author details in research paper

Office of the Provost

Guidance on authorship in scholarly or scientific publications, general principles.

The public’s trust in and benefit from academic research and scholarship relies upon all those involved in the scholarly endeavor adhering to the highest ethical standards, including standards related to publication and dissemination of findings and conclusions.

Accordingly, all scholarly or scientific publications involving faculty, staff, students and/or trainees arising from academic activities performed under the auspices of Yale University must include appropriate attribution of authorship and disclosure of relevant affiliations of those involved in the work, as described below.

These publications, which, for the purposes of this guidance, include articles, abstracts, manuscripts submitted for publication, presentations at professional meetings, and applications for funding, must appropriately acknowledge contributions of colleagues involved in the design, conduct or dissemination of the work by neither overly attributing contribution nor ignoring meaningful contributions.

Financial and other supporting relationships of those involved in the scholarly work must be transparent and disclosed in publications arising from the work.

Authorship Standards

Authorship of a scientific or scholarly paper should be limited to those individuals who have contributed in a meaningful and substantive way to its intellectual content. All authors are responsible for fairly evaluating their roles in the project as well as the roles of their co-authors to ensure that authorship is attributed according to these standards in all publications for which they will be listed as an author.

Requirement for Attribution of Authorship

Each author should have participated sufficiently in the work to take public responsibility for its content. All co-authors should have been directly involved in all three of the following:

• planning and contribution to some component (conception, design, conduct, analysis, or interpretation) of the work which led to the paper or interpreting at least a portion of the results;
• writing a draft of the article or revising it for intellectual content; and
• final approval of the version to be published.  All authors should review and approve the manuscript before it is submitted for publication, at least as it pertains to their roles in the project.

Some diversity exists across academic disciplines regarding acceptable standards for substantive contributions that would lead to attribution of authorship. This guidance is intended to allow for such variation to disciplinary best practices while ensuring authorship is not inappropriately assigned.

Lead Author

The first author is usually the person who has performed the central experiments of the project. Often, this individual is also the person who has prepared the first draft of the manuscript. The lead author is ultimately responsible for ensuring that all other authors meet the requirements for authorship as well as ensuring the integrity of the work itself. The lead author will usually serve as the corresponding author.

Co-Author(s)

Each co-author is responsible for considering his or her role in the project and whether that role merits attribution of authorship. Co-authors should review and approve the manuscript, at least as it pertains to their roles in the project.

External Collaborators, Including Sponsor or Industry Representatives

Individuals who meet the criteria for authorship should be included as authors irrespective of their institutional affiliations. In general, the use of “ghostwriters” is prohibited, i.e., individuals who have contributed significant portions of the text should be named as authors or acknowledged in the final publication. Industry representatives or others retained by industry who contribute to an article and meet the requirements for authorship or acknowledgement must be appropriately listed as contributors or authors on the article and their industry affiliation must be disclosed in the published article.

Acknowledgements

Individuals who do not meet the requirements for authorship but who have provided a valuable contribution to the work should be acknowledged for their contributing role as appropriate to the publication.

Courtesy or Gift Authorship

Individuals do not satisfy the criteria for authorship merely because they have made possible the conduct of the research and/or the preparation of the manuscript. Under no circumstance should individuals be added as co-authors based on the individual’s stature as an attempt to increase the likelihood of publication or credibility of the work. For example, heading a laboratory, research program, section, or department where the research takes place does not, by itself, warrant co-authorship of a scholarly paper. Nor should “gift” co-authorship be conferred on those whose only contributions have been to provide, for example, routine technical services, to refer patients or participants for a study, to provide a valuable reagent, to assist with data collection and assembly, or to review a completed manuscript for suggestions. Although not qualifying as co-authors, individuals who assist the research effort may warrant appropriate acknowledgement in the completed paper.

Senior faculty members should be named as co-authors on work independently generated by their junior colleagues only if they have made substantial intellectual contributions to the experimental design, interpretation of findings and manuscript preparation.

Authorship Disputes

Determinations of authorship roles are often complex, delicate and potentially controversial. To avoid confusion and conflict, discussion of attribution should be initiated early in the development of any collaborative publication. For disputes that cannot be resolved amicably, individuals may seek the guidance of the dean of their school or the cognizant deputy provost in the Faculty of Arts & Sciences.

Disclosure of Research Funding and Other Support

In all scientific and scholarly publications and all manuscripts submitted for publication, authors should acknowledge the sources of support for all activities leading to and facilitating preparation of the publication or manuscript, including, but not limited to:

• grant, contract, and gift support;
• salary support if other than institutional funds. Note that salary support that is provided to the University by an external entity does not constitute institutional funds by virtue of being distributed by the University; and
• technical or other support if substantive and meaningful to the completion of the project.

Disclosure of Financial Interests and External Activities

Authors should fully disclose related financial interests and outside activities in publications (including articles, abstracts, manuscripts submitted for publication), presentations at professional meetings, and applications for funding.

In addition, authors should comply with the disclosure requirements of the University’s Committee on Conflict of Interest.

• Translators
• Graphic Designers

Please enter the email address you used for your account. Your sign in information will be sent to your email address after it has been verified.

How to Order and Format Author Names in Scientific Papers

As the world becomes more interconnected, the production of knowledge increasingly relies on collaboration. Scientific papers, the primary medium through which researchers communicate their findings, often feature multiple authors. However, authorship isn't merely a reflection of those who contributed to a study but often denotes prestige, recognition, and responsibility. In academic papers, the order of authors is not arbitrary. It can symbolize the level of contribution and the role played by each author in the research process. Deciding on the author order can sometimes be a complex and sensitive issue, making it crucial to understand the different roles and conventions of authorship in scientific research. This article will explore the various types of authors found in scientific papers, guide you on how to correctly order and format author names, and offer insights to help you navigate this critical aspect of academic publishing.

The first author

The first author listed in a scientific paper is typically the person who has made the most substantial intellectual contribution to the work. This role is often filled by a junior researcher such as a Ph.D. student or postdoctoral fellow, who has been intimately involved in almost every aspect of the project.

The first author usually plays a pivotal role in designing and implementing the research, including the formation of hypotheses, experimental design, data collection, data analysis, and interpretation of the findings. They also commonly take the lead in manuscript preparation, writing substantial portions of the paper, including the often-challenging task of turning raw data into a compelling narrative.

In academia, first authorship is a significant achievement, a clear demonstration of a researcher's capabilities and dedication. It indicates that the researcher possesses the skills and tenacity to carry a project from inception to completion. This position can dramatically impact a researcher's career trajectory, playing a critical role in evaluations for promotions, grants, and future academic positions.

However, being the first author is not just about prestige or professional advancement. It carries a weight of responsibility. The first author is generally expected to ensure the integrity and accuracy of the data presented in the paper. They are often the person who responds to reviewers' comments during the peer-review process and makes necessary revisions to the manuscript.

Also, as the first author, it is typically their duty to address any questions or critiques that may arise post-publication, often having to defend the work publicly, even years after publication.

Thus, first authorship is a role that offers significant rewards but also requires a strong commitment to uphold the principles of scientific integrity and transparency. While it's a coveted position that can be a steppingstone to career progression, the associated responsibilities and expectations mean that it should not be undertaken lightly.

The middle authors

The middle authors listed on a scientific paper occupy an essential, albeit sometimes ambiguous, role in the research project. They are typically those who have made significant contributions to the project, but not to the extent of the first author. This group often includes a mix of junior and senior researchers who have provided key input, assistance, or resources to the project.

The roles of middle authors can be quite diverse. Some might be involved in specific aspects of data collection or analysis. Others may bring specialized knowledge or technical skills essential to the project, providing expertise in a particular methodology, statistical analysis, or experimental technique. There might also be middle authors who have contributed vital resources to the project, such as unique reagents or access to a particular patient population.

In some fields, the order of middle authors reflects the degree of their contribution. The closer a middle author is to the first position, the greater their involvement, with the second author often having made the next largest contribution after the first author. This order may be negotiated among the authors, requiring clear communication and consensus.

However, in other disciplines, particularly those where large collaborative projects are common, the order of middle authors may not necessarily reflect their level of contribution. In such cases, authors might be listed alphabetically, or by some other agreed-upon convention. Therefore, it's crucial to be aware of the norms in your specific field when deciding the order of middle authors.

Being a middle author in a scientific paper carries less prestige and responsibility than being a first or last author, but it is by no means a minor role. Middle authors play a crucial part in the scientific endeavor, contributing essential expertise and resources. They are integral members of the research team whose collective efforts underpin the progress and achievements of the project. Without their diverse contributions, the scope and impact of scientific research would be significantly diminished.

The last author

In the listing of authors on a scientific paper, the final position carries a unique significance. It is typically occupied by the senior researcher, often the head of the laboratory or the principal investigator who has supervised the project. While they might not be involved in the day-to-day aspects of the work, they provide overarching guidance, mentorship, and often the resources necessary for the project's fruition.

The last author's role is multidimensional, often balancing the responsibilities of project management, funding acquisition, and mentorship. They guide the research's direction, help troubleshoot problems, and provide intellectual input to the project's design and interpretation of results. Additionally, they usually play a key role in the drafting and revision of the manuscript, providing critical feedback and shaping the narrative.

In academia, the last author position is a symbol of leadership and scientific maturity. It indicates that the researcher has progressed from being a hands-on contributor to someone who can guide a team, secure funding, and deliver significant research projects. Being the last author can have substantial implications for a researcher's career, signaling their ability to oversee successful projects and mentor the next generation of scientists.

However, along with prestige comes significant responsibility. The last author is often seen as the guarantor of the work. They are held accountable for the overall integrity of the study, and in cases where errors or issues arise, they are expected to take the lead in addressing them.

The convention of the last author as the senior researcher is common in many scientific disciplines, especially in the life and biomedical sciences. However, it's important to note that this is not a universal standard. In some fields, authors may be listed purely in the order of contribution or alphabetically. Therefore, an understanding of the specific norms and expectations of your scientific field is essential when considering author order.

In sum, the position of the last author, much like that of the first author, holds both honor and responsibility, reflecting a leadership role that goes beyond mere intellectual contribution to include mentorship, management, and accountability.

Formatting author names

When it comes to scientific publishing, details matter, and one such detail is the correct formatting of author names. While it may seem like a minor concern compared to the intellectual challenges of research, the proper formatting of author names is crucial for several reasons. It ensures correct attribution of work, facilitates accurate citation, and helps avoid confusion among researchers in the same field. This section will delve deeper into the conventions for formatting author names, offering guidance to ensure clarity and consistency in your scientific papers.

Typically, each author's full first name, middle initial(s), and last name are listed. It's crucial that the author's name is presented consistently across all their publications to ensure their work is correctly attributed and easily discoverable.

Here is a basic example following a common convention:

• Standard convention: John D. Smith

However, conventions can vary depending on cultural naming practices. In many Western cultures, the first name is the given name, followed by the middle initial(s), and then the family name. On the other hand, in many East Asian cultures, the family name is listed first.

Here is an example following this convention:

• Asian convention: Wang Xiao Long

When there are multiple authors, their names are separated by commas. The word "and" usually precedes the final author's name.

Here's how this would look:

• John D. Smith, Jane A. Doe, and Richard K. Jones

However, author name formatting can differ among journals. Some may require initials instead of full first names, or they might have specific guidelines for handling hyphenated surnames or surnames with particles (e.g., "de," "van," "bin"). Therefore, it's always important to check the specific submission guidelines of the journal to which you're submitting your paper.

Moreover, the formatting should respect each author's preferred presentation of their name, especially if it deviates from conventional Western naming patterns. As the scientific community becomes increasingly diverse and global, it's essential to ensure that each author's identity is accurately represented.

In conclusion, the proper formatting of author names is a vital detail in scientific publishing, ensuring correct attribution and respect for each author's identity. It may seem a minor point in the grand scheme of a research project, but getting it right is an essential part of good academic practice.

The concept of authorship in scientific papers goes well beyond just listing the names of those involved in a research project. It carries critical implications for recognition, responsibility, and career progression, reflecting a complex nexus of contribution, collaboration, and intellectual leadership. Understanding the different roles, correctly ordering the authors, and appropriately formatting the names are essential elements of academic practice that ensure the rightful attribution of credit and uphold the integrity of scientific research.

Navigating the terrain of authorship involves managing both objective and subjective elements, spanning from the universally acknowledged conventions to the nuances particular to different scientific disciplines. Whether it's acknowledging the pivotal role of the first author who carried the project from the ground up, recognizing the valuable contributions of middle authors who provided key expertise, or highlighting the mentorship and leadership role of the last author, each position is an integral piece in the mosaic of scientific authorship.

Furthermore, beyond the order of authors, the meticulous task of correctly formatting the author names should not be underestimated. This practice is an exercise in precision, respect for individual identity, and acknowledgement of cultural diversity, reflecting the global and inclusive nature of contemporary scientific research.

As scientific exploration continues to move forward as a collective endeavor, clear and equitable authorship practices will remain crucial. These practices serve not only to ensure that credit is assigned where it's due but also to foster an environment of respect and transparency. Therefore, each member of the scientific community, from fledgling researchers to seasoned scientists, would do well to master the art and science of authorship in academic publishing. After all, it is through this collective recognition and collaboration that we continue to expand the frontiers of knowledge.

Header image by Jon Tyson .

• Insights blog

Defining authorship in your research paper

Co-authors, corresponding authors, and affiliations, why does authorship matter.

Authorship gives credit and implies accountability for published work, so there are academic, social and financial implications.

It is very important to make sure people who have contributed to a paper, are given credit as authors. And also that people who are recognized as authors, understand their responsibility and accountability for what is being published.

There are a couple of types of authorship to be aware of.

Co-author Any person who has made a significant contribution to a journal article. They also share responsibility and accountability for the results of the published research.

Corresponding author If more than one author writes an article, you’ll choose one person to be the corresponding author. This person will handle all correspondence about the article and sign the publishing agreement on behalf of all the authors. They are responsible for ensuring that all the authors’ contact details are correct, and agree on the order that their names will appear in the article. The authors also will need to make sure that affiliations are correct, as explained in more detail below.

Open access publishing

There is increasing pressure on researchers to show the societal impact of their research.

Open access can help your work reach new readers, beyond those with easy access to a research library.

How common is co-authorship and what are the challenges collaborating authors face? Our white paper  Co-authorship in the Humanities and Social Sciences: A global view explores the experiences of 894 researchers from 62 countries.

If you are a named co-author, this means that you:

Made a significant contribution to the work reported. That could be in the conception, study design, execution, acquisition of data, analysis and interpretation, or in all these areas.

Have drafted or written, substantially revised or critically reviewed the article.

Have agreed on the journal to which the article will be submitted.

Reviewed and agreed on all versions of the article before submission, during revision, the final version accepted for publication, and any significant changes introduced at the proofing stage.

Agree to take responsibility and be accountable for the contents of the article. Share responsibility to resolve any questions raised about the accuracy or integrity of the published work.

Every submission to our medical and health science journals should comply with the International Committee on Medical Journal Ethics’  definition of authorship .

Please include any other form of specific personal contribution in the acknowledgments section of your paper.

Affiliations: get it right

Your affiliation in the manuscript should be the institution where you conducted the research. You should also include details of any funding received from that institution.

If you have changed affiliation since completing the research, your new affiliation can be acknowledged in a note. We can’t normally make changes to affiliation after the journal accepts your article.

Changes to authorship

Authorship changes post-submission should only be made in exceptional circumstances, and any requests for authors to be removed or added must be in line with our authorship criteria.  

If you need to make an authorship change, you will need to contact the Journal Editorial Office or Editorial team in the first instance. You will be asked to complete our Authorship Change request form ; all authors (including those you are adding or removing) must sign this form. This will be reviewed by the Editor (and in some instances, the publisher). 

Please note any authorship change is at the Editor’s discretion; they have the right to refuse any authorship change they do not believe conforms with our authorship policies. 

Some T&F journals do not allow any authorship changes post-submission; where this is applicable, this will be clearly indicated on the journal homepage or on the ‘instructions for authors’ page. 

If the corresponding author changes before the article is published (for example, if a co-author becomes the corresponding author), you will need to write to the editor of the journal and the production editor. You will need to confirm to them that both authors have agreed the change.

Requested changes to the co-authors or corresponding authors following publication of the article may be considered, in line with the  authorship guidelines issued by COPE , the Committee on Publication Ethics. Please  see our corrections policy  for more details. Any requests for changes must be made by submitting the completed  Authorship Change Request form .

Authorship Change Request form

Important: agree on your corresponding author and the order of co-authors, and check all affiliations and contact details before submitting.

Taylor & Francis Editorial Policies on Authorship

The following instructions (part of our  Editorial Policies ) apply to all Taylor & Francis Group journals.

Corresponding author

Co-authors must agree on who will take on the role of corresponding author. It is then the responsibility of the corresponding author to reach consensus with all co-authors regarding all aspects of the article, prior to submission. This includes the authorship list and order, and list of correct affiliations.

The corresponding author is also responsible for liaising with co-authors regarding any editorial queries. And, they act on behalf of all co-authors in any communication about the article throughout: submission, peer review, production, and after publication. The corresponding author signs the publishing agreement on behalf of all the listed authors.

AI-based tools and technologies for content generation

Authors must be aware that using AI-based tools and technologies for article content generation, e.g. large language models (LLMs), generative AI, and chatbots (e.g. ChatGPT), is not in line with our authorship criteria.

All authors are wholly responsible for the originality, validity and integrity of the content of their submissions. Therefore, LLMs and other similar types of tools do not meet the criteria for authorship.

Where AI tools are used in content generation, they must be acknowledged and documented appropriately in the authored work.

Changes in authorship

Any changes in authorship prior to or after publication must be agreed upon by all authors – including those authors being added or removed. It is the responsibility of the corresponding author to obtain confirmation from all co-authors and to provide a completed Authorship Change Request form to the editorial office.

If a change in authorship is necessary after publication, this will be amended via a post-publication notice. Any changes in authorship must comply with our criteria for authorship. And requests for significant changes to the authorship list, after the article has been accepted, may be rejected if clear reasons and evidence of author contributions cannot be provided.

Assistance from scientific, medical, technical writers or translators

Contributions made by professional scientific, medical or technical writers, translators or anyone who has assisted with the manuscript content, must be acknowledged. Their source of funding must also be declared.

They should be included in an ‘Acknowledgments’ section with an explanation of their role, or they should be included in the author list if appropriate.

Authors are advised to consult the  joint position statement  from American Medical Writers Association (AMWA), European Medical Writers Association (EMWA), and International Society of Medical Publication Professionals (ISMPP).

Assistance with experiments and data analysis

Any significant contribution to the research reported, should be appropriately credited according to our authorship criteria.

If any parts of the research were outsourced to professional laboratories or to data analysts, this should be clearly stated within the manuscript, alongside an explanation of their role. Or, they should be included in the author list if appropriate.

Authors are responsible for retaining all of the original data related to their work, and should be prepared to share it with the journal editorial office if requested.

Acknowledgments

Any individuals who have contributed to the article (for example, technical assistance, formatting-related writing assistance, translators, scholarly discussions which significantly contributed to developing the article), but who do not meet the criteria for authorship, should be listed by name and affiliation in an ‘Acknowledgments’ section.

It is the responsibility of the authors to notify and obtain permission from those they wish to identify in this section. The process of obtaining permission should include sharing the article, so that those being identified can verify the context in which their contribution is being acknowledged.

Any assistance from AI tools for content generation (e.g. large language models) and other similar types of technical tools which generate article content, must be clearly acknowledged within the article. It is the responsibility of authors to ensure the validity, originality and integrity of their article content. Authors are expected to use these types of tools responsibly and in accordance with our editorial policies on authorship and principles of publishing ethics.

Biographical note

Please supply a short biographical note for each author. This could be adapted from your departmental website or academic networking profile and should be relatively brief (e.g. no more than 200 words).Authors are responsible for retaining all of the original data related to their work, and should be prepared to share it with the journal editorial office if requested.

Author name changes on published articles

There are many reasons why an author may change their name in the course of their career. And they may wish to update their published articles to reflect this change, without publicly announcing this through a correction notice. Taylor & Francis will update journal articles where an author makes a request for their own name change, full or partial, without the requirement for an accompanying correction notice. Any pronouns in accompanying author bios and declaration statements will also be updated as part of the name change, if required.

When an author requests a name change, Taylor & Francis will:

Change the metadata associated with the article on our Taylor & Francis Online platform.

Update the HTML and PDF version of the article.

Resupply the new metadata and article content to any abstracting and indexing services that have agreements with the journal. Note: such services may have their own bibliographic policies regarding author name changes. Taylor \u0026amp; Francis cannot be held responsible for controlling updates to articles on third party sites and services once an article has been disseminated.

If an author wishes for a correction notice to be published alongside their name change, Taylor & Francis will accommodate this on request. But, it is not required for an author name change to be made.

To request a name change, please contact your Journal’s Production Editor or contact us.

Taylor & Francis consider it a breach of publication ethics to request a name change for an individual without their explicit consent.

Additional resources

Co-authorship in the Humanities and Social Sciences  – our white paper based on a global survey of researchers’ experiences of collaboration.

Discussion Document: Authorship  – produced by COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics), this updated guide includes practical advice on addressing the most common ethical issues in this area

Taylor & Francis Editorial Policies

Ethics for authors  – guidelines, support, and your checklist.

• Translation

Understanding Author Affiliation and accurately mentioning it in different scenarios

By charlesworth author services.

• Charlesworth Author Services
• 16 April, 2022

In academic publishing, the affiliation of an author is the place (institution) at which the author conducted the research that they have reported / written about . However, given the frequent mobility of academics, that place may not necessarily be the place the author happens to be based at the time of submitting the paper . This article explains the significance of affiliation and illustrates how to accurately mention your affiliation in different scenarios.

The importance of affiliation

In some cases, affiliation is linked to authenticity . Imagine a research paper on field pollination of rice by an author whose affiliation is that of an institute in the polar region. It is not that this work cannot be done, but it would seem incongruous and may raise doubts.

In many cases, it is a matter of prestige . Science may be democratic, but not all research institutions and laboratories are considered equal.

Some may be better equipped than others. Some may have more luminaries on their staff – people who have outstanding work (or even prizes) to their credit. Some may have enviable collections of records or research material. 

Therefore, by proxy, work carried out at those institutions is regarded more highly, at least initially, than that carried out at lesser-known institutions.

A study by Peters and Ceci (1982) found that when 12 already published papers were resubmitted after doctoring the affiliations to replace the original high-status institutions with fictitious ones with no status in the field, eight of those papers were rejected.

Mentioning your affiliation in a paper

In nearly all published papers, affiliations of their authors are given after their names but before the abstract. The typical sequence is: 

• Title of the paper
• Names of authors
• Affiliations
• Abstract and keywords

Paper with title, author names, affiliation, abstract and keywords

Mentioning affiliation and address

Authors of research papers must keep an important distinction in mind: that an affiliation is not the same thing as a mailing address . The former names the institution at which the work in question was carried out whereas the latter simply supplies the current contact details of the author. 

For example…

A PhD candidate submitting a paper based on their doctoral work should name, as their affiliation, the university/institution that is granting them the doctorate. However, that author may have since moved to another institution for a post-doctoral job. This is not considered their affiliation, but just provides their current contact details.

Therefore, you may have to name two institutions in your manuscript: 

• Under Affiliation : Name the institution where the work (that forms the subject of the present study) was undertaken.
• Under Current address : Name the institution at which you happen to be working at the time of submission or even your home address if you have retired. 

Note : The ‘current address’ serves as the means of contact and can change; the affiliation cannot. 

Mentioning affiliation when you change your institute

It may also happen that when you submitted the paper, you were stationed at Institute A and accordingly gave that as your contact address, and subsequently, you moved to Institute B. In such cases, so long as your paper is yet to be published, you should inform the journal of your new current address at Institute B. The paper is based on the work you carried out while you were based at institute A, which constitutes the affiliation and remains unchanged.

Mentioning affiliations for multi-author papers

Most research papers have multiple authors and not all of them may have the same affiliation. To match their names to their affiliations, journals may use the method used for indicating footnotes . The names of authors are followed by superscript letters, numerals or other symbols, and the same symbols precede the respective affiliations.

We recommend : Note the journal’s preferred method (letters, numerals or other symbols) and be sure to  follow the  journal guidelines  when  preparing your manuscripts for submission .

Numerals indicating authors (above) and their affiliations (below) in a paper

Dealing with affiliations during peer review

To avoid the kind of bias mentioned earlier, affiliation information is removed in manuscripts sent out for review: in a blind review , the reviewers do not know who wrote the paper under review, nor their institutional affiliation. To make this easier, many journals ask that such identifying information be separated from the body of the paper . Authors are advised to attend to the journal’s instructions in this regard, which typically involve a separate title page explicitly showing the names and affiliations. This page is usually removed before sending the paper to reviewers.

Maximise your publication success with Charlesworth Author Services.

Charlesworth Author Services, a trusted brand supporting the world’s leading academic publishers, institutions and authors since 1928.

To know more about our services, visit: Our Services

Share with your colleagues

Scientific Editing Services

Sign up – stay updated.

We use cookies to offer you a personalized experience. By continuing to use this website, you consent to the use of cookies in accordance with our Cookie Policy.

• Interlibrary Loan and Scan & Deliver
• Course Reserves
• Purchase Request
• Collection Development & Maintenance
• Current Negotiations
• Ask a Librarian
• Instructor Support
• Library How-To
• Research Guides
• Research Support
• Study Rooms
• Research Rooms
• Partner Spaces
• Loanable Equipment
• Print, Scan, Copy
• 3D Printers
• Poster Printing
• OSULP Leadership
• Strategic Plan

Scholarly Articles: How can I tell?

• Journal Information
• Literature Review

Author and affiliation

Learn more about the author.

• Introduction
• Specialized Vocabulary
• Methodology
• Research sponsors
• Peer-review

If you can't find an author affiliation or want to learn more about the authors and their credentials, here are some ways to do so:

• Search for the author on Google. Sometimes you can find a personal page about an individual. Many of the faculty members at OSU have a website that lists their credentials (education) and research.
• Do a search in one of the online databases to see what else the author has written. Is this person someone who published a lot in this field? For example, a search in the Academic Search Complete database for the author Sandra Hofferth shows the articles she has co-authored on a range of children's issues .
• Look up the institution. What kind of institution is it?  Is the author still affiliated with the institution?

One of the first things to look for is the author or authors. In a research article, the authors will list their affiliation, usually with a university or research institution. In this example, the author's affiliation is clearly shown on the first page of the article. In a research article, you will never have an anonymous author or need to look for the author's name or affiliation.

• << Previous: Literature Review
• Next: Abstract >>
• Last Updated: Apr 15, 2024 3:26 PM
• URL: https://guides.library.oregonstate.edu/ScholarlyArticle

Contact Info

121 The Valley Library Corvallis OR 97331–4501

Phone: 541-737-3331

Services for Persons with Disabilities

In the Valley Library

• Oregon State University Press
• Special Collections and Archives Research Center
• Undergrad Research & Writing Studio
• Graduate Student Commons
• Tutoring Services
• Northwest Art Collection

Digital Projects

• Oregon Explorer
• Oregon Digital
• ScholarsArchive@OSU
• Digital Publishing Initiatives
• Atlas of the Pacific Northwest
• Marilyn Potts Guin Library  
• Cascades Campus Library
• McDowell Library of Vet Medicine

• Affiliate Program

• UNITED STATES
• 台灣 (TAIWAN)
• TÜRKIYE (TURKEY)
• Academic Editing Services
• - Research Paper
• - Journal Manuscript
• - Dissertation
• - College & University Assignments
• Admissions Editing Services
• - Application Essay
• - Personal Statement
• - Recommendation Letter
• - Cover Letter
• - CV/Resume
• Business Editing Services
• - Business Documents
• - Report & Brochure
• - Website & Blog
• Writer Editing Services
• - Script & Screenplay
• Our Editors
• Client Reviews
• Editing & Proofreading Prices
• Wordvice Points
• Partner Discount
• Plagiarism Checker
• APA Citation Generator
• MLA Citation Generator
• Chicago Citation Generator
• Vancouver Citation Generator
• - APA Style
• - MLA Style
• - Chicago Style
• - Vancouver Style
• Writing & Editing Guide
• Academic Resources
• Admissions Resources

How to Order Authors in Scientific Papers

It’s rare that an article is authored by only one or two people anymore. In fact, the average original research paper has five authors these days. The growing list of collaborative research projects raises important questions regarding the author order for research manuscripts and the impact an author list has on readers’ perceptions.

With a handful of authors, a group might be inclined to create an author name list based on the amount of work contributed. What happens, though, when you have a long list of authors? It would be impractical to rank the authors by their relative contributions. Additionally, what if the authors contribute relatively equal amounts of work? Similarly, if a study was interdisciplinary (and many are these days), how can one individual’s contribution be deemed more significant than another’s?

Why does author order matter?

Although an author list should only reflect those who have made substantial contributions to a research project and its draft manuscript (see, for example, the authorship guidelines of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors ), we’d be remiss to say that author order doesn’t matter. In theory, everyone on the list should be credited equally since it takes a team to successfully complete a project; however, due to industry customs and other practical limitations, some authors will always be more visible than others.

The following are some notable implications regarding author order.

• The “first author” is a coveted position because of its increased visibility. This author is the first name readers will see, and because of various citation rules, publications are usually referred to by the name of the first author only. In-text or bibliographic referencing rules, for example, often reduce all other named authors to “et al.” Since employers use first-authorship to evaluate academic personnel for employment, promotion, and tenure, and since graduate students often need a number of first-author publications to earn their degree, being the lead author on a manuscript is crucial for many researchers, especially early in their career.
• The last author position is traditionally reserved for the supervisor or principal investigator. As such, this person receives much of the credit when the research goes well and the flak when things go wrong. The last author may also be the corresponding author, the person who is the primary contact for journal editors (the first author could, however, fill this role as well, especially if they contributed most to the work).
• Given that there is no uniform rule about author order, readers may find it difficult to assess the nature of an author’s contribution to a research project. To address this issue, some journals, particularly medical ones, nowadays insist on detailed author contribution notes (make sure you check the target journal guidelines before submission to find out how the journal you are planning to submit to handles this). Nevertheless, even this does little to counter how strongly citation rules have enhanced the attention first-named authors receive.

Common Methods for Listing Authors

The following are some common methods for establishing author order lists.

• Relative contribution. As mentioned above, the most common way authors are listed is by relative contribution. The author who made the most substantial contribution to the work described in an article and did most of the underlying research should be listed as the first author. The others are ranked in descending order of contribution. However, in many disciplines, such as the life sciences, the last author in a group is the principal investigator or “senior author”—the person who often provides ideas based on their earlier research and supervised the current work.
• Alphabetical list . Certain fields, particularly those involving large group projects, employ other methods . For example, high-energy particle physics teams list authors alphabetically.
• Multiple “first” authors . Additional “first” authors (so-called “co-first authors”) can be noted by an asterisk or other symbols accompanied by an explanatory note. This practice is common in interdisciplinary studies; however, as we explained above, the first name listed on a paper will still enjoy more visibility than any other “first” author.
• Multiple “last” authors . Similar to recognizing several first authors, multiple last authors can be recognized via typographical symbols and footnotes. This practice arose as some journals wanted to increase accountability by requiring senior lab members to review all data and interpretations produced in their labs instead of being awarded automatic last-authorship on every publication by someone in their group.
• Negotiated order . If you were thinking you could avoid politics by drowning yourself in research, you’re sorely mistaken. While there are relatively clear guidelines and practices for designating first and last authors, there’s no overriding convention for the middle authors. The list can be decided by negotiation, so sharpen those persuasive argument skills!

As you can see, choosing the right author order can be quite complicated. Therefore, we urge researchers to consider these factors early in the research process and to confirm this order during the English proofreading process, whether you self-edit or received manuscript editing or paper editing services , all of which should be done before submission to a journal. Don’t wait until the manuscript is drafted before you decide on the author order in your paper. All the parties involved will need to agree on the author list before submission, and no one will want to delay submission because of a disagreement about who should be included on the author list, and in what order (along with other journal manuscript authorship issues).

On top of that, journals sometimes have clear rules about changing authors or even authorship order during the review process, might not encourage it, and might require detailed statements explaining the specific contribution of every new/old author, official statements of agreement of all authors, and/or a corrigendum to be submitted, all of which can further delay the publication process. We recommend periodically revisiting the named author issue during the drafting stage to make sure that everyone is on the same page and that the list is updated to appropriately reflect changes in team composition or contributions to a research project.

Defining the Role of Authors and Contributors

Page Contents

• Why Authorship Matters
• Who Is an Author?
• Non-Author Contributors
• Artificial Intelligence (AI)-Assisted Technology

1. Why Authorship Matters

Authorship confers credit and has important academic, social, and financial implications. Authorship also implies responsibility and accountability for published work. The following recommendations are intended to ensure that contributors who have made substantive intellectual contributions to a paper are given credit as authors, but also that contributors credited as authors understand their role in taking responsibility and being accountable for what is published.

Editors should be aware of the practice of excluding local researchers from low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) from authorship when data are from LMICs. Inclusion of local authors adds to fairness, context, and implications of the research. Lack of inclusion of local investigators as authors should prompt questioning and may lead to rejection.

Because authorship does not communicate what contributions qualified an individual to be an author, some journals now request and publish information about the contributions of each person named as having participated in a submitted study, at least for original research. Editors are strongly encouraged to develop and implement a contributorship policy. Such policies remove much of the ambiguity surrounding contributions, but leave unresolved the question of the quantity and quality of contribution that qualify an individual for authorship. The ICMJE has thus developed criteria for authorship that can be used by all journals, including those that distinguish authors from other contributors.

2. Who Is an Author?

The ICMJE recommends that authorship be based on the following 4 criteria:

• Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND
• Drafting the work or reviewing it critically for important intellectual content; AND
• Final approval of the version to be published; AND
• Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

In addition to being accountable for the parts of the work done, an author should be able to identify which co-authors are responsible for specific other parts of the work. In addition, authors should have confidence in the integrity of the contributions of their co-authors.

All those designated as authors should meet all four criteria for authorship, and all who meet the four criteria should be identified as authors. Those who do not meet all four criteria should be acknowledged—see Section II.A.3 below. These authorship criteria are intended to reserve the status of authorship for those who deserve credit and can take responsibility for the work. The criteria are not intended for use as a means to disqualify colleagues from authorship who otherwise meet authorship criteria by denying them the opportunity to meet criterion #s 2 or 3. Therefore, all individuals who meet the first criterion should have the opportunity to participate in the review, drafting, and final approval of the manuscript.

The individuals who conduct the work are responsible for identifying who meets these criteria and ideally should do so when planning the work, making modifications as appropriate as the work progresses. We encourage collaboration and co-authorship with colleagues in the locations where the research is conducted. It is the collective responsibility of the authors, not the journal to which the work is submitted, to determine that all people named as authors meet all four criteria; it is not the role of journal editors to determine who qualifies or does not qualify for authorship or to arbitrate authorship conflicts. If agreement cannot be reached about who qualifies for authorship, the institution(s) where the work was performed, not the journal editor, should be asked to investigate. The criteria used to determine the order in which authors are listed on the byline may vary, and are to be decided collectively by the author group and not by editors. If authors request removal or addition of an author after manuscript submission or publication, journal editors should seek an explanation and signed statement of agreement for the requested change from all listed authors and from the author to be removed or added.

The corresponding author is the one individual who takes primary responsibility for communication with the journal during the manuscript submission, peer-review, and publication process. The corresponding author typically ensures that all the journal’s administrative requirements, such as providing details of authorship, ethics committee approval, clinical trial registration documentation, and disclosures of relationships and activities are properly completed and reported, although these duties may be delegated to one or more co-authors. The corresponding author should be available throughout the submission and peer-review process to respond to editorial queries in a timely way, and should be available after publication to respond to critiques of the work and cooperate with any requests from the journal for data or additional information should questions about the paper arise after publication. Although the corresponding author has primary responsibility for correspondence with the journal, the ICMJE recommends that editors send copies of all correspondence to all listed authors.

When a large multi-author group has conducted the work, the group ideally should decide who will be an author before the work is started and confirm who is an author before submitting the manuscript for publication. All members of the group named as authors should meet all four criteria for authorship, including approval of the final manuscript, and they should be able to take public responsibility for the work and should have full confidence in the accuracy and integrity of the work of other group authors. They will also be expected as individuals to complete disclosure forms.

Some large multi-author groups designate authorship by a group name, with or without the names of individuals. When submitting a manuscript authored by a group, the corresponding author should specify the group name if one exists, and clearly identify the group members who can take credit and responsibility for the work as authors. The byline of the article identifies who is directly responsible for the manuscript, and MEDLINE lists as authors whichever names appear on the byline. If the byline includes a group name, MEDLINE will list the names of individual group members who are authors or who are collaborators, sometimes called non-author contributors, if there is a note associated with the byline clearly stating that the individual names are elsewhere in the paper and whether those names are authors or collaborators.

3. Non-Author Contributors

Contributors who meet fewer than all 4 of the above criteria for authorship should not be listed as authors, but they should be acknowledged. Examples of activities that alone (without other contributions) do not qualify a contributor for authorship are acquisition of funding; general supervision of a research group or general administrative support; and writing assistance, technical editing, language editing, and proofreading. Those whose contributions do not justify authorship may be acknowledged individually or together as a group under a single heading (e.g. "Clinical Investigators" or "Participating Investigators"), and their contributions should be specified (e.g., "served as scientific advisors," "critically reviewed the study proposal," "collected data," "provided and cared for study patients," "participated in writing or technical editing of the manuscript").

Because acknowledgment may imply endorsement by acknowledged individuals of a study’s data and conclusions, editors are advised to require that the corresponding author obtain written permission to be acknowledged from all acknowledged individuals.

Use of AI for writing assistance should be reported in the acknowledgment section.

4. Artificial Intelligence (AI)-Assisted Technology

At submission, the journal should require authors to disclose whether they used artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted technologies (such as Large Language Models [LLMs], chatbots, or image creators) in the production of submitted work. Authors who use such technology should describe, in both the cover letter and the submitted work in the appropriate section if applicable, how they used it. For example, if AI was used for writing assistance, describe this in the acknowledgment section (see Section II.A.3). If AI was used for data collection, analysis, or figure generation, authors should describe this use in the methods (see Section IV.A.3.d). Chatbots (such as ChatGPT) should not be listed as authors because they cannot be responsible for the accuracy, integrity, and originality of the work, and these responsibilities are required for authorship (see Section II.A.1). Therefore, humans are responsible for any submitted material that included the use of AI-assisted technologies. Authors should carefully review and edit the result because AI can generate authoritative-sounding output that can be incorrect, incomplete, or biased. Authors should not list AI and AI-assisted technologies as an author or co-author, nor cite AI as an author. Authors should be able to assert that there is no plagiarism in their paper, including in text and images produced by the AI. Humans must ensure there is appropriate attribution of all quoted material, including full citations.

Next: Disclosure of Financial and Non-Financial Relationships and Activities, and Conflicts of Interest

Keep up-to-date Request to receive an E-mail when the Recommendations are updated.

Subscribe to Changes

Title Page Setup

A title page is required for all APA Style papers. There are both student and professional versions of the title page. Students should use the student version of the title page unless their instructor or institution has requested they use the professional version. APA provides a student title page guide (PDF, 199KB) to assist students in creating their title pages.

Student title page

The student title page includes the paper title, author names (the byline), author affiliation, course number and name for which the paper is being submitted, instructor name, assignment due date, and page number, as shown in this example.

Title page setup is covered in the seventh edition APA Style manuals in the Publication Manual Section 2.3 and the Concise Guide Section 1.6

Related handouts

• Student Title Page Guide (PDF, 263KB)
• Student Paper Setup Guide (PDF, 3MB)

Student papers do not include a running head unless requested by the instructor or institution.

Follow the guidelines described next to format each element of the student title page.

Professional title page

The professional title page includes the paper title, author names (the byline), author affiliation(s), author note, running head, and page number, as shown in the following example.

Follow the guidelines described next to format each element of the professional title page.

Educational resources and simple solutions for your research journey

Author Affiliations in Research Papers: Answering Your Top 3 Queries

Author affiliation in research papers is an important element because it offers readers useful information about where the research was conducted. However, the time from research to manuscript creation and then publication is so long that by the time the research paper is published authors may have moved to a different institution or location.

In such cases, researchers may have questions about how these affiliation changes could be handled because it’s important for readers to know both old and new author affiliations in research papers. This article aims to answer a few common questions researchers may have regarding this process.

Table of Contents

1. Do I need an affiliation for journal publication ? Can I list multiple author affiliations in research papers ? 1

In academic publishing, an affiliation is the university or institution to which an author belongs or where authors have conducted a major part of the research that is discussed in their paper. Author affiliation in research papers is usually listed after the author names and provide credibility to the research and give readers confidence that the research is backed by an institution or university. The name of the institution clarifies who oversees the research integrity because these institutes usually have review boards that approve the research conducted at their institute. Because of the increase in the number of international collaborations among authors, an individual author may have multiple affiliations, all of which must be listed in the paper to ensure transparency. However, while some manuals or journal style guides may restrict the number of affiliations per author (e.g., APA manual, 7 th ed, no more than 2 affiliations per author; AMA style manual, no more than 1 or 2 affiliations per author in some types of manuscripts like viewpoints or research letters), other journals may have no such restrictions. 2  

2. What should my author affiliation in research papers be if my workplace changes after manuscript submission? Can/should I mention both old and new author affiliations in research papers ? 3

Usually, it is acceptable to mention both current and previous author affiliations in research papers. In general, if your research was primarily conducted at your previous institution using its resources, then this institute should definitely be included in the author affiliations. This same institution should also be mentioned in the Materials and Methods section of your paper and as the sponsor of your work. However, the name of your current institute should also be mentioned so that readers could contact you if required. Different journals or publishers may have different rules for listing old and new author affiliations in research papers, so it is always advisable to consult the specific journal’s instructions for authors.

Here are a few examples of how different publishers or journals address pre- and post-submission changes in author affiliations in research papers :  

• The American Medical Association’s style manual (11 th edition): As per the American Medical Association’s style manual’s rules for author affiliation in research papers, if the author has moved after submitting a manuscript, the current affiliation should still be provided to the journal so that it could be added to the list of affiliations.
• Cambridge University Press : As per the Cambridge University Press’s rules for author affiliation in research papers, if an author has moved before manuscript submission, the current affiliation could be included under Acknowledgments.
• Sage journals : As per Sage journals ’ rules for author affiliation in research papers, an author must include new affiliations after submission as a note at the end of the manuscript. 
• American Chemical Society Publications, Wiley : As per American Chemical Society Publication’s rules for author affiliation in research papers, if the current address of the author is different from the one where the research was conducted, then this current address should be included in a footnote on the title page. 

3. Is it possible to change author affiliation in research papers after the manuscript is accepted/has already been published?  

Most journals accept requests for changes in author affiliation in research papers after acceptance , although there are a few exceptions. However, once an article has been published, changes may not necessarily be accepted or may require special permission and approval from the journal editor.  

Listed below are a few examples of how different publishers address post-acceptance or post-publication requests for changes in author affiliation in research papers :  

• Cambridge University Press : 4 May accept an affiliation change request after submission in the event of a genuine reason. If the article has been published, a change in author affiliation in research papers would require the publishing of a linked correction notice.  
• Taylor and Francis : 5 If the authors have changed affiliations since completing their research, then the new affiliation can be acknowledged in a note; however, they don’t usually make changes to affiliations after accepting a manuscript for publication.  
• Springer : 6 Do not update or change affiliations once an article has been published.  

Author affiliations in research papers constitute an important part of the author information and should be mentioned accurately and clearly for all authors. Always refer to the journal or publisher’s instructions for authors for up-to-date information on the format for writing author affiliations in research papers . We hope this article has elaborated the importance of affiliations for journal publication and helped clarify any questions about handling changes in them.  

Other Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

Q: What does author affiliation in research paper mean?

Author affiliation in research papers refers to the academic, research, or professional institutions to which the paper’s authors are affiliated. Usually mentioned below the author’s name, author affiliation in research papers are important as they provide important information about the author’s background and the context in which the research was conducted. Author affiliations help identify experts in specific fields or disciplines. They establish the credibility and trustworthiness of the research, and affiliations with top institutions add weight to the author’s work and indicate a higher level of expertise and academic rigor. This information also allows readers to identify potential conflicts of interest or connections, which fosters collaborations that further scientific progress.

Q: What is the first author’s affiliation?

The first author affiliation in a research paper refers to the institution or organization to which the lead author is primarily affiliated. The first author is the individual who makes the most substantial contribution to the research work, hence their affiliation is significant. This detail serves as an indicator of the research environment and resources available for the research project, which can bolster the credibility, reach, and impact of the research paper.

Q: Can an author have two affiliations?

Yes, it is possible for an author to have two or more affiliations. Authors may have joint appointments or collaborations between different institutions, allowing them to be affiliated with multiple organizations simultaneously. In such cases, authors often indicate their affiliations using superscript numbers or symbols to denote different institutions. This information helps readers understand the diverse institutional connections and collaborations of the authors.

References  

• E. Bik. False affiliations and fake authors. Science Integrity Digest. Accessed December 15, 2022. https://scienceintegritydigest.com/2019/06/04/false-affiliations-and-fake-authors/  
• American Medical Association style manual. 11 TH edition, Section 2.3.3  
• Q&A Forum. Editage Insights. Accessed December 16, 2022. https://www.editage.com/insights/what-should-my-affiliation-be-if-i-changed-my-workplace-during-a-manuscript-submission  
• Author affiliations. Cambridge University Press. Accessed December 15, 2022. https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/authors/journals/author-affiliations#1a  
• Defining authorship in your research paper. Author services: Taylor & Francis. https://authorservices.taylorandfrancis.com/editorial-policies/defining-authorship-research-paper/  
• Authorship principles. Springer. Accessed December 15, 2022. https://www.springer.com/gp/editorial-policies/authorship-principles  

Editage All Access is a subscription-based platform that unifies the best AI tools and services designed to speed up, simplify, and streamline every step of a researcher’s journey. The Editage All Access Pack is a one-of-a-kind subscription that unlocks full access to an AI writing assistant, literature recommender, journal finder, scientific illustration tool, and exclusive discounts on professional publication services from Editage.  

Based on 22+ years of experience in academia, Editage All Access empowers researchers to put their best research forward and move closer to success. Explore our top AI Tools pack, AI Tools + Publication Services pack, or Build Your Own Plan. Find everything a researcher needs to succeed, all in one place –  Get All Access now starting at just $14 a month !    

Related Posts

Conference Paper vs. Journal Paper: What’s the Difference 

What does Ibid. mean? Citation Examples 

• Scopus: Access and use Support Center

To post social content, you must have a display name. The page will refresh upon submission. Any pending input will be lost.

• Support Center
• Using the product

What can I do on an Author details page?

The Author details page provides information about author research areas, publishing and citation information, name variants, the author Scopus identifier number, ORCID (if available), and other information regarding author publication history.

From an Author search results page, select an author name to view the Author details page.

The author details and publishing information section contains information about the author name and name formats, affiliated organizations, and select metrics.

Author information

The Author details page provides the author name, associated affiliations, Scopus Author ID information, and other name formats.

To view other name formats, affiliation history, and subject areas, select 'Show all author info' .

Scopus Author Identifier

Some authors have similar names, or their names can appear differently in various publications. The Scopus Author Identifier distinguishes between these names by assigning each author in Scopus a unique number and grouping together all of the documents written by that author. For example, an author may appear as Lewis, M.; Lewis, M. J.; and Lewis, Michael in different publications, or there may be two authors named John Smith .

For more information, see What is the Scopus Author Identifier?

Connect to ORCID

When your user profile is linked to its unique ORCID, viewers can see the link to that ORCID on the Author details page or search for your profile using that number.

Select 'Connect to ORCID' to add your author profile details to ORCID (Open Researcher and Contributor Identifier).

For more information, see How do I import author details to ORCID?

Edit profile

You can request corrections if you see an error with an author profile using the Author Feedback Wizard. The Author Feedback Wizard allows you to:

• Correct author details
• Add or remove documents associated with the profile
• Merge/split profiles

Select 'Edit profile' to launch the Author Feedback Wizard. For more information, see How do I use the Author Feedback Wizard?

You can create an email alert to be notified when Scopus publishes new documents by an author or to notify you when another document cites an author’s work.

• Select 'Set alert' to access the Set Alert function. Note: You can edit the name of the search, email address(es), the frequency, and email format of the alert.
• Select 'Set document alert' . A confirmation email is sent to the specified addresses.

For more information, see How do I create, edit and delete alerts?

Save to list

Select 'Save to list' to save the author details to a saved author list.

For more information, see How do I manage my Saved lists?

View potential author matches

The View potential author matches feature helps you to verify that you have the correct author.

Select 'View potential author matches' to show similar profiles, based on your search criteria.

For more information, see How do I create a group of authors?

Export profile to SciVal

Select 'Export profile to SciVal' to export information from the author details page to SciVal. The SciVal Researchers and Groups page opens for your SciVal account, displaying the exported author information.

You can evaluate author performance based on the number of publications, the h- index, the number of times they have been cited, and the author's most contributed topics.

View h -graph

The h -index displays the publishing information for a single author, multiple authors, or a group of selected documents. The h -index is based on the highest number of papers included that have had at least the same number of citations.

Select 'View h-graph' to open the Analyze author output page. The h -graph tab is opened with the author's calculated h -index. For more information see the Analyze author output page .

For more information about the h -graph, see How can I use an h -graph?

Document & citations trends graph

The Document & citations trends graph is a summary graph displaying an author’s publications and total annual citations. This graph provides a quick way to see the recent productivity of an author.

Graph details:

• Shows the number of documents published and the number of citations.
• Appears only for authors having more than 1 year of data.
• Shows data points only for years in which the author has data.
• The x -axis shows the lowest and highest number determined by the author's data. For example, if the most citations an author received in a year was 2, then the highest number is 2.
• For more details about the data for a year, move your cursor over the data point.
• To view a documents/citing documents results list for a year, select the corresponding data point.

Analyze author output

The Analyze author output page provides a visual graph of document, h -index, citations, co-author information, and other functions.

Select 'Analyze author output' to view and analyze the publishing output for an author or a group of matches authors.

For more information, see How do I use the Analyze Author Output function?

View citation overview

The citation overview displays the documents for an author details page and includes the number of times the documents were cited by publication year. You can view, print, or export a list of the citing documents.

Select 'Citation overview' to view the citation overview for an author.

For more information, see How do I create and use a citation overview?

The author page lists all the author documents.

Select 'Export all' to export author document information to a selected file type or reference management tool.

For more information, see How do I export documents from Scopus?

Save all to list

You can save author documents to a list in Scopus.

Select 'Save all to list' to create a new list or add to an existing list.

For more information, see How do I add a document to a list?

View list in search results format

You can view author documents, cited by documents, and co-authors in search results format.

• Select 'View all in search results format' to open a results list.
• Select the desired criteria to refine the list.

For more information, see How do I work with document search results?

View references

Select 'View [X] References' to view a list of all documents an author has used for their publications. The list includes all document citation identification numbers plus the list of documents within a Scopus document results list.

For more information, see How do I work with author search results?

Set document alert

When viewing the contents of the Documents tab, you can create an email alert to be notified when Scopus publishes new documents by an author.

• Select 'Set document alert' to access the Set Alert function. Note: You can edit the name of the search, target email address(es), the frequency of emails you receive, email format, and select the status (active or inactive) of the alert.
• Select 'Save' . You will receive a confirmation email.

View author position details

The Author position relates to the responsibilities of an author among the co-authors. The Author position information is derived from documents published in the last 10 years and assumes that the first author listed on the document is the First author, the last author listed is the Last author, and all other authors are Co-authors. The order of authors after the First author typically indicates the level of contribution, with the second author contributing less than the first, and so on. In some cases, there may be multiple first authors, typically known as co-first authors, who have contributed equally to the work. Currently, Scopus cannot distinguish co-first authors or account for alphabetical author listings in some publications.

Select 'View author position details' to view a flyout containing information about the role of the author among their document output. Conversely, select an individual accordion to view the author position details of each position.

For more information about FWCI, see What is Field-weighted Citation Impact (FWCI)?

The Impact tab provides an insight into the scholarly impact of researchers to help gauge their influence among the scientific community. The Impact tab displays author metrics and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) mapped to documents attributed to the author.

To view the author documents mapped to specific SDG, select '[X] documents' associated with each SDG. For more information about SDGs, see What are Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)?

For the applicable metrics, select 'Analyze in SciVal' to view comprehensive researcher metrics in SciVal.

Scopus metric descriptions:

• International collaboration: the percentage of documents co-authored with researchers in other countries/regions
• Academic-Corporate collaboration: the percentage of documents with both academic and corporate affiliations
• Documents in top citation percentiles: percentage of documents in the top 25% most cited documents worldwide
• Documents in top 25% journals by: the percentage of documents in the top 25% journals by CiteScore
• Documents and FWCI: the highly cited publications for entities with a small scholarly output may skew the FWCI. This metric should be used with care when assessing performance. For more information about FWCI, see What is Field-weighted Citation Impact (FWCI)?

The Cited by [ n ] Documents tab lists all documents which cite a specific author.

View all in search results format

You have the option to view an author’s documents, cited by documents, and co-authors in search results format.

Set citation alert

When viewing the Cited by Documents tab, you have the option to create an email alert notifying you when another document cites an author’s work.

• Select 'Set citation alert' .
• Enter the name of the alert, email address(es)to which they are sent, and the frequency of the alerts.
• Select 'Set author citation alert' . You will receive a confirmation email.

For more information, see How do I create a document citation alert?

Select 'Export all' to export an author’s document information to a selected file type or reference management tool.

You can save an author’s documents to a list in Scopus.

A preprint is a non-peer reviewed publication that precedes publication in a peer-reviewed journal. Preprints do not affect existing publication and citation metrics in Scopus. Preprints reside on preprint servers and allow for dissemination, laying claim to an idea, and help with collecting feedback prior to journal submission. Scopus covers preprints from 2017 onwards. For detailed information, see What are preprints?

Select the 'Preprints' tab to view a list of Preprint documents.

The author page lists all co-authors of the author. Select the 'Co-Authors' tab to view a list of these co-authors.

Select a co-author name to view Author details page of the co-author.

A topic is a collection of documents with a common interest and is clustered based upon direct citation analysis using document reference lists. Select the 'Topics' tab to view an author's associated topics.

For more information, see What is SciVal's Topic Prominence?

Select a Topic or an Author documents number to open the topic overview.

An awarded grant is an award, usually financial, given by a funding body to an individual or organization to facilitate a goal or reward performance. For more information, see What are awarded grants?

Select the grant title to open the Awarded Grant overview page.

Was this answer helpful?

Thank you for your feedback, it will help us serve you better. If you require assistance, please scroll down and use one of the contact options to get in touch.

Help us to help you:

Thank you for your feedback!

• Why was this answer not helpful?
• It was hard to understand / follow.
• It did not answer my question.
• The solution did not work.
• There was a mistake in the answer.
• Feel free to leave any comments below: Please enter your feedback to submit this form

Related Articles:

• What is the Scopus Author Identifier?
• How do I work with author search results?
• Scopus Author Profile FAQs
• How can I use an h-graph?
• Scopus tutorials

For further assistance:

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

The PMC website is updating on October 15, 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Springer Nature - PMC COVID-19 Collection

Publication ethics: Role and responsibility of authors

Shubha singhal.

Department of Pharmacology, Maulana Azad Medical College, New Delhi, 110 002 India

Bhupinder Singh Kalra

Publication of scientific paper is critical for modern science evolution, and professional advancement. However, it comes with many responsibilities. An author must be aware of good publication practices. While refraining from scientific misconduct or research frauds, authors should adhere to Good Publication Practices (GPP). Publications which draw conclusions from manipulated or fabricated data could prove detrimental to society and health care research. Good science can blossom only when research is conducted and documented with complete honesty and ethics. Unfortunately, publish or perish attitude has led to unethical practices in scientific research and publications. There is need to identify, acknowledge, and generate awareness among junior researchers or postgraduate students to curb scientific misconduct and adopt GPP. This article discusses various unethical publication practices in research. Also, the role and responsibilities of authors have been discussed with the purpose of maintaining the credibility and objectivity of publication.

Introduction

Need to publish.

A scientific paper is an organized description of hypothesis, data, and conclusions, intended to instruct the readers. Research conducted has to be published or documented; otherwise, it is considered not done. Publication of paper is critical for the evolution of modern science, in which the work of one scientist builds upon that of others [ 1 ]. The roots of scholarly, scientific publishing can be traced to 1665, when Henry Oldenburg of the British Royal Society established the journal Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society . The aim of the journal was to create a public record of original contribution to knowledge and also to encourage scientists to “speak” directly to others [ 2 ]. Documentation of research work followed by publication helps in the dissemination of observations and findings. This flow of knowledge guides and contributes towards research coalition. Established and budding researchers do get benefited by published literature and consolidates their research.

Publication of research in peer-reviewed journal not only validates the research and boosts confidence of the authors but also gives national and international recognition to an author, department, university, and institution [ 3 ]. Unfortunately, in some establishments, the most compelling reason for publication is to fulfill specific job requirements by employers. It may include promotion to an academic position and improving prospects of success in research grant application. The importance of publication in the career is further emphasized by the adage “Publish or perish,” i.e. publish your research or lose your identity.

Ethics-related organizations and their role

A good research involves many coordinated steps. It starts from hypothesis, selection of appropriate study design, study execution, data collection, analysis, and finally publication. Not only the conduct of the study requires ethics to be adhered to but also the process of publication comes under the purview of ethics. Any publication that reports the results and draws the conclusion from the data which have been manipulated is considered research fraud or scientific misconduct [ 4 ]. Recently, Lancet retracted a study entitled “Hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with or without a macrolide for treatment of COVID-19: a multinational registry analysis” because the veracity of the data underlying this observational study could not be assured by the study authors [ 5 ].

There are organizations which give recommendations and develop guidelines to assist authors, editors, and reviewers. The purpose is to create and disseminate accurate, clear, reproducible, unbiased research papers. The organizations involved with publication ethics are

• International Committee of Medical Journals Editors (ICMJE).
• World Association of Medical Editors (WAME)
• Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)

The ICMJE was established in 1978, in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, by a group of medical journal editors. ICMJE developed recommendations which are primarily for authors who want to submit their work in ICMJE member journals. These recommendations discuss the role and responsibilities of the authors, contributors, reviewers, and editors. Steps of manuscript preparation, submission, and editorial issues related to publication in medical journals are also discussed and drafted. The uniform requirements for manuscript submitted to biomedical journals, which most of the journals are following were drafted by ICMJE [ 6 ].

The WAME is a nonprofit voluntary association, which was established in 1995 by a group of members of the ICMJE. The goal was to improve editorial standards, promote professionalism in medical editing, and encourage research on the principals and practice of medical editing. The role of WAME is to facilitate worldwide cooperation and communication among editors of peer-reviewed medical journal. Membership in WAME is free and all decision-making editors of peer-reviewed journals are eligible to join. WAME has more than 1830 members representing more than 1000 journals from 92 countries [ 7 ].

The COPE also helps in ethical publication. COPE was founded in 1997 by a small number of UK medical editors as a self-help group to discuss troubling ethical cases in the publication process. It provides paid membership and currently has more than 7000 members in various disciplines from all parts of the world. The purpose of COPE is to find the practical ways to deal with the misconduct cases and to develop codes of conduct for good publication practice. It also generates the funding for the research based on the issues related to publication misconduct [ 8 ].

Process of publication

The scientific publication is a team effort. Transforming the research findings and observations into a published article is an art as well as science, which involves multiple steps. The very first step is the preparation of the manuscript as per the journal’s requirement. The language in which the manuscript has been drafted is important. It should be checked by an expert or native language speaker and the senior authors. Clear and concise language helps editors and reviewers to concentrate on the content. For up-to-date information, recent references should be cited. Final manuscript must be shared with all the authors and it should have approval of all the authors. Copyright transfer form should be signed by all the authors before submitting to the journal. Signing the copyright form brings responsibility.

Submitted manuscripts are first screened by the editors for its suitability, content, novelty, and what it adds to existing knowledge. The subject of research work should be synchronized with the target journal. It should comply with journal’s manuscript drafting guidelines. After the editorial screening, if some technical issues or non-adherence to manuscript guidelines are observed, it is sent back to the author for technical modifications. The peer review process gets initiated after technical modifications are acceptable. It may take a couple of weeks/months.

In light of reviewer’s recommendations, the editor sends the decision letter to the author mentioning the status of the manuscript, i.e. accepted, rejected, or requires revision. In case of revision, author(s) reply in detail to all comments of reviewers and submit to the journal again within stipulated time. After deliberation on replies and revised manuscript submitted, the editor decides for suitability of publication or if it needs to be sent out for review again. These steps get repeated until the manuscript is accepted or rejected. Once it gets accepted, it goes under proof read stage and finally gets published. The author is never in direct communication with the reviewer. He communicates with the Editorial board only. The reviewer should declare conflicts of interest (COI), if any, before reviewing the manuscript. Manuscripts are usually mailed to reviewers without information of the authors and their affiliations; hence, reviewers are blinded.

What is publishable or not publishable?

Writing for publication is an important yet challenging form of knowledge dissemination. Journals like to publish articles that present an exhaustive meaningful research. It should contribute towards the knowledge building and awareness of readers. At the very minimum, a publishable article needs to be original. It should be conducted and drafted with robust methodology and significant findings, well organized, well written, and concise yet clear. It should be drafted with clear explanation of how the article addresses the existing knowledge gap. Conclusion drawn should be relevant to the audience or readers with a comprehensive list of up-to-date references. Papers that are poorly organized, cluttered with unnecessary information, and consist of routine extension of previous reports or fragmentary reports of research results are not accepted for publication. Violation of ethical or legal norms, including plagiarism, duplicates publication lead to immediate rejection of the paper [ 9 ].

Scientific misconduct

Scientific misconduct is the violation of the standard codes of scholarly conduct and ethical behavior in the publication of scientific research [ 10 ]. Misconduct in the scientific publication process by the authors is detrimental for integrity of the whole system and is considered unethical. Falsification or fabrication of data is the gravest form of scientific misconduct wherein authors either manipulate skewed data to look favorable or generate data where no data exists. Different forms of scientific misconduct are plagiarism or misappropriation of the ideas of others, improprieties of authorship, simultaneous publications, duplicate publications, salami slicing, and non-declaration of COI. Conducting research without informed consent or ethics approval and not maintaining data confidentiality is a form of scientific misconduct. Editors or publication houses do take disciplinary action as per COPE recommendations against scientific misconduct. Authors are blacklisted or banned to submit articles in the respective journal in the future [ 11 ].

Criteria of authorship

Academic life revolves around publications. The publication adds to the credibility of the research and brings fame and recognition. An author is an individual who fulfills enlisted criteria collectively: (1) substantial contributions to conception and design; (2) acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data; (2) drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content; and (3) final approval of the version to be published. Individuals who have provided technical services/translating text/identifying patients for study/supplying material/providing funds/applied statistics/medical writers are not eligible for authorship. However, all those contributors who do not meet the criteria for authorship should be listed in the acknowledgement section [ 12 , 13 ]. Because of the important role of publication in clinical practice and academic setting, the authorship of articles must be honest, reliable, trustworthy, and transparent.

Types of authors

Since authorship is sought after, many unethical practices are also prevalent. Ghost, guest, or gift authors are the examples of such practices. A ghost author is a person who has made a substantial contribution to the research or writing of a manuscript but is not listed as an author. A ghost author might be a direct employee or hired contract employee of pharmaceutical company and hence, listing him as an author amounts to COI [ 14 ]. It is dishonest to omit an author who has made significant contributions. In contrast to ghost author, guest or gift/honorary author is someone who is named as an author, but who did not contribute in a meaningful way to the design, research, analysis, or writing of a paper. Often guest or gift authors are well known and well respected in the field of research. The inclusion of their name in the author list might increase chances of acceptance for publication.

However, sometimes senior investigators may also give honorary authorship to their colleagues for encouraging collaborations and maintaining good working relations or as repayment of favors. Whatever the cause, the gift or guest authorship is an unacceptable practice in publication. The presence of well-known author on the board as a guest author can influence the opinion of clinicians, academicians, and politicians about a particular drug or device. Secondly, due to gift authorship, the person is perceived as being more skilled than his colleague who has not published [ 12 , 13 ]. In multicenter trials, since investigators from different sites have contributed, they qualify for the authorship and all those who qualify for authorship should be listed [ 15 ]. One should always remember that authorship brings responsibility and authors have to be accountable to the data and results which are published.

Authorship issues/disputes

Authorship issues or disputes account for 2% to 11% of all disagreement in the scientific community. The authorship disputes could range from order of authorship, inclusion or exclusion of authors, number of authors etc. Request for addition of authors after submission or even after publication is quite common. In contrast, there are examples where a co-author denies becoming a part of a manuscript, once any scientific misconduct including plagiarism is detected [ 16 ].

The order of authorship should be mutually decided before taking up the study. It has to be a joint decision of all co-authors. In multicenter trials, research group includes large number of researchers. Hence, the corresponding author specifies and registers the group name and clearly identifies the group members who can take credit and responsibility for the work as an author.

ICMJE and other organizations issued the guidelines regarding group authorship and stated that in case of group authorship the byline of the article identifies who is directly responsible for the manuscript, and MEDLINE lists as authors. If the byline includes a group name, MEDLINE will list the names of individual group members who are authors or who are collaborators [ 17 ]. Despite these guidelines, authorship battles for inappropriate attribution of credit are witnessed in this area also.

Usually, the dispute is for the “First author” place because most of the articles are cited by the name of the first author. Conventionally, the extent of involvement decides the order of authorship; for example, the person who has done the majority of the groundwork would be considered eligible for being the first author (junior researcher) and the person who planned and conceived the study would be the last author (supervisor). There is no general consensus in order of authorship, and there are different schools of thoughts [ 16 ]. During submission of revised manuscript, order of authorship should not be altered without any justification. Approval from all authors is warranted in case of revision of order of authorship. It affects the credibility of manuscript too.

How to resolve authorship issues

The best way to prevent disputes in authorship is to generate awareness among research groups about authorship criteria and to develop Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for the conduct and publication of research. COPE guidelines are to be referred in case of authorship or conflicts [ 18 ]. The next best option to prevent disputes is to have open discussion among all the authors involved in multidisciplinary research prior to initiating research, i.e. at the time of protocol drafting. Defining the role and responsibility of each author further reduces the chances of disputes within the research team. Editors do ask for individual contributions of authors in designing manuscript. The journal can blacklist guest or ghost authors [ 12 ].

Plagiarism: do’s and don’ts

The word plagiarism was first used in the English language in the year 1601 by the dramatist Ben Jonson to describe someone who was guilty of theft. Plagiarism is derived from the Latin word “plagiare” which means to “kidnap.” A plagiarist is the person who commits plagiarism [ 19 ]. By definition, plagiarism is the use of previously published work by another author in one’s own manuscript without consent, credit, or acknowledgement. It is the most common form of scientific misconduct [ 4 ]. Plagiarism can be intentional or unintentional. Unintentional plagiarism is usually seen in articles written by students or junior researchers. Lack of awareness and ignorance lead to unintentional plagiarism. Intentional plagiarism happens when an author deliberately copies documented or published work and presents it as his/her own. Both types of plagiarism are unethical and illegal, which can ruin the career and reputation of the writer [ 19 ].

Plagiarism of idea occurs when a plagiarist copies or steals the idea or thought of someone else and presents it as his/her own. Such type of plagiarism is difficult to detect; however, once detected, it is considered serious offense. The example of plagiarism of idea is presenting or documenting an idea of someone else which is being discussed or presented in any conference or seminar without citing proper sources. Plagiarism of text or direct plagiarism, i.e. word to word writing, is when a researcher takes large section of an article from another source and pastes it in his/her own research without providing proper citation. One of the hybrid varieties of plagiarism is Mosaic plagiarism where the author steals the idea, opinion, words, and phrases from different sources and merges words without acknowledging the original author.

Self-plagiarism is the practice of an author using portions of their previous writings on the same topic in their subsequent publications, without specifically citing it formally in quotes. There is no consensus as to whether this is a form of scientific misconduct, or how many of one’s own words one can use before it is truly “plagiarism.” To be on the safer side, authors should cite source or give reference of their previous publications. There are examples in which plagiarism engulfed the entire career of authors and writers and it became the reason of article retraction or rejection [ 20 ].

Culture of publish or perish is one of the important causes of plagiarism. The researcher needs to publish a large number of papers in limited time period to get more opportunities in career and research. In addition, lack of knowledge, laziness, and fear of failure and desire of getting recognition also lead to plagiarism. Many softwares, which can detect plagiarism are available online. It is the responsibility of the author to run their manuscript through software before submitting it to the journal [ 19 , 21 ].

The very first step to prevent plagiarism is the awareness about plagiarism, the consequences, and how to avoid plagiarism. Authors can avoid plagiarism by acknowledging the original source of the idea or word and enclosing them within quotation marks. In case of paraphrasing, where the writer writes the text in his own word, authors must properly cite the original source. Authors must always obtain permission for use of published illustration. Authors should avoid writing multiple separate articles if he can present a large, complex study in a cohesive manner in a single article [ 21 ].

Conflict of interest

Conflict of interest is an attribute which is invisible to the reader or editor, but which may affect or influence his or her judgment or objectivity. Academicians/physicians and researchers often work in collaboration with pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies to develop a product for the well-being of society. However, there are examples where financial and non-financial ties of researches or physicians with the company have compromised the integrity of research [ 22 ].

Conflict of interest describes the situations where the impartiality of the research may be compromised because the researcher stands to profit in some way from the conclusions they draw [ 23 ]. Examples of potential conflicts of interests that are directly or indirectly related to the research may include research grants from funding agencies, honorarium for speaking at symposium, financial support for educational programs, employment, and multiple affiliations. In addition, non-financial benefits including recognition, career advancement, advocacy for a strongly held position, and support for friends and colleagues can also affect the research work and result biases in the research. These biases, when hidden, can affect clinical decision-making by making interventions appear safer or more effective than they really are [ 24 ].

Disclosure of COI is the basic requirement to prevent attribution-related bias in the research. The ICMJE has produced a common form to disclose any COI and that has to be individually signed by each co-author. It has to be uploaded along with the manuscript files. The intent of the disclosure form is not to prevent authors with a potential COI from publication. It is merely intended that any potential conflict should be declared so that the readers may form their own judgment about the findings and observations. It is for the readers to determine whether the authors outside interest may reflect a possible bias in either the exposition of the conclusions presented [ 25 ]. Authors are supposed to declare COI in the manuscript text too which is meant for readers.

Duplicate publication

Duplicate publication or redundant publication is a publication of a paper that substantially overlaps with one which is already published, without clear, visible reference to the previous publication [ 26 ]. As per copyright law and publication ethics, whatever is available in the journal for reading would be original unless there is a clear statement that the author and editor are intentionally republishing an article. Hence, duplication of publication is the breach in the copyright law and against the ethical conduct. In addition, duplication of publication causes waste of limited resources and also leads to inappropriate weighting of the result of a single study. It was observed that duplicate publications of Ondansetron led to overestimation of its efficacy by 23% in one of the meta-analyses [ 26 , 27 ].

The COPE classifies duplicate publication into major and minor offenses. The major offense is the one where duplicate publication is based on the same data set and findings which are already published. It is also considered if there is evidence that the author tried to hide duplication by changing the title or order of authorship or by not referring previous publication [ 28 ]. Minor or salami slicing is considered segmental publication or part publication of results or reanalysis derived from a single study. Authors do it to increase the number of publications and citations. It is considered unethical and it is taken in a bad taste because for a reader it may cause distortion in the conclusions drawn. Publication of the results of a single study in parts in different journals might lead to over-judgement. Wrong conclusions may be drawn from a study if it is done on a fixed number of subjects but the data are being presented in fragments in different journals.

When an author needs to submit a report that has been already published or closely related to another paper that has been submitted elsewhere, the letter of submission should clearly say so. The authors should declare and provide copies of the related submission to help the editor decide how to handle the submission. Authors who attempt to duplicate publication without such notification can face prompt rejection of the submitted manuscript. If the editor was not aware of the violations and the article has already been published, then the article might warrant retraction with or without the author’s explanation or approval.

Duplicate publication does not prevent the author to disseminate important public health information in case of public health emergency. In fact, ICMJE encourages editors to give priority to authors who have made crucial data publicly available without delay [ 26 ]. Duplicate publications are justified if it is about combined editorials, clinical guidelines, and translation of archives.

Predatory publishing

Predatory publishing is the publication of an article in the journal that lacks the usual feature of editorial oversight, transparent policies, and operating procedure of legitimate peer review journals. Predatory journals exploit the authors by charging the publication fee and deceiving them by providing the false claim about the journal’s impact factor, indexing, and peer review [ 29 ].

Predatory publishing is harmful for both the author and the community. Predatory publishing may tarnish the image of the author. Articles published in predatory journals are usually not appreciated by the subject expert. It can misinform the readers and propagate wrong science because of poor quality control. Sometimes genuine information also gets missed because most of the predatory journals are not indexed in the database, so papers are not easily traceable [ 30 ].

Predatory publishing can be avoided by educating researchers, supervisors, and administrators about fake journals. Authors should also learn how to identify trustworthy journals. If the journal website mentions of indexing, then it is important to cross check the inclusion of the journal in the mentioned databases. For an open-access journal, the inclusion in Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) can be checked at the DOAJ website. The journal’s claim of the Journal Citation Report (JCR) impact factor can be verified by its International Standard Serial Number (ISSN) number in the JCR Master list. Another approach to check trustworthy journals is to self-asses the journal through websites like https://thinkchecksubmit.org/ [ 30 ].

Responsibility of author

Authorship is not just a list of names. It is the matter of pride that has to be deserved, earned, and declared [ 15 ]. To maintain the integrity and credibility of medical research and to nourish the trust of public in scientific endeavors, all authors must follow the rules of good scientific publication practice and should stick to the following responsibilities (Table ​ (Table1 1 ):

• Do not fabricate or manipulate the data
• Avoid plagiarism and give proper acknowledgment to other works
• Decide the order of authorship prior to writing the paper to avoid future conflicts
• Declare whether research work has been published or presented before
• Declare COI
• Avoid ghost/gift/guest authorship
• Do not submit the manuscript to more than one journal for simultaneous consideration
• Take approval from the Institutional Ethics Committee before conducting research
• Last but not the least, take direct responsibility for appropriate portions of the content.

Role and responsibilities of author

COI conflict of interest, CONSORT Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials, ARRIVE Animal research: reporting in vivo experiments, CTRI Clinical Trials Registry - India

Awareness of good publication practices should be generated among novice authors to prevent unethical practices in publication of scientific research. Each institute or department should resort to COPE or ICMJE recommendations for publications and draft their own SOP for authors who are actively involved in research. Unethical practices on the part of the authors or scientific misconduct should be discouraged and addressed by appropriate training and guidance.

Compliance with ethical standards

SS, and BSK declare that they have no conflict of interest.

The authors are solely responsible for the data and the contents of the paper. In no way, the Honorary Editor-in-Chief, Editorial Board Members, the Indian Society of Gastroenterology or the printer/publishers are responsible for the results/findings and content of this article.

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Authorship and the importance of the author contribution statement

• Published: 31 March 2023
• Volume 42 , pages 655–656, ( 2023 )

Cite this article

• C. Neal Stewart Jr 1 &
• Gűnther Hahne 2  

9817 Accesses

3 Citations

3 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Scientists universally agree that scientific articles and authorship are critically important. Ethical guidelines have been established for best practices and transparency in authorship. Nonetheless, it is not uncommon to see significant errors in authorship practices in published papers. The purpose of this article is to clarify whose names should be listed as authors on a Plant Cell Reports paper and to give some practical guidelines when writing the authorship contribution statement.

In short, the corresponding author and the team of authors are responsible to avoid two critical potential errors in authorship. The first type of error happens when a person who made key contributions to a study and manuscript is not named as an author: someone is inadvertently omitted from the author list. The second type of error happens when a person who did not make a substantial contribution is listed as an author: people are unnecessarily added to the author list. This second type of error occurs when favors are granted to people (gift authorship) or senior scientists, administrators, or famous scientists are granted authorship (honorary authorship). Both types of errors, but especially gift and honorary authorship, could conceivably warrant the rejection of a submitted manuscript.

For many years, Plant Cell Reports has adhered to authorship criteria of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE; https://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the-role-of-authors-and-contributors.html ).

In short, the four ICMJE criteria for authorship are:

Substantial contributions

Conception/design of the research or

Collection of data or

Data analysis/interpretation AND

Drafting the manuscript or making intellectual contributions on text/revisions AND

Final approval of the manuscript AND

Agreeing to be held accountable for the work.

Please note that accountability is an important concept in science that is a point of emphasis these days as research misconduct appears to be on the rise. It is critical that scientists be aware of the importance of research integrity from the lab bench to publication. Not only should the content of a scientific research paper be accurate, but the author list should be accurate as well.

The authorship contribution statement plays an important role in authorship and accountability. Ideally, the statement should be able to be mapped back to the ICMJE criteria. Figure  1 shows a good example of an ICMJE-mapped author contribution statement.

To the left is a fictional author contribution statement that serves here as a model. The statement is sufficiently detailed to paint a picture of each author’s role in the study and manuscript. The statement can also be mapped to the ICMJE criteria for authorship (to the right) as depicted by the arrows

In submissions to the journal, sometimes we see certain words and phrases in authorship contribution statements that do not belong there: assisted, gave advice, provided funding, made coffee, translated to English, and helped are some examples. None of these words or phrases can be found in the ICMJE criteria and should be avoided in authorship contribution statements.

Given that paper mills are known to buy and sell authorship, and that honorary and gift authorship is also problematic and widespread in science, we, the editors, are increasingly wary of very long author lists and vague authorship contribution statements. It should not be challenging for the editors and peer reviewers to determine if authors meet the criteria for authorship. Also, it should be noted that ChatGPT and other large language models do not fit the criteria for authorship and should also not be listed as authors.

Below are additional resources and tips for authorship:

No changes to authorship can be made after acceptance of a manuscript.

Authors might find that the Contributor Roles Taxonomy (CRediT; https://credit.niso.org/ ) is useful in thinking about roles of authors and when writing author contribution statements.

For articles that are based primarily on the student’s dissertation or thesis, it is recommended that the student is listed as the first author.

Authors are asked to use their Open Researcher and Contributor ID (OCRID; https://ocrid.org ) when submitting manuscripts to Plant Cell Reports. If authors don’t have an ID yet, it can be acquired during the submission process.

If authors become deceased or incapacitated during the writing, submission, or peer-review process, and the co-authors agree that it is appropriate to include the deceased or incapacitated person as an author, co-authors should obtain approval from a (legal) representative, which may be a direct relative of the deceased or incapacitated contributor.

In conclusion, most submissions to Plant Cell Reports are in good faith and appear to be honest in content and intent. We scientists must be vigilant, however, to guard our scientific pursuits and outputs for the benefit of the profession and society. The leadership of Plant Cell Reports remains dedicated to these pursuits, which include assessing the veracity and appropriateness of authorship lists and contribution statements.

Data availability

There are no data available.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

University of Tennessee, Knoxville, USA

C. Neal Stewart Jr

Plant Cell Reports, Weinheim, Germany

Gűnther Hahne

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to C. Neal Stewart Jr .

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Stewart Jr, C.N., Hahne, G. Authorship and the importance of the author contribution statement. Plant Cell Rep 42 , 655–656 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00299-023-03007-8

Download citation

Received : 17 March 2023

Accepted : 17 March 2023

Published : 31 March 2023

Issue Date : April 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s00299-023-03007-8

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Stack Exchange Network

Stack Exchange network consists of 183 Q&A communities including Stack Overflow , the largest, most trusted online community for developers to learn, share their knowledge, and build their careers.

Q&A for work

Connect and share knowledge within a single location that is structured and easy to search.

How to appropriately email a researcher to ask for details about their paper?

Often when I am reading a newly published article, I will encounter some points that are difficult to understand. For example, some details of the methodology that I think the authors did not explain in enough detail.

I'm not sure how to write an appropriate email to ask for clarification, especially on how to phrase, so as to be polite. For example, should I write "Ask for details on methodology" or "Inquiry on details on methodology" or ...?

• 1 You can also ask if there is an appendix (published or not) containing more methodological details than appeared in the published article. –  Alexis Commented Jul 6, 2020 at 23:24
• 2 Does this answer your question? How should I phrase an important question that I need to ask a professor? –  Anonymous Physicist Commented Jul 6, 2020 at 23:42
• 3 Be warned that authors of papers can be of varying degrees of helpfulness when you ask them about details of their papers or more explicit details of their methodology/computations. –  Tom Commented Jul 7, 2020 at 0:45
• 2 There is a website called pubpeer, which is useful for public comments of papers, if you have a question it's possible other people may too, maybe someone has asked it before –  Rainb Commented Jul 7, 2020 at 5:10
• 1 By the way, it should go without saying but also make sure you have thoroughly read the paper before asking :) –  a3nm Commented Jul 7, 2020 at 8:26

9 Answers 9

Showing interest is nice, accusing people is not. So, show interest, something like "I saw your article XXX in YYY and I am working on something similar. I was wondering how exactly you dealt with ZZZ."

This probably is a bit culturally determined, but almost anything polite will do. I personally prefer your second formulation, but others might not. Don't overthink it.

But in a first mail to the author(s) I suggest asking questions that can be answered fairly simply/quickly and don't ask for too much. If it seems like it will be a lot of work to reply, then you might not get any answer. You can always follow up with additional questions if the authors seem open to communication.

In the best case it can open the possibility of future collaboration if the topic is of mutual interest.

Contacting researchers for clarification is good practice. Before you do, ask yourself why you think the authors did not provide enough details . In formulating an answer, you may find they did provide enough details. Otherwise, you'll have established a better understanding for what you need to know, and you can put that to the researchers. Always be humble in asking.

Let's get more templated . What about this?

To: %Corresponding author% Subject: %Paper title% Dear Prof. %NAME% , With a great interest I read your paper on %TOPIC% . Since I work in a similar area, I would like to %short presentation of what you want% [e.g., to compare my approach [1, 2, 3] to yours]. Do you have %your actual inquiry, detailed% ? Thank you very much in advance. [1] Paper [2] Paper [3] Paper Best regards, %Your name% -- %Your signature, including your institution, email, phone, and further ways to contact you%

If you are asking for code, try searching GitHub and further usual places first. Googling the corresponding author would also help. Take a look at their most recent papers, may be your question is already answered.

• What if I'm not sure if they are a professor or not. –  hotohoto Commented Jan 31, 2023 at 6:12
• 1 Just google them? –  Oleg Lobachev Commented Feb 1, 2023 at 10:33

So long as what you write is not rude or arrogant, nobody will care much.

The important thing is to ask some specific questions. If you just asked me for "details of methodology" I would hit the delete button, because I'm not going to write a comprehensive reply that is probably longer than the published paper telling you every little detail about what I did - especially if the paper was published years ago and I have forgotten most of the details anyway.

• That depends imho. If you write an article about Nuclear Power and completely leave out the part about uranium atoms splitting, well, do you assume your readers will know ? –  clockw0rk Commented Jul 8, 2020 at 8:09
• @clockw0rk yes? For a journal article, I think you can safely assume a decent general science background, especially in the topic of the journal (e.g., fission for a Modern Physics Letters paper). –  Matt Commented Jul 9, 2020 at 0:11
• @Matt u maybe right about that, but I encountered papers about advanced hacking techniques where the author completely leaves out facts about what he is refferring to when he says "... because it is simply a fact" or "...as is common knowledge". Not the topic of this question, but definately provide at least sources to your readers where they can find the basics of your research. Well, I guess it's part of the topic that these papers always come a little "mysterious" or "arcane", so to speak. –  clockw0rk Commented Jul 9, 2020 at 12:31

I was for 5 or so years a university researcher and co-wrote a few papers. I would have been thrilled if someone had written to me asking a sensible question (they never did) but horrified if they had found an error. Professors, on the other hand, can be time poor, so it will be best to write to the most junior author if this is an option. In my experience many academics build upon their previous work and answers to any questions will often be found in previous papers. To be specific I would suggest: "Do you use the [your best guess at the techniques/methodology used] system in your research?" after a preamble much as Oleg has given above.

If the paper is published it is because the editor (and presumably the referees) believe there are enough details either in the manuscript per se , in the references or that the procedure is sufficiently well-known not to waste time on it.

Thus I would encourage you to be very careful in suggesting there is not enough information: it might not be enough information for you but presumably it’s enough information for that typical reader of the journal.

You might ask for clarifications on a few specific points but do so selectively, making sure you include significant context and references so that your query is legitimate.

A while ago I also read a paper and had a question which was not answered in the paper (or maybe it was and I just wasn't capable of interpreting it).

I searched for the address of the main author and wrote a polite, kind email without much fluff (because I had often heard that scientists don't like fluff).

I also mentioned that I had asked another scientist I knew first, but that no one knew the answer (just to add some justification for why I was writing him instead of asking others or consulting books).

For me, he was something like a famous Professor and I thought he would never answer my mail. But not even a day later I received a kind and helpful answer from him.

I would also like to add here to encourage everyone to answer emails like this if possible. For him it was maybe just an email but his answer meant so very much to me, I nearly even cried because I was so happy and I felt taken seriously and acknowledged.

This is what I used to do when I was a math grad student:

• Be extra polite (I would start with "Dear Prof. NNN")
• Introduce yourself. Say what level you're at, what institution you're at, and who you're working with. (Briefly.) It will help them understand what level you're at and indicate a connection.
• Be somewhat detailed about what you do understand. Don't just say "I didn't understand this step in the methods." Say "When you say that you did XXX, did you mean YYY, or ZZZ? Or perhaps I misunderstand completely?" Just like with Stack Exchange you want to make it clear you put some effort in, and you also want to make it clear just what needs to be explained.
• Include a phone number in case they want to talk further.

I want to re-emphasize the importance of being clear about where you are uncertain. You want to make it as easy as possible for them to answer your question. And as you try to put your confusion into words, it may actually become more clear to you.

But don't be afraid to make the contact. It could even lead to a future collaboration. Connecting with other researchers is a good thing to do.

One other note: Even though I suggested "Dear Prof. NNN", that's just for the first contact. After that, look at how they talk to you. If they close with just their first name, that's generally an invitation to address them that way.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for browse other questions tagged etiquette email ..

• Featured on Meta
• Preventing unauthorized automated access to the network
• User activation: Learnings and opportunities
• Join Stack Overflow’s CEO and me for the first Stack IRL Community Event in...

Hot Network Questions

• How can I draw the intersection of a plane with a dome tent?
• How to fix bottom of stainless steel pot that has been separated from its main body?
• Do tangent vectors of a manifold extend into the ambient space?
• On a glassed landmass, how long would it take for plants to grow?
• BQ25303J Typical Application circuit from datasheet
• Taking out the film from the roll can it still work?
• Post-apocalyptic movie where a traveler encounters a dying robot displaying images on its face in an old store
• Problems regressing y on x/y?
• Why is my Lenovo ThinkPad running Ubuntu using the e1000e Ethernet driver?
• Why does Voyager use consumable hydrazine instead of reaction wheels that only rotate when moving the spacecraft?
• Choosing MCU for motor control
• Please help me understand this problem about cardinality
• Does Voyager send its data on a schedule and hope somebody's listening?
• Is there any language which distinguishes between “un” as in “not” and “un” as in “inverse”?
• Is QUBO formulation actually useful for solving real-world problems?
• \varinjlim and \lim with quotation marks around (ind-lim and pro-lim in LaTeX)
• Why would elves care what happens to Middle Earth?
• Shock absorber rusted from being outside
• CH in non-set theoretic foundations
• What cameos did Stan Lee have in the DC universe?
• Do early termination fees hold up in court?
• How do you measure exactly 31 minutes by burning the ropes?
• Undamaged tire repeatedly deflating
• How to do automated content publishing from CLI in XMCloud

Discover the world's scientific knowledge

With 160+ million publication pages, 25+ million researchers and 1+ million questions, this is where everyone can access science.

You can use AND, OR, NOT, "" and () to specify your search.

• Consent preferences

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts

Submission guidelines

Format of articles, cover letter, revised manuscripts, tex/latex files, writing your manuscript, copy editing services, acknowledgements, author contributions, competing interests, data availability, ethics declarations, approval for animal experiments, approval for human experiments, consent to participate/consent to publish.

• Supplementary information

Figure legends

General figure guidelines, figures for peer review, figures for publication, statistical guidelines, chemical and biological nomenclature and abbreviations, gene nomenclature, characterisation of chemical and biomolecular materials, registered reports.

Scientific Reports publishes original research in two formats: Article and Registered Report. For Registered Reports, see section below . In most cases, we do not impose strict limits on word count or page number. However, we strongly recommend that you write concisely and stick to the following guidelines:

• Articles should ideally be no more than 11 typeset pages
• The main text should be no more than 4,500 words (not including Abstract, Methods, References and figure legends)
• The title should be no more than 20 words, should describe the main message of the article using a single scientifically accurate sentence, and should not contain puns or idioms
• The abstract should be no more than 200 words

For a definitive list of which limits are mandatory please visit the submission checklist page .

Please do not include any references in your Abstract. Make sure it serves both as a general introduction to the topic and as a brief, non-technical summary of the main results and their implications. Abstract should be unstructured, i.e. should not contain sections or subheadings.

We allow the use of up to 6 keywords/key phrases that can be used for indexing purposes. These should represent the main content of the submission.

Your manuscript text file should start with a title page that shows author affiliations and contact information, identifying the corresponding author with an asterisk. We recommend that each section includes an introduction of referenced text that expands on the background of the work. Some overlap with the Abstract is acceptable. Large Language Models (LLMs), such as ChatGPT , do not currently satisfy our authorship criteria . Notably an attribution of authorship carries with it accountability for the work, which cannot be effectively applied to LLMs. Use of an LLM should be properly documented in the Methods section (and if a Methods section is not available, in a suitable alternative part) of the manuscript. In response to emerging information, advice, guidance and policy around artificial intelligence (AI), we have created a dedicated AI section in our  Editorial Policy page . Please familiarize yourself with this content and comply with relevant policies.

For the main body of the text, there are no specific requirements. You can organise it in a way that best suits your research. However, the following structure will be suitable in many cases:

• Introduction
• Results (with subheadings)
• Discussion (without subheadings)

You should then follow the main body of text with:

• References (limited to 60 references, though not strictly enforced)
• Acknowledgements (optional)
• Data availability statement (mandatory)
• Additional Information (including a Competing Interests Statement)
• Figure legends (these are limited to 350 words per figure)
• Tables (maximum size of one page)

Please note, footnotes should not be used. 

We do not automatically include page or line numbers in the materials sent to Editorial Board Members and reviewers. Please consider including those in your manuscript; this can help facilitate the evaluation of the paper and makes giving feedback on specific sections easier.

You may include a limited number of uncaptioned molecular structure graphics and numbered mathematical equations if necessary. Display items are limited to 8 ( figures and/or tables ). However, to enable typesetting of papers, we advise making the number of display items commensurate with your overall word length. So, for Articles of 2,000 words or less, we suggest including no more than 4 figures/tables. Please note that schemes should not be used and should be presented as figures instead.

Your submission must also include:

• A cover letter
• Individual figure files and optional supplementary information files

For first submissions (i.e. not revised manuscripts), you may incorporate the manuscript text and figures into a single file up to 3 MB in size. Whilst Microsoft Word is preferred we also accept LaTeX, or PDF format. Figures can be inserted in the text at the appropriate positions, or grouped at the end.

Supplementary information should be combined and supplied as a single separate file, preferably in PDF format.

A submission template is available in the Overleaf template gallery to help you prepare a LaTeX manuscript within the Scientific Reports formatting criteria.

In your cover letter, you should include:

• The affiliation and contact information of your corresponding author
• A brief explanation of why the work is appropriate for Scientific Reports
• The names and contact information of any reviewers you consider suitable
• The names of any referees you would like excluded from reviewing

Finally, you should state whether you have had any prior discussions with a Scientific Reports Editorial Board Member about the work described in your manuscript.

For revised manuscripts, you should provide all textual content in a single file, prepared using either Microsoft Word or LaTeX. Please note, we do not accept PDF files for the article text of revised manuscripts. Make sure you:

• Format the manuscript file as single-column text without justification.
• Number the pages using an Arabic numeral in the footer of each page.
• Use the default Computer Modern fonts for your text, and the 'symbols' font for any Greek characters.
• Supply any figures as individual files.
• Combine and supply any Supplementary Information as a separate file, preferably in PDF format.
• Include the title of the manuscript and author list in the first page of the Supplementary Information file.

If you do not wish to incorporate the manuscript text and figures into a single file, please provide all textual content in a separate single file, prepared using either Microsoft Word or LaTeX.

If you’re submitting LaTeX files, you can either use the standard ‘Article’ document class (or similar) or the wlscirep.cls file and template provided by Overleaf . For graphics, we recommend your use graphicx.sty. Use numerical references only for citations.

Our system cannot accept .bib files. If you prepare references using BibTeX (which is optional), please include the .bbl file with your submission (as a ‘LaTeX supplementary file’) in order for it to be processed correctly; this file is included automatically in the zip file generated by Overleaf for submissions. Please see this help article on Overleaf for more details.

Alternatively, you can make sure that the references (source code) are included within the manuscript file itself. As a final precaution, you should ensure that the complete .tex file compiles successfully on its own system with no errors or warnings, before submission.

Scientific Reports is read by a truly diverse range of scientists. Please therefore give careful thought to communicating your findings as clearly as possible.

Although you can assume a shared basic knowledge of science, please don’t expect that everyone will be familiar with the specialist language or concepts of your particular field. Therefore:

• Avoid technical jargon wherever possible, explaining it clearly when it is unavoidable.
• Keep abbreviations to a minimum, particularly when they are not standard.
• If you must use an abbreviation, make sure you spell it out fully in the text or legend the first time it appears.
• Clearly explain the background, rationale and main conclusions of your study.
• Write titles and abstracts in language that will be readily understood by any scientist.

We strongly recommend that you ask a colleague with different expertise to review your manuscript before you submit it. This will help you to identify concepts and terminology that non-specialist readers may find hard to grasp.

We don’t provide in-depth copy editing as part of the production process. So, if you feel your manuscript would benefit from someone looking at the copy, please consider using a copy editing or language editing service. You can either do this before submission or at the revision stage. You can also get a fast, free grammar check of your manuscript that takes into account all aspects of readability in English.

We have two affiliates who can provide you with these services: Nature Research Editing Service and American Journal Experts . As a Scientific Reports author, you are entitled to a 10% discount on your first submission to either of these.

Claim 10% off English editing from Nature Research Editing Service

Claim 10% off American Journal Experts

Please note that the use of an editing service is at your own expense, and doesn’t ensure that your article will be selected for peer-review or accepted for publication.

We don't impose word limits on the description of methods. Make sure it includes adequate experimental and characterisation data for others to be able to reproduce your work. You should:

• Include descriptions of standard protocols and experimental procedures.
• Only identify commercial suppliers of reagents or instrumentation when the source is critical to the outcome of the experiments.
• Identify sources for any kits you use in your procedures.
• Include any experimental protocols that describe the synthesis of new compounds.
• Use the systematic name of any new compound and put its bold Arabic numeral in the heading for the experimental protocol, indicating it thereafter by its assigned, bold numeral.
• Describe the experimental protocol in detail, referring to amounts of reagents in parentheses, when possible (eg 1.03 g, 0.100 mmol).
• Use standard abbreviations for reagents and solvents.
• Clearly identify safety hazards posed by reagents or protocols.
• Report isolated mass and percent yields at the end of each protocol.

If you’re reporting experiments on live vertebrates (or higher invertebrates), humans or human samples, you must include a statement of ethical approval in the Methods section (see our detailed requirements for further information on preparing these statements).

We don’t copy edit your references. Therefore, it’s essential you format them correctly, as they will be linked electronically to external databases where possible. At Scientific Reports , we use the standard Nature referencing style. So, when formatting your references, make sure they:

• Run sequentially (and are always numerical).
• Sit within square brackets.
• Only have one publication linked to each number.
• Only include papers or datasets that have been published or accepted by a named publication, recognised preprint server or data repository (if you include any preprints of accepted papers in your reference list, make sure you submit them with the manuscript).
• Include published conference abstracts and numbered patents, if you wish.
• Don’t include grant details and acknowledgements.

Sorry, we cannot accept BibTeX (.bib) bibliography files for references. If you are making your submission by LaTeX, it must either contain all references within the manuscript .tex file itself, or (if you’re using the Overleaf template) include the .bbl file generated during the compilation process as a ‘LaTeX supplementary file’ (see the "Manuscripts" section for more details).

In your reference list, you should:

• Include all authors unless there are six or more, in which case only the first author should be given, followed by 'et al.'.
• List authors by last name first, followed by a comma and initials (followed by full stops) of given names.
• Use Roman text for Article and dataset titles, with only the first word of the title having an initial capital and written exactly as it appears in the work cited, ending with a full stop.
• Use italics for book titles, giving all words in the title an initial capital.
• Use italics for journal and data repository names, abbreviating them according to common usage (with full stops).
• Use bold for volume numbers and the subsequent comma.
• Give the full page range (or article number), where appropriate.

Published papers:

Printed journals Schott, D. H., Collins, R. N. & Bretscher, A. Secretory vesicle transport velocity in living cells depends on the myosin V lever arm length. J. Cell Biol . 156 , 35-39 (2002).

Online only Bellin, D. L. et al. Electrochemical camera chip for simultaneous imaging of multiple metabolites in biofilms . Nat. Commun . 7 , 10535; 10.1038/ncomms10535 (2016).

For papers with more than five authors include only the first author’s name followed by ‘et al.’.

Books: Smith, J. Syntax of referencing in How to reference books (ed. Smith, S.) 180-181 (Macmillan, 2013).

Online material:

Babichev, S. A., Ries, J. & Lvovsky, A. I. Quantum scissors: teleportation of single-mode optical states by means of a nonlocal single photon. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0208066 (2002).

Manaster, J. Sloth squeak. Scientific American Blog Network http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/psi-vid/2014/04/09/sloth-squeak (2014).

Hao, Z., AghaKouchak, A., Nakhjiri, N. & Farahmand, A. Global integrated drought monitoring and prediction system (GIDMaPS) data sets.  figshare   https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.853801 (2014).

Please keep any acknowledgements brief, and don’t include thanks to anonymous referees and editors, or any effusive comments. You may acknowledge grant or contribution numbers. You should also acknowledge assistance from medical writers, proof-readers and editors.

You must supply an Author Contribution Statement as described in the Author responsibilities section of our Editorial and Publishing Policies .

Please be aware:

• The author name you give as the corresponding author will be the main contact during the review process and should not change.
• The information you provide in the submission system will be used as the source of truth when your paper is published.

You must supply a competing interests statement . If there is no conflict of interest, you should include a statement declaring this.

Your statement must be explicit and unambiguous, describing any potential competing interest (or lack thereof) for EACH contributing author. The information you provide in the submission system will be used as the source of truth when your paper is published.

Examples of declarations are:

Competing interests The author(s) declare no competing interests.

Competing interests Dr X's work has been funded by A. He has received compensation as a member of the scientific advisory board of B and owns stock in the company. He also has consulted for C and received compensation. Dr Y and Dr Z declare no potential conflict of interest.

You must include a Data Availability Statement in all submitted manuscripts (at the end of the main text, before the References section); see ' Availability of materials and data ' section for more information.

If your research includes human or animal subjects, you will need to include the appropriate ethics declarations in the Methods section of your manuscript.

For experiments involving live vertebrates and/or higher invertebrates, your Methods section must include a statement that:

• Identifies the institutional and/or licensing committee that approved the experiments, including any relevant details.
• Confirms that all experiments were performed in accordance with relevant named guidelines and regulations.
• Confirms that the authors complied with the ARRIVE guidelines.

For experiments involving human subjects (or tissue samples), your Methods section must include a statement that:

• Confirms that informed consent was obtained from all participants and/or their legal guardians.

Please note that:

• Study participant names (and other personally identifiable information) must be removed from all text/figures/tables/images.
• The use of coloured bars/shapes or blurring to obscure the eyes/facial region of study participants is not an acceptable means of anonymisation. For manuscripts that include information or images that could lead to identification of a study participant, your Methods section must include a statement that confirms informed consent was obtained to publish the information/image(s) in an online open access publication.

Supplementary Information

You should submit any Supplementary Information together with the manuscript so that we can send it to referees during peer-review. This will be published online with accepted manuscripts.

It’s vital that you carefully check your Supplementary Information before submission as any modification after your paper is published will require a formal correction.

Please avoid including any "data not shown" statements and instead make your data available via deposition in a public repository (see ' Availability of materials and data ' for more information).

If any data that is necessary to evaluate the claims of your paper is not available via a public depository, make sure you provide it as Supplementary Information.

We do not edit, typeset or proof Supplementary Information, so please present it clearly and succinctly at initial submission, making sure it conforms to the style and terminology of the rest of the paper.

To avoid any delays to publication, please follow the guidelines below for creation, citation and submission of your Supplementary Information:

You can combine multiple pieces of Supplementary Information and supply them as a single composite file. If you wish to keep larger information (e.g. supplementary videos, spreadsheets [.csv or .xlsx] or data files) as another separate file you may do so.

Designate each item as Supplementary Table, Figure, Video, Audio, Note, Data, Discussion, Equations or Methods, as appropriate. Number Supplementary Tables and Figures as, for example, "Supplementary Table S1". This numbering should be separate from that used in tables and figures appearing in the main article. Supplementary Note or Methods should not be numbered; titles for these are optional.

Refer to each piece of supplementary material at the appropriate point(s) in the main article. Be sure to include the word "Supplementary" each time one is mentioned. Please do not refer to individual panels of supplementary figures.

Use the following examples as a guide (note: abbreviate "Figure" as "Fig." when in the middle of a sentence): "Table 1 provides a selected subset of the most active compounds. The entire list of 96 compounds can be found as Supplementary Table S1 online." "The biosynthetic pathway of L-ascorbic acid in animals involves intermediates of the D-glucuronic acid pathway (see Supplementary Fig. S2 online). Figure 2 shows...".

Remember to include a brief title and legend (incorporated into the file to appear near the image) as part of every figure submitted, and a title as part of every table.

Keep file sizes as small as possible, with a maximum size of 50 MB, so that they can be downloaded quickly.

Supplementary video files should be provided in the standard video aspects: 4:3, 16:9, 21:9.

If you have any further questions about the submission and preparation of Supplementary Information, please email: [email protected] .

Please begin your figure legends with a brief title sentence for the whole figure and continue with a short description of what is shown in each panel. Use any symbols in sequence and minimise the methodological details as much as possible. Keep each legend total to no more than 350 words. Provide text for figure legends in numerical order after the references.

Please submit any tables in your main article document in an editable format (Word or TeX/LaTeX, as appropriate), and not as images. Tables that include statistical analysis of data should describe their standards of error analysis and ranges in a table legend.

Include any equations and mathematical expressions in the main text of the paper. Identify equations that are referred to in the text by parenthetical numbers, such as (1), and refer to them in the manuscript as "equation (1)" etc.

For submissions in a .doc or .docx format, please make sure that all equations are provided in an editable Word format. You can produce these with the equation editor included in Microsoft Word.

You are responsible for obtaining permission to publish any figures or illustrations that are protected by copyright, including figures published elsewhere and pictures taken by professional photographers. We cannot publish images downloaded from the internet without appropriate permission.

You should state the source of any images used. If you or one of your co-authors has drawn the images, please mention this in your acknowledgements. For software, you should state the name, version number and URL.

Number any figures separately with Arabic numerals in the order they occur in the text of the manuscript. Include error bars when appropriate. Include a description of the statistical treatment of error analysis in the figure legend.

Please do not use schemes. You should submit sequences of chemical reactions or experimental procedures as figures, with appropriate captions. You may include in the manuscript a limited number of uncaptioned graphics depicting chemical structures - each labelled with their name, by a defined abbreviation, or by the bold Arabic numeral.

Use a clear, sans-serif typeface (for example, Helvetica) for figure lettering. Use the same typeface in the same font size for all figures in your paper. For Greek letters, use a 'symbols' font. Put all display items on a white background, and avoid excessive boxing, unnecessary colour, spurious decorative effects (such as three-dimensional 'skyscraper' histograms) and highly pixelated computer drawings. Never truncate the vertical axis of histograms to exaggerate small differences. Ensure any labelling is of sufficient size and contrast to be legible, even after appropriate reduction. The thinnest lines in the final figure should be no smaller than one point wide. You will be sent a proof that will include figures.

• Figures divided into parts should be labelled with a lower-case, bold letter ( a, b, c and so on) in the same type size as used elsewhere in the figure.
• Lettering in figures should be in lower-case type, with only the first letter of each label capitalised.
• Units should have a single space between the number and the unit, and follow SI nomenclature (for example, ms rather than msec) or the nomenclature common to a particular field.
• Thousands should be separated by commas (1,000).
• Unusual units or abbreviations should be spelled out in full or defined in the legend.
• Scale bars should be used rather than magnification factors, with the length of the bar defined on the bar itself rather than in the legend.

In legends, please use visual cues rather than verbal explanations such as "open red triangles". Avoid unnecessary figures: data presented in small tables or histograms, for instance, can generally be stated briefly in the text instead. Figures should not contain more than one panel unless the parts are logically connected; each panel of a multipart figure should be sized so that the whole figure can be reduced by the same amount and reproduced at the smallest size at which essential details are visible.

At the initial submission stage, you may choose to upload separate figure files or to incorporate figures into the main article file, ensuring that any figures are of sufficient quality to be clearly legible.

When submitting a revised manuscript, you must upload all figures as separate figure files, ensuring that the image quality and formatting conforms to the specifications below.

You must supply each complete figure as a separate file upload. Multi-part/panel figures must be prepared and arranged as a single image file (including all sub-parts; a, b, c, etc.). Please do not upload each panel individually.

Please read the digital images integrity and standards section of our Editorial and Publishing Policies . When possible, we prefer to use original digital figures to ensure the highest-quality reproduction in the journal. When creating and submitting digital files, please follow the guidelines below. Failure to do so, or to adhere to the following guidelines, can significantly delay publication of your work.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

1. Line art, graphs, charts and schematics

For optimal results, you should supply all line art, graphs, charts and schematics in vector format, such as EPS or AI. Please save or export it directly from the application in which it was made, making sure that data points and axis labels are clearly legible.

2. Photographic and bitmap images

Please supply all photographic and bitmap images in a bitmap image format such as tiff, jpg, or psd. If saving tiff files, please ensure that the compression option is selected to avoid very large file sizes. Please do not supply Word or Powerpoint files with placed images. Images can be supplied as RGB or CMYK (note: we will not convert image colour modes).

Figures that do not meet these standards will not reproduce well and may delay publication until we receive high-resolution images.

3. Chemical structures

Please produce Chemical structures using ChemDraw or a similar program. All chemical compounds must be assigned a bold, Arabic numeral in the order in which the compounds are presented in the manuscript text. Structures should then be exported into a 300 dpi RGB tiff file before being submitted.

4. Stereo images

You should present stereo diagrams for divergent 'wall-eyed' viewing, with the two panels separated by 5.5 cm. In the final accepted version of the manuscript, you should submit the stereo images at their final page size.

If your paper contains statistical testing, it should state the name of the statistical test, the n value for each statistical analysis, the comparisons of interest, a justification for the use of that test (including, for example, a discussion of the normality of the data when the test is appropriate only for normal data), the alpha level for all tests, whether the tests were one-tailed or two-tailed, and the actual P value for each test (not merely "significant" or "P < 0.05"). Please make it clear what statistical test was used to generate every P value. Use of the word "significant" should always be accompanied by a P value; otherwise, use "substantial," "considerable," etc.

Data sets should be summarised with descriptive statistics, which should include the n value for each data set, a clearly labelled measure of centre (such as the mean or the median), and a clearly labelled measure of variability (such as standard deviation or range).

Ranges are more appropriate than standard deviations or standard errors for small data sets. Graphs should include clearly labelled error bars. You must state whether a number that follows the ± sign is a standard error (s.e.m.) or a standard deviation (s.d.).

You must justify the use of a particular test and explain whether the data conforms to the assumptions of the tests. Three errors are particularly common:

• Multiple comparisons: when making multiple statistical comparisons on a single data set, you should explain how you adjusted the alpha level to avoid an inflated Type I error rate, or you should select statistical tests appropriate for multiple groups (such as ANOVA rather than a series of t-tests).
• Normal distribution: many statistical tests require that the data be approximately normally distributed; when using these tests, you should explain how you tested your data for normality. If the data does not meet the assumptions of the test, you should use a non-parametric alternative instead.
• Small sample size: when the sample size is small (less than about 10), you should use tests appropriate to small samples or justify the use of large-sample tests.

You should identify molecular structures by bold, Arabic numerals assigned in order of presentation in the text. Once identified in the main text or a figure, you may refer to compounds by their name, by a defined abbreviation, or by the bold Arabic numeral (as long as the compound is referred to consistently as one of these three).

When possible, you should refer to chemical compounds and biomolecules using systematic nomenclature, preferably using IUPAC . You should use standard chemical and biological abbreviations. Make sure you define unconventional or specialist abbreviations at their first occurrence in the text.

You should use approved nomenclature for gene symbols, and employ symbols rather than italicised full names (for example Ttn, not titin). Please consult the appropriate nomenclature databases for correct gene names and symbols. A useful resource is Entrez Gene .

You can get approved human gene symbols from HUGO Gene Nomenclature Committee (HGNC), e-mail: [email protected] ; see also www.genenames.org .

You can get approved mouse symbols from The Jackson Laboratory, e-mail: [email protected] ; see also www.informatics.jax.org/mgihome/nomen .

For proposed gene names that are not already approved, please submit the gene symbols to the appropriate nomenclature committees as soon as possible, as these must be deposited and approved before publication of an article.

Avoid listing multiple names of genes (or proteins) separated by a slash, as in 'Oct4/Pou5f1', as this is ambiguous (it could mean a ratio, a complex, alternative names or different subunits). Use one name throughout and include the other at first mention: 'Oct4 (also known as Pou5f1)'.

Scientific Reports is committed to publishing technically sound research. Manuscripts submitted to the journal will be held to rigorous standards with respect to experimental methods and characterisation of new compounds.

You must provide adequate data to support your assignment of identity and purity for each new compound described in your manuscript. You should provide a statement confirming the source, identity and purity of known compounds that are central to the scientific study, even if they are purchased or resynthesised using published methods.

1. Chemical identity

Chemical identity for organic and organometallic compounds should be established through spectroscopic analysis. Standard peak listings (see formatting guidelines below) for 1H NMR and proton-decoupled 13C NMR should be provided for all new compounds. Other NMR data should be reported (31P NMR, 19F NMR, etc.) when appropriate. For new materials, you should also provide mass spectral data to support molecular weight identity. High-resolution mass spectral (HRMS) data is preferred. You may report UV or IR spectral data for the identification of characteristic functional groups, when appropriate. You should provide melting-point ranges for crystalline materials. You may report specific rotations for chiral compounds. You should provide references, rather than detailed procedures, for known compounds, unless their protocols represent a departure from or improvement on published methods.

2. Combinational compound libraries

When describing the preparation of combinatorial libraries, you should include standard characterisation data for a diverse panel of library components.

3. Biomolecular identity

For new biopolymeric materials (oligosaccharides, peptides, nucleic acids, etc.), direct structural analysis by NMR spectroscopic methods may not be possible. In these cases, you must provide evidence of identity based on sequence (when appropriate) and mass spectral characterisation.

4. Biological constructs

You should provide sequencing or functional data that validates the identity of their biological constructs (plasmids, fusion proteins, site-directed mutants, etc.) either in the manuscript text or the Methods section, as appropriate.

5. Sample purity

We request evidence of sample purity for each new compound. Methods for purity analysis depend on the compound class. For most organic and organometallic compounds, purity may be demonstrated by high-field 1H NMR or 13C NMR data, although elemental analysis (±0.4%) is encouraged for small molecules. You may use quantitative analytical methods including chromatographic (GC, HPLC, etc.) or electrophoretic analyses to demonstrate purity for small molecules and polymeric materials.

6. Spectral data

Please provide detailed spectral data for new compounds in list form (see below) in the Methods section. Figures containing spectra generally will not be published as a manuscript figure unless the data are directly relevant to the central conclusions of the paper. You are encouraged to include high-quality images of spectral data for key compounds in the Supplementary Information. You should list specific NMR assignments after integration values only if they were unambiguously determined by multidimensional NMR or decoupling experiments. You should provide information about how assignments were made in a general Methods section.

Example format for compound characterisation data. mp: 100-102 °C (lit. ref 99-101 °C); TLC (CHCl 3 :MeOH, 98:2 v/v): R f = 0.23; [α] D = -21.5 (0.1 M in n-hexane); 1 H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl 3 ): δ 9.30 (s, 1H), 7.55-7.41 (m, 6H), 5.61 (d, J = 5.5 Hz, 1H), 5.40 (d, J = 5.5 Hz, 1H), 4.93 (m, 1H), 4.20 (q, J = 8.5 Hz, 2H), 2.11 (s, 3H), 1.25 (t, J = 8.5 Hz, 3H); 13 C NMR (125 MHz, CDCl 3 ): δ 165.4, 165.0, 140.5, 138.7, 131.5, 129.2, 118.6, 84.2, 75.8, 66.7, 37.9, 20.1; IR (Nujol): 1765 cm- 1 ; UV/Vis: λ max 267 nm; HRMS (m/z): [M] + calcd. for C 20 H 15 C l2 NO 5 , 420.0406; found, 420.0412; analysis (calcd., found for C 20 H 15 C l2 NO 5 ): C (57.16, 57.22), H (3.60, 3.61), Cl (16.87, 16.88), N (3.33, 3.33), O (19.04, 19.09).

7. Crystallographic data for small molecules

If your manuscript is reporting new three-dimensional structures of small molecules from crystallographic analysis, you should include a .cif file and a structural figure with probability ellipsoids for publication as Supplementary Information. These must have been checked using the IUCR's CheckCIF routine, and you must include a PDF copy of the output with the submission, together with a justification for any alerts reported. You should submit crystallographic data for small molecules to the Cambridge Structural Database and the deposition number referenced appropriately in the manuscript. Full access must be provided on publication.

8. Macromolecular structural data

If your manuscript is reporting new structures, it should contain a table summarising structural and refinement statistics. Templates are available for such tables describing NMR and X-ray crystallography data. To facilitate assessment of the quality of the structural data, you should submit with the manuscript a stereo image of a portion of the electron density map (for crystallography papers) or of the superimposed lowest energy structures (≳10; for NMR papers). If the reported structure represents a novel overall fold, you should also provide a stereo image of the entire structure (as a backbone trace).

Registered Reports are original research articles which undergo peer-review prior to data collection and analyses. This format is designed to minimize publication bias and research bias in hypothesis-driven research, while also allowing the flexibility to conduct exploratory (unregistered) analyses and report serendipitous findings. If you intend to submit a Registered Report to Scientific Reports , please refer to detailed guidelines here .

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Research paper

Writing a Research Paper Introduction | Step-by-Step Guide

Published on September 24, 2022 by Jack Caulfield . Revised on September 5, 2024.

The introduction to a research paper is where you set up your topic and approach for the reader. It has several key goals:

• Present your topic and get the reader interested
• Provide background or summarize existing research
• Position your own approach
• Detail your specific research problem and problem statement
• Give an overview of the paper’s structure

The introduction looks slightly different depending on whether your paper presents the results of original empirical research or constructs an argument by engaging with a variety of sources.

The five steps in this article will help you put together an effective introduction for either type of research paper.

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

Table of contents

Step 1: introduce your topic, step 2: describe the background, step 3: establish your research problem, step 4: specify your objective(s), step 5: map out your paper, research paper introduction examples, frequently asked questions about the research paper introduction.

The first job of the introduction is to tell the reader what your topic is and why it’s interesting or important. This is generally accomplished with a strong opening hook.

The hook is a striking opening sentence that clearly conveys the relevance of your topic. Think of an interesting fact or statistic, a strong statement, a question, or a brief anecdote that will get the reader wondering about your topic.

For example, the following could be an effective hook for an argumentative paper about the environmental impact of cattle farming:

A more empirical paper investigating the relationship of Instagram use with body image issues in adolescent girls might use the following hook:

Don’t feel that your hook necessarily has to be deeply impressive or creative. Clarity and relevance are still more important than catchiness. The key thing is to guide the reader into your topic and situate your ideas.

Receive feedback on language, structure, and formatting

Professional editors proofread and edit your paper by focusing on:

• Academic style
• Vague sentences
• Style consistency

See an example

This part of the introduction differs depending on what approach your paper is taking.

In a more argumentative paper, you’ll explore some general background here. In a more empirical paper, this is the place to review previous research and establish how yours fits in.

Argumentative paper: Background information

After you’ve caught your reader’s attention, specify a bit more, providing context and narrowing down your topic.

Provide only the most relevant background information. The introduction isn’t the place to get too in-depth; if more background is essential to your paper, it can appear in the body .

Empirical paper: Describing previous research

For a paper describing original research, you’ll instead provide an overview of the most relevant research that has already been conducted. This is a sort of miniature literature review —a sketch of the current state of research into your topic, boiled down to a few sentences.

This should be informed by genuine engagement with the literature. Your search can be less extensive than in a full literature review, but a clear sense of the relevant research is crucial to inform your own work.

Begin by establishing the kinds of research that have been done, and end with limitations or gaps in the research that you intend to respond to.

The next step is to clarify how your own research fits in and what problem it addresses.

Argumentative paper: Emphasize importance

In an argumentative research paper, you can simply state the problem you intend to discuss, and what is original or important about your argument.

Empirical paper: Relate to the literature

In an empirical research paper, try to lead into the problem on the basis of your discussion of the literature. Think in terms of these questions:

• What research gap is your work intended to fill?
• What limitations in previous work does it address?
• What contribution to knowledge does it make?

You can make the connection between your problem and the existing research using phrases like the following.

Now you’ll get into the specifics of what you intend to find out or express in your research paper.

The way you frame your research objectives varies. An argumentative paper presents a thesis statement, while an empirical paper generally poses a research question (sometimes with a hypothesis as to the answer).

Argumentative paper: Thesis statement

The thesis statement expresses the position that the rest of the paper will present evidence and arguments for. It can be presented in one or two sentences, and should state your position clearly and directly, without providing specific arguments for it at this point.

Empirical paper: Research question and hypothesis

The research question is the question you want to answer in an empirical research paper.

Present your research question clearly and directly, with a minimum of discussion at this point. The rest of the paper will be taken up with discussing and investigating this question; here you just need to express it.

A research question can be framed either directly or indirectly.

• This study set out to answer the following question: What effects does daily use of Instagram have on the prevalence of body image issues among adolescent girls?
• We investigated the effects of daily Instagram use on the prevalence of body image issues among adolescent girls.

If your research involved testing hypotheses , these should be stated along with your research question. They are usually presented in the past tense, since the hypothesis will already have been tested by the time you are writing up your paper.

For example, the following hypothesis might respond to the research question above:

Scribbr Citation Checker New

The AI-powered Citation Checker helps you avoid common mistakes such as:

• Missing commas and periods
• Incorrect usage of “et al.”
• Ampersands (&) in narrative citations
• Missing reference entries

The final part of the introduction is often dedicated to a brief overview of the rest of the paper.

In a paper structured using the standard scientific “introduction, methods, results, discussion” format, this isn’t always necessary. But if your paper is structured in a less predictable way, it’s important to describe the shape of it for the reader.

If included, the overview should be concise, direct, and written in the present tense.

• This paper will first discuss several examples of survey-based research into adolescent social media use, then will go on to …
• This paper first discusses several examples of survey-based research into adolescent social media use, then goes on to …

Scribbr’s paraphrasing tool can help you rephrase sentences to give a clear overview of your arguments.

Full examples of research paper introductions are shown in the tabs below: one for an argumentative paper, the other for an empirical paper.

• Argumentative paper
• Empirical paper

Are cows responsible for climate change? A recent study (RIVM, 2019) shows that cattle farmers account for two thirds of agricultural nitrogen emissions in the Netherlands. These emissions result from nitrogen in manure, which can degrade into ammonia and enter the atmosphere. The study’s calculations show that agriculture is the main source of nitrogen pollution, accounting for 46% of the country’s total emissions. By comparison, road traffic and households are responsible for 6.1% each, the industrial sector for 1%. While efforts are being made to mitigate these emissions, policymakers are reluctant to reckon with the scale of the problem. The approach presented here is a radical one, but commensurate with the issue. This paper argues that the Dutch government must stimulate and subsidize livestock farmers, especially cattle farmers, to transition to sustainable vegetable farming. It first establishes the inadequacy of current mitigation measures, then discusses the various advantages of the results proposed, and finally addresses potential objections to the plan on economic grounds.

The rise of social media has been accompanied by a sharp increase in the prevalence of body image issues among women and girls. This correlation has received significant academic attention: Various empirical studies have been conducted into Facebook usage among adolescent girls (Tiggermann & Slater, 2013; Meier & Gray, 2014). These studies have consistently found that the visual and interactive aspects of the platform have the greatest influence on body image issues. Despite this, highly visual social media (HVSM) such as Instagram have yet to be robustly researched. This paper sets out to address this research gap. We investigated the effects of daily Instagram use on the prevalence of body image issues among adolescent girls. It was hypothesized that daily Instagram use would be associated with an increase in body image concerns and a decrease in self-esteem ratings.

The introduction of a research paper includes several key elements:

• A hook to catch the reader’s interest
• Relevant background on the topic
• Details of your research problem

and your problem statement

• A thesis statement or research question
• Sometimes an overview of the paper

Don’t feel that you have to write the introduction first. The introduction is often one of the last parts of the research paper you’ll write, along with the conclusion.

This is because it can be easier to introduce your paper once you’ve already written the body ; you may not have the clearest idea of your arguments until you’ve written them, and things can change during the writing process .

The way you present your research problem in your introduction varies depending on the nature of your research paper . A research paper that presents a sustained argument will usually encapsulate this argument in a thesis statement .

A research paper designed to present the results of empirical research tends to present a research question that it seeks to answer. It may also include a hypothesis —a prediction that will be confirmed or disproved by your research.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

Caulfield, J. (2024, September 05). Writing a Research Paper Introduction | Step-by-Step Guide. Scribbr. Retrieved September 27, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/research-paper/research-paper-introduction/

Is this article helpful?

Jack Caulfield

Other students also liked, writing strong research questions | criteria & examples, writing a research paper conclusion | step-by-step guide, research paper format | apa, mla, & chicago templates, get unlimited documents corrected.

✔ Free APA citation check included ✔ Unlimited document corrections ✔ Specialized in correcting academic texts

We Trust in Human Precision

20,000+ Professional Language Experts Ready to Help. Expertise in a variety of Niches.

API Solutions

• API Pricing
• Cost estimate
• Customer loyalty program
• Educational Discount
• Non-Profit Discount
• Green Initiative Discount1

Value-Driven Pricing

Unmatched expertise at affordable rates tailored for your needs. Our services empower you to boost your productivity.

• Special Discounts
• Enterprise transcription solutions
• Enterprise translation solutions
• Transcription/Caption API
• AI Transcription Proofreading API

Trusted by Global Leaders

GoTranscript is the chosen service for top media organizations, universities, and Fortune 50 companies.

GoTranscript

One of the Largest Online Transcription and Translation Agencies in the World. Founded in 2005.

Speaker 1: Guys, if you're going to be publishing your first research paper anytime soon, this video is going to be very important because in this video I'm going to be covering how to find a topic to research, how do you go ahead and find co-authors to basically work with so that they can research with you, they can collaborate with you, what's the difference between a review paper versus an original research paper which is typically just called research paper, how do you actually go ahead and perform the research, what's the process of it and how How do you go ahead and publish a research paper as quickly as possible in as reputable a journal as possible? Finally, we're going to discuss briefly about the difference between conference versus journal papers. By the way, guys, did you know it can take on an average from one to six months to publish a research paper? Those who know the techniques to get it quickly published can do it in one, one and a half months as well. Other people can take up to six months as well. And worst to worst case scenario, I've seen people take a year as well. In this video, I'm going to tell you how to do it quickly. A little bit about me, I have recently published 4 research papers in reputable journals. We actually did a couple more, but Google Scholar found these 4 by default. But on top of that, what I'm really proud of is that I've helped hundreds of students publish 600 plus papers till date, all in reputable journals like IEEE and Springer based journals, essentially. And this is what I'm hoping for in this video as well, that I'll be able to teach you the process. Again, if you need any help with the processing, even after watching this video, my number is in the description. can whatsapp me on it and I'll be very happy to help. Apart from that, if you like the content of this video, we make a lot of videos about studying, working, researching and doing everything abroad. So if you want to travel overseas, if you want to do some of these things, make sure to subscribe to the channel and follow me on Instagram where you can connect with me directly. We have a lot more content just like this one over there as well. Now guys, beginning with the video, the first thing we're going to talk about is how do you actually go ahead and find a topic to research on. See, basically it's not very difficult. All have to think about is what are the problems in your field of study. Now as a student or let's say as a bachelor student, high school student, master's student, sometimes it may feel difficult as to hey I haven't really studied this field as deeply that I can go ahead and find the problems in the field itself. Aren't there researchers doing this out there? Exactly, that's a typical answer, that's a typical thought process. I also had that. But trust me, there are immense topics of research and that research community needs always more and more and more people. So you don't need to worry about it. A few examples that I may be able to give you over here would be how algorithm A performs against algorithm B in case the data is skewed. So you understand how certain things perform while the background or circumstances like this. That can be a research topic. You can think about it and you can produce research on that. Another topic can be detecting suicidal users from their tweets. So you do some NLP processing and you basically detect which user is suicidal and you can even try to check the accuracy of it at the end. Then another topic let's say in biotechnology could be effects of the excessive intakes of alcohol on the human microbiome. So you know things like that how one thing affects the other how different algorithms perform these are the general topics. Now even after listening to these examples if you are not able to find it don't worry about it I have another methodology for you. Go ahead on google.com search for the research papers in your field let's say you're doing computer science search for machine learning research papers or computer science research papers or cloud computing whatever depending on your field right search for them take a look at what others are doing and then after that what you have to do is you have to think of which which topics you essentially like and which ones you can possibly enhance all right I'm gonna be going deeper don't worry but first let's talk about how do you find co-authors people to club up and research with now I understand not every single one of you may have friends who are very deeply interested in doing that, right? Some people find boring some people have no interest in it in that case You can go on to why I'm grad comm you can go on to the discussions forum and you can post over here that hey I'm interested in doing some research in so-and-so field is anyone interested and people can directly, you know For instance, maybe this person posted something. I want to chat with them or you can search for Post here right research for instance, and I'll just select search and right over here Let's say this person here says that you know, like this was three weeks ago, but this person says hey I want to do research papers in psychology If you are looking like, you know, if you're also looking for a co-author and connect with me So you can just go ahead message them right over here and you can start chatting with them It's a very easy and convenient way. The whole community is based around people who are Interested in getting more jobs getting more research work on their profile or going overseas to study. So people always interested here Otherwise, let's say that this way it does not work for you. It's too slow go ahead and search for YM grad research groups on Google and you will find this page create or join a research group you go ahead on this page and you can then see which people are already working on research papers in which fields or you can even create your own group you can find people very easily over here maybe you want to message this person you can message this person over here hey I'm interested in the same field would you like to research with me so we have a whole page dedicated to it as well now this one comes under our service so parts of it are paid as well so keep that in mind however the discussions forum is completely free. Now before I tell you how to actually perform the research I want to discuss briefly on what review papers are and what research papers are. Remember review papers only summarize the current knowledge on a topic so you know let's say let's say that effect of alcohol on the human microbiome research review papers would basically go ahead and read five six ten papers that are the state-of-the-art right now that have done the most progress in the field in this on this topic and then they would summarize everything that's a review paper you don't really need to do a lot of work over there you just go ahead read a couple of papers take content from each of these and then build up a review paper. Research papers would actually be however wherein you would be performing an experiment you would be possibly taking a survey from people or you'd be actually working with some people you'd be seeing the effect of alcohol on their body you'd be measuring from time to time you would have some measurements with you you'll be creating graphs, you'll be creating charts, you'll be showing what you have proved. That's heavy workload and that's a research paper essentially. Remember research papers will always hold a higher value than review papers. Review papers are just a summary essentially. Now how do you actually go ahead and perform this research? Let's talk about that. Like I said first you have to go ahead and select a research problem to work with. The next thing that I would always advise you to do is go ahead read the latest papers in that field, on that topic and understand what other authors have already done. Next, what you want to do is you want to experiment and find out better solutions. Now, remember, this may not be as difficult as it seems. You could potentially read two papers and you could be like, okay, this author used approach A, this author used approach B. What if I combine these approaches and maybe then, well, the result will be better, right? It could be as simple as that. That could be generally a very good research paper in a lot of cases finally what you have to do is you have to compare your solution with the other solutions out there so okay my solution against author A and author B is better because of so and so reason or it did not perform as expected because of so and so reason I'm still publishing it so that everyone knows and they don't make the same mistake as me because of so and so reason I you know messed up right over here but generally of course if you have a better solution that's well worth it people will cite your paper they'll use your solution and the final step is to publish the paper now how do you publish the paper that's what I'm getting at next. Now I'm going to be talking to you about the quickest way we have found that works very well and publishes your papers in journals if you are careful while doing it all right we're gonna go on to easychair.org slash CFP all right and then right over here you're gonna see the list of the proceedings now you can sort them by area of research by country by topics but after listing them what you want to do is you want to sort this by submission deadline see the earliest deadlines that there are all right these are the ones that are still accepting submissions all right so right now today is for instance June 6th so I will only submit two papers from here on out all right I will also go ahead take a look at these proceedings I want to make sure that these proceedings publish in reputable journals so I will always search for journal all right and if they are publishing in reputable journals only then I will proceed all right if I don't see a reputable journal then I will not proceed. I can even go on to their website and I can check more as to where they are publishing. I would recommend stick to IEEE, Springer only in most cases, Scopus index journals for the very least. Alright, remember that for some of these proceedings you may have to present the paper in a conference before it is published. That's completely fine as long as it gets published in the journal. Alright, as long as that is happening so you can always communicate with the people who are you know holding the conference holding the proceeding and then you can make sure that your paper is being published only then proceed with it I know we're not sponsored either I'm just showing you this because of my personal experience final thing guys conference versus journal papers which one to go for which one is better again I think it's pretty easy to understand right over here that journal papers are peer-reviewed whereas conference papers are generally just meant to be presented in a conference. However, journal papers will always hold a higher value. Many conferences though will not only publish the paper, many conferences though after the proceeding publish the paper in a journal. That's why I recommended Easychair as well because most of the proceedings over here do the exact same thing. Yes, you will have to present it in some cases but they will always publish it in the journal. Again, as for my recommendation, aim for high impact factor journals with a scopus index and you generally won't go wrong with that. These research papers can help you in a couple of things. These couple of things would be admissions, scholarships, jobs and even permanent residence. For instance, even the US has visas like the O-1 visa where they're looking for people who have done specialized research. And if you face any issues regarding your research and your endeavors, feel free to whatsapp me. My number is in the description. I hope that this video helps. Again, follow us for more information like this. Subscribe to the channel and I hope to see you in the next one. Goodbye and take care.