Intellectual contributions meriting authorship: Survey results from the top cited authors across all science categories.
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2019
2019
Historique:
received:
11
05
2018
accepted:
13
12
2018
entrez:
17
1
2019
pubmed:
17
1
2019
medline:
17
9
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Authorship is the currency of an academic career for which the number of papers researchers publish demonstrates creativity, productivity, and impact. To discourage coercive authorship practices and inflated publication records, journals require authors to affirm and detail their intellectual contributions but this strategy has been unsuccessful as authorship lists continue to grow. Here, we surveyed close to 6000 of the top cited authors in all science categories with a list of 25 research activities that we adapted from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) authorship guidelines. Responses varied widely from individuals in the same discipline, same level of experience, and same geographic region. Most researchers agreed with the NIH criteria and grant authorship to individuals who draft the manuscript, analyze and interpret data, and propose ideas. However, thousands of the researchers also value supervision and contributing comments to the manuscript, whereas the NIH recommends discounting these activities when attributing authorship. People value the minutiae of research beyond writing and data reduction: researchers in the humanities value it less than those in pure and applied sciences; individuals from Far East Asia and Middle East and Northern Africa value these activities more than anglophones and northern Europeans. While developing national and international collaborations, researchers must recognize differences in peoples values while assigning authorship.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30650079
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0198117
pii: PONE-D-18-14023
pmc: PMC6334927
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0198117Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
Mayo Clin Proc. 2010 Oct;85(10):920-7
pubmed: 20884825
Nature. 2014 Apr 17;508(7496):312-3
pubmed: 24745070
Sci Adv. 2017 Nov 08;3(11):e1700404
pubmed: 29152564
Heliyon. 2017 May 10;3(5):e00300
pubmed: 28560354
Account Res. 2016;23(2):136-8
pubmed: 26252450
Account Res. 2017;24(8):433-450
pubmed: 29035082
Ann Intern Med. 1986 Feb;104(2):269-74
pubmed: 3511815
Soc Stud Sci. 2016 Jun;46(3):417-435
pubmed: 28948891
Phys Rev Lett. 2015 May 15;114(19):191803
pubmed: 26024162
Sci Eng Ethics. 2014 Jun;20(2):363-77
pubmed: 23690133
EMBO Rep. 2007 Nov;8(11):988-91
pubmed: 17972896
J Med Ethics. 2016 Mar;42(3):199-202
pubmed: 26714812
J Med Ethics. 2006 Jul;32(7):420-3
pubmed: 16816044
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2018 Mar 13;115(11):2557-2560
pubmed: 29487213
Nature. 2018 Sep;561(7722):167-169
pubmed: 30209384
BMJ. 2011 Oct 25;343:d6128
pubmed: 22028479
Account Res. 2018;25(4):199-211
pubmed: 29400074
Lancet. 2017 Dec 16;390(10113):2627-2642
pubmed: 29029897
Account Res. 2013;20(2):59-71
pubmed: 23432769
PLoS One. 2017 Jun 26;12(6):e0179956
pubmed: 28650967
PLoS One. 2017 Oct 4;12(10):e0185578
pubmed: 28976996