Authorship is easy to agree while it is still abstract and hard once results exist. The partner with less institutional power cannot raise it — the cost of doing so badly falls entirely on them — which makes it the responsibility of whoever holds more.
Settle before data collection
- Criteria for authorship, and who applies them.
- Author order for the primary paper.
- Who writes the first draft, and whether that rotates.
- Whether local partners lead at least one paper.
- How contributions will be documented as work happens.
Where imbalance comes from
- Whoever writes the first draft shapes the framing and usually claims a leading position.
- Writing in one's first language is a large advantage in claiming that role.
- The funded partner is assumed to be the lead partner.
- Local contribution gets described as access rather than science.
What actually counts as credit
- Authorship in a position reflecting the contribution.
- Structured contribution statements naming specific roles.
- Co-authored datasets with their own identifiers.
- Named investigator status on the grant.
- Acknowledgement is not credit — it appears in no system that affects a career.
Practical measures
- Assign a specific paper to the local partner as lead from the outset.
- Offer writing support rather than taking over the writing.
- Record contributions in a shared document during the project.
- Publish the dataset separately with local leadership.
After the project ends
- Agree rules for later papers using the shared data.
- Keep personal contact addresses, not only institutional ones.
- Contact everyone who contributed before writing a secondary analysis.
One thing worth remembering
Ask yourself whether anyone in this project is in a position to tell you the credit allocation is unfair.
If the honest answer is no — because they depend on the funding, the equipment, or the future collaboration — then the absence of complaint tells you nothing at all.
Câu hỏi thường gặp
Why is authorship your responsibility to raise?
Because the partner with less institutional power cannot raise it — the cost of doing so badly falls entirely on them.
What should be settled before data collection?
Criteria for authorship and who applies them, author order for the primary paper, who writes the first draft, whether local partners lead a paper, and how contributions are documented.
Where does imbalance come from?
Whoever writes the first draft claims a leading position, writing in one's first language is an advantage, the funded partner is assumed to be lead, and local contribution gets described as access.
What actually counts as credit?
Authorship in a position reflecting contribution, structured contribution statements, co-authored datasets with identifiers, and named investigator status — acknowledgement is not credit.
What question should you ask yourself?
Whether anyone in the project is in a position to tell you the credit allocation is unfair — if not, the absence of complaint tells you nothing.
