Is there a rationale for author byline order? A case study of the journal of informetrics

  1. Hilário, Carla Mara 1
  2. Cabrini Grácio, Maria Cláudia 2
  3. Martínez-Ávila, Daniel 3
  4. Wolfram, Dietmar 4
  1. 1 Universidade Estadual de Londrina
    info

    Universidade Estadual de Londrina

    Londrina, Brasil

    ROR https://ror.org/01585b035

  2. 2 Universidade Estadual Paulista
    info

    Universidade Estadual Paulista

    São Paulo, Brasil

    ROR https://ror.org/00987cb86

  3. 3 Universidad de León
    info

    Universidad de León

    León, España

    ROR https://ror.org/02tzt0b78

  4. 4 University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee
    info

    University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee

    Milwaukee, Estados Unidos

    ROR https://ror.org/031q21x57

Mostrar afiliacións +
Revista:
Revista española de documentación científica

ISSN: 0210-0614,  1988-4621

Ano de publicación: 2022

Volume: 45

Número: 3

Tipo: Artigo

DOI: 10.3989/REDC.2022.3.1890 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openAcceso aberto editor

Outras publicacións en: Revista española de documentación científica

Resumo

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.

€ Ver financiamento

Información de financiamento

Financiadores

Referencias bibliográficas

  • 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
Fonte de datos: Dialnet