Leave a Comment
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
Who Should Submit a Manuscript? Rethinking Authorship Responsibility in the Digital Era
In scholarly publishing, the question of who should be responsible for submitting a manuscript is often taken for granted. Traditionally, many publication writers have submitted manuscripts on behalf of the corresponding author, sometimes with explicit permission and direct access to the author’s login credentials. The intention is clear: streamline the process and save time.
Yet this seemingly practical approach raises important ethical and legal questions that deserve closer attention.
The Ethical and Legal Dilemma
When a writer submits on behalf of an author, does consent alone make it acceptable? Some argue yes—after all, the author has given permission. Others point out that this practice risks exposing sensitive information, such as the author’s personal details or submission history, particularly if competitor companies are involved.
At its heart, this dilemma touches on issues of:
- Authorship accountability – Shouldn’t the corresponding author personally take responsibility for every stage of submission?
- Transparency – Does proxy submission obscure who is truly responsible for the manuscript?
- Data privacy – Could handing over credentials create unnecessary vulnerabilities?
A Broader Question for Publishing Ethics
These questions are not just technical, they go to the very foundation of trust in research communication. If authorship is the cornerstone of accountability, then the act of submitting a manuscript could be considered inseparable from that responsibility.
On the other hand, in practice, many authors depend on support staff or writers to navigate submission systems, especially in institutions with limited administrative capacity. Industry-academic relationships have further complicated the picture: increasingly, writers are being advised to avoid submitting manuscripts on behalf of authors, precisely because of the ethical, legal, and intellectual property concerns this practice raises.
While I have not yet seen explicit legal consequences or intellectual property disputes arise from proxy submissions, it is clear that the trend is moving toward stricter oversight. Ethical guidelines, IP standards, and legal regulations are becoming more stringent. It is better to address these issues now than to regret later.
So where should the line be drawn? Is this practice a pragmatic necessity, or does it cross into ethically problematic territory?
Possible Solutions and Best Practices
Moving forward, journals, publishers, and associations can play a stronger role in providing clarity:
- Detailed Submission Guidelines: Journals could prepare user-friendly guidance that enables authors to submit independently, even if they rely on external support for drafting and formatting.
- Delegated Access Features: Submission systems could introduce secure delegated-access options that allow assistants or writers to help without requiring full access to the author’s account.
- Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs): Formal agreements between authors, writers, and industry partners can help uphold confidentiality and data security, ensuring that sensitive information is not misused.
- Author Responsibility Statements: Journals could require the corresponding author to formally confirm responsibility for submission, even if technical support was provided.
My Perspective
In the absence of explicit guidelines, I believe it is best for submissions to be made directly by the authors themselves. Writers, editors, or assistants can, and should, provide the necessary support, but through tools like detailed submission guides or step-by-step instructions rather than taking over the process entirely.
This approach not only reinforces accountability but also helps prevent breaches of confidentiality and avoids potential legal or IP issues that could have reputational or financial consequences for both authors and their institutions.
An Invitation to Dialogue
This issue deserves thoughtful discussion across our community. Should journals, publishers, or professional associations offer clearer guidance? Should submission platforms provide alternative workflows that balance efficiency with accountability?
We invite readers to share their perspectives:
- Have you encountered this situation as an editor, writer, or author?
- How do your institutions or journals approach it?
By opening this dialogue, we can work toward stronger, more transparent practices that protect both authors and the integrity of scholarly publishing.
Keywords
authorship accountability manuscript submission publishing ethics data privacy proxy submission intellectual property scholarly publishing editorial responsibility submission guidelines ACSE
I am an International Society for Medical Publication Professionals-Certified Medical Publication Professional™ (ISMPP-CMPP™ 2020) with over 18 years of experience spanning academia and the pharmaceutical industry. Throughout my career, I have supported academic authors, scientists, editors, and peer reviewers across the entire publication lifecycle—from manuscript development to submission—ensuring the delivery of high-quality, compliant scientific content. With more than one and a half decades of specialized experience in medical communications, I have worked with leading pharmaceutical companies and healthcare solution providers, contributing to the successful execution of a wide range of publication and communication projects. In addition to my core publication expertise, I have been actively involved in project scoping, budgeting, and proposal development. As a culturally adaptable and collaborative professional, I am passionate about advancing best practices in science communication by mentoring early-career professionals and enhancing awareness of ethical publishing practices within the scientific community.
View All Posts by Ramandeep SinghDisclaimer
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of their affiliated institutions, the Asian Council of Science Editors (ACSE), or the Editor’s Café editorial team.
