Influences on authorship issues: An evaluation of receiving, not receiving, and rejecting credit

Accountability in Research

Volumn 17, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 176-197

  Seeman, Jeffrey I ^a   House, Mark C ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF RICHMOND   (United States)

^b Giant Steps Research   (United States)

Author keywords

Acknowledgment; Authorship; Ghost author; Guest author; Mentor; Responsible conduct of research (RCR)

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CHEMISTRY; ETHICS; HUMAN; MORALITY; PUBLISHING; RESEARCH ETHICS; SCIENTIFIC MISCONDUCT; UNITED STATES; WRITING;

AUTHORSHIP; CHEMISTRY; ETHICS, RESEARCH; HUMANS; MORAL OBLIGATIONS; PLAGIARISM; PUBLISHING; SCIENTIFIC MISCONDUCT; UNITED STATES; WRITING;

EID: 77954283902     PISSN: 08989621     EISSN: 15455815     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2010.493094     Document Type: Article

References (69)

1. Adam, D. (2001). Chemistry journal reacts to dispute. Nature, 412:669.
2. American Chemical Society (2006). Ethical guidelines to publication of chemical research. Available at http://pubs.acs.org/userimages/ContentEditor/ 1218054468605/ethics.pdf. Last accessed May 14, 2010.
3. American Chemical Society (2007). The chemical professional's code of conduct. Available at http://portal.acs.org/portal/acs/corg/content?. Last accessed May 14, 2010.
4. Anderson, C. (1993). Survey tracts misconduct, to an extent. Science, 262:1202-1203.
5. Anderson, M. S., Horn, A. S., Risbey, K. R., Ronning, E. A., de Vries, R., and Martinson, B. C. (2007). What do mentoring and training in the responsible conduct of research have to do with scientists' misbehavior? Findings from a national survey of NIH-funded scientists. Academic Medicine, 82:853-860.
6. Anderson, M. S., Oju, E. C., and Falkner, T. M. R. (2001). Findings from the Acadia Institute graduate education study. Science and Engineering Ethics, 7:487-503.
7. Anderson, M. S., Ronning, E. A., Vries, R. D., and Martinson, B. C. (2007b). The perverse effects of competition on scientists' work and relationships. Science and Engineering Ethics, 13:437-461.
8. Barrett, K. A., Funk, C. L., and Macrina, F. L. (2005). Awareness of publication guidelines and the responsible conduct of research. Accountability in Research, 12:193-206.
9. Bates, T., Anie, A., Marusic, M., and Marusic, A. (2004). Authorship criteria and disclosure. Comparison of 3 general medical journals with different author contribution forms. Journal of the American Medical Association, 292:86-88.
10. Benfey, O. T. and Morris, P. J. T. (Eds.)(2001). Robert Burns Woodward. Architect and Artist in the World of Molecules. Philadelphia, PA: Chemical Heritage Foundation.
11. Bird, S. J. (2001). Mentors, advisors and supervisors. Science and Engineering Ethics, 7:455-468.
12. Borman, S. (2004). Dispute on theory's origins goes public. Chemical and Engineering News, 82 (November 29):8.
13. Bouville, M. (2008). Plagiarism: Words and ideas. Science and Engineering Ethics, 14:311-322.
14. Brown-Wright, D. A., Dubick, D. A., and Newman, I. (1997). Graduate assistant expectation and faculty perceptions: Implications for mentoring and training. Journal of College Student Development, 38:410-415.
15. Claxton, L. D. (2005). Scientific authorship. Part 2. History, recurring issues, practices, and guidelines. Mutation Research, 589:31-45.
16. Cohen, M. B., Tarnow, E., and De Young, B. R. (2004). Coauthorship in pathology, a comparison with physics and a survey-generated and member-preferred authorship guideline. Medscape General Medicine, 6:1-13.
17. Corey, E. J. (2004a). Impossible dreams. Journal of Organic Chemistry, 69:2917-2919.
18. Corey, E. J. (2004b). Priestley medal address: Impossible dreams. Chemical and Engineering News, 82 (March 29):42-44.
19. Davis, M. S. (2003). The role of culture in research misconduct. Accountability in Research, 10:189-201.
20. Davis, M. S., Webster, K. L., and King, B. (2008). Narcissism, entitlement, and questionable practices of research in counseling: A pilot study. Journal of Counseling Development 86:200-210.
21. Drenth, J. P. H. (1998). Multiple authorship. Journal of the American Medical Association, 280:219-221.
22. Everts, S. (2009). Data manipulation at ETH. Chemical and Engineering News, 87 (September 28):11.
23. Fine, M. A. and Kurdeck, L. A. (1993). Reflections on determining authorship credit and authorship order on faculty-student collaborations. American Psychologist, 48:1141-1147.
24. Flanagin, A., Carey, L. A., Fontanarosa, P. B., Philips, S. G., Pace, B. P., Lundberg, G. D., and Rennie, D. (1998). Prevalence of articles with honorary authors and ghost authors in peer-reviewed medical journals. Journal of the American Medical Association, 280:222-224.
25. Funk, C. L., Barrett, K. A., and Macrina, F. L. (2007). Authors and publication practices: Evaluation of the effect of responsible conduct of research instruction to postdoctoral trainees. Accountability in Research, 14:1-37.
26. Gardner, W. (1998). The enforcement of professional ethics by scientific societies. Professional Ethics, 5:125-138.
27. Garfield, E. (1982). More on the ethics of scientific publications: Abuses of authorship attribution and citation amnesia undermine the reward system of science. Current Contents, 5-10. This article also appears in: Garfield, E. (1981-1982) Essays of an Information Scientist, 5:621-626.
28. Goodman, N. W. (1994). Survey of fulfillment of criteria for authorship in published medical research. British Medical Journal, 309:1482.
29. Hashemian, G. and Loui, M. C. (2010). Can instruction in engineering ethics change students' feelings about professional responsibility? Science and Engineering Ethics, 16:201-215.
30. Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academies of Science USA, 102:16569-16572.
31. Hirsch, J. E. (2007). Does the h-index have predictive power? Proceedings of the National Academies of Science USA, 104:19193-19198.
32. Hoffmann, R. (2004). A claim on the development of the frontier orbital explanation of electrocyclic reactions. Angewandte Chemie International Edition, 43:6586-6590.
33. House, M. C. and Seeman, J. I. Credit and authorship practices. Educational and environmental influences. (In preparation).
34. Johnson, C. (2005). Questioning the importance of authorship. Journal of Manipulative Physiological Therapeutics, 28:149-150.
35. MacDonald, C. and Williams-Jones, B. (2009). Supervisor-student relations: Examining the spectrum of conflicts of interest in bioscience laboratories. Accountability in Research, 16:106-126.
36. Macrina, F. L. (2000). Scientific Integrity. Washington, D.C.: ASM Press.
37. Martinson, B. C., Anderson, M. S., and de Vries, R. (2005). Scientists behaving badly. Nature, 435:737-738.
38. Medawar, P. B. (1979). Advice to a Young Scientist. New York: Harper & Row.
39. Merton, R. K. (1969). Behavior patterns of scientists. American Scientist, 57:1-23.
40. Merton, R. K. (1973). The Sociology of Science. Theoretical and Empirical Investigations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
41. National Institutes of Health (1993). Final findings of scientific misconduct. (June 25). Available at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/not93-177.html. Last accessed May 14, 2010.
42. Nature Publishing Group (2009). Guide to publications policies of the Nature journals. Available at http://www.nature.com/authors/gta.pdf. Last accessed May 14, 2010.
43. Newman, A. and Jones, R. (2006). Authorship of research papers: Ethical and professional issues for short-term researchers. Journal of Medical Ethics, 32:420-423.
44. Panel on Scientific Responsibility and the Conduct of Research (1993). Responsible science. Ensuring the integrity of the research process. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
45. Rennie, D., Yank, V., and Emanuel, L. (1997). When authorship fails. A proposal to make contributors accountable. Journal of the American Medical Association, 278:579-585.
46. Resnik, D. B. (1997). A proposal for a new system of credit allocation in science. Science and Engineering Ethics, 3:237-244.
47. Robinson, D. L., Burton-Danner, K., and Kiser, K. (1999). Dealing with scientific disputes involving authorship. Professional Ethics, 7:45-58.
48. Rovner,S.L.(2008).Fraudbusters.ChemicalandEngineeringNews,86(June16):50-55.
49. Schneider, A. (1998). Harvard faces the aftermath of a graduate student's suicide. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 45:A12-A14.
50. Schreiber, M. (2008). A modification of the h-index: The hm-index accounts for multiauthored manuscripts. Journal of Informetrics, 2:211-216.
51. Schulz, W. G. (2007). Giving proper credit. Chemical & Engineering News, 85 (March 12):35-38.
52. Seeman, J. I. and House, M. C. (2010). Influences on authorship issues. An evaluation of giving credit. Accountability in Research, 17:146-169.
53. Seeman, J. I. and House, M. C. Credit and authorship practices: Conflict resolution. (In preparation).
54. Sekercioglu, C. H. (2008). Quantifying coauthor contributions. Science, 322:371.
55. Shamoo, A. E. and Resnik, D. B. (2003). Responsible Conduct of Research. New York: Oxford University Press.
56. Steneck, N. H. (2007). Introduction to the Responsible Conduct of Research. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
57. Sullivan, L. E. and Ogloff, J. R. (1998). Appropriate supervisor-graduate student relationships. Ethics and Behavior, 8:229-248.
58. Tarnow, E. (2002). Coauthorship in physics. Science and Engineering Ethics, 8:175-190.
59. Tarnow, E., DeYoung, B. R., and Cohen, M. B. (2004). Coauthorship in pathology, a comparison with physics and a survey-generated and member-preferred authorship guideline. Medscape General Medicine, 6:1-2.
60. Vernon, B., Rankin, J., Stacy, R., Perrson, P., Thomas, L., Kaner, E., McColl, E., and Bhopal, R. (1997). The process of researching authorship issues: A case study from the United Kingdom. The Council of Biological Editors (CBE) Views, 20:119-124.
61. Wager, E., Fiack, S., Graf, C., Robinson, A., and Rowlands, I. (2009). Science journal editors' views on publication ethics: Results of an international survey. Journal of Medical Ethics, 35:348-353.
62. Welsh, R. K., Lareau, D. R., Clevenger, J. K., and Reger, M. A. (2008). Ethical and legal considerations regarding disputed authorship with the use of shared data. Accountability in Research, 15:105-131.
63. Wester, K. I., Willse, J. T., and Davis, M. S. (2008). Responsible conduct of research measure: Initial development and pilot study. Accountability in Research, 15:87-104.
64. White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (2000). Federal policy on research misconduct. 76260-76264; Available at http://ori.dhhs.gov/policies/fed_ research_misconduct.shtml. Last accessed May 14, 2010.
65. Wilcox, L. J. (1998). Authorship. The coin of the realm, the source of complaints. Journal of the American Medical Association, 280:216-217.
66. Woodward, J. and Goodstein, D. (1996). Conduct, misconduct and the structure of science. American Scientist, 84:479-490.
67. Woodward, R. B. (1967). The conservation of orbital symmetry. In: Aromaticity. London: The Chemical Society, pp. 217-249.
68. Woodward, R. B. and Hoffmann, R. (1970). The Conservation of Orbital Symmetry. Weinheim: VCH.
69. Zurer, P. S. (1993). Survey finds researchers often encounter scientific misconduct. Chemical and Engineering News, 71 (November 22):24-25.