The effects of listing authors in alphabetical order: A review of the empirical evidence

Weber, Matthias

doi:10.1093/reseval/rvy008

Cited by 37 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, arbitrary conventions that influence citation counts can have measurable influences on scholarly success. In the field of economics, for example, where coauthor orders are sometimes arranged alphabetically, researchers with surnames starting with letters earlier in the alphabet are more likely to achieve academic success, such as obtaining tenure or becoming fellows of professional societies (Einav & Yariv, 2006;Van Praag & Van Praag, 2008;Weber, 2018).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Order matters: Alphabetizing in-text citations biases citation rates

Stevens¹,

2018

Psychon Bull Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Though citations are critical for communicating science and evaluating scholarly success, properties unrelated to the quality of the work-such as cognitive biases-can influence citation decisions. The primacy effect, in particular, is relevant to lists, which for in-text citations could result in citations earlier in the list receiving more attention than those later in the list. Therefore, how citations are ordered could influence which citations receive the most attention. Using a sample of 150,000 articles, we tested whether alphabetizing in-text citations biases readers into citing more often articles with first authors whose surnames begin with letters early in the alphabet. We found that surnames earlier in the alphabet were cited more often than those later in the alphabet when journals ordered citations alphabetically compared with chronologically or numerically. This effect seemed to be stronger in psychology journals (which have a culture of alphabetizing citations) compared with biology or geoscience journals (which primarily order chronologically or numerically) and was strongest among moderately and highly cited articles. Therefore, alphabetizing in-text citations biases citation decisions toward authors with surnames occurring early in the alphabet. These citation decisions result from an interaction between cognitive biases (more attention devoted to items earlier in a list) and the structure of the citation environment (the style in which citations are ordered). We suggest that journals using alphabetically ordered citations switch to chronological ordering to minimize this arbitrary alphabetical citation bias.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Order matters: Alphabetizing in-text citations biases citation rates

Stevens¹,

2018

Psychon Bull Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Journals have generally not adopted policies or guidelines for equal contribution statements [ 33 ], nor are there general practices for handling such notes in research evaluations [ 34 ]. Contribution notes notwithstanding, the first author’s name becomes the most associated with the paper because many journals's citations in the body of the text list only the first author when there are three or more, and “et al” sweeps away whatever information is conveyed by fine print about equal contribution [ 2 , 37 – 42 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Resolving authorship disputes by mediation and arbitration

Faulkes

2018

Res Integr Peer Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundDisputes over authorship are increasing. This paper examines the options that researchers have in resolving authorship disputes. Discussions about authorship disputes often address how to prevent disputes but rarely address how to resolve them. Both individuals and larger research communities are harmed by the limited options for dispute resolution.Main bodyWhen authorship disputes arise after publication, most existing guidelines recommend that the authors work out the disputes between themselves. But this is unlikely to occur, because there are often large power differentials between team members, and institutions (e.g., universities, funding agencies) are unlikely to have authority over all team members. Other collaborative disciplines that deal with issues of collaborative creator credit could provide models for scientific authorship. Arbitration or mediation could provide solutions to authorship disputes where few presently exist. Because authors recognize journals’ authority to make decisions about manuscripts submitted to the journal, journals are well placed to facilitate alternative dispute resolution processes.ConclusionRather than viewing authorship disputes as rare events that must be handled on a case by case basis, researchers and journals should view the potential for disputes as predictable, preventable, and soluble. Independent bodies that can offer alternative dispute resolution services to scientific collaborators and/or journals could quickly help research communities, particularly their most vulnerable members.

show abstract

“…Tables 14 and 15). These findings may result from the higher salience and more frequent exposure of surnames than given names in academic domains, especially in publication and citation 12,51 (for more discussion on the unexpected negative effects of given names, see Supplementary Note 2).…”

Section: Study 6: Replicating Name-job Uniqueness Fit and Its Benefitmentioning

confidence: 99%

Name Uniqueness Predicts Career Choice and Career Achievement

Bao¹,

Cai²,

Cn³

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Do personal names relate to career choice and career achievement? If so, how and why? We propose that uniqueness (vs. conformity), a dimension crucial for identity construction, may associate name (personal identity) with career (vocational identity). By testing a broad range of names and jobs, we identified a phenomenon—the name-job uniqueness fit—and revealed its benefit to career success. Seven studies (total N = 7.38 million) provided correlational, experimental, and real-world evidence for that holding more unique names (less used in the population) predicted choosing more unique jobs (less occupied in the workforce). The need for uniqueness partly explained the name-job uniqueness fit. Furthermore, better name-job uniqueness fit predicted higher career achievement. Importantly, the name-job relations remained positive when considering confounding factors (e.g., socioeconomic status) and alternative explanations (e.g., parental influences) and were replicated in the U.S., the U.K., and China (with some cross-cultural differences). Our findings provide a perspective on how and why personal names relate to career outcomes beyond past theories.

show abstract

The effects of listing authors in alphabetical order: A review of the empirical evidence

Cited by 37 publications

References 37 publications

Order matters: Alphabetizing in-text citations biases citation rates

Order matters: Alphabetizing in-text citations biases citation rates

Resolving authorship disputes by mediation and arbitration

Name Uniqueness Predicts Career Choice and Career Achievement

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About