Suggestions to Improve the Comprehensibility of Current Definitions of Scientific Authorship for International Authors

Abstract

Much has been said about the need for improving the current definitions of scientific authorship, but an aspect that is often overlooked is how to formulate and communicate these definitions to ensure that they are comprehensible and useful for researchers, notably researchers active in international research consortia. In light of a rapid increase in international collaborations within natural sciences, this article uses authorship of this branch of sciences as an example and provides suggestions to improve the comprehensibility of the definitions of authorship in natural sciences. It assesses whether the definition of authorship provided by the European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity can deal with current issues and problems of scientific authorship. Notably, problems that are experienced in project groups with researchers coming from multiple countries. Using theories developed by Jürgen Habermas and Robert Merton, a normative framework is developed to articulate ethical authorship in natural sciences. Accordingly, enriching the current definition of authorship with normative elements and using discipline-specific metaphors to communicate them are introduced as possible ways of improving the comprehensibility of the definition of authorship in international environments. Finally, this article provides a proposal to be considered in the future revisions of the European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity.

An Ethical Exploration of Increased Average Number of Authors Per Publication

“…Strategic behaviors in publication can be best understood using Jürgen Habermas’s notion of strategic communication, which describes forms of communication aimed at gaining power and domination (Habermas, 1996 ). In the authorship context, behaviors associated with strategic communication look to increase the chances of publication, enhance its visibility, drive metrics, claim priority, and prevent the competition from catching up (Hosseini et al, 2020 ), all of which are at odds with the prime goals of conducting research, that is, to extend certified knowledge (Merton, 1973 ) and improve understanding within the scientific community (Habermas, 1971 ).…”

Dinamika Agenda Setting dan Formulasi Kebijakan untuk Pembangunan Berkelanjutan: Analisis Bibliometrik

“…Namun demikian, temuan bahwa beberapa penulis memiliki kontribusi yang lebih rendah atau tidak terhubung dengan penulis lainnya juga menyoroti kompleksitas kriteria penulisan ilmiah dan kemungkinan terjadinya konflik dalam menetapkan penulis (Hosseini & Gordijn, 2020) dan (Hosseini et al, 2019). Hasil ini juga menggambarkan pentingnya mengukur keberagaman ekosistem co-authorship dalam komunitas akademis (Wang, 2019).…”

Hábitos de publicación de la élite científica de España

“…El European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity, elaborado por más de 50 academias europeas de ciencia de más de 40 países, señala que todos los autores son responsables del contenido de una publicación y que la autoría se basa en una contribución significativa al diseño de la investigación, colección de datos o análisis e interpretación de los resultados (ALLEA -All European Academies, 2017). Pero no aclara el significado de "contribución significativa"; la ambigüedad en el concepto de autoría implica diferentes interpretaciones en distintas disciplinas y países Hosseini et al, 2020). Springer, una de las principales editoriales de revistas, declara que, aunque no existe una definición universal de lo que constituye la autoría, el grupo de investigación debería identificar a los autores que han contribuido suficientemente al trabajo científico, que son responsables de su parte del trabajo y que revisaron críticamente y aprobaron la versión final del manuscrito.…”