Whose scientific work is it anyway? Knowledge production in the socially constructed fuzzy authorship

References

• Adams, J. (2012). Collaborations: The rise of research networks. Nature, 490(7420), 335–336. https://doi.org/10.1038/490335a
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allen, L., Scott, J., Brand, A., Hlava, M., & Altman, M. (2014). Publishing: Credit where credit is due. Nature, 508(7496), 312–313. https://doi.org/10.1038/508312a
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carpenter, M., & Fritz-Laylin, L. (2013, December 27). The snarky, clever comments hidden in the “Acknowledgments” of academic papers. Slate. https://slate.com/technology/2013/12/academics-hide-snarky-clever-comments-in-the-acknowledgments-sections-of-scientific-papers.html.
   Google Scholar
• Castelvecchi, D. (2015). Physics paper sets record with more than 5,000 authors. Nature. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature.2015.17567.
   Google Scholar
• Cronin, B. (2001). Hyperauthorship: A postmodern perversion or evidence of a structural shift in scholarly communication practices? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 52(7), 558–569. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.1097
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cronin, B., Shaw, D., & La Barre, K. (2003). A cast of thousands: Coauthorship and subauthorship collaboration in the 20th century as manifested in the scholarly journal literature of psychology and philosophy. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 54(9), 855–871. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.10278
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Mesnard, L. (2017). Attributing credit to coauthors in academic publishing: The 1/n rule, parallelization, and team bonuses. European Journal of Operational Research, 260(2), 778–788. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2017.01.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Erren, T. C., Groß, J. V., Wild, U., Lewis, P., & Shaw, D. M. (2017). Crediting animals in scientific literature. EMBO Reports, 18(1), 18–20. https://doi.org/10.15252/embr.201643618
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jackson, L., Peters, M. A., Benade, L., Devine, N., Arndt, S., Forster, D., Gibbons, A., Grierson, E., Jandrić, P., Lazaroiu, G., Locke, K., Mihaila, R., Stewart, G., Tesar, M., Roberts, P., & Ozoliņš, J. (J.). (2018). Is peer review in academic publishing still working? Open Review of Educational Research, 5(1), 95–112. https://doi.org/10.1080/23265507.2018.1479139
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Larivière, V., Desrochers, N., Macaluso, B., Mongeon, P., Paul-Hus, A., & 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
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lăzăroiu, G. (2017). What do altmetrics measure? Maybe the broader impact of research on society. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 49(4), 309–311. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2016.1237735
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lăzăroiu, G. (2019). Postmodernist sophistry, shoddy peer review, and academic dishonesty: How subjective science knowledge and patience for nonsense may cause (pseudo-)scholarly hoax. Boghossian et al. affair. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 51(14), 1408–1412. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2019.1590791
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patience, G. S., Galli, F., Patience, P. A., & Boffito, D. C. (2019). Intellectual contributions meriting authorship: Survey results from the top cited authors across all science categories. PLoS One, 14(1), e0198117. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0198117
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Priego, E. (2015, May 27). Long author-lists on research papers are threatening the academic work system. Independent. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/long-author-lists-on-research-papers-are-threatening-the-academic-work-system-10279748.html
   Google Scholar
• Smith, E., Williams-Jones, B., Master, Z., Larivière, V., Sugimoto, C. R., Paul-Hus, A., Shi, M., Diller, E., Caudle, K., & Resnik, D. B. (2019). Researchers’ perceptions of ethical authorship distribution in collaborative research teams. Science and Engineering Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-019-00113-3.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shapiro, J. (2009). Contested will: Who wrote Shakespeare? Simon and Schuster.
   Google Scholar
• Ward-Fear, G., Pauly, G. B., Vendetti, J. E., & Shine, R. (2020). Authorship protocols must change to credit citizen scientists. Trends in Ecology & Evolution (Amsterdam), 35(3), 187–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2019.10.007
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whitehead, A. N. (1979). Process and reality. Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Zastrow, M. (2019). More South Korean academics caught naming kids as co-authors. Nature, 575(7782), 267–268. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-019-03371-0
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar