No more first authors, no more last authors

Abstract

E very academic scientist has heard a tale of someone being shafted on an authorship list, or had it happen to them. Less appreciated is how much the attribution of credit impedes crossdisciplinary approaches to difficult questions. It creates a negative feedback loop that hinders research. Most scientists agree that research questions and approaches have become more complex, so the need to engage in expanded team science has increased. I've found, however, that there is great reluctance among faculty members to join such efforts. I find myself asking, 'What if we completely blow up the way in which we attribute authorship?' I suspect that if we got rid of first authors, last authors and the fight for asterisks, we might interrupt the negative feedback loop and see more innovation.

Building Sustainable Global Collaborative Networks: Recommendations from Music Studies and the Social Sciences

“…Ultimately, however, solving these problems will require a fundamental reevaluation of the nature of research credit attribution (cf. Kiser, 2018;Holcombe, 2019).…”

Chapter 6 “… and his wife Sally”: The Binford Legacy and Uncredited Work in Archaeology

“…The American Psychological Association has a Student Guide (2006, 2015) and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors has a page on their website detailing the importance of authorship conversations (International Committee of Medical Journal Editors 2022). Debates over who “owns” research materials, products, and intellectual property rights have arisen in various disciplines (Ahmed and Monahan 2019; Anonymous 2015; CASRAI 2006; Hedges 2015; Hundley, Teijlingen, and Simkhada 2013; McGlynn 2016; McKiernan 2012; Oberlander and Spencer 2006; Salaz 2018), with some even calling for a reduction in the importance placed on authorship order (Kiser 2018). The “first author” question in traditional archaeological publications may be solved using alphabetical order if multiple individuals actually authored the paper.…”

Toward a more open and diverse science in Neuropsychology.

“…CRediT, which has also been implemented in Editorial Manager, provides authors with the opportunity to share an accurate and detailed description of their diverse contributions to a manuscript. Our hope is that this practice will help move the field beyond the simplistic assignment of authorship order, which often gives disproportionate credit to first or last authors at the expense of the contributions by other coauthors (Kiser, 2018).…”