The involvement of multiple individuals in different capacities naturally evokes the question of who should be credited and held accountable for the research published, especially since careers, ethics, and scientific integrity are at stake. This article outlines the major concepts pertaining to authorship.

1. Authorship
Helping you get published

2. Authorship
A century ago, defining an author was quite straightforward
in academia—most articles were written by single authors
who were solely responsible for the research conducted.
Complexities have arisen in the last several decades with the
increasing scope of research, which has engendered
collaboration between researchers and institutes across
disciplines and specializations and led to an increase in the
number of authors per paper.1,2
The involvement of multiple individuals in different capacities
naturally evokes the question of who should be credited and
held accountable for the research published, especially since
careers, ethics, and scientific integrity are at stake. This
article outlines the major concepts pertaining to authorship.

3. Who is an author?
The need for definite guidelines on authorship is disparate
across fields. In some branches of the humanities, single
authors are still common, and authorship issues surface rarely.
In contrast, collaborations are the predominant trend in the
sciences, and so there is a greater need for clarity. Therefore,
authorities in scientific fields usually spell out authorship
criteria.
In broad terms, an author should make significant
contributions to the intellectual content of the paper and be
willing to take public responsibility for the entire study,
including the data and results. The author’s role has been
delineated most precisely in the Uniform Requirements for
Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals—established by
the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors
(ICMJE)—to which many top journals in the biomedical field
subscribe.

4. Who is an author?
According to ICMJE’s guidelines, an author should have6:
a. Contributed substantially to conception and design,
acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data
b. Drafted the article or revised it critically for important
intellectual content
c. Provided final approval of the version to be published
Any individual who has contributed to the study in some way but
does not meet the criteria for authorship should be mentioned
under Acknowledgements.

5. Who is an author?
Who is not an author?
According to ICMJE, completing any of the following tasks
does not qualify you as an author:
X Acquisition of funds
X Supervision of work
X Minor laboratory support
X Administrative support

6. Contributorship / guarantorship
With several people contributing to different aspects of a research project,
the distinction between an author and someone acknowledged elsewhere is
often blurred. The unethical publication practices mentioned above only add
to these problems. To solve this conundrum, journals are gradually drifting
from the authorship model to the contributorship model.3
Many journals now encourage or require authors to describe each person’s
contribution to the study. This description is usually printed in a footnote
that will appear in the published article.
Some journals, like the Journal of the American Medical Association, require
these details in the authorship form. The Nature journals require authors to
include a statement of responsibility specifying the contribution of each
author.

7. Contributorship / guarantorship
Another concept that has evolved in response to the diluted accountability in
multi-author papers is guarantorship. An author (generally a senior member)
is asked to serve as a guarantor of the paper, who will be held responsible for
the entire work. For example, the British Medical Journal requires at least
one author to be listed as a guarantor.

8. Order of listing authors
What is probably as important to a researcher’s career as the number of
papers published is where his or her name appears in the author byline. The
order of listing authors deserves a special mention, considering that it is
sometimes a bone of contention and can cause bitterness.
In the sciences, and in related fields like psychology, authors are generally
listed in the order of the relative importance of their contributions, with the
first author being the main author of the paper.
An exception is the last author, who is often the head of the department in
which the research was carried out. Friction arises when one or more
authors think that the order does not reflect the significance of their
contributions.

9. Order of listing authors
In some branches of humanities, like political science, the trend is to list
authors alphabetically4. While this convention may seem a simple measure
to preempt any dispute, it has its own disadvantages.
Readers get almost no information on who contributed the most, and if the
main author’s name begins with a letter late in the alphabet, it’s very likely to
be overlooked, or hidden in the “et al” list when the paper is cited by
others—naturally, not an agreeable scenario.
Since there is no foolproof system for the ordering author names yet and
journals do not normally arbitrate in such disputes, the onus is on authors to
decide how best to resolve differences in opinion.

10. When should authorship/order of authors be decided?
The best time to decide who should be named authors and in what order is
before the research project itself is initiated.5,7 The group of individuals who
will be involved in the project must ideally agree upon these points, with the
person-in-charge assuming a bigger responsibility in clarifying them to junior
researchers.
Any changes in the level of involvement, or the addition or exclusion of some
members, during the project should be approved by the individuals involved
and reflected in the author byline. Changes to the author byline after a
manuscript has already been submitted are rare, and if required, should be
explained to the journal.

11. Unethical authorship practices
Certain questionable practices, described below, are frowned upon in most fields.
Honorary/gift authorship: Naming the head of the department where the study is
carried out as an author of a paper when he/she has made no significant
contribution to the study. This practice may be more prevalent in cultures where
supervisors and seniors are treated with respect and it is considered appropriate
to include them in the byline.
Guest authorship: Naming a certain person (generally a senior, well-known
researcher) an author in the hope that it will boost the chances of a paper being
published, although his/her role in the research may be insignificant.
Ghost authorship: Omitting the name of a significant contributor from the byline
as well as the Acknowledgments section. Such individuals may include those who
will be perceived as having conflicts of interest, medical writers, etc.

12. Authorship
Concluding remarks
Since an author shares not only credit but also scientific and, sometimes, social
accountability for a paper, it is the primary responsibility of each author to preserve
scientific integrity. Those who had no significant contributions should desist from taking
undue credit, and all those who had should ensure that they are duly credited. When in
doubt, authors should consult the authorship guidelines provided by the journal they
have chosen for submission and resolve any disputes amicably.

13. Authorship
References
1. Epstein R.J. (1993). Six authors in search of a citation: villains or victims of the Vancouver
convention?British Medical Journal, 306, 765–767. (Abstract)
2. Sacco W.P., & Milana S. (1984). Increase in number of authors per article in ten APA journals: 1960–
1980. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 8, 77–83. (Abstract)
3. Rennie D., Yank V., & Emanuel L. (1997). When authorship fails. A proposal to make contributors
accountable. Journal of the American Medical Association, 278, 579–585.
4. Lake D.A. (2010). Who’s on First? Listing Authors by Relative Contribution Trumps the Alphabet. PS:
Political Science & Politics, 43, 43–47.
5. Vollmer W.M. (2007). Responsibilities of Authorship. Chest, 132, 2042–2045.
6. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts
Submitted to Biomedical Journals: Ethical Considerations in the Conduct and Reporting of Research:
Authorship and Contributorship. Last accessed October 18, 2011. Available
from:http://www.icmje.org/ethical_1author.html.
7. Albert T, Wager E. How to handle authorship disputes: a guide for new researchers. COPE Report
2003, Committee on Publication Ethics, London. Last accessed October 18,2011. Available from:
www.publicationethics.org.uk.

14. Connect
http://www.facebook.com/Editage
http://www.twitter.com/Editage
http://www.linkedin.com/company/cactus-communications