Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32410102›Full record

ArticleScience and engineering ethics2020

Authorship Not Taught and Not Caught in Undergraduate Research Experiences at a Research University.

Lauren E Abbott, Amy Andes, Aneri C Pattani, Patricia Ann Mabrouk

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Science and engineering ethics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pedagogic Strategies and Contents in Medical Writing/Publishing Education: A Comprehensive Systematic Survey.European journal of investigation in health, psychology and education · 2024
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Lauren E AbbottDepartment of Chemistry and Chemical Biology, Northeastern University, Boston, MA, 02115, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5957-7996
Amy AndesDepartment of Chemistry and Chemical Biology, Northeastern University, Boston, MA, 02115, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2653-0582
Aneri C PattaniDepartment of Chemistry and Chemical Biology, Northeastern University, Boston, MA, 02115, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0631-5551
Patricia Ann MabroukDepartment of Chemistry and Chemical Biology, Northeastern University, Boston, MA, 02115, USA. p.mabrouk@northeastern.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4965-1448
Northeastern University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This grounded study investigated the negotiation of authorship by faculty members, graduate student mentors, and their undergraduate protégés in undergraduate research experiences at a private research university in the northeastern United States. Semi-structured interviews using complementary scripts were conducted separately with 42 participants over a 3 year period to probe their knowledge and understanding of responsible authorship and publication practices and learn how faculty and students entered into authorship decision-making intended to lead to the publication of peer-reviewed technical papers. Herein the theoretical model for the negotiation of authorship developed through the analysis of these interviews is reported. The model identifies critical causal and intervening conditions responsible for the coping strategies faculty and students employ, which, in our study, appear to often produce unfortunate consequences for all involved. The undergraduate student researchers and their graduate student mentors interviewed in this study exhibited a limited understanding of authorship and the requirements for authorship in their research groups. The power differential between faculty and students, the students' limited epistemic development, the busy-ness of the faculty, and the faculty's failure to prioritize authorship have been identified as key factors inhibiting both undergraduate and graduate students from developing a deeper understanding of responsible authorship and publication practices. Implications for graduate education and undergraduate research are discussed, and strategies for helping all students to develop a deeper understanding of authorship are identified.

Indexed as

AuthorshipUniversitiesFacultyHumansMentorsStudentsAuthorshipResearch ethicsResponsible conduct of researchUndergraduate research experience

Identifiers

PMID32410102
OpenAlexW3025592030

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.