Irresponsible authorship and wasteful publication.

Area of Science:

• Bibliometrics
• Scholarly Communication
• Research Integrity

Background:

• While scientific fraud garners significant attention, less severe misconduct is more prevalent and potentially more damaging.
• Irresponsible authorship and wasteful publication represent common ethical breaches in scientific publishing.

Purpose of the Study:

• To identify and categorize frequent, lesser offenses in scientific publishing.
• To analyze the damaging impact of these offenses, particularly wasteful publication, on the scientific ecosystem.

Main Methods:

• Qualitative analysis of publication ethics literature.
• Categorization of authorship and publication misconduct based on established definitions.

Main Results:

• Irresponsible authorship involves misattribution of credit (inclusion of undeserving authors, omission of key contributors).
• Wasteful publication encompasses "salami science" (fragmenting single studies), self-republication, and "meat extenders" (combining data for additional papers).
• Wasteful publication is identified as the most frequent and economically damaging offense.

Conclusions:

• Practices like "salami science" and improper authorship are more common than fraud and impose significant economic burdens.
• Addressing these frequent offenses is crucial for maintaining the efficiency and integrity of scientific publishing and its economic viability.