Journal: Jurnal Agrium (Journal of Agricultural Research)
Last updated: 25 October 2025
Contact: agrium@unimal.ac.id

1. Purpose and Principles

Jurnal Agrium (Journal of Agricultural Research) is committed to preserving the integrity, transparency, and permanence of the scholarly record. This policy sets out procedures to correct the literature when necessary and to retract published content when the findings or the publication record are no longer reliable. The Journal follows internationally recognized best practices in publication ethics and research integrity (e.g., COPE-aligned practices).

2. Scope

This policy applies to all content published by the Journal, including research articles, reviews, data papers, editorials, and supplementary materials. It covers pre-publication withdrawals, post-publication corrections, addenda, editor’s notes, expressions of concern, retractions, and rare removals.

3. Definitions and When They Apply

3.1 Author Correction (Corrigendum) / Publisher Correction (Erratum)

Issued when a reliable article requires minor to moderate textual or metadata amendments that do not alter the overall conclusions (e.g., author name/affiliation errors, funding statement updates, minor figure legend clarifications, small numerical typos with unchanged interpretation). “Corrigendum” is used when the authors are responsible for the error; “Erratum” when it originated in editorial/production.

3.2 Addendum

Published to add essential information or clarification that strengthens but does not change the original conclusions (e.g., late data availability links, methodological clarifications).

3.3 Editor’s Note

A brief note may be added to a record to indicate that an investigation is underway or that a specific aspect (e.g., an image or dataset) is being verified.

3.4 Expression of Concern

A formal notice used when there are serious, credible concerns about integrity or reliability (e.g., potential image manipulation, undisclosed conflicts) but the evidence remains inconclusive or an investigation cannot be completed promptly.

3.5 Retraction

Issued when the article’s findings are unreliable due to misconduct (e.g., fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, image manipulation) or honest error that invalidates the results; when there is redundant/duplicate publication; when there are unethical research practices; or when authorship or competing-interest issues fatally compromise the record. Retractions aim to correct, not punish, and clearly state the reason(s).

3.6 Article Withdrawal (pre-publication)

Before official publication (ahead of print/online first), the Journal may withdraw a manuscript if severe issues are identified that preclude publication (e.g., major ethical concerns, lack of author approval, legal risks).

3.7 Article Removal (rare)

Reserved for exceptional circumstances where leaving the content online poses legal risk (e.g., defamation, court orders), infringes privacy, or presents serious public-health risk. A bibliographic “tombstone” with reason for removal remains in place.

4. Triggers for Action

Actions may be initiated by authors, readers, reviewers, editors, institutions, funders, or third parties. Submissions must provide specific evidence (e.g., overlapping text with citation, original images/data, ethics approvals). Anonymous reports are considered if supported by verifiable documentation.

5. Investigation Process

1. Initial Screening. The Editor-in-Chief (EIC) or a delegated editor assesses the concern, preserves evidence, and determines whether to proceed.
2. Notification. The corresponding author and, where relevant, co-authors and their institutions are informed and invited to respond with explanations and supporting evidence.
3. Assessment. The Journal may consult independent experts, statistical reviewers, image-forensics tools, or institutional research-integrity offices.
4. Interim Notice. If resolution will be delayed and the concern could mislead readers, the Journal may post an Editor’s Note or an Expression of Concern.
5. Decision. The EIC, with editorial oversight (and in consultation with the publisher where applicable), decides the appropriate outcome under Section 3.
6. Record-Keeping. All correspondence and evidence are retained in accordance with the Journal’s retention schedule.

6. Decision Criteria

Decisions prioritize the reliability of the scholarly record and reader protection. Considerations include the strength of evidence, impact on conclusions, author intent (honest error vs. misconduct), cooperation during the inquiry, and input from institutions/funders. When misconduct is alleged, institutional findings—if available—are given substantial weight, but the Journal retains independent editorial judgment.

7. How Notices Are Published

• Versioning and Permanence: Corrections, addenda, expressions of concern, and retractions are published as citable items with their own DOIs and are linked bidirectionally to the original article.
• Labeling and Transparency: Titles clearly indicate the action (e.g., “Correction:…”, “Expression of Concern:…”, “Retraction:…”). Notices state what is being corrected/retracted, who initiated the action (authors, editor, or both), the specific reasons, and any effect on conclusions.
• Access: The original article remains accessible to preserve the scholarly record. For retractions, the PDF and HTML are watermarked or flagged as “Retracted” on every page.
• Indexing: Metadata are updated with Crossref and other indexing services to ensure discoverability in databases and reference managers.

8. Authorship, Funding, and Competing Interests

If a correction involves authorship (addition, removal, or order), all listed authors must agree in writing; the EIC may request institutional verification of contributions. Changes to funding or conflict-of-interest statements are published as corrections and updated in article metadata.

9. Data, Images, and Materials

Where concerns relate to data, code, or images, the Journal may request originals, laboratory records, or raw datasets. Failure to provide satisfactory underlying materials may result in an Expression of Concern or Retraction. Corrected images must reflect the original data, with any legitimate adjustments described transparently.

10. Timing

The Journal aims to act promptly. Minor corrections are processed upon verification. Complex investigations may require additional time, particularly when institutions are involved. Interim notices will be used where reader guidance is needed during an investigation.

11. Author and Institutional Responsibilities

Authors must promptly notify the Journal of significant errors or ethical issues in their published work and cooperate fully with investigations. Institutions and funders are encouraged to support transparent and timely resolution and to share relevant findings with the Journal, subject to applicable laws and policies.

12. Appeals

Authors may appeal editorial decisions under this policy by writing to the EIC with a reasoned explanation and any new evidence. Appeals are reviewed by an editor not previously involved (or an independent advisor). The Journal’s final decision will be communicated in writing and is binding for the publication record.

13. Legal and Ethical Constraints

Where legal restrictions limit the detail that can be disclosed in a notice, the Journal will state this constraint while providing the maximum information permissible. In rare cases requiring removal, bibliographic information will remain publicly available with an explanation.

14. Post-Retraction Use and Licensing

Retraction does not, by itself, alter the article’s license. However, readers are notified that the findings are unreliable and should not be used as evidence. Reuse must acknowledge the retracted status and comply with the original license terms.

15. Policy Governance and Review

This policy is approved by the Editor-in-Chief and will be reviewed periodically to reflect evolving best practices in research integrity and scholarly publishing. Proposed changes may be discussed with the editorial board and publisher before adoption.