Clear authorship identifies who made the intellectual contribution to a scholarly work and who accepts responsibility for the version submitted for publication. This policy sets ICPK’s publisher-level authorship criteria for academic publishing and applies across journals published by the International Center for Promoting Knowledge (ICPK).

Authorship must reflect actual contribution and accountability. Every person who satisfies all of the criteria below must be listed as an author, and no person who does not satisfy them may be listed. Contributions that do not qualify for authorship should still be disclosed appropriately so that the published record accurately reflects how the work was produced.

Criteria for Authorship

To qualify as an author, a person must meet all three of the following requirements:

1. Substantial contribution: The person made a substantial contribution to one or more core elements of the work, such as its conception or design; collection or acquisition of data; or analysis or interpretation of data, evidence, or findings.
2. Drafting or critical revision: The person participated in drafting the manuscript or critically revising it for important intellectual content. Proofreading, formatting, or minor language corrections alone do not satisfy this requirement.
3. Approval of the submitted version: The person reviewed and approved the version submitted to the journal and agreed to be identified as an author of that work.

These requirements operate together. A substantial contribution alone is insufficient without drafting or substantive revision and approval of the submitted version. Approval alone does not create authorship without a substantial intellectual contribution.

The author list must be inclusive and accurate: nobody who meets all three criteria may be omitted, and nobody who fails to meet them may be added. Authors should discuss authorship, author order, and contributions early and revisit those decisions if roles change.

Contributions That Do Not Establish Authorship

The following activities, by themselves, do not qualify a person for authorship:

• Obtaining or administering funding;
• Providing general administrative, departmental, or research supervision;
• Providing materials, facilities, participants, records, equipment, or access;
• Performing routine technical, laboratory, clerical, language, formatting, or data-entry assistance; or
• Offering general encouragement or non-substantive advice.

With the contributor’s permission, such support should be described in the acknowledgements. Funding belongs in the manuscript’s funding statement or other journal-specified location. Relevant technical or professional services should be disclosed transparently. Acknowledgement must not imply authorship or responsibility for the article.

Gift, Guest, and Ghost Authorship

ICPK journals do not accept gift authorship or guest authorship. These practices occur when someone is included because of status, seniority, reputation, authority, relationships, or expected reciprocity rather than qualifying contribution. Such inclusion misrepresents contribution and wrongly assigns responsibility.

ICPK journals also do not accept ghost authorship: omitting someone who meets the criteria, including by concealing substantial writing or intellectual work. It misrepresents who created the work and obscures accountability.

Suspected manipulation or concealment of authorship may be considered under ICPK’s Research Integrity and Misconduct Policy and Publication Ethics Policy.

Contributorship

Authors must provide an accurate account of individual contributions when requested. A contributorship statement should describe roles specifically rather than rely on position or author order. Each author must verify their description, and the corresponding author must confirm that everyone reviewed the collective statement.

Acknowledged contributors should consent to being named and to the proposed wording. Authors must still disclose relevant funding, services, assistance, or interests where required.

The use of generative AI or other automated tools does not confer authorship. Any such use must comply with ICPK’s AI Use Policy.

Corresponding Author Responsibilities

The corresponding author is the journal’s principal contact. These corresponding author responsibilities include:

• Confirming that every listed author meets the authorship criteria and that no qualifying author has been omitted;
• Ensuring that all authors have reviewed and approved the submitted manuscript;
• Confirming that all authors agree to the author order and the stated contributorship information;
• Submitting complete and accurate author information and required declarations;
• Communicating editorial correspondence and requests to all co-authors promptly;
• Coordinating responses, revisions, and corrected files with the other authors’ knowledge and approval; and
• Keeping the journal informed of reliable contact details during consideration and after publication.

Acting as corresponding author does not give one author authority to add, remove, or reorder authors without the agreement of the others.

Changes to the Author List

Any request to add or remove an author, change the author order, or otherwise amend the author list after submission must be sent to the journal with:

1. A written explanation of why the change is necessary; and
2. Written confirmation of agreement from every listed author and from any person being added or removed.

The journal may pause consideration while reviewing the documentation. Requests after acceptance will be considered only in exceptional circumstances, and publication may be delayed. The journal may decline a change if the explanation or confirmations are incomplete.

If an authorship concern arises after publication, it will be addressed in accordance with the Publication Ethics Policy, Research Integrity and Misconduct Policy, and applicable corrections procedures.

Authorship Disputes

ICPK and its journals do not arbitrate authorship disputes between colleagues or determine competing contributors’ entitlement. The journal will pause consideration and expect the authors and, where applicable, their institution or institutions to resolve the matter.

Consideration may resume after the journal receives a clear written resolution supported by all relevant authors. If institutional review is necessary, the journal may await its findings before acting on the manuscript or published record.