ABSTRACT

The passionate pursuit of authorships is fuelled by the value they represent to scholars and scientists. This article asks how this value differs across scientists and how these different processes of valuation inform authorship articulation, strategies, and publication behavior in general. Drawing from a qualitative analysis of authorship practices among nutrition scientists employed at universities, contract research organizations, and in food industry, I argue that two different modi operandi emerge when it comes to authorship. These different ways of working produce different collaborative approaches, different credit distribution strategies amongst collaborators, and different value placed upon (the pursuit of) authorship. These different valuation processes are neither explicit nor recognizable to those reading (and judging) author lists. As a consequence, in the politics of authorship, the names standing atop a scientific publication in nutrition science represent different types of value to both the individuals and employing organizations.
.

KEYWORDS:
Authorship, value, credit, public-private collaboration, collaboration, nutrition science
.

Penders B. (2017) All for one or one for all? Authorship and the cross-sectoral valuation of credit in nutrition science. Accountability in Research 24(8): 433-450.
Publisher (Open Access): http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/08989621.2017.1386565

Also see
Percentage-based Author Contribution Index: a universal measure of author contribution…