Retraction Policy

The journal Current Issues of Economic Sciences adheres to international standards for ensuring the integrity of the scholarly literature. This policy defines the grounds, procedure, and consequences of the retraction of published articles in accordance with the COPE Retraction Guidelines (version 3, August 2025).

The purpose of retraction is to correct the scholarly literature and ensure its reliability, not to punish authors.

1. Grounds for Retraction

The editorial board considers the retraction of a published article when it no longer has confidence in the reliability of the results and conclusions presented in the publication. Grounds for such loss of confidence include, in particular:

  • the identification of significant errors in data, methodology, calculations, or interpretation of results that undermine the reliability of the article's main conclusions and cannot be corrected through the publication of a corrigendum;
  • fabrication or falsification of data, research results, tables, figures, or images;
  • plagiarism, including the use of others' texts, ideas, data, or results without proper citation and attribution;
  • duplicate publication — the article or a substantial part of it was previously published in another outlet without appropriate disclosure, permission, or justification;
  • authorship of the publication cannot be confirmed or there are serious doubts regarding responsibility for the research conducted (including cases of ghost authorship or the use of paper mill services);
  • use of materials or data without the necessary permission (including data obtained in breach of confidentiality or without the informed consent of research participants);
  • violation of research ethics involving human participants, including the absence of required ethical approval;
  • undisclosed use of artificial intelligence to generate substantive parts of the text, fabricate data or citations, in a manner that substantially affects the reliability of the publication;
  • systematic manipulation of the publication process (fabricated peer reviews, manipulation of the review process, coordinated actions to circumvent editorial oversight);
  • an undisclosed conflict of interest that substantially affected the interpretation or conclusions of the research.

2. Alternatives to Retraction

Not every problem requires retraction. The editorial board considers alternative measures where these are sufficient to preserve the integrity of the scholarly record:

Corrigendum (Correction / Erratum) — published when errors are identified that do not affect the main conclusions of the article. A corrigendum clearly describes the nature of the error and makes the necessary corrections. It is applied when the main research results remain reliable.

Expression of Concern — published when the editorial board has serious doubts about the reliability of a publication but does not have sufficient evidence for retraction (for example, during an institutional investigation or when obtaining information is delayed). An Expression of Concern may subsequently be replaced by a retraction, a corrigendum, or a withdrawal of the concern, depending on the outcome of the investigation.

Retraction is a measure of last resort, applied when the alternatives listed above cannot ensure the reliability of the scholarly record.

3. Who May Initiate Retraction

A retraction procedure may be initiated by:

  • the author(s) of the article — upon identifying significant errors in their own work;
  • the Editor-in-Chief — following an editorial review, on the basis of reports received, or on their own initiative;
  • the institution with which the author is affiliated — following an internal investigation;
  • third parties — through a substantiated submission to the editorial office with evidence of violations.

The decision on retraction is made exclusively by the Editor-in-Chief of the journal.

4. Retraction Procedure

Step 1. Receipt of information. The editorial office receives notification of a possible violation from authors, reviewers, readers, institutions, or as a result of its own review (including through the use of plagiarism detection software).

Step 2. Preliminary assessment. The Editor-in-Chief conducts a preliminary assessment of the validity of the submission. If the submission is unfounded or concerns matters that do not require retraction, a response with an explanation is provided to the author or the party who submitted the report.

Step 3. Notification of authors. If the preliminary assessment confirms grounds for consideration, the editorial office notifies the author(s) in writing of the identified issues and provides an opportunity to submit an explanation within 14 calendar days. Authors have the right to submit additional materials, a rebuttal, or an acknowledgement of the error.

Step 4. Review and decision. The Editor-in-Chief reviews all available materials (the original submission, the authors' explanations, the results of checks, the findings of any institutional investigation) and takes one of the following decisions:

  • closing the case without action (the violation was not confirmed);
  • publication of a corrigendum (the error does not affect the main conclusions);
  • publication of an Expression of Concern (insufficient evidence for a final decision);
  • retraction of the article.

In complex cases, the Editor-in-Chief may consult members of the editorial board.

Step 5. Formalisation of retraction. If a decision to retract is taken, the editorial office prepares a Retraction Notice.

5. Retraction Notice

The Retraction Notice is published as a separate article in the current issue of the journal and must include:

  • full bibliographic details of the retracted article (title, authors, issue, DOI);
  • a clear statement of who initiated the retraction (authors, editorial board, institution);
  • the grounds for retraction, set out specifically and factually, without generalised or uninformative wording;
  • the date on which the decision to retract was taken;
  • a reference to the findings of any institutional investigation, with proper attribution of conclusions to the institution;
  • a statement of whether the authors were informed and whether they agree with the retraction.

The Retraction Notice is assigned a separate DOI.

6. Treatment of the Retracted Article

Following retraction:

  • the original article remains on the journal's website and in all indexing databases and is not deleted;
  • a clear watermark reading "RETRACTED" is placed on every page of the article's PDF file;
  • the article's metadata in OJS and Zenodo are updated with a retraction flag;
  • a prominent retraction notice with a link to the Retraction Notice is placed on the article's page on the journal's website;
  • the Retraction Notice is linked to the original article through bidirectional references;
  • bibliographic databases (Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, and others) are notified of the retraction for the purpose of updating their records.

Complete removal of an article is permitted only in exceptional circumstances: where the article contains information that poses a threat to the safety of individuals, or where it violates a court order. In such cases, the metadata and a notice of removal are retained.

7. Retraction at the Author's Initiative

Authors have the right to approach the editorial office with a request for the retraction of their own article. Such a request must include specific grounds. The editorial office considers the request in accordance with the procedure set out in this policy. The decision on retraction remains with the Editor-in-Chief even in cases where the initiative comes from the author.

If authors disagree with the decision to retract, they have the right to submit a written statement of their position, which will be considered by the editorial board. The authors' disagreement does not constitute grounds for refusing retraction if the editorial board has sufficient grounds to proceed.

8. Timelines

The editorial board commits to:

  • providing a preliminary assessment of a submission within 7 working days of receipt;
  • allowing authors 14 calendar days to provide explanations;
  • reaching a decision within 30 calendar days of receiving all materials;
  • publishing the Retraction Notice in the nearest issue of the journal following the decision;
  • updating metadata in all indexing databases within 14 days of publication of the notice.

In cases where the results of an institutional investigation are awaited, timelines may be extended, with an Expression of Concern published for the duration of the waiting period.

9. Confidentiality

The process of considering a retraction matter is confidential until a decision is reached. The editorial board does not disclose information about the progress of the review to third parties other than those directly involved in the process (authors, the institution, the party who submitted the report).

Once the Retraction Notice is published, the information becomes public.

10. Regulatory Framework

This policy has been developed in accordance with:

  • the COPE Retraction Guidelines (version 3, August 2025) — https://publicationethics.org/guidance/guideline/retraction-guidelines
  • the COPE Recommendations on Expressions of Concern
  • the ICMJE Recommendations on Corrections and Retractions
  • the ANSI/NISO Standard RP-25-2020: Recommended Practice for Retractions, Removals, and Expressions of Concern