CRediT extensions and adjacent contribution vocabularies

Nature reports China’s multiple-corresponding-author rate hit ~30% by 2020, up from 21.6% in 2016 — tied to evaluation incentives, not byline convention.

A 2026 Journal of Informetrics study uses CRediT data to measure contribution among co-corresponding authors, finding it rises with byline position.

A January 2026 Royal Society Open Science paper models why contribution-insensitive authorship norms (alphabetical, senior-last) evolve via a ‘Red King’ dynamic — and shows they measurably discourage collaboration compared to contribution-sensitive norms.

A February 2026 study surveyed 375 North American accounting researchers on 44 debatable research and authorship practices, mapping where field norms diverge.

The Supreme Court declined to hear Thaler v. Perlmutter (March 2026). What the human-authorship rule now means for CRediT, ICMJE, and AI disclosure practice.

Agents4Science 2025, organized by researchers at Stanford and Together AI, ran as a one-day virtual conference on October 22, 2025 with an unusual submission rule: an AI system had to be the paper’s primary author, generating the hypotheses, running the experiments, and writing the manuscript, with a human listed as a supervising co-author. It is one of the most concrete tests to date of how authorship credit and disclosure norms hold up when the ‘researcher’ doing the work is an AI agent.

A 2026 bibliometric analysis of roughly 480,000 PubMed and PMC records (2010-2024) finds equal-contribution tags climbing from a median of about 19% of articles in 2015 to over 30% in 2024, with China driving most of the growth.

CRediT taxonomy translations now cover 35+ languages via a community project, not an official NISO release — what it means for non-English journals.

Bibliometric data show single-author systematic reviews climbing steadily since 2000 — including inside Cochrane’s own database — despite guidance calling for independent dual-reviewer screening.

A 2026 audit of how the top-100 cited journals collect CRediT at submission. Coverage is up, but qualifier capture and JATS fidelity remain uneven.

When a paper’s main output is code, the CRediT Software role bears the load. A practical guide to assigning Software for code-only research outputs.

ICMJE authorship plus CRediT contributorship: a practical 2026 guide to the 14 roles, lead/equal/supporting qualifiers, JATS XML, and journal-specific expectations.

The case for a 15th CRediT role covering AI assistance, the counter-arguments, and a draft scope statement for the CASRAI community to test.