What do you think about articles where the list of coauthors is bigger than the article itself ?
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
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
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.
Some time depends on the number of authors involved in the whole project with different discipline.
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
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Cognitive Science
- Thinking