The “good author”
Main Article Content
Keywords
Authorship, Ethics, Research, Editorial Policies, Scientific and Technical Activities
Abstract
This article examines the notion of the “good author” within systems of scientific evaluation, defining it through observable practices: the relevance of research questions, methodological adequacy, and transparency throughout the manuscript-writing process. It emphasizes accountability in collaboration, properly justified authorship—free of honorary practices—and editorial and regulatory integrity. In addition, by analogy with journal indexing, it proposes an “index of responsible authorship” grounded in verifiable indicators and multidimensional profiles, rather than in prestige or impact. It concludes by underscoring the tension between authorship as social accountability and authorship as evaluative performance, arguing that the central challenge is cultural and institutional.
References
1. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). Recommendations for the conduct, reporting, editing, and publication of scholarly work in medical journals. Actualizado abril 2025 [citado 2026 enero 12]. Disponible en: https://www.icmje.org/icmje-recommendations.pdf
2. Munafò MR, Nosek BA, Bishop DVM, et al. A manifesto for reproducible science. Nat Hum Behav. 2017 Jan 10;1(1):0021. doi: 10.1038/s41562-016-0021.
3. Resnik DB, Shamoo AE. Reproducibility and Research Integrity. Account Res. 2017;24(2):116-123. doi: 10.1080/08989621.2016.1257387.
4. Zhaksylyk A, Zimba O, Yessirkepov M, et al. Research Integrity: Where We Are and Where We Are Heading. J Korean Med Sci. 2023;38(47):e405. doi: 10.3346/jkms.2023.38.e405.
5. Wager E, Kleinert S. Why do we need international standards on responsible research publication for authors and editors? J Glob Health. 2013;3(2):020301. doi: 10.7189/jogh.03.020301.
6. Moher D, Simera I, Schulz KF, et al. Helping editors, peer reviewers and authors improve the clarity, completeness and transparency of reporting health research. BMC Med. 2008;6:13. doi: 10.1186/1741-7015-6-13.
7. Council of Science Editors. Authorship and Authorship Responsibilities [Internet]. [citado 2026 enero 12]. Disponible en: https://www.councilscienceeditors.org/2-2-authorship-and-authorship-responsibilities
8. UK Research Integrity Office (UKRIO). Good Authorship Practice: guidance for research contributors. 2025 Sep 17 [citado 2026 enero 12]. doi: 10.37672/UKRIO.2025.08.goodauthorshippractice
9. Kambhampati SBS, Menon J, Maini L. Ethics in Research and Publications. Indian J Orthop. 2023;57(11):1722-1734. doi: 10.1007/s43465-023-00971-x.
10. Salas Zendejo D, Suárez Escalona R. Analysis of best practices compliance and transparency for diamond open access journals. Revista de Comunicación de la SEECI. 2025;58:1-20. doi:10.15198/seeci.2025.58.e903.
11. Alfonso F, Zelveian P, Monsuez JJ, et al. Authorship: From Credit to Accountability Reflections From the Editors´ Network. Anatol J Cardiol. 2019;21(5):281-286. doi: 10.14744/AnatolJCardiol.2019.18124.
12. Tijdink JK, Verbeke R, Smulders YM. Publication pressure and scientific misconduct in medical scientists. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2014;9(5):64-71. doi: 10.1177/1556264614552421.
Article Sidebar
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Authors retain their copyright and grant the Revista Médica del IMSS the right of first publication. Articles are distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which allows sharing as long as the author and the original source are properly credited.