Two Different Things
Not every error published after review is the same kind of error, and treating them the same would either be too harsh on a minor fix or too lenient on a real problem. We follow the standard distinction used across academic and open-access publishing:
A factual error — a wrong figure, a citation mistake, a typo that changes meaning — that doesn't undermine the article's core finding or argument. The article stands; the record is fixed and the fix is visible.
A flaw serious enough that the article's central finding or argument can no longer be relied on — whether from good-faith error, a methodology that doesn't hold up, or misconduct. The article is marked as retracted; it is not deleted.
Nothing Is Deleted
Consistent with the permanence commitment described in Copyright, Licensing & Preservation, a retracted article remains accessible with a clear, permanent retraction notice attached, stating what was wrong and when the retraction occurred. Quietly removing a piece from the record would defeat the purpose of publishing it as a citable, permanent work in the first place — and would hide the correction rather than make it part of the record.
How a Correction or Retraction Starts
Three ways this can begin:
- The author identifies an error in their own published work and requests a correction or retraction.
- A reader, including a domain expert with no connection to the original review, identifies a problem and reports it.
- The editor's own periodic re-reads (see the Quality Assurance Statement) surface something missed at the time of original review.
Process
- The claimed error is documented in writing — what's wrong, and why it matters.
- The Founding Editor (or the original reviewing domain expert, where available) evaluates the claim against the published article directly, not a summary of it.
- Where practical, the original author is given the opportunity to respond before a decision is finalized.
- The outcome — no action, correction, or retraction — is documented and, if the article is changed, the change is dated and described in the published record itself.
Guided By, Not a Member Of
Undeterred Press is not currently a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the standard-setting body most established journals belong to. Where this policy doesn't cover a specific situation, we default to COPE's published guidance on corrections and retractions as the reference standard, rather than improvising one. COPE membership is worth pursuing as the journal's track record grows.
See also: the Editorial Triage & Review Workflow, Step 5a, for the appeals process that applies before a piece is ever published — this policy covers what happens after.