research paper author affiliation

• Interlibrary Loan and Scan & Deliver
• Course Reserves
• Purchase Request
• Collection Development & Maintenance
• Current Negotiations
• Ask a Librarian
• Instructor Support
• Library How-To
• Research Guides
• Research Support
• Study Rooms
• Research Rooms
• Partner Spaces
• Loanable Equipment
• Print, Scan, Copy
• 3D Printers
• Poster Printing
• OSULP Leadership
• Strategic Plan

Scholarly Articles: How can I tell?

• Journal Information
• Literature Review

Author and affiliation

Learn more about the author.

• Introduction
• Specialized Vocabulary
• Methodology
• Research sponsors
• Peer-review

If you can't find an author affiliation or want to learn more about the authors and their credentials, here are some ways to do so:

• Search for the author on Google. Sometimes you can find a personal page about an individual. Many of the faculty members at OSU have a website that lists their credentials (education) and research.
• Do a search in one of the online databases to see what else the author has written. Is this person someone who published a lot in this field? For example, a search in the Academic Search Complete database for the author Sandra Hofferth shows the articles she has co-authored on a range of children's issues .
• Look up the institution. What kind of institution is it?  Is the author still affiliated with the institution?

One of the first things to look for is the author or authors. In a research article, the authors will list their affiliation, usually with a university or research institution. In this example, the author's affiliation is clearly shown on the first page of the article. In a research article, you will never have an anonymous author or need to look for the author's name or affiliation.

• << Previous: Literature Review
• Next: Abstract >>
• Last Updated: Apr 15, 2024 3:26 PM
• URL: https://guides.library.oregonstate.edu/ScholarlyArticle

Contact Info

121 The Valley Library Corvallis OR 97331–4501

Phone: 541-737-3331

Services for Persons with Disabilities

In the Valley Library

• Oregon State University Press
• Special Collections and Archives Research Center
• Undergrad Research & Writing Studio
• Graduate Student Commons
• Tutoring Services
• Northwest Art Collection

Digital Projects

• Oregon Explorer
• Oregon Digital
• ScholarsArchive@OSU
• Digital Publishing Initiatives
• Atlas of the Pacific Northwest
• Marilyn Potts Guin Library  
• Cascades Campus Library
• McDowell Library of Vet Medicine

We use cookies on this site to enhance your experience

By clicking any link on this page you are giving your consent for us to set cookies.

A link to reset your password has been sent to your email.

Back to login

We need additional information from you. Please complete your profile first before placing your order.

Thank you. payment completed., you will receive an email from us to confirm your registration, please click the link in the email to activate your account., there was error during payment, orcid profile found in public registry, download history, understanding author affiliation and accurately mentioning it in different scenarios.

• Charlesworth Author Services
• 16 April, 2022

In academic publishing, the affiliation of an author is the place (institution) at which the author conducted the research that they have reported / written about . However, given the frequent mobility of academics, that place may not necessarily be the place the author happens to be based at the time of submitting the paper . This article explains the significance of affiliation and illustrates how to accurately mention your affiliation in different scenarios.

The importance of affiliation

In some cases, affiliation is linked to authenticity . Imagine a research paper on field pollination of rice by an author whose affiliation is that of an institute in the polar region. It is not that this work cannot be done, but it would seem incongruous and may raise doubts.

In many cases, it is a matter of prestige . Science may be democratic, but not all research institutions and laboratories are considered equal.

Some may be better equipped than others. Some may have more luminaries on their staff – people who have outstanding work (or even prizes) to their credit. Some may have enviable collections of records or research material. 

Therefore, by proxy, work carried out at those institutions is regarded more highly, at least initially, than that carried out at lesser-known institutions.

A study by Peters and Ceci (1982) found that when 12 already published papers were resubmitted after doctoring the affiliations to replace the original high-status institutions with fictitious ones with no status in the field, eight of those papers were rejected.

Mentioning your affiliation in a paper

In nearly all published papers, affiliations of their authors are given after their names but before the abstract. The typical sequence is: 

• Title of the paper
• Names of authors
• Affiliations
• Abstract and keywords

Paper with title, author names, affiliation, abstract and keywords

Mentioning affiliation and address

Authors of research papers must keep an important distinction in mind: that an affiliation is not the same thing as a mailing address . The former names the institution at which the work in question was carried out whereas the latter simply supplies the current contact details of the author. 

For example…

A PhD candidate submitting a paper based on their doctoral work should name, as their affiliation, the university/institution that is granting them the doctorate. However, that author may have since moved to another institution for a post-doctoral job. This is not considered their affiliation, but just provides their current contact details.

Therefore, you may have to name two institutions in your manuscript: 

• Under Affiliation : Name the institution where the work (that forms the subject of the present study) was undertaken.
• Under Current address : Name the institution at which you happen to be working at the time of submission or even your home address if you have retired. 

Note : The ‘current address’ serves as the means of contact and can change; the affiliation cannot. 

Mentioning affiliation when you change your institute

It may also happen that when you submitted the paper, you were stationed at Institute A and accordingly gave that as your contact address, and subsequently, you moved to Institute B. In such cases, so long as your paper is yet to be published, you should inform the journal of your new current address at Institute B. The paper is based on the work you carried out while you were based at institute A, which constitutes the affiliation and remains unchanged.

Mentioning affiliations for multi-author papers

Most research papers have multiple authors and not all of them may have the same affiliation. To match their names to their affiliations, journals may use the method used for indicating footnotes . The names of authors are followed by superscript letters, numerals or other symbols, and the same symbols precede the respective affiliations.

We recommend : Note the journal’s preferred method (letters, numerals or other symbols) and be sure to  follow the  journal guidelines  when  preparing your manuscripts for submission .

Numerals indicating authors (above) and their affiliations (below) in a paper

Dealing with affiliations during peer review

To avoid the kind of bias mentioned earlier, affiliation information is removed in manuscripts sent out for review: in a blind review , the reviewers do not know who wrote the paper under review, nor their institutional affiliation. To make this easier, many journals ask that such identifying information be separated from the body of the paper . Authors are advised to attend to the journal’s instructions in this regard, which typically involve a separate title page explicitly showing the names and affiliations. This page is usually removed before sending the paper to reviewers.

Maximise your publication success with Charlesworth Author Services.

Charlesworth Author Services, a trusted brand supporting the world’s leading academic publishers, institutions and authors since 1928.

To know more about our services, visit: Our Services

Share with your colleagues

Related articles.

Authorship of academic papers

Charlesworth Author Services 11/07/2017 00:00:00

Understanding and following the Information for Authors (Author Guidelines)

Charlesworth Author Services 12/01/2022 00:00:00

What to pay attention to when submitting your article

Charlesworth Author Services 16/03/2021 00:00:00

Related webinars

Bitesize Webinar: How to write and structure your academic article for publication - Module 1: Know when are you ready to write

Charlesworth Author Services 04/03/2021 00:00:00

Bitesize Webinar: How to write and structure your academic article for publication: Module 4: Prepare to write your academic paper

Bitesize Webinar: How to write and structure your academic article for publication: Module 6: Choose great titles and write strong abstracts

Charlesworth Author Services 05/03/2021 00:00:00

Bitesize Webinar: How to write and structure your academic article for publication: Module 11: Know when your article is ready for submission

How to use Footnotes and Endnotes in academic papers

Charlesworth Author Services 28/01/2022 00:00:00

From writing to submission: Checklist for writing and submitting a Quality Scientific Article

Charlesworth Author Services 10/11/2021 00:00:00

Differences between Single-Blind and Double-Blind Peer Review

Charlesworth Author Services 22/09/2020 00:00:00

• Writing Your Manuscript
• Copyright & Plagiarism
• Publication Ethics
• Deceptive (Predatory) Publishing
• Citation Styles
• Writing Help
• Peer Review
• Author Affiliations

Writing Your Manuscript : Author Affiliations

• Health Science Information Consortium
• University Health Network - New

How should you include affiliation information for the authors?

When you are getting ready to submit your manuscript you will need to include the author names, their credentials, and their affiliations - but with so many institution names and affiliations, what do you do?  UHN Research has developed guidance to help you with listing affiliations, find that guidance as a PDF document and in the text below.

• UHN Author Affiliations Guidance Guidance from UHN Research for best practices for listing names, affiliations and funding in publications. December 21, 2022

UHN Guidance for Author Names and Affiliations in Publications

December 21, 2022

This document provides guidance to UHN researchers on best practices for listing their names, UHN affiliations, and funding in publications to ensure consistency, maximize traceability and publicity.

Why this is important

There is an increased push towards increasing accountability for scientists, research institutes, and funding agencies through more effective data collection of research outputs.

As a researcher, you can better showcase your scientific output by ensuring that your publications are correctly attributed to you, your institution(s), and your funders in various databases.

The guidance is as follows:

1) Publish under a Consistent Author Name

It is recommended that you publish under a consistent name format, and that you try to make that name format as unique as possible. Ensure that all future publications list your name in the same format, including those in which you are a co-author.

For example, including a middle name or initial such as “H. C.” can help differentiate “Robert H. C. Chen” from the approximately 30 other “Robert Chen”s in the Web of Science database. This becomes particularly important in journals that only list the initials and last name of authors (e.g. ~15 “R. H. Chen”s vs ~235 “R. Chen”s in Web of Science).

It is recommended that you do not publish under diminutive names (e.g. “Bob” instead of “Robert”) as analysts and database programs may not be aware of these aliases. If you prefer to go by an alias or diminutive name, it is recommended that you use that specific name in all your publications, including those in which you are a co-author.

2) Include Author Identifiers such as ORCID

Whenever possible, it is recommended that you submit an author identifier when you submit a manuscript. A popular identifier is the Open Researcher and Contributor ID (ORCID; https://orcid.org/ ).

When journal publishers send article information to the various databases (e.g., Web of Science, Scopus) for indexing, they also provide ORCID information. This guarantees that the publication will be included in the search results when someone searches for you using your ORCID in the database.

Many major publishers now require that authors’ ORCIDs be submitted along with the manuscript. By including your ORCID when submitting a manuscript, the publication will automatically be added to your ORCID profile—ensuring that the publications in your profile are always up to date.

Most of the major publication databases can update your ORCID profile with their data, but only a select few (Web of Science/Publons and Europe PMC) allow synchronization in the reverse direction (i.e. permit your ORCID profile to update their database). This can lead to your publications not being properly attributed to you in databases.

For more information on what ORCID does and how to manage yours, visit the Research Intranet ORCID service page .

3) Ensure Complete and Proper Listing of Affiliations

It is recommended that “University Health Network” (fully spelled out) is part of your affiliation listing, as well as your Research Institute or hospital site. Your UHN affiliation does not have to take precedence over other, more-direct affiliations such as a clinical unit, but it should be present.

Affiliations are important because many external organizations will identify your publications based only on the listed author names and affiliations. Failure to list all your affiliations may lead to you, your group, your Research Institute, or UHN not being credited with your work. This can impact the accuracy of reviews.

The recommended formats for listing the Research Institutes at UHN are as follows:

KITE - Toronto Rehabilitation Institute, University Health Network.

[Krembil Brain Institute / Donald K Johnson Eye Institute / Schroeder Arthritis Institute], Krembil Research Institute, University Health Network.

McEwen Stem Cell Institute, University Health Network.

Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network.

Techna Institute, University Health Network.

The Institute for Education Research, University Health Network.

Toronto General Hospital Research Institute, University Health Network.

Here are some common errors in listing affiliations at UHN:

4) Ensure Complete Listing of Funding

When you acknowledge the funding sources for your work, it is recommended that you include the grant identifiers (IDs).

Databases, such as Web of Science, Scopus and Dimensions, index almost all information in a publication—including the acknowledgement section. They offer the option of searching for publications associated with specific grant IDs. Granting agencies may track these IDs to assess their return on investment.

To demonstrate your productive track record and the benefits of funding your research, include the agency/sponsor-assigned grant ID of the grants that supported the research that you are submitting for publication.

Princess Margaret Cancer Centre also recommends that their researchers use the following template text for citing funding in their published work:

Funding for this work was provided by [other sources of funding citing specific grant sponsors to the published work in order of magnitude of contribution], Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, The Princess Margaret Cancer Foundation, and Ontario Ministry of Health.

• << Previous: Peer Review
• Last Updated: Aug 17, 2023 3:41 PM
• URL: https://guides.hsict.library.utoronto.ca/writingyourmanuscript

We acknowledge this sacred land on which the University Health Network operates. For thousands of years it has been the traditional territory of the Huron-Wendat, the Haudenosaunee, and most recently, the Mississaugas of the Credit River. This territory was the subject of the Dish With One Spoon Wampum Belt Covenant, an agreement between the Haudenosaunee Confederacy and the Confederacy of the Ojibwe and allied nations to peaceably share and care for the resources around the Great Lakes. Today, the meeting place of Toronto is still the home to many Indigenous people from across Turtle Island and we are grateful to have the opportunity to work and learn on this territory

UHN Library and Information Services

In this section:

• Advertising and sponsorship
• Authorship and contributorship
• Competing interests
• Copyright and authors’ rights
• Correction and retraction policies
• Data protection policy
• Data sharing
• Editor Roles & Responsibilities
• Gender identity and race & ethnicity data in ScholarOne
• Patient and public partnership
• Patient consent and confidentiality
• Peer Review Terms and Conditions
• Publication embargo
• Reproducing third party illustrative materials
• Research Ethics
• Rapid responses
• Scientific misconduct
• Trial registration

This policy ensures that contributors who have made substantive intellectual contributions to an article are given credit and that contributors understand their role in taking responsibility and being accountable for what is published. Contributors are either author contributors (meaning that they meet all four authorship criteria – see below) or non-author contributors.

BMJ credits and lists contributors in two ways:

• Authorship – we publish a list of authors’ names at the beginning of the paper in the byline
• Contributorship – we publish a contributorship statement at the end of the paper, giving details of who did what in planning, conducting, and reporting the work. This should include all author contributors and may include non-author contributors.

We also publish an acknowledgements statement at the end of the paper, detailing those who helped in carrying out the research but that have not been recognised as contributors, and for personal expressions of gratitude.

Submitting author

Corresponding author, joint first authorship, collaborators (group authorship), deceased authors, alteration to authorship, acknowledgements.

The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals ( ICMJE Recommendations 2019 ) recommend that authorship be based on the following four criteria:

• Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND
• Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; AND
• Final approval of the version to be published; AND
• Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

BMJ requires that all those designated as authors should meet all four ICMJE criteria for authorship, and all who meet the four criteria should be identified as author contributors. We recognise only natural persons (an individual human being, as opposed to a private or public organisation) as authors. These authorship criteria are intended to reserve the status of authorship for those who deserve credit and can take responsibility for the work. The criteria should not be used to disqualify colleagues from authorship who otherwise meet authorship criteria by denying them the opportunity to meet criterion number 2 or 3. Therefore, all individuals who meet the first criterion should have the opportunity to participate in the review, drafting and final approval of the manuscript.

Contributors who have contributed materially to the paper but whose contributions do not justify authorship should be described clearly in the contributorship statement .

In addition to being accountable for the parts of the work they have done, an author should be able to identify which co-authors are responsible for specific other parts of the work. In addition, authors should have confidence in the integrity of the contributions of their co-authors.

Submitting authors should provide assurance that all authors included on a paper fulfil the criteria of authorship. We also ask for assurance that there is no one else who fulfils the criteria that has been excluded as an author.

When we encounter disagreements among authors we follow guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

The submitting author takes primary responsibility for submitting the article to the journal using our manuscript submission system ScholarOne and for communicating with the journal during the article submission, peer review and revision process. They ensure that all of the journal’s administrative requirements are properly completed. These include, but are not limited to, providing details of authorship, ethics committee approval, clinical trial registration documentation, and gathering conflict of interest forms and statements. These tasks may be delegated to one or more co-authors, but the submitting author remains responsible for them.

When you submit your article through our submission system you will be asked to provide a name, email address and institutional affiliation for all author contributors. In the final published article author names, institutions and addresses will be taken from these completed fields and not from the submitted Word document.

Affiliations listed should be those where the work was carried out at the time the research/article was written. If institution details appear incorrectly these can be directly amended under ‘Actions’ by selecting the ‘Edit’ drop down next to each author.

All author contributors receive a confirmation email when an article has been submitted and when a final decision is made.

The submitting author should assign the corresponding author when providing author details (see below for more information about the corresponding author role). The submitting author and corresponding author can be the same person.

The corresponding author, as listed on ScholarOne, takes primary responsibility for completing all necessary actions after acceptance of the manuscript and communicating with the journal and with readers after publication. All email communication from BMJ will be sent to the corresponding author including:

• The timeline for your article proof with a link to Publishing at Work where you can track your article’s status
• If your article will be published open access or in colour in the print edition of the journal, you will receive an email from Rightslink with payment options and instructions. If you are not making the payment yourself, you may forward the email to the person or organisation that will be paying on your behalf
• A link to review and approve the proof when available
• Confirmation that your article has been published online
• Notifications when a response has been posted to your article

Find out more about what to expect when your article has been accepted .

Although we include only one corresponding author on ScholarOne for email communication, multiple authors can be listed with correspondence information in the author byline of the final published article. This information can be included at the article proof stage, after acceptance.

Note, the policy for The BMJ differs and can be found here

Joint first authors can be indicated by the inclusion of the statement ‘X and X contributed equally to this paper’ in the contributorship statement.

Collaborators are a large group of multi-author contributors (e.g. a specific consortium, committee, study group or the like). Collaborators should decide who will be an author before the work is started and confirm who is an author before submitting the manuscript for publication. All members of the group named as authors should meet all four criteria for authorship as detailed above. They will also be expected as individuals to complete conflict-of-interest disclosure forms and provide a summary in the relevant section.

The collaborator group name(s) should be included in the main author list on ScholarOne. The collaborator group name(s) followed by the individual names should also be listed in the ‘Collaborator’ field on ScholarOne. BMJ will list the author group name(s) in the author byline, with the full list of individual names included in a collaborator statement at the end of the article. Details of the group’s contributions should also be listed in the ‘Contributorship statement’ field on ScholarOne.

If the journal is indexed in PubMed (MEDLINE and/or PubMed Central), the group name will be listed in the author byline and the names of individual group members entered as collaborators on the PubMed record to ensure individual due credit.

The BMJ Effect of a collector bag for measurement of postpartum blood loss after vaginal delivery: cluster randomised trial in 13 European countries

PubMed record >>

BMJ Open Establishing a core outcome set for treatment of uncomplicated appendicitis in children: study protocol for an international Delphi survey

AI technologies will not be accepted as an author(s) of any content submitted to BMJ for publication. BMJ only recognises humans as being capable of authorship since they must be accountable for the work.

Deceased persons deemed appropriate as authors should be highlighted to the Editorial Assistant when submitting your article and should also be included in your contributorship statement.

If an author’s affiliation has changed during the course of the work, the author may either list the affiliation at the time that the research (or most significant portion of the research) was conducted, or their current affiliation, or both. The change of affiliation can be explained in an acknowledgements section.

Any change in authors after initial submission and before publication must be approved by all authors. This applies to additions, deletions, a change of order to the authors’ names or a change to the attribution of contributions. Any alterations must be explained to the Editor. The Editor may contact any of the authors and/or contributors to ascertain whether they have agreed to any alteration.

Contributorship statement

A contributorship statement is required for every article submitted and should outline who has contributed what to the planning, conduct and reporting of the work described in the article. A contributorship statement should include author contributors, non author contributors and group author contributors (collaborators). Contributors who have contributed materially to the paper but whose contributions do not justify authorship should be described clearly in the contributorship statement; for example, “served as scientific advisors”, “critically reviewed the study proposal”, “collected data” or “provided and cared for study patients”.

Researchers must determine among themselves the precise nature of each person’s contribution, and we encourage open discussion among all participants to reach a consensus.

This is also the appropriate place to include contributions by patients or members of the public who have assisted as research volunteers, giving their names and specific roles. We encourage authors to fully acknowledge the contribution of patients and the public to their research where appropriate.

All individuals named in the contributorship statement must give permission to be included, as readers may infer their endorsement of the data and conclusions of the paper. It is the responsibility of the submitting author to ensure that permission is obtained and to be able to provide evidence of this if required.

Each contributorship statement must make clear who is responsible for the overall content as guarantor. The guarantor accepts full responsibility for the finished work and/or the conduct of the study, had access to the data, and controlled the decision to publish.

• To ensure transparent declaration of AI, authors should:

2. Transparent declaration includes a description of: 

• What AI technology was used (the name of the technology)
• Why this AI technology was used (the reason for its use)
• How the AI technology was used (what the task of the technology was)
• Consider including a summary of the input, output, and the way in which the AI output was reviewed on the part of the authors as supplementary files or additional information for the editor to review. The editor may ask for more information and/or for information to be added to the content for internal use and/or for publication.

An acknowledgements statement may be included at the end of the paper, detailing those who helped in carrying out the research but who have not been recognised as contributors, as well as for personal expressions of gratitude.

Because acknowledgment may imply endorsement by acknowledged individuals of a study’s data and conclusions, authors are strongly advised to obtain permission to be acknowledged from all acknowledged individuals before submitting to any BMJ journal.

A uthor name change requests

As an inclusive publisher, BMJ wishes to ensure a smooth process and experience to facilitate author name changes after publication. For more information on how to request an author name change in an existing publication see our corrections policies.

Last updated: March 2023

Publishing Strategies: Author Affiliations

• Author Affiliations
• Where to Publish
• Finding Collaborators

Affiliations in academic papers refer to places (institutions) where authors belong when they are conducting the published research. Given the mobility of faculty, the affiliated institutions may not always be the ones that authors based at the time of paper submission. Publishing with accurate affiliation(s) facilitates not only authorship identification, but also citation tracking for both authors themselves and their affiliated organisations, which prevents scattered citation counts in split profiles. Note that publishers seldom allow changes on affiliations once the paper is accepted, and it takes time and effort for both authors and publishers to communicate and rectify the wrong data. Authors are therefore advised to check and display correct affiliation data in their publications to minimise problems with authorship misattribution, paper disappearance, citation loss, etc.

What are publishers saying about affiliations?

• Taylor & Francis: https://authorservices.taylorandfrancis.com/editorial-policies/defining-authorship-research-paper/#affiliations
• Springer: https://www.springer.com/us/editorial-policies/authorship-principles#toc-49266
• Elsevier: https://service.elsevier.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/34306/supporthub/publishing/
• Cambridge University Press: https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/authors/journals/author-affiliations
• Next: Where to Publish >>
• Last Updated: Dec 7, 2023 8:31 AM
• URL: https://libguides.library.cityu.edu.hk/publishing_strategies

© City University of Hong Kong | Copyright | Disclaimer

• - Google Chrome

Intended for healthcare professionals

• Access provided by Google Indexer
• My email alerts
• BMA member login
• Username * Password * Forgot your log in details? Need to activate BMA Member Log In Log in via OpenAthens Log in via your institution

Search form

• Advanced search
• Search responses
• Search blogs
• News & Views
• Research papers should...
• Authors’ affiliations in Research Papers: To Include or not

Rapid response to:

Research papers should omit their authors’ affiliations

• Related content
• Article metrics
• Rapid responses

Rapid Response:

The fact that the affiliation of authors could influence readers/reviewers has been highlighted by Matthew Harris in a Personal View (1). It has also been suggested that research papers should omit their authors’ affiliations. Nevertheless, we assume that, although the presence of authors’ affiliations in the articles could impose the concept that the study is well-conducted or more immediately relevant to the context of the reader, their elimination would violate the freedom of the readers.

Furthermore, when it comes to the medical sciences and the lives that could be either saved thanks to an excellent study or lost due to a fabricated or biased study, the editors and reviewers ought to be more cautious. The emerging discipline of “reverse innovation” is extremely appealing yet it neglects a crucial fact. In case of detection of any conflict, bias, mistake or fabrication in the studies from within developed countries, they are ultimately retracted from the databases; this is not an uncommon phenomenon these days, especially in the leading journals (2, 3). Consequently, the authors shoulder the responsibility; appropriate legislation is ready to be promptly implemented and the losses caused due to the flawed study are compensated to some extents. One might skeptically pose the question whether this would be true for all authors from every corner of the world.

References:

1. BMJ 2014;349:g6439 2. Shafer SL. Editor's Note: Notice of Retraction. Anesth Analg. 2014;119(5):1225. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000000417. 3. Lancet Editors. Retraction--Valsartan in a Japanese population with hypertension and other cardiovascular disease (Jikei Heart Study): a randomised, open-label, blinded endpoint morbidity-mortality study. Lancet. 2013; 7;382(9895):843. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)61847-4.

Competing interests: No competing interests

• Journal Article Publishing Support Center

To post social content, you must have a display name. The page will refresh upon submission. Any pending input will be lost.

What affiliations should I use?

Authors should use their current or recent affiliation in Author forms, and the affiliation that applied mostly when the manuscript was being prepared/ research was undertaken in the proofs of the paper.

Proof Central makes it possible to change the author list, including the affiliations and the associated footnotes. To do so, click on the 'pencil' icon to open the edit screen in the right pane. Here you can add, remove or edit author names, the author’s associated affiliations and footnotes. Changes made to the author group will always be reviewed and require approval from the journal editor, to make sure no invalid correction is being made by the corresponding author.

Was this answer helpful?

Thank you for your feedback, it will help us serve you better. If you require assistance, please scroll down and use one of the contact options to get in touch.

Help us to help you:

Thank you for your feedback!

• Why was this answer not helpful?
• It was hard to understand / follow.
• It did not answer my question.
• The solution did not work.
• There was a mistake in the answer.
• Feel free to leave any comments below: Please enter your feedback to submit this form

Related Articles:

• What should I do if my organization (i.e. affiliation or funder) is not found when I am requested to add this information when completing the Rights and Access form?
• Author Guide to the Publication Process (Post-Acceptance)
• What should I do if the proof is incorrect or incomplete?
• Will I get to check my proofs again?
• Can I make a correction to my typeset article after I have returned my proofs?

For further assistance:

Library Research Guides - University of Wisconsin Ebling Library

Uw-madison libraries research guides.

• Course Guides
• Subject Guides
• University of Wisconsin-Madison
• Research Guides
• Publication Tracking
• Searching for an Individual Author in PubMed

Publication Tracking : Searching for an Individual Author in PubMed

• Getting Started
• Searching for a Group of Authors in PubMed
• Searching for an Institution or Department in PubMed
• Searching for an Individual Author in Scopus
• Searching for a Group of Authors in Scopus
• Searching for an Affiliation in Scopus
• Searching for an Individual Author in Google Scholar
• Searching for a Group of Authors in Google Scholar
• Searching for an Affiliation in Google Scholar
• Exporting Search Results

This page gives tips on how to search for an individual author in PubMed. Click here to access this information as a downloadable PDF.

Click here to access a PDF containing search templates and examples of searching for an individual author in PubMed.

Creating Your Search

1. construct a broad search strategy.

You will want to begin by using the broadest and least limiting search terms to ensure you do not inadvertently exclude relevant publications.

To do this, start with your most basic search of last name and first initial, and then add the PubMed author field tag [au] to the end of the name. So, for example, if you wanted to search for publications by a Dr. John E. Doe, your initial search would look like this:

With this search, you will be retrieving publications with authors that have the last name of Doe, and a first initial of J. In consequence, this search will be likely to retrieve most all relevant results for the author, but it will also be including a lot of irrelevant results as well (e.g. authors whose names are John P. Doe, Jason Doe, or Janet Doe, etc.).

2. Limit Your Search by Author's Middle Initial

If you want to narrow your search, you can limit it by including the author's middle initial. However, you will want to correct for name ambiguity in your search, to ensure you will not miss relevant results. For example, the author, John E. Doe, may write their name in different ways in their publications (e.g. sometimes they may be referred to as J Doe, without a middle initial, or as J E Doe in a PubMed record). To correct for this, you will want to include name variations in your search, just like in the strategy used below:

"Doe J"[au] OR Doe JE[au]

This search will retrieve any articles that either have J. Doe or J.E. Doe in the author field. The quotation marks around "Doe J" ensures that PubMed will only retrieve articles that list J Doe but that do not include a middle initial. So, for example, a search of Doe J, without quotation marks, such as in your first search, will retrieve articles with authors like J M Doe, J P Doe, etc., whereas "Doe J" in quotation marks will only retrieve authors listed as J Doe. This way, we will be retrieving articles regardless of whether John E Doe decides to include their middle initial or not in their paper, but we won't be retrieving as many irrelevant results, like we did in the first search.

3. When Possible, Include ORCID ID

ORCID IDs are like a social security number for researchers. If consistently included in publications and updated by the researcher, they can solve the issue of name ambiguity when searching for publications. For more information on ORCID IDs, visit the ORCID ID research guide .

If the author you are searching for happens to have an ORCID ID, you can include it in your search. To do this, you will add the ORCID ID using OR, just like you would add an alternative name for the author, and use the [auid] field tag, like so:

"Doe J"[au] OR Doe JE[au] OR  0000-0003-0799-4776[auid]

4. Limit Your Search by Author Affiliation

You can further limit your results by including an author's affiliation information in your search. However, just like author names, affiliations are subject to name ambiguity. Affiliations in PubMed are not standardized, and can be represented in multiple ways. So, for example, the University of Wisconsin-Madison can be listed as the University of Wisconsin-Madison, UW, UW-Madison, University of Wisconsin, etc. To correct for this, you will want to include name variations in your affiliation search string by using OR, just like you did for your author names.You will also be adding the affiliation field tag [affil].

You will then combine this with your author search by using AND, and enclosing each search string in parentheses. So your search would look like this:

("Doe J"[au] OR Doe JE[au] OR  0000-0003-0799-4776[auid] ) AND (wisconsin[affil] OR madison[affil] OR UW[affil] OR wi[affil] OR wisc[affil])

Depending on how comprehensive you would like your search to be, you may also want to consider adding past affiliations to your search (e.g. if John Doe worked at another institution before they began working at UW-Madison).If you decide to do this, you would simply combine these past affiliations with the current ones by using OR. So, for example, if John Doe worked at the University of Iowa before coming to UW-Madison, and you wanted to include their Iowa publications as well, your search may look something like this:

("Doe J"[au] OR Doe JE[au] OR  0000-0003-0799-4776[auid] ) AND (wisconsin[affil] OR madison[affil] OR UW[affil] OR wi[affil] OR wisc[affil] OR iowa[affil] OR uiowa[affil] )

5. Limit Your Search by Date

An additional way you can narrow your search results is to limit your results by a specific date range. Just like before, you would combine this search string with your author name search by using AND, and enter you dates in year/month/day format followed by the publication date field tag [pdat].

So, for example, If you wanted to only retrieve publications by John Doe between the dates of January 1st, 2019 and December 1st, 2019, your search would look something like this:

("Doe J"[au] OR Doe JE[au] OR  0000-0003-0799-4776[auid] ) AND (2019/01/01:2019/12/01[pdat])

If you wanted to your search to be more specific, you could add your publication date search string to your affiliation search, like so:

("Doe J"[au] OR Doe JE[au] OR  0000-0003-0799-4776[auid] ) AND (wisconsin[affil] OR madison[affil] OR UW[affil] OR wi[affil] OR wisc[affil] OR iowa[affil] OR uiowa[affil] ) AND ( 2019/01/01:2019/12/01[pdat] )

How Do I Interpret These Searches?

Boolean Operators (AND and OR)

OR is used to combine synonyms together. For example, a search of parent OR guardian is going to retrieve publications that have the word parent, the word guardian, or both the words parent and guardian in them.

AND is used to combine concepts together. For example, a search of parent AND guardian is going to retrieve publications that have BOTH the words parent and guardian in them. If a publication has the word parent, and not the word guardian, your search will not retrieve that publication.

Parentheses ( )

Parentheses are used in much the same way you would use them in a math equation, where OR is an addition symbol and AND is a multiplication symbol. A search of (cat OR feline) AND (dog OR canine) is going to retrieve publications that have both the words cat and dog, or cat and canine, or feline and dog, or feline and canine in them.

Field Tags [ ]

These tell PubMed where to search in the article for your terms.

• [au] searches the author field
• [affil] searches the affiliation field
• [pdat] searches the publication date field

Quotation Marks " "

These tell PubMed to search for two or more words as an intact phrase. So, for example, search ing "young adult" is going to search for that intact phrase, whereas search ing young adult, without quotation marks, will look for articles that have young and adult anywhere in the article, regardless of how apart those two words might be in the article (e.g., it could retrieve an article that says "The young polar bear was now an adult ")

• << Previous: PubMed for Tracking Publications
• Next: Searching for a Group of Authors in PubMed >>
• Last Updated: Sep 27, 2023 11:47 AM
• URL: https://researchguides.library.wisc.edu/publication-tracking

Authors / Researchers: Find collaborators

• First steps
• Build your profile
• Find collaborators
• Find funding
• Advanced citation management
• Get published
• What is your impact?
• Support and training

Who could you be working with?

Explore local, regional and international collaboration possibilities using trusted Web of Science data. Although the theme is finding collaborators, the methods described here are the same for finding key opinion leaders, mentors, experts, etc.

Use these questions to help guide you:

• Which authors are writing the most papers on your topic?

Who are the authors of Hot and Highly Cited papers on your topic?

Which authors have cited you?

• Who are the authors writing in your field that have the most overall citation impact?

Which authors are frequently writing papers in your field?

To find out who the established authors are in your field, you can search the Web of Science Core Collection for your topic of interest and use the Analyze Results tool.

You'll find the Analyze Results tool when you're looking at any result set in Web of Science, including the Marked List.

When you run Analyze Results, you can choose to show the top 10, 25, 50, etc. authors for your result set.

This will provide you with insight into who are the most prolific authors writing on your topic.

To view an author's papers, including their institutional affiliation, mark the box for the author name and click the Refine Results by Selected button.

To identify an author's institutional affiliation, open the full record for any paper published after 2007* and go to the Author Information section of the record.

* All authors and their affiliations are captured for every publication in Web of Science Core Collection . Starting in 2008, each author is also linked to his/her affiliation(s).

If your institution subscribes to Essential Science Indicators , you can view the Highly Cited and/or Hot Papers in any result set in the Web of Science Core Collection .

Search the Web of Science Core Collection for your topic and use the Hot and Highly Cited quick filter options in the refine panel on the left. 

For a large set of Highly Cited and/or Hot Papers, you can use the Analyze Results tool described earlier to see which authors are the most prolific within this group of papers, or, for a smaller set of papers, you can open up each individual record to see the authors and their affiliations.

The authors who cite your work could be your partners in future collaborations.

Go to the citing articles of a single paper

From the full record view of any paper you've authored in the Web of Science , you can click on the Times Cited count to view the citing articles. If there are a lot of citing articles, you might want to use the Analyze Results tool described earlier to see if any authors have cited you in more than one paper.

Go to the citing articles of a group of papers

For a group of papers that you've authored, you can view the citing articles for the whole group by using the Citation Report feature.

1. Search Web of Science by your name, Web of Science ResearcherID or ORCID unique identifier.  Refine results as needed to obtain your specific publications.

2. You'll find the Citation Report tool available for any result set of 10,000 or fewer records.

3. Run Citation Report on all of your publications. This report will show you the total number of citing articles for all of your publications: you'll see a Citing Articles count and a Citing Articles without self-citations count, which is the number of citing articles minus any articles that are appearing in the set of publications you are examining (in other words, for the scenario described here, this count would show you only citing articles that you have not authored).

4. Click on the citing article count to go to the citing articles. From the Citing Articles page, you can use the Analyze Results tool to see the subject categories of the citing articles, who is citing you, etc.

Who are the authors in your field with the most overall citation impact?

Until now we've found collaborators by identifying the most prolific authors in your field, the authors of the most cited papers in your field, and the authors of papers that cite your work.

For a more nuanced view of an author's citation impact within your field, you can use InCites Benchmarking & Analytics .

Note: InCites Benchmarking & Analytics requires a sign-in. If you have already set up a Web of Science sign-in as described on the First Steps page of this guide , then you can use the same credentials to sign into InCites. Otherwise, use the Register an email address option below the Sign in button when you are in InCites.

1. We begin in Web of Science Core Collection. Do a search for your topic of interest. If your search results are 50,000 records or fewer, you can export those publications to InCites for an author analysis. ( Note: if you have more than 50,000 records try the options in the Refine panel, or modify your search, to whittle your results to under 50,000 ).

2. Use the Save to InCites option. You will be prompted to sign into InCites and give your custom dataset a name.

3. In InCites go to the Researchers entity from the Analyze menu.

4. Make sure to change your dataset from the InCites dataset to the custom dataset you just created from Web of Science Core Collection.

5. Set a minimum Web of Science document threshold so that you're not looking at authors who have written just a few papers on your topic.

6. Sort the table by Web of Science Documents to get a sense of who are the most prolific authors in your topic. Use Category Normalized Citation Impact (CNCI) to get a sense of each author's impact within your topic. CNCI is an indicator of impact normalized for subject focus, age, and document type. A CNCI value of one represents performance at par with world average, values above one are considered above average, and values below one are considered below average. A CNCI value of two is considered twice the world average.

7. Click on the Web of Science Document count for an author to view the list of documents by that author. The document list also provides article level metrics. Click on the title of any document in the list to go to the full record page for that item in Web of Science Core Collection.

Custom Datasets

Watch the video on saving custom datasets from Web of Science Core Collection to InCites.

Recommended Videos

Build Better Searches

Training options

Learning options

• Web of Science Learning Portal A complete library of learning resources for Web of Science
• Register for live training Calendar of live training events
• Recorded Webinars View past webinars hosted by our expert trainers
• Enroll in self-guided courses In-depth learning available on demand

Technical Support

• Get Help Now Have a product question? Search our Knowledgebase or open a support case with our Customer Care teams.
• << Previous: Build your profile
• Next: Find funding >>
• Last Updated: Dec 7, 2023 11:57 AM
• URL: https://clarivate.libguides.com/authors

Research Voyage

Research Tips and Infromation

7 Essential Steps for Changing Author Affiliation in Research Paper

As researchers traverse their academic journey, their affiliations may undergo changes due to new opportunities, collaborations, or career advancements. While the process of publishing research papers often involves meticulous attention to detail, unforeseen circumstances can occasionally lead to inaccuracies in affiliations associated with a published paper.

As a researcher, you might have encountered situations where you needed to update your affiliation on an already published research paper. Whether it’s joining a new institution, relocating to a different country, or transitioning to a different research group, it’s essential to ensure that your affiliations accurately reflect your current standing in the academic community. In this blog post, we aim to provide a comprehensive guide on how to navigate the process of changing affiliations in already published research papers.

Emphasizing the importance of adhering to publication policies and maintaining accuracy in scientific literature, this guide will walk you through the step-by-step process of correcting affiliations. We’ll explore how to initiate the correction process, gather the necessary documentation, and interact with journal publishers in a professional manner. Furthermore, we’ll touch upon considerations for more substantial changes and address the significance of updating personal profiles and notifying indexing services.

By sharing insights and best practices, we hope to empower researchers to navigate the affiliation change process smoothly and responsibly. Ultimately, this blog post aims to contribute to the integrity and reliability of scientific literature, ensuring that affiliations accurately represent the journeys and contributions of researchers in the ever-evolving realm of academia.

Let’s delve into the intricacies of updating affiliations in published research papers, and equip ourselves with the knowledge to make necessary corrections with confidence and efficiency.

Introduction

Importance of understanding publication guidelines:, tips on where to find publication guidelines:, types of documentation for affiliation change:, advice on contacting the journal or publisher:, process of submitting a correction or erratum:.

• Journal's Role in Reviewing the Correction or Erratum:

Emphasizing the Need for Accuracy and Validity:

Importance of notifying indexing services:, informing indexing services:, advice on updating personal profiles:, request letter for affiliation change in published paper.

Research papers are the currency of knowledge dissemination, and the affiliations listed on these papers carry significant weight. Affiliations serve as a vital identifier, linking researchers to their respective institutions or organizations, and they play a crucial role in establishing credibility, recognizing contributions, and fostering collaborations within the scientific community.

When a research paper is published, the affiliations of the authors are essentially imprinted in time, forever associated with the findings and insights presented in the work. However, the journey of a researcher is dynamic, and circumstances can change over time. Researchers may find themselves faced with situations where their affiliations need to be updated in already published papers. These situations can arise due to a variety of reasons, such as career advancements, relocation to a new institution, or joining a collaborative project with colleagues from different organizations.

Imagine a scenario where Dr. Smith, an esteemed biologist, publishes a groundbreaking study on genetic mutations in cancer cells. The paper, which carries her former institution’s affiliation, receives widespread recognition and becomes a cornerstone in cancer research. However, a year after the publication, Dr. Smith accepts an enticing research opportunity at a leading medical centre. Now, with her scientific journey taking her to a new institution, she realizes the need to update her affiliation on the already published paper, ensuring that her latest work reflects her current professional standing.

In such cases, ensuring accurate and up-to-date affiliations is not only a matter of personal career progression but also a matter of scientific integrity. It’s crucial to maintain an accurate historical record of affiliations, as these affiliations provide valuable insights into the collaborative networks and institutional contributions that shaped the research landscape.

In this blog post, we aim to shed light on the significance of affiliations in research papers and why researchers may need to modify them post-publication. We recognize the challenges researchers might face when attempting to make such changes and the potential impact on their academic standing and future collaborations. To empower researchers in navigating this process, we will provide a step-by-step guide, offering practical advice on how to initiate and implement affiliation changes in published papers.

Whether you’re a seasoned researcher or a budding scholar, understanding the process of updating affiliations is essential for maintaining the accuracy and credibility of your scientific contributions. So, let’s embark on this informative journey and equip ourselves with the knowledge and tools to responsibly manage affiliation changes in the dynamic world of academic research.

I have written articles on the possible corrections an author may want to do to a research paper that is already published. Please visit the articles listed below for further details.

• “ 5 Proven Steps to Change Author Email Id in a Published Research Paper”
• “ How to Change Author Name on a Previously Published Research Paper? “
• “ 4 Easy Steps to Withdraw Author Name from a Research Paper “

How can I change my affiliation in a Published Research Paper?

Step 1: check publication policy.

Before embarking on the process of changing affiliations in an already published research paper, it is vital to familiarize yourself with the publication’s guidelines and policies regarding corrections and updates. Each journal or publication may have specific procedures and requirements for making changes to author affiliations, and understanding these guidelines is crucial to ensure a smooth and successful process.

Journal publications uphold rigorous standards of accuracy and integrity to maintain the credibility of scientific literature. Affiliation details play a significant role in establishing the author’s credibility, expertise, and institutional association with the research presented in the paper. Any changes to affiliations should be done in a manner that preserves the historical record of the paper while reflecting the most current and accurate information.

Let’s consider an example where Dr. Johnson, a researcher in the field of environmental science, published a paper on climate change with her previous institution’s affiliation. Due to her recent appointment as a faculty member at a renowned university, Dr. Johnson now wishes to update the affiliation on the published paper to reflect her current position. However, she is unsure about the correct procedure to follow.

• Journal Website : The publication’s website often contains a dedicated section titled “Instructions for Authors” or “Author Guidelines.” This section outlines the journal’s policies, including instructions on how to correct or update affiliations post-publication.
• Author’s Dashboard : If the paper was submitted through an online manuscript submission system, the author’s dashboard may provide information on how to request affiliation changes.
• Contact the Editorial Office : If the journal’s guidelines are not easily accessible, contacting the editorial office via email or phone is a reliable way to obtain the necessary information. Editorial staff members are well-versed in the publication’s policies and can provide guidance on making affiliation changes.
• Online Resources : Some journals have FAQs or online resources addressing common author queries, including how to correct affiliations. Check the journal’s website or relevant forums for any such resources.
• Publication Agreement : Revisit the publication agreement or copyright transfer form you signed during the submission process. It may contain provisions related to post-publication changes.

Example (Continued):

After some research, Dr. Johnson visits the journal’s website and locates the “Instructions for Authors” page. She discovers a subsection specifically addressing corrections and updates to published papers. Following the provided instructions, she prepares to contact the editorial office to initiate the process of changing her affiliation.

By understanding the publication’s guidelines and following the correct procedure, researchers like Dr. Johnson can navigate the affiliation change process with confidence, ensuring that their contributions are accurately represented in the scientific literature. Remember, each journal may have its own unique guidelines, so it’s essential to be diligent in locating and adhering to the specific instructions for the paper in question.

Step 2: Gather Documentation

Once you have familiarized yourself with the publication’s guidelines and determined the appropriate procedure for changing affiliations, the next crucial step is to gather the necessary documentation to support the affiliation change. Providing proper documentation is essential to validate the updates and ensure the accuracy and credibility of the revised affiliation.

• Official Letters from the New Institution : A formal letter from the new institution confirming your affiliation with them is one of the primary and most important documents. The letter should be on the institution’s official letterhead and signed by an authorized representative, such as the department head, dean, or human resources officer. The letter should include your name, the effective date of the affiliation change, your official title or position at the new institution, and any other relevant details.

Let’s consider Dr. Rodriguez, a postdoctoral researcher in the field of neuroscience, who recently accepted a position at a prestigious research institute. She now needs to update her affiliation on a published paper that was submitted during her previous postdoctoral position. To support the affiliation change, Dr. Rodriguez obtains an official letter from the research institute confirming her employment and new affiliation. The letter contains all the necessary details, including the effective date of the change.

• Employment Contract or Offer Letter : If your affiliation change is due to a new job or employment opportunity, providing a copy of your employment contract or offer letter can be valuable documentation. This document further substantiates the official nature of your affiliation with the new institution and reinforces the validity of the update.
• Acceptance Letters or Invitations to Collaborate : In cases where the affiliation change is the result of a collaboration with researchers from a different institution, you can include acceptance letters or invitations to collaborate as additional supporting documentation. These letters should clearly state the nature of the collaboration and your role in the project.
• Publication Agreement : Including a copy of the publication agreement or copyright transfer form you signed during the initial submission can serve as proof that you are an author associated with the paper.
• CV or Resume : While not a formal document for the affiliation change process, providing an updated CV or resume that includes your new affiliation can be helpful for the editorial office to cross-check and verify the change.

Having received the official letter from the prestigious research institute, Dr. Rodriguez is now ready to initiate the affiliation change process. She gathers all the relevant documentation, including the official letter, her new employment contract, and a copy of the publication agreement signed during the initial submission.

By compiling the necessary documentation, researchers like Dr. Rodriguez ensure that their affiliation change request is well-substantiated and meets the publication’s requirements for validation. Proper documentation adds credibility to the affiliation change, giving the journal’s editorial office confidence in implementing the updates accurately. Remember to provide clear and legible copies of the documents to avoid any delays or complications in the process.

Step 3: Contact the Journal or Publisher

After gathering the necessary documentation to support the affiliation change, the next step is to contact the journal or publisher to initiate the process formally. Professional and courteous communication is essential when reaching out to the editorial office to ensure smooth and efficient handling of your request.

• Locating Contact Information : Start by identifying the appropriate contact information for the journal or publisher. Most reputable journals will have a dedicated editorial office or a contact email specifically for author inquiries or corrections. You can typically find this information on the journal’s website, in the published paper, or in any communications you may have received from the journal during the review process.
• Compose a Clear and Concise Email : When drafting your email, be clear and concise in stating the purpose of your inquiry. Begin by mentioning the title of the published paper, the names of all authors, and the DOI (Digital Object Identifier) or any other identifying information of the paper.

Subject: Request for Affiliation Change – Paper Title: “Advancements in Neural Network Research”

Dear [Journal/Publisher Name],

I hope this email finds you well. I am writing to request a correction to the affiliation associated with the published paper titled “Advancements in Neural Network Research,” authored by [Author Names]. The DOI for the paper is [DOI number].

• Explain the Reason for the Affiliation Change : Briefly explain the reason for the affiliation change and attach the relevant supporting documentation. State the effective date of the affiliation change and provide a clear statement of the updated affiliation details.

As of [Effective Date], I have joined [New Institution Name] as [New Position/Title]. I kindly request to update my affiliation on the published paper to reflect this change accurately. Please find attached the official letter from [New Institution Name] confirming my affiliation with them.

• Express Gratitude and Professionalism : Show appreciation for the journal’s consideration of your request and maintain a professional tone throughout the email.

I understand that the editorial process involves careful attention to detail, and I genuinely appreciate your assistance in making this important correction. Should you require any additional information or have any questions, please do not hesitate to reach out to me.

Thank you for your time and attention to this matter.

Sincerely, [Your Name] [Your Current Affiliation]

• Attach Relevant Documents : Attach the supporting documentation, such as the official letter from the new institution, your updated CV, or any other documents requested by the journal’s guidelines.

Dr. Rodriguez drafts a professional email following the guidelines outlined above. She attaches the official letter from the prestigious research institute and includes her updated CV for reference. After thoroughly reviewing the email for clarity and accuracy, she sends it to the contact email provided by the journal.

By communicating professionally and providing all the necessary information, researchers like Dr. Rodriguez can ensure that their affiliation change request is handled efficiently by the journal’s editorial office. Remember to be patient during this process, as it may take some time for the journal to review and process the request, especially if there are other pending corrections or updates.

Step 4: Submit a Correction or Erratum

Once the journal or publisher has acknowledged your request to change the affiliation on the published paper and provided instructions for correction, it’s time to prepare and submit a formal correction or erratum. A correction is issued to rectify errors or inaccuracies in the published paper, while an erratum is used to address mistakes made by the journal itself.

• Identify the Corrected Information : Clearly state the specific changes that need to be made to the affiliations. Include the updated affiliation details, including the new institution’s name, department, address, and any additional information required by the journal’s guidelines.

The corrected affiliation for Dr. Johnson is as follows: Department of Environmental Science, Prestigious Research Institute, City, Country.

• Title the Correction or Erratum : Use a descriptive title that indicates that the document is a correction or erratum for the published paper. Include the paper’s title and any relevant identifying information, such as the DOI or publication date.

Correction to: “Insights into Climate Change Impact on Biodiversity” – DOI: [DOI number]

• Explain the Reason for the Correction or Erratum : Provide a concise explanation of the reason for the change in affiliations. Mention that the original publication had an outdated affiliation and that this correction aims to update and accurately reflect the author’s current institutional affiliation.

We are issuing this correction to update the author’s affiliation on the published paper to reflect her current position at the Prestigious Research Institute. The previous affiliation listed was based on her previous postdoctoral position.

• Reference the Original Paper : Include the full citation or reference to the original published paper that requires the correction or erratum. This will help readers and indexers connect the corrected version to the original work.

Original Paper: [Author Names]. (Year). “Insights into Climate Change Impact on Biodiversity.” Journal of Environmental Science, Volume(X), Page Range. DOI: [DOI number]

• Attach Supporting Documentation : Include the relevant supporting documentation that validates the affiliation change. Attach the official letter from the new institution or any other documents required by the journal’s guidelines.

Following the journal’s instructions, Dr. Johnson prepares the correction document. She includes the updated affiliation information, the title indicating the document as a correction, and a concise explanation of the reason for the change. Dr. Johnson references the original paper with its full citation and attaches the official letter from the prestigious research institute.

• Submit the Correction or Erratum : Follow the journal’s specific instructions for submission. Some journals may have a dedicated online platform for corrections or errata, while others may require submission via email.

Dr. Johnson submits the correction document, along with the required attachments, through the journal’s online submission system as per their guidelines.

By submitting a well-organized and clear correction or erratum document, researchers like Dr. Johnson ensure that the journal’s readership and indexing services have access to the accurate and updated affiliation information. This process upholds the integrity of the published scientific literature and ensures that researchers’ contributions are appropriately recognized with their current institutional affiliations.

Step 5: Review and Approval

After submitting the correction or erratum to the journal, the document undergoes a review process to ensure its accuracy and validity. The journal’s role in this step is essential as they act as gatekeepers of scientific integrity, maintaining the credibility of the published literature.

Journal’s Role in Reviewing the Correction or Erratum:

• Verification of Information : The journal’s editorial team carefully reviews the submitted correction or erratum to verify the accuracy of the requested changes. They cross-reference the provided documentation with the original publication and ensure that the updated affiliation information aligns with the supporting evidence.

In Dr. Johnson’s case, the journal’s editorial team compares the correction document with the original paper titled “Insights into Climate Change Impact on Biodiversity” to validate the affiliation change from her previous institution to the prestigious research institute.

• Adherence to Publication Policies : The journal’s editorial team ensures that the correction or erratum complies with the publication’s policies and guidelines. They confirm that the document follows the correct formatting, includes the necessary information, and adheres to ethical standards.

The journal confirms that Dr. Johnson’s correction document includes all the required elements, such as the corrected affiliation, a clear explanation of the change, and a reference to the original paper. They also verify that the supporting documentation provided by Dr. Johnson meets the journal’s requirements.

• Communication with the Author : If any discrepancies or questions arise during the review process, the journal’s editorial team may communicate with the author to seek clarification or additional information. Open communication helps ensure the accuracy and completeness of the correction or erratum.

The journal contacts Dr. Johnson to inquire about a minor formatting issue in the correction document. Dr. Johnson promptly addresses the matter, providing the necessary adjustments.

• Approval and Publication : Once the review process is complete, and the correction or erratum is deemed accurate and valid, the journal approves the document for publication. The updated affiliation is then published in a subsequent issue, either as a standalone correction or as part of an erratum section.

After conducting a thorough review and confirming the validity of Dr. Johnson’s correction document, the journal’s editorial team approves it for publication. The corrected affiliation of Dr. Johnson is scheduled to be published in the upcoming issue of the journal.

It is crucial to underscore that accuracy and validity are paramount when making corrections or issuing errata. The journal’s role in reviewing and approving such changes ensures that the scientific record remains reliable and up-to-date. By maintaining strict quality control measures, journals safeguard against potential inaccuracies and contribute to the integrity of the research community.

As researchers, authors, and readers, we share the collective responsibility to uphold the accuracy of published work. Collaboration between authors and journal teams in the correction process reinforces the commitment to transparent and accurate scientific communication. With these rigorous standards in place, the scientific literature continues to be a reliable foundation for advancing knowledge and shaping the future of research.

Step 6: Notify Indexing Services (if applicable)

After the correction or erratum has been approved and published by the journal, it is essential to notify indexing services about the affiliation change. Indexing services, such as PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and others, play a crucial role in organizing and providing access to the vast amount of scientific literature. Informing them about the affiliation change ensures that the updated information is accurately reflected in their databases, facilitating proper attribution and discoverability of the research.

• Accurate Attribution : Indexing services use affiliations to attribute research to specific institutions or organizations accurately. Keeping this information up to date is essential to ensure that researchers are credited appropriately for their work and that institutions receive proper recognition for their contributions.

When Dr. Rodriguez’s affiliation is updated to the prestigious research institute in the journal’s published correction, notifying indexing services like PubMed about this change ensures that her research contributions are accurately linked to her new institution in their database. This allows other researchers and institutions to recognize her affiliation with the prestigious research institute when accessing her publications.

• Discoverability and Accessibility : Correctly indexed affiliations help researchers and readers easily discover relevant literature from specific institutions or researchers. This enhances the accessibility and visibility of research from particular institutions or research groups.

If a reader searches for publications from the prestigious research institute, the correct indexing of Dr. Rodriguez’s research under her new affiliation will lead to more accurate and relevant search results, making it easier for readers to find her latest work.

• Research Evaluations and Rankings : Some institutions and funding agencies use publication records to assess research productivity and impact. Ensuring accurate affiliations is crucial for fair evaluations and rankings, which can influence funding decisions and institutional recognition.

The prestigious research institute’s ranking and reputation may be positively affected by the accurate affiliation indexing of its researchers, such as Dr. Rodriguez. This can lead to increased opportunities for research funding and collaborations.

Each indexing service has its own procedures for updating affiliations. It may involve contacting the indexing service directly, filling out a form, or following specific instructions on their website. Journals or publishers might also have direct communication channels with indexing services to facilitate such updates.

After the publication of the correction with Dr. Rodriguez’s updated affiliation, the journal’s editorial team takes the initiative to notify indexing services about the change. They ensure that the corrected information is communicated accurately to the relevant indexing databases.

By proactively notifying indexing services about affiliation changes, journals, researchers, and institutions contribute to maintaining the accuracy and integrity of research records worldwide. It also ensures that researchers receive proper recognition and that their contributions are accurately represented in the scientific community.

Step 7: Update Personal Profiles

After the affiliation change has been approved and published in the journal, it is crucial for the author to update their personal profiles to reflect the new affiliation. This step helps maintain consistency across various platforms and ensures that the author’s current institutional association is accurately represented in the academic community.

• Researcher Profile Websites : If you have a researcher profile on platforms like ResearchGate, Academia.edu , Google Scholar , or ORCID , log in to your account and update your affiliation information.

Dr. Smith, who recently changed her affiliation to a new university, visits her ResearchGate profile and updates the “Affiliation” section with her new institution’s details. This change is automatically reflected on her ResearchGate profile, which is viewed by researchers worldwide.

• University/Institution Websites : If your new institution hosts researcher profiles on its website, update your affiliation information there as well. This ensures that your profile is consistent with the official records of your institution.

Dr. Johnson, who is now affiliated with the prestigious research institute, visits the institute’s website and navigates to her faculty profile. She updates the “Affiliation” field on her profile page, providing her new position and affiliation details.

• Social and Professional Networking Sites : Platforms like LinkedIn are widely used for professional networking. Make sure to update your LinkedIn profile to reflect the correct affiliation, as this information is visible to potential collaborators, employers, and colleagues.

Dr. Rodriguez, now affiliated with the prestigious research institute, logs in to her LinkedIn account and edits her “Experience” section, adding her new position and affiliation. This update is visible to her connections and professional network.

• Publication Records : If you maintain a personal publication list on your website or other platforms, update the affiliation information for your published papers to match the corrected version in the journal.

Dr. Smith manages her personal website, where she maintains a list of her publications. She updates the affiliation for the published paper to reflect her new institution and provides a link to the corrected version of the paper on the journal’s website.

• Provide Links to the Corrected Paper : When updating your personal profiles, consider providing links to the corrected version of the published paper, especially if it is available online. This allows readers and colleagues to access the accurate and updated version of your work.

Dr. Johnson updates her ResearchGate profile and includes a link to the corrected version of her paper, “Advancements in Neural Network Research,” on the journal’s website. This way, readers who visit her profile can access the most recent and accurate information about her research.

By updating personal profiles with the correct affiliation and providing links to the corrected version of the published paper, researchers ensure that their professional information is current and consistent across different platforms. This contributes to establishing a reliable and accurate academic identity, allowing colleagues and collaborators to find and connect with them easily.

Subject: Request for Affiliation Change in Published Paper

I hope this email finds you well. I am writing to request a correction to the affiliation associated with the published paper titled “[Paper Title]” authored by [Author Names]. The paper’s DOI is [DOI number], and it was published in [Journal Name], [Volume], [Issue], [Publication Year].

I recently experienced a change in my institutional affiliation, and I wish to update the information in the published paper to reflect my current position. The correction is necessary to ensure the accuracy and credibility of the scientific literature and to properly credit my research contributions to the institution with which I am currently affiliated.

I kindly request to update my affiliation as follows:

Old Affiliation: [Old Institution Name], [Old Department], [Old City], [Old Country]

New Affiliation: [New Institution Name], [New Department], [New City], [New Country]

To support this affiliation change, I have attached an official letter from [New Institution Name] confirming my current association with them. The letter is on the institution’s official letterhead and is signed by [Name and Designation of Authorized Representative].

I assure you that the affiliation change has no impact on the content, results, or conclusions presented in the published paper. All co-authors have been informed of this request, and they fully support this correction.

Please let me know if you require any additional information or documentation to proceed with the affiliation change process. I am more than willing to provide any further details necessary.

Thank you for your attention to this matter. I greatly appreciate your cooperation in updating my affiliation in the published paper. I look forward to your positive response.

[Your Name] [Your Current Affiliation] [Contact Email] [Contact Phone Number]

The journey of academic research is one paved with innovation, collaboration, and growth. As researchers, our affiliations serve as critical milestones, connecting us to the institutions and organizations that shape our contributions to the scientific community. However, the dynamic nature of our careers can lead to situations where updating affiliations in already published research papers becomes necessary.

In this comprehensive guide, we have explored the step-by-step process of changing affiliations in published papers, emphasizing the importance of accuracy, transparency, and integrity. Understanding the publication’s guidelines, gathering the right documentation, and maintaining professional communication with the journal’s editorial team are the initial keystones to navigating this process.

We have witnessed the significance of notifying indexing services to ensure accurate records, enhance discoverability, and preserve the credit and recognition researchers deserve. Updating personal profiles with the correct affiliations reinforces a consistent and reliable academic identity, making it easier for colleagues and collaborators to connect and engage.

Upcoming Events

• Visit the Upcoming International Conferences at Exotic Travel Destinations with Travel Plan
• Visit for  Research Internships Worldwide

Recent Posts

• Are Postdoctoral Fellowships Taxable? A Guide to Understanding Tax Implications
• How to Get Off-Cycle Research/Academic Internships
• How to End Your Academic/Research Internship?
• PhD or Industry Job? A Comprehensive Career Guide
• Post Doc Positions in India
• All Blog Posts
• Research Career
• Research Conference
• Research Internship
• Research Journal
• Research Tools
• Uncategorized
• Research Conferences
• Research Journals
• Research Grants
• Internships
• Research Internships
• Email Templates
• Conferences
• Blog Partners
• Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2024 Research Voyage

Design by ThemesDNA.com

Main Navigation

• Contact NeurIPS
• Code of Ethics
• Code of Conduct
• Create Profile
• Journal To Conference Track
• Diversity & Inclusion
• Proceedings
• Future Meetings
• Exhibitor Information
• Privacy Policy

NeurIPS 2024

Conference Dates: (In person) 9 December - 15 December, 2024

Homepage: https://neurips.cc/Conferences/2024/

Call For Papers 

Author notification: Sep 25, 2024

Camera-ready, poster, and video submission: Oct 30, 2024 AOE

Submit at: https://openreview.net/group?id=NeurIPS.cc/2024/Conference  

The site will start accepting submissions on Apr 22, 2024 

Subscribe to these and other dates on the 2024 dates page .

The Thirty-Eighth Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS 2024) is an interdisciplinary conference that brings together researchers in machine learning, neuroscience, statistics, optimization, computer vision, natural language processing, life sciences, natural sciences, social sciences, and other adjacent fields. We invite submissions presenting new and original research on topics including but not limited to the following:

• Applications (e.g., vision, language, speech and audio, Creative AI)
• Deep learning (e.g., architectures, generative models, optimization for deep networks, foundation models, LLMs)
• Evaluation (e.g., methodology, meta studies, replicability and validity, human-in-the-loop)
• General machine learning (supervised, unsupervised, online, active, etc.)
• Infrastructure (e.g., libraries, improved implementation and scalability, distributed solutions)
• Machine learning for sciences (e.g. climate, health, life sciences, physics, social sciences)
• Neuroscience and cognitive science (e.g., neural coding, brain-computer interfaces)
• Optimization (e.g., convex and non-convex, stochastic, robust)
• Probabilistic methods (e.g., variational inference, causal inference, Gaussian processes)
• Reinforcement learning (e.g., decision and control, planning, hierarchical RL, robotics)
• Social and economic aspects of machine learning (e.g., fairness, interpretability, human-AI interaction, privacy, safety, strategic behavior)
• Theory (e.g., control theory, learning theory, algorithmic game theory)

Machine learning is a rapidly evolving field, and so we welcome interdisciplinary submissions that do not fit neatly into existing categories.

Authors are asked to confirm that their submissions accord with the NeurIPS code of conduct .

Formatting instructions:   All submissions must be in PDF format, and in a single PDF file include, in this order:

• The submitted paper
• Technical appendices that support the paper with additional proofs, derivations, or results 
• The NeurIPS paper checklist  

Other supplementary materials such as data and code can be uploaded as a ZIP file

The main text of a submitted paper is limited to nine content pages , including all figures and tables. Additional pages containing references don’t count as content pages. If your submission is accepted, you will be allowed an additional content page for the camera-ready version.

The main text and references may be followed by technical appendices, for which there is no page limit.

The maximum file size for a full submission, which includes technical appendices, is 50MB.

Authors are encouraged to submit a separate ZIP file that contains further supplementary material like data or source code, when applicable.

You must format your submission using the NeurIPS 2024 LaTeX style file which includes a “preprint” option for non-anonymous preprints posted online. Submissions that violate the NeurIPS style (e.g., by decreasing margins or font sizes) or page limits may be rejected without further review. Papers may be rejected without consideration of their merits if they fail to meet the submission requirements, as described in this document. 

Paper checklist: In order to improve the rigor and transparency of research submitted to and published at NeurIPS, authors are required to complete a paper checklist . The paper checklist is intended to help authors reflect on a wide variety of issues relating to responsible machine learning research, including reproducibility, transparency, research ethics, and societal impact. The checklist forms part of the paper submission, but does not count towards the page limit.

Supplementary material: While all technical appendices should be included as part of the main paper submission PDF, authors may submit up to 100MB of supplementary material, such as data, or source code in a ZIP format. Supplementary material should be material created by the authors that directly supports the submission content. Like submissions, supplementary material must be anonymized. Looking at supplementary material is at the discretion of the reviewers.

We encourage authors to upload their code and data as part of their supplementary material in order to help reviewers assess the quality of the work. Check the policy as well as code submission guidelines and templates for further details.

Use of Large Language Models (LLMs): We welcome authors to use any tool that is suitable for preparing high-quality papers and research. However, we ask authors to keep in mind two important criteria. First, we expect papers to fully describe their methodology, and any tool that is important to that methodology, including the use of LLMs, should be described also. For example, authors should mention tools (including LLMs) that were used for data processing or filtering, visualization, facilitating or running experiments, and proving theorems. It may also be advisable to describe the use of LLMs in implementing the method (if this corresponds to an important, original, or non-standard component of the approach). Second, authors are responsible for the entire content of the paper, including all text and figures, so while authors are welcome to use any tool they wish for writing the paper, they must ensure that all text is correct and original.

Double-blind reviewing:   All submissions must be anonymized and may not contain any identifying information that may violate the double-blind reviewing policy.  This policy applies to any supplementary or linked material as well, including code.  If you are including links to any external material, it is your responsibility to guarantee anonymous browsing.  Please do not include acknowledgements at submission time. If you need to cite one of your own papers, you should do so with adequate anonymization to preserve double-blind reviewing.  For instance, write “In the previous work of Smith et al. [1]…” rather than “In our previous work [1]...”). If you need to cite one of your own papers that is in submission to NeurIPS and not available as a non-anonymous preprint, then include a copy of the cited anonymized submission in the supplementary material and write “Anonymous et al. [1] concurrently show...”). Any papers found to be violating this policy will be rejected.

OpenReview: We are using OpenReview to manage submissions. The reviews and author responses will not be public initially (but may be made public later, see below). As in previous years, submissions under review will be visible only to their assigned program committee. We will not be soliciting comments from the general public during the reviewing process. Anyone who plans to submit a paper as an author or a co-author will need to create (or update) their OpenReview profile by the full paper submission deadline. Your OpenReview profile can be edited by logging in and clicking on your name in https://openreview.net/ . This takes you to a URL "https://openreview.net/profile?id=~[Firstname]_[Lastname][n]" where the last part is your profile name, e.g., ~Wei_Zhang1. The OpenReview profiles must be up to date, with all publications by the authors, and their current affiliations. The easiest way to import publications is through DBLP but it is not required, see FAQ . Submissions without updated OpenReview profiles will be desk rejected. The information entered in the profile is critical for ensuring that conflicts of interest and reviewer matching are handled properly. Because of the rapid growth of NeurIPS, we request that all authors help with reviewing papers, if asked to do so. We need everyone’s help in maintaining the high scientific quality of NeurIPS.  

Please be aware that OpenReview has a moderation policy for newly created profiles: New profiles created without an institutional email will go through a moderation process that can take up to two weeks. New profiles created with an institutional email will be activated automatically.

Venue home page: https://openreview.net/group?id=NeurIPS.cc/2024/Conference

If you have any questions, please refer to the FAQ: https://openreview.net/faq

Ethics review: Reviewers and ACs may flag submissions for ethics review . Flagged submissions will be sent to an ethics review committee for comments. Comments from ethics reviewers will be considered by the primary reviewers and AC as part of their deliberation. They will also be visible to authors, who will have an opportunity to respond.  Ethics reviewers do not have the authority to reject papers, but in extreme cases papers may be rejected by the program chairs on ethical grounds, regardless of scientific quality or contribution.  

Preprints: The existence of non-anonymous preprints (on arXiv or other online repositories, personal websites, social media) will not result in rejection. If you choose to use the NeurIPS style for the preprint version, you must use the “preprint” option rather than the “final” option. Reviewers will be instructed not to actively look for such preprints, but encountering them will not constitute a conflict of interest. Authors may submit anonymized work to NeurIPS that is already available as a preprint (e.g., on arXiv) without citing it. Note that public versions of the submission should not say "Under review at NeurIPS" or similar.

Dual submissions: Submissions that are substantially similar to papers that the authors have previously published or submitted in parallel to other peer-reviewed venues with proceedings or journals may not be submitted to NeurIPS. Papers previously presented at workshops are permitted, so long as they did not appear in a conference proceedings (e.g., CVPRW proceedings), a journal or a book.  NeurIPS coordinates with other conferences to identify dual submissions.  The NeurIPS policy on dual submissions applies for the entire duration of the reviewing process.  Slicing contributions too thinly is discouraged.  The reviewing process will treat any other submission by an overlapping set of authors as prior work. If publishing one would render the other too incremental, both may be rejected.

Anti-collusion: NeurIPS does not tolerate any collusion whereby authors secretly cooperate with reviewers, ACs or SACs to obtain favorable reviews. 

Author responses:   Authors will have one week to view and respond to initial reviews. Author responses may not contain any identifying information that may violate the double-blind reviewing policy. Authors may not submit revisions of their paper or supplemental material, but may post their responses as a discussion in OpenReview. This is to reduce the burden on authors to have to revise their paper in a rush during the short rebuttal period.

After the initial response period, authors will be able to respond to any further reviewer/AC questions and comments by posting on the submission’s forum page. The program chairs reserve the right to solicit additional reviews after the initial author response period.  These reviews will become visible to the authors as they are added to OpenReview, and authors will have a chance to respond to them.

After the notification deadline, accepted and opted-in rejected papers will be made public and open for non-anonymous public commenting. Their anonymous reviews, meta-reviews, author responses and reviewer responses will also be made public. Authors of rejected papers will have two weeks after the notification deadline to opt in to make their deanonymized rejected papers public in OpenReview.  These papers are not counted as NeurIPS publications and will be shown as rejected in OpenReview.

Publication of accepted submissions:   Reviews, meta-reviews, and any discussion with the authors will be made public for accepted papers (but reviewer, area chair, and senior area chair identities will remain anonymous). Camera-ready papers will be due in advance of the conference. All camera-ready papers must include a funding disclosure . We strongly encourage accompanying code and data to be submitted with accepted papers when appropriate, as per the code submission policy . Authors will be allowed to make minor changes for a short period of time after the conference.

Contemporaneous Work: For the purpose of the reviewing process, papers that appeared online within two months of a submission will generally be considered "contemporaneous" in the sense that the submission will not be rejected on the basis of the comparison to contemporaneous work. Authors are still expected to cite and discuss contemporaneous work and perform empirical comparisons to the degree feasible. Any paper that influenced the submission is considered prior work and must be cited and discussed as such. Submissions that are very similar to contemporaneous work will undergo additional scrutiny to prevent cases of plagiarism and missing credit to prior work.

Plagiarism is prohibited by the NeurIPS Code of Conduct .

Other Tracks: Similarly to earlier years, we will host multiple tracks, such as datasets, competitions, tutorials as well as workshops, in addition to the main track for which this call for papers is intended. See the conference homepage for updates and calls for participation in these tracks. 

Experiments: As in past years, the program chairs will be measuring the quality and effectiveness of the review process via randomized controlled experiments. All experiments are independently reviewed and approved by an Institutional Review Board (IRB).

Financial Aid: Each paper may designate up to one (1) NeurIPS.cc account email address of a corresponding student author who confirms that they would need the support to attend the conference, and agrees to volunteer if they get selected. To be considered for Financial the student will also need to fill out the Financial Aid application when it becomes available.

Auctions with resale at a later date

• Research Article
• Published: 08 May 2024

Cite this article

• Sanyyam Khurana   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-4958-3721 1  

In this paper, we consider fixed time delays in auctions with resale. The time delay may impact the bidders’ valuations of the object. In particular, the auction’s winner may obtain some value by depleting the object, either by consuming it or exploiting it, over the interim period and the loser may lose some value by virtue of the object being depleted by the winner. Our main result is that fixed time delays lead to asymmetric bid distributions. For a special family of probability distributions, we show that the first-price auction is revenue superior to the second-price auction.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Che, X., Klumpp, T.: Auctions versus sequential mechanisms when resale is allowed. Econ. Theor. 75 (4), 1207–1245 (2023)

Article   Google Scholar  

Cheng, H.: Auctions with resale and bargaining power. J. Math. Econ. 47 (3), 300–308 (2011)

Cheng, H.H., Tan, G.: Asymmetric common-value auctions with applications to private-value auctions with resale. Econ. Theory 45 (1–2), 253–290 (2010)

Garratt, R., Tröger, T.: Speculation in standard auctions with resale. Econometrica 74 (3), 753–769 (2006)

Hafalir, I., Krishna, V.: Asymmetric auctions with resale. Am. Econ. Rev. 98 (1), 87–112 (2008)

Hafalir, I., Krishna, V.: Revenue and efficiency effects of resale in first-price auctions. J. Math. Econ. 45 (9–10), 589–602 (2009)

Kaplan, T.R.: Zamir, Shmuel: Asymmetric first-price auctions with uniform distributions: analytic solutions to the general case. Econ. Theor. 50 (2), 269–302 (2012)

Khurana, S.: Auctions with resale and risk aversion. Econ. Theory Bull. 10 (1), 117–128 (2022)

Khurana, S.: Unraveling of value-rankings in auctions with resale. Rev. Econ. Design 1–29 (2024)

Lebrun, B.: First price auctions in the asymmetric n bidder case. Int. Econ. Rev. 40 (1), 125–142 (1999)

Lebrun, B.: First-price auctions with resale and with outcomes robust to bid disclosure. Rand J. Econ. 41 (1), 165–178 (2010)

Lebrun, B.: Optimality and the english and second-price auctions with resale. Games Econom. Behav. 75 (2), 731–751 (2012)

Lebrun, B.: Revenue-superior variants of the second-price auction. Econ. Theor. 59 , 245–275 (2015)

Maskin, E., Riley, J.: Asymmetric auctions. Rev. Econ. Stud. 67 (3), 413–438 (2000)

Mylovanov, T., Tröger, T.: Optimal auction with resale-a characterization of the conditions. Econ. Theor. 40 (3), 509–528 (2009)

Riley, J.G., Samuelson, W.F.: Optimal auctions. Am. Econ. Rev. 71 (3), 381–392 (1981)

Google Scholar  

Virág, G.: First-price auctions with resale: the case of many bidders. Econ. Theor. 52 (1), 129–163 (2013)

Virág, G.: Auctions with resale: Reserve prices and revenues. Games Econom. Behav. 99 , 239–249 (2016)

Zhoucheng Zheng, C.: Optimal auction with resale. Econometrica 70 (6), 2197–2224 (2002)

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Policy and Management Studies, TERI School of Advanced Studies, New Delhi, 110070, India

Sanyyam Khurana

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sanyyam Khurana .

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

I wish to thank Krishnendu Ghosh Dastidar, Anirban Kar, Rohit Lamba, Debasis Mishra, Stephen Morris, Ariel Rubinstein, Soumendu Sarkar, Sudhir Shah, and Uday Bhanu Sinha for their feedback. I would also like to thank the conference participants at Winter School of the Econometric Society (Delhi School of Economics), Annual Conference on Economic Growth and Development (Indian Statistical Institute Delhi), Asian Meeting of the Econometric Society (Indian Institute of Technology Bombay), Society for Economics Research in India Doctoral Conference, and Annual Economics Conference (Ahmedabad University). A special thanks to two anonymous referees for helpful comments. This project was completed when I was a PhD Candidate at Delhi School of Economics, University of Delhi, India.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Khurana, S. Auctions with resale at a later date. Econ Theory (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00199-024-01577-6

Download citation

Received : 31 October 2022

Accepted : 16 April 2024

Published : 08 May 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s00199-024-01577-6

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

JEL Classification

• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Research on the Oscillation Reduction Control During Mode Transition in Hybrid Electric Vehicles

2024-01-2720.