Do you think that in a publication with several authors, that the first author is the one who "worked the most" for the publication of the article?
What are the arguments for this?
In which disciplines this will not be valid?
As a rule, no, sometimes I'm the third in my work. There is a leader, there is a management, there are co-authors who took part. In our reports there are the first three authors, then "all the others"... Therefore, as a rule, I am the first in my works, or in the first three.
Sometimes the order of authors is alphabetical, and in this case no distinction between the authors can be made.
Honorary authorship?????
Honorary authorship is given to an individual despite a lack of substantial contributions to a research project. One form, gift authorship, is bestowed out of respect for or gratitude to an individual. For example, in Asian cultures, departmental heads or senior researchers may be added to a paper regardless of their involvement in the research. Another form, guest authorship, may be used for multiple purposes, including to increase the apparent quality of a paper by adding a well-known name or to conceal a paper’s industry ties by including an academic author......
From:
https://www.aje.com/arc/ethics-manuscript-authorship/
Unless you are under obligation, you should put the name of the person who worked most in that research
as the first author in every subject.
The question I asked is actually not the right one I wanted to ask and I apologize for that.
I'm not asking for opinions, but specific information.
In fact, the question is; “On what criteria or rules is the order of authors established in a scientific publication and in what field or discipline are these rules currently applied?
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Cognitive Science
- Thinking