56

On the other hand, it seems unusual that the creator of an already published dataset would request co-authorship on a paper they did not otherwise contribute to. I do not think they are asking for co-authorship on a paper they did not otherwise contribute to; I think they are soliciting a collaboration with someone who is interested in using their data. &...


38

It is just their "business model". I suggest that you ignore them. If they insist, then ask that the paper be retracted. Apparently you still hold copyright. However, IANAL, and don't know what legal remedy they might have. If you can reconstruct the complete history of correspondence with them it would be useful.


35

It would not be ethical to claim sole authorship in this case and the statistician should be listed as an author. It's always a good idea to get authorship sorted out as early in a project as possible to avoid problems later. In the fields I'm familiar with (STEM) anyone who made a substantial intellectual contribution to the paper should be an author. Their ...


33

You're dealing with a predatory journal. Rights and logic don't apply to predatory journals. You refuse to pay and tell them to retract the article if they wish.


26

They can request whatever they like, but you don't have to accede to their wishes unless you think it is valid. If they don't actually contribute to the intellectual content of the paper, then they aren't due authorship, but certainly need to be acknowledged with a citation. Saying "thanks" explicitly would be polite, also. I've never heard of such ...


18

If you read the license (on the right side of the webpage you provided the link for), it states that "The person who associated a work with this deed has dedicated the work to the public domain by waiving all of his or her rights to the work worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law." ...


17

All of the thoughts you raise about co-authorship are negative! The data folks might delay publication The data folks might shape the paper As others have said, this is in the public domain, so you are not required to make the data folks co-authors. But I think you should consider the many benefits: You build new collaborations. Later, this leads to ...


14

The statistician has a very good case for being included, but not absolutely clear-cut. The British Sociological Association (BSA) lists a number of criteria for deserving authorship. The BSA criteria are quoted below (emphasis mine). They are similar to the Vancouver Protocol, which relates to medical research but is often referred to beyond medicine. ...


11

I request that if you read the rest of this answer, you upvote it, send me a check for $100, and include me as a coauthor on your next paper. See what I did there? It wasn’t unreasonable, I merely made a request. If it had been a demand, it would be quite unreasonable on the other hand. The same goes for these authors, who merely wrote (coyly using the ...


11

I do not know what the standards are in sociology, but the contribution of the statistician looks quite substantial to me. Without even looking at standard guidelines as other responses do, from my gut impression that the contribution you describe is well above the threshold for co-authorship. Leaving them out feels quite wrong, even mentioning it in an ...


8

I had a similar situation. I did not know it was a predatory journal. As Allure wrote, refuse to pay even a penny and ask for a retraction. Your only fault seems to be that you have submitted, as I did, without a thorough investigation of the journal.


6

At this point I will offer what I think is an authoritative answer to the question. I consulted with a senior sociologist who conducts quantitative studies. Here's what he told me: (1) It's common for sociologists to hire statisticians because they don't have and aren't expected to have advanced skills in statistics. (2) Normally the statistician only ...


6

While I do not generally disagree with Buffy's thought-through answer, I think there is another thing to consider which makes it more difficult to judge whether their demand is unreasonable or legitimate. There is a change in perspective these days. With mounting demands for research transparency, there is increasing moral pressure for groups to publish ...


5

If someone has done enough work to qualify as an author if they would only complete some late-stage steps like helping to draft the manuscript/review the final manuscript, then their coauthors have a duty to offer that person to be included in those steps. It's not fair to purposefully prevent someone from fulfilling a key criteria for authorship in order to ...


4

There is now a (reasonably) standard way of specifying author contributions, at least in some fields: a CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy) statement, see http://credit.niso.org/. It was first introduced by Brand et al. (2015), and there are quite a few follow-up publications about it. E.g., Cell Press, Wiley and Elsevier do not seem to require it for all ...


4

Trying actively to find a situation where I'd think this request may sensible: They may think it likely that further work with their data will lead to lots of genuine discussion about the data between you and them. I.e., to them actually contributing intellectually to your study in a manner that warrants co-authorship. I could think of such a scenario if e.g....


4

If people care about Scopus in your field, then maybe, otherwise I wouldn't bother. In my field, I'm fairly sure they don't. I've no idea whether Scopus will take any notice - you'd have to ask them to find out. I suspect it depends a bit on the individual who processes your email. The most important place for it to be noted is not in Scopus (or any other ...


3

Is the dataset related to forest ecology? Because this is the norm there. The logic is that there is a lot of field work, which is really heavy work, which goes unappreciated with a simple citation. I've seen papers with 20 authors, because they used datasets which were authored by teams of 10+ people. I personally do not agree with this view, but I've heard ...


2

Ideally, he should be on the paper as author, if and only if his intellectual contributions appear in it. But practice differs in some fields and you likely need to adhere to the norms of the field, even if not ideal. If he is not an author, you need to acknowledge him for starting the project (at least). And "starting the project" may or may not ...


2

Just what rights the journal has depends on the wording of the website and whatever terms you submitted your work under. A valid contract, at least in US law, requires meeting of the minds and exchange of consideration. If you agreed to terms as a result of a false belief (e.g. you believed that the journal has an impact factor that it does not in fact have, ...


2

What I have come to understand is that in research your position, your affiliation, your status must not matter. The quality of your work cannot be overpowered and overshadowed by what or who you are.


2

From my understanding, much of Google scholar citations are automated. I know folks who have shown up as cited in studies where they were not in fact cited. That said, I just tested this. If you create a profile, you can select articles that are yours, and you can edit these once they are associated with your profile. You can also manually input articles ...


1

I had one case of data being produced in a research center and used in my publication. The one who built the experiment and measured the data did not contribute to the paper. I added him as a co-author because I could not have written my paper without his work. I felt that he deserved actual academic recognition for his work (his name on a paper), not only a ...


1

Data sets are a bit like software. Often they are regarded to be not publishable by themselves, but some scientific contribution like new insight have to be generated with the software / from the data set. If this is not the case, the author gets a publication for this data set / software and everybody using it will cite this paper. Any further authorship ...


1

Not in and of itself. However, if you're hard to contact, it might motivate people to change the paper so that it no longer contains any contributions from you, and ship that paper, without you on it. That's reasonable, if none of your work went into the modified paper. What they shouldn't do is write papers that involve your contributions without your say-...


1

Inclusion as an author of a paper is field- and research-group-dependent. Here is one example from Oceanography, which suggests a "2 out of 3" rule, where you are expected to contribute to two out of three of (1) ideas, (2) analyses, and (3) writing to be considered for authorship. Although you don't provide enough detail to understand the ...


1

Just to add a search term to the discussion: Not including someone who did make a substantial intellectual contribution to the study/paper is called ghost authorship and is as such unacceptable. Academic ghostwriting is not just a matter of the rights of the ghostwriter (who in many jurisdictions can legally agree to their name being excluded from the author ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible