Tessier-Lavigne debacle underlines case for more transparent authorship

By distributing both credit and blame where it is due, initiatives such as CRediT can help deter research fraud, says Paul Ayris 

Published on
August 8, 2023
Last updated
August 8, 2023
A laptop with a checklist and a magnifying glass, illustrating author transparency
Source: iStock

Register to continue

Why register?

  • Registration is free and only takes a moment
  • Once registered, you can read 3 articles a month
  • Sign up for our newsletter
Please
or
to read this article.

Related articles

With careers riding on young scientists’ position in author lists, friction is all too common. A snowballing initiative to list authors’ contributions aims to make sure credit is always given where it is due. But will it be enough to ease the angst? Jack Grove is first author

30 January

Reader's comments (1)

Excellent article and well done Paul for raising this. However, Institutions do not sufficiently enforce the ethics of authorship and indeed reward those who appear to publish prolifically but who clearly have no contribution to the paper nor expertise in the area. Multi-author consortia need to be investigated: where author/collaborator lists run to hundreds or even thousands, it stretches credulity to call all of the named authors. Yet, I have seen careers flourish on this sort of behaviour.

Sponsored

Featured jobs

See all jobs
ADVERTISEMENT