Skip to content

ACN - 101321555 | ABN - 39101321555

Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)

AHRECS icon
  • Home
  • About Us
    • Consultants
    • Services
  • Previous Projects
  • Blog
  • Resources
  • Feeds
  • Contact Us
  • More
    • Request a Quote
    • Susbcribe to REM
    • Subscribe to VIP
Menu
  • Home
  • About Us
    • Consultants
    • Services
  • Previous Projects
  • Blog
  • Resources
  • Feeds
  • Contact Us
  • More
    • Request a Quote
    • Susbcribe to REM
    • Subscribe to VIP
Exclude terms...
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
AHRECS
Analysis
Animal ethics
Animal Ethics Committee
Animal handling
Animal housing
Animal Research Ethics
Animal Welfare
ANZCCART
Artificial Intelligence
Arts
Australia
Authorship
Belief
Beneficence
Big data
Big data
Biobank
Bioethics
Biomedical
Biospecimens
Breaches
Cartoon/Funny
Case studies
Clinical trial
Collaborative research
Conflicts of interest
Consent
Controversy/Scandal
Controversy/Scandal
Creative
Culture
Data management
Database
Dual-use
Essential Reading
Ethical review
Ethnography
Euthanasia
Evaluative practice/quality assurance
Even though i
First People
Fraud
Gender
Genetics
Get off Gary Play man of the dog
Good practice
Guidance
Honesty
HREC
Human research ethics
Humanities
Institutional responsibilities
International
Journal
Justice
Links
Media
Medical research
Merit and integrity
Methodology
Monitoring
New Zealand
News
Online research
Peer review
Performance
Primary materials
Principles
Privacy
Protection for participants
Psychology
Publication ethics
Questionable Publishers
Research ethics committees
Research integrity
Research Misconduct
Research results
Researcher responsibilities
Resources
Respect for persons
Sample paperwork
sd
se
Serious Adverse Event
Social Science
SoTL
Standards
Supervision
Training
Vulnerability
x
Young people
Exclude news

Sort by

Animal Ethics Biosafety Human Research Ethics Research Integrity

Unearned authorship pervades science – Nature (Dalmeet Singh Chawla | January 2023)

Posted by Connar Allen in Research Integrity on January 13, 2023
Keywords: Authorship, Institutional responsibilities, Journal, Research integrity

The Linked Original Item was Posted On January 5, 2023

Author - blue binder in the office

Research-integrity survey also suggests that there is a split in US and Europe-based researchers’ perceptions of ‘questionable research practices’.

Almost 70% of researchers based in Europe say that they have been involved in projects in the past three years that listed authors who did not contribute sufficiently to the work, according to a major survey. The survey also raises questions about whether academics in the United States are underestimating the prevalence of ‘questionable research practices’ (QRPs).

This piece and the research (Europe and US) it reports, is a significant concern. Gifting authorship, otherwise known as undeserved or honorary authorship, is unacceptable.  Individuals should only be listed as an author if they meet agreed international standards of authorship (such as those issued by COPE and ICMJE) and where they have explicitly agreed to be named.  Lab and centre directors, persons who secured the project funding, mentors, scientific/statistical advisers and community/cultural advisers who don’t meet the criteria should be acknowledged but named as authors.  Gifting authorship to underserved persons is a breach of responsible conduct.

The International Research Integrity Survey (IRIS) received responses from around 47,000 academics in Europe and the United States about their experience of eight QRPs, including inadequate peer review; deliberate failure to report contradictory findings; lack of supervision of junior colleagues; and conducting research without ethics approval. Inappropriate authorship — listing authors who did not adequately contribute to a manuscript — was the most common QRP encountered by the respondents.

Around 69% of researchers based in Europe and roughly 55% in the United States said that they were aware of co-authors being listed who hadn’t contributed sufficiently, according to the survey results1, which were published before peer review on the MetaArXiv preprint server on 27 October.

Inadequate peer review and poor supervision were the next most common QRPs. Just under 54% of authors in Europe and nearly 50% of US respondents said peer review had not been conducted thoroughly on projects that they had worked on. More than 56% of US researchers reported inadequate supervision, compared with 49% of those in Europe.

Unearned authorship pervades science
Research-integrity survey also suggests that there is a split in US- and Europe-based researchers’ perceptions of ‘questionable research practices’.

Related Reading

‘Honorary authors’ of scientific papers abound—but they probably shouldn’t – Science (Jeffrey Brainard | September 2022)

And the credit goes to … – Ghost and honorary authorship among social scientists (Papers: Gernot Pruschak & Christian Hopp | May 2022)

(EU) What is research misconduct? European countries can’t agree – Science (Cathleen O’Grady | March 2021)

Recognizing Contributions and Giving Credit – EOS Editors’ Vox (Brooks Hanson and Susan Webb | August 2018)

“Ethical shades of gray:” 90% of researchers in new health field admit to questionable practices – Retraction Watch (Alison McCook | March 2018)

Rules for authorship must be clarified – The Ethics Blog (Pär Segerdahl | April 2018)

How to counter undeserving authorship (Papers: Stefan Eriksson, et al)

Ghost and Honorary Authorship in Cancer Research – Cancer Therapy Advisor (Jim Daley: September 2016)

Ethical considerations in naming authors of scientific papers (Papers: Sepideh Mohammadi and Tajmohammad Arazi 2015)

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Links

Complaints against Research Ethics Monthly

Request a Takedown

Submission Guidelines

About the Research Ethics Monthly

About subscribing to the Research Ethics Monthly

A diverse group discussing a topic

Random selected image from the AHRECS library. These were all purchased from iStockPhoto. These are images we use in our workshops and Dr Allen used in the GUREM.

Research Ethics Monthly Receive copies of the Research Ethics Monthly directly
by email. We will never spam you.

  • Enter the answer as a word
  • Hidden
    This field is hidden and only used for import to Mailchimp
  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
  • Home
  • Services
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Home
  • Services
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Company
  • Terms Of Use
  • Copyright
  • Privacy Policy
  • Company
  • Terms Of Use
  • Copyright
  • Privacy Policy
  • Site Map
  • Site Map

Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)

Facebook-f Twitter Linkedin-in