[Esip-citationguidelines] Contribution vs Credit vs Authorship for software – Daniel S. Katz's blog

[Matthew Mayernik]

And a paper, https://doi.org/10.2218/ijdc.v11i1.357.  One of the things we
note, however, in our paper is that movie credits are a highly regulated
form of credit. Most of the credit designations in movies are mediated by
unions, guilds, etc. For example, screenwriting credits for hollywood
movies have to be reviewed and approved by the Screenwriters Guild. To move
in that direction within science would require the creation of analogous
forms of institutionalized mediation.

Another relevant point here is that this kind of approach was discussed at
the American meteorological society meeting a few weeks ago and there was
significant pushback, particularly by senior scientists. In specific, the
concern cited most strongly was that it could make it harder for students,
e.g. if a PI has an idea for a study that is then carried out and written
up by a student, would the student be penalized when trying to get a job
for not being the originator of the idea? In other words, there can be a
double edge sword for transparency around work roles. Exposing that
specific people contributed to tasks that are not conventionally considered
to be important could a) raise the status of those tasks, or b) reduce the
importance of the people doing those tasks. I would not be willing to make
a prediction about which way the scale would tilt between those two.

My point is that anything authorship-related is complicated, and hard to
influence in a straight-forward way.

Matt

Matt

<http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
Virus-free.
www.avg.com
<http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 6:12 PM Sophie Hou via Esip-citationguidelines <
esip-citationguidelines at lists.esipfed.org> wrote:

> Hi Mark,
>
> I agree; especially since Matt and I had an IDCC15 poster demonstrating
> exactly that: :-)
>
>
> http://www.dcc.ac.uk/sites/default/files/documents/IDCC15/175_Creatingaclimatemodel.pdf
>
> Best,
> Sophie
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 6:03 PM Parsons, Mark via Esip-citationguidelines <
> esip-citationguidelines at lists.esipfed.org> wrote:
>
>> Thoughts on credit from our friend Dan Katz.
>>
>>
>> https://danielskatzblog.wordpress.com/2019/01/23/contribution-vs-credit-vs-authorship-for-software/
>>
>>
>> I like how he works to separate the different levels of credit and more
>> importantly:
>>
>> "In the longer term, we need to stop using the term author as the means
>> of recognizing all significant contributions, and possibly go to a
>> movie-like system where we name contributors and explain their
>> contributions, and where author would be one of many types of contribution.”
>>
>> Something for us to consider.
>>
>> cheers,
>>
>> -m.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Esip-citationguidelines mailing list
>> Esip-citationguidelines at lists.esipfed.org
>> https://lists.esipfed.org/mailman/listinfo/esip-citationguidelines
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Esip-citationguidelines mailing list
> Esip-citationguidelines at lists.esipfed.org
> https://lists.esipfed.org/mailman/listinfo/esip-citationguidelines
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.esipfed.org/pipermail/esip-citationguidelines/attachments/20190124/c3269acf/attachment-0001.html>