Back

Analysis of justification for and gender bias in author order among those contributing equally

Mattoon, E. R.; Miles, M.; Casadevall, A.; Broderick, N. A.

2024-03-04 scientific communication and education
10.1101/2024.03.01.582955 bioRxiv
Show abstract

The practice of designating two or more authors as equal contributors (EC) on a scientific publication is increasingly common as a form of sharing credit. However, EC authors are often unclearly attributed on CVs or citation engines, and it is unclear how research teams determine author order within an EC listing. In response to studies showing that male authors were more likely to be placed first in an EC listing, the American Society of Microbiology (ASM) required that authors explain the reasons for author order beginning in 2020. In this study we analyze data from over 2500 ASM publications to see how this policy affected gender bias and how research teams are making decisions on author order. Data on publications from 2018-2021 show that gender bias was largely nonsignificant both before and after authors were asked by ASM to provide an EC statement. The most likely reasons for EC order included alphabetical order, seniority, and chance, although there were differences for publications from different geographic regions. However, many research teams used unique methods in order selection, highlighting the importance of EC statements to provide clarity for readers, funding agencies, and tenure committees.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 8%
19.3%
2
PLOS Biology
408 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
15.2%
3
The FEBS Journal
78 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
7.0%
4
Royal Society Open Science
193 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
5.0%
5
FACETS
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
5.0%
50% of probability mass above
6
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B
51 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.1%
7
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 23%
3.8%
8
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.7%
9
FEBS Letters
42 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.7%
10
F1000Research
79 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
3.7%
11
Wellcome Open Research
57 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
3.7%
12
mBio
750 papers in training set
Top 6%
2.1%
13
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 52%
1.9%
14
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 19%
1.3%
15
eneuro
389 papers in training set
Top 7%
1.3%
16
Heliyon
146 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.0%
17
Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
0.9%
18
FASEB BioAdvances
15 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.9%
19
FEBS Open Bio
29 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.8%
20
Epidemics
104 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
21
Acta Crystallographica Section D Structural Biology
54 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.8%
22
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
341 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.8%
23
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 46%
0.7%
24
The Journal of Infectious Diseases
182 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.7%
25
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 14%
0.5%
26
BMC Research Notes
29 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.5%
27
Journal of Cellular Physiology
21 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.5%
28
Plant Direct
81 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.5%
29
Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology
98 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.5%
30
Frontiers in Psychology
49 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.5%