Authorship credit is one of the areas addressed by research integrity. Policies established by graduate academic programs and academic institutions in Puerto Rico are analyzed by describing authorship principles included. Twenty-six percent of the policies specify that students are authors of their research work. Four percent of the policies mention activities that do not qualify a person for author, and only 7% include a statement regarding the process to address authorship disagreement. Implications for institutional policy are discussed.
Committee on Science, Engineering and Public Policy, National Academy of Science, National Academy of Engineering, and Institute of Medicine of the national Academies. (2009). On being a scientist (3rd ed.). Washington, DC: The National Academic Press.
3.
FineM. A.KurdekL. A. (1993). Reflections on determining authorship credit and authorship order on faculty-student collaborations. American Psychologist, 48(11), 1141-1147.
4.
FunkC. L.BarrettK. A.MacrinaF. L. (2007). Authorship and publication practices: Evaluation of the effect of responsible conduct of research instruction to postdoctoral trainees. Accountability in Research, 14, 269-305.
International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. (2007). Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals: Writing and editing for biomedical publication. Retrieved from http://www.icmje.org/
8.
JusticeL. (2010). Authorship intricacies. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 11, 1-2.
LouwD. A.FouchéJ. B. (1999). Authorship credit in supervisor-student collaboration: Assessing the dilemma in psychology. South African Journal of Psychology, 29(3), 145-148.
MorseJ. (2009). Negotiating authorship for doctoral dissertation publications. Qualitative Health Research, 19, 3-4.
13.
NewmanA.JonesR. (2006). Authorship of research papers: Ethical and professional issues for short-term researchers. Journal of Medical Ethics, 32, 420-423.
14.
NguyenT.NguyenT. D. (2006). Authorship ethics: Issues and suggested guidelines for the helping professions. Counseling and Vales, 50, 208-216.
15.
OberlanderS. E.SpencerR. J. (2006). Graduate students and the culture of authorship. Ethics & Behaviour, 16(3), 217-232.
RoseM. P.FischerK. (1998). Do authorship policies impact students’ judgments of perceived wrongdoing?Ethics & Behavior, 8(1), 59-79.
18.
SilvaG. A. (2005). La autoría múltiple y la autoría injustificada en los artículos científicos. Investigación en Salud, 7(2), 84-90.
19.
SteinbokP. (1995). Ethical considerations relating to writing a medical scientific paper for publication. Child’s Nervous System, 11, 323-328.
20.
SteneckN. H. (2006a). Introduction to the responsible conduct of research. Washington, DC: Office of Research Integrity, Department of Health and Human Services. Retrieved from http://ori.hhs.gov/education/products/RCRintro/
21.
SteneckN. H. (2006b). Fostering integrity in research: Definitions, current knowledge, and future directions. Science and Engineering Ethics, 12(1), 53-74.
22.
StrangeK. (2008). Authorship: Why not just toss a coin?American Journal of Physiology—Cell Physiology, 295, 567-575.
23.
SullivanL. E.OgloffJ. R. P. (1998). Appropriate supervisor-graduate student relationships. Ethics & Behavior, 8(3), 229-248.
24.
TimmonsS.ParkJ. (2008). A qualitative study of the factors influencing the submission for publication of research undertaken by students. Nurse Education Today, 28, 744-750.
WashburnJ. J. (2008). Encouraging research collaboration through ethical and fair authorship: A model policy. Ethics & Behaviour, 18(1), 44-58.
27.
YoshikawaT. T.OuslanderJ. G. (2007). Integrity in publishing: Update on policies and statements on authorship, duplicate publications, and conflict of interest. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 55, 155-157.
