Boyer Stéphane, Ikeda Takayoshi, Lefort Marie-Caroline, Malumbres-Olarte Jagoba, Schmidt Jason M
1Institut de Recherche sur la Biologie de l'Insecte (IRBI) - UMR 7261 CNRS / Université de Tours, Parc Grandmont, 37200 Tours, France.
2Applied Molecular Solutions Research Group, Environmental and Animal Sciences, Unitec Institute of Technology, Private Bag 92025, Victoria Street West, Auckland, 1142 New Zealand.
Res Integr Peer Rev. 2017 Nov 3;2:18. doi: 10.1186/s41073-017-0042-y. eCollection 2017.
Deciphering the amount of work provided by different co-authors of a scientific paper has been a recurrent problem in science. Despite the myriad of metrics available, the scientific community still largely relies on the position in the list of authors to evaluate contributions, a metric that attributes subjective and unfounded credit to co-authors. We propose an easy to apply, universally comparable and fair metric to measure and report co-authors contribution in the scientific literature.
The proposed Author Contribution Index (ACI) is based on contribution percentages provided by the authors, preferably at the time of submission. Researchers can use ACI to compare the contributions of different authors, describe the contribution profile of a particular researcher or analyse how contribution changes through time. We provide such an analysis based on contribution percentages provided by 97 scientists from the field of ecology who voluntarily responded to an online anonymous survey.
ACI is simple to understand and to implement because it is based solely on percentage contributions and the number of co-authors. It provides a continuous score that reflects the contribution of one author as compared to the average contribution of all other authors. For example, ACI(i) = 3, means that author i contributed three times more than what the other authors contributed on average. Our analysis comprised 836 papers published in 2014-2016 and revealed patterns of ACI values that relate to career advancement.
There are many examples of author contribution indices that have been proposed but none has really been adopted by scientific journals. Many of the proposed solutions are either too complicated, not accurate enough or not comparable across articles, authors and disciplines. The author contribution index presented here addresses these three major issues and has the potential to contribute to more transparency in the science literature. If adopted by scientific journals, it could provide job seekers, recruiters and evaluating bodies with a tool to gather information that is essential to them and cannot be easily and accurately obtained otherwise. We also suggest that scientists use the index regardless of whether it is implemented by journals or not.
解读科学论文不同共同作者的工作量一直是科学界反复出现的问题。尽管有大量可用的指标，但科学界在很大程度上仍依赖作者名单中的排名来评估贡献，这一指标会将主观且毫无根据的功劳归于共同作者。我们提出一种易于应用、普遍可比且公平的指标，用于衡量和报告科学文献中共同作者的贡献。
提议的作者贡献指数（ACI）基于作者提供的贡献百分比，最好是在提交时提供。研究人员可以使用ACI来比较不同作者的贡献，描述特定研究人员的贡献概况，或分析贡献随时间的变化。我们基于来自生态学领域的97位科学家自愿回复的在线匿名调查所提供的贡献百分比进行了这样的分析。
ACI易于理解和实施，因为它仅基于贡献百分比和共同作者数量。它提供了一个连续得分，反映了一位作者相对于所有其他作者平均贡献的贡献程度。例如，ACI(i)=3意味着作者i的贡献是其他作者平均贡献的三倍。我们的分析涵盖了2014年至2016年发表的836篇论文，并揭示了与职业发展相关的ACI值模式。
已经提出过许多作者贡献指数的例子，但没有一个真正被科学期刊采用。许多提议的解决方案要么过于复杂，要么不够准确，要么无法在不同文章、作者和学科之间进行比较。这里提出的作者贡献指数解决了这三个主要问题，有可能提高科学文献的透明度。如果被科学期刊采用，它可以为求职者、招聘人员和评估机构提供一种工具，以收集对他们至关重要且否则难以轻易准确获得的信息。我们还建议科学家无论期刊是否采用该指数都使用它。
Zotero 插件
