a retraction is converted to a correction or an expression of concern).
  • Allow the appeal – the original decision is reversed and the appropriate remedial action is taken (e.g., removal of a retraction notice, republication of a corrected article).

Notification

The appellant and all relevant parties will be informed of the Appeal Panel’s decision in writing within five (5) working days of the decision being finalised. The decision will include a clear statement of reasons.

Timeline

IJTMH aims to complete the appeal process within sixty (60) calendar days of the date the appeal is acknowledged as eligible. Complex cases may take longer, and the appellant will be informed of any delay.

Finality of Appeal Decision

The decision of the Appeal Panel is final and binding. IJTMH does not operate a second tier of appeal. Where an appellant believes that the appeal process itself was conducted improperly, they may raise the matter with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) through COPE’s dispute resolution process at www.publicationethics.org.

Confidentiality

All parties involved in the retraction investigation and appeal process are required to maintain strict confidentiality throughout and after the process. Disclosure of the identity of complainants, the content of investigations, or the proceedings of the Appeal Panel to third parties is not permitted, except where required by law or as necessary for the proper conduct of the investigation.

In cases where institutional investigations are underway, IJTMH will co-operate with the relevant institution while maintaining appropriate confidentiality.

Record Keeping

IJTMH will maintain secure records of all retraction investigations and appeal proceedings for a minimum of ten (10) years. These records will be made available to relevant institutional bodies, funding agencies, or regulatory authorities where legally required.

Policy Review

This Retraction Policy and Appeal Procedure will be reviewed by the Editorial Board every two (2) years, or sooner if required by changes in publication ethics standards or applicable law. The current version of this policy, including the effective date, will be published on the IJTMH website.

Contact Information

 

Editor-in-Chief

International Journal of Technology, Management and Humanities (IJTMH)

 

Editorial Enquiries

editor@ijtmh.com

 

Publisher

Mripub – Journal Publishing & OJS Development Platform

mripub.com

 

Publication Ethics

This journal is a member of and subscribes to the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) – www.publicationethics.org

Policy Adopted by the Editorial Board of IJTMH – June 2025

This document supersedes any prior statements or policies relating to retractions, corrections, expressions of concern, or appeals published by IJTMH. Authors, reviewers, and readers are encouraged to familiarise themselves with this policy, which is available in full on the IJTMH website.