Editorial Experience and the Wrong Way of Retraction: Ethical and Bias Concerns in Retraction Decisions in Skin Research and Technology, American Journal of Transplantation, and the Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice

Abstract

Retraction is a fundamental mechanism for protecting the integrity of the scientific record, but its misuse can itself create ethical harm. In recent years, heightened scrutiny of artificial intelligence (AI) use and post-publication reassessment of Letters to the Editor have led to retractions justified primarily by subjective evaluations of scholarly contribution rather than demonstrable misconduct. This article examines three retraction cases involving Skin Research and Technology, the American Journal of Transplantation, and the Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice. Drawing on editorial experience, the article highlights recurring problems, including retrospective editorial value judgments, speculative concerns about AI, and inadequate differentiation between editorial responsibility and author misconduct. Particular attention is given to ethical concerns and potential editorial bias, questioning whether responsibility for these cases should rest with authors or with editorial processes. The analysis argues that misapplied retraction practices risk undermining trust in peer review, chilling academic debate, and shifting blame from editorial decision-making to authors without sufficient ethical justification.