Health sciences and medical librarians conducting research and their experiences asking for co-authorship
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2022.1485Keywords:
Authorship, librarians, medical librarians, health science librarians, research ethics, intradisciplinary scholarship, negotiation, professional supportAbstract
Objective: Health sciences librarians frequently engage in scholarly publication, both with other librarians undertaking intradisciplinary scholarship, and increasingly as members of research teams centered in other disciplines. We sought to assess the emotional and institutional context of authorship among health sciences librarians, including emotions experienced during authorship negotiation, the frequency with which authorship is denied, and the correlation of perceived support from supervisors and the research community with the number of publications produced.
Methods: 342 medical and health sciences librarians took an online survey of 47 questions regarding emotions experienced when asking for authorship, denial of authorship, if they have been given authorship without asking, and the extent to which they felt supported to conduct research in their current job.
Results: Authorship negotiation creates varied and complex emotions among librarians. The emotions reported differed when negotiating authorship with librarian colleagues and when negotiating authorship with professionals in another field. Negative emotions were reported when asking either type of colleague for authorship. Respondents reported feeling mostly supported and encouraged by their supervisors, research communities, and workplaces. Nearly one quarter (24.4%) of respondents reported being denied authorship by colleagues outside of their departments. Perceived research appreciation and support by the research community is correlated with the total number of articles or publications produced by librarians.
Conclusions: Authorship negotiation among health sciences librarians involves complex and frequently negative emotions. Denial of authorship is frequently reported. Institutional and professional support appear to be critical to publication among health sciences librarians.
References
References
Bayer AE, Smart JC. Career publication patterns and collaborative “styles” in American academic science. J Higher Educ. 1991;62(6):613-36. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.1991.11774160
Hammad FT, Shaban S, Abu-Zidan F. Multiple authorship and article type in journals of urology across the Atlantic: trends over the past six decades. Med Princ Pract. 2012;21(5):435-41. DOI: 10.1159/000339884
Hudson J. Trends in multi-authored papers in economics. J Econ Perspect. 1996;10(3):153-8. DOI: 10.1257/jep.10.3.153
Schrock JB, Kraeutler MJ, McCarty EC. Trends in authorship characteristics in The American Journal of Sports Medicine, 1994 to 2014. Am J Sports Med. 2016 Jul;44(7):1857-60. DOI: 10.1177/0363546516639955.
Kuld L, O’Hagan J. Rise of multi-authored papers in economics: demise of the ‘lone star’ and why? Scientometrics. 2018;114(3):1207-25. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2588-3
Fennewald J. Research productivity among librarians: factors leading to publications at Penn State. Coll Res Libr. 2008;69(2):104-16. <https://crl.acrl.org/index.php/crl/article/view/15920/17366>.
Lessick S, Perryman C, Billman BL, Alpi KM, De Groote SL, Babin TD Jr. Research engagement of health sciences librarians: a survey of research-related activities and attitudes. J Med Libr Assoc. 2016 Apr;104(2):166-73. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2016.68
Borrego Á, Pinfield S. Librarians publishing in partnership with other researchers: roles, motivations, benefits, and challenges. portal: Libraries and the Academy. 2020;20(4):655-75. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1353/pla.2020.0031
Lee D. Faculty status, tenure, and compensating wage differentials among members of the association of research libraries: Emerald Group Publishing Limited; 2008.
Stark RK, McElfresh J. A recipe for success: personal research network development and maintenance for solo medical librarians. J Hosp Librariansh. 2021;21(2):130-40. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15323269.2021.1899795
Hoffmann K, Berg SA, Koufogiannakis D. Examining success: identifying factors that contribute to research productivity across librarianship and other disciplines. Libr Inf Res. 2014;38(119):13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29173/lirg639
Castelló M, McAlpine L, Pyhältö K. Spanish and UK post-PhD researchers: writing perceptions, well-being and productivity. High Ed Res Dev. 2017;36(6):1108-22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2017.1296412
Borrego Á, Ardanuy J, Urbano C. Librarians as research partners: their contribution to the scholarly endeavour beyond library and information science. J Acad Librariansh. 2018;44(5):663-70. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2018.07.012
Bahr AH, Zemon M. Collaborative authorship in the journal literature: perspectives for academic librarians who wish to publish. Coll Res Libr. 2000;61(5):410-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.61.5.410
Norelli B, Harper TL. Collaborative scholarship in academic library literature: who, what, and when. Coll Undergrad Libr. 2013;20(2):173-96. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10691316.2013.789680
Folk AL. Librarians as authors in higher education and teaching and learning journals in the twenty-first century: an exploratory study. J Acad Librariansh. 2014;40(1):76-83. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2013.12.001
Rethlefsen ML, Farrell AM, Osterhaus Trzasko LC, Brigham TJ. Librarian co-authors correlated with higher quality reported search strategies in general internal medicine systematic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol. 2015 Jun;68(6):617-26. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.11.025
Koffel JB, Rethlefsen ML. Reproducibility of search strategies is poor in systematic reviews published in high-impact pediatrics, cardiology and surgery journals: a cross-sectional study. PLoS One. 2016 Sep 26;11(9):e0163309. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0163309
Schellinger J, Sewell K, Bloss JE, Ebron T, Forbes C. The effect of librarian involvement on the quality of systematic reviews in dental medicine. PLoS One. 2021 Sep 1;16(9):e0256833. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256833
Nicholson J, McCrillis A, Williams JD. Collaboration challenges in systematic reviews: a survey of health sciences librarians. J Med Libr Assoc. 2017 Oct;105(4):385-393. DOI: 10.5195/jmla.2017.176
Ahmad UNU, Amin SM. The dimensions of technostress among academic librarians. Procedia Soc. 2012;65:266-71. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.11.121
Davis KD. Derailing anxiety in library instruction: a study of teaching anxiety in academic librarians. Tennessee Libraries. 2007;57(2).
Davis KD. The academic librarian as instructor: a study of teacher anxiety. Coll Undergrad Libr. 2007;14(2):77-101. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1300/J106v14n02_06
Fourie, D. The relation between librarian anxiety, technostress and the impostor phenomenon in academic librarians. [Master’s thesis, University of Pretoria]. Thesis Commons. 2020. <https://thesiscommons.org/9c6rw/>.
Gordon RS. Overcoming the systems librarian imposter syndrome. Libres. 2003;13(2):1. <https://staff.washington.edu/rmjost/Readings/overcoming_the_systems_librarian_imposter_syndrome.pdf>.
Kupersmith J. Technostress and the reference librarian. Ref Serv Rev. 1992. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/eb049150
Martinez J, Forrey M. Overcoming imposter syndrome: the adventures of two new instruction librarians. Ref Serv Rev. 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/RSR-03-2019-0021
COPE discussion document: Authorship, Version 2. [Internet]. COPE Council. [cited 8 Feb 2022]. <https://publicationethics.org/files/COPE_DD_A4_Authorship_SEPT19_SCREEN_AW.pdf >.
Harmon-Jones C, Bastian B, Harmon-Jones E. The discrete emotions questionnaire: a new tool for measuring state self-reported emotions. PLoS One. 2016 Aug 8;11(8):e0159915. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0159915.
The four basic styles of communication. [Internet]. UK Violence Intervention and Prevention Center. [cited 8 Feb 2022]. <https://www.uky.edu/hr/sites/www.uky.edu.hr/files/wellness/images/Conf14_FourCommStyles.pdf>.
Cheney G, Lee Ashcraft K. Considering “the professional” in communication studies: implications for theory and research within and beyond the boundaries of organizational communication. Commun Theory. 2007;17(2):146-175. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2007.00290.x
Garcia MA, Barbour JB. "Ask a professional—ask a librarian”: librarianship and the chronic struggle for professional status. Manag Commun Q. 2018;32(4):565-592. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0893318918776798
Fagan J. Students' perceptions of academic librarians. Ref Libr. 2003;37(78):131-148. <https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1300/J120v37n78_09>.
Oberg LR, Schleiter MK, Van Houten M. Faculty perceptions of librarians at Albion College: status, role, contribution, and contacts. Coll Res Libr. 1989 Mar:215-230. <https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/bitstream/handle/2142/41244/crl_50_02_215_opt.pdf?sequence=2>.
Babb MN. An exploration of academic librarians as researchers within a university setting. Thesis. 2017. <https://era.library.ualberta.ca/items/15c87b25-5656-41c6-9242-42a0fb7ed74c>.
Nilsen C. Faculty perceptions of librarian-led information literacy instruction in postsecondary education. In World library and information congress: 78th IFLA general conference and assembly. 2012 Aug:1-25. < https://www.ifla.org/past-wlic/2012/105-nilsen-en.pdf>.
Wyss PA. Library school faculty member perceptions regarding faculty status for academic librarians (Order No. 3340610). In Library & Information Science Abstracts (LISA); ProQuest Central; ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (304466629). 2008. <https://www.proquest.com/dissertations-theses/library-school-faculty-member-perceptions/docview/304466629/se-2>.
Labaree RV. Tips for getting published in scholarly journals: strategies for academic librarians. Coll Res Libr News. 2004;65(3):137-139. <https://crln.acrl.org/index.php/crlnews/article/view/22440/28724>.
Kelly SL. Faculty perceptions of librarian value: the moderating relationship between librarian contact, course goals, and students' research skills. J Acad Librariansh. 2019;45(3):228-233. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2019.03.003
Meredith W, Mussell J. Amazed, appreciative, or ambivalent? student and faculty perceptions of librarians embedded in online courses. Internet Ref Serv Q. 2014;19(2):89-112. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10875301.2014.917756
Defining the Role of Authors and Contributors. [Internet]. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. [cited 8 Feb 2022]. <http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the-role-of-authors-and-contributors.html>.
Preer JL. "Louder please": using historical research to foster professional identity in LIS students. Libr Cult Rec. 2006;41(4):487-496. <https://www.jstor.org/stable/25549366>.
Geelhoed RJ, Phillips JC, Fischer AR, Shpungin E, Gong Y. Authorship decision making: an empirical investigation. Ethics Behav. 2007;17(2):95-115. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10508420701378057
Macfarlane B. The ethics of multiple authorship: power, performativity and the gift economy. Stud High Educ. 2017;42(7):1194-1210. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2015.1085009
Sandler JC, Russell BL. Faculty-student collaborations: ethics and satisfaction in authorship credit. Ethics Behav. 2005;15(1):65-80. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327019eb1501_5
Greer L, Bendersky C. Power and status in conflict and negotiation research [Special Issue]. Negot Confl Manag Res. 2013;6(4). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ncmr.12021
Toosi NR, Mor S, Semnani-Azad Z, Phillips KW, Amanatullah ET. Who can lean in? the intersecting role of race and gender in negotiations. Psychol Women Q. 2019;43(1):7-21. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684318800492
Laws S. A pilot study of the effects of faculty status for medical librarians in the United States. J Med Libr Assoc. 2021;109(4):618–623. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2021.1138
Walters WH. Faculty status of librarians at US research universities. J Acad Librariansh. 2016;42(2):161-171. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2015.11.002
Bland CJ, Ruffin MT 4th. Characteristics of a productive research environment: literature review. Acad Med. 1992;67(6):385-397. DOI: 10.1097/00001888-199206000-00010
Folb BL, Klem ML, Youk AO, Dahm JJ, He M, Ketchum AM, Wessel CB, Hartman LM. Continuing education for systematic reviews: a prospective longitudinal assessment of a workshop for librarians. J Med Libr Assoc. 2020;108(1):36–46. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2020.492
Jacobs HL, Berg SA. By librarians, for librarians: building a strengths-based institute to develop librarians' research culture in Canadian academic libraries. J Acad Librariansh. 2013;39(3):227-231. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2013.02.003
Cooke NA, Sweeney ME. Implicit bias and microaggressions in library and information science. Diversity and Inclusion in Libraries: A Call to Action and Strategies for Success. 2019;35.
Pionke JJ. Medical library association diversity and inclusion task force 2019 survey report. J Med Libr Assoc. 2020;108(3):503. DOI: 10.5195/jmla.2020.948
Schneider A, Gur-Arie R. Negotiating co-authorship, ethically and successfully. IJCER. 2017;5:71. <https://heinonline.org/hol-cgi-bin/get_pdf.cgi?handle=hein.journals/ijconfer5§ion=9>.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Jamie E Bloss, Kerry Sewell, Jana Schellinger, Amanda Haberstroh
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
