Umeå University's logo

umu.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
From acknowledgment to authorship: exploring contributions and credit allocation in life science research
Umeå University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Sociology.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-1836-557X
2025 (English)Licentiate thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

In the scientific community, authorship is a key mechanism for establishing intellectual priority, securing peer recognition, and assigning responsibility for scientific claims. Over the past two decades, in response to contemporary research practices – characterized by a proliferation of coauthors, increasingly diverse interpretations of authorship roles, and concerns surrounding scientific misconduct – an expanding number of journals have adopted the practice of explicitly disclosing authors’ contributions in published articles.

In this thesis, these author contribution statements serve as the foundation for examining how authorship is attributed, ordered, and valued in the life sciences, a field that has experienced rapid growth in collaborative research. Given the growing reliance on metric-based evaluative mechanisms in academia, the thesis addresses two main objectives: (1) to clarify how authorship is awarded in lab-based life sciences and how authors’ contributions relate to author order, and (2) to validate different models for allocating author credit against the information presented in author contribution statements. This thesis also examines “acknowledgees” – hereafter referred to as subauthors –who are often overlooked despite representing a substantial and sometimes critical segment of the scientific community.

The main results suggest that most authors are core or middle layer contributors, i.e., they perform at least one core layer task or middle layer task. In contrast, most subauthors are classified as outer layer contributors. Authors typically undertake multiple tasks, in contrast to subauthors, and exhibit greater specialization in larger research teams compared to smaller ones. The results also suggest a discrepancy between traditional author guidelines and actual scientific practice regarding author attribution, evident in the significant proportion of outer layer authors.

In addition to these findings, when contributions are ordered by byline position, they exhibit a distinct u-shaped distribution. Among the tested author credit models (u-shaped, arithmetic, fractional, geometric, harmonic), the u-shaped model most accurately reflects observed author contributions, exhibiting the closest alignment with empirical data on core and middle-layer tasks. Furthermore, it also surpasses the other models in predicting which authors are core and which are not.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Umeå: Umeå University, 2025. , p. 80
Series
Akademiska avhandlingar vid Sociologiska institutionen, Umeå universitet, ISSN 1104-2508 ; 91
Keywords [en]
Bibliometrics, Credit Allocation, Authorship, Subauthorship, Acknowledgments, Reward System of Science
National Category
Information Studies
Research subject
library and information science
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-245618ISBN: 978-91-8070-746-6 (electronic)ISBN: 978-91-8070-745-9 (print)OAI: oai:DiVA.org:umu-245618DiVA, id: diva2:2006823
Presentation
2025-11-07, Hörsal NBET.A.101, Norra Beteendevetarhuset, 901 87, Umeå, 13:15 (English)
Opponent
Supervisors
Available from: 2025-10-20 Created: 2025-10-16 Last updated: 2025-10-20Bibliographically approved
List of papers
1. The many hands of science: Commonalities and differences in the research contributions of authors and subauthors
Open this publication in new window or tab >>The many hands of science: Commonalities and differences in the research contributions of authors and subauthors
2017 (English)In: Aslib Journal of Information Management, ISSN 2050-3806, E-ISSN 2050-3814, Vol. 69, no 5, p. 591-606Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to identify the research contributions of authors and subauthors in order to outline how authorship, as opposed to acknowledgment, is awarded in the lab-based life sciences.

Design/methodology/approach - The work tasks described in author contribution statements and acknowledgments sections of research articles published in Nature Chemical Biology were classified according to a three-layered taxonomy: core layer; middle layer; outer layer.

Findings - Most authors are core or middle layer contributors, i.e. they perform at least one core or middle layer task. In contrast, most subauthors are outer layer contributors. While authors tend to be involved in several tasks, subauthors tend to make single contributions. The small but significant share of authors performing only outer layer tasks suggests a disconnect in author attribution between traditional author guidelines and scientific practice. A level of arbitrariness in whether a contributor is awarded authorship or subauthorship status is reported. However, this does not implicate first or last authorships.

Research limitations/implications - Data from one journal only are used. Transferability is limited to research in high impact journals in the lab-based life sciences.

Originality/value - The growth in scientific collaboration underlines the importance of gaining a deeper understanding of the distinction between authorship and subauthorship in terms of the types of research contributions that they de facto represent. By utilizing hitherto unexplored data sources this study addresses a gap in the literature, and gives an important insight into the reward system of science.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
EMERALD GROUP PUBLISHING LTD, 2017
Keywords
Authorship, Collaboration, Bibliometrics, Contributorship, Acknowledgements, Subauthorship
National Category
Information Studies
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-141838 (URN)10.1108/AJIM-01-2017-0012 (DOI)000413875800009 ()2-s2.0-85032376201 (Scopus ID)
Note

Special Issue

Available from: 2017-11-24 Created: 2017-11-24 Last updated: 2025-10-16Bibliographically approved
2. Author contributions and allocation of authorship credit: testing the validity of different counting methods in the field of chemical biology
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Author contributions and allocation of authorship credit: testing the validity of different counting methods in the field of chemical biology
2023 (English)In: Scientometrics, ISSN 0138-9130, E-ISSN 1588-2861, Vol. 128, p. 2737-2762Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

This paper explores the relationship between an author's position in the bylines of an article and the research contributions they have made to analyze the validity of five bibliometric counting methods (arithmetic, fractional, geometric, harmonic, and harmonic parabolic author credit allocation) in the field of Chemical Biology. By classifying the tasks found in the author contribution statements of articles published in Nature Chemical Biology according to a three-tiered scheme, it was possible to divide the authors into three types: core-layer authors, middle-layer authors, and outer-layer authors. When ordering the authorships according to the position in the bylines, there is a distinct u-shaped distribution for the share of authors involved in writing the paper or designing the research (i.e., core authors) and for the average number of tasks performed by each author. The harmonic parabolic model best distributes author credit according to the observed empirical data. It also outperforms the other models in predicting which authors are core authors and which are not. The harmonic parabolic model should be the preferred choice for bibliometric exercises in chemical biology and fields with similar practices regarding authorship order.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Springer, 2023
Keywords
Author contributions, Authorship credit, Byline hierarchy, Counting methods, Validity
National Category
Peace and Conflict Studies Other Social Sciences not elsewhere specified Information Studies
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-206655 (URN)10.1007/s11192-023-04680-y (DOI)001085065200007 ()2-s2.0-85151339974 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2023-04-14 Created: 2023-04-14 Last updated: 2025-10-16Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(2076 kB)280 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT02.pdfFile size 2076 kBChecksum SHA-512
cdc34913f29ab2188b989309635ff6d3a7c140ec01de039c6c61fc11cc0abce90c933651a7eb4f9798d4be1ea3eb2b423e69c23b5445bea8be8da4cc4469bf3f
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Authority records

Sundling, Pär

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Sundling, Pär
By organisation
Department of Sociology
Information Studies

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 281 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

isbn
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

isbn
urn-nbn
Total: 589 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf