Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Figure 1.

Selection of the articles for the systematic review.

Search keyword was ‘authorship’, limited to article as a publication type, search performed 15 January 2010. Asterisk : inclusion criteria – quantitive or qualitative research on the definition of or criteria for authorship, authors' contribution to the research and manuscript, order of authors on the byline, opinions of researchers and/or editors on authorship criteria, opinions of researchers and/or editors on authorship order; exclusion criteria: 1. research topics which use journal articles and their authors as a starting point for studying: collaborative or citation networks; authorship in the context of citation analysis; analysis of research collaboration outputs of institutions, groups, research fields; trends in authorship in journals, groups of journals, fields, institutions, countries, geographical regions; gender of authors in journals, groups of journals, fields, institutions, countries, geographical regions; 2. analysis of authorship attribution in literature, taxonomy, and psychology/cognitive research.

More »

Figure 1 Expand

Figure 2.

Trends in publications on authorship research in different research areas since 1967, when the first research report was identified [8].

No studies were identified in humanities.

More »

Figure 2 Expand

Table 1.

Definitions of authorship, contributions for deserved authorship and authorship practices*.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Table 2.

Order of authors on the byline*.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Table 3.

Ethical and unethical authorship practices*.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Figure 3.

Forest plot of reported rates of problems with or misuse of authorship in self- or non-self reports in 14 survey studies [31], [41], [46], [50], [75], [77], [78], [82], [85], [91], [96], [109], [114], [126].

The area of a square represent sample size, horizontal lines are 95% confidence interval, diamond and vertical dotted line show the pooled weighted estimate.

More »

Figure 3 Expand

Figure 4.

Forest plot of reported rates of problems with or misuse of authorship in self- or non-self reports in 12 survey studies from USA, UK or international journals [31], [41], [46], [50], [78], [85], [109], [126].

The area of a square represent sample size, horizontal lines are 95% confidence interval, diamond and vertical dotted line show the pooled weighted estimate.

More »

Figure 4 Expand

Figure 5.

Forest plot of reported rates of problems with or misuse of authorship in self- or non-self reports in 4 survey studies from South Africa, France, India, or Bangladesh [75], [77], [82], [114].

The area of a square represent sample size, horizontal lines are 95% confidence interval, diamond and vertical dotted line show the pooled weighted estimate.

More »

Figure 5 Expand

Table 4.

Authorship in researcher – student/non-researcher collaborations*.

More »

Table 4 Expand