Co-authorship between doctoral students and supervisors: motivations, reservations, and challenges

References

• Aitchison, C., Kamler, B., & Lee, A. (Eds.). (2010). Publishing pedagogies for the doctorate and beyond. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Anderson, T., & Okuda, T. (2019). Writing a manuscript-style dissertation in TESOL/applied linguistics. BC TEAL Journal, 4(1), 33–52.
   Google Scholar
• Barney, K. (2023). Co-authorship, collaboration and contestation in relation to Indigenous research. Australian Archaeology, 89(1), 73–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/03122417.2023.2190510
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
   Google Scholar
• Brownlow, C., Eacersall, D. C., Martin, N., & Parsons-Smith, R. (2023). The higher degree research student experience in Australian universities: A systematic literature review. Higher Education Research & Development, 42(7), 1608–1623. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2023.2183939
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cardilini, A. P., Risely, A., & Richardson, M. F. (2021). Supervising the PhD: Identifying common mismatches in expectations between candidate and supervisor to improve research training outcomes. Higher Education Research & Development, 41(3), 613–627. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2021.1874887
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carter, S., & Laurs, D. (Eds.). (2018). Developing research writing: A handbook for supervisors and advisors. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Florence, M. K., & Yore, L. D. (2004). Learning to write like a scientist: Coauthoring as an enculturation task. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(6), 637–668. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20015
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haddow, G., Xia, J., & Willson, M. (2017). Collaboration in the humanities, arts and social sciences in Australia. The Australian Universities’ Review, 59(1), 24–36.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henriksen, D. (2016). The rise in co-authorship in the social sciences (1980–2013). Scientometrics, 107(2), 455–476. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-1849-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hodge, L., & Murphy, J. (2023). Write on! Cultivating social capital in a writing group for doctoral education and beyond. Educational Review, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2023.2184772
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• House, M. C., & Seeman, J. I. (2010). Credit and authorship practices: Educational and environmental influences. Accountability in Research, 17(5), 223–256. https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2010.512857
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kamler, B., & Thomson, P. (2014). Helping doctoral students write: Pedagogies for supervision. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Kiley, M. (2011). Developments in research supervisor training: Causes and responses. Studies in Higher Education, 36(5), 585–599. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2011.594595
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kumar, V., & Wald, N. (2023). Ambiguity and peripherality in doctoral co-supervision workload allocation. Higher Education Research & Development, 42(4), 860–873. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2022.2115984
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leane, E., Fletcher, L., & Garg, S. (2019). Co-authorship trends in English literary studies, 1995–2015. Studies in Higher Education, 44(4), 786–798. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2017.1405256
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, A., & Kamler, B. (2008). Bringing pedagogy to doctoral publishing. Teaching in Higher Education, 13(5), 511–523. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562510802334723
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liardét, C. L., & Thompson, L. (2022). Monograph v. manuscript: Exploring the factors that influence English L1 and EAL candidates’ thesis-writing approach. Higher Education Research & Development, 41(2), 436–449. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2020.1852394
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lokhtina, I., Löfström, E., Cornér, S., & Castelló, M. (2022). In pursuit of sustainable co-authorship practices in doctoral supervision: Addressing the challenges of writing, authorial identity and integrity. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 59(1), 82–92. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2020.1799839
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Macfarlane, B. (2017). The ethics of multiple authorship: Power, performativity and the gift economy. Studies in Higher Education, 42(7), 1194–1210. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2015.1085009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maher, M. A., Feldon, D. F., Timmerman, B. E., & Chao, J. (2014). Faculty perceptions of common challenges encountered by novice doctoral writers. Higher Education Research & Development, 33(4), 699–711. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2013.863850
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mason, S. (2018). Publications in the doctoral thesis: Challenges for doctoral candidates, supervisors, examiners and administrators. Higher Education Research & Development, 37(6), 1231–1244. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2018.1462307
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Health and Medical Research Council. (2018). Australian code for the responsible conduct of research. NHMRC.
   Google Scholar
• NSW Ombudsman. (2017). Discussion Paper: Complaints about supervision of postgraduate students (Publication No. 978-1-925569-50-6).
   Google Scholar
• Ponomariov, B., & Boardman, C. (2016). What is co-authorship? Scientometrics, 109(3), 1939–1963. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2127-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilkins, S., Hazzam, J., & Lean, J. (2021). Doctoral publishing as professional development for an academic career in higher education. The International Journal of Management Education, 19(1), 100459. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2021.100459
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar