Changes

==What constitutes authorship?==  

==What constitutes authorship?==  

Guidelines for assigning authorship vary between [[institution]]s and disciplines.  They may be formally defined or simply customary. Incorrect application of authorship rules occasionally leads to charges of [[academic dishonesty|academic misconduct]] and sanctions for the violator.  In one study, disputed authorship was the most commonly reported form of alleged misconduct. <ref name=Nylenna>Nylenna, M.,Andersen, D., Dahiquist, G., Sarvas, M., and Aakvaag, A.  (1999) Handling of scientific dishonesty in the Nordic countries. ''The Lancet'' 354: 11-18 [http://www.publicationethics.org.uk/reports/1999/1999pdf3.pdf] Acessed 2006-09-02.</ref>

Guidelines for assigning authorship vary between [[institution]]s and disciplines.  They may be formally defined or simply customary. Incorrect application of authorship rules occasionally leads to charges of [[academic dishonesty|academic misconduct]] and sanctions for the violator.  In one study, disputed authorship was the most commonly reported form of alleged misconduct. (Nylenna, M.,Andersen, D., Dahiquist, G., Sarvas, M., and Aakvaag, A.  (1999) Handling of scientific dishonesty in the Nordic countries. ''The Lancet'' 354: 11-18 [http://www.publicationethics.org.uk/reports/1999/1999pdf3.pdf] Acessed 2006-09-02.)

Some major institutions have put forth guidelines for authorship. The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors specifies that authors must have made a substantial intellectual contribution to a study's conception and design, or to the acquisition, analysis or interpretation of [[data]]. They must also have drafted or revised the article's intellectual content, and approved the final version. The [[academic journal|journal]] ''Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences'' has an editorial policy that specifies "authorship should be limited to those who have contributed substantially to the work" and furthermore, "authors are strongly encouraged to indicate their specific contributions" as a [[footnote]].

Some major institutions have put forth guidelines for authorship. The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors specifies that authors must have made a substantial [[intellectual]] contribution to a study's conception and design, or to the acquisition, analysis or interpretation of [[data]]. They must also have drafted or revised the article's intellectual content, and approved the final version. The [[academic journal|journal]] ''Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences'' has an editorial policy that specifies "authorship should be limited to those who have contributed substantially to the work" and furthermore, "authors are strongly encouraged to indicate their specific contributions" as a [[footnote]].

Some papers will have quite a few authors. In genome sequencing and particle-physics collaborations, for example, a paper's author list can run into the hundreds. One commentator wrote, "In more than 25 years working as a scientific editor ... I have not been aware of any valid argument for more than three authors per paper, although I recognize that this may not be true for every field."<ref>van Loon, A. J. Pseudo-authorship. ''Nature'' 389, 11 (04 September 1997); doi:10.1038/37855</ref>

Some papers will have quite a few authors. In [[genome]] sequencing and [[particle-physics]] collaborations, for example, a paper's author list can run into the hundreds. One commentator wrote, "In more than 25 years working as a scientific editor ... I have not been aware of any valid argument for more than three authors per paper, although I recognize that this may not be true for every field."(van Loon, A. J. Pseudo-authorship. ''Nature'' 389, 11 (04 September 1997); doi:10.1038/37855)

Authors are sometimes included in a list without their permission.<ref>

Authors are sometimes included in a list without their permission.

Anonymous (presumably the editor of ''Nature Materials'' at that time). Authorship without authorization. Nature Materials 3, 743 (2004) doi:10.1038/nmat1264</ref>

Anonymous (presumably the editor of ''Nature Materials'' at that time). Authorship without authorization. Nature Materials 3, 743 (2004) doi:10.1038/nmat1264

Honorary authorship is sometimes granted to those who played no significant role in the work, for a variety of reasons.  Until recently, it was standard for the head of a German department or institution to listed as an author on a paper regardless of input.<ref>Pearson, H. Credit where credit's due. Nature 440, 591-592 (30 March 2006) doi:10.1038/440591a </ref>

Honorary authorship is sometimes granted to those who played no significant role in the work, for a variety of reasons.  Until recently, it was standard for the head of a German department or institution to listed as an author on a paper regardless of input.<ref>Pearson, H. Credit where credit's due. Nature 440, 591-592 (30 March 2006) doi:10.1038/440591a  

A phenomena termed ''ghost authorship'' is sometimes discussed in relation to industry initiated research.  When an individual makes a substantial contribution to the research and is not listed as an author, he is considered a ghost author.  Ghost authorship is considered problematic especially because it may be used to obscure the participation of researchers with conflicts of interest.<ref name=Nylenna /><ref>Gøtzsche, P.C., Hróbjartsson, A., Johansen, H.K., Haahr, M.T., Altman, D.G., Chan, A.-W. (2007) Ghost authorship in industry-initiated randomised trials. PLoS Medicine 4(1), 47-52.</ref>

A phenomena termed ''ghost authorship'' is sometimes discussed in relation to industry initiated research.  When an individual makes a substantial contribution to the research and is not listed as an author, he is considered a ghost author.  Ghost authorship is considered problematic especially because it may be used to obscure the participation of researchers with conflicts of interest.(Nylenna Gøtzsche, P.C., Hróbjartsson, A., Johansen, H.K., Haahr, M.T., Altman, D.G., Chan, A.-W. (2007) Ghost authorship in industry-initiated randomised trials. PLoS Medicine 4(1), 47-52.)

Claiming authorship twice for the same work (''e.i.'' submission of findings to more than one journal) is usually regarded as misconduct, under what is known as the Ingelfinger rule, named after the editor of the [[New England Journal of Medicine]] 1967-1977, Franz Ingelfinger [http://www.councilscienceeditors.org/members/securedDocuments/v25n6p195-198.pdf].

Claiming authorship twice for the same work (''e.i.'' submission of findings to more than one journal) is usually regarded as misconduct, under what is known as the Ingelfinger rule, named after the editor of the [[New England Journal of Medicine]] 1967-1977, Franz Ingelfinger [http://www.councilscienceeditors.org/members/securedDocuments/v25n6p195-198.pdf].