When a research is carried out by a team, each participant’s contribution is important and, in an experimental study, sometimes even a single parameter measured by somebody can be of a key importance for interpretation of results. When I compose a research team I cannot predict whose input will be the most significant, but a tacit agreement always was that each member of this team would have authorship rights. To put aside ethical considerations, who would agree to work with me otherwise? Now, however, the Medical Journals' Editors community has decreed that, in order to qualify for authorship, a person should meet four (sic!) strict criteria established by these pundits. So those who do not qualify as authors must be moved to the Acknowledgment section of the manuscript.
In my opinion, this is a gross violation of scientific community’s rights – does anybody disagree?
Dear Prof, when you compose a research team you cannot predict whose input will be the most significant, but when the work is all done, you will be able to know who has contributed INTELLECTUAL INPUT. Such persons should have a share in the authorship. A person who has reviewed your paper and improved it to a great degree should also be included, but one who read without providing much valuable feedback can be acknowledged without being in the authorship. (Please put here the 4 criteria, thanks.)
Dear Miranda,I am sorry to disagree with you but I do disagree. A research team, especially the stable one is like a living organism with many direct and feedback influences, and each member of it contributes to the final intellectual product. Anyway, I maintain that it should be up to this team and its Head to decide who is and who is not a co-author without any bureaucratic interference,
@Boris, first author should decide - and such a strong-minded person as you will always find a way to prove who needs to be among aythors.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Linguistics
- Philology
- Classical Philology
- Manuscripts