An author published an article in journal A. At the proofreading stage they were asked by the publisher to reduce the number of words in the abstract. After publication, the author indicated that they had inadvertently included the wrong abstract in the proofreading correction step, supplying one which belonged to another article they had authored. The article is now published with the wrong abstract. The author is asking for a retraction and republication.
Question for COPE Council
- Should the journal issue a corrigendum or retraction and republication?
Advice on this case is from a small number of COPE Council Members. Most cases on the COPE website are presented to the COPE Forum where advice is offered by a wider group of COPE Members and COPE Council Members. Advice on individual cases is not formal COPE guidance.
A retraction seems unnecessary here as a mistake was made, and it did not involve misconduct/fraud or affect the validity of the actual findings. This appears to be a simple mix-up, although it shows the need for careful version comparison during production and proofreading.
In the case of e-first publication, there is a window of opportunity to make corrections, so if the journal can, they might replace the abstract in the HTML and PDF versions and let indexers know that the abstract needs to be replaced. The journal should then publish a correction notice to state that the previous abstract was that of another article by the authors, included in error during the production process.
The article itself is unaffected, so using a form of retraction seems inappropriate. Retraction and republication, as discussed in the COPE retraction guidelines, does not apply because a simple correction will suffice.