I don't approve of having many co-authors because it makes the article inconsistent and you can never know the contributions they actually made

Articles are devoid of creativity .

Well, I have nothing against the practise itself. "Share the blame."

Often these cabals put their names to everything that the others do. It's still just a matter of deciding if this group does good or crap work. As it is for single authors.

Christopher NOCK

For example, LIGO project does this.

One shouldn't mix up how the author list is defined-a sociological construction-with the technical content of the article.

Certain experiments require a lot of people to contribute. Others don't.

The author list is, just, an expanded version of the terms ``Project So-and-So'' or ``Collaboration Such-and-Such'', that are much, much, shorter than the length of any article-and carries the same information.

That is new a problem in studies

I don't approve such practice. However, depends by the article.

Some time depends on the number of authors involved in the whole project with different discipline.

May be maximum works got shared or collaborative works.

Interdisciplinary teamwork is highly recommended and needed. Per say, sometimes we see many names. Hopefully, the more names there are, the more collaborative comprehensive work and better research quality we get.

Some research áreas like medicine maintain a big number of authors. I do not konw if this is beacuse many researcher are involved due to the number of studies and cases with patients

This is rarely seen, mostly either for reviews type of articles or for articles that sometimes involve the gist/outputs from various related interdisciplinary areas.

Believe, that all have contributed in such articles!!

I think the "AUTHORS CONTRIBUTIONS" section clarify this point very well. Just read it and see who did the major and minor work.

However, i would say it's necessary sometimes, especially when we have a multidisciplinary field there, which may bring different perspectives and analysis on it.

It is a little related to Ethics also. Sometimes people do it as academic business, which it become a concerning. Been honest I have heard "put my name I will put your name in my paper" which I considere as building a fake academic reputation.

This is a big concern, because it make researchers look what in fact they are not, and maybe confounding scientific communities.

Researchers and researchers usually affiliate a particular institution, university, research institute or enterprise with which they are employed by their scientific and research achievements. The fact that such a topic is currently the subject of many discussions confirms the thesis that the principles of affiliation of scientific achievements between individual countries are probably not identical.

Greetings,

Dariusz Prokopowicz