N.P.GRIGORIEV, G.SENATSKAIA
Geoethical problems of authorship
in scientific publications
The authorship may be
defined as a moral recognition by society that the scientist has a right to be
considered as creator or participant of creation of published research results.
To fulfill the research the author has to demonstrate creative abilities and
professional skill. The authorship is documented by indicating name/names of the
author(s) or co-authors in printed, electronic or written form. Authorship
presents a serious ethical problem but it may also have financial and other
consequences. In some aspects it is close to legal acknowledgement of a right
to intellectual property. Authorship determines priority, public recognition
(including - for example - citation index) and all kinds of awards, prizes etc.
Not rarely the scientists salaries depend on it. Numerous ethical problems
arise in connection with collective authorship. Beside researchers many other
persons claim for the co-authorship.
We single out several
existing approaches to authorship determination:
1. Research collaboration or participation,
2. Suggesting the dominant area,
3. Creative or professional contribution (analytical work, fauna
determination, results interpretation etc.),
4. Hierarchical authorship (all persons on upper levels consider
themselves o be authors of research, fulfilled by their subordinates),
5. Prestige authorship (head of scientific school automatically is
recognized as author of his pupils or collaborators research),
6. Corporation authorship (research made by collaborators of company or
other corporation, structure etc. is recognized as anonymous product of
corporation),
7. Faked authorship (authorship got as bribe, gift, purchase, plagiarism
etc. by a person alien to research).
Borders between these
categories are difficult to be delineated. Who should be considered as author,
first author, and co-author, faked author or violator of moral standards that
is sometimes hard to decide without an appropriate inquiry. The criteria inside
research community are unsteady and dim. Many hidden conflicts and unethical
compromises occur.
The problem under discussion
is of practical importance. In publishing and show-business legal rights of
producer on one side, interpreter and creator on the other side are clearly
delineated. It determines their share in income from intellectual property and
its exploitation. Certain rules are observed also in order of mentioning names
and titles. One may consider types 1 - 3 as analogous to creator - interpreter
part, 4 - 6 as producer part, and 7 - as criminal. In Russia a conception of
state right to scientific and technological intellectual property created with
the state money is in preparation. It is obvious that geoethical criteria (in
the sense of L. Němcová) of authorship must be formulated previously by the
geoscience community.