Give Credit Where It’s Due: The Ethical Imperatives of Authorship Attribution in Collaborative Research

Abstract

This article proposes practical steps for those new to collaborative research or those seeking to improve the nature of collaborative research partnerships. Questioning academia’s exaltation of publications and authorship as coveted assets, the authors critically analyze the often complex, contentious, and ambiguous environment of collaborative research and negotiating authorship. With respect to academic publishing and ethics of authorship, this article grapples with two critical questions: (1) What factors create ethical dilemmas in authorship in academia? (2) How can academics and researchers better navigate the complexities of collaborative research to sustain ethical authorship practices? A seven-phase process model is proposed to guide the collaborative research process to mitigate ambiguities that reside in the black box. The seven phases encompass problem settings and pre-negotiations, direction setting: action planning, social capital, re-negotiations, equity and inclusivity, implementation- the submission-revision cycle, and reflexivity. This theoretical analysis aims to offer a useful resource to promote enhanced collaborative practices, and the authors take an explicit advocacy and visionary perspective to promote transparency, accountability, and reciprocal trust, to shatter overarching issues such as oppressive, deceitful, and exploitative norms in academic authorship practices.