Smith Elise
Kennedy Inst Ethics J. 2017;27(3):371-411. doi: 10.1353/ken.2017.0032.
In academia, authorship on publications confers merit as well as responsibility. The respective disciplines adhere to their "typical" authorship practices: individuals may be named in alphabetical order (e.g., in economics, mathematics), ranked in decreasing level of contribution (e.g., biomedical sciences), or the leadership role may be listed last (e.g., laboratory sciences). However, there is no specific, generally accepted guidance regarding authorship distribution in multidisciplinary teams, something that can lead to significant tensions and even conflict. Using Scanlon's contractualism as a basis, I propose a conceptual foundation for the ethical distribution of authorship in multidisciplinary teams; it features four relevant principles: desert, just recognition, transparency, and collegiality. These principles can serve in the development of a practical framework to support ethical and nonarbitrary authorship distribution, which hopefully would help reduce confusion and conflict, promote agreement, and contribute to synergy in multidisciplinary collaborative research.
在学术界，论文署名既赋予荣誉，也带来责任。各学科都遵循其“典型”的署名惯例：作者可能按字母顺序排列（如经济学、数学领域），按贡献程度递减排序（如生物医学领域），或者领导角色列在最后（如实验室科学领域）。然而，对于多学科团队中的署名分配，并没有具体的、被普遍接受的指导原则，这可能导致严重的紧张关系甚至冲突。以斯坎伦的契约主义为基础，我提出了一个多学科团队中署名伦理分配的概念基础；它包含四个相关原则：应得、公正认可、透明和合作。这些原则可用于构建一个实用框架，以支持符合伦理且非随意的署名分配，有望有助于减少混乱和冲突，促进共识，并为多学科合作研究中的协同效应做出贡献。
