Was Osha breaking them?
http://www.icmje.org/ethical_1author.html
"Authorship credit should be based on 1) substantial contributions to conception and design, acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data; 2) drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content; and 3) final approval of the version to be published. Authors should meet conditions 1, 2, and 3."
Since the paper was never published, I guess not. What has been done in the past however, e.g. Bilal, was to publish several years after his exit from the lab without giving him notice of the pre-publication procedures and therefore not allowing him to participate in the writing process. This has is how she justifies putting him in the "Acknowledgemet" section.
P11: "All contributors who do not meet the criteria for authorship should be listed in an acknowledgments section. Examples of those who might be acknowledged include a person who provided purely technical help, writing assistance, or a department chair who provided only general support."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
I don't know who Bilal is or what his/her contribution to Osha's lab was during his/her tenure, but I will say this: The first paragraph is correct. An author should contribute to those three areas to have his/her name attached to a manuscript. However, given an individual meets the 1st criterion, he or she is inherently given the opportunity to meet the final two criteria. Ultimately, if an individual is responsible for the first criterion, he/she owns that data (call it intellectual property). If Bilal noticed Osha’s published work, and recognizes the work as his/her own, Bilal (if not given to opportunity to prepare a manuscript) would have an ethical case against Osha.
ReplyDeleteHopefully that was not too confusing. Again, I don’t know Bilal or how much Bilal contributed to the content detail in criterion 1. You will have to inform me on whether Bilal designed the study, tested the parameters, streamlined a new method, carried through the experimentation, etc.
He did not design the study. Osha acquired the funding and had the idea of what to test. Bilal tested the parameters and streamlined the method. He did end up doing some experimentation but not all of it (the rest being done by Osha made possible by other labworkers). Osha designed the experiment with Erica and Josh where they would do all of the work up to the point where EPR data was gathered. She took over at this point and did most of the data analysis her help. It should be noted though that for every hour at the EPR, probably 10 hours of manpower had to go into getting that sample ready (from mutagenesis involving plasmids and expression of the mutant rlc, purification, using detergent to remove the native rlc and then replacing with the mutant which couldn't be done without rabbit prep and psoas dissection and tying into capillary tubes and then testing ATPase to ensure viable muscle). So, she gathered the data technically but definitely could not have on her own. And if given the chance, the students could have learned EPR but Osha would not allow this to happen. She wanted no one to operate the machine and gather the data and therefore would not allow anyone to learn (forcefully sometimes).
ReplyDeleteBut a person doesn't specifically need to meet all three criteria, do they? I don't think I did anything in regards to #s 2 & 3 under Dawn, and here I've been told we'll be listed as authors, and I'm pretty certain we won't even do any analyzing of the data, let alone writing & final approval.
ReplyDeleteWell as I stated, performing the tasks in criterion 1 inherently gives you the right to do #2 and #3 if you wish.
ReplyDeleteSteve, in your case, Dawn had intellectual ownership of the study given she designed it. I'm guessing this is similar to your current situation (correct me if I am wrong). If an individual chooses not to participate in criteria 2 and 3, or is has been previously arranged that an individual will not be participating in criteria 2 and 3, it is up to the primary author of the manuscripts whose names are included.
Steve, I am pretty sure in "Rachel's" paper you were given the manuscript and asked for recommendation and corrections. You may not have written it, but you were involved in the manuscripts completion. This suffices for #2 and #3.
I suppose that makes sense. I probably did at least proofread the methods part for what I did to make sure it was accurate. I just don't remember it.
ReplyDelete