How do research faculty in the biosciences evaluate paper authorship criteria?
Kassis asked biology, biomedical engineering and bioengineering faculty how important they considered several criteria for recognition as an author and rank on authorship list. A key finding is that, “Overall, there seemed to be a consensus that the time spent conducting experiments, coming up with a hypothesis, analyzing data, and writing the manuscript were the four most important criteria for both determining one’s authorship status and rank.” However, there was wide variation in the relative importance of several other criteria (including contributing a reagent or code, or conducting a literature review), indicating some inconsistency in how authorship decisions are made. The author suggests that these findings will help students navigate “the discrepancy between official policies for authorship and the contributions that faculty truly value.” [For more on authorship policies see Defining the role of authors and contributors (International Committee of Medical Journal Editors) and How to handle authorship disputes:a guide for new researchers (Tim Albert and Liz Wager)]. bioRxiv 10.1101/069468
Leave a ReplyWant to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!