A qualitative study of Equal Co-First Authorship

Area of Science:

• Scientific publishing
• Research integrity
• Academic authorship

Background:

• Increasing trend of "Equal Co-First Authorship" (ECFA) designations in scientific literature.
• Growing need to understand the motivations and implications of shared first authorship.
• ECFA practices present challenges in acknowledging research contributions accurately.

Purpose of the Study:

• To provide background on ECFA designations and explore arguments for and against the practice.
• To investigate the opinions of authors who have shared equal co-first authorship.
• To identify factors contributing to the rise in ECFA and its impact on authors.

Main Methods:

• Qualitative study involving 19 authors with ECFA.
• Analysis of author experiences in leading scientific journals.
• Exploration of circumstances and opinions surrounding ECFA designations.

Main Results:

• Circumstances leading to ECFA designations are highly diverse.
• Authorship attribution and credit evaluation policies for ECFA are inconsistent.
• Lack of clear policies generates tension among co-first authors and obscures credit.

Conclusions:

• The varied nature of ECFA makes policy development challenging.
• Clearer, consistent policies are needed to address ECFA attribution and evaluation.
• Addressing policy gaps can mitigate tensions and ensure accurate credit for co-first authors.