1.

The Primary Ethic of Scientific Publication

For a result to be scientific, and contribute to the body of scientific knowledge, it must be described sufficiently so that the paper’s conclusions can be validated by others. I call this the primary ethic of scientific publication. It requires openness, honesty, and integrity on the part of the authors, all traits that most scientists readily exhibit. When followed, this ethic allows new scientific knowledge to add to existing knowledge and for science to advance.

When commercial or competitive interests intrude, there may be pressure on authors not to provide sufficient detail in a paper. Companies may want to keep certain ideas trade secrets. Authors may want to keep flaws hidden, to increase the chance of publication and to maximize claims of significance. Authors may also want to keep certain techniques to themselves in order to keep ahead of rival research groups in generating new results. Secrets may be desirable, or even necessary, but they are not a part of science.

Put simply, if other interests require that details necessary to validating a paper’s conclusions cannot be disclosed, then that paper should not be published in a peer-reviewed journal. Authors who want to keep necessary details hidden should not submit such work for publication.

2.

Author Responsibilities Before Publication

Before submitting a manuscript to a peer-reviewed journal for publication, here are the major responsibilities of the authors:

3.

Author Responsibilities During the Peer-Review Process

During the review process, the authors find themselves waiting until that anticipated moment arrives when the editor returns a first decision, often with reviewer comments attached. If the decision requires a response and a revised manuscript, the response and revisions provided by the authors are critical to whether the manuscript will finally be accepted or rejected. To that end, here are the major responsibilities of the authors during this process:

Remember that during the peer-review process the material found in your manuscript cannot be submitted to another journal for consideration. If your manuscript is rejected, you are then free to submit the manuscript elsewhere. It is very wise, however, to take any comments or criticisms that accompany a rejection very seriously and to improve your manuscript accordingly before trying again.

4.

Author Responsibilities After Publication

An author’s responsibilities do not end with publication. Here are the major responsibilities of the authors after publication:

Advances in technology have the opportunity to make the primary ethic of scientific publication easier to achieve. Archives of supplemental material and data can be linked to a publication so that authors do not have the bear the burden of keeping a publication’s data available to others. SPIE is currently investigating options for providing this service to its authors and readers.

5.

Conclusions

All parties involved in the publication process have ethical responsibilities formed by the role of publishing in the progress of science. Here, the author’s responsibilities have been spelled out before, during, and after the publication of a scientific paper.

6.

Announcement

This editorial is the last in a series of editorials I've written, spanning six years, on the topic of how to write a good scientific paper. I have collected up these editorials, edited them, added some new material, and organized them into a book: How to Write a Good Scientific Paper, published by SPIE. Thanks to the generosity of SPIE, the electronic version of this book will be available free of charge. You can find it here: http://spie.org/Publications/Book/2317706. My hope is that it will be useful to any scientist or engineer who wants to publish in a peer-reviewed journal.