Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Accommodating an Uninvited Guest: Perspectives of Researchers in Switzerland on ‘Honorary’ Authorship

  • Original Research/Scholarship
  • Published:
Science and Engineering Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to analyze the attitudes and reactions of researchers towards an authorship claim made by a researcher in a position of authority who has not made any scientific contribution to a manuscript or helped to write it. This paper draws on semi-structured interviews conducted with 33 researchers at three seniority levels working in biomedicine and the life sciences in Switzerland. This manuscript focuses on the analysis of participants’ responses when presented with a vignette describing an authorship assignment dilemma within a research group. The analysis indicates that researchers use a variety of explanations and arguments to justify inclusion of what guidelines would describe as honorary or guest authorship. Fuzzy parameters such as “substantial contribution” lead to varied interpretation and consequently convenient application of authorship guidelines in practice. Factors such as the culture of the research group, the values and practice shaped by the research leaders, the hierarchy and relative (perceived) positions of power within research institutions, and the importance given to publications as the currency for academic success and growth tend to have a strong influence on authorship practice. Unjustified authorship assignment practices can be reduced to some extent by creating empowering research cultures where each researcher irrespective of his/her career stage feels empowered to confidently raise concerns without fearing adverse impact on their professional lives. However, individual researchers and research institutions currently have limited influence on established methods for evaluating academic success, which is primarily based on the number of high impact publications.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abramo, G., & D’Angelo, C. A. (2014). How do you define and measure research productivity? Scientometrics,101(2), 1129–1144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aguzzi, A. (2015). Authoring scientific papers: A perspective from the trenches. Swiss Medical Weekly,145, w14107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Al-Herz, W., Haider, H., Al-Bahhar, M., & Sadeq, A. (2014). Honorary authorship in biomedical journals: How common is it and why does it exist? Journal of Medical Ethics,40, 346–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bozeman, B., & Youtie, J. (2016). Trouble in paradise: Problems in academic research co-authoring. Science and Engineering Ethics,22(6), 1717–1743.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bretag, T. (2013). Challenges in addressing plagiarism in education. PLoS Medicine,10(12), e1001574. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001574.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cell. (2019). Information for Authors: Authorship. Retrieved September 3, 2019 from http://www.cell.com/cell/authors.

  • Citrome, L. (2017). Authorship: Musings about guests and ghosts. The International Journal of Clinical Practice,71(7), e12986. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcp.12986.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • da Silva, J. A. T., & Dobránszki, J. (2016). Multiple authorship in scientific manuscripts: Ethical challenges, ghost and guest/gift authorship, and the cultural/disciplinary perspective. Science and Engineering Ethics,22(5), 1457–1472.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenberg, R. L., Ngo, L., Boiselle, P. M., & Bankier, A. A. (2011). Honorary authorship in radiologic research articles: Assessment of frequency and associated factors. Radiology,259(2), 479–486.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eret, E., & Gokmenoglu, T. (2010). Plagiarism in higher education: A case study with prospective academicians. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences,2(2), 3303–3307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilmore, J., Strickland, D., Timmerman, B., Maher, M., & Feldon, D. (2010). Weeds in the flower garden: An exploration of plagiarism in graduate students’ research proposals and its connection to enculturation, ESL, and contextual factors. International Journal for Educational Integrity,6(1), 13–28. https://doi.org/10.21913/IJEI.v6i1.673.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hess, C. W., Brueckner, C., Kaiser, T., Mauron, A., Wahli, W., Wenzel, U., et al. (2015). Authorship in scientific publications: Analysis and recommendations. Swiss Medical Weekly,145, w14108. https://doi.org/10.4414/smw.2015.14108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (2017). Defining the Role of Authors and Contributors. Retrieved September 3, 2019 from http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the-role-of-authors-and-contributors.html.

  • Kassis, T. (2017). How do research faculty in the biosciences evaluate paper authorship criteria? PLoS ONE,12(8), e0183632. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0183632.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, M. S., Barnsteiner, J., & Daly, J. (2014). Honorary and ghost authorship in nursing publications. Journal of Nursing Scholarship,46(6), 416–422.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kornhaber, R. A., McLean, L. M., & Baber, R. J. (2015). Ongoing ethical issues concerning authorship in biomedical journals: An integrative review. International Journal of Nanomedicine,10, 4837–4846. https://doi.org/10.2147/IJN.S87585.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, N. C. (2009). The story of academic ranking of world universities. International Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.6017/ihe.2009.54.8409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lu, Y., Jones, D. J., Sharara, N., Kaltenbach, T., Laine, L., McQuaid, K., et al. (2017). Transparency ethics in practice: Revisiting financial conflicts of interest disclosure forms in clinical practice guidelines. PLoS ONE,12(8), e0182856. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0182856.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lundh, A., Barbateskovic, M., Hróbjartsson, A., & Gøtzsche, P. C. (2010). Conflicts of interest at medical journals: The influence of industry-supported randomised trials on journal impact factors and revenue–cohort study. PLoS Medicine,7(10), e1000354. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marušić, A., Bošnjak, L., & Jerončić, A. (2011). A systematic review of research on the meaning, ethics and practices of authorship across scholarly disciplines. PLoS ONE,6(9), e23477. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0023477.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nature (2019). Nature Research journals’ authorship policy. Retrieved September 3, 2019 from http://www.nature.com/authors/policies/authorship.html.

  • Nature Geoscience (2017). [Editorial]. Where credit is due 10, 323, https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo2949.

  • Neuman, J., Korenstein, D., Ross, J. S., & Keyhani, S. (2011). Prevalence of financial conflicts of interest among panel members producing clinical practice guidelines in Canada and United States: Cross sectional study. British Medical Journal,343, d5621. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.d7063.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nylenna, M., Fagerbakk, F., & Kierulf, P. (2014). Authorship: Attitudes and practice among Norwegian researchers. BMC Medical Ethics,15(1), 53. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6939-15-53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ordorika, I., & Lloyd, M. (2015). International rankings and the contest for university hegemony. Journal of Education Policy,30(3), 385–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rajasekaran, S., Shan, R. L. P., & Finnoff, J. T. (2014). Honorary authorship: Frequency and associated factors in physical medicine and rehabilitation research articles. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation,95(3), 418–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rennie, D., Yank, V., & Emanuel, L. (1997). When authorship fails: A proposal to make contributors accountable. JAMA,278(7), 579–585.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roper, N., & Korenstein, D. (2015). Industry collaboration and primary guest authorship of high-impact randomized clinical trials: A cross-sectional study. Journal of General Internal Medicine,30(10), 1421–1425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roseman, M., Milette, K., Bero, L. A., Coyne, J. C., Lexchin, J., Turner, E. H., et al. (2011). Reporting of conflicts of interest in meta-analyses of trials of pharmacological treatments. JAMA,305(10), 1008–1017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment. (2012). Retrieved September 3, 2019 from https://sfdora.org/.

  • Schofferman, J., Wetzel, F. T., & Bono, C. (2015). Ghost and guest authors: You can’t always trust who you read. Pain Medicine,16(3), 416–420.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Science (2018). Science journals editorial policies: Authorship. Retrieved September 3, 2019 from http://www.sciencemag.org/authors/science-journals-editorial-policies.

  • Shaw, D. (2019). The quest for clarity in research integrity: A conceptual schema. Science and Engineering Ethics,25(4), 1085–1093.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, D., & Satalkar, P. (2018). Researchers’ interpretations of research integrity: A qualitative study. Accountability in research,25(2), 79–93. https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2017.1413940.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, E., & Williams-Jones, B. (2012). Authorship and responsibility in health sciences research: A review of procedures for fairly allocating authorship in multi-author studies. Science and Engineering Ethics,18(2), 199–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tarnow, E. (1999). The authorship list in science: Junior physicists’ perceptions of who appears and why. Science and Engineering Ethics,5(1), 73–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vera-Badillo, F. E., Napoleone, M., Krzyzanowska, M. K., Alibhai, S. M., Chan, A.-W., Ocana, A., et al. (2016). Honorary and ghost authorship in reports of randomised clinical trials in oncology. European Journal of Cancer,66, 1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warrender, J. M. (2016). A simple framework for evaluating authorial contributions for scientific publications. Science and Engineering Ethics,22(5), 1419–1430.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wislar, J. S., Flanagin, A., Fontanarosa, P. B., & DeAngelis, C. D. (2011). Honorary and ghost authorship in high impact biomedical journals: A cross sectional survey. British Medical Journal,343, d7677. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.d7677.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This study was funded by the Käthe-Zingg-Schwichtenberg Fonds of the Swiss Academy of Medical Sciences received by Dr. David M. Shaw.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute for Biomedical Ethics, University of Basel, Bernoullistrasse 28, 4056, Basel, Switzerland

    Priya Satalkar & David Shaw

  2. Division of Clinical Epidemiology, University Hospital Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland

    Thomas Perneger

  3. Department of Health, Ethics and Society, Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands

    David Shaw

Authors
  1. Priya Satalkar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Thomas Perneger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. David Shaw
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Priya Satalkar.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

All authors declare no conflict of interest.

Ethics Approval

None necessary according to the Research Ethics Committee of Northwestern and Central Switzerland. This interview study was considered unproblematic from an ethical point of view.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Satalkar, P., Perneger, T. & Shaw, D. Accommodating an Uninvited Guest: Perspectives of Researchers in Switzerland on ‘Honorary’ Authorship. Sci Eng Ethics 26, 947–967 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-019-00162-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-019-00162-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation