Free Access
Nat. Sci. Soc.
Volume 19, Number 4, octobre-décembre 2011
Dossier « Le champ des commons en question : perspectives croisées »
Page(s) 432 - 435
Section Libre opinion – Opinion
Published online 27 March 2012
  • Anonymous, 1993. Are academic institutions corrupt? The Lancet, 342, 315-316.
  • Bennett, D.M.,Taylor, D.M., 2003. Unethical practices in authorship of scientific papers, Emergency Medicine, 15, 263-270. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  • Carbone, K.C., 2010. Fundamental change in German research policy, Science, 328, 569. [CrossRef]
  • Cronin, B., 2001. Hyperauthorship: A postmodern perversion or evidence of a structural shift in scholarly communication practices? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 52, 558-569. [CrossRef]
  • Cullington, B.J., 1998. Authorship, data ownership examined, Science, 242, 658. [CrossRef]
  • Epstein, R.J., 1993. Six authors in search of a citation: villains or victims of the Vancouver convention? British Medical Journal, 306, 765-767. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  • Flanagin, A.,Carey, L.A.,Fontanarosa, P.B.,Phillips, S.G.,Pace, B.P.,Lundberg, G.D.,Rennie, D., 1998. Prevalence of articles with honorary authors and ghost authors in peer-reviewed medical journals, Journal of the American Medical Association, 280, 222-224. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  • Fröhlingsdorf, M., Verbeet, M., 2009. Pilze im Kakao, Der Spiegel, 04/05.
  • Gendron, Y., 2008. Constituting the academic performer: The spectre of superficiality and stagnation in academia, European Accounting Review, 17, 97-127. [CrossRef]
  • Greene, M., 2007. The demise of the lone author, Nature, 450, 1165.
  • Hochberg, M.E.,Chase, J.M.,Gotelli, N.J.,Hastings, A.,Naeem, S., 2009. The tragedy of the reviewer commons, Ecology Letters, 12, 2-4. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  • Horton, R., 1998. The unmasked carnival of science, The Lancet, 351, 688-689. [CrossRef]
  • Hudson, J., 1996. Trends in multi-authored papers in economics, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 10, 153-158. [CrossRef]
  • Jacqué, P., 2011. Peut-on évaluer la recherche ? Le Monde, 04/02.
  • Khan, K.S.,Nwosu, C.R.,Khan, S.F.,Dwarakanath, L.S.,Chien, P.F.W., 1999. A controlled analysis of authorship trends over two decades, American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 181, 503-507. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  • Lawrence, P.A., 2003. The politics of publication, Nature, 422, 259-261, doi:10.1038/422259a. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  • Lawrence, P.A., 2007. The mismeasurement of science, Current Biology, 17, 583-585, doi:10.1016/j.cub.2007.06.014. [CrossRef]
  • Louis, K.S.,Holdsworth, J.M.,Anderson, M.S.,Campbell, E.G., 2008. Everyday ethics in research: Translating authorship guidelines into practice in the bench sciences, Journal of Higher Education, 79, 88-112. [CrossRef] [MathSciNet]
  • Marx, K., 1894. Le Capital, Livres II et III, in Œuvres, Paris, Gallimard, 1968.
  • McClain, C., 2011. The mass extinction of scientists who study species, Wired Science, 19/01.
  • Mulligan, A., 2004. Is peer review in crisis? Perspectives in Publishing, 2, 1-6.
  • Noorden (Van), R., 2010. A profusion of measures, Nature, 465, 864-866. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  • Osborne, J.W., Holland, A., 2009. What is authorship, and what should it be? A survey of prominent guidelines for determining authorship in scientific publications, Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 14, 1-19.
  • Pestre, D., 2003. Science, argent et politique. Un essai d’interprétation, Paris, Inra Éditions.
  • Quan, S.F., 2008. Guests and ghosts begone–guest authorship and ghostwriting and the Journal of Clinical Sleep Medicine, Journal of Clinical Sleep Medicine, 4, 203.
  • Rennie, D.,Flanagin, A.,Yank, V., 2000. The contributions of authors, Journal of the American Medical Association, 284, 89-91. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  • Rohn, J., 2010. Reward effort, not luck, Nature, 465, 872. [CrossRef]
  • Slone, R.M., 1996. Coauthors’ contributions to major papers published in the AJR: Frequency of undeserved coauthorship, American Journal of Roentgenology, 167, 571-579.
  • Statzner, B.,Resh, V., 2010. Negative changes in the scientific publication process in ecology: potential causes and consequences, Freshwater Biology, 55, 2639-2653. [CrossRef]
  • Tainer, J.A., 1991. Science, citation, and funding, Science, 251, 1408. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  • Tasch, W., 2008. Inquiries into the Nature of Slow Money. Investing as if Food, Farms, and Fertility Mattered, Chelsea, Chelsea Green Publishing.
  • Weltzin, J.,Belote, R.,Williams, L., 2006. Authorship in ecology: Attribution, accountability, and responsibility, Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 4, 435-441. [CrossRef]
  • West, J.D., 2010. Learn from game theory, Nature, 465, 871-872.
  • Whitley, R., 2000. The Intellectual and Social Organization of the Sciences, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.