Publication and Authorship Policy
| Policy name | Publication and Authorship Policy |
| Policy number | RP006 |
| Date approved | 1 April 2020 |
| Approving body | Academic Board |
| Responsible officer | Dean |
| Implementation officer | Associate Dean (Research) |
| Next review date | April 2023 |
| Related Policies |
|
| Related forms and documents |
1. Purpose of this Policy
- The Cairnmillar Institute (the Institute) and its members produce and publish research papers, texts and monographs. An author is defined as an individual who:
- Has made a significant intellectual or scholarly contribution to research and its output, and;
- Agrees to be listed as an author (see Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research #2, 2018).
- Staff and students are required to agree on the designated authors for all
publications, including the order in which these authors are presented, prior to
submitting the paper or text for publication. - This policy is to:
- Stipulate the criteria used to decide who are designated as authors.
- Provide principles to establish the listed order of authors.
- Clarify the status of authorial affiliation.
2. SCOPE
- This policy applies to all research outputs in which authors are specified, including:
- Traditional publications, such as books, chapters, conference papers, and journal articles.
- Other online publications, such as technical reports or websites.
- This policy must be followed by all Institute staff and students. For research collaborations involving staff or students external to the Institute, this policy should be followed to the extent possible, and issues of authorship inclusion and authorial order must be discussed and resolved in the early stages of the collaboration. This policy does not apply to a research thesis prior to publication.
3. Criteria to establish authorship
3.1. Intellectual contribution
3.1.1. In principle, and in accord with the Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research (the Code), individuals can be designated as authors only if they provided substantial intellectual contribution to the work and they agree to be named as an author. A substantial intellectual contribution corresponds to activities or deliberations that shape the research objectives, outcomes, or interpretations. Primary examples include:
- Substantial intellectual contribution to the conception and design of the project with respect to the research rationale, questions, method or analysis strategy.
- Substantial intellectual contribution to the analysis and interpretation of data.
- Drafting significant portions of the work.
- Critical revisions of the work that shape the interpretations.
3.1.2. In general, the collection of data alone does not constitute substantial intellectual contribution. However, some exceptions are possible. For example, while conducting interviews, the interviewer may adjust the questions and uncover key insights that would otherwise have been overlooked.
3.1.3. Individuals are not designated as authors if their only contribution was to:
- Provide routine technical or statistical assistance—that is, assistance in which the individuals merely initiated established routines rather than offered intellectual insight.
- Assist in the acquisition of funding.
- Provide pre-existing datasets to other researchers.
- Assume a position of authority, such as head of department or supervisor of a research team, without substantial intellectual contribution to this particular work (known as ‘gift authorship’).
3.1.4. Where individuals are awarded authorship or cited in ‘Acknowledgement of contributions’ (see below), their written permission for this inclusion must be obtained (and record held). Publication and Authorship Policy 1 April 2020 5
3.2. Criteria to establish authorship for supervisors
3.2.1. After completing their theses, some students may publish their work in other outlets, such as scholarly journals. In these instances, supervisors may be designated as authors, although this is not inevitable.
3.2.2. Supervisors will be designated as authors only if they provide substantial intellectual contribution to the work for publication.
4. MULTIPLE AUTHORS
4.1. Where several authors are involved in a work, one will be nominated as lead author to keep a record of authorship and to manage communication about the work with the publisher.
4.2. The lead author must offer authorship to all people who meet the criteria for authorship as set out in the Code, including research students, research assistants and technicians.
4.3. Multiple authors will agree on authorship of any research output early in the research project and document their agreement to be held by the lead author. The lead author should review the authorship agreement before submission and discuss any proposed revisions with authors.
4.4. The lead author will determine the order of authorship based on an unbiased, fair assessment of the proportional contributions of each individual author. The level of contribution can be defined as the degree to which a person shaped the intellectual contribution of this work, including time dedicated to the intellectual facets of the research.
4.5. All authors must consent to being named as an author on a work.
5. PRINCIPLES TO ESTABLISH ORDER OF AUTHORSHIP
5.1. In the case of a HDR thesis, if the thesis is published as a paper, the student will typically be the first author, and the supervisor(s) will be the second and subsequent author(s).
5.2. If there are several HDR students working on several linked projects, it may be that the supervisor considers a combined paper is more likely to be published. In this case, providing all students agree, the supervisor may be the first author. The authorial order of all contributing students may depend on the extent to which they are willing/able to complete extra work on the paper.
5.3. Sometimes, a third person may have contributed substantial intellectual input to the work and may also be granted authorship, even if the individual had been paid for their contribution.
6. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF CONTRIBUTION
6.1. Individuals who have contributed to the research but have not met the criteria for authorship inclusion by providing substantial intellectual contribution, may be acknowledged in the published work in the ‘acknowledgements’ section. Typically, wording reads: “We would like to acknowledge the valuable assistance of (named individuals, contribution and institutions)”.
7. ATTRIBUTION OF AFFILIATION
7.1. In the majority of publications, authors must specify the institution to which they are affiliated. Staff and students of the Institute must acknowledge their affiliation to the Institute, particularly if their contributions were provided whilst employed as staff or enrolled as students of the Institute.
8. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
8.1. Occasionally, authors might experience a conflict of interest. They might, for example, have conducted research into a product in which they have been afforded some level of ownership. All authors must declare actual or potential conflicts of interest. Typically, publications provide opportunities for authors to declare these conflicts.
9. AUTHORSHIP DISPUTES
9.1. Every reasonable attempt will be made to reach agreement on the authorship of a publication and the order in which authors are listed. If agreement cannot be reached or disputes arise, advice and assistance should be sought from the Associate Dean Research. If necessary, formal mediation may be arranged by the Associate Dean Research.
9.2. Where there is a dispute as to authorship on a publication, both parties are to maintain records of agreements made as part of the research project and its publication plan.
10. BREACHES OF THE AUTHORSHIP CODE
10.1. All researchers should be aware that denial of authorship when a person meets the criteria for authorship is a breach of the Code. A denial of authorship raises a potential allegation of plagiarism, as work is not credited to its creator or originator.
10.2. Other breaches relating to authorship include:
- Crediting authorship to or accepting authorship from individuals who do not meet the criteria for authorship (for example, honorary, gift or guest authorship).
- Failing to ascribe authorship to individuals where those individuals meet the requirements of authorship (for example, ghost authorship).
- Attributing authorship to individuals without their consent.
- Publishing research without the final approval of the attributed authors.
- Failure to comply with an authorship agreement.
- Making false claims about the authorship in a grant application.
10.3. When investigating and managing a potential breach of the Code regarding authorship, the Institute will consider the extent to which each author met their authorship responsibilities. Investigations will be managed by the Associate Dean (Research).