Demeter Elise, McBride Andrew, Holladay-Sandidge Holly, Rasmussen Lisa M, Banks George, Hall-Hertel Katherine
Office of Assessment and Accreditation, University of North Carolina at Charlotte, Charlotte, NC, USA.
Organizational Science, University of North Carolina at Charlotte, NC, , Charlotte, USA.
Sci Eng Ethics. 2025 Aug 5;31(4):22. doi: 10.1007/s11948-025-00548-x.
Authorship credit is essential for researchers' success in academia. For academics collaborating with others, differing perceptions of how to value different contributions, disciplinary differences in authorship conventions, and power differences among collaborators can make authorship decisions more difficult to navigate in ways that feel fair and transparent to all involved. Graduate students may feel particularly disadvantaged in authorship decisions due to their relative lack of publishing experience. Here we tested the effectiveness of an educational training intervention designed to promote ethical authorship practices by supporting graduate students' knowledge of authorship and authorship ethics and their ability to effectively navigate authorship conversations with collaborators. Students (n = 185) underwent an online training program and used an authorship agreement form to discuss authorship on a research project with their faculty mentor. We randomly assigned half of the students to undergo an additional small group workshop to test the level of institutional investments needed to see benefits for students. We found the online training and authorship agreement forms boosted students' perceptions of their authorship knowledge and confidence effectively navigating authorship conversations with collaborators. The additional workshop did not yield further benefits for students' outcomes, suggesting that institutions can help promote ethical authorship through low-cost, scalable educational resources.
作者身份认定对于研究人员在学术界取得成功至关重要。对于与他人合作的学者而言,在如何衡量不同贡献的价值方面存在不同看法,作者身份认定惯例存在学科差异,以及合作者之间的权力差异,这些都使得作者身份的决策变得更加困难,难以以让所有相关人员都感到公平和透明的方式进行。由于相对缺乏发表经验,研究生在作者身份决策中可能会感到特别不利。在此,我们测试了一种教育培训干预措施的有效性,该措施旨在通过支持研究生对作者身份和作者身份伦理的了解以及他们与合作者有效进行作者身份对话的能力,来促进符合道德规范的作者身份实践。学生(n = 185)参加了一个在线培训项目,并使用一份作者身份协议表格与他们的教师导师讨论一个研究项目的作者身份。我们随机将一半的学生分配参加一个额外的小组研讨会,以测试为使学生受益所需的机构投入水平。我们发现,在线培训和作者身份协议表格有效地提高了学生对自己作者身份知识的认知以及他们与合作者进行作者身份对话的信心。额外的研讨会并未给学生的成果带来进一步的益处,这表明机构可以通过低成本、可扩展的教育资源来帮助促进符合道德规范的作者身份认定。
Sci Eng Ethics. 2025-8-5
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016-4-4
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008-7-16
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014-10-29
Nat Hum Behav. 2023-12
Sci Eng Ethics. 2020-4
Sci Eng Ethics. 2020-8
Account Res. 2018-2-21