# data[].attributes.body
Is it OK to put the Group/Team Name as the author on a (social science) report?

# data[].attributes.body
Is authorship with "equal contribution" common in social sciences? If I recall correctly, some STEM papers feature instances like :

Johnson* & Smith* (2023) Title of paper.

* - equal contribution.

# data[].attributes.headline
Guidelines for authorship: international genetics consortia 

# data[].attributes.subject
Guidelines for authorship: international genetics consortia 

# data[].attributes.body
The international genetics consortia set out rules (sadly i cant find the document) on how contribution translated to authorship. The main aim was to fairly share credit, particulary for junior authors. Bearing in mind that these project ran for 3-10years, had 300-400 co-authors and the same 10 junior authors were involved in multiple papers. Authors were split into first (up to ~10), middle (the bulk) and senior (up to ~10). Being first or senior required a lot of work, each junior author got one "actual" first name paper and up to 5 authors could be * equal contribution. To my knowledge, there was little objection, almost all involved thought this was fair. Within genetics this model is understood, but on grant applications reviewed by non-genetics people, the equal contributions were not fully appreciated.

# data[].attributes.headline
What to do if you can't contact someone who you think meets authorship criteria on your paper?

# data[].attributes.subject
What to do if you can't contact someone who you think meets authorship criteria on your paper?

# data[].attributes.headline
What is the cut-off contribution point for a technician to be included in a manuscript?

# data[].attributes.subject
What is the cut-off contribution point for a technician to be included in a manuscript?

# data[].attributes.headline
In what ways can I practice and improve my writing for getting a good authorship on a research or review paper?

# data[].attributes.subject
In what ways can I practice and improve my writing for getting a good authorship on a research or review paper?

# data[].attributes.headline
Is there a massive difference in being second vs third author? (In biology papers)

# data[].attributes.subject
Is there a massive difference in being second vs third author? (In biology papers)

# data[].attributes.headline
I’d be interested in learning how to spot signs of plagiarism in journals or other sources of information. Plagiarism is often viewed as a thing to avoid doing, not as much as a thing to watch out for while conducting your research. It would be enlightening to view plagiarism from this prospective.

# data[].attributes.subject
I’d be interested in learning how to spot signs of plagiarism in journals or other sources of information. Plagiarism is often viewed as a thing to avoid doing, not as much as a thing to watch out for while conducting your research. It would be enlightening to view plagiarism from this prospective.

# data[].attributes.headline
Should the order of authors be based on contribution to the paper or is the last author especially important and should be saved for important people?

# data[].attributes.subject
Should the order of authors be based on contribution to the paper or is the last author especially important and should be saved for important people?

# data[].attributes.headline
As part of MVLS, authorship guidances within the college follow ICMJE criteria. However, such criteria are driven by the words 'substantial contribution' to qualify someone as a co-author. 'substantial' is a subjective concept and in my experience created several issues within the few project teams I had been part of. To categorise who is a co-author. Would it be possible to define the word 'substantial' more formally to solve authorship conflicts within each college?

# data[].attributes.subject
As part of MVLS, authorship guidances within the college follow ICMJE criteria. However, such criteria are driven by the words 'substantial contribution' to qualify someone as a co-author. 'substantial' is a subjective concept and in my experience created several issues within the few project teams I had been part of. To categorise who is a co-author. Would it be possible to define the word 'substantial' more formally to solve authorship conflicts within each college?

# data[].attributes.headline
Most interested in: negotiating authorship

# data[].attributes.subject
Most interested in: negotiating authorship

# data[].attributes.headline
Do grants co-applicants who are barely involved in the overall research and just reading the final paper/outcome qualify as co-author of a paper?

# data[].attributes.subject
Do grants co-applicants who are barely involved in the overall research and just reading the final paper/outcome qualify as co-author of a paper?

# data[].attributes.headline
Most of the time, senior staff involved in the study (e.g., PIs) decide who should be acknowledged as a coauthor rather than objective criteria. Objective criteria should be implemented, or ECRs working with certain PIs with more propensity to 'large' co-authorship would be working advantaged compared to ECRs working with PIs with a more restricted co-authorship view. is there any policy in place?

# data[].attributes.subject
Most of the time, senior staff involved in the study (e.g., PIs) decide who should be acknowledged as a coauthor rather than objective criteria. Objective criteria should be implemented, or ECRs working with certain PIs with more propensity to 'large' co-authorship would be working advantaged compared to ECRs working with PIs with a more restricted co-authorship view. is there any policy in place?

# data[].attributes.headline
Is there a random assessment in place to avoid/disincentive gifted authorships? I believe it would be beneficial for research integrity within the university. Reporting bad authorship practices is challenging if senior and ECRs roles are involved. 

# data[].attributes.subject
Is there a random assessment in place to avoid/disincentive gifted authorships? I believe it would be beneficial for research integrity within the university. Reporting bad authorship practices is challenging if senior and ECRs roles are involved. 

# data[].attributes.body
Is it enough to add someone as author who was a co-writer of the grant, but was not involved in the direct work at all? This seems to be expected by some senior academics, but does not feel sufficient to me and is hard to argue as a junior academic.