Common Ground Research Networks is committed to maintaining the accuracy, integrity, and completeness of the scholarly record. We address concerns about published content in accordance with the guidance of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and recognized scholarly publishing standards.
Concerns may be raised by authors, readers, reviewers, editors, institutions, or other parties. All concerns will be considered carefully and, where appropriate, investigated by the journal’s Editorial Team in consultation with the publisher. We will act as promptly as reasonably possible while ensuring that the process is fair, confidential, and based on available evidence. Where an allegation involves possible research misconduct, we may request information from the authors or refer the matter to the relevant institution, employer, funding body, ethics committee, or other appropriate authority.
The purpose of any post-publication action is to correct the scholarly record rather than to punish an author. The action taken will depend upon the nature, severity, and reliability of the concern.
A correction will be published when an error or omission affects the accuracy, interpretation, attribution, or integrity of a published article but does not invalidate its principal findings or conclusions.
Minor typographical or formatting errors that do not affect the meaning, interpretation, or scholarly record may be corrected without a formal notice. Substantive corrections will be published as separate, clearly identified notices and linked bidirectionally to the original article. The original article will normally remain available, with a clear indication that a correction has been issued. Corrections will include the article title, author names, publication details, DOI, and a description of the matter corrected.
Corrections will not normally be used to introduce new findings, substantially alter an article’s conclusions, or address errors that invalidate the work as a whole. Such cases may require retraction.
An article may be retracted when there is clear evidence that its findings, conclusions, or scholarly integrity are substantially unreliable. Grounds for retraction may include, but are not limited to:
Retraction may be initiated by the authors, the journal’s Editorial Team, or the publisher. Authors will normally be informed of the concerns and given a reasonable opportunity to respond. Authors’ agreement is not required when the Editorial Team and publisher determine that retraction is necessary to protect the scholarly record.
A retraction notice will:
The original article will normally remain accessible to preserve the scholarly record, but every version will be clearly and prominently marked as retracted and linked to the retraction notice. Retraction does not mean that every statement or conclusion in an article is necessarily incorrect; it indicates that the article as a whole should not be relied upon as part of the validated scholarly record.
Authorship disputes alone will not normally justify retraction unless they call the reliability, provenance, or integrity of the article into question.
An expression of concern may be issued when substantial questions have been raised about an article but the available evidence is inconclusive, an investigation is ongoing, or a responsible institution is unwilling or unable to investigate the matter within a reasonable period.
An expression of concern will be clearly identified, freely accessible, and linked to the article. It will describe the nature of the concern without presenting unverified allegations as established facts. Once sufficient information becomes available, the expression of concern may be followed by a correction, retraction, removal notice, or a statement that the concerns have been resolved. In some circumstances, an expression of concern may remain the final notice when the underlying questions cannot be conclusively resolved.
An accepted article that has not yet been formally published as the version of record may be withdrawn if it contains serious errors, violates publication ethics, infringes legal rights, was submitted or accepted in error, or cannot appropriately proceed to publication.
Authors may request withdrawal, but withdrawal after acceptance is not automatic and requires editorial approval. A withdrawal notice may be published when a DOI or public publication record has already been created.
Once an article has been formally published as the version of record, concerns will normally be addressed through a correction, expression of concern, retraction, or removal notice rather than withdrawal.
Complete removal of a published article is exceptional. An article may be removed from public access only when continued publication presents a serious legal, privacy, security, or safety risk that cannot adequately be addressed through correction, retraction, or redaction. This may include:
Where an article is removed, its DOI and bibliographic record will ordinarily be retained. The article will be replaced by a removal notice explaining why the content is unavailable, except where legal or safety considerations prevent disclosure of that information.
Formal corrections, expressions of concern, retractions, withdrawals, and removal notices will be permanently linked to the affected publication. Common Ground Research Networks will update relevant article pages, files, DOI records, and publication metadata and will notify Crossref and other appropriate abstracting and indexing services.
Post-publication notices will remain freely accessible. Except in cases requiring removal, the published version of record will not be silently deleted or replaced. Where an updated article file is issued, the nature and date of the update will be clearly recorded.
Authors will normally be notified of a proposed correction, expression of concern, retraction, or removal and invited to provide relevant information. The publisher may nevertheless act without an author’s agreement when action is necessary to maintain the integrity of the scholarly record or meet legal obligations.
Decisions are made by the journal’s Editorial Team in consultation with the publisher and, where appropriate, independent subject specialists or research-integrity advisers. Anyone with a material conflict of interest will be excluded from the decision-making process.
Authors may appeal a decision by submitting a written request that identifies a significant procedural error or provides substantive new evidence. Disagreement with the decision alone is not sufficient grounds for appeal. Appeals will be reviewed by an editor or other qualified person who was not directly responsible for the original decision, wherever practicable. The outcome of the appeal will be final.
Concerns about published work should be submitted to editor@cgnetworks.org and should include the article title and DOI, a clear description of the concern, and any relevant supporting evidence. Anonymous concerns may be considered when they provide sufficiently specific and credible information to permit an assessment.
Common Ground Research Networks will handle allegations as confidentially as reasonably possible. We will not disclose the identity of a person raising a concern unless disclosure is necessary for a fair investigation, required by law, or authorized by that person.