首页> 外文期刊>Social science and medicine >Credit where credit is due? Regulation, research integrity and the attribution of authorship in the health sciences.
【24h】

Credit where credit is due? Regulation, research integrity and the attribution of authorship in the health sciences.

机译:信用在哪里到期?卫生科学中的法规,研究的完整性和作者身份的归属。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

Despite attempts at clear direction in international, national and journal guidelines, attribution of authorship can be a confusing area for both new and established researchers. As journal articles are valuable intellectual property, authorship can be hotly contested. Individual authors' responsibilities for the integrity of article content have not been well explored. Semi-structured interviews (n = 17) were conducted with staff, student advocates and doctoral candidates working in health research in two universities in Australia. Stratified sampling ensured participants reflected a range of experience across biomedical, clinical and social science disciplines. Participants were asked about their experience with research publication and their views on the responsibilities of authorship. Participants gave a variety of reasons for attribution of authorship including: writing the paper; seniority; and student supervision. Gift authorship was seen by some participants as: a way of maintaining relationships; a reward; a means to increase a paper's credibility; or a demonstration of collaboration between authors. Norms and beliefs differed markedly between disciplines for authorship attribution and, to a lesser extent, for authors' responsibility for content integrity. Discussions about the effect of power differentials on authorship were common across disciplines. This paper describes a broad range of beliefs, values and practice norms held by health science researchers with respect to attribution of authorship and author responsibility for scientific publications. The findings support the need for clarity in relation to authorship, and a research environment which is supportive of ethical behaviour in the publication of research.
机译:尽管尝试在国际,国家和期刊指南中提供明确的指导,但作者身份的归属对于新老研究人员来说都是一个令人困惑的领域。由于期刊文章是有价值的知识产权,因此作者身份可能会引起激烈的争论。没有很好地探讨个人作者对文章内容完整性的责任。对澳大利亚两所大学从事健康研究的工作人员,学生倡导者和博士候选人进行了半结构化访谈(n = 17)。分层抽样确保参与者反映了生物医学,临床和社会科学学科的一系列经验。与会者被问及他们在研究出版物方面的经验以及他们对作者职责的看法。参与者给出了作者归属的多种原因,包括:撰写论文;以及资历和学生监督。一些参与者将礼物的创作视为:一种维持关系的方式;一份奖励;一种提高纸质信誉的方法;或作者之间合作的示范。在作者身份归属的学科之间以及在较小程度上,作者对于内容完整性的责任方面,规范和信念存在显着差异。关于权力差异对作者身份的影响的讨论在各个学科中都很常见。本文描述了健康科学研究者在作者身份归属和作者对科学出版物的责任方面持有的广泛的信念,价值观和实践准则。研究结果支持需要明确作者身份以及研究环境,该环境应支持研究出版中的道德行为。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号