Ethics for Astronomers

Transcription

1 Ethics for Astronomers Lecture 05 October 01, 2008 Authorship READINGS: ApJ Policy and others

2 Authorship: What s at stake? Authorship is a metric of a researcher s scienmfic impact and producmvity. Other metrics are significantly weaker than authorship. Individual and Group research integrity is at stake vis a vis peers, the host insmtumon, & public. Funding and promomon (academic degree) is at stake. Authorship is part of the research record, the history of science, and with potenmal for fame as scienmfic nomenclature. Life and death issue? Yes scribo, ergo sum Wri0ng assigns permanence to your existence because permanence is a quality of reality and/or truth. One perceives infrac0ons on your wri0ng as a threat to one s existence.

3 Scribo, ergo sum? For science the published research record is both a personal and a public monument. Who created the above? Does credit always require recognition (i.e. across history and across cultures)?

4 Define an author What is the ApJ definimon of an author (KennicuZ 2006)? What is your definimon?

5 Define an author? Coauthorship scoring system, Hunt (1991, Nature, 352, 187): need > 25 points, score gives author order

6 The Research Misconduct Authors Gid author: Using the value of authorship in return for something else of value (score<25) Ghost author: FabricaMng an author (score=0) False author: Falsifying an author (score<25, Bubble Fusion) Buddy author: Benificence can be bad Banker author: Who provided the funds but did nothing else. Boss author: Just because they are a supervisor. Alliance author: Let s work together, potenmally OK if Mme shided. Rubber stamp author: accrete integrity. JusMfy the Resources author: e.g. put all astronomers on one proposal. Others? Which one s might be OK in other cultures?

7 Tarnow (2002): APS/URBJ Hybrid DefiniMon

8 Who decides? Can authority to determine authorship change with Mme? Sponsor or InsMtuMon? In astronomy, the observatory? In a dispute, who resolves it and how?

9 Case study A new facility instrument becomes available at an observatory. The observatory director promises authorship to the instrument builders in the first scienmfic paper to be published with new data from the instrument. Various groups from the user community (a consormum of universimes) obtain data, and when the first paper is ready to be submized, the observatory director contacts the PI and states that 8 instrument scienmsts must be coauthors. The PI has not heard of this policy before, and calls a meemng of the his two coauthors. From the point of view of the PI and the two co authors, what would they discuss? What are the principles they might adopt to comply with the director s command, and what principles would they use to reject the dirctor s command? What types of circumstances might change how the enmre story plays out?

10 Case study How does authorship extend to press releases? Press release issued October 6, Authors who are quoted: Looper (student, 1 st author) Burgasser (professor, 3 rd author) Gelino (researcher, 2 nd author) Not quoted: Kirkpatric (4 th author) or people in acknowledgements. Press release retracted (October 08, 2008) due to authorship issue. Who decides? In this case the IfA Director.

11 Case study Co owner of data, Michael Liu, not cited in press release, does he have a case for unethical conduct against Looper? Who should be given the authority to adjudicate?

12 Lesson from all of this? Few issues in scienmfic life can now match authorship of collaboramve work for its potenmal to distract and destroy (Hunt 1991) Just like COI s, authorship issues will be a fact of life that need to be managed. Best idea is to work in advance, up front (and don t forget a discussion of the press release). When you publish in scienmfic journals, the primary interested parmes (the owners or stakeholders) are the authors, editors, authors cited, and referees. Who decides is an author/editor affair. When you have a press release, the interested parmes are all of the above plus: the director/dean/president/ceos of the insmtumons, including the observatories, the funding agencies (NASA, NSF, etc.), the local and namonal government/society, internamonal organizamons, and even the people in the acknowledgements. Who decides is no longer under the exclusive control of the author/editor.

13 Who decides? Publication in a refereed journal. Limited authorship, semi-private viewing. A press release. Many authors, huge audience.