Authorship Procedure

1. Purpose

1.1 The Authorship Procedure (the procedure) guides researchers on acceptable practice for the recognition of significant intellectual or scholarly contribution to a research output that must be:

an honest reflection of contribution to research
assigned fairly, and consistently, with established disciplinary practice
communicated clearly and transparently between contributors to the research.

2. Scope

2.1 The procedure applies to all those under the scope of the Research Policy (the policy) who have made a significant contribution to a research output and have agreed to be included as an author.

3. Principles

3.1 The principles outlined in the policy apply for this procedure.

4. Procedure statements

Authorship criteria

4.1 An author is an individual who has made a significant intellectual or scholarly contribution (as defined in Authorship (an Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research guide)) to research and its output and who agrees to be included as an author.

4.2 Only individuals who have made a significant contribution to a research output and agreed to be named as authors should be listed on the output.

4.3 Students and research trainees who have made a significant contribution to the research are entitled to authorship.

4.4 Authorship must not be attributed when an individual has not made a significant intellectual or scholarly contribution to a research output. Authorship should not be attributed solely on the basis of:

the provision of funding, data, materials, infrastructure or access to equipment
the provision of routine technical support, technical advice or technical assistance
an individual’s position or profession, for example, a researcher’s supervisor or senior leader in a faculty (‘gift authorship’)
whether the contribution was paid for or voluntary
the status of an individual who has not made a significant intellectual or scholarly contribution but may elevate the esteem of the research (‘guest authorship’).

4.5 UTS supports the Contributor Roles Taxonomy (CRediT), which outlines 14 roles that typically represent individuals’ contribution to research outputs.

Authorship arrangements

4.6 It is good practice to formalise an authorship agreement before writing up a research project (refer Statement of authorship template (Word) (SharePoint)). An individual who meets the criteria for authorship must not be included or excluded without their written agreement.

4.7 Written agreement on authorship should be sought and provided in a reasonable timeframe, considering the circumstances of all authors. Authorship agreements should consider:

corresponding authorship – there may be cases where more than one corresponding author is required between institutions
author order – this should be based on accepted practice within the disciplines.

4.8 If an author has died, or cannot be contacted despite reasonable attempts, all co-authors must have confidence in the accuracy and integrity of that individual’s contribution and have no reason to believe that the person would have objected to being included as an author.

Author responsibilities

4.9 All authors listed on an output are:

collectively responsible for the whole research output, and
individually responsible for the integrity and accuracy of their contribution to the output.

4.10 Authors must approve a research output before its submission for publication. In doing so, all authors agree to be accountable for it. If an individual does not agree to be accountable for their contribution, their contribution should not be included in the output and that individual should not be listed as an author. Refer also statement 4.30 for disputes relating to authorship.

4.11 Authors must submit research outputs in line with the Research Open Access Procedure.

4.12 The corresponding author must seek approval from all authors on all versions of an output that are submitted for publication, including the final version before publication (except in cases where a publisher’s stated practice is to seek author approval).

4.13 If, after an appropriate length of time, and multiple documented attempts, an author is unable to be contacted, appropriate attribution of authorship (including order) must be given according to the authorship agreement and in line with the requirements of the Authorship guide.

4.14 Authors must raise any concerns about the integrity and accuracy of the research before submission or publication.

4.15 Following publication, authors must respond appropriately to any concerns raised about the integrity or accuracy of the research. This means providing all necessary evidence and data to justify the research or correcting the public record in instances where the research cannot be justified or verified.

Appropriate and fair attribution

4.16 The corresponding author must ensure that all contributors to the output are appropriately recognised, regardless of any changes in their position, role or affiliation with UTS.

4.17 All authors should notify the corresponding author of any contributors who have been omitted.

4.18 UTS authors should provide their Open Researcher and Contributor ID (ORCID at UTS (SharePoint)) digital identifier to the corresponding author before submission or publication of the output.

4.19 Contributions to research that do not meet the criteria for authorship (refer Authorship criteria) should be acknowledged in an output where appropriate. Permission should be obtained from contributors before including any acknowledgement.

4.20 The corresponding author must follow the acknowledgement requirements of funding bodies such as the Australian Research Council's Acceptable Forms for Acknowledgement of ARC Funding and the National Health and Medical Research Council’s Funding Agreement.

4.21 Research outputs involving Indigenous Knowledges should seek approval from Indigenous Peoples or communities from which that Knowledge originates and appropriately acknowledge the individual and collective contributions (refer Ethical conduct in research with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples and communities: Guidelines for researchers and stakeholders).

Institutional attribution and affiliation

4.22 In all publications by UTS staff and students, authors must cite their institutional affiliation as 'University of Technology Sydney' on research outputs generated by UTS expertise, resources, facilities or services as outlined in the Research Management Procedure (SharePoint).

4.23 The by-line must begin with 'University of Technology Sydney', followed by any relevant centre/institute/faculty information. To ensure the university is correctly attributed, do not include any comma in the UTS name. Other wording, use of acronyms or different order of by-line information is not allowed. This may result in the publication being mapped to another institution in external publications databases.

4.24 Where there is no publisher’s convention, the following examples show how a publication should be attributed. Centre/institute/faculty and location are used only where space allows, as follows:

researcher name, University of Technology Sydney, centre name, Ultimo NSW 2007, Australia
researcher name, University of Technology Sydney, faculty name, Ultimo NSW 2007, Australia.

4.25 For authors who have moved from another university to UTS and both institutions have contributed to the publication, or for authors who hold an honorary appointment at UTS with a primary affiliation at another university, the UTS affiliation should appear in addition to the primary affiliation, where the publisher’s convention permits.

4.26 UTS authors must maintain up-to-date records of their research outputs in Symplectic and ensure their academic profile on external databases accurately reflects their affiliation with UTS. An academic profile should identify the 'University of Technology Sydney' as the primary affiliation and/or employer.

4.27 UTS authors must use their UTS email address as their primary email address for correspondence.

Conflicts of interest

4.28 Authors must declare any actual, perceived or potential conflicts of interest on the authorship agreement (refer Statement of authorship (Word) (SharePoint)) in line with the policy and the Conflicts of Interest Disclosure Policy.

Records management

4.29 The corresponding author must keep a record of all authorship arrangements, including approvals, agreements and any changes to authorship, in line with the Records Management Policy.

Breaches and dispute resolution

4.30 Demanding, accepting, purchasing or claiming authorship on an output without having made a significant intellectual contribution is a breach of this procedure and the Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research (Australian Code).

4.31 Ghost authorship, gift authorship, purchasing authorship or selling authorship is not acceptable practice and is inconsistent with the principles and responsibilities outlined in the Australian Code.

4.32 Disputes relating to authorship (inclusion, exclusion, order and merit) may arise from time to time, either before, during or after a research output has been published. Authorship disputes do not necessarily relate to a research integrity breach.

Where possible, disputes relating to work (published and unpublished) should be managed between authors, including the corresponding author, and should refer to any formalised statements of authorship.
Authors can discuss any concerns with a research integrity advisor (RIA) who can provide advice and, if necessary, assist in mediation (refer Research integrity: Advice and support (SharePoint))
Disputes that cannot be resolved between authors may be referred to the head of department or associate dean (research) for mediation.
In the case of published works, if remediation is unsuccessful the dispute may be referred to the publisher.

4.33 The aim of authorship dispute resolution is to reach an agreement on appropriate authorship of a research output so that it can be published. If authorship cannot be agreed, then the output cannot be published in its current form.

4.34 All other breaches will be managed in line with the policy.

5. Roles and responsibilities

5.1 Procedure owner: The Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research) is responsible for enforcement of and compliance with this procedure, ensuring that its principles and statements are observed.

5.2 Procedure contact: The Manager, Research Integrity and Governance is the primary contact for advice on implementing and administering this procedure.

6. Definitions

The definitions outlined in the policy apply for this procedure. The following definitions are in addition to those definitions. Definitions in the singular include the plural meaning of the word.

Corresponding author is the author responsible for communicating with publishers, managing communication between co-authors and maintaining a record of the authorship agreement. All co-authors must agree on who is the corresponding author.

Approval information

Procedure contact	Manager, Research Integrity and Governance
Approval authority	Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research)
Review date	2029
File number	UR20/1823
Superseded documents	Guidelines for authors of research outputs