Correction and Retraction Policy

UltimaComm : Jurnal Ilmu Komunikasi

1. Policy Statement

UltimaComm: Jurnal Ilmu Komunikasi is committed to preserving the accuracy, reliability, and integrity of the scholarly record. The journal recognizes that errors, omissions, and ethical concerns may be identified after an article has been published.
When such concerns arise, the journal will assess the available evidence and determine the appropriate response. Depending on the nature and significance of the issue, the response may include a correction, an expression of concern, or a retraction.
Editorial action is intended primarily to correct or clarify the scholarly record. It must be based on evidence, proportionate to the issue, and conducted in accordance with recognized publication-ethics principles.

2. Scope

This policy applies to articles and other scholarly content published by UltimaComm, including concerns identified by authors, readers, editors, reviewers, institutions, or other relevant parties.
The policy covers errors in published content, unreliable findings, research-integrity concerns, ethical violations, and other circumstances that may affect the credibility or integrity of the scholarly record.

3. Corrections

A correction may be issued when a published article contains an error or omission that requires rectification but does not invalidate the overall reliability of the work.
Examples include:
a. Errors in author names, affiliations, acknowledgments, or funding information.
b. Incorrect bibliographic details, references, or citations.
c. Factual, numerical, typographical, or labeling errors that require clarification.
d. Errors in tables, figures, captions, or supplementary materials.
e. Inaccurate or incomplete competing-interest or funding disclosures.
f. Other substantive reporting errors that can be corrected without undermining the article's principal findings or conclusions.
The editor-in-chief or an authorized editor will assess the nature of the error, its potential effect on interpretation, and the appropriate corrective action.
Corrections should clearly identify the affected article, explain what has been corrected, and provide sufficient information for readers to understand the significance of the change.
The correction notice will be linked to the original article, and the original publication will remain identifiable. Where technically feasible, the journal will preserve a transparent record of the correction.
Minor typographical or formatting errors that do not affect meaning may be corrected during routine production or maintenance without a separate formal notice, where appropriate and consistent with the journal's publication practices.

4. Expressions of Concern

An expression of concern may be issued when credible information raises significant questions about a published article but the available evidence is insufficient for a definitive editorial determination.
Circumstances may include:
a. An unresolved allegation of data fabrication or falsification.
b. Questions concerning research ethics or the validity of reported findings.
c. An ongoing institutional investigation that may materially affect the reliability of the article.
d. Unresolved concerns about authorship, publication integrity, or the authenticity of research materials.
e. Other significant issues requiring readers to be alerted while further assessment is undertaken.
An expression of concern is a provisional editorial notice. It does not, by itself, establish that misconduct has occurred.
The notice should identify the article, explain the general nature of the concern to the extent appropriate, and clarify that the matter remains under assessment.
The journal may update or withdraw the expression of concern when sufficient evidence becomes available or when the circumstances otherwise warrant a change.

5. Retractions

Retraction may be appropriate when substantial evidence demonstrates that a published article is unreliable or that serious ethical or publication violations compromise the integrity of the work.
Possible grounds include:
a. Fabrication or falsification of research data, findings, or evidence.
b. Substantial plagiarism or unauthorized appropriation of intellectual contributions.
c. Serious manipulation of images, research materials, or analytical results.
d. Unethical research practices that materially compromise the article.
e. Duplicate or redundant publication involving substantial undisclosed overlap.
f. Serious authorship or publication misconduct that undermines the integrity of the publication.
g. Compromised or fraudulent peer review that materially affects confidence in the article.
h. Other circumstances in which the reliability or ethical integrity of the publication cannot reasonably be maintained.
Retraction will be based on the available evidence and the seriousness of the problem. The journal will distinguish deliberate misconduct from honest error and will consider whether a correction can adequately resolve the issue.
Retraction does not necessarily imply that every author acted improperly. Where appropriate, the notice will clarify the grounds for the action and the extent to which responsibility can be established

6. Retraction Procedure

When a potential retraction issue is identified, the journal will follow a fair and documented process.
Step 1: Preliminary assessment. The editor-in-chief or an authorized editor evaluates the concern, its credibility, and its potential implications for the published article.
Step 2: Evidence gathering. The journal may request relevant documentation, data, explanations, or other materials from the authors and, where appropriate, consult independent experts.
Step 3: Author notification and response. The corresponding author and other relevant authors will ordinarily be informed of the concern and given a reasonable opportunity to respond. Failure to respond will not automatically establish misconduct, but the journal may proceed on the evidence available.
Step 4: Institutional consultation. Where necessary, the journal may refer the matter to the relevant institution, research ethics committee, funder, or other competent body. The journal may seek clarification of institutional findings but does not replace the institution's formal investigative role.
Step 5: Editorial determination. The editor-in-chief or an independent, appropriately authorized decision-maker determines the appropriate action based on the available evidence. A conflicted editor must not control the decision.
Step 6: Publication of the notice. If retraction is warranted, the journal will publish a clear retraction notice linked to the original article. The notice should identify the article and explain the principal grounds for retraction.
The journal will document significant decisions and maintain relevant records in accordance with its editorial procedures.

7. Publication and Accessibility of Retraction Notices

A retracted article must remain identifiable as retracted so that readers are not misled about its publication status.
The journal will, where technically feasible:
a. Clearly label the article as retracted.
b. Publish a separate retraction notice.
c. Link the notice to the original article and the original article to the notice.
d. Preserve the article's bibliographic information and DOI.
e. Update relevant metadata and inform indexing or archiving services where appropriate.
The original article will not ordinarily be silently removed or replaced. Exceptions may be necessary where retention would create serious legal, privacy, safety, or other compelling concerns.
Retraction notices should be factual, specific, and proportionate. They should not include unsupported accusations or disclose confidential information unnecessarily.

8. Initiation of Corrections and Retractions

A correction or retraction may be initiated by the authors, the editor-in-chief, another authorized editor, the publisher, a reader, an institution, or another party who provides credible evidence.
Authors who identify a material error in their published work should promptly notify the journal and cooperate in determining the appropriate corrective action.
Readers and other parties may submit concerns through the journal's official editorial contact channels. Submissions should identify the article, explain the concern, and provide supporting evidence where available.
The journal will evaluate concerns on their merits regardless of the identity, affiliation, or professional standing of the person raising them.

9. Appeals and Disputes/strong>

Authors may submit a reasoned appeal concerning a proposed correction or retraction by identifying specific factual errors, procedural irregularities, or relevant evidence that was not adequately considered.
Where appropriate, the appeal will be assessed by an independent editor or authorized decision-maker who was not responsible for the original determination and has no relevant conflict of interest.
An appeal does not automatically suspend necessary measures to protect readers or the scholarly record.
The journal may maintain an expression of concern or take other proportionate interim action while a material issue remains unresolved.

10. Relationship to Other Editorial Policies

This policy operates alongside the journal's Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement, Conflict of Interest Policy, and Post-Publication Discussion Policy.
The journal will distinguish scholarly disagreement from factual error and research misconduct. A disagreement with an article's interpretation or theoretical position is not, by itself, grounds for correction or retraction.
Where a concern indicates possible research misconduct, the journal may initiate a separate investigation in accordance with its publication-ethics procedures.

11. Responsibility and Review

The editor-in-chief or an appropriately authorized independent editor is responsible for determining whether a correction, expression of concern, or retraction is warranted.
Decisions will be based on the evidence available, the implications for the scholarly record, and the principles of fairness, transparency, and proportionality.
This policy will be reviewed periodically to ensure consistency with recognized publication-ethics standards and the journal's editorial practices.
Guiding principle: The integrity of the scholarly record takes precedence over the preservation of any individual publication. Corrections and retractions are mechanisms for maintaining trustworthy scholarship, not instruments of personal or institutional punishment.