Skip to main content
Log in

Authorship in Student-Faculty Collaborative Research: Perceptions of Current and Best Practices

  • Published:
Journal of Academic Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Determining appropriate authorship recognition in student-faculty collaborative research is a complex task. In this quantitative study, responses from 1346 students and faculty in education and some social science disciplines at 36 research-intensive institutions in the United States were analyzed to provide a description of current and recommended practices for authorship in student-faculty collaborative research. The responses revealed practices and perceptions that are not aligned with ethical guidelines and a lack of consensus among respondents about appropriate practice. Faculty and student respondents agreed that students deserve more authorship recognition than they get in common practice but they did not agree on the appropriate authorship arrangement for several of the collaborative scenarios described in the study or on the relative value of various contributions to research projects. The misalignment with ethical codes and lack of consensus among the respondents is problematic because student-faculty collaborative research is common and authored publications are powerful indicators of research competency. With these detailed results, students and faculty can better anticipate areas where their perspectives are likely to differ and faculty can work to clarify ambiguous expectations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

References

  • American Counseling Association. (2005). ACA code of ethics. Alexandria: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Educational Research Association. (2000). Ethical standards of the american educational research association. Washington: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Psychological Association. (2002). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. Washington: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Psychological Association. (2010). Publication manual of the american psychological association (2nd ed.). Washington: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • Apgar, D. H., & Congress, E. (2005). Authorship credit: a national study of social work educators’ beliefs. Journal of Social Work Education, 41(1), 101–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Association for the Study of Higher Education. (2003). Principles of ethical conduct. Las Vegas: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crespi, T. D. (1994). Student scholarship: in the best interests of the scholar. American Psychologist, 49(12), 1094–1096.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Endersby, J. W. (1996). Collaborative research in the social sciences: multiple authorship and publication credit. Social Science Quarterly, 77(2), 375–392.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fine, M. A., & Kurdek, L. A. (1993). Reflections on determining authorship credit and authorship order on student-faculty collaborations. American Psychologist, 48(11), 1141–1147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geelhoed, R. J., Phillips, J. C., Fischer, A. R., Shpungin, E., & Gong, Y. (2007). Authorship decision making: an empirical investigation. Ethics & Behavior, 17(2), 95–115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodyear, R. K., Crego, C. A., & Johnston, M. W. (1992). Ethical issues in the supervision of student research: a study of critical incidents. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 23(3), 203–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harvard Medical School. (1996). Authorship guidelines. Boston: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ilakovac, V., Fister, K., Marusic, M., & Marusic, A. (2007). Reliability of disclosure forms of authors’ contributions. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 176(1), 41–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kitchener, K. S. (1984). Intuition, critical evaluation and ethical principles: the foundation for ethical decisions in counseling psychology. Counseling Psychologist, 12(3), 43–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kitchener, K. S. (1992). Psychologist as teacher and mentor: affirming ethical values throughout the curriculum. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 23(3), 190–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koro-Ljungberg, M., & Hayes, S. (2006). The relational selves of female graduate students during academic mentoring: from dialogue to transformation. Mentoring & Tutoring, 14(4), 389–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Louis, K. S., Holdsworth, J. M., Anderson, M. S., & Campbell, E. G. (2008). Everyday ethics in research: translating authorship guidelines into practice in the bench sciences. The Journal of Higher Education, 79(1), 88–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merton, R. K. (1973 [1942]). The normative structure in science. In R. K. Merton & N. W. Storer (Eds.), The sociology of science: Theoretical and empirical investigations (pp. 267-278). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

  • Messick, S. (1995). Validity of psychological assessment: validation of inferences from persons' responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score meaning. American Psychologist, 50, 741–749.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Netting, F. E., & Nichols-Casebolt, A. (1997). Authorship and collaboration: preparing the next generation of social work scholars. Journal of Social Work Education, 33(3), 555–566.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nguyen, T., & Nguyen, T. D. (2006). Authorship ethics: issues and suggested guidelines for the helping professionals. Counseling and Values, 50, 208–216.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pope, K. S., & Vetter, V. A. (1992). Ethical dilemmas encountered by members of the American Psychological Association: a national survey. American Psychologist, 47(3), 397–411.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robins, L., & Kanowski, P. (2008). PhD by publication: a student’s perspective. Journal of Research Practice, 4(2), 1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandler, J. C., & Russell, B. L. (2005). Student-faculty collaborations: ethics and satisfaction in authorship credit. Ethics & Behavior, 15(1), 65–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro, D. W., Wenger, N. S., & Shapiro, M. F. (1994). The contributions of authors to multiauthored biomedical research papers. Journal of the American Medical Association, 271(6), 438–442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spiegel, D., & Keith-Spiegel, P. (1970). Assignment of publication credits: ethics and practices of psychologists. American Psychologist, 25, 738–747.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winston, R. B. (1985). A suggested procedure for determining order of authorship in research publications. Journal of Counseling and Development, 63, 515–518.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Laura E. Welfare.

Additional information

This study was supported in part by the Southern Association for Counselor Education and Supervision.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Welfare, L.E., Sackett, C.R. Authorship in Student-Faculty Collaborative Research: Perceptions of Current and Best Practices. J Acad Ethics 8, 199–215 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-010-9119-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-010-9119-7

Keywords

Navigation