Guidelines on using row and column headings. A guide for early career researchers What is the difference between a research paper and a review paper? A young researcher's guide to a systematic review 5 Differences between a research paper and a review paper [Infographic] A step-by-step guide to creating a journal publication schedule in Download - Journal publication planning template View all in Publication Planning.
How do I write an inquiry to the editor about my manuscript's current status? A global perspective on plagiarism Is it plagiarism if I use the same words as the original text but cite the source? What do the terms "lead author" and "co-author" mean? View all in Publication Ethics. Tips for ESL authors on using academic translation services effectively 5 Things you should do before sending your manuscript to a scientific editing service How your language editing service can help you improve your writing skills How researchers can communicate more effectively with journals The Editage formatting service View all in Using Editorial Services.
International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics: Quick facts and submission tips PNAS: Quick facts and submission tips Angewandte Chemie: Quick facts and submission tips The American Journal of Psychiatry: Quick facts and submission tips View all in Know Your Journal.
Quick facts and submission tips Nature Methods: Quick facts and submission tips Organization Science journal: Quick facts and submission tips. Tips for early career researchers How to identify predatory conferences: Attend checklist Can we present a research paper in a symposium based on our published research work?
View all in Career Advancement. A survey overview Journal indexing Understanding the basics 10 Point checklist to identify predatory publishers [Infographic] How can I find out if a journal is included in Journal Citation Reports? Open access vs subscription model: What do journals prefer? View all in Publication Buzzwords. An unorthodox approach to clinical trial publication Publish faster, progress faster: The basics of rapid publication China aspires to lead the world in artificial intelligence by View all in Global Trends.
Responsibilities of journal editors towards authors As an author, would you prefer to have your paper freely available to everyone for viewing or download? Behind the scenes Pledge to publish ethically today View all in Beyond Research.
Who's responsible for misrepresenting science — media or journals? Perceptions of science in media and the non-scientific community 8 Tips to increase the reach of your research in 5 Steps to tweet your research at conferences effectively Is there a gap between the scientific and non-scientific community?
View all in Science Communication. No Content What top universities are doing to stay ahead of the curve Is there a gap between the scientific and non-scientific community? Perceptions of science in media and the non-scientific community Misinformation in science news: How the media shapes public understanding 5 Steps to simplifying language in research communication.
Upcoming Events No Content What top universities are doing to stay ahead of the curve Is there a gap between the scientific and non-scientific community? A global perspective on plagiarism. Make peer reviews more effective! Navigating through peer review, selecting preferred reviewers, and more. How to write a cover letter for journal submissions.
How to create an outline for your research paper. What is the best way of stating the background of a study? What is the difference between a research paper and a review paper? In research, what is the difference between implication and recommendation? Taking inclusion in peer review to a new level: Kids as reviewers for scientific manuscripts.
Learning how to perform a review should be part of the PhD training. Everybody faces manuscript rejection, even a Nobel Laureate. A Women's Day special Academic publishing and scholarly communications: Good reads, July View all in Recommended Reading. A tutorial for authors Transparency in research and reporting: Expanding the effort through new tools for authors and editors New CrossMark service alerts readers to changes in published scholarly works: Author perspectives on the academic publishing process: What causes peer review scams and how can they be prevented?
What causes cancer - "bad luck" or extrinsic factors? Stem cell divisions in tissues indicate cancer risk. Interaction between magnetic fields of Earth and sun observed. Researchers identify the genes that increase the risk of Type 1 diabetes. Researchers develop a theoretical model to reduce antibiotic resistance. Courses What causes cancer - "bad luck" or extrinsic factors? Deciding the order of authors on a paper.
Shazia Khanam Oct 16, , views. Save to read later. Republish on your website. What corresponding authors are expected to do after journal submission 5 Pre-submission tips for corresponding authors Can the corresponding authors and order of authors be changed in the revised paper?
Can I write to the editor if I'm the first author but not the corresponding author? Corresponding author assigns co-authors without their knowledge: In academic publishing , authorship of a work is claimed by those making intellectual contributions to the completion of the research described in the work.
In simple cases, a solitary scholar carries out a research project and writes the subsequent article or book. In many disciplines , however, collaboration is the norm and issues of authorship can be controversial.
In these contexts, authorship can encompass activities other than writing the article; a researcher who comes up with an experimental design and analyzes the data may be considered an author, even if she or he had little role in composing the text describing the results. According to some standards, even writing the entire article would not constitute authorship unless the writer was also involved in at least one other phase of the project.
Guidelines for assigning authorship vary between institutions and disciplines. They may be formally defined or simply cultural custom. Incorrect application of authorship rules occasionally leads to charges of academic misconduct and sanctions for the violator. A survey of a large sample of researchers who had received funding from the U.
In other fields only limited or no empirical data is available. The natural sciences have no universal standard for authorship, but some major multi-disciplinary journals and institutions have established guidelines for work that they publish.
The journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America PNAS has an editorial policy that specifies "authorship should be limited to those who have contributed substantially to the work" and furthermore, "authors are strongly encouraged to indicate their specific contributions" as a footnote. The American Chemical Society further specifies that authors are those who also "share responsibility and accountability for the results"  [ not in citation given ] and the U.
National Academies specify "an author who is willing to take credit for a paper must also bear responsibility for its contents. Thus, unless a footnote or the text of the paper explicitly assigns responsibility for different parts of the paper to different authors, the authors whose names appear on a paper must share responsibility for all of it. In mathematics, the authors are usually listed in alphabetical order this is the so-called Hardy-Littlewood Rule. This usage is described in the "Information Statements on the Culture of Research and Scholarship in Mathematics" section of the American Mathematical Society website,  specifically the statement: Joint Research and Its Publication.
In other branches of knowledge such as economics, business, finance or particle physics , it is also usual to sort the authors alphabetically.
The medical field defines authorship very narrowly. According to the Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals , designation as an author must satisfy four conditions. The author must have:. Acquisition of funding, or general supervision of the research group alone does not constitute authorship. Many authors - especially those in the middle of the byline - do not fulfill these authorship criteria.
Between about the average number of authors in medical papers increased, and perhaps tripled. The APA acknowledge that authorship is not limited to the writing of manuscripts, but must include those who have made substantial contributions to a study such as "formulating the problem or hypothesis, structuring the experimental design, organizing and conducting the statistical analysis, interpreting the results, or writing a major portion of the paper".
Like medicine, the APA considers institutional position, such as Department Chair, insufficient for attributing authorship. Neither the Modern Languages Association  nor the Chicago Manual of Style  define requirements for authorship because usually humanities works are single-authored and the author is responsible for the entire work.
From the late 17th century to the s, sole authorship was the norm, and the one-paper-one-author model worked well for distributing credit. In particular types of research, including particle physics, genome sequencing and clinical trials, a paper's author list can run into the hundreds.
In , the Collider Detector at Fermilab CDF adopted a at that time highly unorthodox policy for assigning authorship. CDF maintains a standard author list. All scientists and engineers working at CDF are added to the standard author list after one year of full-time work; names stay on the list until one year after the worker leaves CDF. Every publication coming out of CDF uses the entire standard author list, in alphabetical order.
Other big collaborations, including most particle physics experiments, followed this model. A paper published in the New England Journal of Medicine in reported on a clinical trial conducted in 1, hospitals in 15 different countries, involving a total of 41, patients. There were authors listed in an appendix and authorship was assigned to a group. Large authors lists have attracted some criticism.
They strain guidelines that insist that each author's role be described and that each author is responsible for the validity of the whole work. Such a system treats authorship more as credit for scientific service at the facility in general rather that as an identification of specific contributions. I have not been aware of any valid argument for more than three authors per paper, although I recognize that this may not be true for every field.
Alternatively, the increase in multi-authorship might be a consequence of the way scientists are evaluated. Traditionally, scientists were judged by the number of papers they published, and later by the impact of those papers. The former is an estimate of quantity and the latter of quality.
Both methods were adequate when single authorship was the norm, but vastly inflate individual contribution when papers are multi-authored. Furthermore, there is no cost to giving authorship to individuals who made only minor contribution and, actually, there is an incentive to do so.
Hence, the system rewards heavily multi-authored papers. This problem is openly acknowledged, and it could easily be "corrected" by dividing each paper and its citations by the number of authors. Finally, the rise in shared authorship may also reflect increased acknowledgment of the contributions of lower level workers, including graduate students and technicians, as well as honorary authorship, while allowing for such collaborations to make an independent statement about the quality and integrity of a scientific work.
Honorary authorship is sometimes granted to those who played no significant role in the work, for a variety of reasons. Until recently, it was standard to list the head of a German department or institution as an author on a paper regardless of input. However, it is plausible to expect that it is still widespread, because senior scientists leading large research groups can receive much of their reputation from a long publication list and thus have little motivation to give up honorary authorships.
A possible measure against honorary authorships has been implemented by some scientific journals, in particular by the Nature journals. They demand  that each new manuscript must include a statement of responsibility that specifies the contribution of every author.
The level of detail varies between the disciplines. Senior persons may still make some vague claim to have "supervised the project", for example, even if they were only in the formal position of a supervisor without having delivered concrete contributions. The truth content of such statements is usually not checked by independent persons.
However, the need to describe contributions can at least be expected to somewhat reduce honorary authorships. In addition, it may help to identify the perpetrator in a case of scientific fraud. Ghost authorship occurs when an individual makes a substantial contribution to the research or the writing of the report, but is not listed as an author. Writers who work in this capacity are called ghostwriters.
Ghost authorship has been linked to partnerships between industry and higher education. Two-thirds of industry-initiated randomized trials may have evidence of ghost authorship. Litigation against the pharmaceutical company, Merck over health concerns related to use of their drug, Rofecoxib brand name Vioxx , revealed examples of ghost authorship. Authors are sometimes included in a list without their permission.
Rules for the order of multiple authors in a list have historically varied significantly between fields of research.
The growing list of collaborative research projects raises important questions regarding the author order for research manuscripts and the impact an author list has on readers’ perceptions. With a handful of authors, a group might be inclined to create an author name list based on the amount of work contributed.
Yes, I agree it shall be based on the amount of contribution. But in practice, it is often not followed. There are quite a few dummy authors. Adding the name of well known and powerful person as one of the authors, helps in getting paper accepted for publication.
Jan 16, · However, authors often adopt different methods of crediting contributions for the following authors, because of very different traditions across countries and research fields, resulting in very different criteria that committees adopt to quantify author's contributions [8,9]. For example, some authors use alphabetical sequence, . The importance of the first author is reflected in the common practice of referring to a paper by the first author’s name e.g. ‘Jones et al. report that ’ Publishing a paper as the first author is very crucial for the scientific career of a Ph.D. student.
dissertation success Order Of Author Names In Research Paper music therapy essay proposal of research. In particular types of research, including particle physics, genome sequencing and clinical trials, a paper's author list can run into the hundreds. In , the Collider Detector at Fermilab (CDF) adopted a (at that time) highly unorthodox policy for assigning authorship.