TL;DR
This study analyzes authorship contribution patterns in scientific papers, revealing how author roles vary with position and number of authors, and emphasizing the need for nuanced evaluation metrics.
Contribution
It introduces an entropy-based method to quantify author contributions and identifies three general patterns of author roles based on contribution types.
Findings
Authorship contribution regularity decreases with more authors.
First and last authors tend to contribute more overall.
Intermediate authors often contribute significantly to data collection.
Abstract
Science is becoming increasingly more interdisciplinary, giving rise to more diversity in the areas of expertise within research labs and groups. This also have brought changes to the role researchers in scientific works. As a consequence, multi-authored scientific papers have now became a norm for high quality research. Unfortunately, such a phenomenon induces bias to existing metrics employed to evaluate the productivity and success of researchers. While some metrics were adapted to account for the rank of authors in a paper, many journals are now requiring a description of the specific roles of each author in a publication. Surprisingly, the investigation of the relationship between the rank of authors and their contributions has been limited to a few studies. By analyzing such kind of data, here we show, quantitatively, that the regularity in the authorship contributions decreases…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Code & Models
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
