Loading…
Hyperauthorship: A postmodern perversion or evidence of a structural shift in scholarly communication practices?
Classical assumptions about the nature and ethical entailments of authorship (the standard model) are being challenged by developments in scientific collaboration and multiple authorship. In the biomedical research community, multiple authorship has increased to such an extent that the trustworthine...
Saved in:
| Published in: | Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2001-05, Vol.52 (7), p.558-569 |
|---|---|
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Subjects: | |
| Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
| Online Access: | Get full text |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3887-6502d742759369c36be266899e660a7afe92a7fba20c9666df3748f2e2e5bcd63 |
|---|---|
| cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3887-6502d742759369c36be266899e660a7afe92a7fba20c9666df3748f2e2e5bcd63 |
| container_end_page | 569 |
| container_issue | 7 |
| container_start_page | 558 |
| container_title | Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology |
| container_volume | 52 |
| creator | Cronin, Blaise |
| description | Classical assumptions about the nature and ethical entailments of authorship (the standard model) are being challenged by developments in scientific collaboration and multiple authorship. In the biomedical research community, multiple authorship has increased to such an extent that the trustworthiness of the scientific communication system has been called into question. Documented abuses, such as honorific authorship, have serious implications in terms of the acknowledgment of authority, allocation of credit, and assigning of accountability. Within the biomedical world it has been proposed that authors be replaced by lists of contributors (the radical model), whose specific inputs to a given study would be recorded unambiguously. The wider implications of the ‘hyperauthorship’ phenomenon for scholarly publication are considered. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1002/asi.1097 |
| format | article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_26203390</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>72560083</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3887-6502d742759369c36be266899e660a7afe92a7fba20c9666df3748f2e2e5bcd63</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp10F1rFDEUBuBBFKyt4E8IIuLN2HzMJBNvZCl2t7BUZJVehmzmhE2dmYw5mdr9986ySwXBqxzIc14Ob1G8YfQjo5RfWgzzoNWz4ozVgpe80fT509zwl8UrxHtKGasZPSvG1X6EZKe8iwl3YfxEFmSMmPvYQhrI_PcACUMcSEwEHkILgwMSPbEEc5pcnpLtyLzpMwkDQbeLnU3dnrjY99MQnM2H5TFZl4MD_HxRvPC2Q3h9es-LH9dfvl-tyvXX5c3VYl060TSqlDXlraq4qrWQ2gm5BS5lozVISa2yHjS3ym8tp05LKVsvVNV4DhzqrWulOC_eH3PHFH9NgNn0AR10nR0gTmi45FQITWf49h94H6c0zLcZLlilFa2aGX04IpciYgJvxhR6m_aGUXPo3cy9m0PvM313yrPobOeTHVzAv55VtaT1zMoj-x062P83ziw2N6fYkw-Y4fHJ2_TTSCVUbe5ul2a1Wa6rb3cbcyv-AOiCoSk</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>231497048</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Hyperauthorship: A postmodern perversion or evidence of a structural shift in scholarly communication practices?</title><source>Library & Information Science Abstracts (LISA)</source><source>Wiley-Blackwell Read & Publish Collection</source><source>BSC - Ebsco (Business Source Ultimate)</source><creator>Cronin, Blaise</creator><creatorcontrib>Cronin, Blaise</creatorcontrib><description>Classical assumptions about the nature and ethical entailments of authorship (the standard model) are being challenged by developments in scientific collaboration and multiple authorship. In the biomedical research community, multiple authorship has increased to such an extent that the trustworthiness of the scientific communication system has been called into question. Documented abuses, such as honorific authorship, have serious implications in terms of the acknowledgment of authority, allocation of credit, and assigning of accountability. Within the biomedical world it has been proposed that authors be replaced by lists of contributors (the radical model), whose specific inputs to a given study would be recorded unambiguously. The wider implications of the ‘hyperauthorship’ phenomenon for scholarly publication are considered.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1532-2882</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 2330-1635</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1532-2890</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2330-1643</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/asi.1097</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc</publisher><subject>17th century ; Academic discourse ; Authoring ; Authority ; Authors ; Authorship ; Biomedicine ; Co authorship ; Collaboration ; Communication (Thought Transfer) ; Communication. Information transfer ; Communications systems ; Ethical standards ; Ethics ; Exact sciences and technology ; Information and communication sciences ; Information Science ; Information science. Documentation ; Library and information science ; Library and information science. General aspects ; Medical research ; Periodicals ; Postmodernism ; Scholarly communication ; Scholarly publishing ; Sciences and techniques of general use ; Scientists ; Studies ; Trends ; Trustworthiness ; Writers</subject><ispartof>Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2001-05, Vol.52 (7), p.558-569</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.</rights><rights>2001 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright (C) 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.</rights><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3887-6502d742759369c36be266899e660a7afe92a7fba20c9666df3748f2e2e5bcd63</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3887-6502d742759369c36be266899e660a7afe92a7fba20c9666df3748f2e2e5bcd63</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27284,27903,27904,34114</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=1145605$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Cronin, Blaise</creatorcontrib><title>Hyperauthorship: A postmodern perversion or evidence of a structural shift in scholarly communication practices?</title><title>Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology</title><addtitle>J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci</addtitle><description>Classical assumptions about the nature and ethical entailments of authorship (the standard model) are being challenged by developments in scientific collaboration and multiple authorship. In the biomedical research community, multiple authorship has increased to such an extent that the trustworthiness of the scientific communication system has been called into question. Documented abuses, such as honorific authorship, have serious implications in terms of the acknowledgment of authority, allocation of credit, and assigning of accountability. Within the biomedical world it has been proposed that authors be replaced by lists of contributors (the radical model), whose specific inputs to a given study would be recorded unambiguously. The wider implications of the ‘hyperauthorship’ phenomenon for scholarly publication are considered.</description><subject>17th century</subject><subject>Academic discourse</subject><subject>Authoring</subject><subject>Authority</subject><subject>Authors</subject><subject>Authorship</subject><subject>Biomedicine</subject><subject>Co authorship</subject><subject>Collaboration</subject><subject>Communication (Thought Transfer)</subject><subject>Communication. Information transfer</subject><subject>Communications systems</subject><subject>Ethical standards</subject><subject>Ethics</subject><subject>Exact sciences and technology</subject><subject>Information and communication sciences</subject><subject>Information Science</subject><subject>Information science. Documentation</subject><subject>Library and information science</subject><subject>Library and information science. General aspects</subject><subject>Medical research</subject><subject>Periodicals</subject><subject>Postmodernism</subject><subject>Scholarly communication</subject><subject>Scholarly publishing</subject><subject>Sciences and techniques of general use</subject><subject>Scientists</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Trends</subject><subject>Trustworthiness</subject><subject>Writers</subject><issn>1532-2882</issn><issn>2330-1635</issn><issn>1532-2890</issn><issn>2330-1643</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2001</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>AIMQZ</sourceid><sourceid>ALSLI</sourceid><sourceid>CJNVE</sourceid><sourceid>CNYFK</sourceid><sourceid>F2A</sourceid><sourceid>M0C</sourceid><sourceid>M0P</sourceid><sourceid>M1O</sourceid><recordid>eNp10F1rFDEUBuBBFKyt4E8IIuLN2HzMJBNvZCl2t7BUZJVehmzmhE2dmYw5mdr9986ySwXBqxzIc14Ob1G8YfQjo5RfWgzzoNWz4ozVgpe80fT509zwl8UrxHtKGasZPSvG1X6EZKe8iwl3YfxEFmSMmPvYQhrI_PcACUMcSEwEHkILgwMSPbEEc5pcnpLtyLzpMwkDQbeLnU3dnrjY99MQnM2H5TFZl4MD_HxRvPC2Q3h9es-LH9dfvl-tyvXX5c3VYl060TSqlDXlraq4qrWQ2gm5BS5lozVISa2yHjS3ym8tp05LKVsvVNV4DhzqrWulOC_eH3PHFH9NgNn0AR10nR0gTmi45FQITWf49h94H6c0zLcZLlilFa2aGX04IpciYgJvxhR6m_aGUXPo3cy9m0PvM313yrPobOeTHVzAv55VtaT1zMoj-x062P83ziw2N6fYkw-Y4fHJ2_TTSCVUbe5ul2a1Wa6rb3cbcyv-AOiCoSk</recordid><startdate>20010501</startdate><enddate>20010501</enddate><creator>Cronin, Blaise</creator><general>John Wiley & Sons, Inc</general><general>Wiley</general><general>Wiley Periodicals Inc</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7SC</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>883</scope><scope>88B</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AIMQZ</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>CJNVE</scope><scope>CNYFK</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>E3H</scope><scope>F2A</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>JQ2</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>K7-</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>L7M</scope><scope>LIQON</scope><scope>L~C</scope><scope>L~D</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M0F</scope><scope>M0P</scope><scope>M1O</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEDU</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>Q9U</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20010501</creationdate><title>Hyperauthorship: A postmodern perversion or evidence of a structural shift in scholarly communication practices?</title><author>Cronin, Blaise</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3887-6502d742759369c36be266899e660a7afe92a7fba20c9666df3748f2e2e5bcd63</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2001</creationdate><topic>17th century</topic><topic>Academic discourse</topic><topic>Authoring</topic><topic>Authority</topic><topic>Authors</topic><topic>Authorship</topic><topic>Biomedicine</topic><topic>Co authorship</topic><topic>Collaboration</topic><topic>Communication (Thought Transfer)</topic><topic>Communication. Information transfer</topic><topic>Communications systems</topic><topic>Ethical standards</topic><topic>Ethics</topic><topic>Exact sciences and technology</topic><topic>Information and communication sciences</topic><topic>Information Science</topic><topic>Information science. Documentation</topic><topic>Library and information science</topic><topic>Library and information science. General aspects</topic><topic>Medical research</topic><topic>Periodicals</topic><topic>Postmodernism</topic><topic>Scholarly communication</topic><topic>Scholarly publishing</topic><topic>Sciences and techniques of general use</topic><topic>Scientists</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Trends</topic><topic>Trustworthiness</topic><topic>Writers</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Cronin, Blaise</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection【Remote access available】</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>Education Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Literature</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Education Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</collection><collection>Library & Information Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Library & Information Sciences Abstracts (LISA)</collection><collection>Library & Information Science Abstracts (LISA)</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Computer Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>Computer Science Database</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><collection>ProQuest One Literature</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts Academic</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts Professional</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Trade & Industry</collection><collection>Education Database</collection><collection>Library Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest_Research Library</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest advanced technologies & aerospace journals</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>One Business (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Education</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Cronin, Blaise</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Hyperauthorship: A postmodern perversion or evidence of a structural shift in scholarly communication practices?</atitle><jtitle>Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology</jtitle><addtitle>J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci</addtitle><date>2001-05-01</date><risdate>2001</risdate><volume>52</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>558</spage><epage>569</epage><pages>558-569</pages><issn>1532-2882</issn><issn>2330-1635</issn><eissn>1532-2890</eissn><eissn>2330-1643</eissn><abstract>Classical assumptions about the nature and ethical entailments of authorship (the standard model) are being challenged by developments in scientific collaboration and multiple authorship. In the biomedical research community, multiple authorship has increased to such an extent that the trustworthiness of the scientific communication system has been called into question. Documented abuses, such as honorific authorship, have serious implications in terms of the acknowledgment of authority, allocation of credit, and assigning of accountability. Within the biomedical world it has been proposed that authors be replaced by lists of contributors (the radical model), whose specific inputs to a given study would be recorded unambiguously. The wider implications of the ‘hyperauthorship’ phenomenon for scholarly publication are considered.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>John Wiley & Sons, Inc</pub><doi>10.1002/asi.1097</doi><tpages>12</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1532-2882 |
| ispartof | Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2001-05, Vol.52 (7), p.558-569 |
| issn | 1532-2882 2330-1635 1532-2890 2330-1643 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_26203390 |
| source | Library & Information Science Abstracts (LISA); Wiley-Blackwell Read & Publish Collection; BSC - Ebsco (Business Source Ultimate) |
| subjects | 17th century Academic discourse Authoring Authority Authors Authorship Biomedicine Co authorship Collaboration Communication (Thought Transfer) Communication. Information transfer Communications systems Ethical standards Ethics Exact sciences and technology Information and communication sciences Information Science Information science. Documentation Library and information science Library and information science. General aspects Medical research Periodicals Postmodernism Scholarly communication Scholarly publishing Sciences and techniques of general use Scientists Studies Trends Trustworthiness Writers |
| title | Hyperauthorship: A postmodern perversion or evidence of a structural shift in scholarly communication practices? |
| url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-27T14%3A08%3A15IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Hyperauthorship:%20A%20postmodern%20perversion%20or%20evidence%20of%20a%20structural%20shift%20in%20scholarly%20communication%20practices?&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20the%20American%20Society%20for%20Information%20Science%20and%20Technology&rft.au=Cronin,%20Blaise&rft.date=2001-05-01&rft.volume=52&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=558&rft.epage=569&rft.pages=558-569&rft.issn=1532-2882&rft.eissn=1532-2890&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/asi.1097&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E72560083%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3887-6502d742759369c36be266899e660a7afe92a7fba20c9666df3748f2e2e5bcd63%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=231497048&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |