# What to Include in the Acknowledgments Section ## Quick Answer - The acknowledgments section names individuals and organizations that supported the research without meeting authorship criteria, including funders, technical staff, and mentors. - Use the [Committee on Publication Ethics Core Practices](https://publicationethics.org/core-practices) to distinguish contributors who warrant authorship from those who merit acknowledgment only. - Acknowledgments must not imply authorship or responsibility for the work, and every person named must consent to being acknowledged. ## Purpose and Boundaries of the Acknowledgments Section The acknowledgments section serves a distinct function in a scientific paper. It records the contributions of individuals and organizations that supported the research without meeting the threshold for authorship. The [Committee on Publication Ethics Core Practices](https://publicationethics.org/core-practices) states that all authors must agree on the list of contributors and that the corresponding author is responsible for confirming the final list of authors. The same principle applies to acknowledgments. Every person named in the acknowledgments must have agreed to be named, and the author team must agree on who belongs in that section. The acknowledgments section is a formal record of research support that carries ethical weight. When you name someone in the acknowledgments, you are publicly stating that they contributed to the work. That statement becomes part of the permanent scientific record. If the acknowledgment is inaccurate, it can misrepresent the nature of the contribution and create problems for the person named. The distinction between authorship and acknowledgment is the central decision in this section. Authorship requires a substantial intellectual contribution to the conception, design, data acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of the work, plus involvement in drafting or revising the manuscript and final approval of the version to be published. Acknowledgment is appropriate for contributions that fall below that threshold. These include technical assistance, material support, statistical advice, editorial help, and administrative support. The [National Library of Medicine Research Methods Resources](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books) provides access to authoritative biomedical books and research-method references that describe the conventions of scientific writing and publication. These resources reinforce the principle that the acknowledgments section is a formal component of the manuscript and should be handled with the same care as the methods section. ## Who Should Be Acknowledged ### Technical and Laboratory Staff Technical staff who performed routine procedures, maintained equipment, or prepared materials should be acknowledged when their work does not rise to the level of authorship. A laboratory technician who ran hundreds of samples, prepared culture media, or maintained animal colonies has made a real contribution to the research. That contribution belongs in the acknowledgments when the technician did not participate in the design, analysis, or writing of the study. The decision to acknowledge technical staff should be based on the actual contribution, not on the person's job title. A technician who also contributed to the study design, analyzed data, or drafted sections of the manuscript may meet the authorship criteria. The [Committee on Publication Ethics Core Practices](https://publicationethics.org/core-practices) states that all contributors who meet the authorship criteria should be listed as authors. The same principle works in reverse, contributors who do not meet the authorship criteria should be acknowledged instead of listed as authors. ### Statistical Consultants and Data Analysts Statistical consultants who advised on the analysis plan, reviewed the statistical methods, or performed the analysis should be acknowledged when their contribution does not meet the authorship threshold. The acknowledgment should specify the nature of the contribution, such as statistical advice or data analysis. This specificity helps the reader understand the scope of the contribution and prevents ambiguity about the person's role. ### Technical Editors and Language Editors Editors who improved the language, structure, or clarity of the manuscript should be acknowledged. This includes professional editing services and colleagues who reviewed the manuscript for readability. The acknowledgment should state the nature of the editing work, such as "edited the manuscript for English language" or "provided editorial feedback on the final draft." ### Material and Resource Providers Individuals or organizations that provided materials, equipment, or resources essential to the research should be acknowledged. This includes providers of cell lines, reagents, software, or access to specialized equipment. The acknowledgment should specify what was provided and how it supported the research. ### Research Participants and Communities Research participants and community partners who contributed to the study should be acknowledged when appropriate. This acknowledgment should respect the privacy and preferences of the participants. Some participants may prefer not to be named, and the acknowledgment should reflect their wishes. ### Peer Reviewers and Colleagues Who Provided Feedback Colleagues who reviewed the manuscript before submission and provided feedback should be acknowledged. This includes internal reviewers, mentors, and peers who read the manuscript and offered suggestions. The acknowledgment should be specific about the nature of the feedback, such as "provided comments on the manuscript" or "reviewed the statistical methods." ## Who Should Not Be Acknowledged ### Individuals Who Meet Authorship Criteria The most important exclusion is the person who meets the authorship criteria. The [Committee on Publication Ethics Core Practices](https://publicationethics.org/core-practices) states that all individuals who meet the criteria for authorship should be listed as authors. Acknowledging a person who meets the authorship criteria is a form of misattribution. It denies the person the credit they have earned and misrepresents the nature of their contribution. ### Individuals Who Did Not Contribute People who did not contribute to the research should not be acknowledged. This includes individuals who provided general encouragement, who were consulted informally, or who had no direct involvement in the work. The acknowledgments section is not a place to thank people for personal support or to honor colleagues who had no role in the study. ### Individuals Who Did Not Consent to Be Acknowledged Every person named in the acknowledgments must have agreed to be named. The [Committee on Publication Ethics Core Practices](https://publicationethics.org/core-practices) states that all authors must agree to the final version of the manuscript and the content of the acknowledgments. The same principle applies to the people named in the acknowledgments. The corresponding author should confirm that each person named in the acknowledgments has agreed to be named. ### Organizations That Require Specific Disclosure Formats Some organizations, particularly funders, require specific disclosure formats. The acknowledgment of funding should follow the format required by the funder and the journal. The [National Institutes of Health Grants and Funding](https://grants.nih.gov/) pages describe the expectations for acknowledging NIH support in publications. The acknowledgment of NIH funding must follow the specific format required by the NIH and the journal. ### Individuals Who Provided Only Personal Support Personal support, such as encouragement, emotional support, or general advice, does not belong in the acknowledgments section. The acknowledgments section is for professional contributions to the research. Personal support belongs in a personal note to the individual, not in the published manuscript. ## At a Glance | Contribution Type | Authorship Required? | Acknowledgment Appropriate? | Key Consideration | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Study conception and design | Yes | No | Substantial intellectual contribution | | Data acquisition and analysis | Yes, if substantial | Yes, if routine or supervised | Evaluate the level of intellectual input | | Technical assistance and sample preparation | No | Yes | Specify the nature of the work | | Statistical consultation | Yes, if substantial | Yes, if advisory only | Describe the scope of the advice | | Language editing and proofreading | No | Yes | State the type of editing performed | | Material or resource provision | No | Yes | Name the specific materials provided | | Funding support | No | Yes, in funding disclosure | Follow funder and journal format | ## The Distinction Between Authorship and Acknowledgment The [Committee on Publication Ethics Core Practices](https://publicationethics.org/core-practices) provides the framework for distinguishing authorship from acknowledgment. The core practices state that all authors must agree to the final version of the manuscript and the content of the acknowledgments. The corresponding author is responsible for confirming the final list of authors and ensuring that all authors have agreed to the content of the manuscript. The distinction between authorship and acknowledgment is not always clear. The following criteria help make the decision: - Authorship requires a substantial contribution to the conception, design, data acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of the work. - Authorship requires participation in drafting or revising the manuscript. - Authorship requires final approval of the version to be published. - Authorship requires agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work. Acknowledgment is appropriate when the contribution does not meet all of these criteria. The contribution may be substantial, but if the person did not participate in the writing or the final approval, the contribution belongs in the acknowledgments. The decision should be made by the author team, not by the individual contributor. The authors should discuss the contributions of each person and decide who meets the authorship criteria and who should be acknowledged. The decision should be documented and agreed upon by all authors. ## How to Write the Acknowledgments Section ### Structure and Content The acknowledgments section should be concise and specific. It should name the person or organization, describe the nature of the contribution, and state the relationship to the research. The section should not include personal opinions, praise, or commentary about the research. A typical acknowledgment follows this structure: - The names of the individuals or organizations being acknowledged. - A description of the contribution. - A statement of the relationship between the contributor and the research. The acknowledgment should be written in the first person plural, such as "We thank Dr. Smith for providing the statistical analysis" or "We acknowledge the support of the National Institutes of Health for funding this research." ### Wording Examples The following examples illustrate appropriate wording for different types of contributions: - **Technical support**: "We thank the laboratory staff for their technical assistance with the sample preparation and analysis." - **Statistical support:** "We thank Dr. Johnson for her statistical advice and for reviewing the data analysis." - **Material support:** "We thank the Department of Biology for providing the cell lines used in this study." - **Editorial support:** "We thank Dr. Lee for editing the manuscript for English language." - **Funding support:** "This research was supported by the National Institutes of Health under grant number [grant number]." The wording should be specific about the nature of the contribution. This specificity helps the reader understand the scope of the contribution and prevents ambiguity about the person's role. ### The Role of the Corresponding Author The corresponding author is responsible for the content of the acknowledgments section. The corresponding author should confirm that each person named in the acknowledgments has agreed to be named. The corresponding author should also ensure that the acknowledgments section is accurate and does not misrepresent the contributions of any person. The corresponding author should also ensure that the acknowledgments section is consistent with the authorship list. If a person is acknowledged for a contribution that meets the authorship criteria, the corresponding author should discuss the matter with the author team and decide whether the person should be listed as an author. ## Practical Steps for Drafting Acknowledgments ### Step 1: Inventory All Contributions Before writing the acknowledgments section, create a complete inventory of everyone who contributed to the research. Include funders, technical staff, statistical consultants, editors, material providers, research participants, and colleagues who provided feedback. For each person, write down the specific contribution they made. ### Step 2: Classify Each Contribution For each person on the inventory, determine whether the contribution meets the authorship criteria. Use the [Committee on Publication Ethics Core Practices](https://publicationethics.org/core-practices) as the framework. If the person made a substantial intellectual contribution and participated in writing or revising the manuscript, they should be listed as an author. If the contribution falls below that threshold, they should be acknowledged. ### Step 3: Confirm Consent Contact every person you plan to acknowledge and confirm that they agree to be named. This step is essential. The [Committee on Publication Ethics Core Practices](https://publicationethics.org/core-practices) requires that all authors agree to the content of the acknowledgments, and the same principle applies to the people named in the acknowledgments. Keep a record of the consent for each person. ### Step 4: Draft the Section Write the acknowledgments section using the structure and wording examples provided. Be specific about the nature of each contribution. Avoid vague statements such as "We thank everyone who helped with this project." The reader should understand exactly what each person did. ### Step 5: Review for Accuracy Review the acknowledgments section with the author team. Confirm that every person named has consented, that the contributions are described accurately, and that no one who meets the authorship criteria has been relegated to the acknowledgments. The corresponding author should take the lead on this review. ### Step 6: Check Journal and Funder Requirements Review the journal's author guidelines for specific requirements about the acknowledgments section. Some journals require the acknowledgments to be placed in a specific location or to follow a specific format. If the research was funded by the NIH, review the [NIH Grants and Funding](https://grants.nih.gov/) pages for the required funding acknowledgment format. ## Common Failure Patterns in Acknowledgments ### Acknowledging Individuals Who Should Be Authors The most common failure is acknowledging a person who meets the authorship criteria. This misrepresents the contribution and denies the person the credit they have earned. The author team should review the contributions of each person and ensure that anyone who meets the authorship criteria is listed as an author. ### Acknowledging Individuals Without Their Consent Acknowledging a person without their consent is a violation of the person's rights. The person may not want to be associated with the research, or they may not want their name in the publication. The corresponding author should confirm that each person named in the acknowledgments has agreed to be named. ### Acknowledging Individuals Who Did Not Contribute Acknowledging individuals who did not contribute to the research is a form of misrepresentation. The acknowledgment should be limited to people who made a real contribution to the work. Acknowledging people who did not contribute can be seen as an attempt to gain favor or to inflate the list of contributors. ### Acknowledging Funding in the Wrong Section Funding information belongs in the funding disclosure section of the manuscript, not in the acknowledgments. The funding disclosure section is a separate section that lists the funders and the grant numbers. The acknowledgments section should not include funding information unless the journal requires it to be included there. ### Acknowledging Individuals Who Should Not Be Named The acknowledgments section should not include individuals who should not be named for ethical or legal reasons. This includes individuals who have a conflict of interest, individuals who have been involved in misconduct, or individuals who have requested not to be named. ## The Role of the Acknowledgments in Research Integrity The acknowledgments section is a component of research integrity. The [Committee on Publication Ethics Core Practices](https://publicationethics.org/core-practices) addresses the responsibilities of authors, including the responsibility to ensure that the manuscript is accurate and that the contributions of all individuals are properly credited. The acknowledgments section is part of this responsibility. The acknowledgments section also has implications for the transparency of the research. The reader should be able to understand who contributed to the research and how. The acknowledgments section provides this information, and it should be accurate and complete. The acknowledgments section is also a matter of professional ethics. The authors have a responsibility to the individuals who contributed to the research. The acknowledgment should be accurate and should not misrepresent the contribution of any person. ## The Role of the Journal and the Publisher The journal and the publisher have a role in the acknowledgments section. The journal may have specific requirements for the acknowledgments section, such as the format of the funding disclosure or the requirement that the acknowledgments section be included in the manuscript. The journal may also have policies on the acknowledgment of individuals who have a conflict of interest. The [Committee on Publication Ethics Core Practices](https://publicationethics.org/core-practices) addresses the responsibilities of journals and publishers in the publication process. The journal should ensure that the acknowledgments section is accurate and that the authors have followed the journal's requirements. The journal may also require the authors to disclose any conflicts of interest in the acknowledgments section. The conflict of interest disclosure is a separate section of the manuscript, but the acknowledgments section may include a statement about the conflicts of interest of the contributors. ## The Acknowledgments Section in Different Types of Research ### Biomedical Research In biomedical research, the acknowledgments section typically includes the funding sources, the technical staff, the statistical consultants, and the clinical research coordinators. The acknowledgment of the funding sources is particularly important in biomedical research, as the funding is often provided by government agencies or private foundations. The [National Institutes of Health Grants and Funding](https://grants.nih.gov/) page describes the requirements for acknowledging NIH funding in publications. The NIH requires that the acknowledgment of NIH funding be included in the publication and that the grant number be specified. ### Social Science Research In social science research, the acknowledgments section may include the research participants, the community partners, and the research assistants. The acknowledgment of the research participants is particularly important in social science research, as the participants are often the source of the data. ### Clinical Research In clinical research, the acknowledgments section may include the clinical staff, the research nurses, and the data safety monitoring board. The acknowledgment of the clinical staff is particularly important in clinical research, as the staff are often involved in the data collection and the patient care. ### Laboratory Research In laboratory research, the acknowledgments section may include the laboratory staff, the technical support, and the providers of the materials. The acknowledgment of the technical staff is particularly important in laboratory research, as the staff are often involved in the data collection and the analysis. ## The Acknowledgments Section and the Data Management and Sharing Policy The acknowledgments section may also include a statement about the data management and sharing. The [National Institutes of Health Data Management and Sharing Policy](https://sharing.nih.gov/data-management-and-sharing-policy) describes the expectations for data management and sharing in NIH-funded research. The policy requires that the data management and sharing plan be included in the grant application and that the data be shared in a timely manner. The acknowledgments section may include a statement about the data management and sharing, such as "The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request." This statement is a part of the acknowledgments section and should be included when the data are not publicly available. The acknowledgment of the data management and sharing is a matter of transparency. The reader should know how to access the data and the conditions under which the data are available. The acknowledgments section is a place to provide this information. ## The Acknowledgments Section and the ORCID The acknowledgments section may also include the ORCID identifiers of the contributors. The [ORCID for Researchers](https://info.orcid.org/researchers) page describes the use of ORCID identifiers for researchers. The ORCID identifier is a unique identifier for a researcher, and it is used to link the researcher to their publications and other research outputs. The acknowledgment of the ORCID identifier is a matter of the researcher's identity. The ORCID identifier should be included in the acknowledgments section when the contributor has an ORCID identifier. The ORCID identifier should be included in the format specified by the journal. ## The Acknowledgments Section and the Reporting Guidelines The acknowledgments section should also be consistent with the reporting guidelines for the research. The [EQUATOR Network](https://www.equator-network.org/) provides a list of reporting guidelines for different types of research. The reporting guidelines specify the information that should be included in the manuscript, and the acknowledgments section is a part of this information. The reporting guidelines may specify the information that should be included in the acknowledgments section. For example, the reporting guidelines may require that the acknowledgments section include the funding sources, the contributors, and the conflicts of interest. The author should follow the reporting guidelines when writing the acknowledgments section. ## Records and Documentation for Acknowledgments ### What to Document The author team should maintain records of the decisions made about authorship and acknowledgment. These records should include the inventory of contributions, the classification of each contribution, and the consent of each person named in the acknowledgments. The records should be kept with the other research documentation and should be available if questions arise about the manuscript. ### When to Document The documentation should be created at the time the decisions are made. The inventory of contributions should be created when the research is completed and the manuscript is being prepared. The classification of each contribution should be documented during the author team discussions. The consent of each person named in the acknowledgments should be documented when the consent is obtained. ### How to Use the Documentation The documentation serves as a reference for the author team during the manuscript preparation and revision process. If a question arises about whether a person should be an author or should be acknowledged, the documentation provides the basis for the decision. The documentation also serves as a record of the responsible conduct of research, which may be reviewed by the institution or the funder. ## Limitations and Professional Escalation Criteria ### Limitations of the Acknowledgments Section The acknowledgments section has limitations. It cannot fully capture the complexity of all contributions to a research project. Some contributions may be difficult to classify as authorship or acknowledgment. The acknowledgments section also cannot address disputes about authorship that arise after the manuscript is submitted. These disputes should be resolved through the journal's process for handling authorship disputes. ### When to Escalate to a Professional The author team should escalate to a professional when the decisions about authorship and acknowledgment are unclear or when a dispute arises. The [Committee on Publication Ethics Core Practices](https://publicationethics.org/core-practices) provides guidance on handling authorship disputes. The author team should also consult the journal's editor or the institution's research integrity officer when the decisions are difficult. ### When to Escalate to the Funder The author team should escalate to the funder when the funder's requirements for acknowledgment are unclear or when the funder's requirements conflict with the journal's requirements. The [National Institutes of Health Grants and Funding](https://grants.nih.gov/) pages provide guidance on the NIH requirements for acknowledging funding. The author team should contact the NIH program officer when the requirements are unclear. ## Frequently Asked Questions ### What is the difference between an author and someone who should be acknowledged? An author makes a substantial intellectual contribution to the conception, design, data acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of the work, participates in drafting or revising the manuscript, and approves the final version. A person who should be acknowledged provides support that falls below that threshold, such as technical assistance, material support, or editorial help. The [Committee on Publication Ethics Core Practices](https://publicationethics.org/core-practices) provides the framework for this distinction. ### Can I acknowledge someone who did not consent to be named? No. Every person named in the acknowledgments must have agreed to be named. The [Committee on Publication Ethics Core Practices](https://publicationethics.org/core-practices) requires that all authors agree to the content of the acknowledgments, and the same principle applies to the people named in the acknowledgments. The corresponding author should confirm that each person named has consented. ### Should funding information be in the acknowledgments or in a separate section? Funding information belongs in the funding disclosure section of the manuscript, not in the acknowledgments. The funding disclosure section is a separate section that lists the funders and the grant numbers. The acknowledgments section should not include funding information unless the journal requires it to be included there. The [National Institutes of Health Grants and Funding](https://grants.nih.gov/) pages describe the requirements for acknowledging NIH funding. ### Can I acknowledge a colleague who provided general encouragement? No. The acknowledgments section is for professional contributions to the research. Personal support, such as encouragement, emotional support, or general advice, does not belong in the acknowledgments section. Personal support belongs in a personal note to the individual, not in the published manuscript. ### What should I do if a person I want to acknowledge meets the authorship criteria? If a person meets the authorship criteria, they should be listed as an author, not acknowledged. The [Committee on Publication Ethics Core Practices](https://publicationethics.org/core-practices) states that all contributors who meet the authorship criteria should be listed as authors. The author team should discuss the matter and decide whether the person should be listed as an author. ### How specific should the acknowledgment be about the contribution? The acknowledgment should be specific about the nature of the contribution. Instead of writing "We thank Dr. Smith for her help," write "We thank Dr. Smith for her statistical advice and for reviewing the data analysis." This specificity helps the reader understand the scope of the contribution and prevents ambiguity about the person's role. ### Should I include ORCID identifiers in the acknowledgments? The acknowledgments section may include the ORCID identifiers of the contributors. The [ORCID for Researchers](https://info.orcid.org/researchers) page describes the use of ORCID identifiers for researchers. The ORCID identifier should be included in the format specified by the journal. ### What should I do if a dispute arises about who should be acknowledged? The author team should escalate to a professional when ## Using the Evidence | Source | Best use in this topic | Important limitation | |---|---|---| | [Research Methods Resources](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books) | official guidance | Check the linked page for current local requirements | | [EQUATOR Network](https://www.equator-network.org/) | official guidance | Check the linked page for current local requirements | | [Core Practices](https://publicationethics.org/core-practices) | official guidance | Check the linked page for current local requirements | ## Related Articles - [The Role of the Research Ethics Committee: What Researchers Need to Know](/blog/guides/the-role-of-the-research-ethics-committee-what-researchers-need-to-know) - [Ethical Considerations in Psychological Research: A Guide for Students and Early-Career Researchers](/blog/guides/ethical-considerations-in-psychological-research-a-guide-for-students-and-early-career-researche) - [Writing the Methods Section of a Scientific Paper: A Reproducibility-Focused Guide](/blog/guides/writing-the-methods-section-of-a-scientific-paper-a-reproducibility-focused-guide) - [How to Read a Scientific Paper Efficiently](/blog/careers/how-to-read-a-scientific-paper-efficiently) - [Ethical Considerations in Research: A Practical Guide for Scientists](/blog/guides/ethical-considerations-in-research-a-practical-guide-for-scientists) ## References and Further Reading - [Research Methods Resources](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books). National Library of Medicine. - [EQUATOR Network](https://www.equator-network.org/). EQUATOR Network. - [Core Practices](https://publicationethics.org/core-practices). Committee on Publication Ethics. - [NIH Grants and Funding](https://grants.nih.gov/). National Institutes of Health. - [ORCID for Researchers](https://info.orcid.org/researchers). ORCID. - [Data Management and Sharing Policy](https://sharing.nih.gov/data-management-and-sharing-policy). National Institutes of Health. - [NCBI Literature Resources](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/). National Center for Biotechnology Information. - [PubMed](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/). National Library of Medicine. > This article is educational and does not replace institutional policy, professional advice, or applicable safety and regulatory requirements.