##Authorship in massive collaborative projects
Goals for this lesson
- understand the formal requirements for authorship in biomedical journals;
- compare and contrast these requirements with contributions to software and data;
- introduce the incentive structure behind authorship;
Please read this blog post, and consider the following question:
What do you think is the appropriate set of requirements for authorship on a software paper? Is it:
- I agree with the ICMJE recommendations - authors need to be involved in design/analysis of the research, AND the writing of the paper.
- Any significant intellectual contribution to the software or research is sufficient.
- Any significant contribution to the software is sufficient.
- Any contribution to the software is sufficient for authorship.
Please decide on one, and then read some of the comments on the blog post. At random, please pick 3 substantive comments that disagree with you, and record their URLs. Then fill out this form before class.
We'll do a Strengths, Weaknesses, Oppportunities, Threats analysis in class - see the google doc.
- What are authorship traditions in fields other than biology? How much do they differ?
- Under the ICMJE rules, who is responsible for research misconduct in publications? Is this appropriate?
I am also happy to go over people's answers on the homework.
- Recording of discussion
- Challenges in computationally assigning credit? from depsy.org
- Transitive credit and JSON-LD from Dan Katz and Arfon Smith
- Code as a Reasearch Object
- Contributorship Badges for Science