Extended definition
Acknowledgments is the section of an academic manuscript that recognizes substantive contributions to the work that do not meet the four ICMJE authorship criteria — conception/analysis, drafting/critical revision, final approval, and responsibility for the work. Types of contribution canonically recognized in this section: funding (with grant number and specific agency), institutional infrastructure (laboratories, shared equipment), technical support (equipment operation, sample preparation, statistical analysis under author direction), critical review by colleagues on preliminary drafts, and — increasingly common in contemporary research — contracted specialized technical services (statistical consultation, computational analysis, substantive editing, academic translation). Cronin (1995, The Scholar’s Courtesy) is the classic sociological reference on recognition practices; Paul-Hus et al. (2017, Journal of Informetrics) offered contemporary quantitative analysis crossing authorship and acknowledgments to reveal collaboration patterns. ICMJE explicitly recommends that people mentioned in acknowledgments be informed and have consented — good editorial practice.
When it applies
Acknowledgments apply in every manuscript where there were substantive contributions beyond named authors — that is, in nearly every manuscript. Funded research requires explicit declaration of source and grant number in compliance with funder mandates (ERC, NIH, NSF, and national agency requirements). It applies in projects with contracted research services: non-coauthor statistical consultation, outsourced computational analysis, substantive editing or academic rewriting, publication-quality academic translation. CRediT partially integrates this function, but acknowledgments remain necessary for recognitions outside the 14 CRediT roles (institutional funding, ethically declared family support, etc.). It applies to declaration of generative AI use — editorial policy growing since 2023 requires explicit declaration of tools used and purpose.
When it does not apply
It does not apply as a bridge to courtesy authorship: someone who does not meet ICMJE cannot be an author; someone who meets ICMJE should be an author (not merely acknowledged). It does not replace formal conflict of interest declarations — these have their own dedicated section in modern manuscripts. It does not apply for inflated recognitions (mentioning the lab head who had no substantive involvement in the specific work — “honorary mention” practice criticized as problematic). It does not apply in informal communication (posts, talks), although acknowledgments are frequent there as courtesy.
Applications by field
— Health and biomedical sciences: declaration of funding and use of tissues/bank data is mandatory; ICMJE governs practices. — Social sciences: recognition of research assistants, transcribers, informal reviewers; mention of anonymized participants in some cases. — Computer science: acknowledgment of computational infrastructure (clusters, cloud credits), anonymous paper reviewers, open-source code contributions. — Humanities: tradition of extensive acknowledgments to colleagues, archivists, librarians; more conversational culture.
Common pitfalls
The first pitfall is treating acknowledgments as space for excessive or sentimental recognitions — modern editorial convention favors conciseness and focus on substantive contributions. The second is mentioning people without consent: ICMJE recommends obtaining written authorization (especially when the acknowledgment suggests endorsement of the work). The third is omitting funding or grant number: omission can breach the funder contract and compromise future funding. The fourth is failing to declare generative AI use in writing or analysis — editorial policies growing since 2023 require transparency. The fifth is placing in acknowledgments contributions that meet ICMJE authorship — characterizes ghost authorship, unacceptable editorial practice documented in COPE flowcharts.