This is excellent, thank you Will use CRediT from now on
Long story short - there has been no discussion about introduction of the CRediT taxonomy in our community. The roles do not reflect what we do in our field. It doesn't fix the system in a useful way.
I'm a big fan of the CRediT system, which uses (). Instead of saying "I published this paper," CVs can say "I contributed xyz to this paper." Individual committees can evaluate individual contributions -- presence of other authors shouldn't matter.
More and more science publishers are using the credit taxonomy to distinguish which authors performer which roles. You're an author at least twice over: Data Analysis & Visualization.
No need to have arbitrary authorship cutoffs for fear that someone will get some credit they don't deserve. Describe author contributions with the CRediT taxonomy.
Interesting presentation by on #CRediT Science is collaborative and contributorsnperform various roles. And who doesn’t just love a #taxonomy #ARMA2019
Thanks! Looking forward to the blog! I hope you will address the CRediT system in particular now used by PLoS and incorporated into many others' journal management systems.
I have a very not secret goal to eliminate author lists from academia (particularly ordered author lists) and replace them with a movie style credits reel. These contributor roles from look really nice: #CiteSoftware #RecogniseCollaborators
How NOT to be #BulliedIntoBadScience: workshop recommends replacing journal names w 2-4 sentence summary of article’s contribution to field & authors contribution to article Highlight CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy)
Obviously we need a better standard for this and it’s coming
Does this help as a start
. #REF2021 outlines coauthorship rules ... 15 or more outputs in UOA 1-6,9 then take a look at #CRediT
Enter the CREDIT taxonomy This framework provides a detailed breakdown of the ways people can contribute to scientific projects
This is the contributorship open standard that's gaining steam
Another A: "Ask for contributions (e.g. credit taxonomy ) to research outputs" #assessingresearch
Have you seen We recently learned about it and are gonna use it in our papers from now on.
I wonder if anyone has studied how different authors of a paper describe their contributions to that work? is adopting the CASRAI system, & I expect the data to be so noisy as to be unusable, since students won't ever see what PIs report
"CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy) is high-level taxonomy, including 14 roles, that can be used to represent the roles typically played by contributors to scientific scholarly outputs" #scholcomm
Yes ... all the more need for more nuance that “lead” author or not... #CRediT is ready and waiting ... why not use it? Many do!
#CASRAIUK19 #CRediT presentation well received, and lots of good discussion would (I hope) be proud!
"The roles are not intended to define what constitutes authorship, but instead to capture all the work that allows scholarly publications to be produced".