Responsible Authorship
Publication and Authorship
Definition and Background
A “responsible author” is one who receives or is included in a “byline” on a published report just in case s/he has made nontrivial intellectual contributions to the work described by the report. Despite that many decisions about publication and authorship require judgment calls, this position is accepted across the sciences and the humanities.
The growth of knowledge and its applications require accurate, fair and appropriate credit. It is inappropriate to be listed as an author as a result of financial support, administrative leadership or technical assistance (such as mere data collection). One should not be listed as an author as a favor, as a courtesy or as an expression of gratitude.
The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors – widely accepted as authoritative for biomedical scientists – says, “An ‘author’ is generally considered to be someone who has made substantive intellectual contributions to a published study…” The committee offers these criteria:
Authorship credit should be based on 1) substantial contributions to conception and design, or acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data; 2) drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content; and 3) final approval of the version to be published. Authors should meet conditions 1, 2, and 3.
Note that the guideline calls for meeting all three criteria.
The American Physical Society’s Guidelines for Professional Conduct declare that
“Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the concept, design, execution or interpretation of the research study. All those who have made significant contributions should be offered the opportunity to be listed as authors. Other individuals who have contributed to the study should be acknowledged, but not identified as authors.”
The American Geophysical Society’s Guidelines to Publication of Geophysical Research, in a document based in part on guidelines by the American Chemical Society, direct that
Only persons who have significantly contributed to the research should be listed as authors. The corresponding author attests that any others named as authors have seen the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication. Deceased persons who meet the criterion for co-authorship should be included, with a footnote reporting date of death. No fictitious name should be listed as authors or co-authors. The author who submits a manuscript for publication accepts the responsibility of having included as co-authors all persons appropriate and none inappropriate.
Other issues in publication and authorship include the following:
Redundant publication: According to the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, “Redundant (or duplicate) publication is publication of a paper that overlaps substantially with one already published in print or electronic media.” This is wrong because it might deceive other scholars, can subvert journals’ editorial integrity and can be used to create a false impression of scholarly productivity.
Fragmented publication: This is the intentional dividing of a coherent research report into smaller, publishable reports to create the (false) impression of extensive productivity. According to the American Geophysical Society, “Fragmentation of research papers should be avoided. A scientist who has done extensive work on a system or group of related systems should organize publication so that each paper gives a complete account of a particular aspect of the general study.” However, reports of some studies may credibly be divided into a number of articles if doing so will present a clearer impression of the scope of the work, assist other scholars who seek information about specific aspects of the work or if the study covers genuinely distinct (sub)topics.
Under-reporting research: Scholars have a duty to (try to) publish results. The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors note that “Failure to submit or publish negative studies, in particular, contributes to publication bias,” a potentially dangerous corruption of the research corpus. Failure to publish results because of financial considerations is especially problematic. Note, though, that debate continues on the question whether and under what circumstances it is permissible to delay publication.
Citations and acknowledgments: Scholars should cite all works referred to or relied on. Failure to note intellectual antecedents is a form of deception – although it might be necessary to make a judgment call about whether an antecedent is so well known or obvious so as to eliminate the need for citation. (Note, for instance, declining frequency in citation of keystone documents describing the polymerase chain reaction.) Over-citation of intellectual antecedents can also be wrong if it is done with the intent of giving a false impression of a project’s significance, gravitas or ancestry. Similarly with acknowledgments of intellectual or editorial assistance: The American Geophysical Society makes clear that, generally, one should thank someone in print only with that person’s permission. Such acknowledgments are usually the appropriate place to note the contributions of those whose contributions do not rise to the level of authorship. The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors: “Examples of those who might be acknowledged include a person who provided purely technical help, writing assistance, or a department chair who provided only general support… Groups of persons who have contributed materially to the paper but whose contributions do not justify authorship may be listed under a heading such as “clinical investigators” or “participating investigators,” and their function or contribution should be described - for example, “served as scientific advisors,” “critically reviewed the study proposal,” “collected data,” or “provided and cared for study patients.”
Web Based Resources Available
American Chemical Society
Ethical Guidelines to Publication of Chemical Research
http://pubs.acs.org/instruct/ethic2000.pdfAmerican Geophysical Society
Guidelines to Publication of Geophysical Research
http://www.agu.org/pubs/pubs_guidelines.htmlAmerican Physical Society Guidelines for Professional Conduct
http://www.aps.org/statements/02.2.htmlInternational Committee of Medical Journal Editors
Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals: Writing and Editing for Biomedical Publication
http://www.icmje.org