The Authorship Determination Process in Student-Faculty Collaborative Research

Faculty-student authorship practices in nursing: Cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Academic institutions often encourage nursing students to submit scholarly work for publication. Oftentimes, faculty and students collaborate on scholarship during a student's enrollment in a nursing program. Although there are benefits to the faculty and students, there are also areas of conflict due to the lack of professional and institutional guidelines to ensure equitable gains.

PURPOSE

The study explored authorship practices among nursing institutions in order to identify criteria for faculty-student authorship guidelines and policies.

METHODS

A descriptive and cross-sectional study was utilized to describe nursing faculty's perception of best practices for faculty-student authorship and their level of comfort with specific components of the authorship process.

RESULTS

There were several criteria that the faculty identified as warranting authorship credit, such as completing the review of the literature or making substantial contributions to analysis and interpretation of data. On the other hand, there were several criteria the faculty felt neutral or did not warrant authorship credit, such as providing general administration support or writing assistance.

CONCLUSION

Most faculty felt comfortable discussing authorship criteria with students. However, their responses highlighted complexities inherent in faculty-student relationships when collaborating on scholarship. This accentuated the need for the nursing profession and institutions to develop and implement faculty-student authorship guidelines.

Authorship Not Taught and Not Caught in Undergraduate Research Experiences at a Research University

This grounded study investigated the negotiation of authorship by faculty members, graduate student mentors, and their undergraduate protégés in undergraduate research experiences at a private research university in the northeastern United States. Semi-structured interviews using complementary scripts were conducted separately with 42 participants over a 3 year period to probe their knowledge and understanding of responsible authorship and publication practices and learn how faculty and students entered into authorship decision-making intended to lead to the publication of peer-reviewed technical papers. Herein the theoretical model for the negotiation of authorship developed through the analysis of these interviews is reported. The model identifies critical causal and intervening conditions responsible for the coping strategies faculty and students employ, which, in our study, appear to often produce unfortunate consequences for all involved. The undergraduate student researchers and their graduate student mentors interviewed in this study exhibited a limited understanding of authorship and the requirements for authorship in their research groups. The power differential between faculty and students, the students' limited epistemic development, the busy-ness of the faculty, and the faculty's failure to prioritize authorship have been identified as key factors inhibiting both undergraduate and graduate students from developing a deeper understanding of responsible authorship and publication practices. Implications for graduate education and undergraduate research are discussed, and strategies for helping all students to develop a deeper understanding of authorship are identified.

A review of the literature on ethical issues related to scientific authorship

The article at hand presents the results of a literature review on the ethical issues related to scientific authorship. These issues are understood as questions and/or concerns about obligations, values or virtues in relation to reporting, authorship and publication of research results. For this purpose, the Web of Science core collection was searched for English resources published between 1945 and 2018, and a total of 324 items were analyzed. Based on the review of the documents, ten ethical themes have been identified, some of which entail several ethical issues. Ranked on the basis of their frequency of occurrence these themes are: 1) attribution, 2) violations of the norms of authorship, 3) bias, 4) responsibility and accountability, 5) authorship order, 6) citations and referencing, 7) definition of authorship, 8) publication strategy, 9) originality, and 10) sanctions. In mapping these themes, the current article explores major ethical issue and provides a critical discussion about the application of codes of conduct, various understandings of culture, and contributing factors to unethical behavior.