role of corresponding author in research paper

First Author vs. Corresponding Author? How to Decide Which to Choose

This article discusses the importance of authorship in academic publishing. The first author executes a large portion of the work throughout the research process and signifies the researcher has provided the greatest intellectual contribution. The corresponding author is explicitly identified on the first page of the manuscript, is selected to further manage the pre and post-publication responsibilities, and serves as the point of contact for communication with a journal during the submission, peer review, and publication process.

Updated on April 26, 2023

Every process is conducted through a series of steps. The Scientific Method, for example, provides guidelines for navigating the research process and generally includes:

• Making observations
• Identifying a problem
• Formulating a hypothesis
• Designing an experiment
• Analyzing the data
• Reporting a conclusion

While the actual procedures may vary between fields, the underlying process remains intact. The same holds true for the publication process:

• Complete your research
• Choose a journal
• Prepare the manuscript
• Submit the manuscript
• Make any revisions
• Publication

Each of these processes contains many more specific steps and processes, including assigning authorship to the research manuscript . This article outlines the importance of authorship, delineates the meanings of first author and corresponding author, and addresses some of the challenges associated with the process.

Why is authorship important?

On the surface, the positioning of a researcher’s name and title on a manuscript seems straightforward, a simple task. Most lay people use the list of names solely for searching and citation purposes.

In reality, though, the order of those names tells a complex story of authorship. It is, in fact, the primary way for a researcher to convey the extent of their contribution to the reader.

To attain authorship on a manuscript, a researcher must not only contribute substantially to the work but also take responsibility and accountability for the information it contains. The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) recommends authorship be based on 4 specific criteria related to these broad principles.

With authorship comes both recognition and obligation that have important academic, social, and financial implications. The two most prominent authorship positions are first author and corresponding author .

What is the first author?

The first author position is a coveted spot. No matter how many other authors’ names appear on the manuscript or which referencing style is used, the first author’s last name will be mentioned in every future citation of the work.

For this reason alone, the name of the first author is remembered, indexed, and promoted more than any other. It is not just a status symbol, though. The first author executes a large portion or majority of the work throughout the research process.

First author credit signifies the researcher has provided the greatest intellectual contribution, and, therefore, comes with substantial benefits. The manuscripts of first authors hold substantial value for grant and position applications, staff appraisals and reviews, and many other forms of career development.

First author duties

The designation as first author is not based on academic or professional hierarchy, the prestige, or expertise of the author. It’s based on the inputs and outputs of work. First authors must:

• Make significant, original, and insightful intellectual contributions
• Participate in the conception and planning of the study
• Generate data through performing experiments, conducting literature reviews, and organizing surveys and interviews
• Analyze the results through statistical analysis and by generating graphs, tables, and illustrations
• Write and edit the manuscript
• Help with queries and revisions after submission

The researcher fulfilling all these duties is rightfully the first author.

What is the corresponding author?

Like the first author designation, the title of corresponding author also comes with considerable prestige. The corresponding author is explicitly identified on the first page of the manuscript. In addition to meeting all the preexisting authorship requirements, this person is selected to further manage the pre and post-publication responsibilities.

The corresponding author is customarily a senior researcher or academic with extensive publishing knowledge and experience. As the primary source of communication for both the publisher and the readers, the corresponding author’s contact information is included within the article.

The corresponding author must have exceptional communication skills. The role assumes primary responsibility for connecting with target journals. They must be organized and meticulous with the substantial volume of tasks associated with the position.

Corresponding author duties

Neither electing a corresponding author nor accepting the position should be taken lightly as it is an essential and long lasting obligation. The duties span from prior to publication to well afterwards and include:

While all corresponding authors serve as the point of contact for communication with a journal during the submission, peer review, and publication process, some journals outline additional conditions for the role. The National Academy of Sciences offers a table that compiles the corresponding author requirements for various journals.

What if there are authorship disputes or changes?

While openly discussing and defining a research team’s roles during the initial planning phase is vital for curbing authorship disputes, combining this practice with other forward-thinking acts is key. Responsibilities and work status must be addressed during regularly scheduled meetings and special meetings need to be called when a team member is added or ends involvement in the project.

How to avoid authorship disputes

To avoid disputes, teams start by mapping out the most obvious roles, author and non-author contributor, and by rejecting any proposed “non-role.” The input of non-author contributors is narrow in scope, providing technical, administrative or writing assistance, and does not fulfill the previously outlined authorship criteria.

A non-role is any inappropriate or irrelevant participant who will harm the research process, such as unethical types of authors . This category encompasses guest authors, forged authors, ghost authors, and orphan authors and must be avoided at all costs.

Many journals require a document be included with the submission package to delineate author contributions to explain and justify author order. By creating this list as a living document from the outset, a research team fulfills the prerequisite for the publisher and guarantees transparency and fairness throughout.

Because changing authorship after publication is messy, necessitating specific documentation, signatures, and approval, it is frowned upon by journal editors. While taking proactive steps to avoid disputes that may result in this situation saves the research team time and hassle, it does not always alleviate future changes.

The addition, removal, or reordering of authors on a manuscript while actively going through the publication process requires a letter signed by all original and additional authors stating the reason for the change and their mutual agreement. For changes made after publication, an authorship corrigendum must be submitted by all authors per COPE guidelines .

Final thoughts

Getting to the manuscript writing and publication stages of a research project are exciting milestones for everyone involved. Ideally, authorship roles are clearly defined and assigned at this point.

Though the first author and corresponding author positions are sometimes performed by the same person, the obligations of each are unique. The first author undertakes the bulk of work duties and makes a significant intellectual contribution to the research project. The corresponding author carries out the communication and administrative tasks necessary for publishing the manuscript.

Both roles are vital to the research and publication processes. They require intense labor and responsibility. With this comes great recognition and prestige for first authors and corresponding authors.

Charla Viera, MS

See our "Privacy Policy"

• Publication Recognition

What is a Corresponding Author?

• 3 minute read
• 421.3K views

Table of Contents

Are you familiar with the terms “corresponding author” and “first author,” but you don’t know what they really mean? This is a common doubt, especially at the beginning of a researcher’s career, but easy to explain: fundamentally, a corresponding author takes the lead in the manuscript submission for publication process, whereas the first author is actually the one who did the research and wrote the manuscript.

The order of the authors can be arranged in whatever order suits the research group best, but submissions must be made by the corresponding author. It can also be the case that you don’t belong in a research group, and you want to publish your own paper independently, so you will probably be the corresponding author and first author at the same time.

Corresponding author meaning:

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. Normally, he or she also ensures that all the journal’s administrative requirements, such as providing details of authorship, ethics committee approval, clinical trial registration documentation, and gathering conflict of interest forms and statements, are properly completed, although these duties may be delegated to one or more co-authors.

Generally, corresponding authors are senior researchers or group leaders with some – or a lot of experience – in the submission and publishing process of scientific research. They are someone who has not only contributed to the paper significantly but also has the ability to ensure that it goes through the publication process smoothly and successfully.

What is a corresponding author supposed to do?

A corresponding author is responsible for several critical aspects at each stage of a study’s dissemination – before and after publication.

If you are a corresponding author for the first time, take a look at these 6 simple tips that will help you succeed in this important task:

• Ensure that major deadlines are met
• Prepare a submission-ready manuscript
• Put together a submission package
• Get all author details correct
• Ensure ethical practices are followed
• Take the lead on open access

In short, the corresponding author is the one responsible for bringing research (and researchers) to the eyes of the public. To be successful, and because the researchers’ reputation is also at stake, corresponding authors always need to remember that a fine quality text is the first step to impress a team of peers or even a more refined audience. Elsevier’s team of language and translation professionals is always ready to perform text editing services that will provide the best possible material to go forward with a submission or/and a publication process confidently.

Who is the first author of a scientific paper?

The first author is usually the person who made the most significant intellectual contribution to the work. That includes designing the study, acquiring and analyzing data from experiments and writing the actual manuscript. As a first author, you will have to impress a vast group of players in the submission and publication processes. But, first of all, if you are in a research group, you will have to catch the corresponding author’s eye. The best way to give your work the attention it deserves, and the confidence you expect from your corresponding author, is to deliver a flawless manuscript, both in terms of scientific accuracy and grammar.

If you are not sure about the written quality of your manuscript, and you feel your career might depend on it, take full advantage of Elsevier’s professional text editing services. They can make a real difference in your work’s acceptance at each stage, before it comes out to the public.

Language Editing Services by Elsevier Author Services:

Through our Language Editing Services , we correct proofreading errors, and check for grammar and syntax to make sure your paper sounds natural and professional. We also make sure that editors and reviewers can understand the science behind your manuscript.

With more than a hundred years of experience in publishing, Elsevier is trusted by millions of authors around the world.

Check our video Elsevier Author Services – Language Editing to learn more about Author Services.

Find more about What is a corresponding author on Pinterest:

• Research Process

What is Journal Impact Factor?

What is a Good H-index?

You may also like.

How to Make a PowerPoint Presentation of Your Research Paper

How to Submit a Paper for Publication in a Journal

Input your search keywords and press Enter.

The Role of the Corresponding Author in Academic Publishing

Unlock the secrets of the corresponding author! Learn what it takes to be a successful corresponding author and how to use it.

Academic publishing is a complex process that includes paper submission, peer review , and publication. The involvement of the corresponding author is an important part of this process. On behalf of the research team, the corresponding author communicates with journal editors, reviewers, and co-authors. This person is frequently the primary point of contact for any manuscript-related queries or updates.

Given the significance of the corresponding author’s role, it is critical that those who take on this responsibility understand what is expected of them. The purpose of this article is to give a comprehensive assessment of the role of the corresponding author in academic publications. 

Definition Of A Corresponding Author

The primary point of communication between the research team and the journal editors, reviewers, and readers is the corresponding author. The individual in question is often the main or senior author of a research publication and is in charge of handling manuscript communication. 

The corresponding author is responsible for providing every necessary document and material to the journal editors, adhering to all ethical and legal guidelines, and ensuring that all co-authors are informed of the manuscript’s status and any updates that may emerge. 

The name and contact details of the corresponding author are often given in the published article, allowing readers to direct any queries or inquiries to them.

Responsibilities Of A Corresponding Author

The corresponding author’s responsibilities in academic publishing are important and need close attention to detail. Some of the primary responsibilities of a corresponding author are as follows:

Manuscript Submission

Typically, the corresponding author is in charge of submitting the paper to the journal. For example, if this is the first time the paper has been submitted to a journal, the corresponding author may need to acquaint themselves with the publication’s submission procedures and prepare the manuscript properly. This may entail examining the journal’s publication guidelines, preparing the paper to a certain standard, and submitting any supplementary documents required by the journal.

Communication With Journal Editors

The corresponding author is in charge of engaging with journal editors on the research team’s behalf. For example, if the journal’s editors have queries about the paper or need extra material, the corresponding author may need to communicate with the other co-authors to provide a response. They may also be required to organize revisions or to supply extra information or data to support the publication.

Managing The Communication With Co-Authors

The corresponding author is responsible for interacting with the manuscript’s co-authors to ensure that everyone is up to date on the manuscript’s development and any updates that may occur. 

For example, if the article is revised numerous times, the corresponding author may need to organize feedback and ensure that everyone is aware of the changes. They may also be required to provide updates on the development of the work, such as when it has been submitted or accepted for publication.

Ensuring Ethical And Legal Guidelines

The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that the work complies with the publication process’s ethical and legal guidelines. Obtaining agreement from research participants, ensuring that the paper complies with ethical standards, and reporting any possible conflicts of interest are all examples of this.

For example, if the paper incorporates human subjects research, the corresponding author may be required to secure relevant permission forms and verify that the study follows ethical standards established by regulating organizations such as the Institutional Review Board (IRB).

Providing Contact Information

The name and contact details of the corresponding author are often given in the published article. For instance, if readers have any queries or concerns regarding the text, they can contact the author for clarification or more information.

Benefits Of Being A Corresponding Author

Being a corresponding author of a research publication can provide an academic researcher with many benefits, including:

• Visibility and recognition: As the corresponding author, the researcher’s name and contact information are typically included in the published article, providing them with increased visibility and recognition in their field.
• Leadership and responsibility: The corresponding author is often the lead or senior author of the research article, providing them with the chance to exhibit authority and take responsibility for the study’s publishing process.
• Networking opportunities: Communication with journal editors, reviewers, and readers can give networking opportunities and assist researchers in establishing contacts within their area.
• Improved writing and communication skills: Coordinating communication between co-authors, journal editors, and reviewers can help researchers develop their writing and communication skills.
• More control over the publication process: The corresponding author is in charge of managing the publication process and ensuring that the paper follows ethical and legal guidelines. This gives researchers more control over the publication process and helps guarantee that the work is published on time and in an ethical way.
• Potential for career advancement: Being published as the corresponding author of a research publication may be a beneficial addition to a researcher’s résumé and may help them acquire funding or advance their academic career.

In conclusion, being a corresponding author of a research publication may give an academic researcher many benefits, which might help them develop in their professional careers.

Tips For Becoming A Successful Corresponding Author

A successful corresponding author must pay close attention to detail, have great communication skills, and adhere to ethical and legal requirements. Here are some tips to help researchers succeed as corresponding authors:

• Acquaint yourself with the publishing process: Before submitting a manuscript, it is crucial to understand the journal’s submission requirements, formatting guidelines, and ethical guidelines. This can aid in the manuscript’s acceptance and publication in a timely and ethical manner.
• Coordinate communication among co-authors: Organizing the communication between co-authors is an important aspect of the publication process. Corresponding authors should communicate with their co-authors on a regular basis, offering updates on the manuscript’s development, and asking for feedback and input as needed.
• Develop strong writing skills: Corresponding authors should be able to clearly communicate their research findings to a wide range of audiences. This can assist in guaranteeing that the content is well-written and reader-friendly.
• Be responsive to journal editors and reviewers: Corresponding authors ought to respond to journal editors and reviewers in a timely and professional manner, addressing any issues or queries. This can assist in ensuring that the work gets evaluated and published as soon as feasible.
• Be organized and detail-oriented: Corresponding authors should be organized and detail-oriented, keeping track of deadlines, submission requirements, and other key publication-related elements. This can assist in ensuring that the paper is submitted on time and in the proper format.
• Seek feedback and support from colleagues and mentors: Throughout the publication process, corresponding authors should seek feedback and support from colleagues and mentors. This can assist in guaranteeing that the content is of good quality and fulfills the field’s requirements.

Mind The Graph Has 300+ Pre-Made Beautiful Templates For Professional Infographics

Mind the Graph contains over 300 pre-made templates developed exclusively for scientific communication. These templates cover a variety of themes and may be personalized with various colors, fonts, and graphics. The platform has an easy-to-use interface that allows scientists to easily build their own customized visuals and infographics.

Subscribe to our newsletter

Exclusive high quality content about effective visual communication in science.

About Jessica Abbadia

Jessica Abbadia is a lawyer that has been working in Digital Marketing since 2020, improving organic performance for apps and websites in various regions through ASO and SEO. Currently developing scientific and intellectual knowledge for the community's benefit. Jessica is an animal rights activist who enjoys reading and drinking strong coffee.

Content tags

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

How to Decide the First Author and Corresponding Author in a Manuscript

When a scholarly/academic paper is produced, the researchers participating in the work must assign a first author and corresponding author. This is a challenging decision and sometimes there’s conflict because the positions can also indicate status (whether real or perceived).

The first author and corresponding author, ideally, are decided during the research and through a mutual agreement among the authors. It’s made based on an understanding of the role and significance of the positions. The author order generally indicates the amount of contribution.

The first author is considered to have contributed more than the second author, and so forth, until reaching the author in the last position. A shared first author (co-first author) or shared corresponding author (co-corresponding author), however, isn’t out of the question.

The last position may also be prestigious – considered the senior author or principal investigator. One of the authors in the list will also be the corresponding author. This means they coordinate the publication process (such as arranging editing and communicating with the journal and with other inquiries) and have their contact information shown upfront in the work.

• What you’ll learn in this post
• The differences between first author and corresponding author (and what’s a senior author?).
• How first author and corresponding author are defined.
• How to fairly determine which author(s) will fulfill which role(s).
• When and why the same person might fulfill both roles.

Determining the author order

What defines the first author, some of the main duties of a first author are:, what defines a corresponding author, some of the corresponding author’s main duties are:, and who is the senior author, a few words on guarantors, can the first and the corresponding authors be the same person, how do you decide who does what role what are the potential ethical issues.

The order of authors should reasonably correspond to how the authors contributed to the work. It also implies specific credit and responsibilities that go with being in these positions. Working it out over a cup of tea or coffee as soon as possible can help to avoid disputes, and even mediation , later on.

The issue of determining a senior author is also a bit challenging. You need to understand these roles and responsibilities. Don’t just think about who gets the most credit.

Publishing in a scientific journal or any peer-reviewed publication, including preprints and poster presentations , makes research visible to the greater public. It brings discoveries and insights into the eyes of the main experts around the world. This, in turn, builds the author’s reputation as a researcher.

Having a good list of published papers can also help achieve some career goals, such as getting a degree, a promotion or, as a scientist, getting funding to continue with research. The number of first-author papers may also be looked upon as a positive metric.

An “author” (having authorship) of a paper must meet certain criteria for their contributions. The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICJME) guidelines state authorship must at least include:

• made substantial contributions to work
• approved the final version
• assumed responsibility and accountability for what is published

However, while the minimum requirements for authorship are generally agreed upon, the credit/responsibility given to a specific author list isn’t so clear. The position on the list can determine the author’s expected duties and show the readers how the author contributed to the work.

So let’s take a deeper look at the definitions of these positions. Hopefully, this will help in your decision-making process. It may in fact affect your future career and status.

Effective English Writing

Get insights from a real journal editor!

This quick handy PDF highlights what to do (and what NOT to do) when writing your research manuscript.

Our experts show you how to write effectively for better readability and faster publication!

Free PDF e-book

The first author is usually the person who makes the greatest practical/intellectual contributions to the work.

This person might have co-authors’ assistance with specific tasks, but they are the main responsible one for acquiring and analyzing the data, and for writing the final manuscript.

The first position in the authorship list of a paper is the most attractive one. First authors will have their (last) name mentioned in every future citation of the work, no matter how many other authors there are.

There can also be co-first authors. This is common in projects that require different areas of expertise. It’s also used where it’s hard to figure out who made a larger contribution. Two or even three authors can be listed as equal contributors.

The co-first authors are denoted by an asterisk or other symbol (for example, “ Author A*, Author B*, Author C, Author D.. ”) and a note on the first page.

But even then, the person listed first will continue to be the most visible. This is because of how citations are created. To give equal credit to both first authors, an alternative is to cite the paper as “ Author A & Author B et al .”., instead of “ Author A et al. ”

• Make intellectual contributions to the work. Participate in the conception and planning of the study; define aims and trace a methodological approach to achieve them.
• Generate the data. For instance, perform experiments, conduct literature reviews, write programming code, etc.
• Analyze the results. Generate graphs , tables , and illustrations to convey the data, and perform statistical analyses when needed.
• Write and edit the manuscript.
• Help the corresponding author with referees’ queries when the paper is under revision.

The corresponding author is responsible for bringing together the manuscript, and for the whole process of submitting it to a journal, up to (hopefully!) final acceptance. Of course, the corresponding author also must meet the academic authorship requirements.

The ICJME defines a corresponding author as someone who takes primary responsibility for communication with the journal during the manuscript submission, peer review, and publication process.

In that sense, the corresponding author is also responsible for ensuring that all the journal’s administrative requirements are fulfilled. This can include providing documents related to ethics committee approval, data and signatures from all authors, and conflict of interest (COI) statements.

In line with this, the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) says the corresponding author should be someone willing to fulfill all obligations the journal stipulates ( COPE Discussion Document , 2014).

The corresponding author’s contact details are included in the article. This makes them the representative for inquiries about the work. A good corresponding author must therefore be readily available. All communications with journals or readers should be done in a timely way.

English ability is also a big help if you’re the corresponding author and you want to publish in English. You’re usually the person whom I , as the editor, will be communicating with when you choose an editing service.

• Certify the manuscript contains all the necessary parts, it is appropriately organized, and it complies with the journal’s requirements. Upload the manuscript and other files.
• Make sure all authors have reviewed and approved the final version of the manuscript before submission. Get signed consent.
• Be in charge of all communications related to the paper. Distribute notifications to all authors (e.g., emails, peer review feedback , decision letters).
• Meet all deadlines,­ communicate with the authors and editors efficiently, and follow time schedules for publication.
• Ensure all editorial and submission policies are followed.

Note: Although there’s common sense on the main roles of a corresponding author, some of the responsibilities involved can change from one journal to another (e.g., see this list , created by the National Academy of Sciences, with different journals and their respective requirements).

The senior author is the person who provides the intellectual input and helps to design the study and the protocols to be followed. This is especially because they’re experts in that field of research.

They are also sometimes the financial driving force behind the study and generally supervise several projects. For these reasons, they are also known as the “ principal investigator .” They usually have broad experience in publishing processes, and their names appear in the last positions of the author list.

Honestly, the senior author is often the lab leader or simply the person in charge. For the work they’ve put into this to date, they earned this honor.

Some journals now ask for one author on a paper to be listed as a guarantor. The guarantor:

• accepts official responsibility for the overall integrity of the manuscript (including ethics, data handling, reporting of results, and study conduct)
• does not act as the primary correspondent for the manuscript
• ensures all statements in the manuscript are true to his knowledge

The guarantor can be the same as the corresponding author, or can be another of the authors.

It’s often recommended that the Principal Investigator or Senior Researcher on a manuscript act as the guarantor as they will be responsible for the study supervision already; however, this is not explicitly required.

Yes, first authors can also be corresponding authors in a manuscript. In fact, it’s quite common.

The main conflict here is when authors equate being a corresponding author with seniority. Senior authors are often viewed as the perfect corresponding authors because of all the qualities they have, as mentioned.

However, as discussed, a corresponding author is charged with communicating with editors and readers only. Journal editors usually see this as an administrative role. Therefore, the corresponding author doesn’t necessarily have to be the seniormost author.

While there’s a special responsibility involved in this role, it’s not supposed to be a mark of distinction. Also, most senior authors will probably have less available time to reply to queries during the submission review process. And they may not have time to respond to reader queries in the future.

So, first authors should be expected to serve as corresponding authors. This is the case as long as they’re consistently involved in the study and know-how to go through the submission/publication process.

This includes deciding on the need for scientific editing if the English needs improving. The role can also help them gain experience in corresponding with journals and general readers.

Even when the first and corresponding authors aren’t the same person some of their duties can be shared.

While a corresponding author can help the first author, or main author, with data analysis, for example, the first author can help the corresponding author prepare the documents for submission.

The same applies to other authors. Deciding who does what role should be clearly discussed and defined beforehand. Ideally, researchers involved in the study should have regular meetings to clarify responsibilities and update the status of the work. New co-authors may be included and other members may end their involvement along the way. Doing this planning may help prevent conflicts regarding academic authorship and help manage any disputes (Albert & Wager, 2009).

There are many possible reasons for conflict (you can find many examples of real cases on COPE’s website ). Disputes around first authorship are more common because this is the most prestigious position and an important measure of productivity. This happens, for example, when two authors both claim they contributed the most. This issue can be solved by proposing co-first authorship, or by using a system to quantify their contributions and then decide who should go first.

There can also be disagreements when the senior author wants to be the first author, or main author. For example, they may need more or higher-impact publications as the first author. Or they wrote the manuscript and believe this entitles them to be the first author.

Disputes on who will be the corresponding author are less likely. That’s because the role, as mentioned, doesn’t have any special distinction other than a visible name and contact. However, some senior authors may still want this role and occasionally there’s some conflict.

Ideally, the corresponding author should be decided among the others. It’s also possible to share the position, have shared corresponding authors; e.g. both the first and senior authors are co-corresponding authors. This may actually work out well if one is available and the other isn’t.

Every participant should feel free to seek clarity throughout the collaboration. Consider having a written document ( see this example PDF file on APA) in place as guidance ( COPE Discussion Document , 2014; Guidelines on Authorship and Acknowledgement , n.d.).

Before publication, authors should reunite to check the previous responsibilities list and create a final version of the documents. This includes detailed information on the type and extent of the contribution of each person involved. For categories of contributions, see the Contributor Roles Taxonomy [CRediT] website (McNutt et al., 2018). To quantify contributions, different proposed systems can be found in the literature (APA, for example, proposed a scorecard – see their Helpful Tools files).

As several journals now request and publish information about each author’s contributions, such documents can be essential. This can help in creating standards that will improve transparency in the system of scientific publishing. That, in turn, greatly reduces ethical concerns and authorship disputes.

Our Publication Support team is ready to hear from you if you want to accelerate your path to publication. And explore valuable research services that can help increase your impact and avoid ethical mishaps.

This is a guest post from Adam Goulston, PsyD, MBA, MS, MISD, ELS. Adam runs the Asia-based science marketing and PR company Scize . He has worked as an in-house Senior Language Editor, as well as a manuscript editor, with Edanz.

Albert, T., & Wager, E. (2009). How to handle authorship disputes: A guide for new researchers. Committee on Publication Ethics. https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2018.1.1

COPE Discussion Document: Authorship. (2014). Committee on Publication Ethics. https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.3.3

Guidelines on Authorship and Acknowledgement. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://research.fas.harvard.edu/links/guidelines-authorship-and-acknowledgement

McNutt, M. K., Bradford, M., Drazen, J. M., Hanson, B., Howard, B., Jamieson, K. H., Kiermer, V., Marcus, E., Pope, B. K., Schekman, R., Swaminathan, S., Stang, P. J., & Verma, I. M. (2018). Transparency in authors’ contributions and responsibilities to promote integrity in scientific publication. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(11), 2557-2560. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1715374115

• Researcher Services
• English Editing
• EXCITED by the SCIENCE
• Smart Tools
• Journal Selector
• About Edanz
• Privacy Policy
• Terms & Conditions
• Services & Pricing
• 特定商取引法に基づく表記

Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website: https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings .

Login Alert

• < Back to search results
• Corresponding Author
• All services
• Open access policies
• Publishing partners
• Researchers
• Publishing ethics
• Annotation for Transparent Inquiry (ATI)
• Annotating research
• Data availability statements
• Data citation
• Where to share your data
• Journal Production FAQs
• Author Affiliations
• Co-reviewing policy
• Publishing Open Access
• Preparing and submitting your paper
• Publishing an accepted paper
• Signing journal author agreements during the Covid-19 lockdown period
• Promoting your published paper
• Measuring impact
• Journals artwork guide
• Using ORCID
• Open access waivers and discounts
• Read and publish agreements
• User Guides
• Frequently Asked Questions
• Language services
• Social sharing

Corresponding Author Definition

When submitting your paper, you will be asked to assign a Corresponding Author. The Corresponding Author is the person who handles the manuscript and correspondence during the publication process, including approving the article proofs. We ask that the corresponding author confirm that they have the authority to act on behalf of all co-authors in all matters pertaining to publication of the manuscript including supplementary material. The Corresponding Author is responsible for obtaining such agreements and for informing the co-authors of the manuscript’s status throughout the submission, review, and publication process. In addition, the Corresponding Author also acts as the point of contact for any enquiries (including those relating to the integrity of the work) after the paper is published.

The Corresponding Author’s specific responsibilities include:

• Manuscript correction and proofreading. Handling the revisions and re-submission of revised manuscripts up to the acceptance of the manuscripts;
• Agreeing to and signing the Author Publishing Agreement on behalf of relevant coauthors and/or arranging for any third-party copyright owners’ signature;
• Arranging for payment of an APC (article processing charge) where one is required or requesting a discretionary waiver if necessary. The affiliation(s) of the corresponding author may be used to determine eligibility for discounted or waived APCs under transformative agreements and author equity initiatives;
• Acting on behalf of all co-authors in responding to queries from all sources post-publication, including questions relating to publishing ethics, reuse of content, or the availability of data, materials, resources etc.

Can the corresponding author change once assigned? Please ensure the corresponding author is correct at submission. Any change in authorship (including order and designations such as corresponding author) requires the written agreement of all manuscript authors, and may be subject to review in line with the relevant COPE guidelines ( click here for more information ). After an article has published online, any authorship changes will be accompanied by a relevant notice (correction, retraction, expression of concern).

Do all journals use corresponding authors? Not all disciplines have a tradition of using corresponding authors, particularly disciplines where there are only one or two authors. However, the affiliation of a corresponding author is generally used to determine eligibility for open access article fee funding under transformative agreements by both publishers and institutions, so we require a corresponding author to be declared for all articles.

Do I have to check with my institution before declaring who corresponding author is? The corresponding author should be the person who is most appropriate to fulfil the responsibilities outlined above. We are aware, however, that this might not always be the most advantageous choice in terms of benefiting from transformative agreement funding . For this reason, and for best practice around authorship generally, we recommend article authorship, affiliation information and designation of the corresponding author is discussed and agreed as early as possible in the research process to minimise the risk of misunderstandings and disputes.

How does the designated corresponding author affect Open Access Agreement eligibility?

Eligibility to publish under a transformative open access agreement is based on the corresponding author’s institution – which is provided at manuscript submission – as well as the article type, and is subject to the institution’s confirmation of eligibility.

Note that the date of manuscript acceptance must be during the term date of the transformative agreement in order for the manuscript to be eligible to publish under the agreement.

Any article affiliations should represent the institution(s) at which the research presented was conducted and/or supported and/or approved. For non-research content, any affiliations should represent the institution(s) with which each author is currently affiliated. 

Further help

If you have any questions relating to open access agreements with your institution (Transformation Agreements), please visit our information page or contact [email protected] . To find out if you're eligible for an Open Access waiver or discount, please use our  checker tool .

If you have questions about authorship or corrections policies, please read our publishing ethics policy or contact [email protected]

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
• Published: 03 September 2021

What makes an author

Nature Methods volume  18 ,  page 983 ( 2021 ) Cite this article

9461 Accesses

43 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Research management

Constructing a fair and accurate author list can be one of the most fraught aspects of manuscript publication. We provide some advice and resources for authors at all career levels.

The acknowledgement of scientific contributions in the form of manuscript authorship is vital at all stages of a researcher’s career, from the well-established principal investigator applying for million-dollar grants to the undergraduate student applying to PhD programs. It’s essential that authorship lists are constructed with utmost care.

The variety of authorship practices across the scientific literature, however, is vast. Different fields, different countries, even different labs have different norms. Some practices are troubling: lab technicians not included for their major contributions to a study because they are not on an academic track; contributors removed from author lists due to personal disputes; researchers who have not substantially contributed added to papers (in a misguided attempt to increase ‘impact’) without their consent; senior scientists taking advantage of power imbalance to undeservedly gain publications.

Even researchers with the best intentions can struggle with finalizing a fair and accurate author list. Here, we provide some best practice guidelines and explain how Nature Methods handles authorship issues.

First of all, community guidelines for authorship are available. Nature Portfolio’s authorship policies are based on guidelines developed by McNutt et al. ( Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 115 , 2557–2560, 2018). Other guidelines in common use include those from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors . As defined by Nature Portfolio, an author listed on a paper should have made a substantial contribution to the design of the work, the collection or analysis of data, the creation of a software tool, or the writing of the paper. This policy is meant to be broad and flexible, leaving “substantial contribution” up for quite a bit of room for interpretation.

In our view, job title or rank should never exclude a potential author. The lab technician or core facility scientist who developed a custom experimental workflow for the study should be included as an author. The first-year rotation student who spent several weeks collecting data should be included as an author. The software engineer who made substantial developments to an existing algorithm to analyze the data should be included as an author.

That said, not just any kind of assistance justifies authorship. People who provided routine services or basic technical help, contributed resources (such as by giving plasmids), proofread the manuscript, or gave general advice but did not otherwise significantly contribute to the scientific content of the paper should be thanked in the Acknowledgements. If previously published datasets or software tools are utilized in a new study without further development from their generators, there is no need to name them as authors. Even the person who secured funding need not necessarily be an author on a paper—they too ought to have scientifically contributed in a meaningful way. This is almost unheard of in lab-based science, where a principal investigator typically supervises the design of experiments and analysis of the resulting data, but it’s relatively common practice in, for example, computer science for grad students to publish sole-author papers.

Though different research fields have different traditions, the custom in life sciences research is to name the person or people who did the bulk of the research first, followed by other contributors in descending order of the significance of their contributions, with the principal investigator(s) named at the very end of the list. Disputes often arise over who is named first on a paper. Most journals allow co-first-authorship designations to recognize cases of equal contribution, but one name must necessarily come first; the research community should take care to recognize these equal contributions. Those listed second should not feel that their contributions are minimized in any way.

Project managers should make defining authorship and authorship order a priority of a new study. Students and postdocs, collaborators, and service providers should speak up if authorship is not discussed early on. Setting clear parameters and communicating openly from the outset of a research study—in some cases even by signing formal authorship agreements—can go a long way toward preventing disputes and hurt feelings down the line.

All authors on a paper have a responsibility for at least part of its content. Nature Portfolio journals require author contribution statements, which in our view are crucial to clarify each author’s role and responsibilities, to assign credit where it is due, to discourage the practice of including authors who did not significantly contribute to the study, and to assign accountability in (rare) cases of misconduct. The corresponding author, the main point of contact with a journal, has extra responsibilities. They are tasked with communicating with all coauthors at the submission, revision and final acceptance stages, including ensuring that all are satisfied with the manuscript text and content. The corresponding author must also check that all coauthors agree with changes to the author list, that any competing interests are declared, and that the paper complies with all of the journal’s policies regarding data, materials and code sharing. Note that the journal corresponding author need not be the same person as the corresponding author(s) listed on the published paper, who take responsibility for post-publication inquiries.

We encourage our authors to speak up to let us know when best practices for authorship are not being followed. However, our editorial power is limited to delaying review or publication until disputes can be resolved, making corrections to papers, adding an ‘editorial expression of concern’ or, in very rare cases, retracting a paper. We rely on authors to behave responsibly and we cannot investigate or adjudicate authorship disputes. We advise those embroiled in disputes to seek help from their department head, university or other employer. We also recommend speaking to an experienced neutral party familiar with the study for advice—it’s human nature to often overestimate our own contributions, but it’s right to speak up about unfair treatment.

Unfortunately, we do not have the space to cover all possible authorship scenarios in this short piece. We look forward to answering your questions and perhaps sparking some lively discussion on Twitter, where you can follow us at @naturemethods .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

What makes an author. Nat Methods 18 , 983 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41592-021-01271-8

Download citation

Published : 03 September 2021

Issue Date : September 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41592-021-01271-8

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

Quick links

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

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

• - Google Chrome

Intended for healthcare professionals

• My email alerts
• BMA member login
• Username * Password * Forgot your log in details? Need to activate BMA Member Log In Log in via OpenAthens Log in via your institution

Search form

• Advanced search
• Search responses
• Search blogs

About The BMJ

• Resources for authors
• Forms, policies, and ethics
• Authorship & contributorship

The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals ( ICMJE Recommendations 2018 ) recommend that authorship be based on the following four 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 revising 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 he or she has 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.

We include only one corresponding author per article. Any further contribution details (eg, equal contribution) must be included in the contributors or acknowledgement sections at the end of the article.

The BMJ requires that all those designated as authors should meet all four ICMJE criteria for authorship, and all who meet the four criteria should be identified as authors. We recognise only natural persons over 18 years of age as authors. 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. The corresponding author takes primary responsibility for communication with the journal during the manuscript submission, peer review, and publication process, and typically ensures that all the journal’s administrative requirements, such as providing details of authorship, ethics committee approval, clinical trial registration documentation, and gathering conflict of interest forms and statements, are properly completed, although these duties may be delegated to one or more coauthors.

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 conflict-of-interest disclosure forms.

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.

At The BMJ we want authors to assure us that all authors included on a paper fulfil the criteria of authorship. In addition we want assurance that there is no one else who fulfils the criteria but has not been included as an author.

When we encounter disagreements among authors we follow guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)—see here and here .

AI technologies will not be accepted as an author(s) of any content submitted to BMJ for publication. BMJ only recognises humans as being capable of authorship since they must be accountable for the work.

Contributorship

The BMJ lists contributors in two ways. Firstly, we publish a list of authors' names at the beginning of the paper and, secondly, we list contributors (some of whom may not be included as authors) at the end of the paper, giving details of who did what in planning, conducting, and reporting the work. This is a good place to include contributions by patients or members of the public who have assisted as research volunteers, giving their names and specific roles. We encourage authors to fully acknowledge the contribution of patients and the public to their research where appropriate.

One or more of these contributors are listed as guarantors of the paper. The guarantor accepts full responsibility for the work and/or the conduct of the study, had access to the data, and controlled the decision to publish. See Maintaining the integrity of the scientific record.

Contributorship and guarantorship are concepts that were applied first to original research papers, and are sometimes hard to define for other articles. Each contributorship statement should make clear who has contributed what to the planning, conduct, and reporting of the work described in the article, and should identify one, or occasionally more, contributor(s) as being responsible for the overall content as guarantor(s). For articles in The BMJ that do not report original research - such as editorials, clinical reviews, and education and debate - please state who had the idea for the article, who performed the literature search, who wrote the article, and who is the guarantor (the contributor who accepts full responsibility for the finished article, had access to any data, and controlled the decision to publish). For non-research articles that include case reports such as lessons of the week, drug points, and interactive case reports, please also state who identified and/or managed the case(s).

Researchers must determine among themselves the precise nature of each person's contribution, and we encourage open discussion among all participants. See Authorship is dying; long live contributorship.

Alteration to authorship or contributorship

Any change in authors and/or contributors after initial submission must be approved by all authors. This applies to additions, deletions, change of order to the authors, or contributions being attributed differently. Any alterations must be explained to the editor. The editor may contact any of the authors and/or contributors to ascertain whether they have agreed to any alteration.

Group authorship

If there is a very large number of authors we may ask for confirmation that everyone listed met the ICMJE criteria for authorship. If they did, we may then require that the authors form a group whose name will appear in the article byline.

We appreciate that authors may be concerned that their work will not be properly recognised if they form a group, but this is unfounded. Medline guidance can handle group authorship and still give each individual due credit:

"When a group name for a specific consortium, committee, study group, or the like appears in an article byline, the personal names of the members of that group may be published in the article text. Such names are entered as collaborator names for the Medline citation."

Key points:

• A Medline citation may contain an array of personal author names, group (or corporate) author names, and collaborator names. • Personal author names are included in Medline when the author names appear in the article byline, or are explicitly identified anywhere else in the text of the article as the authors or as the members of the writing group or writing committee for the article. • Group author names (also known as corporate, organization or collective names) are included in Medline when such names appear in the article byline. • When a group name for a specific consortium, committee, study group, or the like appears in an article byline, the personal names of the members of that group may be published in the article text. Such names are entered as collaborator names for the Medline citation. • Collaborator names are entered for a Medline citation only when a group (corporate) author name is present for the citation. • More than one group name may appear for a citation, and a group name may appear along with personal author names. • For articles that represent a formal guideline or practice guideline, the name of the guideline-issuing body is entered as a group name for the Medline citation, even if that name does not appear in the article byline.

What this means for The BMJ 's authors

a) if authors form a group for the article's main byline they will also be listed individually:

• As collaborators in the article's Medline/PubMed record; • As authors in a group authorship statement at the end of the article on thebmj.com; and • As contributors in the contributorship statement at the end of the article on thebmj.com.

b) however, for The BMJ 's research articles with many authors, where those authors do not opt to form a group, we will not be able to publish a BMJ pico in the print issue of The BMJ . Such research articles will be for online only (thebmj.com) publication only.

Here's a research article in The BMJ with group authorship as it appeared on Medline, with all collaborators clearly listed as individuals:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20123835

And here's how the individual authors for that article were listed on thebmj.com:

1. What appeared at the top of the article and was dowloadable to citation manager:

Effect of a collector bag for measurement of postpartum blood loss after vaginal delivery: cluster randomised trial in 13 European countries. Wei-Hong Zhang, Catherine Deneux-Tharaux, Peter Brocklehurst, Edmund Juszczak, Matthew Joslin, Sophie Alexander, on behalf of the EUPHRATES Group. BMJ 2010;340:c293, doi: 10.1136/bmj.c293 (Published 1 February 2010)

2. What appeared at the end of the article in an authorship statement:

The following are members of EUPHRATES (EUropean Project on obstetric Haemorrhage, Reduction, Attitudes, Trial and Early warning System): Sophie Alexander (project leader, Belgium), Diogo Ayres-de-Campos (Portugal), Istvan Berbik (Hungary), Marie-Hélène Bouvier-Colle (France), Gérard Bréart (France), Peter Brocklehurst (UK), Vicenç Cararach (Spain), Anna Maria Marconi (Italy), Catherine Deneux-Tharaux (France), Risto Erkkola (Finland), Mathias Klein (Austria), Jens Langhoff-Roos (Denmark), Alison Macfarlane (UK), Walter Prendiville (Republic of Ireland), Jos van Roosmalen (Netherlands), Babill Stray-Pedersen (Norway), Carolyn Troeger (Switzerland), Clare Winter (UK), and Wei-Hong Zhang (Belgium). Also see web extra for a list of people who helped in each country.

3. What appeared at the end of the article in the contributorship statement:

Contributors: W-HZ designed data collection tools, monitored data collection for the whole trial, wrote the statistical analysis plan, cleaned and analysed the data, and drafted and revised the paper. She is guarantor. CD-T implemented the trial in France, analysed the data, and drafted and revised the paper. PB analysed the data and drafted and revised the paper. EJ wrote the statistical analysis plan, monitored data collection for the whole trial, and revised the draft paper. MJ designed data collection tools,, monitored data collection for the whole trial, and revised the draft paper. SA initiated the collaborative project, designed data collection tools, implemented the trial for the all countries, monitored data collection for the whole trial, analysed the data, and drafted and revised the paper. All members of EUPHRATES designed the trial. Diogo Ayres-de-Campos, Istvan Berbik, Marie-Hélène Bouvier-Colle, Vicenç Cararach, Risto Erkkola, Mathias Klein, Walter Prendiville, Jos van Roosmalen, Babill Stray-Pedersen, and Carolyn Troeger implemented the trial in, respectively, Portugal, Hungary, France, Spain, Finland, Austria, Republic of Ireland, Netherlands, Norway, and Switzerland, and revised the draft paper. Gérard Bréart analysed the data and revised the draft paper. Alison Macfarlane and Clare Winter revised the draft paper.

• Publishing model
• Editorial staff
• Advisory panels
• Explore The BMJ
• BMJ Student
• How green is The BMJ?
• Sources of revenue
• Article types and preparation
• Article submission
• Competing interest policy
• Copyright, open access, and permission to reuse
• Patient consent and confidentiality
• Research Ethics
• BMJ papers audit
• Guidance for new authors
• BMJ Christmas issue
• Resources for advertisers and sponsors
• Resources for BMA members
• Resources for media
• Resources for subscribers
• Resources for readers
• Resources for reviewers
• About The BMJ app
• Poll archive
• International jobs

This week's poll

Read related article

See previous polls

Research Voyage

Research Tips and Infromation

08 Things One Must Know About Corresponding Author in a Research Paper

In the world of academia and scientific research, the publication of research papers holds immense value, serving as a gateway to disseminating knowledge, sharing discoveries, and advancing the collective understanding of various disciplines. Behind each scholarly article lies a team of dedicated researchers, and among them stands a pivotal figure known as the “Corresponding Author.” This individual shoulders a crucial responsibility, acting as the primary point of contact between the research team and the journal or conference where the paper is submitted.

In this blog post, we shall explore the multifaceted role of the corresponding author in a research paper, unravelling the significance of this position and shedding light on its various dimensions. From understanding the core responsibilities that come with this designation to addressing common questions and misconceptions, we will embark on a journey to grasp the intricacies of the corresponding author’s role in the publication process.

Introduction

Importance of designating a corresponding author in multi-author papers:, can there be more than one corresponding author in a research paper, coordinating co-authors and obtaining their approval:, handling post-publication inquiries and comments:, mediating conflicts and disputes, if any:, dealing with consent and copyright matters:, possible reasons for wanting to change the corresponding author:, challenges and considerations in making such a change:, discussing the impact of such changes on the published paper and its authors:, corresponding author:, main author:, contributions of both roles in a research paper:, whether the corresponding author is typically the first author:, pros of designating multiple corresponding authors:, cons of designating multiple corresponding authors:, contributing author:, roles of various authors in a research paper:, considerations and potential benefits of having a student as the corresponding author:.

In the vast realm of academia and scientific exploration, research papers stand as the lifeblood of knowledge dissemination and progress. These scholarly articles are the vehicles through which researchers share their groundbreaking findings, innovative ideas, and rigorous investigations with the global scientific community. As such, research papers play a pivotal role in shaping the landscape of various disciplines, paving the way for advancements and breakthroughs that fuel intellectual growth and societal development.

Within this landscape of collaborative research efforts, a key figure emerges – the “Corresponding Author.” This individual holds a position of utmost importance, acting as the linchpin that connects the research team to the larger scientific world. The corresponding author assumes a multifaceted role, with responsibilities that extend far beyond simply contributing to the research itself.

In essence, the corresponding author can be likened to the ambassador of a research paper. When a study reaches its conclusion and the team is ready to share their discoveries with the world, the corresponding author steps forward to represent the collective effort and findings of the research team. They play a critical role in orchestrating the journey of the paper, from its inception to its final destination in reputable journals or conference proceedings.

The corresponding author is typically the point of contact for the editorial boards of journals or conference organizers. They serve as the conduit through which communication flows during the submission and review process, liaising with reviewers, responding to queries, and ensuring that the manuscript adheres to the journal’s guidelines and standards.

Consider a team of researchers who have collaborated on a groundbreaking study that could potentially revolutionize a field of science. They have meticulously conducted experiments, analyzed data, and composed a comprehensive research paper detailing their findings and conclusions. Now comes the critical moment of publication.

In this scenario, the corresponding author would be the one responsible for compiling and submitting the manuscript to relevant scientific journals. They would carefully craft the cover letter, detailing the significance of their research and explaining why it merits publication in that particular journal. Additionally, the corresponding author would coordinate with co-authors to finalize the manuscript and ensure that everyone approves of the submission.

As the submission process progresses, the journal’s editorial team may reach out to the corresponding author with questions, suggestions, or revision requests. The corresponding author would diligently address these inquiries, collaborating with co-authors to make necessary adjustments. In some cases, they might need to obtain additional data or clarifications from specific team members.

After a successful peer review, the corresponding author would be the point of contact for the journal’s editorial team when addressing reviewer comments and providing the revised version of the manuscript. Finally, when the paper is accepted for publication, the corresponding author would work with the journal to finalize the paper and ensure all copyright and publication requirements are met.

In this way, the corresponding author becomes the guardian of the research, safeguarding its integrity and ensuring that it navigates the publication process smoothly to reach its intended audience – fellow researchers, scholars, and enthusiasts alike. Their tireless efforts and dedication play a pivotal role in the dissemination of knowledge and the advancement of human understanding across the scientific landscape.

1. Who is a Corresponding Author in a Research Paper?

In the realm of academic publishing, a corresponding author is a pivotal role assigned to one of the co-authors of a research paper. This individual is entrusted with representing the research team and serving as the main point of contact during the submission, peer review, and publication process. The corresponding author acts as a bridge between the research team and the journal or conference where the paper is being submitted.

Research papers are often the culmination of collaborative efforts involving multiple researchers, each contributing their expertise to the study. In such cases, designating a corresponding author becomes essential to streamline communication and ensure efficient handling of the publication process. Without a corresponding author, coordinating and managing the submission and review process could become cumbersome, leading to potential delays and miscommunications.

Let’s consider a scenario where a team of researchers from different universities collaborates on a cutting-edge study in the field of medical research. This study involves several aspects, such as experimental design, data collection, statistical analysis, and manuscript writing. Each team member contributes significantly to the research and the eventual paper.

To avoid confusion and facilitate smooth communication with the journal, the research team designates one of the co-authors as the corresponding author. This individual, often chosen based on their expertise in the subject matter or their familiarity with the publication process, takes the lead in handling manuscript submission, responding to reviewer comments, and communicating with the editorial team.

Traditionally, research papers had only one corresponding author, primarily to streamline communication and avoid ambiguity during the publication process. However, in recent years, the practice of designating multiple corresponding authors has gained some acceptance in the scientific community.

In cases of large multi-institutional studies or research projects involving numerous collaborators, the research team might decide to have more than one corresponding author. This approach can be useful in distributing responsibilities, especially when the workload is substantial or when multiple aspects of the research require specific expertise.

For instance, in a research project involving both medical researchers and statisticians, the medical researchers may designate one corresponding author from their team, while the statisticians may designate another corresponding author from their team. This way, both groups can efficiently manage the submission and review process for their respective contributions to the paper.

However, it is essential to note that the practice of having multiple corresponding authors is not universally accepted, and some journals might not permit it. Therefore, researchers should carefully review the submission guidelines of the target journal to ensure compliance with their policies.

In summary, the corresponding author plays a crucial role in managing the publication process of a research paper. By designating a responsible and knowledgeable individual, research teams can navigate the complexities of academic publishing more effectively, ensuring that their findings reach the scientific community and contribute to the advancement of knowledge.

2. Responsibilities of the Corresponding Author

The corresponding author shoulders the responsibility of preparing and submitting the research paper to the chosen journal or conference. This involves carefully adhering to the submission guidelines and ensuring that all required documents, such as cover letters, author disclosures, and supplementary materials, are provided. The corresponding author acts as the liaison between the research team and the journal’s editorial board during the submission process. They handle all communications, responding to queries from the journal and providing any additional information requested.

Imagine a team of environmental scientists conducting a comprehensive study on the impact of climate change on a particular ecosystem. Once their research is complete, the corresponding author prepares the manuscript according to the formatting guidelines specified by a respected environmental science journal. They ensure that all co-authors have reviewed and approved the final version of the paper before submission. The corresponding author then submits the manuscript through the journal’s online submission portal and promptly responds to any follow-up questions or requests for revisions from the journal’s editors.

In multi-author papers, the corresponding author is responsible for maintaining communication among all co-authors throughout the publication process. They coordinate efforts to finalize the manuscript, making sure all co-authors agree with the content, data, and conclusions presented in the paper. The corresponding author seeks input from co-authors on the responses to reviewer comments, addressing any concerns raised during the peer-review process.

A team of researchers collaborates on a groundbreaking study in the field of artificial intelligence, aiming to develop an innovative algorithm for speech recognition. As the corresponding author, one of the researchers takes charge of integrating feedback from all co-authors, including computer scientists, linguists, and machine learning experts. They ensure that the manuscript reflects a cohesive representation of the team’s work and that everyone is satisfied with the final version before submitting it for publication.

Once the paper is published, the corresponding author continues to play a significant role in addressing inquiries and comments from readers and fellow researchers. They respond to emails or messages requesting additional information, clarifications, or opportunities for collaboration. They also take the lead in addressing any errors or corrections that may arise post-publication.

After the publication of the AI speech recognition research paper, interested researchers and technology enthusiasts reach out to the corresponding author with questions about the methodology used in the study. The corresponding author promptly replies to each inquiry, providing detailed explanations and sharing additional insights. They may also collaborate with co-authors to prepare responses to inquiries that require expertise in specific areas.

In collaborative research endeavours, disagreements or conflicts may occasionally arise among co-authors regarding authorship attribution, data interpretation, or the direction of the research. The corresponding author plays a critical role in resolving such conflicts by facilitating open communication, listening to all perspectives, and striving to find a fair and ethical resolution.

In a collaborative study involving researchers from different cultural backgrounds, differing interpretations of certain data points lead to a dispute among co-authors. As the corresponding author, one of the researchers takes the initiative to schedule a virtual meeting where all co-authors can discuss their viewpoints and concerns openly. Through respectful dialogue and a focus on finding common ground, the corresponding author helps the team reach a consensus on how to address the disputed data in the final manuscript.

The corresponding author ensures that all necessary permissions and consents have been obtained before submitting the paper for publication. This includes obtaining consent from all co-authors, as well as any necessary permissions to use copyrighted material, such as figures or tables, in the manuscript. The corresponding author may also be responsible for handling copyright transfer agreements with the journal or conference organizers.

A team of medical researchers conducts a study involving patient data and images. The corresponding author ensures that all co-authors have reviewed and provided consent for the use of patient data in the paper. Additionally, they obtain permission from the hospital or institution to use the images and comply with the journal’s requirements for handling sensitive patient information. The corresponding author also signs the copyright transfer agreement on behalf of all co-authors, granting the journal the right to publish and distribute the research.

In conclusion, the responsibilities of the corresponding author extend far beyond the preparation of the manuscript. This key figure plays a vital role in facilitating effective communication, ensuring collaboration among co-authors, addressing inquiries from the scientific community, and upholding ethical standards in the publication process. By managing these responsibilities with diligence and integrity, the corresponding author contributes significantly to the successful publication and dissemination of valuable research findings.

I have written articles where the corresponding author plays a key role between the co-authors and journals. Please visit the articles listed below for further details.

• “ 5 Proven Steps to Change Author Email Id in a Published Research Paper”
• “ How to Change Author Name on a Previously Published Research Paper? “
• “ 4 Easy Steps to Withdraw Author Name from a Research Paper “
• “Can I Change My Research Paper Title Before or After Publication in a Research Journal?”

3. Can I Change the Corresponding Author in an Already Published Paper?

Changing the corresponding author in an already published paper is a rare occurrence and typically takes place under exceptional circumstances. While journals generally discourage such changes, some situations may arise where it becomes necessary or unavoidable. One such scenario could be when the originally designated corresponding author is no longer affiliated with the institution or unavailable due to unforeseen circumstances, such as personal reasons, health issues, or career changes.

Several reasons may prompt the need for changing the corresponding author in an already published paper:

• Affiliation Change: If the original corresponding author changes institutions or affiliations, they may no longer have access to the resources or institutional support required to handle post-publication inquiries and administrative responsibilities effectively.
• Unavailability: In some cases, the originally designated corresponding author might become unavailable or unreachable, making it challenging to address post-publication inquiries or fulfill the responsibilities associated with the role.
• Career Progression: The corresponding author might be a graduate student or postdoctoral researcher at the time of publication, and their career might have progressed significantly since then. As they transition to new roles or institutions, they may find it more appropriate to transfer the corresponding authorship to a co-author who can better handle the ongoing responsibilities.
• Personal Reasons: Personal circumstances, such as health issues or family emergencies, may arise, preventing the original corresponding author from continuing their role in managing post-publication matters.

Changing the corresponding author in an already published paper presents several challenges and considerations:

• Journal Policies: Journals typically have specific policies regarding authorship changes post-publication. Some journals may permit changes only under exceptional circumstances, while others may not allow any modifications to the published authorship.
• Consent from Co-Authors: Before making any changes, the consent of all co-authors is vital. The decision to change the corresponding author should be reached through mutual agreement and understanding among all co-authors.
• Maintaining the Paper’s Integrity: Changing the corresponding author should not alter the integrity of the published paper. The research findings, data, and conclusions should remain unchanged.
• Publication Ethics: Any changes must adhere to publication ethics guidelines. Ethical considerations include ensuring that authorship is not manipulated to gain unwarranted credit or minimize accountability.

Changing the corresponding author can have implications on the published paper and its authors:

• Responsibility Transfer: The newly appointed corresponding author assumes responsibility for managing post-publication inquiries, corrections, and updates.
• Credibility and Recognition: Changing the corresponding author does not alter the contributions of the other co-authors. Each author’s contributions and affiliations remain the same.
• Acknowledging the Change: Journals may publish a formal correction notice to acknowledge the change in the corresponding authorship.
• Visibility and Communication: After the change, the newly designated corresponding author becomes the primary point of contact for future communications related to the paper.
• Authorship Order: Changing the corresponding author does not impact the order of authors listed in the published paper. The authorship order should remain consistent with the original publication.

It is crucial to note that changing the corresponding author should be approached with caution and undertaken only when genuinely necessary. Researchers considering such changes should carefully review the policies of the relevant journal, seek input and consent from all co-authors, and ensure that ethical and publication standards are upheld to maintain the integrity of the published work.

4. Corresponding Author vs. Main Author

In a research paper, the corresponding author and the main author are distinct roles, each with specific responsibilities in the publication process.

• The corresponding author serves as the primary point of contact between the research team and the journal or conference where the paper is submitted.
• They handle all communication with the editorial board, reviewers, and readers, and are responsible for managing the submission and review process.
• The corresponding author’s name and contact details are usually provided in the published paper to facilitate post-publication communication.
• The main author, also known as the first author or lead author, is the individual who has made the most significant contribution to the research and writing of the paper.
• They are typically the researcher who conducted the majority of the experiments, gathered and analyzed the data, and played a central role in writing the manuscript.
• The main author’s name appears first in the list of authors and is often considered the primary contributor to the study.

In a multi-author research paper, each author contributes to the study in various ways, and the corresponding author and the main author play critical but distinct roles:

Consider a research paper that presents the findings of a collaborative study on a new potential treatment for a specific medical condition:

• Main Author: Dr. Emily Thompson, a medical researcher with extensive experience in clinical trials and patient care, takes the lead in this study. She designs the clinical trial, collects and analyzes the patient data, and prepares the initial draft of the manuscript.
• Corresponding Author: Prof. Michael Johnson, the senior researcher overseeing the project, is designated as the corresponding author. He provides guidance and expertise throughout the research process, assists in manuscript preparation, and ensures that all co-authors have reviewed and approved the final version before submission.

In this example, Dr. Emily Thompson’s contributions as the main author are indispensable. Her expertise in clinical trials and patient care is instrumental in the successful execution of the study. She is responsible for the bulk of the research work, making her the primary contributor to the study’s scientific content.

On the other hand, Prof. Michael Johnson’s role as the corresponding author is equally vital. He takes charge of the manuscript’s submission to a reputable medical journal, communicates with the journal’s editorial board, and ensures that all necessary documents are in order. His experience as a seasoned researcher and his network of contacts facilitate a smooth publication process, ultimately allowing the research findings to reach a wider audience.

It is essential to recognize that both the main author and the corresponding author make crucial contributions to the research paper. While the main author’s expertise drives the scientific content, the corresponding author’s organizational skills and communication play a pivotal role in getting the research recognized and published. The collaboration between these roles ensures that valuable research findings can be effectively shared with the scientific community and beyond, contributing to the advancement of knowledge and potential benefits to society.

5. Is the Corresponding Author Always the First Author?

Authorship order in a research paper carries essential information about the relative contributions of the authors to the study. The order of authors serves as a way to acknowledge and attribute their roles in the research process. While the exact conventions for authorship order can vary between disciplines and research groups, certain common principles are often followed:

• First Author: The first author is typically the individual who has made the most substantial contribution to the research project. They are often the one who conducted the majority of the experiments, performed data analysis, and played a primary role in writing the manuscript. In many fields, being the first author is considered prestigious, as it signifies the lead role in the study.
• Last Author: The last author is usually the senior researcher or principal investigator (PI) who oversaw and supervised the entire project. They provide guidance, mentorship, funding, and overall direction to the research. In many cases, the last author is the corresponding author, but this is not always the case.
• Middle Authors: Authors listed between the first and last authors are considered co-authors and have contributed significantly to the research. The order of middle authors might reflect the level of their contributions, but it can also be alphabetical or based on other conventions established within the research group or field.

The corresponding author is not necessarily the first author, although it is a common convention in many research papers. The corresponding author is designated to handle the communication and administrative responsibilities related to the publication process, but this role is distinct from the first author, who is responsible for the primary research and writing efforts.

Let’s consider a study in the field of astronomy, where a team of researchers collaborates on a significant discovery of a new celestial phenomenon:

• First Author: Dr. Sarah Adams, an astrophysicist with expertise in data analysis and simulations, leads the research efforts. She processes and analyzes the astronomical data, develops the simulation models, and is the main contributor to the manuscript writing.
• Last Author and Corresponding Author: Prof. John Smith, the head of the astronomy department and the PI of the project, serves as the last author and corresponding author. He provided funding, guidance, and overall direction for the study. As the corresponding author, he handles manuscript submission, communication with the journal, and coordination with co-authors.
• Middle Authors: The list of middle authors includes other researchers who made significant contributions to the data collection, data analysis, and validation of the findings. The order of these middle authors might reflect their contributions or follow conventions established within the research group.

In this example, Dr. Sarah Adams is the first author due to her significant contributions to the research, leading the data analysis and simulations. On the other hand, Prof. John Smith, as the corresponding author, handles the administrative aspects and communication with the journal. Despite being the corresponding author, Prof. Smith’s role as the last author signifies his seniority and overall guidance in the research project.

Overall, the corresponding author and the first author have distinct roles in a research paper. While the first author is recognized for their primary contributions to the research, the corresponding author takes charge of managing the publication process and acting as the point of contact with the journal. The collaboration between these roles ensures that both the scientific content and the administrative aspects of the research are handled effectively, leading to a successful publication and dissemination of valuable research findings.

6. Co-Corresponding Authors

Can There Be Co-Corresponding Authors in a Research Paper?

There can be co-corresponding authors in a research paper. Co-corresponding authorship is a practice where two or more authors share the responsibilities of the corresponding author. It is becoming increasingly common in collaborative research projects, especially those involving large research teams or multi-institutional studies.

• Shared Responsibilities: Having co-corresponding authors allows for the distribution of administrative responsibilities. Each co-corresponding author can handle specific aspects of the publication process, making it more manageable, particularly for complex or extensive studies.
• Expertise and Representation: Co-corresponding authors may represent different areas of expertise within the research team. For example, one co-corresponding author may have expertise in the experimental aspects of the study, while another may specialize in data analysis or clinical applications. This ensures that the expertise of all relevant team members is adequately represented during the publication process.
• Efficient Communication: With multiple corresponding authors, there is a higher likelihood of prompt responses to journal queries or reviewer comments, as the workload is shared among the co-corresponding authors. This can lead to quicker turnaround times during the peer-review process.
• Inclusivity and Collaboration: Designating multiple corresponding authors fosters a sense of collaboration and inclusivity within the research team. All co-corresponding authors are recognized for their contributions and dedication to the project.
• Potential for Miscommunication: Coordinating between multiple corresponding authors may lead to miscommunication if roles and responsibilities are not clearly defined. It is essential to establish effective communication channels and clarify each co-corresponding author’s tasks.
• Journal Policies and Recognition: Some journals might not permit co-corresponding authors, or they may have specific guidelines regarding this practice. Additionally, listing multiple corresponding authors may affect the visibility and recognition of individual contributions by readers or indexing databases.
• Decision-Making Challenges: Disagreements or differences in opinion among co-corresponding authors may arise, particularly when making critical decisions during the publication process. Resolving such conflicts requires open and respectful communication.

A research team comprised of scientists from different countries collaborates on a groundbreaking study in the field of renewable energy. This comprehensive study involves extensive experimental work, data analysis, and theoretical modelling. Given the scale of the research and the diverse expertise of the team members, the team decides to have two co-corresponding authors to manage the publication process effectively.

• Co-Corresponding Author 1: Dr. Mia Johnson, an expert in experimental physics, oversees the laboratory work and data collection for the study. She is responsible for preparing the manuscript and coordinating with the journal during the submission and peer-review process.
• Co-Corresponding Author 2: Dr. Raj Patel, a computational scientist specializing in numerical simulations, takes charge of data analysis and theoretical modelling for the research. He collaborates with Dr. Johnson in manuscript preparation and handles communication with the journal during revisions and responses to reviewer comments.

In this example, both Dr. Mia Johnson and Dr. Raj Patel share the responsibilities of the corresponding author. Dr. Johnson primarily focuses on the experimental aspects, while Dr. Patel contributes with his expertise in data analysis and simulations. This co-corresponding authorship ensures that both experimental and theoretical aspects of the research are adequately represented, facilitating a smooth and comprehensive publication process.

In conclusion, co-corresponding authors can be designated in research papers to share administrative responsibilities, represent diverse areas of expertise, and promote collaboration within the research team. While there are potential challenges, clarifying roles and maintaining effective communication can make co-corresponding authorship a successful approach in managing the publication process for complex and collaborative research endeavours.

7. Contributing Author vs. Corresponding Author

In a research paper, various authors play distinct roles based on their contributions to the study and their responsibilities in the publication process:

• A contributing author is any individual who has made a meaningful and significant contribution to the research project.
• Their contributions may include data collection, experimentation, data analysis, writing specific sections of the manuscript, providing critical feedback, or offering substantial intellectual input to the study.
• Contributing authors are listed in the byline of the paper, reflecting their involvement in the research and their academic contributions to the study.
• They share ownership of the research findings and are accountable for the accuracy and integrity of the reported work.
• The corresponding author serves as the main point of contact between the research team and the journal or conference where the paper is submitted.
• They are responsible for manuscript submission, communication with the journal’s editorial board and reviewers, and handling post-publication inquiries and comments.
• The corresponding author is designated to manage the administrative aspects of the publication process but may or may not have been the primary contributor to the research itself.
• Their contact information is usually provided in the published paper, allowing readers and other researchers to reach out for additional information or collaborations.

The roles of various authors in a research paper can vary based on their contributions and the nature of the research project:

Let’s consider a study conducted on the biodiversity of a tropical rainforest:

• Contributing Author 1: Dr. Lisa Adams, a botanist, spends months in the rainforest collecting plant specimens and conducting field surveys. Her expertise in identifying plant species is instrumental in determining the botanical diversity of the area. Dr. Adams also contributes significantly to writing the section of the manuscript related to plant diversity and assists in data analysis.
• Contributing Author 2: Dr. Mark Johnson, an entomologist, specializes in insect taxonomy and ecology. He conducts extensive surveys of insects in the rainforest, identifying new species and documenting their ecological roles. Dr. Johnson writes the section of the manuscript focusing on insect diversity and contributes to the discussion of ecological interactions among species.
• Contributing Author 3: Dr. Sophia Chen, a statistical analyst, is responsible for analyzing the large dataset generated by Dr. Adams and Dr. Johnson. She uses advanced statistical methods to determine patterns of biodiversity and provides valuable insights into the ecological relationships among various organisms.
• Corresponding Author: Prof. Michael Lee, the senior researcher overseeing the project, takes on the role of the corresponding author. He guides the research team throughout the study, securing funding, providing overall direction, and facilitating collaboration among the contributing authors. Prof. Lee oversees the manuscript preparation, communicates with the journal, and ensures that all co-authors have reviewed and approved the final version before submission.

In this example, Dr. Lisa Adams, Dr. Mark Johnson, and Dr. Sophia Chen are contributing authors because they have each made significant and distinct contributions to the research project. They represent different areas of expertise (botany, entomology, and statistics) and have actively participated in data collection, analysis, and manuscript writing.

On the other hand, Prof. Michael Lee, as the corresponding author, manages the publication process and communication with the journal. While he may have contributed intellectually to the study, his primary role lies in facilitating and coordinating the collaborative research effort.

8. Can a Student Be a Corresponding Author?

A student can be a corresponding author in a research paper. There are no strict rules prohibiting students from assuming the corresponding author role. The designation of the corresponding author is typically based on the individual’s ability to fulfill the responsibilities associated with the position, regardless of their academic status.

• Significant Contributions: If a student has played a leading role in conceptualizing and conducting the research, as well as in writing the manuscript, they may be an appropriate choice for the corresponding author. Their contributions and dedication to the project justify their eligibility for this responsibility.
• Learning Opportunity: Assuming the corresponding author role offers students valuable experience in managing the publication process and interacting with journals and reviewers. It provides them with insights into the world of academic publishing and enhances their research and communication skills.
• Recognition and Visibility: Being listed as the corresponding author in a published paper can enhance the student’s visibility within the scientific community. It can also be a positive addition to their academic and professional profile, especially if the research is well-regarded in the field.
• Supervisory Support: Students who take on the corresponding author role often work closely with their supervisors and mentors. This collaboration can provide guidance and support to ensure that the publication process proceeds smoothly.

Let’s consider a scenario where a graduate student, Emily, conducts a research study on the impact of climate change on marine ecosystems. Emily’s project involves extensive fieldwork, data analysis, and developing a comprehensive research manuscript. She dedicates significant effort and time to the study, making substantial contributions to the research project.

Given Emily’s dedication and primary role in the research, her supervisor and co-authors acknowledge her as the corresponding author. Emily takes charge of manuscript preparation, communicating with co-authors, and submitting the research paper to a reputable marine science journal.

Despite being a student, Emily is well-qualified for the corresponding author role due to her contributions and her ability to handle the publication process effectively. The journal recognizes her as the corresponding author, and the research is successfully published.

In this example, Emily’s eligibility as a corresponding author is based on her dedication, contributions, and mentorship and support provided by her supervisor and co-authors. Assuming this responsibility offers Emily a valuable learning opportunity and enhances her reputation as a budding researcher in marine science.

In conclusion, students can indeed be corresponding authors in research papers, provided they have made significant contributions to the study and are capable of managing the publication process. The eligibility for the corresponding author role is not restricted by academic status, but rather by the individual’s ability to fulfil the responsibilities associated with this significant position in the publication process.

Behind each publication lies a dedicated team of authors, each with distinct roles and responsibilities that collectively contribute to the success of the research endeavour. Understanding the significance of various authorship roles is crucial for fostering collaboration, recognizing contributions, and upholding ethical practices in the publication process.

The corresponding author serves as the linchpin that binds the research team with the scientific community. With adept organizational skills and effective communication, they navigate the intricate landscape of manuscript submission, peer review, and post-publication interactions. While often responsible for coordinating the publication process, the corresponding author need not always be the first author or the primary contributor to the research. Their expertise lies in ensuring the paper’s journey from conception to publication is a smooth and fruitful one.

Upcoming Events

• Visit the Upcoming International Conferences at Exotic Travel Destinations with Travel Plan
• Visit for  Research Internships Worldwide

Recent Posts

• Top Mistakes to Avoid When Writing a Research Paper
• Average Stipend for Research/Academic Internships
• These Institutes Offer Remote Research/Academic Internships
• How to Include Your Journal in the UGC-CARE List? A Guide for Publishers
• Understanding UGC CARE Journals: A Comprehensive Guide
• All Blog Posts
• Research Career
• Research Conference
• Research Internship
• Research Journal
• Research Tools
• Uncategorized
• Research Conferences
• Research Journals
• Research Grants
• Internships
• Research Internships
• Email Templates
• Conferences
• Blog Partners
• Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2024 Research Voyage

Design by ThemesDNA.com

Corresponding Authors: Past and Present How Has the Role of Corresponding Author Changed Since the Early 2000s? [ICSR Perspectives]

2 Pages Posted: 8 Mar 2022 Last revised: 26 Aug 2022 Publication Status: Under Review

Alvin Shijie Ding

Elsevier - International Center for the Study of Research

Rachel Herbert

International Center for the Study of Research

With over 1.7 million researchers active in the role of Corresponding Author between 2020 and 2021, the role of Corresponding Author, and the research community’s understanding of it, remains critical to research evaluation. In this short infographic, we analyzed Corresponding Authors who were linked to journal articles indexed in Scopus over a 20 year period. We explored which authors are assigned the role and found that the proportion of women in the role is lower than men, but is rising, and that there is a small but growing trend for authors to have more than one Corresponding Author. As well as exploring when researchers first take on the role in their career, we demonstrate that the role is not a reliable signal of seniority – as it is sometimes assumed to be.

Keywords: Corresponding author, Research trends, Research careers, Bibliometrics, Scopus

Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation

Alvin Shijie Ding (Contact Author)

Elsevier - international center for the study of research ( email ).

Langford Lane Kidlington, OX5 1GB

International Center for the Study of Research ( email )

HOME PAGE: http://https://www.elsevier.com/icsr

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics, related ejournals, information systems: behavioral & social methods ejournal.

Subscribe to this fee journal for more curated articles on this topic

International Center for the Study of Research Paper Series

Subscribe to this free journal for more curated articles on this topic

Defining authorship in your research paper

Co-authors, corresponding authors, and affiliations, quick links, 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.

Educational resources and simple solutions for your research journey

Mastering the Pre-Submission Process: A Guide for Corresponding Authors

Many researchers, especially students and early career researchers, dream about being listed as the corresponding author on a research paper. Yet budding academics competing for authorship don’t always know who is a corresponding author in research papers. Corresponding authors play a crucial role in research, and this responsibility is not one to be taken lightly. In this article, we delve into the role of corresponding authors in research papers and share valuable advice and pre-submission tips to help you play this role effectively.

Table of Contents

Importance of the Corresponding Author

The role of the corresponding author in research papers is significant for several reasons. For one, you are accountable for the research project and must lead the publication process while ensuring integrity of the research. The corresponding author’s importance is visible in the communication and collaboration required between the authors and with the journal editors and reviewers to streamline the publication process. These critical responsibilities also mean that the corresponding author is research papers is often listed prominently in published work, which increases their visibility within the scientific community, leading to a stronger professional reputation and advanced career growth.

Responsibilities and role of the corresponding author

The corresponding author in research papers is the individual who takes primary responsibility for communicating with the journal and handling the submission and publication process. Often also the lead author with significant contributions to the study, a corresponding author must shoulder many important responsibilities.

Manuscript preparation: As the corresponding author in research papers, you are responsible for coordinating and organizing the manuscript. This includes ensuring that all co-authors have provided their inputs, addressing conflicts of interest, and adhering to the journal’s formatting and submission guidelines.

Correspondence with the journal: Corresponding authors in research papers are the main point of contact for the journal during the pre-submission phase. This involves drafting effective cover letters, responding to queries from the journal’s editorial team, and ensuring all required documents, such as author disclosures and ethical approval, are provided.

Coordinating the peer review: The corresponding author in research papers typically oversees the peer review process. This includes suggesting appropriate reviewers, managing revisions, and addressing reviewer comments and suggestions in collaboration with the co-authors.

Ensuring ethical compliance: It is crucial for the corresponding author to ensure the research study complies with ethical guidelines and follows the principles of responsible conduct in research. This includes obtaining informed consent, protecting participant confidentiality, and providing necessary permissions for the use of copyrighted materials.

Meeting all key deadlines: As a corresponding author in research papers, you have to make sure that all important deadlines are met, especially in terms of getting drafts from different co-authors in a collaborative research effort. Even if one co-author delays submitting drafts it can have a cascading effect on other aspects and derail the whole publication exercise.

Pre-Submission Tips for Corresponding Authors

Being chosen to be the corresponding author in research papers can be both extremely exciting and overwhelming. Here are a few pointers to help you master the pre-submission process.

Plan and manage the research project: To avoid any delays and to ensure the manuscript writing and submission process is on track, corresponding authors in research papers are advised to first create a master list of to-do items, with subtasks, people responsible, and timelines, and get it agreed upon by everyone involved in the research project.

Familiarize yourself with journal guidelines: Thoroughly read the journal’s author guidelines, including formatting requirements, word limits, and submission instructions. As the corresponding author in a research paper, it is your job to adhere to these guidelines to increase the chances of your manuscript being accepted.

Seek co-author input: Collaborate with your co-authors early on to ensure their contributions are acknowledged and integrated seamlessly into the paper. Establishing clear lines of communication to facilitate efficient collaboration throughout the writing process can make the role of a corresponding author a bit easier.

Proofread and edit everything: Before submitting the manuscript, carefully review your work for clarity, grammar, and accuracy of information. As the corresponding author in research papers, you can consider seeking feedback from peers or mentors to improve the overall quality of the work.

Craft a convincing cover letter: One of the most important tasks in your role as a corresponding author is writing a compelling cover letter that succinctly highlights the significance of your research, emphasizes its novelty, and explains why it is a good fit for the journal. Turn to earlier references, take support from mentors, and ensure you’ve included all the elements required for a compelling cover letter.

Double-check supporting documents: The corresponding author in research papers must verify that all the necessary documents, such as ethical approvals, funding disclosures, and conflict of interest statements, are included and properly formatted according to the target journal’s requirements.

As corresponding author in research papers, you hold a vital role in the publication journey, from planning the research to preparing the manuscript, successful submission to streamlining the peer review process. By understanding the role of a corresponding author and following the practical pre-submission tips outlined in this article, you can navigate the process with confidence, showcase your research, and make a meaningful impact within your field.

Researcher.Life is a subscription-based platform that unifies top AI tools and services designed to speed up, simplify, and streamline a researcher’s journey, from reading to writing, submission, promotion and more. Based on over 20 years of experience in academia, Researcher.Life empowers researchers to put their best research forward and move closer to success.   

Try for free or sign up for the Researcher.Life All Access Pack , a one-of-a-kind subscription that unlocks full access to an AI academic writing assistant, literature reading app, journal finder, scientific illustration tool, and exclusive discounts on professional services from Editage. Find the best AI tools a researcher needs, all in one place – Get All Access now at just $25 a month or $199 for a year !  

Related Posts

What is Research? Definition, Types, Methods, and Examples

Language and Cultural Barriers in Research: How to Bridge the Gap

Research management

Sponsored by

The evolving meaning of ‘corresponding authorship’ in research

How the role of the corresponding author is changing in terms of research team dynamics and the perception of its meaning, and the implications for assuming the role

Rachel Herbert

.css-76pyzs{margin-right:0.25rem;} ,, alison mcintosh, additional links.

• More on this topic

Elsevier helps researchers and healthcare professionals advance science and improve health outcomes for the benefit of society.

Discover elsevier.

In decades gone by, the duties of a corresponding author (CA) were clear. They communicated with the journal editor, declared any conflict of interest and were the point of contact for readers after publication. The position carried no additional sense of seniority or accountability for the paper than any other author listed in the byline. Crucially, there was usually one CA per paper. However, requests for multiple CAs per paper are rising. Could this indicate that corresponding authorship is no longer seen as simply a communications role, and how are publishers responding?

The rise of multiple corresponding authors

Traditionally, the role of CA was assumed by a senior researcher who had contributed significantly to a paper and had experience in submitting and publishing research. But the global count of first-time CAs more than tripled between 2000 and 2021, according to analysis of articles indexed in Scopus® by the International Center for the Study of Research at Elsevier. Notably, first-time CAs in 2020-21 already had more published journal articles to their name than those taking on the role for the first time 20 years before, see figure 1.

“For many, it was becoming an indication of seniority and leadership on the team, rather than a particular set of responsibilities, and that was leading to requests for multiple corresponding authors per paper,” recalls Emilie Marcus, executive strategy officer at the University of California, Los Angeles’ School of Medicine, and CEO of Cell Press from 2012 to 2018.

• THE Campus spotlight: Tips for success in academic publishing
• The ‘25 method’ for forming a writing routine when you have limited time
• THE podcast: pointers on writing and publishing for academics

Funding shortages and the growing complexity of global challenges have prompted a rise in interdisciplinary, large-scale consortia projects. In 2000-01, less than 1 per cent of articles had multiple CAs, but by 2020-21, this had risen to 10 per cent, with multiple CAs being more common when international collaboration was involved, according to Scopus® data.

Journals’ response to the evolution of corresponding authorship

Scott Edmunds, editor of GigaScience , found that, in the eight years following the launch of the journal in 2012, they “saw joint corresponding authorship increasing – in some cases, up to six were being nominated per paper”. In part, this was driven by financial incentives for researchers in China, but in early 2020, the Chinese government took steps to change this policy. GigaScience responded to the changing dynamics and introduced icons to recognise senior researchers in the author list and accept up to two CAs per paper.

But journal and publisher interpretations of the CA’s role vary. Only some require the CA to be the same person who submits the paper. The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers requires both a contact author, who is the liaison during the peer review and production processes, and a CA, who is the contact featured in the printed publication. Nature indicates that CA duties end upon publication. Other journals communicate with all authors through the publication process, not just the CA.

Conflating corresponding authorship with research ‘leadership’

The lack of clarity around the CA role may lead to assumptions that impact research findings and policymaking. CA is used in some cases to imply, without clear justification, that author’s “leadership” of the research in analyses of multi-authored papers. In studies aggregated at the level of individual authors, universities and countries, this presents a danger that decision-making processes may be based on misleading findings.

Although the meaning of author name order differs by field, the last author is often a group leader or principal investigator. Since the CA was the last author in only a third of articles indexed in Scopus® in 2020-21, the CA cannot be considered a reliable signal of seniority. To more accurately and fairly recognise individual contributions, which is particularly vital for early career researchers, the CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy) was introduced. Including a CRediT contribution statement in a manuscript is a way to share a detailed description of the diverse contributions to a published work.

When to assume the role of corresponding author

For researchers with the opportunity to assume the role of corresponding author, there are several considerations:

• Any author might assume the role of CA – it need not default to the most senior. Investigate the options available when submitting a manuscript: some journals offer multiple CAs.
• Is the role right for you? You may have more responsibilities throughout the peer review and publication process, with many researchers directing their questions or comments to the CA in the first instance.
• To avoid authorship disputes, authorship order and author roles should be agreed before submitting a manuscript.
• Specific roles associated with a publication can be captured in a contribution statement in a manuscript using CRediT.

Alison McIntosh is research evaluation assistant at Elsevier, working within the International Center for the Study of Research and a student at the University of St Andrews; Rachel Herbert is senior research evaluation manager at Elsevier, working within the International Center for the Study of Research .

If you found this interesting and want advice and insight from academics and university staff delivered direct to your inbox each week, sign up for the THE Campus newsletter .

To read more and discover ways in which a research institution could boost serendipitous discovery, read the following reports from the International Center for the Study of Research at Elsevier:

Corresponding Authors: Past and Present How Has the Role of Corresponding Author Changed Since the Early 2000s?

Great Power or Great Responsibility: What Is the Meaning of ‘Corresponding Authorship’ in Modern Research?

You may also like

The secrets to success as a provost

Using non verbal cues to build rapport with students, emotionally challenging research and researcher well-being, augmenting the doctoral thesis in preparation for a viva, how hard can it be testing ai detection tools, emotions and learning: what role do emotions play in how and why students learn, the podcast: bringing an outsider’s eye to primary sources, a diy guide to starting your own journal, formative, summative or diagnostic assessment a guide, harnessing the power of data to drive student success.

Register for free

and unlock a host of features on the THE site

What roles Co-author and Corresponding Author play in Research Papers

Introduction

In current academic research, nothing exists in isolation. Good research requires collaboration, thus giving rise to the guild of co-authors and corresponding authors. These terms often raise questions about their significance and differences. Let’s delve into the distinctions between co-authors and corresponding authors, their roles, and how to appropriately mention the corresponding author in a paper.

Co-author vs. Corresponding Author: Unveiling the Differences

Co-author Meaning

• A co-author is a researcher who has contributed significantly to a research paper, sharing responsibility for its content and findings.
• Co-authors collaborate to design experiments, analyze results, and contribute to the overall intellectual content of the paper.

Corresponding Author Meaning

• The corresponding author is the designated point of contact for the paper. They facilitate communication with the journal, handle revisions, and address queries.
• The corresponding author isn’t necessarily the primary contributor but takes on administrative responsibilities.

How to Mention the Corresponding Author in a Paper

• Typically, the corresponding author’s name and contact information are provided at the top of the first page of the paper.
• Including an asterisk (*) next to the corresponding author’s name and explaining their role in a footnote is common practice.
• Mention the corresponding author’s email address for efficient communication.

Co-author vs. Second Author: Clarifying the Distinction

• Co-author: Holds equal responsibility for the content contributed substantially.
• Second Author: Holds a significant role but might not have been as involved as co-authors.

Who Should Be the Corresponding Author?

• Usually, the corresponding author is a senior researcher who can effectively handle communication.
• The corresponding author need not be the primary author; any co-author familiar with the research can take on this role.

Differences Between Co-author and Corresponding Author

• Responsibility : Co-authors share content responsibility; the corresponding author manages communication.
• Involvement : Co-authors are deeply involved in research; the corresponding author handles administrative aspects.
• Listing : All co-authors are listed in the byline; only the corresponding author’s contact details are visible.
• Primary Contribution : Co-authors contribute intellectually; the corresponding author manages logistics.

Main Author vs. Corresponding Author: Unraveling the Contrast

• Main Author : Often referred to as the first author, contributes significantly to research and writing.
• Corresponding Author : Handles communication, edits, and revisions after accepting the paper.

Collaborative Writing: Can Two Authors Pen a Book Together?

• Multiple authors can co-write a book, combining their expertise and perspectives.

The Merits of Being a Co-author

• Learning Opportunity : Co-authoring exposes you to diverse ideas and research methods.
• Networking : Collaboration connects you with other researchers in your field.
• Shared Workload : Co-authors distribute the research and writing burden.

Conclusion: Navigating the Authorship Landscape

Understanding the roles of co-authors and corresponding authors is vital in the intricate realm of academic authorship. Collaborative efforts enrich research and foster academic growth. As you embark on research journeys, remember the unique contributions of co-authors and the crucial responsibilities shouldered by corresponding authors. So, cheer up if you are a co-author or corresponding author; your contributions to this evolving knowledge domain are unparalleled.

Explore, Collaborate, and Illuminate. Connect with us at Manuscriptedit.com .

Related Posts

Should you publish your paper in a national journal.

Scholars worldwide make significant contributions to the advancement of knowledge in the STEM fields by publishing their research work in academic journals. Academic journals can be classified into two types of journals – National and International. National Journals – As the name suggests, National Journals are published in a particular nation, in their own local […]

Transparency, Openness and Peer Review

Peer review of a journal article is a critical aspect of publication. The academic circle only acknowledges peer-reviewed journal publication as quality publication, mainly because it gives an assurance of quality and pedigree of the article and thereby the author. However, there are numerous stemming issues with the peer review mechanism, that in turn has […]

Avoiding rejection of your paper due to Language Errors

Nowadays, it is relatively normal for a paper to get rejected. Every researcher has experienced manuscript rejection in their career at some point. But it’s somewhat demotivating considering the amount of time and effort that has gone behind it, starting from the whole research process to writing and formatting. There are various reasons for the […]

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Author roles and responsibilities

IOP Publishing follows the  authorship criteria set out by the International Council of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). Within this, for someone to be considered an author of a work, they must meet all 4 of the following 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 revising 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. 

All named authors should be able to identify which co-authors worked on specific parts of the work. In addition, authors should have confidence in the integrity of the contributions of their co-authors. Authorship should never be bought, sold, or otherwise traded. We reserve the right to request evidence supporting authorship contribution, and reserve the right to reject any work which is suspected to have been bought, sold or otherwise traded.

It’s important all authors agree prior to submission the authorship of their paper, the order in which author names are presented, and ensure all those, and only those, who meet this criteria are included as authors. Acquisition of funding, collection of data or general supervision of the research group does not constitute authorship. 

Other individuals who have contributed to the study in a lesser capacity should be acknowledged, subject to their consent to be named (we may not ask you to provide evidence of this, but please keep a copy for your records), but not cited as authors. Please ensure you declare in the acknowledgments if an individual or organisation has supported with any portions of the work that have been outsourced (such as for translation work, support with experiments etc). Please note, the acknowledgements should not be used to misleadingly imply a contribution or endorsement by individuals who have not, in fact, been involved with the work or given an endorsement.  

We strongly encourage authors to make specific attributions of contribution and responsibility in the acknowledgements of the article. Authors may wish to use a taxonomy such as  CRediT  to describe the contributions of each author. 

We understand some research fields follow long standing prescribed authorship practices for recognised ‘big science’ collaborations, which may differ from the above. Corresponding authors of relevant articles will be asked to confirm upon submission if their paper follows these established practices, and this will be assessed at the journal level according to the accepted practices within that field of study.

If an unresolvable authorship dispute arises, the institution(s) where the work was undertaken should be asked to investigate. IOP Publishing will not arbitrate in cases where there is disagreement over authorship. IOP Publishing has the right to remove your article from the review process until a resolution can be agreed, or issue an expression of concern to the work whilst the investigation is ongoing. 

Responsibility of the corresponding author 

It is the corresponding author’s responsibility to ensure that all named authors have consented to submission to the journal, approved the submitted version of the article, and all further revisions.  

It is the corresponding author’s responsibility to ensure the paper is not under consideration by any other journal at the time of submission.  

It is the corresponding author’s responsibility to ensure the contact details for all co-authors are correctly entered into the submission system, and are correct at the time of submission. 

Changes in authorship 

Any changes to authorship during the publication process must be approved by all authors of the paper, and all authors must confirm to the journal that they give their consent and made a genuine intellectual contribution to the paper.

In addition, you must explain to the journal the reasons behind the change in authorship based on the guidelines above. If additional authors are being added to the manuscript, you will need to provide evidence of their significant contribution to the work.

Proof of contribution includes but is not limited to:

• Earlier drafts of the manuscript with the requested author’s edits
• Laboratory reports with requested author’s name
• Email exchanges directly related to the manuscript or relevant experiments
• WhatsApp Chats directly related to the manuscript or relevant experiments
• Research notes

It is the responsibility of the authors to ensure that evidence proving their contributions to the manuscript is kept during the submission process and can be provided at request.

IOP Publishing reserves the right to refuse requests if there is reason to doubt the legitimacy of the request.

Deceased authors 

In cases where an author has sadly passed away before a paper has been submitted, or during peer review, we require consent from a familial or legal proxy of the deceased for the paper to be reviewed for potential publication. Deceased authors are still eligible for co-authorship if they made a significant intellectual contribution to the article (see above).

Related information:

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

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 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.

Unfortunately we don't fully support your browser. If you have the option to, please upgrade to a newer version or use Mozilla Firefox , Microsoft Edge , Google Chrome , or Safari 14 or newer. If you are unable to, and need support, please send us your feedback .

We'd appreciate your feedback. Tell us what you think! opens in new tab/window

CRediT author statement

CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy) was introduced with the intention of recognizing individual author contributions, reducing authorship disputes and facilitating collaboration. The idea came about following a 2012 collaborative workshop led by Harvard University and the Wellcome Trust, with input from researchers, the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) and publishers, including Elsevier, represented by Cell Press.

CRediT offers authors the opportunity to share an accurate and detailed description of their diverse contributions to the published work.

The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that the descriptions are accurate and agreed by all authors

The role(s) of all authors should be listed, using the relevant above categories

Authors may have contributed in multiple roles

CRediT in no way changes the journal’s criteria to qualify for authorship

CRediT statements should be provided during the submission process and will appear above the acknowledgment section of the published paper as shown further below.

*Reproduced from Brand et al. (2015), Learned Publishing 28(2), with permission of the authors.

Sample CRediT author statement

Zhang San:  Conceptualization, Methodology, Software  Priya Singh. : Data curation, Writing- Original draft preparation.  Wang Wu : Visualization, Investigation.  Jan Jansen :  Supervision. : Ajay Kumar : Software, Validation.:  Sun Qi:  Writing- Reviewing and Editing,

Read more about CRediT  here opens in new tab/window  or check out this  article from  Authors' Updat e:  CRediT where credit's due .

• Indexing databases: All about their similarities and differences
• Open Science in the scientific community
• Introduction to pilot studies: advantages and disadvantages
• The importance and practice of research integrity
• Preprints in the scientific community – Why, when, and how?
• The guarantee of quality: All types of peer review
• Creative Commons licenses in academic publishing
• Abusing Open Access: Predatory Publishing

Corresponding author: Roles, responsibilities, and more

• The base of the pyramid: Research articles
• Self-citation: why (or why not), how, and when?
• What Is H-Index? Everything You Need to Know About Research Impact Metrics
• In-Text Parenthetical Citation - With Examples
• What Is a Good Impact Factor for an Academic Journal?
• What Are the Different Types of Scientific Research?
• Introducing the Gold Open Access and Green Open Access Publishing Options
• Peer-Reviewed Articles and How to Find Them
• How to Write a Cover Letter for Journal Article Submission
• Academic Publishing Guide – How to Choose the Right Publisher
• Everything you need to know about article processing charges
• Our Comprehensive Guide on Manuscript Writing
• The Process of Article Submission – How to Submit Your Paper
• What Is the Role of Journal Impact Factor and its Peers?
• Why is peer review important in science?
• How to cite an academic journal
• Share on facebook Share on linkedin Share on twitter

Nowadays, research is becoming increasingly collaborative due to factors, such as the spread of globalization and the growing expectations toward scientists to publish. As a result, more and more academic papers are being written by multiple authors, which triggers the need for a corresponding author , namely, a person selected from the group of authors to be in charge of duties pertaining to the pre-publication and post-publication phases of a paper. His/her identity is typically revealed on the first page of the article (Carmichael, 2020). Given the importance of this topic in scholarly publishing, in this blog article, we discuss the duties and responsibilities of a corresponding author during the pre-publication and post-publication phases.

The roles of a corresponding author

As the name suggests, a corresponding author is the primary contact for the publisher and readers alike (Carmichael, 2020). Based on this definition, a corresponding author’s duties can be broken down into two distinct phases : the pre-publication phase, in which one is in contact with the publisher, and the post-publication phase, in which one is expected to respond to readers’ questions and requests. The two phases come with quite varied responsibilities to the extent that they are not always managed by the same person (Helgesson, 2021). As such, it has been suggested by some stakeholders that the roles for the two phases be separated for the sake of transparency, a practice that, in fact, has already been adopted by some journals (Helgesson, 2021).  

More specifically, during the pre-publication phase , a corresponding author’s duties constitute five key areas.

• Submission and handling of the manuscript: One submits the manuscript together with all the necessary auxiliary files (e.g., cover letter , figures, tables, anonymized title page , statements, permissions, certificates, etc.) as well as all potentially necessary revisions, and shares the referee report , the journal editors’ decisions, and galley proofs with all the co-authors (Weiss, 2012).
• Maintaining a close relationship with the publisher: One manages the article processing charge (APC) payment if it applies as well as all the communication with the journal editorial team, for example, orders extra services (e.g., color figures in print, offprints, posters), adds potentially missing files, clarifies any ambiguities (e.g., non-consistent numbering of figures or tables), and provides better quality figures.
• Obtaining permissions for the use of copyrighted material.
• Obtaining disclosures and statements from co-authors.
• Signing the license agreement on behalf of all the co-authors.

Regarding the post-publication phase , the communication between corresponding authors and readers involves three main activities.

• They forward readers’ scientific questions to the co-authors and send out the latter’s joint response.
• They receive and manage requests of data sharing.
• They represent all co-authors in copyright-related questions (e.g., concerning the re-use of some part from the given paper).

So, what is a corresponding author responsible for ? It is important to emphasize that, while all authors share equal responsibility about the following points, the corresponding author will be addressed in case of any questions.

• Getting permissions, affirmations, certificates, etc.
• Dealing with the names of the authors (i.e., identifying first and last names), precise presentation of affiliations, acknowledgment of all support.
• Responsibility for the accuracy and integrity of the work.
• Responsibility to live up to the journal’s policies and ethical standards.

Why does your choice of the corresponding author matter?

The selection of a corresponding author matters for several reasons. As Hu (2009) points out, being the corresponding author of a paper entails considerable prestige . This is because many committees only consider first and/or corresponding authorship when evaluating grant and promotion applications, which, in fact, has led to an increase in the number of corresponding authors associated with an article (Ding & Herbert, 2022; Hu, 2009). Choosing the corresponding author wisely is also important because it is a long-term obligation . Although, in principle, it is possible to change the corresponding author after publication – it is up to the given journal’s discretion –, the change must be stated in a so-called corrigendum, which is quite unfortunate as this type of article is indicative of an error made on the part of an author/s.

Last, but not least, the identity of the corresponding author also matters from a practical point of view. This is because a corresponding author can be exempted from the payment of the expenses of Open Access publication , namely, the APC , depending on whether one’s institution is a member of the consortium with which the publisher has a Read and Publish agreement.

What makes a suitable corresponding author?

In light of the importance and prestige ascribed to the role of a corresponding author, the question inevitably arises, what attributes should one possess? As a corresponding author assumes primary responsibility for communication with a journal during the manuscript submission, peer-review, and publication process, one is expected to have great communication and organizational skills and accuracy . In addition, loadability can be regarded as another essential skill given the amount of tasks that can come with the role. Finally, a broad understanding of the research topic is expected as well, these days even more than before: Ding and Herbert (2022) found that, while between 2000–2001, a first-time corresponding author only had 4 publications on average, by 2020–2021, this number grew to 7.

Dilemmas about the authorship

The choice of the corresponding author is not the only dilemma when composing the authors’ list in an academic paper. As research has become an increasingly collaborative enterprise, occurrences of authorship-related controversies and misconduct have escalated as well. This is evidenced by the emergence of the following author types , each of which reflects some unethical practice:

• Ghost authors : those whose contribution to a work is not stated, typically, to conceal a conflict of interest.
• Guest authors : those who are listed as authors, but have made no real contribution to the paper.
• Orphan authors : those who have made material contribution to a work, but, deliberately, have not been given authorship credit by the drafting team.
• Forged authors : those who are listed as authors without their consent and despite a lack of contribution, to maximize the chances of the paper being published.

Some authorship-related disputes concern the distinction between an author and a contributor, so it is important to clarify what the criteria for authorship are. Essentially, being an author of a scientific paper presupposes that a person has made intellectual contribution to the work and agreed to take responsibility and accountability for any part of the work. Authors can have various possible roles , such as conceptualization, data curation, validation, project administration, and so on. In contrast, non-author contributors are those who provide assistance to authors on financial, editorial, conceptual, technical and even moral matters. Their identities should be acknowledged in the relevant section of the paper and the exact nature of their contribution be specified.

Authorship order has been another controversial issue. While, ideally, the order should reflect the extent to which the authors have contributed to the work , with the greatest intellectual contribution being made by the first author, alphabetical order is also common. Since the first position is the most prestigious one, it is the most likely to generate conflict; nevertheless, this may be solved by having multiple co-first authors . While corresponding authors are often first authors, this should not be taken as a general rule either (Mattsson et al., 2011). Although there are no standard policies across the scientific disciplines as to authorship order, there are various ways to avoid disputes over it. These include explicit and continuous discussions about it during the research project , consulting the given journal’s guidelines , and making quantitative or qualitative statements of each author’s contribution.

AKJournals to help authors worldwide

AKJournals is committed to helping its corresponding authors. Our relevant services include informative web pages online submission and peer-review platforms, and a team of professional and dedicated publishing editors . If you would like to read more about the topic of this blog article, we also recommend checking our journal, Scientometrics , co-published with Springer Nature, as it has several papers with “corresponding authors” as a keyword (e.g., Bigdeli & Gazni, 2012; Mattsson et al., 2011; Mendlowicz et al., 2011).

Bigdeli, Z., & Gazni, A. (2012). Authors’ sources of information: A new dimension in information scattering. Scientometrics, 92 (3), 505–521. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0609-1

Carmichael, S. W. (2020). Authorship. In M. M. Shoja, A. Arynchyna, M. Loukas, A. V. D’Antoni, S. M. Buerger, M. Karl, & R. S. Tubbs (Eds.), A guide to the scientific career: Virtues, communication, research, and academic writing (pp. 357–360). Wiley Blackwell.

Ding, A., & Herbert, R. (2022). Corresponding authors: Past and present. How has the role of corresponding author changed since the early 2000s? ICSR Perspectives . http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4049439

Helgesson, G. (2021). The two faces of the corresponding author and the need to separate them. Learned Publishing, 34 (4), 679–681. https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1385

Hu, X. (2009). Loads of special authorship functions: Linear growth in the percentage of “equal first authors” and corresponding authors. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60 (11), 2378–2381. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21164

Mattsson, P., Sundberg, C. J., & Laget, P. (2011). Is correspondence reflected in the author position? A bibliometric study of the relation between corresponding author and byline position. Scientometrics, 87 (1), 99–105. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0310-9

Mendlowicz, M. V., Coutinho, E. S. F., Laks, J., Fontenelle, L. F., Valença, A. M., Berger, W., Figueira, I., & Azambuja de Aguiar, G. (2011). Is there a gender gap in authorship of the main Brazilian psychiatric journals at the beginning of the 21 st century? Scientometrics, 86 (1), 27–37. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0296-3

Weiss, P. S. (2012). Who are corresponding authors? ACS Nano, 6 (4), 2861. https://doi.org/10.1021/nn301566x

Akadémiai Kiadó

P.O.Box 245 / H-1519 Budapest, Hungary Budafoki út 187-189. Bldg A., Floor 3 / 1117 Budapest, Hungary Phone: +36 1 464 8244 / Fax: +36 1 464 8240 Skype: Akadémiai Kiadó Zrt. / [email protected]

Copyright Akadémiai Kiadó AKJournals is the trademark of Akadémiai Kiadó's journal publishing business branch.

• [195.158.225.244]
• 195.158.225.244

Sequential good lattice point sets for computer experiments

• Published: 13 June 2024

Cite this article

• Xue-Ru Zhang 1 ,
• Yong-Dao Zhou 1 ,
• Min-Qian Liu 1 &
• Dennis K. J. Lin 2  

1 Altmetric

Sequential Latin hypercube designs (SLHDs) have recently received great attention for computer experiments, with much of the research restricted to invariant spaces. The related systematic construction methods are inflexible, and algorithmic methods are ineffective for large designs. For designs in contracting spaces, systematic construction methods have not been investigated yet. This paper proposes a new method for constructing SLHDs via good lattice point sets in various experimental spaces. These designs are called sequential good lattice point (SGLP) sets. Moreover, we provide efficient approaches for identifying the (nearly) optimal SGLP sets under a given criterion. Combining the linear level permutation technique, we obtain a class of asymptotically optimal SLHDs in invariant spaces, where the L 1 -distance in each stage is either optimal or asymptotically optimal. Numerical results demonstrate that the SGLP set has a better space-filling property than the existing SLHDs in invariant spaces. It is also shown that SGLP sets have less computational complexity and more adaptability.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Chen D J, Xiong S F. Flexible nested Latin hypercube designs for computer experiments. J Qual Technol, 2021, 49: 337–353

Article   Google Scholar  

Fang K T, Liu M Q, Qin H, et al. Theory and Application of Uniform Experimental Designs. Singapore: Springer/Beijing: Science Press, 2018

Book   Google Scholar  

Fang K T, Wang Y. A sequential algorithm for optimization and its application to regression analysis. In: Lecture Notes in Contemporary Mathematics. Beijing: Science Press, 1990, 17–28

Google Scholar  

Hou R Z, Lu L. MOLHD: Multiple objective Latin hypercube design. R package version 0.2, http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=MOLHD

Hua L K, Wang Y. Application of Number Theory to Numberial Analysis. Berlin: Springer/Beijing: Science Press, 1981

Huang C M, Lee Y J, Lin D K J, et al. Model selection for support vector machines via uniform design. Comput Statist Data Anal, 2007, 52: 335–346

Article   MathSciNet   Google Scholar  

Johnson M E, Moore L M, Ylvisaker D. Minimax and maximin distance designs. J Statist Plann Inference, 1990, 26: 131–148

Joseph V R. Space-filling designs for computer experiments: A review. Qual Engrg, 2016, 28: 28–35

Kong X, Ai M, Tsui K L. Flexible sliced designs for computer experiments. Ann Inst Statist Math, 2018, 70: 1–16

Korobov N M. The approximate computation of multiple integrals. Dokl Akad Nauk SSSR, 1959, 124: 1207–1210

MathSciNet   Google Scholar  

Lam C Q, Notz W I. Sequential adaptive designs in computer experiments for response surface model fit. Statist Appl, 2008, 6: 207–233

Liu H, Xu S, Wang X. Sequential sampling designs based on space reduction. Eng Optim, 2015, 47: 867–884

Loeppky J L, Moore L M, Williams B J. Batch sequential designs for computer experiments. J Statist Plann Inference, 2010, 140: 1452–1464

McKay M D, Beckman R J, Conover W J. Comparison of three methods for selecting values of input variables in the analysis of output from a computer code. Technometrics, 1979, 33: 239–245

Niederreiter H, Peart P. Localization of search in quasi-Monte Carlo methods for global optimization. SIAM J Sci Stat Comput, 1986, 7: 660–664

Qian P Z G, Ai M, Wu C F J. Construction of nested space-filling designs. Ann Statist, 2009, 37: 3616–3643

Qian P Z G, Tang B, Wu C F J. Nested space-filling designs for computer experiments with two levels of accuracy. Statist Sinica, 2009, 19: 287–300

Qian P Z G, Wu C F J. Bayesian hierarchical modeling for integrating low-accuracy and high-accuracy experiments. Technometrics, 2008, 50: 192–204

Ranjan P, Bingham D, Michailidis G. Sequential experiment design for contour estimation from complex computer codes. Technometrics, 2008, 50: 527–541

Rennen G, Husslage B, Van Dam E R, et al. Nested maximin Latin hypercube designs. Struct Multidiscip Optim, 2010, 41: 371–395

Santner T J, Williams B J, Notz W I. The Design and Analysis of Computer Experiments, 2nd ed. New York: Springer, 2018

Sun F S, Liu M Q, Qian P Z G. On the construction of nested space-filling designs. Ann Statist, 2014, 42: 1394–1425

Wang G G. Adaptive response surface method using inherited Latin hypercube design points. J Mech Des, 2003, 125: 210–220

Williams B J, Santner T J, Notz W I. Sequential design of computer experiments to minimize integrated response functions. Statist Sinica, 2000, 10: 1133–1152

Yang J Y, Liu M Q, Lin D K J. Construction of nested orthogonal Latin hypercube designs. Statist Sinica, 2014, 24: 211–219

Zhou X J, Lin D K J, Hu X L, et al. Sequential Latin hypercube design with both space-filling and projective properties. Qual Reliab Eng Int, 2019, 35: 1941–1951

Zhou Y D, Fang K T, Ning J H. Mixture discrepancy for quasi-random point sets. J Complexity, 2013, 29: 283–301

Zhou Y D, Xu H. Space-filling fractional factorial designs. J Amer Statist Assoc, 2014, 109: 1134–1144

Zhou Y D, Xu H. Space-filling properties of good lattice point sets. Biometrika, 2015, 102: 959–966

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 11871288, 12131001, and 12226343), National Ten Thousand Talents Program, Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities, China Scholarship Council and U.S. National Science Foundation (Grant No. DMS-18102925). The authors thank the referees for their helpful comments and suggestions. The first two authors contributed equally to this work.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

NITFID, LPMC & KLMDASR, School of Statistics and Data Science, Nankai University, Tianjin, 300071, China

Xue-Ru Zhang, Yong-Dao Zhou & Min-Qian Liu

Department of Statistics, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, 47907, USA

Dennis K. J. Lin

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Min-Qian Liu .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Zhang, XR., Zhou, YD., Liu, MQ. et al. Sequential good lattice point sets for computer experiments. Sci. China Math. (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11425-021-2087-2

Download citation

Received : 10 November 2021

Accepted : 11 January 2023

Published : 13 June 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11425-021-2087-2

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

• contracting space
• maximin distance
• nested Latin hypercube design
• sequential design
• space-filling design
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research