Hyperauthorship: A postmodern perversion or evidence of a structural shift in scholarly communication practices?

By Blaise Cronin. J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol., 2001

482 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Health, Information Systems and Management, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/3dd45d95b84642b0c4e2eacd2dd004907caca944

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Health

In Information Systems and Management

In Statistics and Probability

Citations in the corpus

A review of the literature on citation impact indicators (2015, background): “ Extreme examples of large-scale scientific collaboration can be found in high energy physics and in certain biomedical fields, where publications sometimes include several hundreds of authors (e.g., Cronin, 2001). With increasing numbers of authors per publication, it becomes more and more difficul”
Bias in peer review (2013, unknown): “Although unethical practices have been documented repeatedly in the medical and biomedical fields (e.g., Biagioli, 1998; Cronin, 2002; Sismondo, 2009), there is also suggestive evidence that chicanery and corner-cutting may be on the rise in some of the social sciences (Shea, 2011).”
Introduction to the special topic section on mining Web resources for enhancing information retrieval (2007, background): “Coauthorship of the paper is used to acknowledge each team’s participation in the experiment and may result in hundreds of authors on a paper ( Cronin, 2001 ).”
A review of theory and practice in scientometrics (2015, background): “These outliers can distort bibliometrics analyses as we shall see (Cronin, 2001).”
Changes in Pronoun Use in American Books and the Rise of Individualism, 1960-2008 (2013, background): “However, multiple authorship of journal articles has increased significantly over time across several disciplines (e.g., Cronin, 2001; Dillon et al., 1992; Hudson, 1996; Khan, Nwosu, Khan, Dwarakanath, & Chien, 1999; King, 2000).”
Impact of license choice on Open Source Software development activity (2009, background): “Coterminal citations can be considered as a generalization of what is widely known as cocitation, and their introduction attempts to capture the “inflationary” trends in scholarly communication which are reflected by coauthorship and “exaggerate” citing ( Cronin, 2001, 2003; Cronin, Shaw, & Barre, ”
Over-optimization of academic publishing metrics: observing Goodhart’s Law in action (2018, unknown): “This phenomenon is known as hyperauthorship [34] or author inflation [35] and is common across research fields, where the majority of papers with > 1,000 authors are produced in the physical sciences [36].”
Constructing bibliometric networks: A comparison between full and fractional counting (2016, background): “There are just 158 publications that have been coauthored by more than 100 universities, but each of these hyperauthorship publications (Cronin, 2001) is responsible for a very large number of co-authorship links.”
Is science becoming more interdisciplinary? Measuring and mapping six research fields over time (2009, unknown): “…result of very different types of collaboration practices (agreements between labs, recruitment, materials or facilities support, etc.) leading to publication co-authorship, and that not all forms collaboration not captured by co-authorship [CRONIN, 2001; GLÄNZEL, 2002; LAUDEL, 2002; RAFOLS, 2007].”
Scientific collaboration and endorsement: Network analysis of coauthorship and citation networks (2011, background): “Bibliometrically, collaboration is not normally viewed or studied graphically, but rather as a social phenomenon with different factors, including economic factors (Price, 1966), intra-scientific factors (Beaver, 2001), scientific acknowledgement factors (Cronin, Shaw, & La Barre, 2003; Giles & Coun”