The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) has released new retraction guidelines designed to address growing challenges such as paper mill activity, fraudulent authorship, and undeclared third-party involvement. The new framework specifies that journals should retract work when authorship cannot be verified, when accountability is uncertain, or when any form of misrepresentation—including deception, fraud (e.g., a paper mill), the undisclosed use of artificial intelligence—is identified.
The guidance also clarifies conditions for retraction linked to compromised or manipulated peer review, explicitly naming practices such as fake reviewers use, citation manipulation, and paper mill use. For large-scale cases, journals are advised to state explicitly when retractions form part of systematic, coordinated, and manipulation of the publication process.
In addition, COPE has issued a separate guidance on expressions of concern (EOCs). Editors are encouraged to publish EOCs when credible issues arise that cannot be resolved quickly, ensuring readers are alerted while investigations proceed. Outcomes of EOCs may range from confirmation that no action is needed to a correction or retraction.
The revisions emphasize timeliness, noting that delays should not depend on institutional investigations or uncooperative authors. However, COPE did not set a fixed timeframe, citing variability in cases. The guidelines also recommend acknowledging third parties, such as researchers who raise concerns, in retraction notices when relevant and permitted.
According to COPE, the updates were informed by consultation with editors, publishers, literature reviews, and integrity policy analyses. They aim to standardize transparency in notices, encourage acknowledgment of investigative contributions, and strengthen responses to systematic manipulation of scholarly publishing.
Click here to read the original press release.
More News in this Theme
