[csaa-forum] collaborative publications

Alison Bartlett alison.bartlett at uwa.edu.au
Mon Sep 1 14:45:03 CST 2014

There's plenty of defensive about exploiting others in these strange new collaborative worlds,
but I'm starting to think that there are no losers in this paradigm shift,
especially now my university is giving equal publication points (not fractional) to every collaborator.

It has to assist postgrads to have a senior scholar's name on their papers, not to mention advice on how to structure, where to send, how to receive reviewers' comments, etc. It's arguably part of mentoring, modelling, and research training.
As an editor of a journal I've starting twinning authors - if a paper isn't quite up to publication, I'll offer the option of finding a more experienced scholar in the area to co-author so that it can be published. It's worked beautifully.
And forcollaborations with colleagues, discussion at the beginning of the project seems key to agreeing on coauthorship practice.

Nice to have those protocols handy Deb - thanks!

Alison Bartlett

On 01/09/2014, at 11:21 AM, Jon Stratton <J.Stratton at curtin.edu.au<mailto:J.Stratton at curtin.edu.au>> wrote:

Hi All,
   I'm wondering what opinions are on what is enough work to legitimately claim joint authorship for an article/chapter.  Increasingly we in Humanities are being asked by our universities to publish jointly, either with our doctoral students or with our Research Assistants, or indeed with each other.  This, we are constantly told, is what happens in the sciences and we are enjoined to behave similarly.  I have assumed that this is supposed to increase our research output.

Now, in the sciences, as I understand it, joint publication is relatively straightforward.  A senior staff member develops a project on which s/he employs one or more RAs or postgrads.  The results are then published under all their names with, most likely, the senior staff member having her/his name first as lead author.

In Humanities things are different.  So, how much work by one person, say the staff member, constitutes enough of a contribution for her/him to be included as an author?  For example, would doing one or more Track Changes on an article/chapter be enough?  What about if the idea for the article is the staff member's?  Would a first drafting, or redrafting be what is required?  What about suggesting the most appropriate journal to send the article to, and helping the RA/postgrad through the submission and, maybe, the revision process?  Or, perhaps, simply the fact of employing the RA on a project where funding has been obtained by the staff member--which might equate with being the supervisor for a postgrad submitting an article?  Or, what combination of these things?

Because collaborative work has been so rare in the Humanities there seems to be no normative rules for what is the appropriate amount of input.  I am wondering how colleagues are dealing with this relatively new situation.

many thanks,

discussion list of the cultural studies association of australasia


change your subscription details at http://lists.cdu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/csaa-forum

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.cdu.edu.au/pipermail/csaa-forum/attachments/20140901/346ca750/attachment.html 

More information about the csaa-forum mailing list