Site-wide search
Results for "credit"
35 matches across dictionary terms, picklists, object templates, domains and news.
Dictionary terms
20 resultsProject metadata
The structured descriptive data about a research project, including title, abstract, dates, funder, award number, PI, contributors, institutions, scope, keywords, outputs, and identifiers (RAiD, ORCID, ROR, DOI), used for discovery, reporting, and linkage.
Gift authorship
The inclusion as an author of a person who did not meet the substantive authorship criteria, typically as a courtesy, in exchange for resources, or for prestige. An authorship is a gift when removing the named person would not require any change to the manuscript.
Authorship dispute
A disagreement between contributors over who should be listed as an author, in what order, or with what role designation. A dispute is formally recognised when raised through an institutional process or with the journal.
Software citation (Software Citation Working Group)
The practice of citing research software in the reference list of a publication, with sufficient metadata (authors, title, version, persistent identifier, role) to credit creators and enable retrieval of the cited version.
Sensitive-data repository
A repository specifically designed to hold sensitive research data — typically personal data, health data, criminal-justice data, commercially-confidential data, or culturally-sensitive Indigenous data — with enhanced access controls, audit logging, contractual access conditions, and (often) a secure analysis environment.
Data citation principle
Any of the eight principles articulated in the Joint Declaration of Data Citation Principles (Force11, 2014) covering importance, credit and attribution, evidence, unique identification, access, persistence, specificity and verifiability, and interoperability and flexibility of data citations in scholarly communication.
Data publication platform
A platform that supports the publication of research data as a citable artefact — assigning a persistent identifier, presenting a landing page, and applying review, curation, or peer-review processes — distinct from purely depositional storage.
Tissue bank
A specific kind of biobank focused on the collection, processing, storage, and distribution of human tissue samples (typically solid tissue specimens from surgical or post-mortem sources), governed under tissue-banking regulation in the relevant jurisdiction.
Crossref deposit XML
The XML schema family maintained by Crossref that publishers and content-registration members use to submit metadata when minting Crossref DOIs, with distinct sub-schemas for journals, books, conference proceedings, preprints, peer reviews, grants, and standards.
Crossref DOI
A DOI registered through Crossref, the DOI Registration Agency for scholarly publications (journals, books, conference proceedings, preprints, peer reviews, grants), accompanied by metadata deposited in Crossref's XML schema.
ORCID work assertion
A claim, recorded in an ORCID record, that a particular research output (journal article, book chapter, dataset, software, etc.) is associated with the iD holder, with metadata fields including title, type, publication year, external identifiers (DOI, ISBN, PMID), and contributor role.
Translation (work)
A scholarly publication that renders a previously-published work from one natural language into another, with the translator(s) credited and the original work referenced, treated as a distinct research output for purposes of credit, citation, and intellectual contribution.
Software paper
A peer-reviewed scholarly publication whose primary subject is a research software package — describing its functionality, architecture, dependencies, testing, and intended uses — published in a venue that issues this format (JOSS, SoftwareX), accompanying the software release in a citable repository.
Data paper
A peer-reviewed scholarly publication whose primary subject is a dataset — describing its collection, structure, processing, quality, and intended uses — published in a journal that specifically issues this format, accompanying the dataset itself in a FAIR-aligned repository.
Co-corresponding author convention
The practice of designating two or more authors as jointly corresponding on a published work, each taking responsibility for post-publication communication, editorial liaison, and queries about the work, with all co-corresponding authors typically marked by a symbol in the byline.
“Degree of contribution” qualifier (lead/equal/supporting)
The optional CRediT modifier that may be applied to any of the 14 CRediT roles to indicate the relative magnitude of a contributor's input: 'lead' (primary responsibility), 'equal' (co-equal with one or more others), or 'supporting' (contributed but did not lead).
Conceptualization lead vs supporting
Under the CRediT taxonomy, the distinction between the contributor who led the formulation of the overarching research question, aims, or ideas for a project (Conceptualization: lead) and those who contributed to but did not originate the conceptual framing (Conceptualization: supporting).
Funding-acquisition lead vs supporting
Under the CRediT taxonomy, the distinction between the contributor who led the funding acquisition for a research project (typically the named principal investigator on the grant) and contributors who supported but did not lead the proposal (co-investigators, named collaborators).
Methodology consultant
A specialist who provides substantive advice on research methodology — study design, sampling, instrument selection, analytic strategy, or implementation approach — to a research project on which they are not a primary investigator.
Data validator
A contributor whose role is to check the integrity, accuracy, completeness, and conformance to schema of a dataset before its use, deposit, or publication — including range checks, plausibility tests, cross-source comparison, and metadata verification.
Picklists
2 resultsPicklist
Licence Types
Types of content licences.
View picklist
Picklist
Contributor Roles
A high-level classification of the diverse roles performed in the work leading to a published research output in the sciences. Its purpose to provide transparency in contributions to scholarly published work, to enable improved systems of attribution, credit, and accountability.
View picklist
Object templates
2 resultsObject template
Research-based Degree Supervision
Services contributed in instances of overseeing the productivity and progress of a student reporting directly to the person, usually in pursuit of academic credit.
View template
Object template
Course-based Degree Supervision
Services contributed in instances of overseeing the productivity and progress of a student reporting directly to the person, who is undertaking research activity, usually in pursuit of academic credit.
View template
Dictionary domains
1 resultNews & perspectives
10 resultsNews · 2026-06-20
CRediT Taxonomy Adoption: Overcoming Institutional Hurdles in University Systems
Introduction The strategic advancement of CRediT Taxonomy Adoption: Overcoming Institutional Hurdles in University Systems is transforming how modern academic institutions catalog, preserve, and evaluate scientific outputs. In an era dominated by rapid open-science transitions and complex funding mandates, establishing unified metadata frameworks, secure persistent identifiers, and collaborative repositories is essential for ensuring institutional transparency and […]
News · 2026-06-18
CRediT in grant reporting: what funders increasingly expect
Funders are moving from author lists to contribution data in grant applications and reports. Why CRediT, ORCID and structured contribution metadata are entering the funding lifecycle, and what applicants and research offices should do about it.
News · 2026-06-18
Mentorship and Training Contributions: Formalizing Credit in the Scholarly Record
Introduction to Mentorship Credit in Scholarly Spaces Mentorship, researcher training, and lab supervision are vital to academic success. However, because scholarly credit systems prioritize author counts and publications, these critical contributions are rarely documented, tracked, or rewarded formally. The Invisibility of Training and Supervision Traditional metrics (like the h-index) completely ignore training efforts. A senior […]
News · 2026-06-17
Hyperauthorship and large collaborations: crediting contributions at scale
Some papers now carry thousands of authors. When the author list runs to several pages, what does it still mean to be an author — and how do consortium authorship, contributor roles and collaboration metadata keep credit meaningful at scale?
News · 2026-06-17
Crediting mentorship and the narrative CV: recognising the whole researcher
Mentorship, training and care work are the connective tissue of research careers, and the parts a publication list never shows. The narrative CV and responsible assessment make the whole researcher visible.
News · 2026-06-16
Recognising peer reviewers: from anonymous service to credited contribution
Peer review is essential, demanding and almost entirely invisible. How ORCID’s reviewer records, Web of Science reviewer recognition and structured review activity turn an anonymous service into a creditable, verifiable contribution.
News · 2026-06-12
Implementing the CRediT Taxonomy: Practical Guide for Journals, Libraries, and Research Administrators
Introduction to the Contributor Roles Taxonomy (CRediT) The traditional model of academic authorship—which ranks researchers in a linear sequence (first author, co-author, corresponding author)—fails to reflect the multi-faceted reality of modern scientific collaboration. Large-scale research requires specialized roles, including software development, data curation, project administration, and hardware calibration. To provide granular, machine-readable attribution, CASRAI pioneered […]
News · 2026-06-11
Team science and collaborative credit: recognising leadership and coordination
Modern research is increasingly done by large, diverse teams — but credit systems built for the lone author or small group struggle to capture leadership, coordination and the work of holding a collaboration together. Team science, contributorship and CRediT offer ways to recognise these roles.
News · 2026-06-11
Data citation: giving datasets the credit they deserve
Datasets underpin findings but are rarely cited as first-class objects. How DataCite DOIs, the FORCE11 Joint Declaration of Data Citation Principles and the CRediT Data curation role together make data both citable and creditable.
News · 2026-06-10
CRediT degree-of-contribution qualifiers: using lead, equal and supporting correctly
CRediT does more than list fourteen contribution roles. Its standard, ANSI/NISO Z39.104-2022, lets each role carry a degree qualifier — lead, equal or supporting — that conveys how much someone contributed. Used well, these qualifiers turn a flat list into a meaningful account of who did what.
