Most frequently, assignation of one author as corresponding author is more of a working arrangement between the authors than of any hierarchy.

However, there are certain institutions that encourages their staff to be either first author or corresponding author, to be eligible for certain credits in promotion, etc. So, it is left to the judgement and or involvement or contribution of the authors to play the role of corresponding author.

Muthuvairavasamy Ramkumar great contribution, well appreciated.

Some research guides make sure before taking a student that in future joint publications the guide will be the corresponding author because it is needed for his/her promotion in the university.

Subir Bandyopadhyay excellent information, thank you.

Hassan Izzeddin Sarsak

Corresponding author is the mostimportant author in a research article.

The point of the corresponding author is who to contact if you want to correspond about the paper author in a research article.

All my papers I am the first author and corresponding author

To be honest, I have no idea in the age of information why it is not possible to include email details of all authors and even a researcher identifier to mitigate the issue of authors moving between institutes. The main author, who knows why they did the work and wrote the proposal may not know all the details of all the aspects of the work. All authors should be contactable. To say that the main author should be the permanent staff member is to perpetuate the pyramid scheme of science jobs. Ideally the corresponding author should be the person those whom the idea came, who designed the entire work and who manage the entire work flow. He or she should have taken the responsibility from A to Z for the project.

Theoretically, any of the author who can provide appropriate answers or satisfy the editor or reviewers can be the corresponding author. However, in a practical situation, faculty staff (supervisor) who offer guidance and bring grant (finance) to the research generally be a corresponding author.

t is important to acknowledge the people involved in compiling and writing your research. Indeed, many journals now require authors to acknowledge not only the authors who were involved in writing up the research, but also any individuals who contributed to the research in some way. These are referred to as authorship and contributorship.This is the author who is nominated as being:

• Responsible for the manuscript as it moves through the entire publication process
• The ‘time keeper’ during each phase of the publication process
• The primary contact between the journal and all the other authors of the paper
• Responsible for ensuring that all authors have reviewed and approved the final version of the manuscript prior to submission
• The person who uploads the manuscript to the online submission site, or sends it to the journal for peer review
• Distributes communications from the journal (e.g., decision letters, reviewers’ reports).

Nirmala S.V.S.G thank you for this informative and useful comment.

Pankaj Tomar

Abu-Hussein Muhamad this is the same with my thought which actually led to this question. I once suffered on an article and ensured it went through the whole tough and stressful reviewers, and my boss forced me to put his name as the Corresponding Author, even though I am not happy. This prompted the above-mentioned question that why is it not possible to include more than one author's name.

Your thought is as good as mine. Thank you for that excellent contribution.

Muhammad Saad Khan excellent comment filled with facts in reality.

Can we now say there is conflict of interest in that regard?

Idea generator i.e owner of the concept.

@Awanish Kumar, thank you for this informative post.

Corresponding author is the link between the researcher and committee evaluation.

I think someone who is available to respond on time to the need of reviewers/editors.

R.T Kamorudeen Fares F. Fares and Jasim Hassen

Authorship is, or at least it might be, a rather sticky issue. The best time to define an authors responsibilities is before an article is written. Make sure everyone was going to contribute has defined roles and make sure that you haven't left anyone out should be acknowledged in the author chain. Sometimes a number gets to be too large and it may not be acceptable to the Journal to which you are submitting. In those cases it may be a matter of a recognition of some sort. If it can't be worked out in advance, it certainly is not going to get easier when an article is through 90% of the submission and review process and discover at that point that a specific author thinks that they should be recognized differently than another.

To great extent you probably need to have this worked out when you are applying for a position. If there is a directer of a line of research and you have applied to that individuals laboratory or clinical setting you should know upon application how publications are to be recognized. If you ask a point-blank question of the laboratory director how publications are to be arranged the answer to this question may well dictate whether or not you want to work and then laboratory. Remember you're going to get the best answer when you apply.

If you are working in a laboratory and you find that recognition for effort in publications is a an ongoing issue, it will probably never go away. In those situations it might be better to find a different laboratory. Sometimes it may not be the director of the laboratory the makes the decision, it could be the university or the hospital that decides. Regardless, you need to identify authorship before the projects begin. Although the best way to do that might be to have everyone sign off on the order before you start, this could be considered to be somewhat offensive. On the other hand if it is done this way every time it will probably be quite acceptable.

Steven E Eckert this is awesome, and succinctly explained which also covers beyond the boundary of the question for public digestion of all issues relating to authorship without limiting to correspondence alone. Thank you, Prof.

No 2 the person who uploads the manuscript to the online submission site, or sends it to the journal for peer review.

The ‘corresponding author’

This is the author who is nominated as being:

• Responsible for the manuscript as it moves through the entire publication process
• The ‘time keeper’ during each phase of the publication process
• The primary contact between the journal and all the other authors of the paper
• Responsible for ensuring that all authors have reviewed and approved the final version of the manuscript prior to submission
• The person who uploads the manuscript to the online submission site, or sends it to the journal for peer review
• Distributes communications from the journal (e.g., decision letters, reviewers’ reports).

Amal Saadoon Majeed well itemised and simplified. Kudos. Thank you very much.

Senior person in the research group / the most knowledgable scientist / head of the research team

M. R. Mozafari thank you, Doc.

The corresponding author is the link between the editorial evaluation process (submission, peer review, revisions etc) of a manuscript and its authors. Commonly the person who takes responsibility of this communication (not necessarily the senior-most or lead author) is the corresponding author.

In the present times, when multiple teams (scientists) collaborate to produce a research article, it is difficult for all to take responsibility of this communication. Hence, one of them takes this. This is a purely matter of convenience.

The listing of authors of a research contribution is on the other hand determined between authors either (a) by the order of reducing contribution of the individuals or (b) by the order of reducing contribution of the 'teams' of common affiliation.

I would not attribute any importance (in terms of the scientific contribution) beyond the above to the corresponding author.

In various research fields being the first author does not mean that one is the most important author. This is a matter of decision between team members, and collaborating author. There are fields , such as mathematics, that the order of authors is alphabetical. Sometimes a PhD student writes an article and collaborates with his adviser who puts his name as a first author, even though the student was the one who did most of the work.

I agree with Steven Eckert, this decision is discussed during the conceptualization of the paper. It could be any of the options mentioned by Kamoru.

Vivek S. Kale , Abu-Hussein Muhamad and Hussin Jose Hejase Profs, thank you all for those excellent contributions.

One who will corresponds.

Dr Kamath Madhusudhana

Madhusudhana Kamath YOU DID NOT READ THE QUESTION THROUGH!

It says who among the following;

1. the originator of the study (the owner of the concept),

2. the person who uploads the manuscript to the online submission site, or sends it to the journal for peer review, or

3. supervisor, who provides the intellectual input.?.

I think that the answer to this question could be any of the above. Think of it like a military position you have the general who conceptually guides the troops, you have the officer who is ensuring that the overall plan is carried out while also responding to changes on the battlefield and then you have the soldiers responding to what has happened and thinking on their feet. I thing the saying is that the plan falls apart with the first firing of a bullet.

It could be a business situation where you have the CEO setting out the plan, the president helping to ensure that the plan survives while responding to changes in the plan that are discovered somewhere along the way, and you have the secretary who is making sure that all things are occurring in the right sequence and making sure that everything is put together correctly.

Whether it's military or business or research, it doesn't matter, these three (sometimes more, rarely fewer) fundamentally different skill sets are required otherwise the plan, execution and description of the executed plan could go nowhere.

It's nice to say that every system is well defined. It may also be naïve to say that every system is well-defined. A system that has an exceedingly efficient secretary will likely do much better at getting ideas published than would one that has an exceedingly thoughtful CEO pushing out new ideas every cycle.Of course if the CEO is not there promoting new ideas the bucket runs dry quite quickly. Success follows a distinct pattern and it demands a working team.

The reality is that you work with what you have. If you can define what each person is good at this will likely be a more effective approach then performing the see one, do one, teach one approach. Thinking of the Army or thinking about the business world you need to have leaders but you need to have people who can take the lead and use it to achieve your goals and then you need that person who documents the process. Put the wrong person in the leadership program and you may go nowhere. It isn't a question of intellectual prowess or organizational skills, all have to be involved. If you have a university setting in the University has a defined research agenda, to a great extent, the agenda, if it has been or will be successful, is what needs to be accomplished you can have a great research program without publishing anything and the great research program falls flat on its face because without publication there is no confirmation that the research was ever done. Likewise you can have a great research program that moves along like a precision clock but if it doesn't get wound the mechanism will not work.

So I look at three categories listed above. I think it's much more important to look at three individuals (nothing magical about three this just happens to be the number of categories that you put up) and have them working towards the achievement of the goal. As long as everyone knows what the goal is and each one can make a contribution towards that goal it will be relatively successful.

Steven E Eckert Prof (Emeritus), this is excellent. It's worth publishing on its own to educate the research community. Kudos.

I agree with Prof Eckert , it could be any of the above, a corresponding author is one , who knows about the study/ research of that particular manuscript and who can answer to the queries of the reviewers.

Ramesh Chowdhary thank you for the contribution.

Hussin Jose Hejase Madhusudhana Kamath Amjad Ali Vivek S. Kale and Amjad Ali

@ALL , In addition, I have seen some articles with dual correspondences. What I do not know is, do authors request for it or it is a norm?

It is the person who contributes the most in the publication. As such, he knows the most about the paper.

Corres. Author is one who renders maximum input/contribution in a publication/ paper and conveys majority of relevant information, when being asked/ requested to do so.

Atul Kohli G Srinivasarao

It is not a matter of hight input or qualification, since all author should be involved in the amendment needed, any author can be the corresponding author. It might be agreed on that the author who uploaded the manus. Should be assigned as the corresponding author. Thank you.

Kamoru A. Adedokun ;

I think the most suitable is the student whose original project, publication and ideas come from him/her. Furthermore, we should respect one's intellectual property by honoring him/her as a Corresponding Author.

Unless, he or she willingly allows the supervisor to become the Corresponding Author...

I think it is the owner of the concept because he/she will be able to make necessary amendments whenever there is a need to do so. In the case of a student's project, the student should be the corresponding author. However, a supervisor may be the corresponding author if the student is a beginner.

Shamsul Rizal Mohd Rosedi and Aderonke Otunla thank you sincerely. It is clearly explained and well understood. Thumb-up.

@Dr. Kamoru, It's not the seniority or position that always decides for consideration of 1st author, but its the actual contribution or content or piece of research that matters towards consideration for corresponding author. There are a number of examples where the student or scholar is corresponding and/or first author.

Best,

AK

Many journal has corresponding author and submitting secreatery option while submitting the manuscripts, which I feel correct.

Corresponding author should be a person who should reply to any query after publication of manuscript and submitting Secretary should take care of manuscript during the review process.

Atul Kohli and Sunil Kumar Mishra thank you for the contributions.

Joshua O. Ighalo My brother, this simplifies everything, what an excellent idea!

@ Dr. Kamoru, It is not the qualification or designation, that leads to a Corresponding Author status. Many a times, it is the Graduate/PG/Research student who is the first/corresponding author while the Supervisor is 2nd or last in the que. Its nothing but a matter of (a) who has contributed maximum in work concerned, and (b) the inclination of Supervisor to give scope to a student and in this way to make the student feel better/confident. On the other hand, many a times, it is the Supervisor who takes first authorship.

Atul Kohli Thumb-up for more information.

The journals ask for the corresponding author , for the reason that , if any query arises pertaining to corrections or other issues of the submitted menuscript and even for the queries arising after the article is published , the corresponding author is the one who needs to answer these queries related to that article. so quite naturally the person who knows about the research of that manuscript , or the person who knows about the study and can reply needs to be corresponding author

Ramesh Chowdhary that is an indisputable fact. Thumb-up!

Someone who is in charge of correspondence from a journal.

As the name implies, someone who is responsible for all correspondences.

The person responsible for all correspondences with the journal.

Dr. Archana Shetty

Perhaps, it might be useful to break the concept of corresponding author into two: its ideal/scientific use and its idiosyncratic/nuanced use.

In its ideal use, the concept is synonymous with that of a first author, which embodies the originator of the core research idea embedded in the published paper. However, its idiosyncratic/nuanced use will vary across contexts and countries. In some Nigerian universities, for instance, graduate student research (regardless of the quality and depth of the student's input) are often published with the supervisor (regardless of their minimal input) assigned the first/corresponding author status.

The pragmatic implication of this analysis is that many corresponding authors may really not be so. Whether or not such a situation constitutes some subtle form of scientific fraud deserves further reflection.