The editorial board of the journal “Scientific Bulletin of Kherson State University. Series ‘Germanic Studies and Intercultural Communication’” regards article retraction as an exceptional yet necessary mechanism for preserving the reliability of the scholarly record, protecting readers from misleading information, and upholding high standards of academic integrity. The purpose of retraction is not to punish authors, but to correct the scientific record when a published work can no longer be considered reliable or ethically acceptable.

The journal follows the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics, recognized editorial best practices, and applicable legislation of Ukraine.

Grounds for Retraction

Retraction may be considered where post-publication findings substantially affect the scholarly reliability or ethical acceptability of the article, including:

• plagiarism, self-plagiarism, or unauthorized use of third-party materials;
• fabrication, falsification, or deliberate distortion of results;
• major errors in data, methodology, or conclusions rendering findings unreliable;
• duplicate or redundant publication without disclosure;
• improper authorship attribution or omission of genuine contributors;
• lack of required ethical approval where applicable;
• copyright infringement;
• undisclosed conflicts of interest affecting the publication;
• manipulation of the peer-review process;
• concealed substantial use of AI contrary to journal policy;
• other serious forms of publication misconduct.

Initiation of the Procedure

A retraction review may be initiated by:

• the editorial board;
• the author or co-authors;
• a reviewer;
• a reader;
• a research institution;
• any other person providing substantiated evidence.

All reports are subject to preliminary assessment.

Stages of Review

Upon receiving relevant information, the journal conducts an internal review which may include examination of documents, source comparison, requests for additional evidence, consultation with independent experts, and written explanations from the authors.

Authors are given an opportunity to respond and submit relevant evidence. The journal ensures impartial consideration, confidentiality, and case-specific assessment.

In complex cases, the journal may contact the institution where the research was conducted or other competent bodies.

Possible Editorial Decisions

Depending on the circumstances, the editorial board may decide to:

• take no further action;
• publish technical or substantive corrections;
• issue an editorial clarification;
• publish an expression of concern;
• temporarily suspend access pending investigation;
• fully retract the article.

Retraction is used only where lesser measures are insufficient to protect scholarly integrity.

Form of Retraction

In the event of retraction, the article is normally not removed from the scholarly archive unless required by law or court order. Instead, the publication remains available with a clear status mark: “Retracted”.

A separate notice is published on the article page containing:

• article title;
• authors’ names;
• bibliographic details;
• date of retraction;
• concise explanation of reasons;
• reference to the editorial decision where appropriate.

The notice should remain open, clear, and accessible to readers.

Voluntary Retraction Requested by Authors

Where authors themselves identify a significant error and promptly notify the journal, such conduct is considered an expression of academic responsibility. In such cases, the editorial board may choose the most proportionate corrective measure: correction, clarification, or retraction.

Consequences of Retraction

Retraction does not preclude possible consequences under institutional procedures, contractual obligations, or applicable law. The journal may also restrict future submissions by authors found responsible for serious or repeated misconduct.

Guiding Principles

The retraction policy is based on the principles of:

• protection of the scholarly record;
• proportionality of measures;
• transparency for readers;
• fairness toward authors;
• evidence-based conclusions;
• compliance with international standards.