IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0020206.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Less Work, Less Respect: Authors' Perceived Importance of Research Contributions and Their Declared Contributions to Research Articles

Author

Listed:
  • Ana Ivaniš
  • Darko Hren
  • Matko Marušić
  • Ana Marušić

Abstract

Background: Attitudes towards authorship are connected with authors' research experience and with knowledge of authorship criteria of International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). The objective of this study was to assess association between authors' perceived importance of contributions for authorship qualification and their participation in manuscripts submitted to a journal. Methods: Authors (n = 1181) of 265 manuscripts submitted to the Croatian Medical Journal were asked to identify and rate their contribution in the preparation of the submitted manuscript (0 – none to 4 – full for 11 listed contributions) and the importance of these contributions as authorship qualifications (0 – none to 4 – full). They were randomly allocated into 3 groups: the first (n = 90 manuscripts, n = 404 authors) first received the contribution disclosure form and then contribution importance-rating questionnaire; the second (n = 88 manuscripts, n = 382 authors) first received the rating questionnaire and then the contribution disclosure form, and the third group (n = 87 manuscripts, n = 395 authors) received both questionnaires at the same time. We compared authors' perception of importance of contribution categories. Results: 1014 (85.9%) authors of 235 manuscripts responded. Authors who declared contribution to a specific category rated it as more important for authorship than those authors who did not contribute to the same category (P>0.005 for all contribution categories, Mann-Withney test). Authors qualifying for ICMJE authorship rated all contribution categories higher than non-qualifying authors. For all contributions, associations between perceived importance of contribution and actual author's contribution were statistically significant. Conclusions: Authorship seems to be not a normative issue subjective to categorization into criteria, but also a very personal view of the importance and value of one's contributions.

Suggested Citation

  • Ana Ivaniš & Darko Hren & Matko Marušić & Ana Marušić, 2011. "Less Work, Less Respect: Authors' Perceived Importance of Research Contributions and Their Declared Contributions to Research Articles," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(6), pages 1-5, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0020206
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0020206
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0020206
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0020206&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0020206?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Karen Seashore Louis & Janet M. Holdsworth & Melissa S. Anderson & Eric G. Campbell, 2008. "Everyday Ethics in Research: Translating Authorship Guidelines into Practice in the Bench Sciences," The Journal of Higher Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 79(1), pages 88-112, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Haeussler, Carolin & Sauermann, Henry, 2020. "Division of labor in collaborative knowledge production: The role of team size and interdisciplinarity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(6).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Street, Jackie M. & Rogers, Wendy A. & Israel, Mark & Braunack-Mayer, Annette J., 2010. "Credit where credit is due? Regulation, research integrity and the attribution of authorship in the health sciences," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 70(9), pages 1458-1465, May.
    2. Françoise Salager-Meyer & María Ángeles Alcaraz-Ariza & Marianela Luzardo Briceño & Georges Jabbour, 2011. "Scholarly gratitude in five geographical contexts: a diachronic and cross-generic approach of the acknowledgment paratext in medical discourse (1950–2010)," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 86(3), pages 763-784, March.
    3. Lana Bošnjak & Ana Marušić, 2012. "Prescribed practices of authorship: review of codes of ethics from professional bodies and journal guidelines across disciplines," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 93(3), pages 751-763, December.
    4. Pär Sundling, 2023. "Author contributions and allocation of authorship credit: testing the validity of different counting methods in the field of chemical biology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(5), pages 2737-2762, May.
    5. Lars H. Breimer & Torbjörn K. Nilsson, 2010. "A longitudinal and cross-sectional study of Swedish biomedical PhD processes 1991–2009 with emphasis on international and gender aspects," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 85(2), pages 401-414, November.
    6. Ana Marušić & Lana Bošnjak & Ana Jerončić, 2011. "A Systematic Review of Research on the Meaning, Ethics and Practices of Authorship across Scholarly Disciplines," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(9), pages 1-1, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0020206. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.