Skip to main content
Journal of Medical Ethics logoLink to Journal of Medical Ethics
. 2000 Dec;26(6):422–426. doi: 10.1136/jme.26.6.422

Publication ethics and the research assessment exercise: reflections on the troubled question of authorship

A Sheikh 1
PMCID: PMC1733321  PMID: 11129840

Abstract

The research assessment exercise (RAE) forms the basis for determining the funding of higher education institutions in the UK. Monies are distributed according to a range of performance criteria, the most important of which is "research outputs". Problems to do with publication misconduct, and in particular, issues of justice in attributing authorship, are endemic within the research community. It is here argued that the research assessment exercise currently makes no explicit attempt to address these concerns, and indeed, by focusing attention on research outputs, may actually be fostering such ethical problems.

Key Words: Research assessment exercise • publication ethics • authorship

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (116.9 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Bhopal R., Rankin J., McColl E., Thomas L., Kaner E., Stacy R., Pearson P., Vernon B., Rodgers H. The vexed question of authorship: views of researchers in a British medical faculty. BMJ. 1997 Apr 5;314(7086):1009–1012. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Goodman N. W. Survey of fulfillment of criteria for authorship in published medical research. BMJ. 1994 Dec 3;309(6967):1482–1482. doi: 10.1136/bmj.309.6967.1482. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Horton R. Publication and promotion. A fair reward. Lancet. 1998 Sep 12;352(9131):892–892. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Horton R. The unmasked carnival of science. Lancet. 1998 Mar 7;351(9104):688–689. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(98)22010-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Scott T. Authorship. Changing authorship system might be counterproductive. BMJ. 1997 Sep 20;315(7110):744–744. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Shapiro D. W., Wenger N. S., Shapiro M. F. The contributions of authors to multiauthored biomedical research papers. JAMA. 1994 Feb 9;271(6):438–442. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Smith J. Gift authorship: a poisoned chalice? BMJ. 1994 Dec 3;309(6967):1456–1457. doi: 10.1136/bmj.309.6967.1456. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Smith R. Authorship: time for a paradigm shift? BMJ. 1997 Apr 5;314(7086):992–992. doi: 10.1136/bmj.314.7086.992. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Smith R. Unscientific practice flourishes in science. BMJ. 1998 Apr 4;316(7137):1036–1036. doi: 10.1136/bmj.316.7137.1036. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Tomlinson S. The research assessment exercise and medical research. BMJ. 2000 Mar 4;320(7235):636–639. doi: 10.1136/bmj.320.7235.636. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of Medical Ethics are provided here courtesy of BMJ Publishing Group

RESOURCES