Last and corresponding authorship practices in ecology
dc.contributor.author | Duffy, Meghan A. | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2017-12-15T16:48:55Z | |
dc.date.available | 2019-01-07T18:34:37Z | en |
dc.date.issued | 2017-11 | |
dc.identifier.citation | Duffy, Meghan A. (2017). "Last and corresponding authorship practices in ecology." Ecology and Evolution 7(21): 8876-8887. | |
dc.identifier.issn | 2045-7758 | |
dc.identifier.issn | 2045-7758 | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/140027 | |
dc.description.abstract | Authorship is intended to convey information regarding credit and responsibility for manuscripts. However, while there is general agreement within ecology that the first author is the person who contributed the most to a particular project, there is less agreement regarding whether being last author is a position of significance and regarding what is indicated by someone being the corresponding author on a manuscript. Using an analysis of papers published in American Naturalist, Ecology, Evolution, and Oikos, I found that: (1) the number of authors on papers is increasing over time; (2) the proportion of first authors as corresponding author has increased over time, as has the proportion of last authors as corresponding author; (3) 84% of papers published in 2016 had the first author as corresponding author; and (4) geographic regions differed in the likelihood of having the first (or last) author as corresponding author. I also carried out an online survey to better understand views on last and corresponding authorship. This survey revealed that most ecologists view the last author as the “senior” author on a paper (i.e., the person who runs the research group in which most of the work was carried out), and most ecologists view the corresponding author as the person taking full responsibility for a paper. However, there was substantial variation in views on authorship, especially corresponding authorship. Given these results, I suggest that discussions of authorship have as their starting point that the first author will be corresponding author and the senior author will be last author. I also suggest ways of deciding author order in cases where two senior authors contributed equally.There is variation in views on corresponding and last authorship in ecology, but most ecologists view the last author position as one of emphasis and view the corresponding author as taking full responsibility for a paper. The field would benefit from greater consensus on what is signified by corresponding and last authorship. | |
dc.publisher | Wiley Periodicals, Inc. | |
dc.publisher | Springer‐Verlag | |
dc.subject.other | last author | |
dc.subject.other | contribution statements | |
dc.subject.other | authorship | |
dc.subject.other | corresponding author | |
dc.title | Last and corresponding authorship practices in ecology | |
dc.type | Article | en_US |
dc.rights.robots | IndexNoFollow | |
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevel | Ecology and Evolutionary Biology | |
dc.subject.hlbtoplevel | Science | |
dc.description.peerreviewed | Peer Reviewed | |
dc.description.bitstreamurl | https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/140027/1/ece33435.pdf | |
dc.description.bitstreamurl | https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/140027/2/ece33435_am.pdf | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1002/ece3.3435 | |
dc.identifier.source | Ecology and Evolution | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Tscharntke, T., Hochberg, M. E., Rand, T. A., Resh, V. H., & Krauss, J. ( 2007 ). Author sequence and credit for contributions in multiauthored publications. Plos Biology, 5, e18. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Eggert, L. D. ( 2011 ). Best practices for allocating appropriate credit and responsibility to authors of multi‐authored articles. Frontiers in Psychology, 2, 6. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Fox, J. W. ( 2016 ). Views on authorship and author contribution statements: Poll results, part 2. Dynamic Ecology, https://dynamicecology.wordpress.com/2016/08/08/views-on-authorship-and-author-contribution-statements-poll-results-part-2/. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Fox, C. W., Burns, C. S., Muncy, A. D., & Meyer, J. A. ( 2016 ). Gender differences in patterns of authorship do not affect peer review outcomes at an ecology journal. Functional Ecology, 30, 126 – 139. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Johnson, S. ( 2006 ). Are ecologists becoming more gregarious? Bulletin of the British Ecological Society, 37, 23. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Kalisz, S., & Teeri, J. A. ( 1986 ). Population‐level variation in photosynthetic metabolism and growth in Sedum Wrightii. Ecology, 67, 20 – 26. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Laurance, W. F. ( 2006 ). Second thoughts on who goes where in author lists. Nature, 442, 26. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Logan, J. M. ( 2016 ). Historical changes in co‐author numbers in ecology. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 14, 297 – 299. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Moss‐Racusin, C. A., Dovidio, J. F., Brescoll, V. L., Graham, M. J., & Handelsman, J. ( 2012 ). Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 109, 16474 – 16479. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Moulopoulos, S. D., Sideris, D. A., & Georgilis, K. A. ( 1983 ). Individual contributions to multiauthor papers. British Medical Journal, 287, 1608 – 1610. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Murcia, C., & Feinsinger, P. ( 1996 ). Interspecific pollen loss by hummingbirds visiting flower mixtures: Effects of floral architecture. Ecology, 77, 550 – 560. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Rennie, D., Flanagin, A., & Yank, V. ( 2000 ). The contributions of authors. JAMA‐Journal of the American Medical Association, 284, 89 – 91. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Rennie, D., Yank, V., & Emanuel, L. ( 1997 ). When authorship fails – A proposal to make contributors accountable. JAMA‐Journal of the American Medical Association, 278, 579 – 585. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Venkatraman, V. ( 2010 ). Conventions of scientific authorship. Science, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.caredit.a1000039 | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Waltman, L. ( 2012 ). An empirical analysis of the use of alphabetical authorship in scientific publishing. Journal of Informetrics, 6, 700 – 711. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Weltzin, J. F., Belote, R. T., Williams, L. T., Keller, J. K., & Engel, E. C. ( 2006 ). Authorship in ecology: Attribution, accountability, and responsibility. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 4, 435 – 441. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Wickham, H. ( 2009 ). ggplot2: Elegant graphics for data analysis. New York, NY: Springer‐Verlag. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Wilke, C. O. ( 2017 ). cowplot: Streamlined plot theme and plot annotations for ‘ggplot2’. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=cowplot | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Wren, J. D., Kozak, K. Z., Johnson, K. R., Deakyne, S. J., Schilling, L. M., & Dellavalle, R. P. ( 2007 ). The write position – A survey of perceived contributions to papers based on byline position and number of authors. Embo Reports, 8, 988 – 991. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Bhandari, M., Guyatt, G. H., Kulkarni, A. V., Devereaux, P. J., Leece, P., Bajammal, S., … Busse, J. W. ( 2014 ). Perceptions of authors’ contributions are influenced by both byline order and designation of corresponding author. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 67, 1049 – 1054. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Bryer, J., & Speerschneider, K. ( 2016 ). likert: Analysis and visualization likert items. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=likert | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Cozzarelli, N. R. ( 2004 ). Responsible authorship of papers in PNAS. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 101, 10495. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Davis, P. J., & Gregerman, R. I. ( 1969 ). Parse analysis: A new method for the evaluation of investigators’ bibliographies. New England Journal of Medicine, 281, 989 – 990. | |
dc.owningcollname | Interdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed |
Files in this item
Remediation of Harmful Language
The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.
Accessibility
If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.