Difference between revisions of "Resource:3f71447b-3d00-47a0-94af-720040d717ae"
From The Embassy of Good Science
Marc.VanHoof (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{Resource |Resource Type=Guidelines |Title=How to handle authorship disputes: a guide for new researhers |Is About=How to handle authorship disputes: a guide for new research...") |
|||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
|Resource Type=Guidelines | |Resource Type=Guidelines | ||
|Title=How to handle authorship disputes: a guide for new researhers | |Title=How to handle authorship disputes: a guide for new researhers | ||
| − | |Is About= | + | |Is About=This document helps new researchers prevent and resolve authorship problems. In particular it provides: |
| + | |||
| + | * suggestions for good authorship practice that should reduce the incidence of such dilemmas, | ||
| + | * advice on what to do when authorship problems do arise, and | ||
| + | * a glossary of key concepts in authorship, with some reading lists and websites for those who wish to take this further. | ||
| + | |||
| + | <br /> | ||
| + | |Important Because=Many people (both editors and investigators) feel that the misrepresentation of authorship is a form of research misconduct, and that honesty in reporting science should extend to authorship. They argue that, if scientists are dishonest about their relationship to their work, this undermines confidence in the reporting of the work itself. | ||
|Important For=Early career researchers; Junior researchers; PhD Students; Postdocs | |Important For=Early career researchers; Junior researchers; PhD Students; Postdocs | ||
}} | }} | ||
| Line 8: | Line 15: | ||
|Has Link=https://publicationethics.org/files/2003pdf12.pdf | |Has Link=https://publicationethics.org/files/2003pdf12.pdf | ||
}} | }} | ||
| − | {{Related To}} | + | {{Related To |
| + | |Related To Resource=Resource:E11c2017-febf-4986-a02a-4d6d9599d21a;Resource:A0df9be7-401a-43ba-af41-245019119182;Resource:3f71447b-3d00-47a0-94af-720040d717ae;Resource:B044b353-a9cb-4a39-9069-79b114497331;Resource:366d47ee-4b9d-4287-8c57-88ba847480bb | ||
| + | |Related To Theme=Theme:Cbe88760-7f0e-4d6d-952b-b724bb0f375e;Theme:540f8241-c354-4249-8b63-6bdc2e74bdf8;Theme:83f33f33-e9ba-4589-b450-92e3992a22db;Theme:28a0859b-9e52-4af4-97f0-b0f8eeac1f1c | ||
| + | }} | ||
{{Tags | {{Tags | ||
| − | |Involves=COPE | + | |Involves=COPE; Tim Albert; Elizabeth Wager |
| − | |Has Timepoint= | + | |Has Timepoint=2003 |
|Has Location=United Kingdom | |Has Location=United Kingdom | ||
| − | |Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Authorship | + | |Has Virtue And Value=Honesty; Respect |
| + | |Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Authorship; Research Misconduct | ||
}} | }} | ||
Revision as of 11:48, 17 August 2020
ResourcesGuidelines
How to handle authorship disputes: a guide for new researhers
What is this about?
This document helps new researchers prevent and resolve authorship problems. In particular it provides:
- suggestions for good authorship practice that should reduce the incidence of such dilemmas,
- advice on what to do when authorship problems do arise, and
- a glossary of key concepts in authorship, with some reading lists and websites for those who wish to take this further.
Why is this important?
Many people (both editors and investigators) feel that the misrepresentation of authorship is a form of research misconduct, and that honesty in reporting science should extend to authorship. They argue that, if scientists are dishonest about their relationship to their work, this undermines confidence in the reporting of the work itself.
