Scientific Works «Adult Education: Theory, Experience, Prospects» follows the principles of transparency, academic integrity, and protection of the scholarly record. If, after publication, there is a need to clarify, correct, or formally review the status of an article, the editorial office applies post-publication measures according to the nature of the problem and with regard to international ethical approaches.

This Policy has been developed with due regard to the recommendations of COPE on corrections, retractions, expressions of concern, and other post-publication actions intended to protect the integrity of the scholarly record.

This Policy defines the procedure for post-publication changes to materials published in the journal, including:

• Correction / Erratum;
• Retraction;
• Expression of Concern.

1. General Principles

1.1. Post-publication changes are used to ensure accuracy, integrity, transparency, and reliability in scholarly communication.

1.2. The editorial office does not make substantial changes to a published article without a proper public notice about such changes.

1.3. Where necessary, the editorial office publishes a separate notice of correction, retraction, or expression of concern, linked to the original article.

1.4. All post-publication notices must be clearly labelled, openly available, linked to the original publication, and contain enough information to explain the nature of the change.

1.5. Decisions on post-publication changes are made by the editorial office after considering the available facts, explanations from the parties involved, editorial materials, peer reviews, and, where necessary, information from the authors’ institutions or other authorised parties.

2. Initiation of Review

2.1. A post-publication review may be started on the basis of information received from:

• author(s);
• readers;
• reviewers;
• editors;
• members of the editorial board;
• institutions connected with the authors;
• other persons or organisations that provide reasoned information about possible problems in a published article.

2.2. Grounds for review may include:

• substantial errors in the text, data, tables, figures, metadata, or author information;
• signs that the results may be unreliable;
• plagiarism;
• duplicate publication;
• fabrication, falsification, or manipulation of data;
• breaches of research ethics;
• serious undisclosed conflict of interest;
• other circumstances that may affect the scholarly reliability or ethical acceptability of the article.

3. Correction / Erratum

3.1. A correction is used when an error or inaccuracy is found in a published article and:

• it does not remove the overall scholarly value of the article;
• it does not make the conclusions fully unreliable;
• but it requires an official public clarification.

3.2. Grounds for correction may include:

• errors in author names, affiliations, ORCID, or contact details;
• errors in the title, abstract, keywords, or bibliographic description;
• technical or editorial mistakes;
• inaccuracies in tables, figures, numbers, references, or parts of the text;
• other errors that need correction but do not justify retraction.

3.3. A correction is published as a separate editorial notice with a clear statement of:

• the title of the article;
• the author(s);
• the nature of the error;
• the corrected information;
• the date of publication of the correction.

3.4. If the error appeared because of the editorial office or publisher, the notice may be labelled as Erratum. If the correction is related to information provided by the author(s), the journal may use the general term Correction.

3.5. A correction must not hide the fact that the original article contained an error. The editorial office ensures a clear link between the article and the correction notice on the journal website.

4. Retraction

4.1. Retraction is used when an article, or its main part, is seriously unreliable, unethical, or should no longer be treated as part of the scholarly record without a clear warning.

4.2. Grounds for retraction may include:

• proven or reasonably established fabrication or falsification of data;
• serious errors that make the results or conclusions unreliable;
• plagiarism or substantial improper use of other people’s work;
• duplicate or redundant publication without proper disclosure;
• unethical conduct of research;
• manipulation of authorship, peer review, data, or citations;
• hidden breaches that seriously affect the scholarly reliability of the article;
• other serious breaches of publication ethics.

4.3. A retraction is published as a separate editorial notice that:

• has a clear title Retraction;
• includes the title and bibliographic details of the retracted article;
• explains the reasons for retraction in a way that is clear enough for readers;
• states who initiated or made the retraction decision;
• includes the date of publication of the notice.

4.4. Retraction does not mean physical removal of the article from the website, except in exceptional cases required by law or connected with serious legal restrictions. If an article is retracted, its status must be clearly marked on the article page and/or in the article file.

4.5. A retracted article remains part of the scholarly record, but it must be clearly accompanied by a notice of retraction so that readers do not treat it as a reliable source without the necessary context.

4.6. If the author(s) disagree with the retraction decision, this does not prevent the editorial office from retracting the article when there are sufficient grounds to do so.

5. Expression of Concern

5.1. An expression of concern is used when serious and well-founded doubts arise about a published article, but at the time of review:

• the editorial office does not yet have enough evidence for correction or retraction;
• an investigation is still ongoing;
• the relevant institution is carrying out an inquiry;
• it is not possible to obtain a final conclusion within a reasonable time.

5.2. An expression of concern is a temporary or intermediate editorial notice that warns readers that there are serious questions about the publication.

5.3. Such a notice must:

• be clearly labelled as Expression of Concern;
• include the title and bibliographic details of the article;
• briefly explain the nature of the concerns;
• state that the review or investigation is still ongoing or not yet completed;
• include the date of publication.

5.4. After the review is completed, the expression of concern may:

• be replaced by a correction;
• be replaced by a retraction;
• remain in place with additional explanation;
• be removed if the concerns are not confirmed.

6. Editorial Review Procedure

6.1. After receiving information about a possible problem, the editorial office makes an initial assessment and decides whether there are grounds for a formal review.

6.2. If the concern appears to be well founded, the editorial office may:

• ask the author(s) for written explanations;
• request additional materials, data, or documents;
• contact reviewers, editors, or other experts;
• inform the relevant institution of the author(s) or ask it for clarification;
• suspend consideration of new submissions from the author(s), if necessary within the ethical review process.

6.3. Each case is considered individually, with due regard to fairness, confidentiality, proportionality, and proper documentation.

7. Form and Availability of Post-Publication Notices

7.1. All notices of correction, retraction, or expression of concern are published on the journal website in open access.

7.2. Such notices must be clearly linked to the relevant article through its webpage, metadata, issue contents, and, where technically possible, DOI infrastructure.

7.3. The editorial office must not silently replace published files without marking the fact that an update has been made.

7.4. If the journal uses DOI and related indexing services, the editorial office seeks to reflect post-publication changes properly in the publication metadata.

8. Relation to Other Journal Policies

8.1. This Policy is applied together with the Publication Ethics Policy, Conflict of Interest Policy, Peer Review Policy, Policy on Citation Manipulation and Self-Citation, Artificial Intelligence Policy, and other editorial documents of the journal.

8.2. In cases not directly covered by this Policy, the editorial office follows generally recognised international ethical guidance in scholarly publishing.

8.3. A well-grounded complaint, report, or other notice of a possible breach of academic integrity or publication ethics may serve as a basis for post-publication review in accordance with the Policy for the Handling of Complaints on Breaches of Academic Integrity and Publication Ethics.