Protocol for authorship, acknowledgements, data sharing & specimen use


Protocol for authorship, acknowledgements, data sharing, and specimen use
Revised March 2008 Revised and approved, March 2000 Original: October 1995 By Dr. Bruce McLellan and Dr. John Woods A major of objective of the Columbia Mountains Institute of Applied Ecology (CMI) is to facilitate cooperative, multi-discipline research. This objective will hopefully lead to research with many contributors. Research with many contributors, however, has the potential of causing conflicts regarding authorship and acknowledgments. Here we design a protocol for credit which should reduce if not eliminate conflict. This protocol is offered as a tool for researchers wishing to clarify issues surrounding authorship, acknowledgements, data sharing, and specimen use.
Authorship
There are several aspects to most ecological research projects and contributions to each aspect can be subjectively scaled as none, low, moderate, or high. We have categorized the aspects of a research project as: 1. Concept Development And Project Design Concept development and project design are usually the first stages of any research project, however, new ideas often arise while data are being collected; stimulating new questions or approaches. The project design stage is often relatively routine and uses standard research methods. On the other hand, new ideas, concepts, and methods sometimes arise that can be critically important. Often these new ideas are not generated by one person, but during discussions among a group of people. 2. Funding Raising funding to conduct the project is necessary, but, like all aspects, credit for this is not straightforward. As part of their regular work, some people supply funding for research. Although this funding is important, these people’s contribution is low. Other people may have to write proposals and/or solicit funding from their own agencies while others must try to obtain funds from other agencies or non-government sources. The effort required for obtaining funding can vary enormously and this should be reflected in the credit they receive. 3. Data Collection The major part of ecological research is often collecting the data, but, like other aspects of research, credit due for data collection is complex. The amount of time invested in data collection is an obvious variable while the skill required to collect required data varies. At one extreme, a data-logger can fill databases while other types of data may require extraordinary knowledge and ability to obtain. 4. Database Development and Analysis Like other aspects of research, developing a clean and working database and then analyzing and interpreting the data can be relatively straightforward and routine or a major undertaking and involve novel ideas and methods. In some instances, particularly when addressing theoretical questions, this aspect of a research program may be the only one of real significance. It should be noted that people should not proceed independently on this aspect of a cooperative project without consulting people who have contributed highly in any of the previous aspects. 5. Manuscript Writing and Editing The final aspect of a research program is writing the paper or report and seeing it through the publication process. Again, the overall significance of this stage varies but is always relatively high and, depending largely on the complexity of the discussion, can be extremely important. All authors should provide at least a simple, largely grammatical edit but this would be a low contribution whereas a major edit that incorporates new ideas may be an important addition. We believe that people who make high contributions on two aspects of the project or high contributions on one aspect and moderate contributions in two others should be potential authors. If these people are confident that they understand and can discuss and/or defend the report, then they should be authors. Although some people who frequently find themselves junior author stress that order is trivial, to many scientists, order remains important. Who becomes senior author should be negotiated among the authors. In general, if a high contribution is worthy of 2 moderates, then whoever has the highest score should be considered as first author. To reduce chances of erroneous interpretations or misuse of data, before a report is submitted for publication it should be reviewed by the people who collected the majority of the data.
Acknowledgements
Acknowledgements are not as controversial as authorship and therefore we will not develop a complex protocol. Agencies or groups providing funding or other contributions and people responsible for providing the contributions should be acknowledged. It is kind to acknowledge all individuals who assist with the project, however, because, huge numbers of people may contribute at one time or another, listing everyone is rarely possible. We suggest that authors acknowledge people who not only contributed but who were sincerely interested in the topic of research and were intellectually or emotionally stimulated.
Data and Specimen Use
To increase efficiency and thus maximize productivity, CMI encourages sharing data or specimens, unless sharing would violate confidentiality and anonymity of the research subjects. Due to the nature of most ecological data/specimens, their use by people not involved with collection can lead to erroneous interpretation. It is therefore imperative that reports or publications that are based even in part on borrowed data/specimens are reviewed by the collectors or those responsible for the collection protocol. On occasion, studies are designed, funded, and data/specimens collected but results are incompletely reported. People who stop working with a data set will be encouraged to permit others use it immediately. To ensure the entire protocol is followed, a written agreement (Memorandum of Understanding) should be prepared and signed in all cases of data sharing.