I have a great respect for authors who publish very nice articles which allows me to get inspired. But sometimes I wonder how good is the girth of the manuscript with respect to the number of authors? I mean, would the content of the manuscript fit into precisely the “number of authors” have worked for the manuscript? Is it worth to have “those number of authors” for a manuscript? With due respect to my fellow scientists, I feel sometimes it is overwhelming to mention this. I suggest the journals to incorporate the following measures for this:
1. Before the manuscript is to be written or the work is to be carried, let the authors realize what and the how of contribution for the work. If someone feels that an iota of work is being done/reviewed by so many authors, perhaps a possible explanation be given in the covering letter to the editor.
2. Let there be a three-way test before one sums up the contribution:
Am I involved?
Is my contribution worthwhile?
Am I concerned in lieu of the girth of the manuscript?
I get reminded of the following quotes by Samuel Johnson:
Your manuscript is both good and original; but the part that is good is not original, and the part that is original is not good.
Just my two cents
Filed under: Weekly stubs | 5 Comments