{"id":1044,"date":"2009-04-30T10:30:50","date_gmt":"2009-04-30T14:30:50","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/esa.org\/esablog\/?p=1044"},"modified":"2009-04-30T10:30:50","modified_gmt":"2009-04-30T14:30:50","slug":"nature-requires-responsible-party","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/esa.org\/esablog\/2009\/04\/30\/nature-requires-responsible-party\/","title":{"rendered":"&#8216;Nature&#8217; requires responsible party"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><span style=\"color: #000000\"><em>Nature <\/em>announced today that it is modifying its <a href=\"http:\/\/www.nature.com\/authors\/editorial_policies\/authorship.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">authorship policies<\/a> for submission to its journals. The two major changes are that one senior author will be required to take \u201cresponsibility\u201d for the paper, and that an explicit list of each coauthor\u2019s role in the paper must be submitted. <\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #000000\">In a <a href=\"http:\/\/www.nature.com\/nature\/journal\/v450\/n7166\/full\/450001a.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">November 2007 editorial<\/a>, the leadership at <em>Nature <\/em>suggested that a senior or corresponding author on every paper be required to sign a statement assuring the paper\u2019s integrity. They made the case that: <\/span><\/p>\n<blockquote><p><span style=\"color: #000000\">\u201cPrincipal investigators traditionally bask in the glory of a well-received paper. We are proposing now that they willingly open themselves to sanctions that could be brought to bear should the paper turn out to have major problems.\u201d<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p><span style=\"color: #000000\">In comments received, the scientific community disapproved of this move. <em>Nature <\/em>has thus instead taken a less drastic, but just as meaningful, step: They are requiring that one senior author name himself the steward of the paper. Duties include preserving paper\u2019s original data, verifying that the figures, images and conclusions accurately reflect the data collected and conform to <em>Nature<\/em> journal guidelines, and making the materials, data and algorithms easily accessible. <\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #000000\">In addition, they are now making mandatory the long-encouraged task of detailing each author\u2019s contributions to a given paper. Because there are no guidelines for authorship within the peer-review world, this new rule is meant to minimize the number of \u201chonorary authorships\u201d, or authorships given to someone for non-scientific reasons, such as prestige of the person\u2019s name. <em>Nature <\/em>leaves the structure of such lists up to the authors, and so far it looks like they will not contest authors they deem unfit. The move simply makes scientists think twice about who they include on their papers. <\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #000000\">The change in terms comes in the wake of a recent rare occurence, the <a href=\"http:\/\/www.nature.com\/nature\/journal\/v458\/n7238\/full\/nature07964.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">retraction of a <em>Nature<\/em> paper<\/a> in which the authors disagree about the validity of the results. <\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #000000\">Despite the increased transparency these measures will create, should journals dictate the dealings of authors on a study? Does good old-fashioned trust simply not work anymore?<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"Z3988\" title=\"ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&amp;rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&amp;rft.jtitle=Nature&amp;rft_id=info%3Adoi%2F10.1038%2F4581078a&amp;rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fresearchblogging.org&amp;rft.atitle=Authorship+policies&amp;rft.issn=0028-0836&amp;rft.date=2009&amp;rft.volume=458&amp;rft.issue=7242&amp;rft.spage=1078&amp;rft.epage=1078&amp;rft.artnum=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nature.com%2Fdoifinder%2F10.1038%2F4581078a&amp;rft.au=Nature+editors&amp;rfe_dat=bpr3.included=1;bpr3.tags=Biology%2CResearch+%2F+Scholarship\">Nature editors (2009). Authorship policies <span style=\"font-style: italic\">Nature, 458<\/span> (7242), 1078-1078 DOI: <a rev=\"review\" href=\"http:\/\/dx.doi.org\/10.1038\/4581078a\">10.1038\/4581078a<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Nature announced today that it is modifying its authorship policies for submission to its journals. The two major changes are that one senior author will be required to take \u201cresponsibility\u201d for the paper, and that an explicit list of each coauthor\u2019s role in the paper must be submitted. In a November 2007 editorial, the leadership at Nature suggested that a&#8230;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":50,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[49],"tags":[230,231,232],"class_list":["post-1044","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-scholarship","tag-authorship","tag-ethics","tag-publishing"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/esa.org\/esablog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1044","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/esa.org\/esablog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/esa.org\/esablog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/esa.org\/esablog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/50"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/esa.org\/esablog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1044"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/esa.org\/esablog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1044\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/esa.org\/esablog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1044"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/esa.org\/esablog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1044"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/esa.org\/esablog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1044"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}