If an author has a lengthy discussion with you that leads to significant changes in a publication, should you be acknowledged?

Enhance your publication skills with the ISMPP Publication Primer Test. Study with targeted questions and detailed explanations to build confidence and be exam-ready!

The situation described suggests a nuanced understanding of publication ethics and the criteria for authorship and acknowledgment. In scholarly publishing, acknowledgment should be reserved for individuals who have made a substantial, identifiable contribution to the work.

In this case, if the discussion with the author leads to significant changes in the publication, the question of acknowledgment is closely tied to whether the insights offered were directly instrumental in shaping the research or work being published. Acknowledgment is generally aimed at recognizing contributions that do not meet the criteria for authorship but still add value to the publication.

If your contributions were deemed significant enough to affect the overall content and direction of the publication, proper practice would typically involve being acknowledged for those insights. However, if the contributions were considered advisory rather than foundational to the research itself, then acknowledgment may not be warranted solely based on discussions without direct input or results.

Thus, acknowledgment should reflect a degree of contribution that aligns with the established ethical norms of the publication process, focusing on tangible involvement in the research or manuscript development rather than merely discussions.

Subscribe

Get the latest from Examzify

You can unsubscribe at any time. Read our privacy policy