Fundamental Science Practices Frequently Asked Questions
What USGS scientific information products must follow FSP?
How does USGS define peer review and what are the FSP peer review requirements?
How is approval granted and what documents at a minimum must be submitted to the approving official?
What is the foundation of FSP?
What Federal Government policies require the release of scientific data, and how does the USGS intend to meet these requirements?
What is considered USGS scientific software and what are the USGS requirements for releasing it?
What types of project progress information can be reported and why is that important?
The frequently asked questions (FAQs) represent a Bureau consensus to ensure interpretations of Fundamental Science Practices (FSP) policies are uniformly applied throughout the USGS. These comprehensive FAQs not only provide further explanation of the FSP and related publishing policies but also describe the specific procedures and decision making necessary to meet the
FSP Background
Authorship
Review
Approval
USGS Publication Series
Journal Publications
Metadata
Data
Software
Project Reporting and Cooperator Publications
Web Pages, Conferences, Abstracts, and Presentations
Preprints
The FAQs will be updated as necessary and changes in the form of additions or revisions are reflected by date (month/year) as they occur. Questions about the FSP that are not addressed here should be directed to gs_fspac@usgs.gov.
FSP Frequently Asked Questions
Where can I find additional guidance related to scientific integrity and authorship? [036]
Department of the Interior (DOI) FAQs on Authorship in Scientific and Scholarly Work Products are available as part of additional guidance made available on the USGS Scientific Integrity website, which also includes links to the DOI Scientific Integrity website and the DOI Code of Conduct. [Read more]
A book publisher has contacted me to contribute a short "blurb" review of content for the back of a book cover. As a USGS scientist, will my positive review be interpreted as an endorsement? [037]
Yes. By definition, a short review or "blurb" placed by the book publisher on the back cover, elsewhere on the book jacket, or as front matter or back matter inside the book is an endorsement of the contents. A USGS employee must not associate his or her position or affiliation with the USGS in these kinds of reviews. [Read more]
How does USGS define peer review and what are the FSP peer review requirements? [038]
USGS defines peer review as scrutiny of work or ideas by colleagues (peers) who are well qualified and who are of equal standing with one another. The FSP requirements for peer review of USGS science information products are found in SM 502.3. [Read more]
Can supervisors and/or managers serve as peer reviewers for information products authored by employees they supervise and vice versa? [039]
No. For all USGS science information products an author and his/her supervisor are not allowed to serve as peer reviewers for one another, regardless of any collegial relationship or the expertise of either because doing so could be perceived as a conflict of interest. [Read more]
What are the recordkeeping requirements for peer review comments, peer review reconciliation, and draft documents associated with a given USGS information product? [040]
Peer review comments and reconciliation documents must follow the National Archives and Records Administration-approved recordkeeping schedule requirements found in USGS General Records Disposition Schedule, Chapter 1300. These short-term, temporary records must be retained by the Bureau for 3 years after publishing or until they are no longer needed for reference, whichever is later. [Read more]
What are the OMB requirements for peer review of influential products? [041]
The Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB) Final Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review requires public posting of documentation about the planning and conducting of peer review for those information products that Federal agencies have designated as influential scientific information or highly influential scientific assessments (terms defined by the OMB). [Read more]
What are the categories of “Open Access” journals and what are the FSP peer review requirements for these products? [042]
Journal peer review processes—Category 1: anonymous peer reviews and draft manuscripts are not available to the public; USGS approval process for peer-reviewed journal articles is used. Category 2: peer reviews of draft manuscripts open to the public; two USGS-initiated peer reviews and Bureau approval are required before sending the manuscript to journal. [Read more]
What are the editing requirements for USGS science information products? [043]
Editing of USGS publication series scientific information products is required and must be coordinated or performed by the USGS Science Publishing Network (SPN). Review by SPN editors for other science information products, such as outside publications and web pages, is recommended but optional. [Read more]
How does the USGS comply with the OMB requirements for scientific information quality and peer review? [044]
The USGS Information Quality Guidelines website and the USGS Peer Review Agenda website help authors comply with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) requirements regarding scientific information quality and peer review of influential products.
Are there any provisions for expedited peer review and Bureau approval? [045]
If it is anticipated that a scientific information product will need to be handled in an expedited manner, the author and (or) Science Center Manager should inform the Bureau Approving Official as soon as possible so that arrangements can be made for expedited approval. Expedited peer reviews should be arranged within the Science Center when the peer reviewers are selected.
If there is a difference of opinion between an author and her/his chain of command in regard to adequacy of response to peer review or in regard to scientific/technical interpretation, what are the options/avenues available to the author? [046]
If there is a dispute between the author and her/his supervisor, Center Director, or others in her/his chain of command regarding the adequacy of peer review or scientific/technical interpretation, the author may contact the Director or Deputy Director of the OSQI for assistance with the resolution of the differences. The author may also contact the FSP Advisory Committee for advice. [Read more]
What are cooperator publications and how are they addressed in FSP? [047]
Cooperator publications are released in full by the cooperating entity in a publicly accessible location and are clearly a cooperator's product and not a USGS product. Cooperator publications must receive at least two peer reviews, reconciliation, supervisory and science center approvals, and Bureau approval before release. [Read more]