The Guidance shared here is based on best practices recommended by the CU Office of Research Security and Integrity within the Research and Innovation Office (RIO) and references guidance from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICJME), the Committee on Public Ethics (COPE), and other academic institutions.
Rationale: CIRES is committed to supporting ethical, consistent, collaborative, and transparent research practices. Providing clear authorship guidance helps ensure that contributions to scholarly work are appropriately recognized and attributed. By adhering to established criteria, researchers can more easily distinguish between co-authorship and acknowledgments, while ensuring the process is transparent for all contributors, fostering collaborative development, accountability and integrity in the publication process.
Recommendation: Authorship should be discussed when manuscripts are first conceptualized and revisited regularly throughout the manuscript preparation and review process
Affiliation guidelines are provided by our CIRES Communications team.
Co-authorship Determination:
1. Follow any guidelines set by the journal or publication to help establish whether a contributor should be listed as a co-author or included in the acknowledgements section.
2. In absence of set guidelines for authorship from the publication, RIO’s Office of Research Security and Integrity recommends listing someone as co-author if they meet the four following standards:
a. Make a substantial contribution to the conception, design, data collection, analysis or interpretation of the research. Without this person’s contributions, the paper or concept would be incomplete and therefore unpublishable.
b. Participate in writing the manuscript or critically revising it for intellectual content.
c. Review and approve the final version of the manuscript before submission.
d. Agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work, ensuring integrity and accuracy.
3. Lead Author:
a. This is typically the person who conducted the central research in the manuscript.
b. The lead author is often the person who writes the first draft of the manuscript as well.
c. The lead author often serves as the corresponding author, who manages the interactions with the publisher, and ensures administrative deadlines are met and communicated to co-authors. If the lead author is in a temporary position, such as a graduate student appointment, then an advisor may serve as the corresponding author.
d. The lead author should consider prior commitments of authorship during manuscript development and discuss with co-authors any significant changes in the direction of the manuscript.
4. Joint First Authorship:
a. First, reference and follow any instructions from the journal if they exist as to the order of names listed in the publication.
b. If there is no set guidance from the journal, the best practice is for the senior faculty mentor or collaborator to make the decision on which co-author’s name should be listed first.
i. The names are typically listed with asterisks to define the individuals as co-authors.
ii. The first co-author is usually the person most actively involved in refining the manuscript, including editing and addressing reviewer feedback.
5. Contributors’ Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding (MOU):
a. Ideally, co-authors would establish an agreement prior to the collaboration that identifies the roles of each contributor. This agreement can be articulated and codified in the form of an MOU, which establishes roles in advance and can mitigate potential conflict or confusion. Guidance for that agreement is available here.
Acknowledgement Determination:
1. Follow any guidelines set by the journal or publication to help establish whether a contributor should be listed as an acknowledgement.
2. In absence of guidance from the publication, individuals may be listed in the acknowledgements section if they do not meet the standard for co-authorship but made a valuable contribution, such as:
a. Providing technical support, equipment use, administrative assistance or general supervision.
b. Offering feedback or suggestions without contributing to the intellectual content.
c. Supplying materials, funding or access to data but did not participate in analysis or writing.
d. Helping with editing or proofreading without contribution to the research design or interpretation.
Management of disputes:
1. If you and your fellow collaborators are unable to agree on allocation of authorship and acknowledgements using the guidance above, please take the following steps:
a. Consult with the CIRES Associate Director for Science (TBD) for their input and any guidance.
i. Include your supervisor for awareness and guidance as appropriate.
ii. Include CIRES HR for awareness and support in connecting with RIO as needed.
b. Consult with the team at CU Office of Research Security and Integrity , led by Dr. Jon Reuter. You can set up a meeting with this team to talk through the disagreements and outline a process to address them.
For more information:
● Contact CU’s Office of Research Security and Integrity Jon Reuter, Associate Vice Chancellor for Research Integrity and Compliance
○ Tom Heddleston, Research Compliance Associate
Resources:
● US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Authorship Best Practices
● University of Virginia (UVA) FAQ Resource
● Committee on Public Ethics (COPE)