Transparency in authors’ contributions and responsibilities to promote integrity in scientific publication

Abstract

In keeping with the growing movement in scientific publishing toward transparency in data and methods, we propose changes to journal authorship policies and procedures to provide insight into which author is responsible for which contributions, better assurance that the list is complete, and clearly articulated standards to justify earning authorship credit. To accomplish these goals, we recommend that journals adopt common and transparent standards for authorship, outline responsibilities for corresponding authors, adopt the Contributor Roles Taxonomy (CRediT) (docs.casrai.org/CRediT) methodology for attributing contributions, include this information in article metadata, and require authors to use the ORCID persistent digital identifier (https://orcid.org). Additionally, we recommend that universities and research institutions articulate expectations about author roles and responsibilities to provide a point of common understanding for discussion of authorship across research teams. Furthermore, we propose that funding agencies adopt the ORCID identifier and accept the CRediT taxonomy. We encourage scientific societies to further authorship transparency by signing on to these recommendations and promoting them through their meetings and publications programs.

Exploring researchers’ perspectives on authorship decision making

“…In recognition of the gravity of authorship issues, journal editors, including those of this journal, have advocated authorship criteria to guide authors in planning projects and navigating authorship disputes . The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) has developed such authorship criteria and these have been widely adopted in biomedicine.…”

“…In recognition of the gravity of authorship issues, journal editors, including those of this journal, have advocated authorship criteria to guide authors in planning projects and navigating authorship disputes. 8 The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) has developed such authorship criteria and these have been widely adopted in biomedicine. According to the ICMJE criteria, each author must: (i) substantially contribute to the conception or design of the work, or to the acquisition, analysis or interpretation of data for the work; (ii) draft the work or revise it critically for important intellectual content; (iii) give final approval of the version to be published, and (iv) agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.…”

How can we ensure visibility and diversity in research contributions? How the Contributor Role Taxonomy (CRediT) is helping the shift from authorship to contributorship

“…CASRAI recently became a Duraspace project (Duraspace, 2018) but remains the custodian of CrediT, and the programme committee is now seeking designated resources to manage and lead an awareness and implementation drive; many publishers are simply not aware of CRediT and its potential benefits. Encouragingly, a group of senior scientific journal editors recently recommended the adoption for CRediT for a whole raft of reasons completely in line with CRediT's raison d'etre (McNutt et al, 2018). As with any taxonomy, being used as a standard, it is important for it to have value as part of metadata that is used consistently.…”

Strategies for effective collaborative manuscript development in interdisciplinary science teams

“…For example, expecting a computer scientist to understand and be held accountable for the intricacies of ecological topics such as nutrient cycling is unreasonable. Strategies to facilitate accountability and integrity among team members include drafting author contribution statements, transparency at all stages of manuscript development, and discussions of contributorship vs. accountability (Weltzin et al 2006, McNutt et al 2017).…”