IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v70y2010i9p1458-1465.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Credit where credit is due? Regulation, research integrity and the attribution of authorship in the health sciences

Author

Listed:
  • Street, Jackie M.
  • Rogers, Wendy A.
  • Israel, Mark
  • Braunack-Mayer, Annette J.

Abstract

Despite attempts at clear direction in international, national and journal guidelines, attribution of authorship can be a confusing area for both new and established researchers. As journal articles are valuable intellectual property, authorship can be hotly contested. Individual authors' responsibilities for the integrity of article content have not been well explored. Semi-structured interviews (n = 17) were conducted with staff, student advocates and doctoral candidates working in health research in two universities in Australia. Stratified sampling ensured participants reflected a range of experience across biomedical, clinical and social science disciplines. Participants were asked about their experience with research publication and their views on the responsibilities of authorship. Participants gave a variety of reasons for attribution of authorship including: writing the paper; seniority; and student supervision. Gift authorship was seen by some participants as: a way of maintaining relationships; a reward; a means to increase a paper's credibility; or a demonstration of collaboration between authors. Norms and beliefs differed markedly between disciplines for authorship attribution and, to a lesser extent, for authors' responsibility for content integrity. Discussions about the effect of power differentials on authorship were common across disciplines. This paper describes a broad range of beliefs, values and practice norms held by health science researchers with respect to attribution of authorship and author responsibility for scientific publications. The findings support the need for clarity in relation to authorship, and a research environment which is supportive of ethical behaviour in the publication of research.

Suggested Citation

  • Street, Jackie M. & Rogers, Wendy A. & Israel, Mark & Braunack-Mayer, Annette J., 2010. "Credit where credit is due? Regulation, research integrity and the attribution of authorship in the health sciences," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 70(9), pages 1458-1465, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:70:y:2010:i:9:p:1458-1465
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(10)00084-5
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Karen Seashore Louis & Janet M. Holdsworth & Melissa S. Anderson & Eric G. Campbell, 2008. "Everyday Ethics in Research: Translating Authorship Guidelines into Practice in the Bench Sciences," The Journal of Higher Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 79(1), pages 88-112, January.
    2. De Vries, Raymond & Lemmens, Trudo, 2006. "The social and cultural shaping of medical evidence: Case studies from pharmaceutical research and obstetric science," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 62(11), pages 2694-2706, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Gómez-Ferri, Javier & González-Alcaide, Gregorio & LLopis-Goig, Ramón, 2019. "Measuring dissatisfaction with coauthorship: An empirical approach based on the researchers’ perception," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 13(4).
    2. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo & Gianluca Murgia, 2014. "Variation in research collaboration patterns across academic ranks," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(3), pages 2275-2294, March.
    3. Yu-Wei Chang, 2019. "Definition of authorship in social science journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(2), pages 563-585, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Perrotta, Manuela & Geampana, Alina, 2020. "The trouble with IVF and randomised control trials: Professional legitimation narratives on time-lapse imaging and evidence-informed care," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 258(C).
    2. Ana Ivaniš & Darko Hren & Matko Marušić & Ana Marušić, 2011. "Less Work, Less Respect: Authors' Perceived Importance of Research Contributions and Their Declared Contributions to Research Articles," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(6), pages 1-5, June.
    3. Pavlova, Milena & Hendrix, Marijke & Nouwens, Elvira & Nijhuis, Jan & van Merode, Godefridus, 2009. "The choice of obstetric care by low-risk pregnant women in the Netherlands: Implications for policy and management," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 93(1), pages 27-34, November.
    4. Shelly Jun & Kelsea Drall & Brittany Matenchuk & Cara McLean & Charlene Nielsen & Chinwe V. Obiakor & Aaron Van der Leek & Anita Kozyrskyj, 2018. "Sanitization of Early Life and Microbial Dysbiosis," Challenges, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-9, December.
    5. Unruh, Lynn & Rice, Thomas & Rosenau, Pauline Vaillancourt & Barnes, Andrew J., 2016. "The 2013 cholesterol guideline controversy: Would better evidence prevent pharmaceuticalization?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(7), pages 797-808.
    6. Françoise Salager-Meyer & María Ángeles Alcaraz-Ariza & Marianela Luzardo Briceño & Georges Jabbour, 2011. "Scholarly gratitude in five geographical contexts: a diachronic and cross-generic approach of the acknowledgment paratext in medical discourse (1950–2010)," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 86(3), pages 763-784, March.
    7. Sobo, Elisa J., 2017. "Parent use of cannabis for intractable pediatric epilepsy: Everyday empiricism and the boundaries of scientific medicine," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 190(C), pages 190-198.
    8. Mykhalovskiy, Eric & Armstrong, Pat & Armstrong, Hugh & Bourgeault, Ivy & Choiniere, Jackie & Lexchin, Joel & Peters, Suzanne & White, Jerry, 2008. "Qualitative research and the politics of knowledge in an age of evidence: Developing a research-based practice of immanent critique," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 195-203, July.
    9. Lana Bošnjak & Ana Marušić, 2012. "Prescribed practices of authorship: review of codes of ethics from professional bodies and journal guidelines across disciplines," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 93(3), pages 751-763, December.
    10. Sismondo, Sergio, 2008. "How pharmaceutical industry funding affects trial outcomes: Causal structures and responses," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 66(9), pages 1909-1914, May.
    11. Pär Sundling, 2023. "Author contributions and allocation of authorship credit: testing the validity of different counting methods in the field of chemical biology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(5), pages 2737-2762, May.
    12. Lars H. Breimer & Torbjörn K. Nilsson, 2010. "A longitudinal and cross-sectional study of Swedish biomedical PhD processes 1991–2009 with emphasis on international and gender aspects," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 85(2), pages 401-414, November.
    13. Ana Marušić & Lana Bošnjak & Ana Jerončić, 2011. "A Systematic Review of Research on the Meaning, Ethics and Practices of Authorship across Scholarly Disciplines," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(9), pages 1-1, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:70:y:2010:i:9:p:1458-1465. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.