How scholars credit editors in their acknowledgements

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Acknowledgements are the one place on public record where scholarly editors receive credit for their contributions to books. Some have argued that the tradition of editorial invisibility is self-defeating; one editor has proposed that editors receive official recognition from the publisher in a book's front matter, irrespective of author acknowledgement. As a preliminary to entertaining such a proposal, this article surveys current practices by authors in a content analysis of acknowledgements sampled from monographs recently published by university presses. The analysis found that editors were often characterized as manuscript shepherds having a dual role: ally to the author and expeditor of production. Speaking for scholarly editors, I oppose making editor recognition a publishing standard, as this might suggest that authors need not credit editors on their own. The cost of such omission would be high, as editors would be left out of the back story to their books.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)384-398
Number of pages15
JournalJournal of Scholarly Publishing
Volume40
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 1 2009
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

credit
editor
Costs
shepherd
dual role
allies
speaking
content analysis
university
costs

Keywords

  • Acknowledgements
  • Content analysis
  • Editors
  • Monographs
  • Scholars

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Education
  • Media Technology

Cite this

How scholars credit editors in their acknowledgements. / Brown, Robert H.

In: Journal of Scholarly Publishing, Vol. 40, No. 4, 01.06.2009, p. 384-398.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{e351729866c0497287a87be363e0fa42,
title = "How scholars credit editors in their acknowledgements",
abstract = "Acknowledgements are the one place on public record where scholarly editors receive credit for their contributions to books. Some have argued that the tradition of editorial invisibility is self-defeating; one editor has proposed that editors receive official recognition from the publisher in a book's front matter, irrespective of author acknowledgement. As a preliminary to entertaining such a proposal, this article surveys current practices by authors in a content analysis of acknowledgements sampled from monographs recently published by university presses. The analysis found that editors were often characterized as manuscript shepherds having a dual role: ally to the author and expeditor of production. Speaking for scholarly editors, I oppose making editor recognition a publishing standard, as this might suggest that authors need not credit editors on their own. The cost of such omission would be high, as editors would be left out of the back story to their books.",
keywords = "Acknowledgements, Content analysis, Editors, Monographs, Scholars",
author = "Brown, {Robert H.}",
year = "2009",
month = "6",
day = "1",
doi = "10.3138/jsp.40.4.384",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "40",
pages = "384--398",
journal = "Journal of Scholarly Publishing",
issn = "1198-9742",
publisher = "University of Toronto Press",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - How scholars credit editors in their acknowledgements

AU - Brown, Robert H.

PY - 2009/6/1

Y1 - 2009/6/1

N2 - Acknowledgements are the one place on public record where scholarly editors receive credit for their contributions to books. Some have argued that the tradition of editorial invisibility is self-defeating; one editor has proposed that editors receive official recognition from the publisher in a book's front matter, irrespective of author acknowledgement. As a preliminary to entertaining such a proposal, this article surveys current practices by authors in a content analysis of acknowledgements sampled from monographs recently published by university presses. The analysis found that editors were often characterized as manuscript shepherds having a dual role: ally to the author and expeditor of production. Speaking for scholarly editors, I oppose making editor recognition a publishing standard, as this might suggest that authors need not credit editors on their own. The cost of such omission would be high, as editors would be left out of the back story to their books.

AB - Acknowledgements are the one place on public record where scholarly editors receive credit for their contributions to books. Some have argued that the tradition of editorial invisibility is self-defeating; one editor has proposed that editors receive official recognition from the publisher in a book's front matter, irrespective of author acknowledgement. As a preliminary to entertaining such a proposal, this article surveys current practices by authors in a content analysis of acknowledgements sampled from monographs recently published by university presses. The analysis found that editors were often characterized as manuscript shepherds having a dual role: ally to the author and expeditor of production. Speaking for scholarly editors, I oppose making editor recognition a publishing standard, as this might suggest that authors need not credit editors on their own. The cost of such omission would be high, as editors would be left out of the back story to their books.

KW - Acknowledgements

KW - Content analysis

KW - Editors

KW - Monographs

KW - Scholars

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=70349734688&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=70349734688&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3138/jsp.40.4.384

DO - 10.3138/jsp.40.4.384

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:70349734688

VL - 40

SP - 384

EP - 398

JO - Journal of Scholarly Publishing

JF - Journal of Scholarly Publishing

SN - 1198-9742

IS - 4

ER -