Abstract
Several studies have already documented a lack of transparency in retraction notices (RNs), which often omit important information that would allow readers to appreciate the entire process’s intricacies, including those involved and the reasons leading up to the retrac-tion. One issue rarely discussed in the academic literature is authors’ disagreement with retractions, the wording of RNs, or retractions themselves. In this paper, using six examples of retractions and their respective RNs across journals and/or publishers, all COPE members, a reflection is offered as to why this issue needs a more intense debate and greater procedural clarity by editors, journals, and publishers.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
