Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy

, Volume 18, Issue 2, pp 171–175 | Cite as

Scientific authorship and intellectual involvement in the research: Should they coincide?

Scientific Contribution

Abstract

An update of the widely acknowledged recommendations on how to handle authorship in research, issued by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), was issued in August, 2013. While the revised recommendations contain several clarifications compared to earlier versions, one arguably important aspect is still not addressed: the relationship between authorship and intellectual involvement in research. In this paper, it is argued that the ICMJE authorship criteria are flawed in this respect: they do not explicitly require of authors of scientific papers that they do research. It is further suggested that unless academic authorship clearly reflects to what extent individual researchers have been intellectually involved in the research and to what extent they have merely contributed with research-related work, they will, in many cases, be misleading about research merits.

Keywords

Authorship Ethics Intellectual involvement Research 

References

  1. Barbour, V. 2010. How ghost-writing threatens the credibility of medical knowledge and medical journals. Haematologica 95: 1. doi:10.3324/haema-tol.2009.017426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bennett, D.M., and D.M. Taylor. 2003. Unethical practices in authorship of scientific papers. Emergency Medicine (Freemantle) 15: 263–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. BMJ. 2014. Authorship & contributorship. http://www.bmj.com/about-bmj/resources-authors/article-submission/authorship-contributorship Accessed May 12, 2014.
  4. Borry, P., P. Schotsmans, and K. Dierickx. 2006. Author, contributor or just a signer? A quantitative analysis of authorship trends in the field of bioethics, Bioethics 20: 213–220.Google Scholar
  5. Brennan, P.M., A. Jubb, J.K. Baillie, and R.W. Partridge. 2013. Deciding authorship order. British Medical Journal 16(347): f7182. doi:10.1136/bmj.f7182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Helgesson, G. 2011. Co-authorship in research publications. In Neither/Nor. Uppsala Philosophical Studies eds Sliwinski R and Svensson F, 58:101–114.Google Scholar
  7. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). 2013. Recommendations for the conduct, reporting, editing, and publication of scholarly work in medical journals. Updated December, 2013. Available at http://www.icmje.org Accessed May 12, 2014.
  8. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). 2010. Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals: writing and editing for biomedical publication. Available at http://www.icmje.org/urm_full.pdf Accessed January 30, 2014.
  9. Karolinska Institutet. 2013. Bibliometrics at Karolinska Institutet. Available at http://kib.ki.se/en/node/45706 Accessed May 12, 2014.
  10. Kaufmann, P., C. Annis, R.C. Griggs, and Muscle Study Group Executive Committee. 2010. The authorship lottery: an impediment to research collaboration? Annals of neurology 68(6): 782–786.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Moffat, B., and C. Elliot. 2007. Ghost marketing: pharmaceutical companies and ghostwritten journal articles. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 50(1): 18–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Shamoo, A.E., and D.B. Resnik. 2003. Responsible conduct of research. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Smith, E., and B. Williams-Jones. 2012. Authorship and responsibility in health sciences research: a review of procedures for fairly allocating authorship in multi-author studies. Science and engineering ethics 18(2): 199–212. doi:10.1007/s11948-011-9263-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Smith, R. 1997. Authorship is dying: long live contributorship. British Medical Journal 315: 696.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Strange, K. 2008. Authorship: why not just toss a coin? American Journal of Physiology. Cell Physiology 295: C567–C575.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Weijer, C., and A. Akabayashi. 2003. Unethical author attribution. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 12: 124–130.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Stockholm Centre for Healthcare Ethics (CHE), Department of Learning, Informatics, Management and EthicsKarolinska InstitutetStockholmSweden

Personalised recommendations