DUTIES, ETHICS, AND PROFESSIONAL WRlTl NC PRACnCES 

P ERSONAL CONTACTS take place between 

authors and many other contributors throughout 

the Survey publication process. Ideally, these contacts 

are harmonious and mutually beneficial. Interpersonal 

frictions sometimes arise, but even strong personal 

differences can yield positive results when everyone 

observes courtesy, good will, and professional respect. 

Some authors tend to regard reviewers and editors as 

punctilious adversaries. Punctiliousness, in fact, is a 

vital part of the review process that helps transform 

rough-hewn manuscripts-some replete with minor 

mistakes and inconsistencies-into paragons of accuracy, style, and proper usage. Conversely, some 

reviewers wrongly see their participation as an 

onerous task standing in the way of their own 

creative research. 

The responsive author is receptive to suggestions 

and recognizes that other members of the group 

reviewing publications share responsibility to the 

Survey and to the users of Survey reports. Similarly, 

good reviewers, like good editors, are tactful and 

constructive. Their function is to assist authors, not 

censor them. Authors should also remember that their 

reports, though bearing their names, are not their 

personal property. The Survey provides salaries, 

office space, laboratories, libraries, and other facilities, &d the results of all its research are in the 

public domain. 

You as author are only the first of many people 

who contribute to the finished report. Only your 

name appears on the title page, but each report in 

final form is the product of a largely anonymous and 

unsung staff of typists, manuscript coordinators, 

reviewers, editors, illustrators, cartographers, printers, 

and distributors. As the chief contributor, you assemble the facts and theories and have a personal interest 

in committing them clearly to print. The Survey 

encourages that interest and recognizes it as essential 

to the high morale and personal esteem of the 

organization. Authors should understand, however, 

that the Survey has a statutory interest in all its 

manuscript reports and may use them as it sees fit or 

may require that they be modified. The Survey rarely 

exercises this prerogative except to ensure that a 

report is scientifically sound, reaches the proper 

readership, and reflects credit on the Survey and the 

author. To these ends, your colleagues, supervisors, 

and staff associates all bring their specialized knowledge, skills, and judgments to bear on your report. 

In using the works of other writers, you as author 

must scrupulously avoid any hint of plagiarism. You 

must take great care to duly cite the ideas and publications of other workers in the subject area, and you 

must clearly attribute any direct or indirect quote 

from another author in a way that leaves no doubt 

as to its source. The name of the author and year of 

publication should unmistakably precede or follow the 

quote. For citations from longer papers, or of specific 

data, inclusion of page numbers is a courtesy to both 

the author and the reader. (See p. 234 for citation 

style.) In quoting from others, you should use only 

original source material or should cite exactly where 

the quote came from. 

Acknowledgments in reports by Survey authors can 

generally be divided into three groups: (1) acknowledgments to outside agencies or persons, (2) acknowledgments to previous investigators for borrowed data 

used by the author, and (3) acknowledgments of 

assistance by colleagues. These groups are discussed 

at length in the current Survey Manual. 

Outside agencies. Cooperative relationships are 

explicitly acknowledged by the Survey, generally in 

the introductory part of the Survey report. Any formal cooperative agreement must be concisely cited on 

the cover and title page of a book report and on 

appropriate margins of separately published maps, 

charts, and atlases. In reporting on areas outside the 

United States, take care to avoid offending the sensitivities of coworkers of the host country: Doublecheck such matters as correct spelling of names and 

use of personal titles. Carefully avoid criticizing local 

customs and facilities. Remember that mapping standards differ from one country to another, both as to 

accuracy and as to appearance. Any non-Survey 

financial support should be acknowledged. 

12 Duties, ethics, and professional writing practices 
Borrowed data. Authors must have permission, 

preferably written, to use borrowed data or conclusions and should properly credit data or conclusions of 

collaborators. Permission from private companies to 

publish confidential information, such as mine maps, 

well logs, and production data, should be indicated in 

the manuscript or in attached documents. Company 

names and trade names of equipment or material are 

avoided in Survey reports unless special reasons 

require their inclusion. Photographs should not show 

company names or trade names. 

Discussions of subject matter outside the Geological 

Survey's field of competence require citation of 

authorities. For example, statements giving the limits 

of chemical constituents acceptable for public water 

supply should cite appropriate State or Federal 

standards; statements concerning matters of waste 

disposal, or limits of such constituents in irrigation 

water, should also cite authoritative sources such as 

boards of health, the U.S. Public Health Service, or 

the Environmental Protection Agency. 

Colleague contributions. Every Survey investigation and report has benefitted from suggestions of the 

author's colleagues as a routine part of their work, 

and such assistance ordinarily need not be recounted 

unless it is noteworthy. If acknowledgment is made, 

an unadorned statement of specific aid will help fix 

responsibility and will probably be more appreciated 

by the recipient than an effusive expression of gratitude. "John Smith gave me access to his unpublished 

data" is more informative then "I am extremely 

grateful to John Smith for his unstinting help and 

generosity during the compilation of this report." 

Analyses, computations, and identifications of 

minerals and fossils, by either Survey or non-Survey 

personnel, must be credited. Such credits should 

appear in the tables, lists, or statements in which the 

work is reported, not in the formal "Acknowledgments" paragraph. This credit is courteous, honest, 

and mandatory. It also helps place responsibility. 

Photographs other than your own should be 

acknowledged. Credit the photographer, by name, in 

the caption of each such illustration. 

Permission to use copyrighted material. Authors 

are responsible for getting permission from the owner 

to use or quote from any copyrighted material. Some 

publishers require specific forms of acknowledgment. 

Copyright permissions must accompany your manuscript when it is submitted to the Director for 

approval. 

Other assistance. Family members, typists, 

editors, illustrators, librarians, and others contribute 

in many ways to the production of nearly all reports. 

Extraordinary assistance by such persons warrants a 

credit line, but letters of appreciation addressed to 

the employees' supervisors are generally more suitable and more immediately profitable to the individuals than mention in a technical paper. Thanks for 

help from family members can be expressed in 

personal ways. 

For acknowledgments and other occasions of 

personal reference, the preferred form is "Joseph P. 

Smith" or "Mary M. Smith" the first time the person 

is referred to; thereafter, "Smith" or "Mr., Mrs., 

Miss, or Ms. Smith" are preferable. Usage should be 

consistent; don't use "Smith" in one paragraph and 

"Mr. Smith" in the next. Military and political titles 

("Colonel," "Senator") are used in Survey papers, but 

academic and professional titles ("Doctor," "Professor") are ordinarily omitted. 

DEDICATION OF U.S. GEOLOGICAL 

According to the U.S. Geological Survey Manual, 

Section 503.2.6, 

It is not the policy of the USGS or of the Federal Government to 

dedicate its publications. Only two USGS publications have been 

dedicated to an individual. These exceptions, Professional Papers 

1249 and 1250 describing the 1980 eruptions of Mount St. Helens, 

were dedicated to David A. Johnston who lost his life during the 

main eruption. This exception was made following a commitment 

by the President of the United States, and may remain a unique 

occurrence. 

Other appropriate ways to honor individuals are available, 

including permanent awards to USGS employees for their accomplishments, and memorial volumes published by leading professional 

societies. Outside publications are especially fitting because they 

encourage non-Geological Survey scientists to participate in the 

memorials. 

CREDITS AND COPYRIGHTS 

Besides any general acknowledgment of a book or 

article in the text, credit for each borrowed illustration should be shown on the illustration or in its 

caption. The preferred credit line is "From Smith 

(1948)" if the illustration is reproduced essentially as 

originally published, even if the format or style is 

slightly changed or the illustration is redrafted. Use 

"modified from" if the substantive content is changed 

in any way. "After" carries a more nebulous connotation that implies use of an idea but not a direct copy. 

"Adapted from" is equivalent to "Modified from" but 

is not preferred usage. Photographs taken by you as 

author are not credited; uncredited photographs are 

assumed to be your work. Individual credit may be 

given, however, if the report has multiple authorship. 

Borrowed photographs or other illustrations should be 

Credits and copyrights 13 
acknowledged in the figure caption, even if modified 

by the borrower. 

Proprietary information, such as mine maps, drillhole production, or sampling records, requires both an 

acknowledgment and written permission from the 

owner, even if published only in open file. 

If copyrighted material is to be reprinted, written 

permission must be had from the owner of the copyright, and a statement of such permission must 

appear in the caption, either in the specific words 

requested by the owner or as "Reprinted from * * * 

and published with permission." You as author retain 

the written permission. Though Government-published 

maps and texts are not subject to copyright, proper 

credit must be given for cited or republished Government work; it is also courteous to not@ the original 

author of work being used. 

Because the subject of copyright transfer to outside 

journals sometimes causes confusion, the following 

form clearly states the position of Government 

(Survey) authors with respect to copyright. An author 

may sign and attach this form to any forms received 

from outside journals. The work of Survey authors 

cannot be copyrighted and, therefore, copyright 

cannot be transferred. 

COPYRIGHT TRANSFER FOR U.S. GOVERNMENT AUTHORS 

Date: 

Title of article: 

I (we) certify that the article named above was prepared as part of 

my (our) official duties. The article is thus in the public domain and 

cannot be copyrighted. 

Signature(s) of U.S. Government author(s): 

.LA 4. .**1 - , ,-. - 'W . , 

Scientific research of itself seldom involves much 

writing practice, but practice is essential for acquiring 

writing skills, and the only way to learn is to write. 

Good writers are made, not born. Survey scientists 

who strive to write well soon learn that what is good 

for the Survey is good for themselves. Few scientists 

achieve professional stature through the spoken word; 

a surer way is through high-quality publications. 

Right or wrong, the research and academic worlds 

tend to equate your fitness for advancement with the 

size of your bibliography, chiefly because published 

reports are easy yardsticks of growth and productivity. Even the rare scientist who lacks the normal need 

or desire for financial advancement finds that professional recognition, election to fellowship, and attainment of high office in scientific societies are based 

more often on published writings than on other 

accomplishments. 

Mere practice alone, however, will not assure 

writing proficiency. Broad reading of good literature 

helps, although good literature and scientific reporting are not necessarily synonymous. The many 

published grammar primers, technical manuals, style 

guides, glossaries, word-usage guides, dictionaries, 

and writers' handbooks also will help sharpen writing 

skills. Most bookstores have several to choose from. 

Writing classes are profitable and can be enjoyable, 

particularly those that offer one-to-one criticism. 

Thoroughly understanding your subject matter is 

essential to committing it clearly to writing. So is 

clear thinking: The Survey geologist who reported 

"limestone blocks the size of a large woman's purse" 

evidently was unaware that a small woman might 

carry a purse of the same size. 

See the section on "Suggestions as to expression" 

@. 124) for hints to enhance writing skills; many examples are taken from actual Survey manuscripts. 

Every Survey author can profit from studying those 

examples. 

Accu RACY 

Vague writing has no place in the scientific literature. Accurate reporting is a self-evident obligation, 

ethic, and good professional practice-accurate reporting not only of all scientific data, but also of such 

basic things as arithmetic and geographic locations. 

Simple typographical errors in numbers and directions 

are easily overlooked in proofing. If the text says a 

site is just northeast of Pine Mountain, the location 

on the map should be nowhere else. Section numbers, 

townships, and ranges should be carefully checked. 

The total thickness of a stratigraphic column should 

equal the total of individual beds, and if the total is a 

rounded one, that fact should be stated. Mineral 

analyses and their totals should agree. All these 

things seem obvious, but they are common sources of 

error, and if incorrect, they reflect on the credibility 

of the entire report. A point is reached in the proofing of a manuscript where every word and every 

figure must be individually checked by the author. No 

other procedure assures accuracy. 

14 Copyright transfer 
Famous remarks are very seldom quoted correctly. 

Simon Strunsky 

Authors are responsible for the accuracy of quotations. Because errors are sometimes made in copying 

printed matter, the typed copy of every quotation 

should be carefully compared with the original. Quotations ordinarily are not verified in editorial review. 

Short quotes may merely be set within quotation 

marks; longer ones may be indented or set in different type sizes as determined by the editor. In quoted 

material, the exact words of the original should be 

preserved. It is not necessary to reproduce details of 

printer's style, such as indentions, type size, and 

spacing, or typographical errors or incorrect spelling. 

Capitalization, punctuation, or grammatical errors 

need not be preserved either, except where the 

preservation of quaintness or exactness of form is 

desired. Titles of references should be quoted without 

change except to correct typographical errors. Any 

other word considered to be in error should be reproduced exactly, followed by "[sic]," which indicates 

that the erroneous word or passage is precisely 

reproduced. 

Italic in the original should be retained. If you 

italicize a word or phrase that is not italicized in the 

original, this change should be indicated immediately 

after the italic by a bracketed phrase such as "[italic 

mine]." Omissions within quoted matter should be 

indicated by three asterisks (* * *); comma and final 

period are placed inside the quotation marks. Other 

punctuation marks are placed inside the quotation 

marks only if they are part of the material quoted. 

To indicate quotations within quotations, use double 

quotation marks for the original quotation and 

single quotation marks for the quotation within the 

original. 

Ordinarily, quotations from foreign languages are 

translated into English; if a quotation in the original 

language is desirable, both the original and a translation should be given. Set the translation in brackets. 

Author and supervisor together share the responsibility for promptness in completing reports on time. 

A researcher is obligated to complete a report of an 

investigation as soon as possible after the close of 

the research. The obligation is not fulfilled until the 

results are published. Supervisors share the obligation. Employees taking on new assignments, moreover, will gain professional stature if they reserve 

sufficient time in their new schedules to complete any 

unfinished reports on time. 

An employee who plans to resign is obligated to 

complete and submit all such reports before leaving 

the Survey. Furthermore, even though an author completes the report before leaving, and thus satisfies 

that obligation, reputations may be endangered and 

the Survey may be embarrassed if unpublished information gained during Government employment is 

used in private employment. To assure the highest 

personal and ethical conduct at all professional levels, 

the Survey relies on the honor and scientific integrity 

of its employees. 

Factual comparisons in reports should be so worded 

as not to offend or cause wrong impressions. Authors 

who must relate their findings to those of other 

workers will do well to concentrate on clear, logical 

presentations of their own subjects; references to 

other writers and quotations from other writings 

should contribute to the presentation without distracting the reader. Expressed opinions, especially about 

writers who have erred or who hold contrary views, 

should be tactful and dignified. If you find a mistake 

in a predecessor's work, you may tingle with selfsatisfaction, particularly if your predecessor is an 

eminent scientist, but before gloating in print, 

consider the state of knowledge and the working 

conditions when the mistake was made. Consider also 

the reminder of Lucan, still valid after 2,000 years: 

"Pigmies placed on the shoulders of giants see more 

than the giants themselves." 

Scientific thought is exact and direct, and scientific writing must 

therefore be accurate and to the point. * * * [Any] writer's first 

duty is to be intelligible. * * * [Plain] writing is not something 

beneath the plane of endeavor of the scientific investigator * *. 

It is our ambition that the reports of the Geological Survey shall be 

written in the language of the people. 

George Otis Smith 

In 1973, Survey Director V.E. McKelvey added to 

the plea of George Otis Smith: 

[Policies, plans, and decisions concerning] resource adequacy, 

strip-mining, land use * * *, powerplant siting, preservation of 

coastal wetlands, wilderness area withdrawals, offshore drilling, *** surface and subsurface waste disposal, air pollution and 

[other problems] that are central issues in the United States today 

are * * * made by legislators, social scientists, lawyers, and others 

who understand and represent people, but who do not understand 

Clarity 15 
[scientific] language. [The information required to solve these problems needs] to be in plain terms and in forms in which it can be 

used effectively * *. 

In our efforts to increase the use of resource and land information in planning and decision-making, we have found that one of 

the most difficult problems is how to bridge the information gap 

between scientists and nonscientists * * *. The earth scientists, on 

the one hand, and the planning and urban decision-making community on the other, despite the best efforts of both, have been unable 

to totally bridge the gap between them. 

Suggestions to Authors stresses the need for 

clarity. To ensure effectiveness, reports must not 

only be accurate but must be so clearly and simply 

written that they are easily read and understood by 

their intended readership. To write clearly one must 

also think clearly; what could the author have been 

thinking who wrote that "most of the data on recent 

sediments in intracratonic basins are surrounded by 

Archean rocks"? The more esoteric aspects of earth 

sciences published nowadays cannot be written in 

layman's language, but no matter how abstruse the 

message, the purpose of writing remains the same: to 

tell somebody something, to report data accurately, 

and to present information clearly for contemporary 

and future readers. 

The more concise a scientific report, the better. 

Henry David Thoreau once wisely said that life is 

frittered away by detail. A lean, crisp report is 

processed faster and more cheaply than a rambling 

one and when published is read and understood by 

more readers. An adequate but brief manuscript 

demands more of an author's energy and skill than 

a fat-filled production. Concise writing demands 

practice. 

After a manuscript is completed it should be set 

aside to cool. Resist the urge to rush it along. Then 

go over it afresh to delete needless words, phrases, 

sentences, and paragraphs. Even then, a spaceconscious journal editor may demand significant 

shortening ("condensation"), but if you condense your 

manuscript before submitting it, processing will be 

more rapid and less painful. 

Technical aspects of earth science cannot be easily 

described in lay terms, despite the admonition of 

George Otis Smith, but there is no place in Survey 

writing for showy and stilted writing. If communication is to be effective, it must be understood, and 

chances of being understood are enhanced if ideas are 

expressed as simply as possible in the fewest possible 

words. 

Authors should decide early in their careers how 

they want their names to appear on reports and 

maps, and hence in bibliographic citations. Confusion 

will be avoided if the name form is not changed later. 

Name continuity not only eases the work of librarians 

and bibliographers but also enables fellow scientists 

and other researchers to find all the works by an 

author in one place in reference lists, bibliographies, 

card catalogs, and computer files. 

Women scientists should consider the desirability of 

retaining one name for professional purposes throughout their careers, even if they change their surnames 

by marriage. A hyphenated combination of wife's 

maiden surname and husband's surname ("Jane R. 

Jones-Smith") is not recommended because it causes 

bibliographic problems in reference lists and catalogs. 

Use of the first name and middle initial is preferred. In the event of name similarities, a distinctive 

combination of names or initials is advisable. The 

author's choice in this matter will be respected. 

Regardless of the form of the name on the title page 

of a report, Survey bibliographic citations traditionally 

give only the initials unless there are (1) name similarities or (2) only one given name (see "Preparing 

References" section, p. 234). 

WANTED: Scientist doing Nobel-prize-level research to edit proceedings volume for major conference. Must be charming, creative, 

determined, diplomatic, enthusiastic, firm, organized, patient, persuasive, resourceful, tactful, witty. Needed for about one year. No 

stipend. May have to suspend own work. 

Despite these requirements for sainthood, many 

scientists take on the task of assembling and editing a 

group of papers for publication in a single volume. If 

you find that you have agreed to be scientific editor 

of such a volume, the following guidelines may help 

you through the trying times ahead. 

The most immediate discussions will be with your 

employer, whose support is vital to your undertaking. 

If you are between projects when you accept the 

editorship, you probably can find time to dovetail 

your own work with editorial tasks, but if your workload is steady, you and your employer must agree on 

an equitable allocation of your time. 

Next, determine beyond all doubt that the sponsoring organization has a firm commitment-both financial and professional-to publish the volume. Be sure 

that the sponsor places complete confidence in you as 

editor and will honor your actions for meeting all objectives, which is to say that the sponsor will provide 

the money to publish and will back up your decisions. 

If your employer is also the sponsoring organization 

(such as the Survey), you may need to iron out a few 

more wrinkles before you begin. Be sure everyone in16 Name continuity 
volved shares the same expectations and perceptions 

of the project and agrees on priorities and scheduling. 

To set up a schedule for the volume, you must 

decide fairly early (1) the intended readership, (2) the 

intended publication date, and (3) the publisher. You 

may have to decide the tone of the volume-informal, 

as might suit a workshop, or formal, as might fit an 

international congress. You must assess what funding, 

resources, and people will be available, and you must 

set up a system for keeping track of everything. 

Some elaboration on these topics may be instructive. 

From the anticipated publication date, you can work 

backward to the present with the publisherlprinter to 

get an idea of what deadlimes the completion date requires. List everything you can think of that has to be 

done, and estimate how much time will be needed to 

complete each step. Then enter the deadline date for 

each step. 

For example, if the papers presented at a meeting 

in October are to be published in time for the next 

year's meeting and you start planning in early September before the meeting, you'll have about 12 

months from beginning to end. The following hypothetical publication schedule lists many of the tasks to 

to be done in that time (although the order can vary), 

working from the target date backward. 

Keep in mind that even the best of schedules is subject to human and postal frailties. In large measure, 

your editorial efforts will be devoted to anticipating 

problems and devising ways to avoid them. 

In the following schedule, read up from "Project 

Begins." Estimated time is how long a task might 

take from the beginning of one step to the beginning 

of the next. Be realistic. Allow time at each step just 

to handle and record the arrival or departure of 

material, which in aggregate can be surprisingly long. 

Note also who will be responsible for each task. The 

order of steps may vary, and many steps may need to 

be added. 

Myriad questions will spring up as you think about 

the schedule. The following questions are samples of 

what you might consider: 

How will papers be solicited and selected? 

How many papers might be anticipated? (The projected cost of the volume will affect its length and 

content.) 

How long should each paper be? 

Date Estimated 

time 

PROJECT ENDS 

Thank-you notes written to all--------- 9/30 

Copies of volume are delivered -------- 9/30 1 

Volumes are packaged and shipped -. 

Volume is printed 

Volume is delivered to printer - 

) 2 weeks 

9/15 . 2 weeks 

911 - 2 weeks 

8/15 

Volume is prepared for rinting 1 week 

(final corrections an$ layout) ------ 818 

Copy for printer is complete to your 1 week 

satisfaction .................... l1 ]4 weeks 

You approve all papers-- 

Authors return final version to vou---------------- "' } 4 weeks 

611 - 8 weeks 

You review papers and send to authors---------- 

--- 

411 j 8 weeks 

You receive papers-- 211 1 

Initial tasks; 14 weeks 

Instrucbons are sent to authors 

who write apers ................................. 10114 

Publisher is &cted and consulted------------ Deadlines are set 

Kind of author cop is decided upon- ------- 6 weeks 

Volume design anzforrnat are settled 

You - t the editorship ......................... 911 

PROJEC! BEGINS 

What about the number and size of tables and figures 

in each paper? 

Should authors follow one style guide (such as STA) 

or will consistency within each paper suffice? 

Will author-prepared art be accepted (or required), or 

will artwork be redrafted? Redrafted by whom? 

How about peer review for each paper? Who will do it 

and how long will it take? 

How do you visualize yourself as scientific editor-as 

a technical advisor or as absolute authority? 

What influence might electronic media have on the 

project? For example, will a paper on a wordprocessing disk be acceptable or useful? 

Wi the papers be camera ready or typeset? 

What guidelines will authors require and when? 

Will you adhere to your deadlines? Will you reject 

papers that fail to meet them, or will you slip your 

schedule for the slowest author? How much flexibility 

is possible without disrupting the entire schedule (and 

irritating the prompt authors)? 

Hypothetical publication schedule 17 
Will you be concerned with how the volume is 

marketed and (or) distributed? 

A few answers crucial to the success of the project 

may require agonized soul-searching on your part. 

Take the matter of deadlines: If you set reasonably 

firm deadlines (give or take a week, say), how will 

you respond to the creative excuses of an anguished 

colleague whose paper you know will be late despite 

your exhortations? 

Once the schedule is set and major decisions 

are made, the time has come to compile names, 

addresses, and phone numbers of everyone on the 

project, particularly authors. Any format is fine that 

can withstand heavy use and can be easily modified. 

Authors will constantly crave news about the project 

(their own papers in particular) and will demand much 

attention, despite your more pressing duties. As Survey geologist Tom Fouch suggests, try to calm their 

anxieties about every 3 weeks with brief progress 

reports, news, or instructions. Your final communication will be the thank-you notes you write to everyone 

involved in the project. Be sure to send one to 

yourself-you will have earned it! 

18 Hypothetical publication schedule