Advertisement

Science and Engineering Ethics

, Volume 23, Issue 2, pp 625–627 | Cite as

Multiple First Authors as Equal Contributors: Is It Ethical?

  • Govindasamy Agoramoorthy
Letter

The recent article titled “Evaluation by citation” by Maarten van Wesel (2016) outlines the thorny ethical dilemma driving the “publish or perish syndrome” that promotes scientific shortcuts leading to ethical misconduct. When I started writing papers three decades ago at the Smithsonian Institution in the United States, we were taught by senior scientists on the ethics of scientific writing that precisely outlined specifics on how to list co-authors in papers based on their actual contributions. What I understood then was that those who are engaged in designing, collecting and analyzing data in fact prepare the paper and they usually take the lead role in authorship while the research adviser being a mentor and senior scientist accepts the responsibility of corresponding authorship. The corresponding author’s duty involves overall accountability for the paper that includes crosschecking data factuality, ethical implications and communication with the journal’s editorial office....

Keywords

Multiple Author Senior Scientist High Impact Journal Ethical Tradition Editorial Office 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Conte, M. L., Maat, S. L., & Omary, M. B. (2013). Increased co-first authorships in biomedical and clinical publications: A call for recognition. FASEB Journal, 27(10), 3902–3904. doi: 10.1096/fj.13-235630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ma, Z., Lee, Y., & Chen, C. F. P. (2009). Booming or emerging? China’s technological capability and international collaboration in patent activities. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 76(6), 787–796. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2008.11.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Rennie, D., Yank, V., & Emanuel, L. (1997). When authorship fails. A proposal to make contributors accountable. Journal of the American Medical Association, 278(7), 579–585. doi: 10.1001/jama.1997.03550070071041.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Smith, R. (1997). Authorship: Time for a paradigm shift? British Medical Journal, 314(7086), 992. doi: 10.1136/bmj.314.7086.992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. van Wesel, M. (2016). Evaluation by citation: Trends in publication behavior, evaluation criteria, and the strive for high impact publications. Science and Engineering Ethics, 22(1), 199–225. doi: 10.1007/s11948-015-9638-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Wagner, C. S., & Leydesdorff, L. (2005). Network structure, self-organization, and the growth of international collaboration in science. Research Policy, 34(10), 1608–1618. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2005.08.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Sengamala Thayaar Educational Trust Women’s CollegeSundarakkottai, MannargudiIndia
  2. 2.College of Pharmacy and Health CareTajen UniversityYanpuTaiwan

Personalised recommendations