An Empirical Study of Gift Authorships in Business Journals

Manton, Edgar J.; English, Donald E.

doi:10.3200/joeb.83.5.283-287

Cited by 10 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 6 publications

(6 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Across disciplines, adding undeserving authors or excluding deserving authors was considered unethical [14], [33], [36], [50], [68], [70], [71], [77], [90], [109], but was reported to be a practice by 10% to 89% of the respondents [18], [31], [41], [46], [50], [58], [65], [68], [75], [82], [85], [91], [96], [109], [114], [127]. Prestige was an important factor in deciding on authorship, as articles from more prestigious economics journals had more authors and fewer contributors in the acknowledgement then those from less prestigious journals [76].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Systematic Review of Research on the Meaning, Ethics and Practices of Authorship across Scholarly Disciplines

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate evidence about authorship issues and provide synthesis of research on authorship across all research fields.MethodsWe searched bibliographical databases to identify articles describing empirical quantitive or qualitative research from all scholarly fields on different aspects of authorship. Search was limited to original articles and reviews.ResultsThe final sample consisted of 123 articles reporting results from 118 studies. Most studies came for biomedical and health research fields and social sciences. Study design was usually a survey (53%) or descriptive study (27%); only 2 studies used randomized design. We identified four 4 general themes common to all research disciplines: authorship perceptions, definitions and practices, defining order of authors on the byline, ethical and unethical authorship practices, and authorship issues related to student/non-research personnel-supervisor collaboration. For 14 survey studies, a meta-analysis showed a pooled weighted average of 29% (95% CI 24% to 35%) researchers reporting their own or others' experience with misuse of authorship. Authorship misuse was reported more often by researcher outside of the USA and UK: 55% (95% CI 45% to 64%) for 4 studies in France, South Africa, India and Bangladesh vs. 23% (95% CI 18% to 28%) in USA/UK or international journal settings.InterpretationHigh prevalence of authorship problems may have severe impact on the integrity of the research process, just as more serious forms of research misconduct. There is a need for more methodologically rigorous studies to understand the allocation of publication credit across research disciplines.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Systematic Review of Research on the Meaning, Ethics and Practices of Authorship across Scholarly Disciplines

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Bennett and Kidwell (2001) suggest collaborations between MOS researchers can be affected by the free rider problem, so affective relationships within these groups have a profound influence on whether collaborations endure. Along similar lines, Manton and English (2008) report findings from a survey of 442 faculty at 30 Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB)-accredited business schools. About 35.6% said they had published a paper with someone who had made very little contribution to the research.…”

Section: Co-authorship In Mosmentioning

confidence: 90%

On interference, collegiality and co-authorship: Peer review of journal articles in management and organization studies

Brewis

2018

Organization

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Management and organization studies commentary on how authors experience peer review of journal papers suggests it can be an overly interventionist process which reduces the originality and coherence of eventual publications. In the literature on coauthorship, this argument is reversed. Here free riders who do not contribute fully to research collaborations and the practice of gift authorships are problematized; and it is argued that everyone involved in writing a published paper should be rewarded with co-authorship. In this paper, qualitative interviews with twelve management and organization studies academics see respondents describing peer review as a transaction during which reviewers -and editors -actually co-author published papers. But their perspectives on this vary with the subject position from which they are speaking. When they speak as reviewers or editors, this co-authorship is depicted as a collegiate gift, a professional obligation or a process where authors might overrely on reviewers' generosity. When they speak as authors or their proxies, it is characterized as reproducing disciplinary orthodoxy and ethnocentric exclusion, 2 perpetuating disciplinary cliques, creating disorganized papers and constituting excessive interference with authorial privilege. These various perspectives on peer review deserve more attention in our empirical studies of academic labour. They also suggest we should reflect more on when, how and why we collaborate in our research, and on how much we should recognize additional co-authors on (or resist their input into) 'our' work.

show abstract

“…İşletme dergilerinde, son 50 yıl içinde ortak yazarlılığın arttığını belirten Manton ve English (2008), anketi cevaplayan 442 akademisyenden sadece 9 tanesinin daha önce ortak yazarlılık yapmamış olduğu ve neredeyse dörtte birinin (en büyük çoğunluk olan %23,5) yönetim alanında çalıştığı bulgusuna ulaşmışlardır. İşletme alanında farklı bilim dalları (muhasebe, pazarlama vb.)…”

Section: Yönetim Ve Organizasyon Bilim Alanında Ortak Yazarlılıkunclassified

“…Bilimsel işbirliğinin bulunmadığı fakat ortak yazarlılığın gerçekleştiği yayınların varlığı, iki olgunun eş anlamlı olarak kullanılmaması gerektiğini göstermektedir. Manton ve English (2008), aynı anketi kullandıkları bu çalışmalarına benzer bir çalışmayı 2004 yılında gerçekleştirmiş ve benzer sonuçlara ulaşmışlardır. Xu vd.…”

Section: Yönetim Ve Organizasyon Bilim Alanında Ortak Yazarlılıkunclassified

Yönetim ve Organizasyon Bilim Alanında Ortak Yazarlılık - Co-Authorship in Management and Organization Science

Dalkılıç¹,

Tunçay²

2017

isarder

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ÖzetBu çalışmanın amacı yönetim ve organizasyon bilim alanında ortak yazarlılık olgusunun nasıl bir çerçeve çizdiğini ortaya çıkarmak ve detaylı yazın taramasıyla elde edilen bulgulardan saptamalara ulaşmaktır. Bu amaçla, yazındaki çalışmalardan yola çıkarak ilk önce ortak yazarlılık konusunda, kavramsal bir yapı oluşturulmuş, ortak yazarlılığın "nedenleri", "sonuçları", ortak yazarlılıkta "üretkenlik" ve "yöntem" hakkında bilgi verilmiştir. Ardından yönetim ve organizasyon alanında ortak yazarlılık konusunda ulaşılabilen tüm çalışmalar irdelenmiş ve ortak bulgulardan belirgin tespitler elde edilmiştir. Yönetim ve organizasyon alanında "iki yazarlı ortak yazarlılığın baskın olduğu ve bu çalışmaların daha fazla atıf aldıkları", "bireylerin daha çok benzer özelliklere sahip oldukları bireylerle ortak yayın yaptıkları fakat farklı özellikteki bireylerle yapılan ortak yazarlı yayınların oranında artış olduğu", "ulaşılan ortak yazarlılık ağlarının yoğunluklarının düşük olduğu", "ağ içindeki izole grupların yıllar içerisinde azaldığı", "en başarılı araştırmacıların birbirleriyle bağlantı içinde oldukları ve bazen ortak yazarlılık ağı içerisinde aracılık rolü üstlendikleri" bulgularına ulaşılmıştır. Anahtar Kelimeler: Bilimsel işbirliği, Ortak yazarlılık, Yönetim ve Organizasyon Alanında Ortak Yazarlılık AbstractThe aim of this research is to reveal out a framework about how co-authorship constitutes in management and organization science and to reach detections via a detailed literature review. By this way, firstly a conceptual structure is formed based on the studies in the literature. " Reasons" and "results" of co-authorship and "production" and "method" in co-authorship

show abstract

An Empirical Study of Gift Authorships in Business Journals

Cited by 10 publications

References 6 publications

A Systematic Review of Research on the Meaning, Ethics and Practices of Authorship across Scholarly Disciplines

A Systematic Review of Research on the Meaning, Ethics and Practices of Authorship across Scholarly Disciplines

On interference, collegiality and co-authorship: Peer review of journal articles in management and organization studies

Yönetim ve Organizasyon Bilim Alanında Ortak Yazarlılık - Co-Authorship in Management and Organization Science

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About