Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 May 5;17(5):e0267312.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0267312. eCollection 2022.

And the credit goes to … - Ghost and honorary authorship among social scientists

Gernot Pruschak  1   2   3 , Christian Hopp  1   3
Affiliations

And the credit goes to … - Ghost and honorary authorship among social scientists

Gernot Pruschak et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

The proliferation of team-authored academic work has led to the proliferation of two kinds of authorship misconduct: ghost authorship, in which contributors are not listed as authors and honorary authorship, in which non-contributors are listed as authors. Drawing on data from a survey of 2,222 social scientists from around the globe, we study the prevalence of authorship misconduct in the social sciences. Our results show that ghost and honorary authorship occur frequently here and may be driven by social scientists' misconceptions about authorship criteria. Our results show that they frequently deviate from a common point of authorship reference (the ICMJE authorship criteria). On the one hand, they tend to award authorship more broadly to more junior scholars, while on the other hand, they may withhold authorship from senior scholars if those are engaged in collaborations with junior scholars. Authorship misattribution, even if it is based on a misunderstanding of authorship criteria rather than egregious misconduct, alters academic rankings and may constitute a threat to the integrity of science. Based on our findings, we call for journals to implement contribution disclosures and to define authorship criteria more explicitly to guide and inform researchers as to what constitutes authorship in the social sciences. Our results also hold implications for research institutions, universities, and publishers to move beyond authorship-based citation and publication rankings in hiring and tenure processes and instead to focus explicitly on contributions in team-authored publications.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1
Rates of ghost (A) and honorary (B) authorship. N. of obs. are 1,878 for (A) and 1,881 for (B).
Fig 2
Fig 2
Shares of the identified rate of ghost authors and perceived rate of ghost authors (A) as well as the shares identified rate of honorary authors and perceived rate of honorary authors (B). N. of obs. are 813 for (A) (because we only can assess the rate of ghost authors among the papers including at least one non-author contributor) and 1,842 for (B).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Kendall DL, Campanario SC. Honoring God through Scientific Research: Navigating the Ethics of Publishing With our Students. Int J Christ Educ. 2016. 20(2): 133–148.
    1. McGrail M, Rickard CM, Jones R. Publish or Perish: A Systematic Review of Interventions to Increase Academic Publication Rates. High Educ Res Dev. 2006. 25(1): 19–35.
    1. Miller AN, Taylor SG, Bedeian AG. Publish or Perish: Academic Life as Management Faculty Live it. Career Dev. 2011. 16(5): 422–445.
    1. Rawat S, Meena S. Publish or Perish: Where Are We Heading? J Res Med Sci. 2014. 19(2): 87–89. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Sestak J, Fiala J, Gavrichev KS. Evaluation of the Professional Worth of Scientific Papers, their Citation Responding and the Publication Authority. J Therm Anal Calorim. 2018. 131(1): 463–471.