Theme:6217a8cb-285f-4101-9cc3-f82a5ad528a5

Themes

The Rise of Octopus Affiliation: Navigating Multiple Institutional Associations in Academic Publishing

What is this about?

One of the most important elements in research articles is author affiliation as it provides readers with information where the research was conducted. The academic community refers to this practice as "octopus affiliation" because it is becoming more and more common for authors to list multiple affiliations (1). When an author lists more than one organization to which they are affiliated in their article, it is known as octopus affiliation (2).

Why is this important?

It is understandable that some authors are connected to one, two or three institutions at the same time. However, some authors are affiliated with as many as 6 or more institutions simultaneously. Such multiple and simultaneous connections can be depicted as an octopus that sets each of its legs in a different direction. The question arises whether multiple affiliations are only a way to strengthen the academic rank of the respective institutions; how the author can fulfill work duties in 5-6 different institutions, especially when they are quite far from each other or even in other countries; how valid and reliable is the system based on octopus affiliations; can the financial support of an institution be an objective reason for citing for affiliation; how ethical and professional is it for individuals to occupy different jobs at different institutions, while others with similar competences are unemployed, etc (1).

It is possible that the phenomenon of octopus affiliations is just one of the many undesirable consequences of academic evaluation and a system that places the greatest emphasis on increasing the rank of individual institutions in order to secure future funding and maintain their status and prestige, which ultimately backfires on the authors (1). It could also be a symptom of a lack of institutional support for authors, which "forces" them to look for resources in other institutions (3).

For whom is this important?

Academic institutionsAuthorsJournal editorsResearchersStudents

What are the best practices?

Some relevant practices that address the issues in academic publishing include efforts to reduce the dominance of large commercial publishing houses. For example, initiatives to shift the publishing model away from commercial monopolies and towards non-commercial or publicly funded options are becoming more common. These practices aim to help board members contribute to academic publishing without relying on intermediary consultant companies that prioritize commercial interests. Another key practice is fostering academic enthusiasm and collaboration among board members and reviewers, which encourages a shift away from preferences for commercial journals. Additionally, projects that promote academic cooperation and non-profit publishing, such as public or association-led initiatives, have gained traction (4). Furthermore, Yumru (2) recommends that international organizations like COPE and ICMJE adress concerns about unethical authorship practices, such as octopus affiliation, and develop guidelines that will encourage transparent and ethical reporting of author affiliations.

References:

       1.     Moustafa K. Octopus affiliations. Scientometrics. 2020 Sep;124(3):2733–5.

2.         Yumru M. The new face of commercial academia: Octopus affiliation. J Clin Psychiatry. 2024;27(2):99–100.

3.         Hottenrott H, Lawson C. A first look at multiple institutional affiliations: a study of authors in Germany, Japan and the UK. Scientometrics. 2017 Apr;111(1):285–95.

4.         The background of publishing: Is ethics possible? J Clin Psychiatry [Internet]. 2020; Available from: https://jag.journalagent.com/z4/download_fulltext.asp?pdir=kpd&plng=eng&un=KPD-89166

contributed to this theme. Latest contribution was Feb 03, 2025

Other information