After several publishing experiences, correcting minor errors occurs in the proofing stage. However, every once and awhile errors can pass by authorship teams and proofing/editing teams. Many errors are never formally addressed but when they are what are standard means to manage them?

Most personal experiences suggest that additional proofing edits take care of most author/journal requirements prior to in print publication. In some cases, issuing an erratum could be a means to provide for additional clarification or corrections. After review of colleagues and COPE guidelines, retraction is not a means to be applied to correct for non-scientific errors/editing mistakes.

Very interested to hear about personal experiences, especially those that serve as editors. I am trying to refine a reasonable editorial 'cap' and approach.

More Cory Jensen's questions See All
Similar questions and discussions