- - - -. ~~i
~s_p_ec_ia_I_CD_m_m_u_ni_ca_t_iD_n
_
A Standardized Method for Determination of Who Should Be Listed as Authors on Scholarly Papers* Richard B. Rafal, AI.D. A handy method is described of selecting among the inevitable onslaught of 100 to 200 potential coauthors that mysteriously appear whenever a journal article is submitted for publication. The urelative authorship weighting scale" helps to decide who actually qualifies as an author and serves as an objective means of determining the appropriate order in which these various goldbrickers should be listed on the manuscript. (Chest 1991; 99:786)
In order to eliminate the guesswork and subjectivity that are so often a part of the coauthor selection process, the relative authorship \veighting scale (RAWS) has been devised. Utilization of this ne\v Inethod is easy (Tahle 1). For each potential coauthor, check all itelns that apply, and then total the corresponding RAWS values in the right-hand colulnn. Using this number (the RAWS ra\\' score), final analysis is nlade \vith Table 2, \\rhich is self-explanatory. I t is the author's firnl belief that strict adherence to this ne\\' systeln \\'ill simplify the selection of potential coauthors. Standardized criteria should elilninate political conflicts, re\vard only those \\'ho merit selection, and weed out those sneaky, sniveling parasites \vho pad their resulnes \vith the \\rork of others. Should a person be miraculously selected as a coauthor utilizing this technique, another pesky probleln is the order in \\rhich authors are listed on the paper. This is sOlnetimes a source of friction. Such unpleasantness is avoided by judicious use of Table 1; simply list the authors according to nunlerical order of their point totals (after your own nanle, naturally). I t is recolnnlended that for every article, each person's RAWS score should be recalculated. This \vill enable various lackeys, underlings, and inferiors to inlprove their chances hefore your next journal submission. More inlportant, this Inanuever buys additional tilHe for a larger gift or higher ubid" to roll in.
ue
*Frorn Tht' I)epartrnent of Radiology, Corrlt~1I Uni\'t'rsity f\tedkal Ct'ntt'r, !\;pw )c)rk. Rt'1Jrint rei/IlI'stS: /Jr. Rilfal, /Jepllrl71U'ut of Radiolo/!,y, Starr 8A,
786
R('print can be obtairu:d by 1nlftin/!, dil1U'S into the nearest photocopyin/!, 11uuJlint·.
Table I-RAWS RAWS Value
Potential Coauthor's Qualifications! Duties Perfonll~d Resident that conceived the idea, researched, xeroxed, and wrote the paper Simple car wash Sitnonizin~
Vacuums car interior (including mats) (;eneralized posterior kissing (must be of >2 year duration) Blatant br()\vn-n()sin~ Benign ne~lect Prior Iistin~ on his or her paper as an author Bribe (generic) Cash bribe \Vhole lotta nloney Shoe shine Dry c1eanin~ (rllust include pickup AND dropof1) Relative Blood relative In-law Peels grapes Sexual favors* Arm t\\'istin~ by Departnlent Chairman 11lkes "on call" f()r you Actually contributed to the paper Fenlale Young fernale Young, attractive fenlale lias pictures of you in co(npronlising positions Iioldin~ hostagest
+2
+5
+ 10 + 15 +8 -4 +25 + ISO +30 +75
+200
+3
+ 10
+ 14 +21
-25 +6 + 25 to +500 +31 +35 per ni~ht +2 + 10
+25 +65
+ 185 +20 to +45
*Depends on specifics. tDepends on nurnher and who is being held.
Table 2-Final Status
REFERE~CES
Shutt YlT Dolt. The fee goes up tOlllorrow. Acta Befi)re Itsa lho Latt' 1990; 12:424-26 2 RU Nutz. Coauthor on nl)' paper? Presented at the Third Annual ~Iet'ting of tht' Society of tht, I)aft and Dt~lusional, Junt' 19H7. 3 Fulla BS. The check is in tht, nlail. British Journal of Apple Polishing 19AA; 4H:23-24
.52.5 f:llst 68th Street, Neu~
Keywords: Bum; lazy; freeloading; obsequious; boot ticker; leech
)(,rk, New )(,rk 10021
RA\VS Raw Score
Status
()"er 10,()()(),()(X)
Qualifies as a coauthor Sorry Charlie
~l(),()()(),(X)()
4 Peeker I~L
Eunich UB. ~ty
nanle's first. Castration Annual 1990;
2:567-7()
5 Holdinga B~t.
Do your o\\'n work. Annals of Anal Retentives
1989; 2.'3:112-13
6 Just l1C. No tickee, no washe{~. suckin~
Archives of Advanced Blood-
1990; 11 :43-45
Who Should be Listed as Authors of Scholarly Papers? (Richard B. Ratal)
~s_p_ec_ia_I_CD_m_m_u_ni_ca_t_iD_n
_
A Standardized Method for Determination of Who Should Be Listed as Authors on Scholarly Papers* Richard B. Rafal, AI.D. A handy method is described of selecting among the inevitable onslaught of 100 to 200 potential coauthors that mysteriously appear whenever a journal article is submitted for publication. The urelative authorship weighting scale" helps to decide who actually qualifies as an author and serves as an objective means of determining the appropriate order in which these various goldbrickers should be listed on the manuscript. (Chest 1991; 99:786)
In order to eliminate the guesswork and subjectivity that are so often a part of the coauthor selection process, the relative authorship \veighting scale (RAWS) has been devised. Utilization of this ne\v Inethod is easy (Tahle 1). For each potential coauthor, check all itelns that apply, and then total the corresponding RAWS values in the right-hand colulnn. Using this number (the RAWS ra\\' score), final analysis is nlade \vith Table 2, \\rhich is self-explanatory. I t is the author's firnl belief that strict adherence to this ne\\' systeln \\'ill simplify the selection of potential coauthors. Standardized criteria should elilninate political conflicts, re\vard only those \\'ho merit selection, and weed out those sneaky, sniveling parasites \vho pad their resulnes \vith the \\rork of others. Should a person be miraculously selected as a coauthor utilizing this technique, another pesky probleln is the order in \\rhich authors are listed on the paper. This is sOlnetimes a source of friction. Such unpleasantness is avoided by judicious use of Table 1; simply list the authors according to nunlerical order of their point totals (after your own nanle, naturally). I t is recolnnlended that for every article, each person's RAWS score should be recalculated. This \vill enable various lackeys, underlings, and inferiors to inlprove their chances hefore your next journal submission. More inlportant, this Inanuever buys additional tilHe for a larger gift or higher ubid" to roll in.
ue
*Frorn Tht' I)epartrnent of Radiology, Corrlt~1I Uni\'t'rsity f\tedkal Ct'ntt'r, !\;pw )c)rk. Rt'1Jrint rei/IlI'stS: /Jr. Rilfal, /Jepllrl71U'ut of Radiolo/!,y, Starr 8A,
786
R('print can be obtairu:d by 1nlftin/!, dil1U'S into the nearest photocopyin/!, 11uuJlint·.
Table I-RAWS RAWS Value
Potential Coauthor's Qualifications! Duties Perfonll~d Resident that conceived the idea, researched, xeroxed, and wrote the paper Simple car wash Sitnonizin~
Vacuums car interior (including mats) (;eneralized posterior kissing (must be of >2 year duration) Blatant br()\vn-n()sin~ Benign ne~lect Prior Iistin~ on his or her paper as an author Bribe (generic) Cash bribe \Vhole lotta nloney Shoe shine Dry c1eanin~ (rllust include pickup AND dropof1) Relative Blood relative In-law Peels grapes Sexual favors* Arm t\\'istin~ by Departnlent Chairman 11lkes "on call" f()r you Actually contributed to the paper Fenlale Young fernale Young, attractive fenlale lias pictures of you in co(npronlising positions Iioldin~ hostagest
+2
+5
+ 10 + 15 +8 -4 +25 + ISO +30 +75
+200
+3
+ 10
+ 14 +21
-25 +6 + 25 to +500 +31 +35 per ni~ht +2 + 10
+25 +65
+ 185 +20 to +45
*Depends on specifics. tDepends on nurnher and who is being held.
Table 2-Final Status
REFERE~CES
Shutt YlT Dolt. The fee goes up tOlllorrow. Acta Befi)re Itsa lho Latt' 1990; 12:424-26 2 RU Nutz. Coauthor on nl)' paper? Presented at the Third Annual ~Iet'ting of tht' Society of tht, I)aft and Dt~lusional, Junt' 19H7. 3 Fulla BS. The check is in tht, nlail. British Journal of Apple Polishing 19AA; 4H:23-24
.52.5 f:llst 68th Street, Neu~
Keywords: Bum; lazy; freeloading; obsequious; boot ticker; leech
)(,rk, New )(,rk 10021
RA\VS Raw Score
Status
()"er 10,()()(),()(X)
Qualifies as a coauthor Sorry Charlie
~l(),()()(),(X)()
4 Peeker I~L
Eunich UB. ~ty
nanle's first. Castration Annual 1990;
2:567-7()
5 Holdinga B~t.
Do your o\\'n work. Annals of Anal Retentives
1989; 2.'3:112-13
6 Just l1C. No tickee, no washe{~. suckin~
Archives of Advanced Blood-
1990; 11 :43-45
Who Should be Listed as Authors of Scholarly Papers? (Richard B. Ratal)
