Literature DB >> 12092489

Coauthorship in physics.

Eugen Tarnow1.   

Abstract

In a large and detailed survey on the ethics of scientific coauthorship, members of the American Physical Society (APS) were asked to judge the number of appropriate coauthors on his or her last published paper. Results show that the first or second coauthors are more appropriate than later coauthors about whom there is equal and considerable doubt. The probability of any third and subsequent coauthors being judged as inappropriate is 23% for the APS guideline, 67% for the tighter guideline of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, 59% if the guideline requires "direct contributions to scientific discovery or invention". Only 3% of respondents report having personally rejected an undeserving scientist who expected to be an author on the last published paper. Respondents seem to be divided into two non-overlapping populations--those who report no inappropriate coauthorship and those who have a more graduated view.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12092489     DOI: 10.1007/s11948-002-0017-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics        ISSN: 1353-3452            Impact factor:   3.525


  6 in total

1.  Office of Research Integrity: a reflection of disputes and misunderstandings.

Authors:  M D Scheetz
Journal:  Croat Med J       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 1.351

2.  Disclosure of researcher contributions: a study of original research articles in The Lancet.

Authors:  V Yank; D Rennie
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1999-04-20       Impact factor: 25.391

3.  Ethical issues in biomedical research: perceptions and practices of postdoctoral research fellows responding to a survey.

Authors:  Susan Eastwood; Pamela Derish; Evangeline Leash; Stephen Ordway
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  1996-01       Impact factor: 3.525

4.  A pilot study of biomedical trainees' perceptions concerning research ethics.

Authors:  M W Kalichman; P J Friedman
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  1992-11       Impact factor: 6.893

5.  Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors.

Authors: 
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1997-03-19       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  When authorship fails. A proposal to make contributors accountable.

Authors:  D Rennie; V Yank; L Emanuel
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1997-08-20       Impact factor: 56.272

  6 in total
  6 in total

1.  Collaboration in sensor network research: an in-depth longitudinal analysis of assortative mixing patterns.

Authors:  Alberto Pepe; Marko A Rodriguez
Journal:  Scientometrics       Date:  2009-12-31       Impact factor: 3.238

2.  Byline corruption can only be controlled by true stakeholders.

Authors:  Eugen Tarnow
Journal:  MedGenMed       Date:  2004-09-28

3.  Coauthorship in pathology, a comparison with physics and a survery-generated and member-preferred authorship guideline.

Authors:  Eugen Tarnow; Barry R De Young; Michael B Cohen
Journal:  MedGenMed       Date:  2004-07-22

4.  A course treating ethical issues in physics.

Authors:  Marshall Thomsen
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 3.525

Review 5.  A systematic review of research on the meaning, ethics and practices of authorship across scholarly disciplines.

Authors:  Ana Marušić; Lana Bošnjak; Ana Jerončić
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-09-08       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Measuring co-authorship and networking-adjusted scientific impact.

Authors:  John P A Ioannidis
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2008-07-23       Impact factor: 3.240

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.