Researchers’ Perceptions of Ethical Authorship Distribution in Collaborative Research Teams

Science and Engineering Ethics:1-28 (forthcoming)

Authors
Elise Smith
National Institutes of Health
Abstract
Authorship is commonly used as the basis for the measurement of research productivity. It influences career progression and rewards, making it a valued commodity in a competitive scientific environment. To better understand authorship practices amongst collaborative teams, this study surveyed authors on collaborative journal articles published between 2011 and 2015. Of the 8364 respondents, 1408 responded to the final open-ended question, which solicited additional comments or remarks regarding the fair distribution of authorship in research teams. This paper presents the analysis of these comments, categorized into four main themes: disagreements, questionable behavior, external influences regarding authorship, and values promoted by researchers. Results suggest that some respondents find ways to effectively manage disagreements in a collegial fashion. Conversely, others explain how distribution of authorship can become a “blood sport” or a “horror story” which can negatively affect researchers’ wellbeing, scientific productivity and integrity. Researchers fear authorship discussions and often try to avoid openly discussing the situation which can strain team interactions. Unethical conduct is more likely to result from deceit, favoritism, and questionable mentorship and may become more egregious when there is constant bullying and discrimination. Although values of collegiality, transparency and fairness were promoted by researchers, rank and need for success often overpowered ethical decision-making. This research provides new insight into contextual specificities related to fair authorship distribution that can be instrumental in developing applicable training tools to identify, prevent, and mitigate authorship disagreement.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s11948-019-00113-3
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 40,625
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Laboratory Life. The Social Construction of Scientific Facts.Bruno Latour & Steve Woolgar - 1982 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 13 (1):166-170.

View all 12 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Scientific Authorship in the Age of Collaborative Research.K. Brad Wray - 2006 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 37 (3):505-514.
Authorship Policies of Bioethics Journals.D. B. Resnik & Z. Master - 2011 - Journal of Medical Ethics 37 (7):424-428.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2019-06-05

Total views
6 ( #914,351 of 2,242,339 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
6 ( #321,184 of 2,242,339 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature