Implications of Authorship in a Journal

Being listed as an author in a peer-reviewed journal is no small feat. It's a public declaration of academics’ intellectual contribution to the research, adding a weighty credential to their academic ledger. This recognition translates into tangible benefits, paving the way for career advancement, securing grants, and even landing coveted academic positions. Beyond personal gain, an academic’s expertise becomes woven into the scientific tapestry, enriching the collective knowledge in his/her field. Collaboration thrives under the banner of co-authorship, forging valuable professional networks that blossom into future research partnerships. And let's not forget the coveted currency of academia: citations. Publications with esteemed author teams tend to attract more citations, a testament to the research's quality and credibility.

However, the weight of authorship demands not just recognition, but responsibility. With an academic’s name on the paper comes accountability for its accuracy and integrity. Any ethical lapses or missteps can cast a long shadow, potentially damaging their reputation and jeopardizing your career. The specter of unethical practices like ghost authorship and inflated author lists lurks in the shadows, raising concerns about fairness and eroding trust in research. Predatory journals, with their siren song of rapid publication and inflated author counts, present a particularly treacherous trap. Engaging with such practices tarnishes academics’ credibility and undermines the value of their genuine contributions.

Ultimately, journal authorship is a double-edged sword. It's a badge of honor, a career booster, and a contributor to scientific progress. Yet, it also demands ethical conduct and a clear understanding of its associated responsibilities. Navigating this landscape requires vigilance, integrity, and a commitment to upholding the highest standards of academic research.

Authorship Credit

Authorship credit in a journal article should be based on substantial contributions to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. SciEnggJ adopts The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE)’s four criteria for authorship:

1. Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work.

2. Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content.

3. Final approval of the version to be published.

4. 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.

Authors should meet all four criteria. Additionally, contributors who do not meet all four criteria should be acknowledged for their contributions but not listed as authors. It's essential to have clear communication and agreement among all contributors regarding authorship and acknowledgment.

Acknowledging Contributors without Authorship Credit

In the spirit of upholding standards of fairness, transparency, and integrity in academic publishing, SciEnggJ realizes the importance of establishing clear guidelines for contributors who are not cited as authors in manuscripts but have made significant contributions to the research. These non-author contributors often play crucial roles in the development and execution of scholarly work, and their efforts deserve recognition within the publication process. Therefore, SciEnggJ provides specific guidelines to ensure that these contributors are appropriately acknowledged while maintaining transparency and integrity in academic publishing.

What constitutes non-author contributions?
These contributions may include technical assistance, data collection, analysis, or critical feedback that significantly impact the manuscript's development. It's essential to distinguish between contributions worthy of acknowledgment and routine support that may not warrant formal recognition.

Authors submitting manuscripts to SciEnggJ should be responsible for identifying individuals who have made substantial non-authorship contributions to their work. These contributors should be informed of their potential acknowledgment and given the opportunity to review the acknowledgment statement for accuracy. Additionally, authors must obtain consent from non-author contributors before including them in the manuscript's acknowledgment section, respecting their preferences regarding recognition.

How are non-author contributors acknowledged?
In the Acknowledgment section, authors are encouraged to provide a clear and descriptive account of each non-author contributor's role in the research. This ensures that their contributions are properly attributed. Non-author contributors should also disclose any potential conflicts of interest related to their involvement in the manuscript, promoting transparency and ethical conduct.

While acknowledgment of non-author contributions is important, it's essential to clarify that acknowledgment does not confer authorship status or involvement in the peer review process. Non-author contributors may be invited to participate in peer review if their expertise is relevant, but this is separate from acknowledgment and subject to the journal's peer review policies.

In cases where errors or inaccuracies are identified in the Acknowledgment section post-publication, authors should promptly correct the record. This ensures the accuracy and integrity of the published work, maintaining the credibility of SciEnggJ and its contributors.

Use of Artifical Intelligence (AI)

For a detailed discussion on SciEnggJ’s guidelines on the use of AI and its implication in publication, please visit the following URL:

Submission of Manuscripts

Online Submission via ScholarOne

SciEnggJ uses ScholarOne as its Online Manuscript Management System (OMMS). Beginning 2018, all submissions to the journal and review of these submissions shall be done via ScholarOne.

The OMMS may be accessed via the following URL: For tutorials on how to use ScholarOne, please visit its Tutorials Center at

Screen%20Shot%202021 08-03%20at%208.49.13%20PM

Submission of Manuscripts

Manuscript Format

Manuscripts should be organized in the following manner:

Title pageTitle, Authors' Names (first, MI, last) and Affiliations (use numerical superscripts), and the name and email address of the Corresponding Author
TitleThe Title (only the first word and proper names should be capitalized) should be informative and be no more than 120 characters in length. Acronyms and abbreviations should be avoided.
AbstractNot necessary for Letters to the Editor, or Reports of Meeting Proceedings. The Abstract should be a single paragraph not exceeding 500 words and devoid of any references or citations. It should give the importance and objectives of the study, the general methods used, the most important results obtained, the conclusions made and their significance.
Keywords5-8 key topics in the manuscript including 1-2 on general field of science
TextLength and organization depends on the type of paper. The Text portion of Regular Research Article should have: Introduction, Materials and Methods, Results and Discussion, and Conclusion (optional). The Materials and Methods section may be subdivided into several subsections with concise subheadings in boldface. Sufficient detail should be provided so that findings may be replicated. The Results and Discussion sections can have subsections. The organization of the Text in a Review, Commentary, Letter to the Editor, or Report of Meeting Proceedings is at the discretion of the author(s).

A Model is a conceptual, logical, objective or visual representation of a phenomenon or an empirical observation. The Text portion of a Modelling article should provide a brief introduction to the phenomenon or observation being modeled, and describe how the model was generated, evaluated and simulated based on known facts or preliminary data.

A Hypothesis is a theoretical attempt to explain a phenomenon or an experimental observation. The Text portion of a Hypotheses article should provide a brief introduction to the phenomenon or observation, describe a plausible explanation supported by known facts or preliminary data, and end with a suggestion as to how the hypothesis could be tested.
AcknowledgementsFunding Agency, Collaborating Institutions, and Sources of Data. The Acknowledgements section should include all sources of financial support.
Conflicts of InterestIndicate if there is none. The authors must disclose any financial, personal, or professional relationship with other individuals or organizations that could be construed as conflict of interest.
Contributions of Individual AuthorsIf more than one author. The authors must indicate in general terms the contribution or role of each author in the study.

The following rules should be observed when citing a reference in the text:
          • one author (Santos 2006)
          • two authors (Monje and Hedreyda 2007)
          • three or more authors (Saloma et al. 2008)

The Reference list should be ordered alphabetically. Include the names of all the authors of each reference.

Journal References:
[Author's last name] [Author's initials], [All other author's last names followed by their initials]. [Title of article with only the first word capitalized]. [Journal's standard abbreviated name] [Year]; [Volume (number)]:[Inclusive pages]. For Example: David MP, Asprer JJ, Ibana JS, Concepcion GP, Padlan EA. A study of the structural correlates of affinity maturation: antibody affinity as a function of chemical interactions, structural plasticity and stability. Mol Immunol 2007; 44:1342-1351.

Book References:
[Author's last name] [Author's initials], [Other authors' last names followed by initials]. [Chapter title]. In: [Editor's last name] [Editor's initials], ed(s). [Book Title]. [Number of edition]. [City]:[Publisher], [Year]:[Inclusive pages]. For Example: Olivera BM. ω-Conotoxin MVIIA: from marine snail venom to analgesic drug. In: Fusetani N, ed. Drugs from the Sea. Basel: Karger, 2000:74-85.

Unpublished Observations or Personal Communications:
Do NOT include such citations in the Reference list. Place them instead in parentheses in the body of the article where it logically belongs, following the format below. Make sure to include all initials and, for personal communications, obtain a signed letter of permission from the person(s) cited. For Example: (LJ Cruz, personal communication) (GP Concepcion, unpublished observations)

Further, together with the manuscript, authors should submit a complete list of all references/citations as they appear in the text, e.g.,
          • Padlan 2007 p1
          • Concepcion 2008 p1
          • Ilag 2009 p2
          • Santos 2008 p2
          • Monje 2008 p3
          • Saloma 2010 p4

The above list should be followed by a sorted/alphabetized list, e.g.,
          • Concepcion 2008 p1
          • Ilag 2009 p2
          • Monje 2008 p3
          • Padlan 2007 p1
          • Saloma 2010 p4
          • Santos 2008 p2

The alphabetized list should match the list of references in the manuscript. This is to facilitate copy editing and checking that the references cited in the text are found in the list of references and vice versa.

Tableswith table numbers and descriptive titles. See Making Tables. Tables should be placed at the end of the manuscript. Each table should have an informative title placed at the top. Abbreviations, footnotes, and other details should be placed below the table. Tables should be submitted as an editable version.
Figureswith figure numbers and appropriate captions See Making Figures. Figures should be placed at the end of the manuscript and should be "camera-ready" and of high quality. Related figures should be combined and labeled as A, B, C, etc.; captions should be Figure 1. ... (A) ..., (B) ..., (C) ..., etc. Each figure should have an informative caption placed below the figure. Only high resolution images should be used (300 dpi and above). Graphs should be saved as a scalable vector image. The figure could occupy either 1 column width (92 mm) or 2 column widths (190 mm) of the page. The height of a figure should not exceed 234 mm.
*All text including legends and references should be typed in document file format (*.doc), double-spaced, 12-point font size, and single-column throughout.
**Submissions that do not conform to the guidelines will be returned to the authors.

Submission of Manuscripts

Required Supporting Documents

When a manuscript is submitted, it is assumed that no similar paper has been or will be submitted for publication elsewhere or has been previously published. Further, it is understood that all authors listed on a manuscript have agreed to its submission. Experts will be consulted regarding the acceptability of the submission for publication in SciEnggJ. All submissions must abide a strict set of research ethics guidelines found here. Editor-in-Charge (EIC) of the submission will have the final decision regarding its acceptance.

Authors should provide the names and (e-mail) addresses of at least three possible referees.

To facilitate review, it is encouraged that the manuscript have line numbers.

Authors should also provide a Certificate of Language Editing issued by their University’s English Department or equivalent. This document must certify that the manuscript has been edited to ensure that the paper is clear and free of grammatical, logical/structural, typographical, and stylistic errors. The editing must have been performed by a professional editor or any reputable proofreading software/application.

In addition, SciEnggJ requires proof that manuscripts were subjected to plagiarism checks performed by a professional or through any reputable plagiarism software/application and obtain an acceptable percentage of similarity which is equal to below 15%.

Prior to publication, the SciEnggJ Quality Assurance Team conducts a thorough analysis for any grammatical lapses and potential items which may have been plagiarized. The QA Team likewise follows the acceptable percentage of similarity (equal or below 15%) in their evaluation. Publication of manuscripts shall happen only once the Co-Editors approve the revisions made by authors as endorsed by the QA and Editorial Teams.

Authors should sign and certify that the manuscript’s data, figures, graphs, calculations, etc. are authentic.

The Copyright Transfer Agreement Form must be filled out and submitted via ScholarOne via the Manuscript Files module and must be appropriately tagged as "Copyright Agreement Form.”

Revision of Manuscripts

EICs may conditionally accept their assigned manuscripts for publication subject to the revision of the authors. For manuscripts requiring Minor Revision, authors are given seven (7) calendar days to refine based on the reviewers’ comments. Meanwhile, authors are given fourteen (14) calendar days to refine manuscripts requiring Major Revision.

The author should respond point-by-point to all the comments made by each reviewer in a separate document/letter and indicate how the manuscript was revised (or not) in response to each comment. The revised manuscript and document/letter addressing all the concerns of the reviewers should be sent to the EIC via ScholarOne within the prescribed deadline.

© 2024 SciEnggJ
Philippine-American Academy of Science and Engineering