Sometimes researchers explicitly or implicitly conceive of authorship in terms of moral or ethical rights to authorship when they are dealing with authorship issues. Because treating authorship as a right can encourage unethical behaviours, such as honorary and ghost authorship, buying and selling authorship, and unfair treatment of researchers, we recommend that researchers not conceive of authorship in this way but view it as a description about contributions to research. However, we acknowledge that the arguments we have given for this position are largely speculative and that more empirical research is needed to better ascertain the benefits and risks of treating authorship on scientific publications as a right.
- Ethics- Research
Data availability statement
No data are available.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Human rights and bioethics
- Honorary and ghost authorship in high impact biomedical journals: a cross sectional survey
- Intellectual property rights and detached human body parts
- Authorship policies of bioethics journals
- Awareness, usage and perceptions of authorship guidelines: an international survey of biomedical authors
- Authorship policies of scientific journals
- Authorship ignorance: views of researchers in French clinical settings
- Experience and awareness of research integrity among Japanese physicians: a nationwide cross-sectional study
- Honorary authorship epidemic in scholarly publications? How the current use of citation-based evaluative metrics make (pseudo)honorary authors from honest contributors of every multi-author article
- Have ignorance and abuse of authorship criteria decreased over the past 15 years?