Ethics and Publishing Matilda Andersson Anna Apler Fabian

Ethics and Publishing Matilda Andersson, Anna Apler, Fabian Engel, and Sergio Tusso

The Dilemma: co-authorship You are involved in a project and there is a research assistant who contributed to data collection over the course of 6 months. They didn’t contribute to data analysis or writing the paper, BUT; 1) The project wouldn’t be possible without their contribution 2) The research assistant is a young scientist who’s career would be helped by co-authorship 3) The research assistant expects to be a co-author 4) You want to avoid future conflicts within the research group

Now consider: Your supervisor for the project has asked you to include the research assistant as a co-author even though it contradicts the departmental policy and good research practice guidelines, would this influence your choice? Good research practice guidelines 1. Contribution to design, acquisition of data or analysis and interpretation 2. Drafting the article or critical revision 3. Final approval

5 minutes to discuss in small groups

Our solution No, we would not add the research assistant as a co-author However… depending on group conflict possibility to re-consider

Will there be any ethical problems or conflicts within the organization/group? Co-authorship - YES Co-authorship – NO • Going against ethical guidelines • Yes – creating an standard within your working group for coauthorship, which contradicts guidelines • Create conflict with group • Against personal moral guidelines

What groups, individuals, organizations, etc. , will in any way be affected by your decision? • Working group – internal conflict, • Research assistant – future career, motivation • Scientific Community at large – inconsistent interpretations of ethical guidelines impacting researcher “impact factor”

What values, interests, duties, and standpoints are involved in your decision and in the possible alternatives? • Values: teamwork • Interests: future career of research assistant, group cohesion • Duties: ethical duties as a scientist • Standpoint: your project contribution should be reflected in your status as an author

A model to ‘calculate’ authorship rights (R. Hunt 1991: Trying an authorship index. Nature, 352: 187) Score Intellectual input No contribution Data capture Data processing Specialist input Literary input No contribution 5 One detailed discussion Small contribution Minor or brief assistance Brief or routine advice Edited others’ material 10 Several detailed discussions Moderate indirect contribution Specially-tailored assistance Contributed small sections 15 Correspondence or longer meetings Substantial liaisons Moderate direct contribution Substantial or prolonged assistance Whole basis of approach Major indirect contribution Contributed moderate proportion Contributed majority Closest possible involvement Major direct contribution Contributed virtually all 0 20 25 The article suggests that a total score of 25 warrants authorship, with the total score person determining order (highest first) The relative weightings can be modified according the research team and nature of work