A cast of thousands: Coauthorship and subauthorship collaboration in the 20th century as manifested in the scholarly journal literature of psychology and philosophy

We chronicle the use of acknowledgments in 20th-century scholarship by analyzing and classifying more than 4,500 specimens covering a 100-year period. Our results show that the intensity of acknowledgment varies by discipline, reflecting differences in prevailing sociocognitive structures and work practices. We demonstrate that the acknowledgment has gradually established itself as a constitutive element of academic writing, one that provides a revealing insight into the nature and extent of subauthorship collaboration. Complementary data on rates of coauthorship are also presented to highlight the growing importance of collaboration and the increasing division of labor in contemporary research and scholarship.

[1]  G D Lundberg,et al.  The order of authorship: who's on first? , 1990, JAMA.

[2]  Blaise Cronin,et al.  Disciplinary Discourses: Social Interactions in Academic Writing , 2002, J. Documentation.

[3]  Blaise Cronin,et al.  The Scholar's Courtesy: The Role Of Acknowledgement In The Primary Communication Process , 1995 .

[4]  O. Persson,et al.  Understanding Patterns of International Scientific Collaboration , 1992 .

[5]  Margaret Gibelman,et al.  A QUEST FOR CITATIONS? AN ANALYSIS OF AND COMMENTARY ON THE TREND TOWARD MULTIPLE AUTHORSHIP , 1999 .

[6]  K. Hyland,et al.  Disciplinary Discourses: Social Interactions in Academic Writing , 2001 .

[7]  James Hartley,et al.  Single Authors Are Not Alone: Colleagues Often Help , 2003 .

[8]  Debora Shaw,et al.  Banking (on) different forms of symbolic capital , 2002, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[9]  Galina F. Gordukalova.  : Scientific Elite: Nobel Laureates in the United States , 1997 .

[10]  P. Hollander,et al.  Acknowledgments: An academic ritual , 2001 .

[11]  C. Bazerman.  Modern Evolution of the Experimental Report in Physics: Spectroscopic Articles in Physical Review, 1893-1980 , 1984 .

[12]  D. Sullivan,et al.  Theories and theory groups in contemporary American sociology , 1975 .

[13]  Daniel D. Hutto.  Wittgenstein's poker: the story of a ten-minute argument between two great philosophers , 2005 .

[14]  A. Strauss.  Work and the Division of Labor , 1985 .

[15]  Debora Shaw,et al.  Citation, funding acknowledgement and author nationality relationships in four information science journals , 1999, J. Documentation.

[16]  Blaise Cronin,et al.  Hyperauthorship: A postmodern perversion or evidence of a structural shift in scholarly communication practices? , 2001, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[17]  R. Collins.  The Sociology of Philosophies , 2000 .

[18]  D. Rennie,et al.  Authorship! Authorship! Guests, ghosts, grafters, and the two-sided coin. , 1994, JAMA.

[19]  Charles H. Davis,et al.  Acknowledgments and Intellectual Indebtedness: A Bibliometric Conjecture , 1993, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci..

[20]  M. Castells.  The rise of the network society , 1996 .

[21]  Eugen Tarnow,et al.  Coauthorship in physics , 2002, Science and engineering ethics.

[22]  K. Brad Wray,et al.  The Epistemic Significance of Collaborative Research , 2002, Philosophy of Science.

[23]  Narsi Patel.  Collaboration in the Professional Growth of American Sociology , 1973 .

[24]  Marilyn Hoder-Salmon,et al.  Collecting Scholar's Wives , 1978 .

[25]  N. House.  Digital libraries and practices of trust: Networked biodiversity information , 2002 .

[26]  Blaise Cronin,et al.  : Public Intellectuals: A Study of Decline , 2003 .

[27]  S. Cole,et al.  : A Social History of Truth: Civility and Science in Seventeenth-Century England , 1996 .

[28]  Betsy Van der Veer Martens,et al.  The scholar's courtesy: The role of acknowledgement in the primary communication process , 1997 .

[29]  K. McCain.  Communication, Competition, and Secrecy: The Production and Dissemination of Research-Related Information in Genetics , 1991 .

[30]  Howard D. White,et al.  Authors as citers over time , 2001, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[31]  Joseph W. Eaton,et al.  Social Processes of Professional Teamwork , 1951 .

[32]  J. S. Katz,et al.  What is research collaboration , 1997 .

[33]  R. Croll,et al.  The Noncontributing Author: An Issue of Credit and Responsibility , 2015 .

[34]  Wolfgang Glänzel,et al.  Coauthorship Patterns and Trends in the Sciences (1980-1998): A Bibliometric Study With Implications for Database Indexing and Search Strategies , 2002, Libr. Trends.

[35]  Blaise Cronin,et al.  Who dunnit? Metatags and hyperauthorship , 2001, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[36]  Harriet Zuckerman,et al.  Scientific Elite: Nobel Laureates in the United States: , 1979 .

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

[38]  Belver C. Griffith,et al.  Communication and information processing within scientific disciplines: Empirical findings for Psychology , 1972, Inf. Storage Retr..

[39]  C. Bazerman.  Shaping Written Knowledge: The Genre and Activity of the Experimental Article in Science , 1989 .

[40]  Juan Manuel Iranzo Amatriaín,et al.  The sociology of philosophies , 2000 .

[41]  Catherine Welsh Chmura.  Magazines for libraries , 1983 .

[42]  M. Wertheimer,et al.  A brief history of psychology , 1970 .

[43]  Ray Jureidini.  Work and the Division of Labour , 1997 .

[44]  Blaise Cronin,et al.  Women's studies: bibliometric and content analysis of the formative years , 1997, J. Documentation.

[45]  A. G. Heffner,et al.  Funded research, multiple authorship, and subauthorship collaboration in four disciplines , 2005, Scientometrics.