When Retraction Becomes Harm: Editorial Ethics, Transparency, and Due Process in the Age of AI-Assisted writing (reflection from “Skin Res Technol” and “Am J Transplant” cases)

Abstract

Retraction is a critical mechanism for maintaining the integrity of the scientific record. However, when applied without transparency, due process, or factual accuracy, retraction itself may become a source of ethical concern and reputational harm to authors. This article examines two recent retraction notices issued by major publishers that explicitly or implicitly link perceived deficiencies in scientific contribution to the suspected use of artificial intelligence (AI) tools. Using these notices as case examples, we analyze key editorial shortcomings, including misrepresentation of disclosed AI use, lack of pre-retraction author engagement, conflation of editorial judgment with ethical misconduct, and the resulting harm to authors. We argue that these practices deviate from established publication ethics principles and underscore the urgent need for clearer, fairer, and more consistent editorial standards in the evaluation of AI-assisted scholarly writing.