The topic of acknowledgements has produced abundant research since the 1970s, though, as previous studies point out, the value of acknowledgements has not yet been demonstrated and further research is limited by lack of conceptualization. This study focuses on funding acknowledgements (FAs), considering that funding represents an important input in the scientific process. In this context, 183 scientific publications retrieved from Scopus from the 1970s until June 2020 were analyzed, with the aim of systematizing conceptually this body of research and contributing to a theory of acknowledgements. Results are summarized into the following main themes: the meaning of FAs; data sources for acknowledgements; the process of funding; association of funding with productivity, impact, and collaboration; and other aspects affected by funding. The literature reviewed shows that a theory of acknowledgements based on the reward triangle, as in previous studies, is unable to capture the extreme complexity of the scientific activity affecting and being affected by FAs. Funding bodies appear as clear and influential actors in the scientific communication system, making important decisions on the research that is supported, and influencing the type of knowledge produced. Funding agencies hold a responsibility regarding the data that they may collect on their programs, as well as the normalization policies they need to develop so that funded authors can reference with less ambiguity the financial source of their projects. Finally, the need to assess the impact of research funding beyond the scientific community that is, the societal impact, is also addressed.

中文翻译：

---

科学出版物中的资助确认：文献综述

自1970年代以来，确认的主题已进行了广泛的研究，但是，正如先前的研究指出的那样，确认的价值尚未得到证明，并且由于缺乏概念化，进一步的研究受到了限制。考虑到资金是科学过程中的重要投入，本研究着重于资金确认（FA）。在这种情况下，分析了从1970年代到2020年6月从Scopus检索到的183篇科学出版物，目的是在概念上对这一研究体系进行系统化，并为承认理论做出贡献。结果归纳为以下主要主题：FA的含义； FA的含义。用于确认的数据源；筹资过程；将资金与生产力，影响力和协作联系起来；以及受资金影响的其他方面。回顾的文献表明，与以往的研究一样，基于奖励三角形的承认理论无法捕捉影响FA或受FA影响的科学活动的极端复杂性。资助机构在科学传播系统中表现为明确而有影响力的参与者，对所支持的研究做出重要决定，并影响所产生的知识类型。资助机构对他们可能在其计划中收集的数据以及需要制定的规范化政策负有责任，以便资助的作者可以较少含糊地参考其项目的资金来源。最后，还需要评估科研经费对科学界以外的影响，即对社会的影响。