Correction, Retraction, and Post-Publication Amendment Policy

Journal of Technology Management & Innovation (JOTMI) — Version 2.0. Effective May 2026. Supersedes the Correction and Retraction Policy.

This policy is binding in conjunction with the JOTMI Publication Integrity Protocol and Extended Retraction Policy, which sets out the Journal's forensic-audit and unilateral-retraction regime for integrity breaches (including the undisclosed or improper use of AI). The two instruments are to be read and applied together.

1. Purpose and guiding principle

JOTMI is committed to the integrity, transparency, and reproducibility of the scholarly record. The version of record of a published article should remain complete, unaltered, and permanently accessible to the greatest extent possible. The Journal recognizes a parallel and equally binding obligation: to correct the record promptly and visibly when published content is shown to be erroneous, unreliable, or compromised. These commitments are reconciled through post-publication amendments — formal, openly accessible, independently citable notices that document any change to the record without erasing what was originally published.

The purpose of correction and retraction is to preserve the accuracy and reliability of the literature, not to penalize authors. No amendment issued under this policy implies a judgment on an author's intentions or good faith unless the corresponding notice states so explicitly and on the basis of evidence.

2. Standards and alignment

This policy is to be interpreted in accordance with:

  • COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) — Retraction Guidelines, Version 3 (August 2025), and the COPE guidance on Expressions of Concern;
  • NISO RP-45-2024 — Communication of Retractions, Removals, and Expressions of Concern (CREC), which COPE has formally endorsed;
  • ICMJE Recommendations on corrections, retractions, version control, and scientific misconduct;
  • The Crossref schema for article relationships and update metadata (CrossMark), and SciELO editorial criteria for errata and retractions.

Where this policy is silent on a specific situation, the most recent COPE and NISO CREC guidance governs.

3. Who may raise a concern, and how

Any reader, reviewer, author, institution, or third party may bring a potential error or integrity concern to the attention of the Editor at [email protected]. For straightforward factual or interpretive matters, correspondents are encouraged but not required to contact the corresponding author first. Where research or publication misconduct is suspected, concerns may be reported directly to the Journal without prior contact with the authors.

JOTMI evaluates the substance of every credible report — including anonymous and pseudonymous reports — on the strength of the evidence provided, not on the identity or motive of the person raising it. Correspondence is treated confidentially to the extent permitted by any investigation. Persons who raise concerns in good faith are not identified without their consent; where they consent and where relevant, their contribution may be acknowledged in the published notice. The Journal distinguishes evidence-based concerns from unsubstantiated or defamatory allegations and will not act on the latter.

4. Process and governance

Concerns are assessed by the Editor in consultation with an editorial committee and, where appropriate, subject-matter advisers, the authors, and the authors' institution(s). Authors are given a fair opportunity to respond before any substantive notice is published. The Journal acts as soon as it is satisfied that the record requires correction; publication of a notice is not made contingent on the conclusion of an institutional investigation, on author agreement, or on author cooperation, although all of these are sought wherever possible. Decisions are documented. An author who disputes a decision may submit a written appeal with supporting evidence to the Editor-in-Chief; appeals are reviewed by the editorial committee.

5. Threshold for action

JOTMI does not issue formal notices for changes that do not materially affect the contribution or the reader's understanding of it — for example, spelling, typographical, or grammatical errors that do not alter meaning. Any change to the version of record, however minor, is logged. All formal amendments are freely accessible, are published as independently citable items with their own DOI, and are bidirectionally linked to the original article, so that readers reach the notice from the article and the article from the notice.

6. Categories of amendment

JOTMI uses the instruments below. Each is a distinct, permanent, openly accessible notice — registered and indexed as a related object, not merely appended to the original file.

6.1 Correction (Corrigendum / Erratum)

A Correction addresses a material error in an otherwise reliable article — significant enough to affect the scientific content, the reader's understanding, or the bibliographic accuracy of the article, but not so fundamental as to invalidate it.

  • Erratum (Publisher Correction) — an error introduced by the Journal during editing or production: significant typographical errors; mislabeled or misnumbered figures, tables, or legends; proof corrections submitted but omitted; or incorrect author or affiliation details.
  • Corrigendum (Author Correction) — a material error originating with the authors and detected after publication that affects the validity or accuracy of the content.

Corrections require the agreement of all co-authors and are assessed for relevance to readers and importance to the record. A reader who identifies an error may submit it directly to the Editor or, where they wish it to form part of the published scholarly discussion, as a Letter to the Editor in the prescribed format; such letters are peer-reviewed, shared with the original authors for response, and — on acceptance — published together with that response. The Letter to the Editor is one available route, not a precondition for issuing a Correction.

6.2 Addendum

A peer-reviewed notice supplying additional information that does not contradict the original article — for example, material inadvertently omitted that is essential to the reader's understanding. Addenda are published rarely, only after peer review and editorial discussion, and only when judged crucial.

6.3 Expression of Concern (EoC)

The Editor may publish an Expression of Concern to alert readers while a matter is unresolved. An EoC is warranted where there is:

  • inconclusive evidence of research or publication misconduct;
  • evidence that the findings are unreliable while the authors' institution declines to investigate;
  • reason to believe an investigation into the work has not been, or will not be, fair, impartial, or conclusive; or
  • an ongoing investigation whose outcome will not be available for a considerable time.

An EoC is provisional: it is superseded by a Correction, a Retraction, or — if the concerns are resolved in the article's favor — by a notice formally rescinding it.

6.4 Retraction

A Retraction is issued when the Editor no longer has confidence in the central results or conclusions of an article. Grounds include, without limitation:

  • clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, whether through misconduct (e.g., fabrication or manipulation of data or images, fictitious data) or through honest error;
  • redundant or duplicate publication;
  • plagiarism or misappropriation of material or data;
  • unethical research, or failure to obtain required approvals or consents;
  • compromised or manipulated peer review (e.g., fabricated or impersonated reviewers);
  • undisclosed conflicts of interest material to the findings;
  • authorship that cannot be verified, identity theft, or fictitious authorship;
  • undisclosed use of artificial intelligence in a manner that misrepresents the work or its authorship; and
  • any other form of misrepresentation.

A Retraction does not require author agreement. The notice states who is retracting the article and the reason(s), is objective and factual, and avoids defamatory language.

The retracted article is not removed. Its title is prefixed "RETRACTED:", it is watermarked as retracted in both its HTML and PDF representations, and it remains linked to a separate, freely available Retraction notice carrying its own DOI. The retracted status is recorded in machine-readable metadata and propagated to Crossref/CrossMark and to indexing and abstracting services (e.g., SciELO, Scopus, Web of Science).

6.5 Retraction with replacement

Where a pervasive but honest error compromises an article yet a corrected version can be reliably produced, the Journal may retract the original and simultaneously publish a corrected, peer-reviewed replacement. The original is retained and marked as retracted; the replacement carries a new version identifier; and the relationship between the versions is recorded and disclosed in the notice.

6.6 Removal

Removal of content is exceptional and is used only where leaving an article accessible would itself cause harm or unlawfulness — for example, a well-founded legal order; defamatory content; content that, if acted upon, would pose a serious risk; or a violation of privacy or data-protection rights (such as identifiable personal or patient data published without authorization). When content is removed, the bibliographic metadata and a tombstone notice explaining the removal are retained at the original DOI, so that the historical existence of the article remains discoverable.

6.7 Batch retraction

Where evidence indicates systematic manipulation of the publication process affecting multiple articles (e.g., paper-mill activity or coordinated peer-review fraud), the Journal may retract the affected articles as a coordinated batch and will state explicitly in the notices that the retractions form part of a response to systematic manipulation. Authors whose work may have been swept into such a process without involvement in the manipulation may be offered an opportunity for the article to be re-reviewed before a retraction notice is published.

7. Research-integrity and AI-specific provisions

This policy operates together with the JOTMI Responsible AI Use Policy, the JOTMI Publication Integrity Protocol and Extended Retraction Policy, and the Journal's editorial-integrity screening. Undisclosed or misrepresented use of generative AI, fabricated or manipulated data or images, fabricated peer review, citation manipulation, and paper-mill involvement are grounds for an Expression of Concern or a Retraction as set out above, in addition to any consequences under the Responsible AI Use Policy. The Journal's screening tools complement, and do not replace, editorial judgment and originality screening (iThenticate).

8. Notices, citation, and the version of record

Every notice issued under this policy is a permanent part of the published record. Notices are open access, carry their own DOI, name the issuing party, state the reason, and are linked from and to the article concerned. The original article remains the version of record except where a Retraction with replacement establishes a new version, or where Removal applies. Citations to a retracted article should make the retracted status clear; JOTMI's metadata is structured so that downstream databases and citing works can identify the article's status automatically.

9. Review of this policy

JOTMI reviews this policy periodically and upon the publication of materially revised guidance by COPE, NISO, or ICMJE. Questions may be addressed to the Editor at [email protected].