Authorship in Science:

Transcription

1 Authorship in Science: What, me worry? Theory vs. Practice Dr. William J. Ullman School of Marine Science and Policy University of Delaware, Lewes 1 2 What is an author? Conceiving the idea? Putting the idea on paper? Publishing the idea (paper, electronically) Ownership (copyright) Citation of a person s idea? Michel Foucault: Qu est-ce qu un auteur? What is an author? Who is an author? What does it mean to be an author? How is scientific authorship different? 3 4 Why is scientific authorship Important? What information is imbedded in the order of authorship? What responsibilities come with scientific authorship? David Pontille, EHESS ABSTRACT: Although many studies question the notion of author, very little attention had been paid to scientific authorship. With articles signed sometimes by more than fifty names, scientific activity is a strategic setting to examine the author in general and to specify the attributes of the scientific author. the collective side of scientific work requires several shifts in comparison with the literary and legal conception of the author that focus on a singular individual creator. From a standpoint focused on current practice, our analysis finds a dissociation of some acts that are generally considered as concomitant, indeed similar: to write, to sign, and to be an author. (Translated, in part, by Ullman) Qu est-ce qu un auteur scientifique? Sciences de la Société, 67 (2006)

2 Signing and Authorship Writing is Signing (traditional literary definition) Signatures without Writing (business, government, law) Science: Writing in order to Sign (graduate students) Signing without Writing (guest authors and ghostwriters do the writing) Many Signatures, few Writers (co-authorship) Signatures of minor Contributors (guest authorship) 7 Who should be an author? What should be the order of authors? Who or what should determine authorship order? 8 Proposed UD Policy (ICMJE*) Qualifications for Authorship Authorship credit should be based on i. substantial contributions to conception and design, or acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data; ii. drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content; and iii. final approval of the version to be published. Authors should meet conditions i, ii, and iii. Acquisition of funding, collection of data, or general supervision of the research group, alone, does not justify authorship. All persons designated as authors should qualify for authorship, and all those who qualify should be listed. *International Committee of Medical Journal Editors 9 Each author should have participated sufficiently in the work to take public responsibility for appropriate portions of the content. All contributors who do not meet the criteria for authorship should be listed in an acknowledgments section. Examples of those who might be acknowledged include a person who provided purely technical help, writing assistance, or a department chair who provided only general support. Financial and material support should also be acknowledged. The order of authorship on the byline should be a joint decision of the co-authors. Authors should be prepared to explain the order in which authors are listed. Based on International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals, 10 Proposed UD Policy (never adopted) The Order of Authors The first author is that person who contributed most to the work, including writing of the manuscript (an author is a person who writes). The sequence of author listing is determined by the relative contributions to the work. In the instance that equal credit is due, this should be footnoted (by asterisk) and it is suggested that authors be listed alphabetically (authors may wish to note this policy on their CVs). Decisions about authors and the order in which their names appear should be discussed as early as possible, even at the outset. Decisions about authors and the order in which their names appear should be made by group consensus, and under the guidance of the lead investigator(s). Based on editorial by D. Riesenberg and G. Lundberg, JAMA 1990; 264: Changes in ICMJE Requirements (2009) Contributorship: All contributors who do not meet the criteria for authorship should be listed in an acknowledgments section. Examples of those who might be acknowledged include a person who provided purely technical help, writing assistance, or a department chairperson who provided only general support. Editors should ask corresponding authors to declare whether they had assistance with study design, data collection, data analysis, or manuscript preparation. If such assistance was available, the authors should disclose the identity of the individuals who provided this assistance and the entity that supported it in the published article. 12 2

3 Continued (2009) Guarantorship: When a large, multicenter group has conducted the work, the group should identify the individuals who accept direct responsibility for the manuscript. These individuals should fully meet the criteria for authorship/contributorship When submitting a manuscript authored by a group, the corresponding author should clearly indicate the preferred citation and identify all individual authors as well as the group name. Journals generally list other members of the group in the Acknowledgments. The NLM indexes the group name, and the names of individuals directly responsible for the manuscript the names of collaborators if they are listed in Acknowledgments. 13 Requirements (2015) 1. A growing number of entities are advertising themselves as medical journals yet do not function as such ( predatory journals ). Authors should be aware of the integrity, history, practices and reputation of the journals to which they submit manuscripts. 2. In the event of a public health emergency (as defined by public health officials), information with immediate implications for public health should be disseminated without concern that this will preclude subsequent consideration for publication in a journal. 14 Continued (2015) Discussion: begin the discussion by briefly summarizing the main findings, and the possible mechanisms or explanations for these findings. Emphasize the new and important aspects of your study and put your findings in the context of the totality of the relevant evidence. State the limitations of your study, and explore the implications of your findings for future research, clinical practice, or policy. Do not repeat information given in other parts of the manuscript 15 Continued (2017) Conflicts of Interest Reporting Standardized form for reporting potential conflicts of interest Submitted with paper Metadata with publication 16 Theory vs Practice? Guest Authorship and Ghostwriting in Publications Related to Rofecoxib: A Case Study of Industry Documents From Rofecoxib Litigation. J.S. Ross, K.P. Hill, D.S. Egilman, H.M. Krumholz JAMA. 2008; 299(15): Merck marketing employees developed publishing plans and then engaged other employees or contractors to write to articles based on VIOXX clinical trials. They then solicited external, academically connected investigators to serve as authors, offering honoraria to do so. Scientific Collaborations as a Family Activity (David Pontille) Goal in authorship order should be: Benefit to the whole research group Different members have different needs/wants Lead PI needs to make decision as to what is best for the most (Pater familias.) PI has responsibility for sharing benefits among members of the family

4 Being first author counts the most. Value of authorship (other than first) declines exponentially with number of authors. C.V. with two first-authored papers is better than a C.V. with 6 papers but where the person is the nth author. If you are the first author, don't be stingy about adding an additional co-author. If you are not the first author, don't be shy about questioning the addition of another co-author. Kirchman s Rules Prof. D. L. Kirchman, School of Marine Science and Policy, University of Delaware 19 Determining who should be a co-author of the paper Best answered before the work even begins. Certainly before writing begins. First author does the most writing. Prof. D. L. Kirchman, School of Marine Science and Policy, University of Delaware 20 Order of authorship contains some information (in some fields) First: Main person, wrote the paper (at least the first draft) Second: Main technical help Third, etc.: Small contributions Last: Most senior person, who wrote the proposal and was awarded the funding. Often listed as the corresponding author. Prof. D. L. Kirchman, School of Marine Science and Policy, University of Delaware 21 Kirchman, D.L., S. Graham, D. Reish, and R. Mitchell Bacteria induce settlement and metamorphosis of Janua (Dexiospira) brasiliensis. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 56: Kirchman: Designed the experiment and wrote the paper Graham: A technician who did the work Reish: Sent the animals to MA from CA Mitchell: Advisor, Editor. Originated The Idea 22 Nature s policy: Authors are strongly encouraged to include a statement in the Acknowledgements to specify the actual contribution of each coauthor. Active foundering of a continental arc root beneath the southern Sierra Nevada in California GEORGE ZANDT, HERSH GILBERT, THOMAS J. OWENS, MIHAI DUCEA, JASON SALEEBY & CRAIG H. JONES Acknowledgements. G.Z. thanks G. Gehrels, P. Kapp and B. Hacker for comments on preliminary interpretations and manuscripts. Authors' contributions: G.Z., H.G., T.J.O. and C.H.J. cooperated on the seismology analysis and interpretation. M.D. and J.S. provided the geologic and tectonic context. C.H.J. led the PASSCAL deployment to collect the data. G.Z. wrote the article with contributions from all other authors. Authorship is important to scientists Intellectual Credit Career Advancement Authorship rules are often complex and variable between and within fields Authorship theory and practice often are at odds Talk about authorship/coauthorship with all collaborators, early in collaborations

5 Something New! Transparency in Authors Contributions and Responsibilities to Promote Integrity in Scientific Publication. Marcia McNutt, Monica Bradford, Jeffrey Drazen, Brooks Hanson, Bob Howard, Kathleen Hall Jamieson, Véronique Kiermer, Michael Magoulias, Emilie Marcus, Barbara Kline Pope,Randy Schek man,sowmya Swaminathan, Peter Stang, Inder Verma. ( May 2017) Enumerate contributions ORCID (Uniform identification for authors) Is this information necessary or useful? Authorship Pathology K, Strange, Authorship: Why not just toss a coin? Cell Physiology, C567-C575 Questions? What is an author? What does it mean to be an author? Who should be an author? What should be the order of authors? Who or what should determine authorship order? Case Studies Ghostwriters Used in Vioxx Studies, Article Says New York Times (15 April 2008) The drug maker Merck drafted dozens of research reports (papers) for a best-selling drug, then lined up prestigious doctors to put their names on the reports before publication In on-going blind medical studies, how do you assign authorship? Guest Authorship and Ghostwriting in Publications Related to Rofecoxib: A Case Study of Industry Documents From Rofecoxib Litigation; J.S. Ross, K.P. Hill, D.S. Egilman, H.M. Krumholz, JAMA. 2008;299(15):

6 Authorship Policy for the Ullman Lab Group School of Marine Science and Policy University of Delaware, Lewes 1. Ullman is always the last author on abstracts and papers with authorship entirely from the Ullman lab group, except as explained under exceptions below. 2. An MS or PhD student is always the first author on material that was derived from his or her completed thesis or dissertation or will be a substantial contribution to the thesis or dissertation when completed, except as explained under exceptions below. 3. A postdoctoral fellow will be the first author of a paper in which he or she is the primary contributor to the research and when the research will not be a primary contribution to an MS thesis or PhD dissertation. 4. Full-time technical personnel who are funded to participate in the research to be published and who contribute substantially to data collection, field support, analysis of results, preparation of the manuscript, or any combination of these items, shall be included as an author of publications resulting from the funded research Authorship Policy for the Ullman Lab Group 5. Undergraduate participants shall be included as authors, if their participation was under an official undergraduate research experience program and their contribution to data collection and analysis contributed substantially to the project. 6. The order of authorship, for authors other than the first author and Ullman, shall be determined by the relative contribution of the authors in designing of the project, carrying out of sample collection and analysis, analysis of the data, and the writing of the initial manuscript. 7. The role of publication in the career advancement of authors may be considered as a secondary factor in decisions concerning the order of authorship, not affecting the first author. 8. When authors from outside of the Ullman lab are included in a publication, the order of authorship shall be discussed before the initiation of writing and the policies described here shall serve as the template for negotiations concerning authorship. 9. The final arbiter of authorship inclusion and authorship order shall be Ullman. 33 Authorship Policy for the Ullman Lab Group 10. In cases of dispute, the Director or an Associate Director of the School of Marine Science and Policy shall serve as mediator. 11. Exception A: When an MS or PhD student does not make progress on a manuscript for a period of one year or more, Ullman may complete the manuscript and award himself first authorship. 12. Exception B: Articles solicited from Ullman by editors outside of the University of Delaware shall have Ullman as the first author. 13. Exception C: Articles for public (non-scientific) audiences shall have Ullman as first author. 14. Exception D: Ullman may choose to omit his name from the list of authors, as long as his contribution is acknowledged in the paper, when the primary research participants are two or more MS or PhD students or postdoctoral fellows. 34 The End Under the supervision of Prof. Leader, three graduate students are working on related projects for their MS degrees, in two cases, and PhD degree, in the remaining case. Most of the laboratory work is done by the students as Prof. Leader is busy with administrative responsibilities including the writing of new grant proposals. After two years, Prof. Leader decides to write a paper based on the work of these students. Although the work emphasizes the contributions of the two MS students who have completed their research and left the University, Prof. Leader and the PhD student are writing the paper together without additional input from the two MS students. What should the order of authorship be and why? Who decides, in the end, the order of authorship? Would it make any difference if the two masters students were undergraduate interns? former postdocs?

7 Student Lucy completes a masters thesis funded by a grant to her advisor, Prof. Goosey, and graduates from Big U. She completes her thesis and, based on the quality of this work and her recommendations from Prof. Goosey, quickly finds a job and leaves the Big U. Prof. Goosey contacts Lucy a number of times about writing up her work for publication in the Journal of Prestigious Results. Initially, she responds that she is working on the paper, but after one-year, she indicates that she doesn t have time to write up the paper and no longer has interest in doing so. Prof. Goosey realizes that in order to get future funding he will need to write up Lucy s work and does so. Should Lucy be rewarded with authorship? Who should be the first author? How should Prof. Goosey respond to future requests for letters of recommendation for Lucy? Prof. Almighty submits a proposal renewal based on work done by MS Student Downtrodden on a previous grant. After the grant proposal is submitted, Downtrodden, now a PhD student, gets a copy of the proposal and finds that substantial portions of his MS thesis appear verbatim in the proposal. Although his MS thesis is well-cited in the proposal, he is upset that there is no indication that the text was initially written by him. 1. Does Downtrodden have reason to be upset? 2. How should have Prof. Almighty acknowledged the Downtrodden s contributions to the proposal? 3. Should Downtrodden complain? If so, to whom? Dr. Pedro Cánovas Postdoc at University of Massachusetts Falling out with supervisor (Prof. Dario Altieri) Altieri declines to publish with Canovas Altieri acknowledges Canovas s right to publish Canovas submits paper, it is accepted Canovas cannot pay publication charges and applies for fee waiver, explaining the situation Journal wants to add Altieri as an author Altieri/U. Mass declines request Paper withdrawn by Journal Professor Wanda Befamous and her graduate students, Nat Naïve, Ingrid Innocent, and Oliver Oblivious went on a research cruise where each of them did various analyses. The most novel part of the work was done by Oliver as part of his Ph.D. work. The project, including student stipends, is supported by a grant written by Professor Befamous. The cruise went extremely well, so well that Professor Befamous wants to write up the results for publication as soon as possible in fact, she wants to submit the paper to Science first and then Nature. Is it okay for Prof. Befamous to be the first author of the Science/Nature submissions? Not unexpectedly, both Science and Nature reject the paper in fact, it wasn t even sent out for review. So, now Professor Befamous wants to re-write the paper for the Journal of Delaware Science and Home Economics. She wants to remain the first author, even though Oliver Oblivious thinks that he should be first as the work is based on his PhD research. Does the professor have any right to be first author of the paper? Who should be first author of this paper?