Friendship vs. Authorship
Dr. Jane McDonald is a psychology professor at a university in
Texas. Her good friend and colleague, Dr. David Woodford, is a
psychology professor at a university in Alabama. Both Jane and
David are members of a professional psychology association that has
requested the assistance of its members in conducting a large
national survey. Although Jane and David are not teaching at the
same university, they went to graduate school together and thought
it would be fun to collaborate on this study. After some discussion
and planning, they informed the professional association that they
would be happy to conduct the study. During the planning stage,
they agreed that since Jane would be doing more of the logistics of
the study, she would be listed as first author and David would be
listed as second when it came time to publish.
Jane approached one of her graduate students, Mark Dunn, and
asked him if he would be interested in taking responsibility for
the logistical aspects of the study, such as mailing the surveys
and data entry. Mark was informed that he would not be responsible
for the new data analysis or final report since David would be
doing these tasks. However, Jane did not discuss the issue of
authorship with Mark. Mark, new in the psychology program, was
flattered to be asked and agreed to participate.
Eight months later Mark completed his portion of the study and
sent the data to David for analysis. Several weeks later Jane
approached Mark and told him that David had not completed the data
analysis and it needed to be done. Furthermore, she needed to have
the data in a final report format so that she could present it at a
conference in two weeks. Mark spent most of the next two weeks
conducting the data analysis and writing the final report. Jane
expressed her gratitude to Mark for his commitment to the project
and asked if he would be interested in collaborating on the final
paper for publication. Mark agreed.
Two months after Jane and Mark had this discussion, Jane handed
Mark a final draft of a manuscript that was to be submitted the
next week for publication. Never in the previous two months had
Jane asked Mark to help with writing the paper. Furthermore,
although David had not contributed to writing the paper, he was
listed as second author and Mark was listed as third. Mark
approached Jane and expressed his confusion as to why he was not
asked to participate, and why David was listed as second author.
Jane stated that she was too busy to collaborate and that it saved
her time to write the paper herself. Furthermore, she and David had
an agreement about authorship from the beginning, and nothing could
be done to change the arrangement.
Discussion Questions:
- Since Mark was not included in the planning stages of the
study, should he be included as an author?
- Should participation in some parts of a study have greater
weight in determining authorship than participation in other
parts?
- Although Jane and David reached an agreement at the outset of
the study, should David be included as an author?
- Did Jane let her friendship with David get in the way of doing
what was right with regard to including Mark as second author?
- How could Jane have handled this situation in a way that was
fair to her?
- How could Jane have handled this situation in a way that was
fair to Mark?
- Did Jane deceive Mark when she failed to collaborate with him
in writing the paper?
- What can Mark do to ensure that he receives proper credit for
his work?
-
Commentary: Friendship vs. Authorship
Commentary on issues of authorship in a lab or research group setting, the problems that occur when policies regarding collaborations are not in place and a faculty member's responsibility to students as a mentor.
-
Additional Commentary: Friendship vs. Authorship
Additional Commentary on issues of authorship in a lab or research group setting, the problems that occur when policies regarding collaborations are not in place and a faculty member's responsibility to students as a mentor.