Science is a highly collaborative endeavor. One important outcome is scientific articles. So it’s an important part of scientific training to understand the practice and meaning of authorship in scientific papers. Here is a recap. on the topic after a few years in the scientific business.
What is authorship in scientific papers?
Authorship in scientific papers refers to the acknowledgment of individuals who have made significant contributions to the research and writing of a manuscript. Authorship is a key factor in academic advancement, funding opportunities, and professional reputation. The number and quality of publications can significantly influence a researcher’s career trajectory.
Criteria for Authorship: A general criterion is: an author is somebody who contributed significantly to the paper. Different fields may have more specific criteria for authorship, but common guidelines include:
- contributions to the conception or design of the work;
- contributions to the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data.
- contributions to drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content.
Order of Authors: The order in which authors are listed can vary by discipline. In many fields, the first author is typically the one who contributed the most to the work, while the last author often holds a senior or supervisory role. Middle authors may have contributed in varying degrees, and the significance of their contributions can differ.
How to cleanly decide for the author list of a paper?
Discuss early and Reach Consensus: Hold discussions among all potential authors to clarify contributions and expectations, even at early stages of a project. This can help prevent misunderstandings. Agenda for the discussion:
- Is that a paper with or without author order?
- Is that a paper that will count towards the PhD of one or more co-authors?
- If there is an order, what is the planned order and why?
- At the end of the conversation, make sure that everyone feels good that their contributions are appropriately recognized.
Revisit Decisions if Necessary: If new contributions arise or if the project evolves, be open to revisiting authorship decisions. Senior researchers and project leaders should be proactive on this, yet anybody in the team can initiate such a discussion. The agenda is the same as in the first conversation.
Transparency and Documentation: Keep a record of contributions and discussions regarding authorship decisions (an email is enough no need for extra dedicated document). This documentation can be useful in case of disputes or questions about authorship later on.
Bad practices: Avoid practices such as gift authorship (adding authors who did not contribute) or ghost authorship (excluding those who contributed). These practices significantly undermine the integrity of the scientific process.
How about Author Contribution Statements?
In many cases, the scientific context and field culture is enough to understand and appreciate an author list. When this is not enough, one can add an “Author Contribution Statement”.
An “Author Contribution Statement” is a paragraph in a scientific paper that explicitly outlines the specific contributions of each author to the research and the writing of the paper. This statement helps clarify the roles of each author, providing transparency about their involvement to the readers. It can be particularly useful in collaborative projects where multiple authors contribute in various ways, ensuring that credit is appropriately assigned.
Typically, an Author Contribution Statement may include details such as:
- Conceptualization: Who developed the research idea or hypothesis.
- Methodology: Who designed the experiments or analytical methods.
- Data Collection: Who was responsible for gathering the data.
- Data Analysis: Who analyzed the data and interpreted the results.
- Writing: Who wrote the initial draft and who contributed to revisions.
- Supervision: Who oversaw the project and provided guidance.
- Funding Acquisition: Who secured funding for the research.
Other aspects include “Investigation”, “Project administration”, “Software”, “Visualization”, etc.
Examples:
J.L., J.R.S. and J.W.L. conceived the Brainbow strategies. J.R.S. and J.W.L. supervised the project. J.L. built initial constructs and validated them in vitro and in vivo. T.A.W. performed all cerebellar axonal tracing and colour profile analysis with programs developed with J. Lu. H.K. performed all live imaging experiments. R.W.D. generated Brainbow-1.0 lines expressing cytoplasmic XFPs, and R.A.B. generated Brainbow-1.1 constructs and lines. J.L., T.A.W. and R.W.D. screened mouse lines. https://blogs.nature.com/nautilus/2007/11/post_12.html
All authors conceived and designed the experiments. K.V. conducted the data collection, analysis, and created the visualizations. K.V. and A.-L.B. wrote the manuscript. All authors reviewed the manuscript and offered comments. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-022-05146-6.pdf
Some journals and funding agencies encourage author contributions. Such statement either replace or complement the author ordering. As for author list, author contribution statements must be written collectively and agreed upon with consensus.
Ethics.
Being a formal author is a reward, but it is also a responsibility. Authors are accountable for the content of the work. They endorse the truthfulness, integrity and soundness of the results.
Authors also carry ethical responsibilities when they accept fraudulent authorship (e.g., including individuals who did not contribute significantly or excluding those who did)
Conclusion & Take-away
Knowing how to handle authorship is a skill, which is neither natural nor obvious. As a PhD student, take the time to reflect about it, as a supervisor spend the time to train your students.
Good communication is key. Talk about authorship, early, often and openly.
Author Contribution Statements are good to resolve authorship issues.
Martin Monperrus
February 2025
Note.
In some disciplines and countries, the role of “Corresponding Author” is well regarded. Same as for the author list, the election of the “Corresponding Author” should be made transparently and fairly.