Rethinking the comparison of coauthorship credit allocation schemes

Jinseok Kim and Jinmo Kim

Journal of Informetrics, 2015, vol. 9, issue 3, 667-673

Abstract: This paper compares Fractional, Geometric, Arithmetic, Harmonic, and Network-Based schemes for allocating coauthorship credits. Each scheme is operationalized to be flexible in producing credit distribution by changing parameters, and to incorporate a special situation where the first and corresponding authors are assigned equal credits. For testing each scheme, empirical datasets from economics, marketing, psychology, chemistry, and medicine, were collected and errors in how each scheme approximates empirical data was measured. Results show that Harmonic scheme performs best overall, contrary to some claims of preceding studies in support of Harmonic or Network-Based models. The performance of a scheme, however, seems to heavily depend on empirical datasets and flexibility of the scheme, not on its innate feature. This study suggests that the comparison of coauthorship credit allocation schemes should be taken with care.

Keywords: Coauthor order; Coauthorship credit; Author contribution; Bibliometrics; Empirical validation (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2015
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (10)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751157715200454
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:infome:v:9:y:2015:i:3:p:667-673

DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2015.07.005

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of Informetrics is currently edited by Leo Egghe

More articles in Journal of Informetrics from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().