A qualitative study of Equal Co-First Authorship

ABSTRACT Over the past several years, there has been a significant increase in the number of scientific articles with two or more authors claiming “Equal Co-First Authorship” (ECFA). This study provides a critical background to ECFA designations, discusses likely causes of its increased use, and explores arguments for and against the practice. Subsequently, it presents the results of a qualitative study that sought the opinion of 19 authors listed among equal first authors of recent publications in leading scientific journals about ECFA designations. Results show that circumstances leading to ECFA designations vary significantly from each other. While the development of policies for these situations would not be easy, participants suggested that the lack of clear and consistent policies regarding the attribution and evaluation of ECFA contributes to tensions amongst ECFA authors and obscures their preferred attributions of credit.

[1]  D DE S Price.  Multiple authorship. , 1981, Science.

[2]  R Smith,et al.  Should we screen for prostate cancer? , 1997, BMJ.

[3]  D. L. Wehmeyer.  Strength in numbers. , 1997, Texas medicine.

[4]  Donald de B. Beaver,et al.  Studies in scientific collaboration Part III. Professionalization and the natural history of modern scientific co-authorship , 1979, Scientometrics.

[5]  Donald de B. Beaver,et al.  Studies in scientific collaboration , 1978, Scientometrics.

[6]  David R. Thomas,et al.  A General Inductive Approach for Analyzing Qualitative Evaluation Data , 2006 .

[7]  Benjamin F. Jones,et al.  Supporting Online Material Materials and Methods Figs. S1 to S3 References the Increasing Dominance of Teams in Production of Knowledge , 2022 .

[8]  Helvi Kyngäs,et al.  The qualitative content analysis process. , 2008, Journal of advanced nursing.

[9]  Xiaojun Hu,et al.  Loads of special authorship functions: Linear growth in the percentage of "equal first authors" and corresponding authors , 2009, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[10]  Hude Quan,et al.  Authors' opinions on publication in relation to annual performance assessment , 2010, BMC medical education.

[11]  Richard Van Noorden,et al.  Metrics: Do metrics matter? , 2010, Nature.

[12]  E. Lautenbach,et al.  "Equal" contributions and credit: an emerging trend in the characterization of authorship. , 2010, Annals of epidemiology.

[13]  Richard Van Noorden.  Metrics: A profusion of measures , 2010, Nature.

[14]  M. Omary,et al.  Acknowledging joint first authors of published work: the time has come. , 2012, Gastroenterology.

[15]  Paula E. Stephan.  How Economics Shapes Science , 2012 .

[16]  Jinbao Li,et al.  Equal contributions and credit given to authors in critical care medicine journals during a 10-yr period* , 2012, Critical care medicine.

[17]  Ruth Müller,et al.  Collaborating in Life Science Research Groups: The Question of Authorship , 2012 .

[18]  Graham Cormode,et al.  First author advantage: citation labeling in research , 2013, CompSci '13.

[19]  M. Conte,et al.  Increased co‐first authorships in biomedical and clinical publications: a call for recognition , 2013, FASEB journal : official publication of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology.

[20]  D. Simonton.  After Einstein: Scientific genius is extinct , 2013, Nature.

[21]  David G. Drubin,et al.  MBoC improves recognition of co–first authors , 2014, Molecular biology of the cell.

[22]  Jason Borenstein,et al.  Rethinking Authorship in the Era of Collaborative Research , 2015, Accountability in research.

[23]  Vincent Larivière,et al.  Team size matters: Collaboration and scientific impact since 1900 , 2014, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[24]  Qing He,et al.  Equal contributions and credit: an emerging trend in the characterization of authorship in major spine journals during a 10-year period , 2016, European Spine Journal.

[25]  A multi-journal partnership to highlight joint first-authors of manuscripts , 2015, Gut.

[26]  David B Resnik,et al.  Authorship policies of scientific journals , 2015, Journal of Medical Ethics.

[27]  R. Kornhaber,et al.  Ongoing ethical issues concerning authorship in biomedical journals: an integrative review , 2015, International journal of nanomedicine.

[28]  Mu-Hsuan Huang,et al.  The co‐first and co‐corresponding author phenomenon in the pharmacy and anesthesia journals , 2016, ASIST.

[29]  Lan-Juan Li,et al.  An emerging trend of equal authorship credit in major public health journals , 2016, SpringerPlus.

[30]  S. Rijcke,et al.  Quantifying ‘Output’ for Evaluation: Administrative Knowledge Politics and Changing Epistemic Cultures in Dutch Law Faculties , 2016 .

[31]  Mitchell S Cappell,et al.  Equal authorship for equal authors: personal experience as an equal author in twenty peer-reviewed medical publications during the last three years. , 2017, Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA.

[32]  Khaled Moustafa,et al.  Contributorships Are Not 'Weighable' to be Equal. , 2016, Trends in biochemical sciences.

[33]  Friedhelm Beyersdorf,et al.  'Two Minds with but a Single Thought …'. , 2016, European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery.

[34]  Cassidy R. Sugimoto,et al.  Contributorship and division of labor in knowledge production , 2016, Social studies of science.

[35]  Howard Bauchner,et al.  Authorship and Team Science , 2017, JAMA.

[36]  Z. Master,et al.  Best Practice to Order Authors in Multi/Interdisciplinary Health Sciences Research Publications , 2017, Accountability in research.

[37]  L. Ross,et al.  Gender Differences in the Authorship of Original Research in Pediatric Journals, 2001–2016 , 2017, Jornal de Pediatria.

[38]  B. Macfarlane.  The ethics of multiple authorship: power, performativity and the gift economy , 2017 .

[39]  Govindasamy Agoramoorthy,et al.  Multiple First Authors as Equal Contributors: Is It Ethical? , 2017, Sci. Eng. Ethics.

[40]  M. Edwards,et al.  Academic Research in the 21st Century: Maintaining Scientific Integrity in a Climate of Perverse Incentives and Hypercompetition , 2017, Environmental engineering science.

[41]  B. Penders.  All for one or one for all? Authorship and the cross-sectoral valuation of credit in nutrition science , 2017, Accountability in research.

[42]  Sameer Kumar,et al.  Ethical Concerns in the Rise of Co-Authorship and Its Role as a Proxy of Research Collaborations , 2018, Publ..

[43]  António Osório.  On the impossibility of a perfect counting method to allocate the credits of multi-authored publications , 2018, Scientometrics.

[44]  Barbara Kline Pope,et al.  Transparency in authors’ contributions and responsibilities to promote integrity in scientific publication , 2017, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[45]  Rajat Bhattacharya,et al.  A Survey on Data Reproducibility and the Effect of Publication Process on the Ethical Reporting of Laboratory Research , 2018, Clinical Cancer Research.

[46]  Steven Joffe,et al.  Gender and Byline Placement of Co-first Authors in Clinical and Basic Science Journals With High Impact Factors , 2018, JAMA.

[47]  Simone Raudino,et al.  The Tyranny of Metrics , 2019, The European Legacy.

[48]  Paolo Malighetti,et al.  Self-citations as strategic response to the use of metrics for career decisions , 2017, Research Policy.

[49]  Arturo Casadevall,et al.  Gender inequalities among authors who contributed equally , 2019, eLife.

[50]  Mario Biagioli,et al.  Gaming the Metrics , 2020 .

[51]  D. Resnik,et al.  Survey of equal contributions in biomedical research publications , 2020, Accountability in research.

[52]  Y. Liu,et al.  Clarifications of concepts concerning interplanar spacing in crystals with reference to recent publications , 2020 .

[53]  Mohammad Hosseini,et al.  Equal Co-authorship Practices: Review and Recommendations , 2020, Sci. Eng. Ethics.

[54]  A. Abbott.  Stress, anxiety, harassment: huge survey reveals pressures of scientists’ working lives , 2020, Nature.