Order of authors in academic publications

While there are scientific disciplines in which individual publications predominate and the question of the order in which the authors appear in the author line does not usually arise, there are other disciplines in which this issue is highly relevant. The role of an individual researcher in a project is often defined by the position in which their name appears in the order. In some cases, for example, doctoral and post-doctoral lecturing qualification candidates are required to appear in certain positions in the order of authors in publications.

Authorship models

Different authorship models have become established in the various research disciplines. In most cases, a single model prevails within one research discipline, but different options may also apply, depending on the type of publication and the circumstances. The explanation of Guideline 14 takes this point into account, requiring that “[t]he decision as to the order in which authors are named is made […] in accordance with clear criteria that reflect the practices within the relevant subject areas”.

Weighting of contribution levels

Some authorship models reflect a weighting of contribution levels and contribution types. Two models are worthy of mention in particular here. The so-called first-last-author-emphasis model distributes levels of contribution among the co-authors on a funnel-like basis: the first-mentioned and last-mentioned individuals are those who have contributed most, and the level of contribution declines towards the middle of the list. Alternatively, authors may be listed in descending order proportional to their level of contribution, starting with the person who contributed most.

If more than one person is to be assigned the same rank in the case of weighted contribution levels, this is indicated accordingly in the author line.

Order of authors in the case of equal contributions

If the author line is to represent contributions of equal value, the authors are often mentioned in alphabetical order; in this type of constellation, reverse alphabetical order is sometimes used; or if the group of authors remains the same, the positions are rotated in different publications. In such cases, an explanation usually appears in the author line stating that the order of authors does not imply a different weighting of the contributions.

Group authorships and consortia

In addition to the above, other variations have emerged for the listing of co-authors in the case of special constellations, and these are now used more and more frequently. In the case of so-called group authorship, for example, the name of a consortium usually appears in the author line. This increases the visibility of the group as a collective, while the individual members are listed in a separate section – usually at the end of the publication. The list of members will frequently be in alphabetical order (possibly under different headings). Diverging from this system, the name of a consortium might also appear alongside the names of individual researchers in the author line.

Conventions in subject disciplines

A specific authorship model will often have been established as the prevailing practice in a particular subject discipline. Yet in many instances, differing models may be used depending on the project and planned publication, so it is not the case that one discipline always uses one model. Different conventions may apply to review articles as compared to original research publications, for example. In addition, the authorship models used are subject to constant change.

Adherence to the rules of good research practice

It is contrary to the rules of good research practice for researchers to claim a position for themselves without meeting the specific requirements of the scientific community in the relevant discipline.

Given the reputation involved, issues of position in the list of authors can be very prone to conflict. This is why it is particularly important – especially in the case of interdisciplinary research projects – to discuss existing conventions and expectations: an agreement should be reached at an early stage on how research contributions to a publication are to be weighted and which positions the authors involved should consequently be allocated in accordance with good research practice. It can also be helpful to set down such an agreement in writing.

Scientific misconduct

If a person changes the order of authors in a way that runs the risk of misrepresentation as relevant to the review in connection with the submission of a funding proposal, this may potentially constitute a case of scientific misconduct.