You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The data (and code) authorship != paper authorship is not at all common in Economics. One example I can think of is https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/pol.20170704, with replication package https://doi.org/10.3886/E110642V1 explicitly single-authored by one of the authors. I've also seen some papers (need to dig out references) where Github with code might be "Author A + RA" whereas paper is "Author A + Author B".
The generic guidance I have in mind is https://casrai.org/credit/, which has been adopted by some journals, such as PLOS https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/s/authorship#loc-author-contributions, where it applies to the paper. If considering the data + the code as distinct first-class research objects, the CRediT taxonomy directly applies there as well, and there's nothing that requires that the two be the same.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/s/authorship#loc-author-contributions and https://casrai.org/credit/. While not typical in social sciences (in particular in economics) might warrant a discussion.
The data (and code) authorship != paper authorship is not at all common in Economics. One example I can think of is https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/pol.20170704, with replication package https://doi.org/10.3886/E110642V1 explicitly single-authored by one of the authors. I've also seen some papers (need to dig out references) where Github with code might be "Author A + RA" whereas paper is "Author A + Author B".
The generic guidance I have in mind is https://casrai.org/credit/, which has been adopted by some journals, such as PLOS https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/s/authorship#loc-author-contributions, where it applies to the paper. If considering the data + the code as distinct first-class research objects, the CRediT taxonomy directly applies there as well, and there's nothing that requires that the two be the same.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: