Retraction, Withdrawal, & Correction (R-W-C) Policy

Habitus Aquatica: Journal of Aquatic Resources and Fisheries Management

This policy outlines the official framework for managing manuscript withdrawals, retractions, corrections, and post-publication discussions for Habitus Aquatica: Journal of Aquatic Resources and Fisheries Management. The policy is guided by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Retraction Guidelines and ICMJE recommendations to safeguard the integrity of the scholarly record

1. Article Withdrawal Policy

  • General Restriction: Authors are not permitted to withdraw submitted manuscripts arbitrarily after the peer-review process has commenced. Arbitrary withdrawals consume significant time and resources from editors and peer reviewers. Withdrawal requests must be grounded in valid academic, ethical, or research-related justifications.
  • Request Procedure: To request a withdrawal during evaluation, the corresponding author must submit a formal written request signed by the corresponding author (and accompanied by institutional or ethics board clearance where applicable) addressed to the Editor-in-Chief.
  • Official Status: A manuscript is considered officially withdrawn only after receiving formal written confirmation from the Editorial Office. Authors must not submit the same manuscript to another journal until the withdrawal process is formally finalized.

2. Article Retraction Policy

Retraction applies to published articles when compelling evidence reveals that the findings are unreliable or that severe publication/research ethics violations have occurred.

  • Grounds for Retraction:
    1. Unreliable Findings: Clear evidence that the conclusions are invalid, whether due to scientific misconduct (such as data fabrication, falsification, or image manipulation) or honest major errors (such as miscalculations or experimental mistakes).
    2. Redundant Publication: Prior publication of the findings elsewhere without proper disclosure, authorization, or cross-referencing.
    3. Ethical and Legal Breaches: Substantial plagiarism, unauthorized data usage, or failure to obtain mandatory research ethics committee approval or participant consent.
    4. Authorship Misconduct: Serious authorship disputes or non-compliance with authorship criteria that compromise the validity of the article.
  • Retraction Procedure:
    1. Reporting & Assessment: Concerns submitted to the Editor-in-Chief are evaluated in accordance with COPE flowcharts.
    2. Investigation & Expression of Concern: The Editorial Board seeks clarification from the authors and relevant institutions. If an investigation involves serious concerns and requires extended time, the journal may publish an Expression of Concern.
    3. Editorial Determination: Authors who retain copyright do not possess a unilateral right to retract a published article; their disagreement does not prevent the journal from issuing a retraction if supported by evidence.
    4. Retraction Notice: A clearly identified Retraction Notice is published and bi-directionally linked to the original article. The article page and PDF will be clearly watermarked as RETRACTED while maintaining the permanent bibliographic record.

3. Article Correction Policy

A formal correction is issued when errors are identified that do not invalidate the principal findings, methodology, or main conclusions of the published work.

  • Types of Correction:
    1. Publisher Correction (Erratum): Corrects significant errors introduced during editorial processing, typesetting, or production by journal staff.
    2. Author Correction (Corrigendum): Corrects significant errors attributable to the authors, such as minor data inaccuracies, incorrect affiliations, or author list revisions.
    3. Addendum: Adds supplementary information or clarifications from the authors to resolve minor ambiguities or expand context without altering the original conclusions.

4. Article Removal and Replacement

  • Article Removal: Complete removal of an article from the online platform is an extraordinary measure applied only in rare cases involving legal mandates, defamatory content, severe privacy infringements, court orders, or substantial public hazards. The article metadata (title and author details) is retained alongside a notice explaining the removal.
  • Article Replacement: In exceptional situations where a flawed article presents serious risks, the original version may be retracted and replaced with a corrected version. The relationship between the original article, the retraction notice, and the replacement version is fully documented and transparently linked.

5. Post-Publication Discussion & Misconduct Allegations

  • Post-Publication Discussion: Habitus Aquatica welcomes constructive, evidence-based academic discussions regarding its published articles. Readers and researchers may submit queries, methodological critiques, or data concerns to the Editorial Board via email. Authors will be provided a fair opportunity to respond before the editor reaches a decision.
  • Allegations of Misconduct: Reports of suspected research or publication misconduct (such as plagiarism or data fabrication) are handled with strict confidentiality and fairness in compliance with COPE guidelines. Confirmed cases of severe misconduct will result in manuscript rejection or article retraction, and may lead to a ban on future submissions.
  • Version Tracking: Article updates, corrections, and retraction notices are permanently tracked and displayed via Crossmark.