Guidelines for Authorship of Project Publications
Introduction
1. Assigning appropriate authorship is an important part of good research practice. While exact prescription or rules regarding authorship is difficult, this document sets out general guidelines which should inform policy and practice in relation to particular situations and projects.
2. There are often different expectations by contributors of who should (and should not) be included as an author. Differing criteria in defining authorship may also be held such as the emphasis put on practical work, conceptual development and data analysis. Discussions relating to authorship, therefore, should be held at an early stage in any research project.
Attributing Authorship
3. Authorship is reserved for those, and only those, who have made a significant contribution to the research. Honorary authorship is not acceptable under any circumstances.
4. Everyone who is listed as an author should have made a substantial direct academic contribution (i.e. intellectual responsibility and substantive work) to two of the four main components of a typical scientific project or paper:
· Conception or design
· Data collection and processing
· Analysis and interpretation of the data
· Writing substantial sections of the paper
5. Principal authorship and other publication credits are based on the relative scientific or professional contributions of the individuals involved regardless of their status.
6. Publication credit is assigned to all those who have contributed to a publication in proportion to their contributions. Major or primary contributions of a professional character made by several persons to a common project are recognised by joint authorship.
7. The person who has made the primary contribution to the paper or taken the lead in writing is entitled to be first author.
8. Those who have made a major contribution to analysis or writing are entitled to follow the first author immediately. Where there is a clear difference in the size of these contributions this should be reflected in the order of authors. All others who fulfil the criteria for authorship should complete the list in alphabetical order of their surnames.
9. If all the authors feel that they have contributed equally to the paper this can be indicated in a footnote.
10. The allocation of credit can be particularly sensitive when it involves researchers at different stages of their careers – differences in roles and status can compound the difficulties of according credit. Senior members are encouraged to give more junior colleagues opportunities to be first author where appropriate.
11. Notes should also be supplied to explain the meaning of the order of authors’ names and of ‘with’ ‘and’ etc. People should be particularly sensitive to this issue where there are student contributors.
12. A particular difficulty may arise in relation to researchers employed on a limited term contract or researchers who have gathered data (particularly qualitative data where analysis is ongoing) but have moved on by the time the publication is drafted. These personnel should be included as author, where appropriate, in any subsequent publication based directly on the work of the project.
13. A student should be listed as principal or first author on any multiple authored publication that substantially derives from the students dissertation or thesis.
14. In cases of re-publication, whether of co-authored pieces or edited works, all affected parties should be informed at an early date, and throughout the process, of any alteration in the original work.
Acknowledging Contributions
15. The contribution of all who directly assist in the research or indirectly support the research should be properly acknowledged.
16. All those who make a substantial contribution to a paper without fulfilling the criteria for authorship should be acknowledged appropriately in footnotes or in an introductory statement which specifies their contributions[1].
Accepting Responsibility
17. Authorship clearly establishes accountability as well as credit. An author who is willing to take credit for a paper must also bear responsibility for its contents. Anyone listed as an author on a paper should accept responsibility for ensuring that s/he is familiar with the contents and can identify their contribution to it.
18. Everyone who is listed as author should be able to defend the paper as a whole (although not necessarily all the technical details).
19. Everyone who is listed as an author should have critically reviewed successive drafts of the paper and should approve the final version. (Some journals require all named authors to sign a letter that accompanies submission of the original article and all subsequent revisions to ensure that no author is named without consent and that all authors agree with the final version.)
Avoiding and Resolving Difficulties
20. There should be frank and open discussion of the division of credit within research groups as early in the research process as possible and preferably at the very beginning. The best practice is for authorship criteria to be explicit among all collaborators. It should be discussed at an early stage and renegotiated as necessary. A record should be made of these discussions.
21. The early drafts of papers should include authorship and other credits which may help avoid or resolve future difficulties.
22. If disputes cannot be settled by the authors and collaborators some mechanisms should be put in place within a centre or department with arbitration undertaken by an agreed objective party.
3
[1] For example survey managers, computing, clerical, statistical advisers, colleagues who have reviewed drafts, people who assisted in obtaining funding.