You do not have permission to edit this page, for the following reason:

Only users who are logged in using ORCID can make a change or add a contribution. Please login here.

Back

Edit a theme

We invite you to share your knowledge and write about a theme which you find relevant, interesting or controversial. You can share your own expertise, present your new initiative, write a commentary about one of the resources hosted on The Embassy, or simply describe a topic that you think should be shared with the research community.

Before you submit, please be aware of our community guidelines.

Theme

Collaborations are becoming more frequent and gather anever  increasing number of researcher. At the same time publications remain a key source of academic credit and career advancement. It is important to allocate credit for research contributions in a fair and transparent way.

The UK Research Integrity Office outlines why authorship standards matter:

“Correct authorship of research publications matters because authorship confers credit, carries responsibility, and readers should know who has done the research. Denying authorship to somebody who deserves it denies recognition and academic credit since publications are used to assess academic productivity. Including an undeserving author is unfair since this person gets credit for work they have not done. Omitting a deserving author from an author also list misleads readers (including journal editors) and may mask conflicts of interest.” <ref>UKRIO (2017). Good practice in research: Authorship. Accessed via: http://ukrio.org/wp-content/uploads/UKRIO-Guidance-Note-Authorship-v1.0.pdf</ref>
<references />

===Difficulties===
Common practises on standards of authorship vary between scientific disciplines, and between countries, making standardizing difficult. They also change over time. As the Swiss Academies of Arts and Sciences note:

''“Customs have changed over the past few decades; for example, the practice of granting “honorary” authorship to an eminent researcher – formerly not unusual – is no longer considered acceptable.”''<ref>Swiss Academies of Arts and Sciences (2013). Authorship in scientific publications: Analysis and recommendations. Accessed via: <nowiki>http://www.akademien-schweiz.ch/en/dms/E/Publications/Guidelines-and-Recommendations/integrity/Academies_Authorship.pdf</nowiki></ref>

==='''European Code of Conduct '''===
''The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity (2017)'' states the following:<ref>ALLEA (2017). European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity. Accessed via: https://allea.org/code-of-conduct/</ref>

*All authors are fully responsible for the content of a publication, unless otherwise specified
*All authors agree on the sequence of authorship, acknowledging that authorship itself is based on a significant contribution to the design of the research, relevant data collection, or the analysis or interpretation of the results
*Authors acknowledge important work and intellectual contributions of others, including collaborators, assistants, and funders, who have influenced the reported research in appropriate form, and cite related work correctly
*All authors disclose any conflicts of interest and financial or other types of support for the research or for the publication of its results

==='''COPE'''===

*Guideline: [https://publicationethics.org/files/2003pdf12_0.pdf How to handle authorship disputes: a guide for new researchers]
*Guideline: [https://publicationethics.org/files/International%20standard_editors_for%20website_11_Nov_2011.pdf Responsible research publication: international standards for editors]
<references />

Related To

Edit Theme: Theme:83f33f33-e9ba-4589-b450-92e3992a22db

Edit a theme