Correction, Clarification, and Retraction Protocol

The journal Tempus Psicológico understands academic publishing as an exercise in ethical responsibility, critical dialogue, and the ongoing construction of knowledge. For this reason, the journal is committed to safeguarding the scientific and human integrity of the works it publishes, acting with transparency and prudence whenever errors, concerns, or situations arise that may affect the quality, clarity, or reliability of a published article.

The journal recognizes that all academic work may be subject to unintentional errors, omissions, or interpretations that require later revision. In this sense, correction processes should not be understood solely as punitive mechanisms, but also as expressions of intellectual honesty and a firm commitment to academic truth.

1. Editorial Corrections

When minor errors are identified after publication that do not substantially alter the conclusions, interpretations, or results of a work, the journal may issue formal editorial corrections. These corrections may involve:

• Formatting and layout issues.

• Bibliographic references and citations.

• Institutional affiliations and relevant typographical errors.

• Clarifications necessary to improve text comprehension.

In such cases, the modification will be made visibly and transparently, indicating the date of the update while preserving the link to the original version of the article.

2. Editorial Clarifications

In certain situations, it may be necessary to publish editorial clarifications to specify information that could generate ambiguity or misunderstanding within the academic community. Such clarifications do not imply ethical misconduct or invalidate the central content of the manuscript, but rather seek to strengthen the clarity and transparency of the editorial process.

3. Expressions of Concern

When there are reasonable concerns regarding the ethical, methodological, or scientific integrity of an article, the journal may issue an Expression of Concern while the corresponding review is conducted. This measure aims to inform the academic community responsibly about a situation under evaluation, while simultaneously preserving due process and the right of those involved to provide explanations and evidence. Situations that may motivate this type of editorial review include:

• Potential plagiarism or duplicate publication.

• Data manipulation or fabrication.

• Undeclared ethical conflicts.

• Inappropriate or uncredited uses of technological tools.

4. Article Retractions

The retraction of an article will be considered only in cases where there is clear evidence of serious misconduct compromising the academic, scientific, or ethical validity of the published work. Such situations include data fabrication or falsification, plagiarism, undisclosed redundant publication, deliberate concealment of conflicts of interest, severe methodological errors, or any practice that significantly undermines research integrity.

In the event of a retraction, the journal will publish a clearly identifiable editorial note permanently linked to the original article. The retracted text will not be removed from the journal's historical archive, except under exceptional legal circumstances, but will remain accessible with its retracted status explicitly indicated to preserve transparency in the academic record.

5. Evaluation and Decision-Making Process

Any request, observation, or report related to possible errors or irregularities will be carefully reviewed by the editorial team. When necessary, the journal may request clarifications from the authors, consult peer reviewers, or seek guidance from institutional bodies specialized in research ethics and editorial best practices. Decisions will be made with balance, impartiality, confidentiality, and absolute respect for all individuals involved.

The journal Tempus Psicológico considers editorial transparency to be fundamental for maintaining the trust of the academic community. Correcting, clarifying, or retracting an article is not merely a technical procedure, but a way of responsibly caring for knowledge and respecting those who research, read, and participate in the collective construction of the human sciences.