Abstract
In a large and detailed survey on the ethics of scientific coauthorship, members of the American Physical Society (APS) were asked to judge the number of appropriate coauthors on his or her last published paper. Results show that the first or second coauthor are more appropriate than later coauthors about whom there is equal and considerable doubt. The probability of any third and subsequent coathors being judged as inappropriate is 23% for the APS guideline, 67% for the tighter guideline of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, 59% if the guideline requires “direct contributions to scientific discovery or invention”. Only 3% of respondents report having personally rejected an undeserving scientist who expected to be an author on the last published paper. Respondents seem to be divided into two non-overlapping populations—those who report no inappropriate coauthorship and those who have a more graduated view.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Scheetz, M.D. (1999) Office of Research Integrity: a reflection of disputes and misunderstandings. Croatian Medical Journal 40: 321–325.
Vasta, R. (1981) The matter of publication credit: a survey of APA members, Journal Supplement Abstract Service Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology 11: 2–3.
Tarnow, E. (2000) How do we bring authorship out of the bedroom? Science Editor 23: 183.
Swazey, Judith P., Anderson, Melissa S. and Louis, Karen Seashore (1993) Ethical problems in academic research, American Scientist 81: 542–554.
Kalichman, M. and Friedman, P., (1992) A pilot study of biomedical trainees perceptions concerning research ethics, Academic Medicine 67: 767–773.
Eastwood, S., Derish, P., Leash, E. and Ordway, S. (1996) Ethical Issues in Biomedical Research: Perceptions and Practices of Postdoctoral Research Fellows Responding to a Survey, Science and Engineering Ethics 2: 89–114.
Uniform Requirement for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals (1997) Journal of the American Medical Association 277: 927–934.
Tarnow, E. (1999) The Authorship List in Science: Junior Physicists’ Perceptions of Who Appears and Why, Science and Engineering Ethics 5: 73–88.
Yank, V. and Rennie, D. (1999) Disclosure of researcher contributions: a study of original research articles, Annals of Internal Medicine 130: 661–70.
Taylor, Humphrey (1999) Does internet research work, International Journal of Market Research 42: 51–63.
Tarnow, E. (1991) Scientific authorship — what’s in a name, Physics Today 44: 13.
Rennie, D., Yank, V. and Emanuel, L. (1997) When Authorship Fails: A Proposal to Make Contributors Accountable, Journal of the American Medical Association 278: 579–85.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Tarnow, E. Coauthorship in physics. SCI ENG ETHICS 8, 175–190 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-002-0017-2
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-002-0017-2