Fundamental Science Practices Frequently Asked Questions

Proprietary information requires both an acknowledgment and written permission from the owner. For copyrighted materials, such as illustrations and photographs used, the figure caption contains the specific words requested by the copyright owner or "Copyrighted; used with permission." [Read more]

Templates available on the internal SPN website provide guidance to authors on placement of acknowledgment and crediting statements in USGS publications. Contact the Science Publishing Network for further information. [Read more]

The USGS author should contact the lead outside author and request that the publication not be made publicly accessible (i.e., galleys should not be posted online) until USGS FSP requirements are met. Alternatively, the USGS scientist’s name should be removed as an author and added to the acknowledgments. [Read more]

The FSP review and approval requirements apply to a USGS scientist who is a coauthor even if a non-USGS scientist is the lead or senior author. If the FSP requirements are not followed, the USGS scientist may not be listed as a coauthor.

Coauthors must make every effort to resolve authorship-related disputes or disagreements among themselves. If disputes or disagreements cannot be resolved among the coauthors, USGS employees should consult their supervisory/management organizational alignment up to the Regional Director or Associate Director for assistance. [Read more]

Department of the Interior (DOI) FAQs on Authorship in Scientific and Scholarly Work Products are available as part of additional guidance made available on the USGS Scientific Integrity website, which also includes links to the DOI Scientific Integrity website and the DOI Code of Conduct. [Read more]

Yes. By definition, a short review or "blurb" placed by the book publisher on the back cover, elsewhere on the book jacket, or as front matter or back matter inside the book is an endorsement of the contents. A USGS employee must not associate his or her position or affiliation with the USGS in these kinds of reviews. [Read more]

USGS defines peer review as scrutiny of work or ideas by colleagues (peers) who are well qualified and who are of equal standing with one another. The FSP requirements for peer review of USGS science information products are found in SM 502.3. [Read more]

No. For all USGS science information products an author and his/her supervisor are not allowed to serve as peer reviewers for one another, regardless of any collegial relationship or the expertise of either because doing so could be perceived as a conflict of interest. [Read more]

Peer review comments and reconciliation documents must follow the National Archives and Records Administration-approved recordkeeping schedule requirements found in USGS General Records Disposition Schedule, Chapter 1300. These short-term, temporary records must be retained by the Bureau for 3 years after publishing or until they are no longer needed for reference, whichever is later. [Read more]

The Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB) Final Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review requires public posting of documentation about the planning and conducting of peer review for those information products that Federal agencies have designated as influential scientific information or highly influential scientific assessments (terms defined by the OMB). [Read more]

Journal peer review processes—Category 1: anonymous peer reviews and draft manuscripts are not available to the public; USGS approval process for peer-reviewed journal articles is used. Category 2: peer reviews of draft manuscripts open to the public; two USGS-initiated peer reviews and Bureau approval are required before sending the manuscript to journal. [Read more]

Editing of USGS publication series scientific information products is required and must be coordinated or performed by the USGS Science Publishing Network (SPN). Review by SPN editors for other science information products, such as outside publications and web pages, is recommended but optional. [Read more]

The USGS Information Quality Guidelines website and the USGS Peer Review Agenda website help authors comply with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) requirements regarding scientific information quality and peer review of influential products.

If it is anticipated that a scientific information product will need to be handled in an expedited manner, the author and (or) Science Center Manager should inform the Bureau Approving Official as soon as possible so that arrangements can be made for expedited approval. Expedited peer reviews should be arranged within the Science Center when the peer reviewers are selected.

If there is a dispute between the author and her/his supervisor, Center Director, or others in her/his chain of command regarding the adequacy of peer review or scientific/technical interpretation, the author may contact the Director or Deputy Director of the OSQI for assistance with the resolution of the differences. The author may also contact the FSP Advisory Committee for advice. [Read more]

Cooperator publications are released in full by the cooperating entity in a publicly accessible location and are clearly a cooperator's product and not a USGS product. Cooperator publications must receive at least two peer reviews, reconciliation, supervisory and science center approvals, and Bureau approval before release. [Read more]

Peer-reviewed journal submissions require a minimum of two peer reviews. Bureau approval occurs after peer review reconciliation and before the reconciled manuscript is returned to the journal for possible acceptance. [Read more]

A minimum of one USGS initiated peer review and one peer review by the journal are required. All peer reviews, regardless of the source, and their associated reconciliations, must be included in the package submitted for Bureau approval. [Read more]

Manuscripts authored or coauthored by USGS scientists and intended for publication in peer-reviewed journals may follow one of two approaches for the peer-review and approval process as outlined in the FAQ. The selection of approach is at the discretion of the Science Center Director. [Read more]

Yes. Science Centers or authors may obtain any number of additional USGS-initiated peer reviews they deem necessary to strengthen the quality of a manuscript before submitting the manuscript to a journal. BAOs in the OSQI also have authority to require additional peer reviews. [Read more]