The Contributor Role Taxonomy Project

Interim report

Marjorie M.K. Hlava

President

Access Innovations, Inc.

Contributor Role Taxonomy

What is it? How did it get here? Who is involved? Why do we need it? What have we done? Where can it be used? Next steps

What is it?

A tool to improve recognition

and details on

all contributor roles in a published work.

Why do we need it?

More and more frequently, research and scholarly publications involve collaboration.

There is a growing interest among stakeholders in scholarship in increasing the transparency of research and in identifying the specific roles that contributors play in creating collaborative scholarly works.

Why do we need it?

Provides a more precise and extensive identification of all contributions to a paper

All roles recognized Better credit given to supporting roles Modeling to writing are all significant Eventually … Publishers to pass author

name data to auto-populate the author name fields

How did it get here?

A workshop at Harvard Sponsored by the Wellcome Trust In autumn of 2011, discussed ways to

improve recognition and details on all contributor roles in a published work. 

Initial report: http://projects.iq.harvard.edu/attribution_workshop/files/iwcsa_report_final_18sept12.pdf

 

Who is involved?

Liz Allen, Wellcome Trust Micah Altman, Brown Ginny Barbour, PLOS Amy Brand, Harvard, Convenor Marjorie Hlava, Access Innovations Veronique Kiermer, Nature Publishing Group Christine Laine, American College of Physicians Diane Scott-Lichter, AACR / ACP

Contributor Role TaxonomyTask Force Members

The word “author”

Role of “author” is no longer clear Not a single designation of the work done Doesn’t represent the complexity involved

in the supporting roles of the community in producing a published work

Offer a list of 11+ roles that contributors can claim in the roles they play in the publication of their work

The challenge

Increasingly complex research communities Conflicting funding contributions Digital distribution mandate that we need to

find a way to identify the contributions of all who participate in the process of bringing research to fruition

Key challenges Keep the list to 10 – 12 terms To make a taxonomy suitably generic but with

sufficient granularity to enable precision To enable some degree of cross-disciplinary

applicability To ensure we don’t introduce perverse

incentives  The funding information is not an author role Covering all disciplines – when the approaches

are quite different

Like the movies – better identification of who did what  

Under construction

The work and result

The task force empowered by the workshop subsequently built a small taxonomy for use in the categorization of the actual contribution an "author" or other contributor makes to the published paper. 

NatureCriteria important for Nature Demand on taxonomy

Transparency No 'honorary authorship'* Contribution must justify authorship

Accountability All authors have responsibilitiesCorresponding authors have more responsibilities (overall integrity, persistence, data/material sharing)Authors responsible for specialized experiments or analysis have some responsibilities

Contribution must justify authorshipDegree of contribution is important (at least 'corresponding' versus 'contributing')

Allow association with parts of the paper (data, figure)

Credit Desire to provide appropriate credit, although we are resisting demands for convoluted co-contributions ("7 co-first and 6 co-second authors")

Desire to allow microattributions

* Simple co-contribution is often demanded* Degree of contribution is important (lead role versus contributor role? or intellectual innovation versus operation?)* Recognition of important expertise that does not typically justify 'first author' level

* Allow association to part of the paper (fig), object (data, resource, protocol), field specific expertise

Ease of use Corresponding author filling in on behalf of authors if captured as metadata; or inferred from existing statements.

Contribution must be self explanatory to reader in addition to be a standard

*We already have a definition of authorship, by which we consider 'author' not necessarily = 'writer'(may be different problem for clinical journals). According to this definition, 'obtaining funding' or 'writing' only would not justify authorship.

We all come into this with a slightly different perspective…..

Taxonomy creation

Mining the literature Contributions from the team Review of other models Draft taxonomy Team vetting Validation by publishers

Mining the literature JATS Contributor element – 800,000 AIP

articles in JATS format 10 years of MEDLINE for the underlying

research acknowledgements Micah Altman mined through the

acknowledgments in the Elsevier data David Shotton’s SCoRO model: http

://www.essepuntato.it/lode/http://purl.org/spar/scoro

Term sources and team vetting

Several iterations of the taxonomy Nature STEM – DTIC IEEE SCoRO PLOS Microattribution Survey IWCSA Report

MethodologyStudy conception

Methodology developmentMethodology designPatient study clinical trials

DataData contribution

  Data gathering

Data recordingData analysis

  Data curationMetadataData analysis

Data interpretationData notation

Mathematical modelingStatistical analysisModel design

EngineeringSoftware programming

Equipment calibrationEquipment designEquipment management

Report preparationInitial draft preparationCritical reviewManuscript contributionManuscript revisionFinal approvalIllustrationData visualization

AdministrationFundingResearch supervisionProject management

Version 1

SUMMARY OF ROLES 1.    Study Conception (Conceptual)

a.     Designed concept of studyb.    Formulated research questionsc.     Developed analytical approachd.    Guidance, input, and advice??? – May be covered if degrees of contribution

are applied.2.    Methodology

a.     Development or design of the methodology; b.    Methodological, technology and equipment design; c.     Creation of models both physical and theoretical;

3.    Formal Analysisa.     Investigation Performance of the experiments b.    Data evidence collection

4.    Investigationa.     Performance of the experiments b.    Data evidence collection

5.    Provision of Resources and Tools6.    Data Curation and Management 7.    Manuscript Preparation

a.     Writing the initial draftb.    Critical review, commentary or revisionc.     Illustration and visualization

8.    Programming and Computation9.    Project Administration10. Funding acquisition11. Supervision

a.     Principal investigator (possible)

Version 2

Version 2 Conceptual framework  

Contributing to writing and revision of manuscript

Conceived and designed the experiments Contributed equallyConceptual design of the study Contributed to manuscriptDevelopment of the methodological design of the study Final approval  Revised manuscript

Methodology  Machine/equipment calibration Illustration/visualization

Methodological design Prepared graphs

Technology/equipment design

Prepared illustrations or graphical displays to accompany text

Development methodology Prepared tablesEquipment management  Programming/software

Statistical analysis   Analytic programmingDeveloped statistical or mathematical techniques to analyze study data Developed software 

 Project management/administration

Research and investigation  

Jointly supervised the research

Contributed reagents, materials or analysis tools Laboratory head

Performed the experiments

Executed, organized and archived of study-related documents

  Project managementData collection   Research management

Assembled study samples or populationOrganization/supervision of study staff

Developed tools, laboratory procedures, or techniques for data collectionGathered and recorded data Funding acquisition  Commercial partner

Data curation   Grant holderAnalyzed the data Obtained fundingInterpreted findings from data Organizational partnerPatient study clinical trialManaged tools and techniquesMetadataData notationRefined analytic approach based on preliminary findings 

Drafting manuscript  Critical reviewPrepared initial draftWrote the manuscript

Version 3

Conceptual framework   Drafting manuscriptConceived and designed the experiments Prepared initial draftConceptual design of the study Wrote the manuscript 

Methodology 

Contributing to writing and revision of manuscript

Machine/equipment calibration Critical reviewMethodological design Contributed to manuscriptTechnology/equipment design Final approvalDevelopment methodology Revised manuscript

Equipment management

Contributed comments and suggestions on drafts of the manuscript

 Performed critical revision of manuscript

 Statistical analysis   Illustration/visualization

Developed statistical or mathematical techniques to analyze study data Prepared graphs

 Prepared illustrations or graphical displays to accompany text

Research and investigation   Prepared tables

InstrumentationContributed reagents, materials or analysis tools

Programming/software

Performed the experiments Analytic programmingCared for patients Developed softwareClinically characterized patients

Ensured patient follow upProject management/administration

Performed phenotyping Jointly supervised the researchPerformed genotyping and association analyses Laboratory head

 Executed, organized and archived of study-related documents

Data collection   Project managementAssembled study samples or population Research managementDeveloped tools, laboratory procedures, or techniques for data collection

Organization/supervision of study staff

Gathered and recorded dataOversaw the recruitment and clinical assessment of study participants

Contributed clinical dataRecruited and evaluated the study subjects

  Contributed advice on the projectData curation   Coordinated baseline studies

Analyzed the dataInterpreted findings from data Funding acquisitionPatient study clinical trial Commercial partnerManaged tools and techniques Grant holderMetadata Obtained fundingData notation Organizational partner

Version 4

Version 4 Conceptual framework  

Contributing to writing and revision of manuscript  

Conceived and designed the experiments Critical reviewConceptual design of the study Contributed to manuscriptFormulates research questions Final approvalDevelopment of analytical approach Revised manuscript

 Contributed comments and suggestions on drafts of the manuscript

Methodology   Performed critical revision of manuscriptMachine/equipment calibration Article guarantorMethodological design Prepares supplementary informationTechnology/equipment design Publishes data

Development methodologyDirect oversight and management for the manuscript

Equipment management  Undertakes modelling Illustration/visualization  Tested equipment Prepared graphs

Specimen preparation and treatmentPrepared illustrations or graphical displays to accompany text

  Prepared tablesStatistical analysis   Photographer

Developed statistical or mathematical techniques to analyze study data Performed imagingStatistical assistance    Programming/software  

Research and investigation   Analytic programming

Maintains research facility Developed softwareProcesses data Designing computer code / algorithms Provides technical support Programming computer code / algorithms Responsibility for day-to-day execution of experiment Creating computer-based workflows Responsible for the overall research findings Managed software developmentTooling  

Computer engineeringProject management/administration  

Assistance with animals/veterinary assistance Laboratory head

InstrumentationExecuted, organized and archived of study-related documents

Contributed reagents, materials or analysis tools Project managementPerformed the experiments Research managementCared for patients Organization/supervision of study staff

Clinically characterized patientsOversaw the recruitment and clinical assessment of study participants

Ensured patient follow upRecruited and evaluated the study subjects

Performed phenotyping Contributed advice on the projectPerformed genotyping and association analyses Coordinated baseline studiesChief scientist Provides administrative supportCo-investigator Controls project financesCollaborator Supervises, mentors or trains colleaguesPrincipal investigator Ensures regulatory complianceResearch assistant Contact personResearcher Patent holderService engineer StakeholderTechnician Rights holderLeads investigation Project memberMaintains IT infrastructure Workpackage leader  Non-academic partner

Data collection   Co-applicantAssembled study samples or population Lead applicantDeveloped tools, laboratory procedures, or techniques for data collection  Gathered and recorded data Funding acquisition  Contributed clinical data Commercial partnerData creator Grant holder  Obtained funding

Data curation   Organizational partnerAnalyzed the dataInterpreted findings from dataPatient study clinical trialManaged tools and techniquesMetadataData notationRefined analytic approach based on preliminary findingsAccess providerData managerData publisherRepository managerWebmasterAssurance of data accuracy and completeness 

Drafting manuscript  

Prepared initial draftWrote the manuscriptCorresponding authorPrincipal authorSenior authorConsortium author

Version 5

Version 6

Version 7

Version 8

Study conception Ideas, formulation of research question, and statement of hypothesis.

Designed concept of studyFormulated research questionsDeveloped analytical approachGuidance, input, and advice??? – May be covered if degrees of contribution are applied.

MethodologyDevelopment and design of methodology

This role includes activities such asDevelopment of the methodology; Methodological, technology and equipment design; Creation of models both physical and theoretical;

 Formal AnalysisThis role includes the application of statistical, mathematical and other models and techniques to analyze study data.

(provided statistical assistance) – May be covered if degrees of contribution are applied InvestigationThis role covers the activities included in the carrying out of the research and investigation process Performance of the experiments Data evidence collection NOTE: . The activities are different in Medical, DNA, Physics, Biology etc however the roles level remains the same. In a medical setting it includes patient care, clinical characterization of patients, ensuring patient followup. In DNA and Genome research it would include phenotyping, genotyping and the associated analysis. In DNA and Genome research it would include phenotyping, genotyping and the associated analysis.  

Version 9

Provision of Resources and Tools This role includes contribution of reagents, material instrumentation or other analysis tools Data Curation and ManagementManagement activities to curate and maintain research data and metadata for use and reuse Manuscript PreparationAny contribution to the creation of the published work.

Writing the initial draftCritical review and commentIllustration/visualization

This role includes those who prepared the illustrations and other graphical displays to accompany the text. They include photographers, the preparation of the tables and graphs, the imaging, visualization of the data in supplemental data. Programming and Computation This role includes the analytic programming, software development, designing programming and implementation of the computer code and supporting algorithms, creation of computer based workflows, and management of the software development. Project Administration This role includes the coordination or management of research activities leading to the publication. This is specifically the project management which led to the execution of this published work.  Funding acquisitionThis role includes those responsible for the acquisition of the financial support of the project through grant or other funding of the project. It includes the commercial partner, organizational partner, leader applicant, co-applicant, and non academic partners. SupervisionThis role is responsible for the overall integrity and accuracy of the research findings, the published material and insurance of regulatory compliance. it includes the Principal Investigator, corresponding author*, and other lead stakeholders. (NOTE: Thorny issue: All members of the team should be accountable for the work.) Could we fold this role up under “administration”?

Version 10

Current taxonomyDRAFT – Version 11

Study conception Methodology Formal analysis Computation Investigation Resources Data curation

Publication Supervision   Project

administration Funding acquisition Other roles

Taxonomy details 1/7

Study conception Scope: Ideas; formulation of research

question; statement of hypothesis Methodology

Scope: Development or design of methodology; creation of models

Taxonomy details 2/7

Formal analysis Scope: Application of statistical, mathematical, or

other formal techniques to analyze study data Computation

Scope: Programming, software development; designing computer programs; implementation of the computer code and supporting algorithms

 

Taxonomy details 3/7

Investigation Scope: Conducting the research and

investigation process Sub-role: Performed the experiments Sub-role: Data/evidence collection Other investigatory role: please specify in

space provided

Taxonomy details 4/7

Resources Scope: Provision of study materials,

reagents, materials, patients, laboratory samples, animals, instrumentation, or other analysis tools. 

Data curation Scope: Management activities to annotate

(produce metadata) and maintain research data for initial use and later re-use.

Taxonomy details 5/7

Publication Scope: Preparation, creation, and/or presentation

of the published work. Sub-role: Writing the initial draft Sub-role: Critical review, commentary or revision Sub-role: Visualization/data presentation Other presentational role: please specify in the

space provided

 

Taxonomy details 6/7

Supervision Scope: Responsibility for supervising

research; project orchestration; principal investigator; other lead stakeholder.

Project administration Scope: Coordination or management of

research activities leading to this publication.

Taxonomy details 7/7

Funding acquisition Scope: Acquisition of the financial support of

the project through grant or other funding of the project

Other roles

Taxonomy validation

To validate the initial taxonomy 25 publishers invited Each participating publisher identified 50

or more articles with corresponding authors (of multi-authored works with between 2 and 15 authors) and completed a survey

The “Corresponding Author”

In physics, medical, and biological sciences, it is very important that each of the authors be allowed to state his or her own level of contribution.

Worry about disagreements when only one author fills in for people’s contribution types and levels.

The publisher data

Returned spreadsheets Included relevant author names Included journal information Corresponding authors and participating

authors submitted their information using a spreadsheet template.  

Pilot project returns

Nature ACPOnline PLOS Elsevier elifesciences.org AAAS The IET (Inspec)

Other participants

American Society for Civil Engineers – ASCE

Cambridge Press IEEE NISO Institute of Physics – IOP American Chemical Society – ACS SPIE

Next steps?

Initial receipt of survey results is in Analyze results Modify taxonomy Report results at CSE in May

Council of Science Editors

Next steps – more validation

Broader feedback Greater variety of constituents Verify with relevant works to see if the test

contributor role assignments accord with their perceptions of their own contributions. 

Request input from the library community. 

Still in research and development stage, so use options are only conjecture

Draft principles of use:

This work is designed to be used with publisher "author" submission systems as well as internal editorial production systems. It may be used as a brief authority file, pick list, or drop down menu in those systems. In order to encourage use and participation, we have made the roles general and the number limited so that they can be used in a drop down menu or pick list within paper submission modules. Contributors may also elect to tag themselves within the author block of a paper.

Draft principles of use:

We found that contributors and publishers come from many different perspectives and cultures of use. Clinical fields currently present attributions differently than physics, or the humanities. The current author assignment protocols are different within the fields of medicine, genetics, physics, biology etc.; however, the roles level remains the same. In a medical setting it includes patient care, clinical characterization of patients, ensuring patient follow-up. In genetics and genome research it would include phenotyping, genotyping and the associated analysis.

Draft principles of use:

Contributions must be self-explanatory to the reader and follow a standard attribution path to be understood globally. Use of this list should be based on level of contribution to encourage transparency.

The contributorship designation should reflect the responsibilities of the individual claiming each role. For example, corresponding author responsibilities include the overall integrity of the paper, and ensuring that the data and appropriate materials are shared.

Some contributors are responsible for the specialized experiments and others for extensive analysis.

Draft principles of use:The degree of the contribution is also important; for example, to distinguish between an intellectual innovation and an operational role.

The expertise offered to the project and paper may not justify a first position on the paper.

Obtaining the funding, or leading the lab where the research is done, may not justify contributorship positions.

As the taxonomy is meant to be considered a standard, contributors to published works should be assigned one or more role descriptors as they appear in the taxonomy.

Taking into account the scope of each descriptor, most contributors’ roles will be covered in the taxonomy. If a role is not available, contributors should contact the creators of the taxonomy so they can consider changing or expanding the taxonomy to reflect this role.

For each contributor of the work in question, please indicate applicable roles, and use free text fields to supply additional role information where relevant. Choose the most appropriate taxonomy term for

your contribution(s). More than one taxonomy term per person may

be used. Please use standard phrasing of each taxonomy

term.

Draft principles of use:

For each role please indicate degree of contribution, if appropriate.

Below the terms are stated first as a "Scope" in several cases with sub roles and secondly as a possible "Scope note" statement__ Lead__ Supporting__ All contributors equal 

Draft principles of use:

Contributor Role

Contributor Information

Editorial Workflow IntegrationContributor Role Tagging

A popup list of contributor role options appears for the author to choose from

?

Study conception ? Methodology ?Formal analysis ?Computation ?Investigation ?Resources ?Data Curation ?Publication ? Supervision ? Project administration ?Funding acquisition ?

Application of statistical, mathematical or other formal techniques to analyze study data

Mouse Over for explanation

Formal Analysis

Current ORCID taxonomy

Contributor Roles as listed on the ORCID Site

Possible ORCID taxonomy

What was your role?Study conception MethodologyFormal analysisComputationInvestigationResourcesData curationPublication Supervision   Project administrationFunding acquisitionOther roles

ProposedContributor Roles taxonomy ORCID Site

Potential taxonomy additions

Translators Commentors or Discussors - Authors who discuss

another person's work or find errors in another work. This could be widened to cover the reviewers of books, software, etc. unless they are considered as curators (?) or investigators (?).

Editors and Guest Editors - They may have a hand in the selection of articles for inclusion in various special issues/sections, or even select conference papers for further development and publication in a periodical.

Potential taxonomy deletions

Fundraising – should this be part of the contributor role or placed in another area?

Will “Other roles” be allowed by NISO?

A possible map to JATS

<collab>: Group of contributors credited under a single name; includes an organization credited as a contributor. REMARKS: This element may contain either a collaboration of individuals or the name of an organization (such as a laboratory, educational institution, corporation, or department) when such a unit acts as a contributor by, for example, authoring the work.

<contrib>: Container element for information about a single author, editor, or other contributor. REMARKS: Types of Contributors. The element <contrib> can be used for many roles besides authors, for example, editors, special issue editors, photographers, illustrators, directors, etc. The @contrib-type attribute placed on the <contrib> element, or the <role> element used within the <contrib> element, may be used to describe the contribution.

<contrib-group>: Container element for one or more contributors and information about those contributors. REMARKS: Inside the element <article-meta>, the <contrib-group> element groups individual contributors to a document such as authors, researchers, or photographers. Inside the element <journal-id>, the <contrib-group> element groups contributors to the whole journal, above the level of an article, such as section editors or journal editors, or special issue editors.

As part of the <contrib> element

<role>: Title or role of a contributor to a work (for example, editor-in-chief, chief scientist, photographer, research associate). REMARKS: Information on the role or type of contribution is collected in two places, in the @contrib-type attribute on the <contrib> element and in the <role> element (which is part of the contributor information inside a<contrib> element). For example, the <contrib> element’s @contrib-type attribute might have a value of “editor”, whereas the content of the <role> element could be “Associate Editor”. As another example, the <contrib> element’s @contrib-type attribute might be “author”, and the <role> element might contain “Principal Author”.

<principal-investigator>: Individual(s) responsible for the intellectual content of the work reported in the document.

<principal-award-recipient>: Individual(s) or institution(s) to whom the award was given (for example, the principal grant holder or the sponsored individual).

<contrib-id>:

<contrib-id>: One identifier for a person such as a contributor or principal investigator. This element will hold: an ORCID, a trusted publisher’s identifier, a JST (Japanese Science and Technology Agency)

identifier, or an NII (National Individual Identifier). ISNI – International Standard Name Identifier

The <contrib-id> tag is the only one that seems to reference controlled vocabularies – map to the ORCID, JST, NII

Possibilities

Encourage widespread adoption Add to JATS – DTD Add to ORCID Make into an ISO / BSI / NISO Standard

Survey results

Early peek How easy or difficult did you find it to assign

the contributions … …do you agree or disagree that the

taxonomy is comprehensive… How does this structured list compare …in

terms of accuracy of contributions? Easy? Agree? Similar? Well over 80%

Still in research mode FULL Results to be

reported at Council of Science Editors

in May

Discussion?

Marjorie M.K. Hlava President and Chairman Access Innovations, Inc.

Data Harmony www.dataharmony.com www.accessinn.com

505-998-0800 ext 109 mhlava@accessinn.com www.taxodiary.com - the taxonomy news blog

We need your Thoughts,

Trials,

Feedback!