Publication Ethics: An Examination of Authorship Practices

Authors: Molly T. Laflin, PhD; Elbert D. Glover, PhD, FASHA, FAAHB, FRIPH Robert J. McDermott, PhD, FASHA, FAAHB, FRIPH, FAAHE

Objective: To review health behavior research policies and practices related to authorship credit and responsibilities and to develop an authorship policy for the American Journal of Health Behavior. Methods: Research on authorship criteria and byline placement was reviewed and the American Journal of Health Behavior Ethics Working Group made recommendations to the editor regarding an authorship policy. Results: A new authorship policy was adopted by the editor. Conclusions: The new policy clarifies the position of the journal regarding authorship issues.

The issue of publication ethics applied to research is a multidimensional concern as well as one that affects a wide array of groups – authors, editors, reviewers, researchers and other scholars, learned societies and organizations, policy makers, practitioners and clinicians, funders, and numerous other stakeholders. Every journal that is an outlet for research findings and the dissemination of other new knowledge must, therefore, assume as much responsibility as possible for assuring that the papers it publishes represent high quality and integrity. In this particular paper and others expected to follow, it is the intention of the American Journal of Health Behavior Ethics Working Group to identify the scope of the publication ethics challenge and to propose mechanisms that establish and enforce practices of quality assurance for the stakeholders for whom health behavior research is so vital. In this first paper of a series, the issue of determining authorship is explored, and a new American Journal of Health Behavior policy addressing issues of authorship ispresented.

Download PDF of entire paper

A Vision for Doctoral Research Training in Health Behavior: A Position Paper

Written by the American Academy of Health Behavior Work Group on Doctoral Research Training

Objective: To establish and disseminate the position of the American Academy of Health Behavior (The Academy) on doctoral research training. Methods: A collaborative process involving the Work Group on Doctoral Research Training with input from The Academy membership led to the development of the guidelines described herein. Results: A set of guidelines is provided that describe the process of learning to be a scholar/researcher and the outcomes of learning the practice of health behavior research. Conclusions: The doctoral students who are to become the stewards of our field should be prepared to engage in scholarship that creates new knowledge, uses research to transform practice, and effectively communicates research findings.

In this paper, The Academy offers a vision for doctoral research training to which we hope the discipline will aspire in the coming years. Part I describes the process of learning to be a scholar/researcher in the health behavior field, including the learning conditions, opportunities, and resources needed to provide excellent research training at the doctoral level. Part II identifies the outcomes of learning the practice of health behavior research.

The paper is intended to establish a conceptual foundation for the discussion of critical issues on this subject. It represents a starting point, not the last word, on a set of problems that has beleaguered many disciplines in recent years. We do not expect that all disciplines involved in health behavior research will achieve consensus on all of the positions taken by The Academy in this paper. We do hope the work stimulates critical discussion about the quality of training currently being provided to prepare doctoral students to engage in significant scholarly inquiry and research.

Health behavior researchers come from a variety of disciplines, including but not limited to health education and health promotion, nursing, psychology, anthropology, sociology, social work, and medicine. The standards and mechanisms of doctoral education vary across these disciplines. The focus of this paper, and the examples used, are concerned primarily with training health behavior researchers, not students in disciplines that may have only a collateral interest in human health. Furthermore, the intention of The Academy is not to explain how the guidelines described herein should be implemented by academic programs. Therefore, the paper offers no recommendations for an interdisciplinary implementation of doctoral training. However, we recognize that many of these recommendations are sufficiently broad and extend beyond our field, and thus may be applied to other disciplines.

Download PDF of entire paper