Hello colleagues,

I want to bring attention to an issue I have personally encountered, which I believe requires deeper discussion within the academic community: the practice of supervisors demanding co-authorship on research papers without contributing to the research.

This situation, commonly referred to as “honorary” or “gift” authorship, raises serious ethical concerns. During my previous studies in my home country, I witnessed numerous instances where supervisors, often lacking strong academic credentials or publication history, insisted on being included as co-authors solely due to their official supervisory role as dictated by university regulations. This happened even when their involvement in the research was negligible, and in some cases, they demanded to be listed as first or last authors to gain the most recognition.

Authorship in academic publishing should reflect substantial intellectual contributions to the conception or design of the research, data acquisition, analysis, interpretation, drafting, or critically revising the manuscript, final approval of the version to be published, and accountability for all aspects of the work. Adding an author who has not contributed to any of these areas violates the core principles of academic integrity and misrepresents the true contributors.

Supervisors demanding authorship without meaningful input effectively engage in academic misconduct. This practice artificially inflates their publication records, unfairly aids their promotion or funding prospects, and undermines the genuine efforts and recognition of student researchers. Additionally, it highlights an unethical exploitation of the supervisor-student relationship, where supervisors often leverage their hierarchical authority to intimidate students into compliance. Fear of academic repercussions often discourages students from challenging these demands.

However, on the other hand, there are supervisors who uphold strong morals and ethics. For instance, in my current institution, I recently completed a research paper with a colleague. Although we had completed the research and writing entirely on our own, we wanted expert feedback before submission. I approached my official supervisors, and they graciously agreed to review the manuscript. Their only condition was that they did not want to be listed as co-authors because they felt that even reviewing and providing feedback did not constitute a major contribution worthy of authorship. This was despite the fact that, as official supervisors, they could have easily used their position to demand co-authorship. What makes this even more remarkable is that one of these supervisors shares the same nationality as those from my home country institution. This highlights that such ethical behavior is not tied to nationality but rather to the academic environment, institutional culture, and individual values.

In contrast, I have encountered professors from my home country institution who continue to express dissatisfaction with me because I do not list them as co-authors on my research papers. These professors, despite making no contributions, attempt to pressure me by setting conditions to be listed as first authors or by implying that their names should appear as a gesture of “honor.” Such behavior is both strange and frustrating, especially when juxtaposed against the ethical practices I have experienced at my current institution.

The motivations behind such practices are varied. Supervisors may see this as an easy way to boost their academic metrics, particularly in environments where such behavior is tolerated or normalized. Furthermore, weak enforcement of ethical guidelines within institutions perpetuates this misconduct.

To address this issue, students need to document their contributions carefully, familiarize themselves with institutional and journal authorship guidelines, and seek advice from alternative mentors or academic integrity offices when necessary. Transparent discussions about authorship expectations with supervisors at the outset of research projects may also help mitigate misunderstandings.

Institutions must play a more active role by developing and enforcing stringent guidelines on authorship criteria. Establishing clear reporting mechanisms for students to voice concerns without fear of retaliation is essential. Additionally, institutions should provide ethics training for both students and supervisors to foster a culture of integrity and accountability.

The broader academic community must also take action to promote transparency and genuine intellectual contributions in authorship. Journals should implement stricter authorship verification processes to ensure compliance with ethical standards. Whistleblowing mechanisms for addressing research misconduct should be encouraged to maintain the credibility of academic publishing.

This unethical practice is not only a breach of academic standards but also demoralizes students who dedicate themselves to producing high-quality research. Co-authorship should reflect significant contributions, not serve as a tool for exploiting power dynamics or gaming the academic system.

I invite everyone here to share their thoughts and experiences. Have you encountered similar situations in your academic career? How do your institutions address this issue, if at all? What measures can be implemented to ensure authorship is a true representation of contribution?

Let’s work together to promote a culture of fairness, integrity, and genuine collaboration in academic research.