1. Policy Statement

Jurnal Pengembangan Penyuluhan Pertanian (JP3) is committed to maintaining the accuracy, transparency, and integrity of the scholarly record. The journal has procedures for correcting errors, retracting unreliable publications, and withdrawing manuscripts when appropriate. These procedures are based on the principles outlined in the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Core Practices and the COPE Retraction Guidelines.

Editorial decisions concerning corrections, retractions, and withdrawals will be made fairly, transparently, and on the basis of the available evidence. The journal will distinguish honest errors from research or publication misconduct and will take proportionate action to protect readers and the reliability of the published record, following the principles in the COPE Retraction Guidelines.

2. Corrections

JP3 may publish a correction when an error is identified in a published article and the error can be corrected without invalidating the overall reliability of the research. Examples may include material factual errors, errors in tables or figures, inaccurate author details, incorrect affiliations, or other mistakes that could mislead readers. This approach is consistent with the COPE Retraction Guidelines, which distinguish correctable errors from circumstances that warrant retraction.

Authors who identify an error in their published article should promptly notify the editorial office and provide a clear explanation of the error, the affected sections, and the proposed correction. Readers or other parties may also report suspected errors to JP3 through the contact information provided on the official JP3 website. The editor will assess the information and determine whether a correction or another editorial action is appropriate, informed by the COPE Flowchart on Handling Post-publication Critiques.

A correction notice should identify the affected article, describe the error and its correction, and explain the effect of the correction where relevant. The notice should be clearly labelled and linked to the original article wherever possible, so that readers can identify the corrected publication. These practices are consistent with the COPE guidance on maintaining a transparent and reliable publication record.

Corrections may be considered for errors in author names, affiliations, funding statements, acknowledgements, references, tables, figures, or other published information. If an error affects the validity of the research findings or conclusions, the editor will assess whether a correction is sufficient or whether retraction or another notice is required, in accordance with the COPE Retraction Guidelines.

3. Retractions

JP3 may retract a published article when there is clear evidence that its findings are unreliable because of a major error or research misconduct, including fabrication or falsification of data, plagiarism, redundant publication, unethical research, or other circumstances that meet the criteria for retraction. The journal will also consider retraction where a seriously misleading competing interest was not disclosed or where the publication resulted from a compromised or manipulated peer-review process. These criteria are based on the COPE Retraction Guidelines.

Retraction will be considered only after the editor has assessed the available evidence and, where appropriate, sought clarification from the authors or relevant institutions. The journal may consult the author's institution or research-integrity authority when an investigation is needed. However, the editor retains responsibility for deciding whether editorial action is required to protect the published record, consistent with the COPE guidance on cooperation between research institutions and journals in research-integrity cases.

JP3 will not use retraction merely to resolve a disagreement over interpretation when the underlying research remains reliable. Where only a limited part of an article is incorrect and the main findings remain dependable, a correction may be more appropriate than retraction. The decision will be based on the nature and extent of the problem, in accordance with the COPE Retraction Guidelines.

A retraction notice must be clearly labelled as a retraction, identify the affected article, state the reasons for retraction, and identify who is retracting the article. The notice should be objective, factual, freely accessible, and linked to the retracted article wherever possible. These requirements follow the COPE Retraction Guidelines.

Retractions should be issued promptly once the editor has sufficient grounds to conclude that retraction is necessary. The journal will not delay an otherwise justified retraction solely because an author does not cooperate or disagrees with the decision. If a relevant institutional investigation is ongoing and the evidence is not yet conclusive, JP3 may consider publishing an expression of concern while the matter is being resolved, as described in the COPE Retraction Guidelines.

4. Expressions of Concern

JP3 may publish an expression of concern when there are serious unresolved questions about a published article but the available evidence is not yet sufficient to justify a final decision on correction or retraction. This may occur when an investigation is ongoing, the evidence is inconclusive, or a relevant institution is unable or unwilling to investigate a credible concern. The journal's approach is informed by the COPE Retraction Guidelines.

An expression of concern should explain the issue as clearly and objectively as the available evidence permits and should be linked to the article concerned. When additional evidence or the outcome of an investigation becomes available, JP3 will review whether the notice should remain in place or whether a correction, retraction, or other action is required, following the COPE Retraction Guidelines.

5. Withdrawal of Submitted Manuscripts

Withdrawal refers to the removal of a manuscript from editorial consideration before it has been formally published. An author who wishes to withdraw a submitted manuscript must send a written request to the JP3 editorial office, identify the manuscript, and provide the reason for withdrawal. The journal will confirm the manuscript's editorial status and process the request according to its submission procedures.

A manuscript should not be submitted to another journal while it remains under active consideration by JP3. Authors requesting withdrawal should obtain confirmation from the editorial office before submitting the same work elsewhere. This requirement is a proposed JP3 editorial procedure intended to prevent duplicate or simultaneous submissions; it should not be interpreted as a verbatim rule from a single COPE document.

If a withdrawal request raises concerns about duplicate submission, plagiarism, authorship disputes, or other possible publication-ethics issues, JP3 may seek clarification from the authors and take further action where appropriate. The handling of such concerns will follow the relevant COPE Core Practices on allegations of misconduct.

6. Withdrawal of an Accepted but Unpublished Manuscript

If a manuscript has been accepted but has not yet been formally published, a withdrawal request will be assessed by the editor and the editorial office. The journal may request written confirmation from the corresponding author and, where necessary, clarification regarding the agreement of the co-authors. The journal will document the decision and update the manuscript's editorial status.

If the journal identifies credible concerns about the integrity of an accepted manuscript, JP3 may suspend publication while the concerns are assessed. Where necessary, the editor may request additional evidence or contact the relevant institution, following the principles in the COPE guidance on cooperation between research institutions and journals.

7. Removal or Withdrawal of an Already Published Article

Once an article has been formally published, it should not ordinarily be removed from the journal website simply because an author requests withdrawal, disagrees with the publication, or wishes to submit the work elsewhere. If the published article contains errors or raises integrity concerns, JP3 will normally consider a correction, expression of concern, or retraction notice rather than silently deleting the article, in accordance with the COPE Retraction Guidelines.

Removal of the full text of a published article will be considered only in exceptional circumstances, such as when the article is clearly defamatory, violates personal privacy, is subject to a court order, or may pose a serious risk to public health. Where removal is necessary, the journal should retain the article's bibliographic information, including its title and authors, and provide a notice explaining why the full text has been removed, consistent with the COPE Retraction Guidelines.

8. Requests for Corrections, Retractions, or Withdrawal

Requests concerning a published article may be submitted by authors, readers, reviewers, research institutions, or other parties with relevant information. Requests should identify the article, explain the concern or proposed change, and include supporting evidence where available. JP3 will assess the request objectively and may seek additional information before making a decision, following the COPE Flowchart on Handling Post-publication Critiques.

The journal will consider the evidence and the potential effect of the concern on the reliability of the article. Where allegations of research misconduct are involved, JP3 may contact the authors or relevant institution and follow the applicable procedures under the COPE Core Practices.

9. Editorial Independence and Author Cooperation

The editor-in-chief is responsible for the final editorial decision on whether to publish a correction, expression of concern, or retraction. JP3 will consider responses from the authors and other relevant parties but may proceed with an appropriate notice when the evidence supports it, even if one or more authors disagree. This principle is set out in the COPE Retraction Guidelines.

The journal will seek to communicate decisions clearly and maintain a record of the reasons for editorial action. Where institutional investigations are relevant, JP3 may cooperate with the institution while independently assessing the implications for the published article, in accordance with the COPE guidance on research institutions and journals.

10. Indexing, Linking, and Accessibility

JP3 will make reasonable efforts to ensure that correction notices, expressions of concern, and retraction notices are clearly labelled, publicly accessible, and linked to the original article wherever technically possible. The journal will also make reasonable efforts to ensure that relevant article metadata and notices are accurately reflected in the journal website and communicated to relevant indexing services when appropriate. These practices follow the COPE Retraction Guidelines and the COPE Journal Audit guidance on post-publication discussions and corrections.

11. Policy Review

JP3 will review this policy periodically to ensure that it remains appropriate for the journal's editorial procedures and consistent with developments in publication ethics. The policy is informed by the COPE Core Practices, the COPE Retraction Guidelines, and the COPE Journal Audit guidance.