I am sure that students' attempts to be competitive in the admission process is an important factor. One need only browse through the many articles published in magazines, such as Eye on Psi Chi, that stress the importance of research experience. However, I believe that another significant factor lies in the expectation that, to be a successful academic, one needs to involve students in research. One obvious measure of this outcome is to have as many students as possible as authors and co-authors in our research. Unfortunately, some folks may be inappropriately stretching the criteria for authorship to benefit their students as well as themselves.
Miguel -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2007 12:12 PM To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) Subject: [tips] Re: Knowledge of statistics in our best students I believe the proliferation of articles with student co-authors has been driven by the highly competitive nature of graduate school admissions criteria, so that many of the top, top programs, especially clinical, will not even look at a candidate without publication. And, unfortunately, the ´student´ oriented journals do not count, such as the Psi Chi journal, or Modern Psychological Inquiry. So we are driving our students to participate in our research that is often over their heads so that they can be competitive; and I expect in some cases professors who have truly capable students will somewhat 'gift' them with publication co-authorship because they realize that without this gift the student will not get the education they are capable of. It becomes an awful monster we have created. Annette Annette Kujawski Taylor, Ph.D. Professor of Psychology University of San Diego 5998 Alcala Park San Diego, CA 92110 619-260-4006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---- Original message ---- >Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2007 09:23:31 -0400 >From: "Miguel Roig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: [tips] Re: Knowledge of statistics in our best students >To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)" <tips@acsun.frostburg.edu> > >I want to thank everyone who responded to me on and off-list. Based on some >of your responses, it does seem like some undergraduates get enough training >(and supervision) to be capable of carrying out and understanding some of >those advanced statistical techniques. Nevertheless, I have a strong >suspicion that an increasing number of students are given unmerited >authorship of journal articles and, especially, of conference papers and I >believe that this is a growing problem. > >Responsible authorship is an issue of concern within the area of research >integrity and inappropriate and questionable practices include ghost >authorship, gift authorship, misappropriation of text and ideas, etc. In the >biomedical world and, increasingly, in the social sciences, the guidelines >proposed by the Committee On Publication Ethics (COPE, >http://www.publicationethics.org.uk/guidelines) are being universally >adopted by science journals and professional associations. One of the >relevant guidelines states: > >“The award of authorship should balance intellectual contributions to the >conception, design, analysis and writing of the study against the collection >of data and other routine work. If there is no task that can reasonably be >attributed to a particular individual, then that individual should not be >credited with authorship”. > >Another guideline states: > >“All authors must take public responsibility for the content of their paper. >The multidisciplinary nature of much research can make this difficult, but >this can be resolved by the disclosure of individual contributions”. > >In fact, the APA has similar guidelines in its ethics code. For example: > >8.12b, Publication Credit : Principal authorship and other publication >credits accurately reflect the relative scientific or professional >contributions of the individuals involved, regardless of their relative >status…. Minor contributions to the research or to the writing for >publications are acknowledged appropriately, such as in footnotes or in an >introductory statement. > >Mike, who teaches at a highly competitive institution, points out that it is >rare for an undergraduate to have both, the skill and the depth of >conceptual understanding to carry out some of these sophisticated >statistical analyses. I would guess the likelihood of having such a student >is even lower at the less competitive colleges and universities. Yet, at >most institutions these days there is a strong expectation to involve >undergraduates in professional research and I think this push has resulted >in too many instances of unmerited authorship being awarded to students. >What I am trying to determine is exactly how extensive and serious is this >breach in academic AND professional integrity? > >I’ll leave you with a quote from Fine and Kurdek (1993), a must-read article >for those of us who involve students in our research: > >“First, a publication on one’s record that is not legitimately earned may >falsely represent the individual’s scholarly expertise. Second, if because >he or she is now a published author, the student is perceived as being more >skilled than a peer who is not published, the student is given an unfair >advantage professionally. Finally, if the student is perceived to have a >level of competence that he or she does not actually have, he or she will be >expected to accomplish tasks that may be outside the student’s range of >expertise” (p. 1143). > > >Reference > >Fine, M. A. and Kurdek, L. A. (1993). Reflections on determining authorship >credit and authorship order on faculty-student collaborations. American >Psychologist, 48, 1141-1147. > > > >--- >To make changes to your subscription go to: >http://acsun.frostburg.edu/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=tips&text_mode=0&lang=english > Njv --- To make changes to your subscription go to: http://acsun.frostburg.edu/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=tips&text_mode=0&lang=english
