2013 | Office for Research Ethics and Integrity, The University of Melbourne
FACULTY OR GRADUATE SCHOOL GUIDELINES FOR AUTHORSHIP TEMPLATE
Authorship Guidelines for [Faculty/Graduate School Name]
Purpose
The purpose of this document is to provide researchers at the [Faculty/Graduate School Name] with
discipline-sensitive and discipline-relevant information for implementing the University of Melbourne
Authorship Policy. This information provides guidelines for meeting researcher responsibilities with respect to
the criteria for authorship, responsibilities of authorship, authorship conventions for supervisors of graduate
researchers and author order.
NOTE: A faculty or graduate school can have more than one set of guidelines. Where there are differences
for authorship conventions in a faculty or graduate school, these differences can be recognised and
addressed in a separate set of guidelines.
Scope
All research outputs produced by [Faculty/Graduate School Name] Students, Staff, Honorary Staff or Visitors
involved in research.
[OR]
All research outputs produced by [Faculty/Graduate School Name] Students, Staff, Honorary Staff or Visitors
involved in research in the following discipline areas:
[INSERT RELEVANT DISCIPLCINE AREAS HERE – MAY BE DEPARTMENT NAMES IF THIS IS
APPROPRIATE]
NOTE: The wording here will be determined by the number of FGSGAs required in the Faculty or Graduate
School.
Guidelines
Authorship Principles
> Researchers at [Faculty/Graduate School Name] communicate research in many different forms
(research outputs). Research outputs at [Faculty/Graduate School Name] commonly include [delete or add
research outputs as appropriate] refereed journal articles, book chapters, books, reports, performances,
exhibitions, audio-visual recordings, seminars, lectures, conference presentations, conference abstracts,
posters at conferences, blogs, discussion or information sites on the internet.
> An author at [Faculty/Graduate School Name] is an individual who has made a significant intellectual or
scholarly contribution to a research output and is willing to be responsible for the integrity and accurate
reporting of at least their contribution.
NOTE: Except for [Faculty/Graduate School Name] the text above cannot change because these are the
two fundamental criteria for authorship regardless of discipline.
Additional text that provides discipline sensitive information can be added, but this cannot be contradictory to
the requirements of the Authorship Policy.
> Authorship at [Faculty/Graduate School Name] must be an honest reflection of contribution to research.
NOTE: Except for [Faculty/Graduate School Name] the text above cannot change. This is a universal
principle for authorship of research.
> Authorship at [Faculty/Graduate School Name] should be assigned fairly and consistently,
communicated clearly and transparently between contributors to the research, and approached with a
generosity of spirit whilst remaining true to the policy requirements.
NOTE: Except for [Faculty/Graduate School Name] the text above cannot change. Additional text that
provides discipline sensitive information can be added, but this cannot by contradictory.
It would be helpful to add discipline-relevant examples to elaborate on ‘generosity’ in authorship practice.
Authorship Inclusions
2013 | Office for Research Ethics and Integrity, The University of Melbourne
> Authorship at [Faculty/Graduate School Name] is attributed only when a researcher has made a
significant intellectual or scholarly contribution to a research output and is willing to take responsibility for the
contribution. Researchers qualify as authors if they have made a significant intellectual or scholarly
contribution through at least one, but often more than one, of the following:
>> Conception and design of the research described in the research output,
>> Acquisition of research data where the acquisition has required significant intellectual judgement
or input,
>> Analysis and interpretation of research data,
>> Drafting of the research output, or redrafting the research output so as to critically change or
substantively advance the interpretation..
NOTE:
Please consider the meaning of ‘acquisition of data’ for the disciplines covered in this guideline e.g. what
types of data might meet the requirement for significant intellectual judgement or input? For example, would
collecting research papers and preparing a literature review of these papers be considered sufficient? Would
running 100 NMR samples? Recruiting patients to a clinical trial?
Consider specific ways in which a contribution in one of these five areas might be made, e.g. the making of
unique instruments for the research described in the research output. Add your own list here.
Authorship Exclusions
> Authorship at [Faculty/Graduate School Name] must not be attributed when a researcher has not made
a significant intellectual or scholarly contribution to a research output or is unwilling to take responsibility for
their contribution.
NOTE: Add your own list here. Contributions made solely through the provision of funding, the provision of
technical support or advice or assistance, their position or as a gift, the provision of research data or
materials or infrastructure (access to equipment), are generally not considered to meet the criteria for
authorship. Consider contributions that do not meet the authorship criteria, but provide some discipline
specific context to the examples listed above.
Recording Authorship
> Authorship for supervisors of graduate researchers at [Faculty/Graduate School Name] aligns with
discipline tradition and convention i.e. supervisors of graduate researchers are not typically included as
authors on research outputs by student researchers. Where exclusion of a supervisor is aligned with
disciplinary practice, a record of this exclusion is not required. In all other cases, a person who qualifies as
an author must not be included or excluded without their written agreement and a record of this agreement
must be kept.
[OR]
> A person who qualifies as an author must not be included or excluded without their written agreement and
a record of this agreement must be kept. Authorship for supervisors of graduate researchers at
[Faculty/Graduate School Name] aligns with discipline tradition and convention i.e. supervisors of graduate
researchers are typically included as authors on research outputs by graduate researchers provided that a
significant intellectual contribution has been made.
NOTE: Delete the paragraph that does not apply.
> Authors included on research outputs must describe their contribution in writing and this must form part of
the agreement.
Research outputs with multiple authors
> Nominate a corresponding author (even if this is not published). The corresponding author is responsible
for communication between the publishers and managing communication between the co-authors. The
corresponding author must maintain records of authorship agreement.
NOTE: Modify the points below to provide further discipline specific advice for research outputs with multiple
authors. Delete those that do not apply.
> Nominate a senior author where this is customary. The senior author’s role is normally to have overseen
the research and to attest to the integrity and accuracy of the research as a whole.
2013 | Office for Research Ethics and Integrity, The University of Melbourne
> Advice for determining author order where relevant. In the disciplines covered in these guidelines, is first
author important? Is author order alphabetical? Does it reflect relative contribution to the research? Is the
senior author usually last on the authorship line?
>Advice for determining equal co-authorship. Sometimes, authors who have contributed equally to the work
should be recognised as equal co-authors (for example, equal first authors). How is this determined in the
disciplines covered by this guideline?
Timeliness
> Timeliness is important. Delays in providing feedback or comments about a draft research output can
sometimes initiate authorship disputes.
NOTE: What is a reasonable timeframe for authors to provide responses to communications about a
research output? Please add this discipline sensitive information.
Resolving Authorship Disputes
> Disputes about authorship should be resolved using the Authorship Dispute Resolution Procedure.
> For the [Faculty/Graduate School Name] the [insert position title] shall act as the Senior Academic
who mediates dispute resolution.
NOTE: The Senior Academic may be the relevant Heads of Department or School, the Associate Dean
(Research), the Associate Dean (Research Training) or some other Senior Academic. Our preference is for
Heads of Department or School because Associate Deans may be involved in other processes if mediation
fails.
Resources
[Link to OREI website]
Authorship at Melbourne Resources provided by the Office for Research Ethics and Integrity:
> Authorship Policy
> Authorship Procedure
> Authorship Dispute Resolution Procedure
> Template Authorship Record Form