Many times co-authors do not respond due to lack of time, disagreement, personal commitments and personal problems in life.
Can one make a decision to exclude them (such co-authors) from the paper or include their name in acknowledgements section or change their order in the co-author list according to their contribution without their consent/approval? Is it ethical to let your paper get published in that way if you don’t hear from them for 2 years or more and you don’t even have a clue if they are alive or their accounts are hacked.
Are there any rules on when declarations and authorship commitments become void when a response is not received for how many years?
Don't change the order of authorship without their permission/consent.
Simply send an email to the authors. If they do not reply after 3 months, no problem. Proceed with paper, submit it and publish it without changing the order of authorship
Print out the email as evidence that you reached out, but the author never responded. This is crucial because the unresponsive author may later find out the paper had been published and may reach out to the editor accusing you of research malpractice and request for a retraction of the article. You could easily counter the author's claim if you provide email evidence of your several attempt to reach and engage with the unresponsive author.
In my opinion, this issue is rather difficult to solve.
1. Before submission all authors are supposed to read and approve the content of the manuscript. In your final message to all coauthors, you could state: “If you do not respond until [DATE], I will assume that you agree to the content of the manuscript and its submission to [JOURNAL]”; or a similar phrase.
2. For submission you need a valid email address and the correct affiliation of all coauthors.
3. Even more difficult to solve, upon acceptance of a manuscript most journals ask all coauthors to electronically sign a conflict of interest statement and a copyright transfer agreement; if any author fails to do so the manuscript will not be published.
Skipping out on procrastinating co-authors presents a complex ethical dilemma influenced by collaboration dynamics, initial expectations, and potential repercussions. To navigate this situation ethically:
Ultimately, resolving the issue demands thoughtful deliberation, fostering open communication, and prioritizing collaborative problem-solving to navigate ethical complexities effectively.
Refer to the Vancouver convention. People who have not contributed to the paper should not be listed as co-authors.
Martin Gilje Jaatun contribution to the paper directly in writing the subsections or indirectly through data collection, analysis or contribution to the research design?
According to the Vancouver convention, these criteria have to be satisfied:
1. Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND
2. Drafting the work or reviewing it critically for important intellectual content; AND
3. Final approval of the version to be published; AND
4. Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.
Simply collecting data is not enough.
https://www.forskningsetikk.no/en/resources/the-research-ethics-library/legal-statutes-and-guidelines/the-vancouver-recommendations/