Submission is an act of accountability
Submitting a dissertation, article, conference paper or report confirms that this version may be assessed as your scholarly work. Responsibility cannot be delegated to software, an editor or a supervisor. Every named author should understand their contribution; data must be used lawfully; and each conclusion should stay within the evidence that supports it.
The DFG Code links authorship to a genuine, identifiable contribution and approval of the final version. ALLEA frames integrity through reliability, honesty, respect and accountability. These principles become practical when the final check asks for evidence rather than reassurance. For each item, point to a file, section, declaration or confirmed agreement.
Separate authorship from acknowledgement
Authorship is not a reward for seniority, funding or general supervision. A material scholarly contribution should be identifiable, and named authors should engage with the final text, approve it and accept appropriate responsibility. The CRediT taxonomy describes roles such as methodology, data curation, software, visualisation and writing. It does not by itself determine who qualifies as an author; disciplinary standards and venue policies still apply.
Discuss roles early and revisit them before submission. Record changes when someone undertakes additional analysis or withdraws from drafting. Limited assistance can be acknowledged with permission. Ghost authorship and honorary authorship distort accountability. Where agreement cannot be reached, seek confidential advice from an ombudsperson or integrity office before submission.
Examine the publication venue
Read the journal’s, repository’s or examinations office’s original instructions. Review scope, peer review, fees, rights, data policy, correction policy and declarations. A polished website does not prove editorial quality. COPE publishes principles of transparency and good publication practice, but even reference to a recognised framework does not remove the need to assess the actual venue.
Do not submit one manuscript to multiple journals simultaneously where their policies prohibit it. Declare related preprints, conference versions and chapters. Reusing your earlier text can create attribution, novelty and licensing problems. Cite relevant previous work, explain overlap and ask the editor in writing when the boundary is unclear.
Data, materials and reuse
A data availability statement must be accurate. Do not expose personal or confidential data in the name of openness. Explain what is public, controlled-access or unavailable and why. Shared files require meaningful names, a version, licence, variable description and connection to reported findings. A persistent identifier supports discovery but does not replace documentation or permission.
Check that the manuscript names the exact archived version. Remove temporary comments and metadata that expose sensitive information. Retain a lawful internal evidence set. Data-management, open-access and repository requirements vary by institution, funder, field and consent; general recommendations cannot override those constraints.
Integrity continues after submission
Answer queries accurately and do not change data or analysis without a recorded reason. In revisions, preserve which amendment answers which reviewer point. If you discover a substantial error, contact the responsible body promptly, describe its reach and provide corrected evidence. Whether the outcome is a correction, withdrawal or another measure depends on the case and belongs to the venue or institution.
Store the submitted version, receipt, declarations, contribution matrix and relevant correspondence together. This establishes what was actually assessed. A similarity report can identify passages for review, but it cannot decide authorship, rights or publication ethics. Each match requires contextual human judgement.
Add a one-page submission record naming the venue, time, manuscript version, related data version, declared interests, confirmed contributors and unresolved queries. Before sending, verify that attachments belong together and contain no forgotten comments, tracked changes or personal metadata. This final package review prevents an otherwise responsible manuscript being undermined by an obsolete table, wrong file or missing declaration.