On the impossibility of a perfect counting method to allocate the credits of multi-authored publications
The problem on how to distribute the publication credits among ordered coauthors has been extensively discussed in the literature. However, there is no consensus about what is the most adequate procedure. This paper studies the properties of the existing counting methods and shows an impossibility result regarding the existence of a general counting method able to satisfy no advantageous merging and no advantageous splitting simultaneously—two properties that we consider fundamental. Our results suggest that the generalized variations of the geometric and the harmonic counting methods are the most flexible and robust in theoretical terms.
KeywordsCounting methods Properties Ordered coauthors Publication credits Bibliometrics
JEL ClassificationC65 D04
Author wish to thank to Juan Pablo Rincón-Zapatero and Ludo Waltman, as well as several seminar and congress participants for helpful comments and discussions. Financial support from the Spanish Ministerio of Ciencia y Innovación project ECO2016-75410-P, GRODE and the Barcelona GSE is gratefully acknowledged. The usual caveat applies.
- Abbas, A. M. (2010). Generalized linear weights for sharing credits among multiple authors. arXiv preprint arXiv:1012.5477.
- Abbas, A. M. (2011). Polynomial weights or generalized geometric weights: Yet another scheme for assigning credits to multiple authors. arXiv preprint arXiv:1103.2848.
- Cronin, B. (2001). Hyperauthorship: A postmodern perversion or evidence of a structural shift in scholarly communication practices? Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 52(7), 558–569.Google Scholar
- Egghe, L., Rousseau, R., & Van Hooydonk, G. (2000). Methods for accrediting publications to authors or countries: Consequences for evaluation studies. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 51(2), 145–157.Google Scholar
- Gazni, A., Sugimoto, C. R., & Didegah, F. (2012). Mapping world scientific collaboration: Authors, institutions, and countries. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 63(2), 323–335.Google Scholar
- Hu, X. (2009). Loads of special authorship functions: Linear growth in the percentage of equal first authors and corresponding authors. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 60(11), 2378–2381.Google Scholar
- Vinkler, P. (2000). Evaluation of the publication activity of research teams by means of scientometric indicators. Current Science, 79, 602–612.Google Scholar