¿Existe una justificación para el orden de los autores en la mención de autoría? Un estudio de caso de la investigación en informetría

Carla Mara Hilário; Maria Cláudia  Cabrini Grácio; Daniel  Martínez-Ávila; Dietmar  Wolfram

doi:10.3989/redc.2022.3.1890

Authors

Carla Mara Hilário Universidade Estadual de Londrina https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2464-1502
Maria Cláudia Cabrini Grácio Universidade Estadual Paulista https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8003-0386
Daniel Martínez-Ávila Universidad de León https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2236-553X
Dietmar Wolfram University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4991-276X

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2022.3.1890

Keywords:

Scholarly communication, Informetrics, research collaboration, co-authorship, author credit, byline order, author contribution

Abstract

Multiple authorship on research publications is common in many disciplines. Is the order in which authors appear in the byline determined by consistent criteria? This study investigated co-authored papers published in the Journal of Informetrics in 2016, the year in which this representative journal of the area of informetrics started to publish the articles with the author contributions form, as a case study to determine if there is consistency in the author order based on author contributions. For the papers studied, there was greater consistency for the first and last authors, and less consistent rationale for the order of the remaining author positions for the papers studied. A survey sent to the authors of the publications studied revealed that authors believed the first and last author positions played a more distinctive role. The lack of agreement and function of author order in other positions raises the question about the significance of author order and its purpose in determining the credit authors receive for co-authored publications.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Abramo, G., & D'angelo, C. A. (2015). The relationship between the number of authors of a publication, its citations and the impact factor of the publishing journal: Evidence from Italy. Journal of Informetrics, 9 (4), 746-761. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2015.07.003

Bhandari, M., Guyatt, G.H., Kulkarni, A.V., Devereaux, P.J., Leece, P., Bajammal, S., Heels-Ansdell, D., & Busse, J.W. (2014). Perceptions of authors' contributions are influenced by both by-line order and designation of corresponding author. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 67(9), 1049-1054. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.04.006 PMid:24973824

Bornmann, L., y Osório, A. (2019). The value and credits of n-authors publications. Journal of Infometrics, 13(2), 540-554. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2019.03.001

Bu, Y., Huang, Y., Sugimoto, C. R., y Chinchilla-Rodríguez, Z. (2019). Investigating scientific collaboration through the sequence of authors in the publication by-lines and the diversity of collaborators. In 17th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics, ISSI 2019 - Proceedings, 2, 2300-2305.

Burrows, S., & Moore, M. (2011). Trends in authorship order in biomedical research publications. Journal of Electronic Resources in Medical Libraries, 8(2), 155-168. https://doi.org/10.1080/15424065.2011.576613

Corrêa Jr., E. A., Silva, F. N., Costa, L. d. F., & Amancio, D. R. (2017). Patterns of authors contribution in scientific manuscripts. Journal of Informetrics, 11(2), 498-510. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.03.003

Conroy, G. (2018, August). The A to Z of paper authorship: It's bad news for Z but A is AOK for authors listed alphabetically. Nature Index. Available at: https://www.natureindex.com/news-blog/a-to-z-of-paper-authorship [Accessed: 10/05/2021].

Costas, R., & Bordons, M. (2011). Do age and professional rank influence the order of authorship in scientific publications? Some evidence from a micro-level perspective. Scientometrics, 88(1), 145-161. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0368-z PMid:21765565 PMCid:PMC3111668

Das, P. K. (2013). Journal of informetrics: A bibliometric profile. DESIDOC Journal of Library and Information Technology, 33(3), 243-252. https://doi.org/10.14429/djlit.33.3.4610

Duffy, M. A. (2017). Last and corresponding authorship practices in ecology. Ecology and Evolution, 7(21), 8876-8887. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.3435 PMid:29152184 PMCid:PMC5677469

Egghe, L. (2012). Five years "journal of informetrics". Journal of Informetrics, 6(3), 422-426. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2012.02.003

Fox, C.W., Ritchey, J.P., & Paine, C.E.T. (2018). Patterns of authorship in ecology and evolution: First, last, and corresponding authorship vary with gender and geography. Ecology and Evolution, 8(23), 11492-11507. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.4584 PMid:30598751 PMCid:PMC6303722

Frandsen, T. F., & Nicolaisen, J. (2010). What is in a name? credit assignment practices in different disciplines. Journal of Informetrics, 4(4), 608-617. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2010.06.010

Hagen, N. T. (2013). Harmonic coauthor credit: A parsimonious quantification of the byline hierarchy. Journal of Informetrics, 7(4), 784-791. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2013.06.005

Hagen, N. T. (2014). Reversing the byline hierarchy: The effect of equalizing bias on the accreditation of primary, secondary and senior authors. Journal of Informetrics, 8(3), 618-627. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2014.05.003

He, B., Ding, Y., & Yan, E. (2012). Mining patterns of author orders in scientific publications. Journal of Informetrics, 6(3), 359-367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2012.01.001

Henry, S. (2013). On the Ethics of Collaborative Authorship: The Challenge of Authorship Order and the Risk of Textploitation. Western Criminology Review, 14(1), 84-87.

Hilário, C. M., & Grácio, M. C. C. (2017). Scientific collaboration in Brazilian researches: a comparative study in the information science, mathematics and dentistry fields. Scientometrics, 113(2), 929-950. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2498-4

Jian, D., & Xiaoli, T. (2013). Perceptions of author order versus contribution among researchers with different professional ranks and the potential of harmonic counts for encouraging ethical co-authorship practices. Scientometrics, 96(1), 277-295. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0905-4

Kosmulski, M. (2012). The order in the lists of authors in multi-author papers revisited. Journal of Informetrics, 6(4), 639-644. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2012.06.006

Larivière, V., Desrochers, N., Macaluso, B., Mongeon, P., Paul-Hus, A., y Sugimoto, C. R.(2016). Contributorship and division of labor in knowledge production. Social Studies of Science, 46(3), 417 - 435. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312716650046 PMid:28948891

Laudel, G. (2019). Studying the embeddedness of researchers' careers: can bibliometric methods help? 17th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics, ISSI 2019 - Proceedings, 1368-1379.

Liu, X.Z., & Fang, H. (2014). Scientific group leaders' authorship preferences: An empirical investigation. Scientometrics, 98(2), 909-925. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-1083-8

Logan, J.M., Bean, S.B., & Myers, A.E. (2017). Author contributions to ecological publications: What does it mean to be an author in modern ecological research? PLoS ONE, 12(6), art. no. e0179956. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0179956 PMid:28650967 PMCid:PMC5484501

Lozano, G. A. (2014). Ethics of using language editing services in an era of digital communication and heavily multi-authored papers. Science and Engineering Ethics, 20(2), 363-377. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-013-9451-6 PMid:23690133

Mattsson, P., Sundberg, C.J., & Laget, P. (2011). Is correspondence reflected in the author position? A bibliometric study of the relation between corresponding author and by-line position. Scientometrics, 87(1), 99-105. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0310-9

Mena-Chalco, J. P., Dalpian, G. M., & Capelle, K. (2014). Redes de colaboração acadêmica: um estudo de caso da produção bibliográfica da UFABC. Revista Interciente, 1(1), 50-58.

Mongeon, P., Smith, E., Joyal, B., & Larivière, V. (2017) The rise of the middle author: Investigating collaboration and division of labor in biomedical research using partial alphabetical authorship. PLoS ONE, 12 (9), art. no. e0184601. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0184601 PMid:28910344 PMCid:PMC5599011

National Library of Medicine (NIH). Samples of Formatted References for Authors of Journal Articles. 2018. Available at: https://www.nlm.nih.gov/bsd/uniform_requirements.html.

Price, D. J. S. (1963). Little Science, Big Science. New York: Columbia University Press. https://doi.org/10.7312/pric91844

Rahman, M. T., Regenstein, J. M., Abu Kassim, N. L., & Haque, N. (2017). The need to quantify authors' relative intellectual contributions in a multi-author paper. Journal of Informetrics, 11(1), 275-281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.01.002

Tarkang, E. E., Kweku, M., & Zotor, F. B. (2017). Publication practices and responsible authorship: a review article. Journal of Public Health in Africa, 8(723). https://doi.org/10.4081/jphia.2017.723 PMid:28748064 PMCid:PMC5510206

Trueba, F. J., & Guerrero, H. (2004). A robust formula to credit authors for their publications. Scientometrics, 60(2), 181-204. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:SCIE.0000027792.09362.3f

Wagner, C. (2018). The Collaborative Era in Science: Governing the Network Palgrave Advances in the Economics of Innovation and Technology Series Editor. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-94986-4

Waltman, L. (2012) An empirical analysis of the use of alphabetical authorship in scientific publishing. Journal of Informetrics, 6(4), 700-711. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2012.07.008

Weber, M. (2018). The effects of listing authors in alphabetical order: A review of the empirical evidence. Research Evaluation, 27(3), 238-245. https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvy008

White, H. D. (2001). Authors as citers over time. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 52(2), 87-108. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-4571(2000)9999:9999<::AID-ASI1542>3.0.CO;2-T

Witter, G. P. (2010). Ética e autoria na produção textual científica. Informação & informação, 15(1), 131-144 https://doi.org/10.5433/1981-8920.2010v15n1espp131

Yang, S., Wolfram, D., & Wang, F. (2017). The relationship between the author byline and contribution lists: a comparison of three general medical journals. Scientometrics, 110(3), 1273-1296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2239-0

Youtie, J., & Borzeman, B. (2014). Social dynamics of research collaboration: norms, practices, and ethical issues in determining co-authorship rights. Scientometrics, 101, 953-962. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1391-7

Zbar, A., & Frank, E. (2011). Significance of Authorship Position: An Open-Ended International Assessment. The American Journal of the Medical Sciences, 341(2), 106-109. https://doi.org/10.1097/MAJ.0b013e3181f683a PMid:20924283