Authorship, Peer Review, and Publication Introductory remarks

On the next page, you'll be introduced to a smattering of resources relevant to the topic of Authorship, Peer Review, and Publication. But first, here are some initial remarks to help you to get situated.

There are four common criteria for granting scientific authorship:

Making substantial contributions to either (a) the conception or design of the scientific work or (b) the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of the data
Drafting or critically revising the work for important intellectual content
Giving final approval for the work of the version to be published
Agreeing to be accountable for all aspects of the work—ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of the work be investigated and resolved

Note that what counts as "substantial" or "critical" or "important" are all crucial points left somewhat unresolved by these criteria. Respectful and even anticipatory communication among collaborative parties can help to establish a shared interpretation of these terms in the context of a particular project. Authorship disputes may arise if collaborative parties have different understandings of what constitutes a substantial contribution, a critical revision, or important intellectual content—especially if effective communication is not used to bring these expectations into alignment. Doing this sort of work early rather than late, before an actual dispute arises, can prevent a conflict among collaborators from either occurring or escalating.

This four-criteria-based pattern for granting scientific authorship follows a policy that was established by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) in 1985, and which was then picked up by many other scientific organizations and entities. The ICMJE policy recommends that:

All four of these criteria must be met by all those listed as authors
All those who meet all four of these criteria must be listed as authors

What this means is that anyone who meets all four of the criteria listed above should be listed as an author on the corresponding scientific publication, and that no one who meets all four of these criteria above should fail to be listed as an author. In other words: you don't get to be an author just because you've done one or two or even three of the things listed above; you have to do all four. But, if you do all four, then you should be listed as an author—no one who does all four should be left out in terms of authorship. The ICMJE recommends that those who meet some but not all four of these criteria be acknowledged in the publication, but not listed as authors.