关于医学科研人员对论文署名中学术不端行为认知程度差异的问卷结果分析探讨

天津科技 ›› 2025, Vol. 52 ›› Issue (06): 107-112.

关于医学科研人员对论文署名中学术不端行为认知程度差异的问卷结果分析探讨

马英¹, 杜育任², 王辰¹, 闫富宏¹

1.中华骨科杂志编辑部天津 300050;
2.Orthopaedic Surgery编辑部天津 300050

收稿日期:2025-05-09 出版日期:2025-06-25 发布日期:2026-01-06
基金资助:
中国科学技术期刊编辑学会2023—2024年度基金资助项目（cessp-2023-D-13）

Analysis and exploration of questionnaire results on differences in cognitive degree of academic misconduct among medical researchers regarding paper authorship

MA Ying¹, DU Yuren², WANG Chen¹, YAN Fuhong¹

1. Editorial Department of Chinese Journal of Orthopedics,Tianjin 300050,China;
2. Editorial Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Tianjin 300050,China

Received:2025-05-09 Online:2025-06-25 Published:2026-01-06

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 为探讨医学科研人员对论文作者署名的认知度与可操控度的差异,以李克特量表（Likert scale）为记分标准,编制主题问卷,设定理论模型中的变量为作者署名认知程度和实操难度。以微信及邮件形式向《中华骨科杂志》和Orthopaedic Surgery两本杂志的发稿作者发放问卷,通过会议宣讲和学术微信群向骨科医生和研究人员发放问卷。对收回的有效问卷进行数据汇总和统计分析,确定作者署名认知程度和实操难度分值差距较大的条目。提出署名争议问题在临床医生和研究人员的研究和发表阶段普遍存在,研究人员经历过作者署名争议的比例更高;对作者署名基本要求的认知度与可操控度存在差异;发文数量越多,署名的可操控性越高。

关键词: 署名, 认知度, 可操作度, 规范, 问卷, 数据分析

Abstract: To explore the differences in cognitive degree and manipulability of authorship among medical researchers,a themed questionnaire was developed using the Likert scale as the scoring criterion. The variables in the theoretical model were set as the cognitive degree and practical difficulty of authorship. Questionnaires were distributed to the authors of the two journals,Chinese Journal of Orthopedics and Orthopaedic Surgery,via Wechat and Email. Questionnaires were also distributed to orthopedic doctors and researchers through conference presentations and academic Wechat groups. The data of the retrieved valid questionnaires were summarized and statistically analyzed to determine the items with a large gap between the cognitive degree of authorship and the score of practical operation difficulty. The issue of authorship disputes is widespread during the research and publication stages of clinicians and researchers,and the proportion of researchers who have experienced authorship disputes is even higher. There are differences in the cognitive degree and manipulability of the basic requirements for authorship. The more articles are published,the higher the manipulability of authorship.

Key words: authorship, cognitive degree, manipulability, norms, questionnaire, data analysis

中图分类号:

G237.5

马英, 杜育任, 王辰, 闫富宏. 关于医学科研人员对论文署名中学术不端行为认知程度差异的问卷结果分析探讨[J]. 天津科技, 2025, 52(06): 107-112.

MA Ying, DU Yuren, WANG Chen, YAN Fuhong. Analysis and exploration of questionnaire results on differences in cognitive degree of academic misconduct among medical researchers regarding paper authorship[J]. TIANJIN SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, 2025, 52(06): 107-112.

参考文献

[1] 中国科协,教育部,科技部,等. 中国科协教育部科技部卫生计生委中科院工程院自然科学基金会关于印发《发表学术论文“五不准”》的通知[J]. 微型电脑应用,2016,33(10):2,81.
[2] 丛敏,王景周. 2类典型学术论文署名不端行为及其防范策略[J]. 编辑学报,2021,33(2):170-175.
[3] WAGER E.Recognition,reward and responsibility:Why the authorship of scientific papers matters[J]. Maturitas,2009,62(2):109-112.
[4] REINISCH J F,LI W Y,YU D C,et al.Authorship conflicts:A study of awareness of authorship criteria among academic plastic surgeons[J]. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery,2013,132(2):303e-310e.
[5] MARUŠIĆ A,BOŠNJAK L,JERONČIĆ A. A systematic review of research on the meaning,ethics and practices of authorship across scholarly disciplines[J]. PLoS One,2011,6(9):e23477.
[6] 李新根,付示威. 科技论文作者署名异化及其治理路径[J]. 编辑学报,2021,33(1):82-85.
[7] NYLENNA M,FAGERBAKK F,KIERULF P.Authorship:Attitudes and practice among Norwegian researchers[J]. BMC Medical Ethics,2014,15(1):53.
[8] International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Defining the Role of Authors and Contributors[EB/OL].[2024-12-05]. https://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the-role-of-authors-and-contributors.html.
[9] PIGNATELLI B,MAISONNEUVE H,CHAPUIS F.Authorship ignorance:Views of researchers in French clinical settings[J]. Journal of Medical Ethics,2005,31(10):578-581.
[10] ELSE H.Authorship wars:Academics outline the rules for recognition[EB/OL]. [2017-11-30].https://www.timeshighereducation.com/features/authorship-wars-academics-outline-rules-recognition.
[11] SHIH T H,FAN X T.Comparing response rates from web and mail surveys:A meta-analysis[J]. Field Methods,2008,20(3):249-271.

[1]	张耀元, 李亚辉, 徐书令, 张梨虹. 科技期刊通信作者署名知情同意的现状分析与对策研究——以临床诊断学类期刊为例[J]. 天津科技, 2025, 52(06): 103-106.
[2]	殷艺萌. 并轨模式下口腔医学专硕研究生科研能力培养现状分析[J]. 天津科技, 2025, 52(05): 60-63+67.
[3]	许斯. 火力发电厂主蒸汽温度参数与其主要影响因素的相关性分析[J]. 天津科技, 2025, 52(03): 1-4.
[4]	朱箫. 探索ChatGPT在定性数据分析中的应用[J]. 天津科技, 2024, 51(10): 36-38.
[5]	谢鸣, 王丽. 不规范期刊预警系统的运行实践与启示——基于贵州职称评审系统的研究结果[J]. 天津科技, 2024, 51(09): 103-107.
[6]	林鲁莹. 医学类科技期刊编辑提升稿件学术质量的审稿要点探讨与分析[J]. 天津科技, 2024, 51(08): 111-114.
[7]	马英, 王辰. 科研诚信背景下论文作者署名和机构标注不当的问题探讨[J]. 天津科技, 2024, 51(01): 10-13+18.
[8]	刘丽. 医院人事档案信息化建设与管理的发展探索[J]. 天津科技, 2023, 50(6): 1-3.
[9]	左奕. 天津市动物园全域科普需求及游客满意度调查[J]. 天津科技, 2023, 50(5): 67-73.
[10]	方军凯, 来萌婧, 田恺, 刘山海, 胡晓悦. 《天津市中医药条例》推动落实中存在的问题及解决建议[J]. 天津科技, 2023, 50(12): 1-5+10.
[11]	吴茉. 科技论文题名的规范写法——以《中国特种设备安全》期刊为例[J]. 天津科技, 2023, 50(12): 85-88.
[12]	刘丽. 医院人事档案信息化建设与管理的发展探索[J]. 天津科技, 2023, 50(06): 1-3.
[13]	左奕. 天津市动物园全域科普需求及游客满意度调查[J]. 天津科技, 2023, 50(05): 67-73.