Switch to: Citations

Add references

You must login to add references.
  1. Authorship and Responsibility in Health Sciences Research: A Review of Procedures for Fairly Allocating Authorship in Multi-Author Studies.Elise Smith & Bryn Williams-Jones - 2012 - Science and Engineering Ethics 18 (2):199-212.
    While there has been significant discussion in the health sciences and ethics literatures about problems associated with publication practices (e.g., ghost- and gift-authorship, conflicts of interest), there has been relatively little practical guidance developed to help researchers determine how they should fairly allocate credit for multi-authored publications. Fair allocation of credit requires that participating authors be acknowledged for their contribution and responsibilities, but it is not obvious what contributions should warrant authorship, nor who should be responsible for the quality and (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   23 citations  
  • Multiple Authorship in Scientific Manuscripts: Ethical Challenges, Ghost and Guest/gift Authorship, and the Cultural/disciplinary Perspective.Judit Dobránszki & Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva - 2016 - Science and Engineering Ethics 22 (5):1457-1472.
    Multiple authorship is the universal solution to multi-tasking in the sciences. Without a team, each with their own set of expertise, and each involved mostly in complementary ways, a research project will likely not advance quickly, or effectively. Consequently, there is a risk that research goals will not be met within a desired timeframe. Research teams that strictly scrutinize their modus operandi select and include a set of authors that have participated substantially in the physical undertaking of the research, in (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   16 citations  
  • Authorship Matrix: A Rational Approach to Quantify Individual Contributions and Responsibilities in Multi-Author Scientific Articles.T. Prabhakar Clement - 2014 - Science and Engineering Ethics 20 (2):345-361.
    We propose a rational method for addressing an important question—who deserves to be an author of a scientific article? We review various contentious issues associated with this question and recommend that the scientific community should view authorship in terms of contributions and responsibilities, rather than credits. We propose a new paradigm that conceptually divides a scientific article into four basic elements: ideas, work, writing, and stewardship. We employ these four fundamental elements to modify the well-known International Committee of Medical Journal (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   19 citations  
  • Authorship Norms and Project Structures in Science.John P. Walsh & Sahra Jabbehdari - 2017 - Science, Technology, and Human Values 42 (5):872-900.
    Scientific authorship has become a contested terrain in contemporary science. Based on a survey of authors across fields, we measure the likelihood of specialist authors : people who only made specialized contributions, such as data, materials, or funding; and “nonauthor collaborators” : those who did significant work on the project but do not appear as authors, across different research contexts, including field, size of the project team, commercial orientation, impact of publication, and organization of the collaboration. We find that guest (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • Honorary authorship and symbolic violence.Jozsef Kovacs - 2017 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 20 (1):51-59.
    This paper invokes the conceptual framework of Bourdieu to analyse the mechanisms, which help to maintain inappropriate authorship practices and the functions these practices may serve. Bourdieu’s social theory with its emphasis on mechanisms of domination can be applied to the academic field, too, where competition is omnipresent, control mechanisms of authorship are loose, and the result of performance assessment can be a matter of symbolic life and death for the researchers. This results in a problem of game-theoretic nature, where (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Scientific integrity and research ethics: An approach from the ethos of science.David Koepsell - 2016 - Amsterdam, NL: Springer.
    This book is an easy to read, yet comprehensive introduction to practical issues in research ethics and scientific integrity. It addresses questions about what constitutes appropriate academic and scientific behaviors from the point of view of what Robert Merton called the “ethos of science.” In other words, without getting into tricky questions about the nature of the good or right (as philosophers often do), Koepsell’s concise book provides an approach to behaving according to the norms of science and academia without (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Appendix A: Programs of Group Meetings.[author unknown] - 1986 - Journal of Philosophy 83 (10):608-618.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   21 citations