Correction and Retraction

1. Policy Statement

The Journal of Management, Education and Communication (JMEC) is committed to maintaining the accuracy, transparency, and integrity of the scholarly record. When errors, ethical concerns, or serious inaccuracies are identified in a published article, the journal will assess the matter carefully and take appropriate action in accordance with publication ethics principles and recognized scholarly publishing practices.

Depending on the nature and severity of the issue, the journal may publish a correction, an expression of concern, or a retraction. Editorial decisions will be based on the available evidence and will not be influenced by commercial, institutional, or personal interests.

2. Corrections

A correction may be issued when an error in a published article affects the accuracy, clarity, attribution, or interpretation of the work but does not invalidate its principal findings or conclusions.

Examples may include:

• Errors in author names, affiliations, or other publication metadata.
• Typographical or factual errors that could cause misunderstanding.
• Errors in tables, figures, references, or data presentation that can be corrected without invalidating the article's main conclusions.
• Other verified mistakes that materially affect the article's clarity or accuracy.

Corrections will be published as a clearly identified notice linked to the original article. Where technically possible, the notice will describe the error and the correction made. The original publication record will remain accessible, with the correction clearly documented.

3. Retractions

Retraction may be considered when the reliability or integrity of a published article is seriously compromised. A retraction is intended to correct the scholarly record, not to punish authors.

Grounds for retraction may include, but are not limited to:

• Reliable evidence that the findings are invalid because of major error, fabricated data, or falsified data.
• Plagiarism or substantial unattributed use of another person's work.
• Duplicate or redundant publication that materially misrepresents the publication record.
• Serious research or publication misconduct that undermines the article's reliability.
• Unethical research practices or serious breaches of applicable ethical requirements.
• Manipulation of the peer-review or publication process that compromises the validity of editorial approval.
• Other substantiated circumstances in which the article cannot be relied upon.

Retraction will be considered only after an appropriate editorial assessment of the available evidence. Where relevant, the journal may seek clarification from the authors, their institutions, or other appropriate parties. An author's disagreement with a decision, by itself, does not determine whether retraction is warranted.

4. Expressions of Concern

If credible concerns arise but the investigation is incomplete, delayed, or unable to reach a conclusive outcome, JMEC may publish an expression of concern. This notice alerts readers to a matter that may affect confidence in the article while further assessment is undertaken.

An expression of concern may be followed by a correction, retraction, or another appropriate editorial action when sufficient information becomes available.

5. Reporting an Error or Concern

Authors, readers, reviewers, editors, institutions, and other interested parties may notify JMEC of a suspected error or concern regarding a published article. Reports should provide sufficient information to identify the article and explain the issue.

Where available, a report should include:

• The article title, author names, DOI, or publication URL.
• A clear description of the suspected error or concern.
• Supporting evidence or relevant documentation.
• The reporter's contact information, if they wish to receive a response.

Reports should be submitted through the journal's official editorial contact or the contact channel designated on the JMEC website. Confidential information should be shared only when necessary and handled appropriately.

6. Editorial Assessment and Decision

Upon receiving a report, the editorial team will assess whether the concern warrants further investigation. The process may include reviewing the article and its underlying evidence, requesting a response from the authors, consulting independent experts, or contacting relevant institutions when appropriate.

Authors will ordinarily be given an opportunity to respond to concerns concerning their work, subject to circumstances in which doing so could compromise an investigation or the protection of individuals. The journal will evaluate the evidence impartially and determine the most appropriate action.

The timing of a decision will depend on the complexity of the case, the availability of evidence, and the responses of relevant parties. JMEC will seek to handle cases without unnecessary delay.

7. Publication and Visibility of Notices

Correction, expression-of-concern, and retraction notices will be clearly identified and linked to the affected article wherever technically possible. Notices should identify the affected publication, explain the reason for the action at an appropriate level of detail, and state the date of publication of the notice.

A retracted article will generally remain available as part of the scholarly record, but it will be clearly marked as retracted. The retraction notice will be linked to the article, and the article will be linked back to the notice where technically possible. The journal will not silently remove or replace a published article except where removal is required by law or is necessary under exceptional circumstances to address a serious legal or safety risk.

8. Author Responsibilities

Authors who discover a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work should promptly inform the editorial team and cooperate with the journal in evaluating the issue. Authors are expected to provide accurate information, respond to reasonable editorial inquiries, and participate in appropriate corrective action.

The journal may proceed with an editorial notice when justified by the evidence, even if an author does not respond, disagrees with the decision, or cannot be contacted.

9. Appeals and Confidentiality

Authors may submit a reasoned appeal of a correction or retraction decision by providing relevant evidence or explaining why they believe the decision should be reconsidered. Appeals will be reviewed by the editor-in-chief or an appropriately designated editor who was not materially involved in the original decision, where practicable.

The journal will handle reports, correspondence, and supporting documents with appropriate confidentiality, while allowing sufficient transparency to protect the scholarly record. Confidentiality will not prevent the journal from taking necessary action or communicating findings when disclosure is justified.