Can science papers be more transparent with respect to who thought of each idea, who ran each experiment, and who analysed the data?

Research-integrity survey also suggests that there is a split in US- and Europe-based researchers' perceptions of 'questionable research practices'.

Authorship represents a highly discussed topic in nowadays academia. The share of co-authored papers has increased substantially in recent years allowing scientists to specialize and focus on specific tasks. But what does authorship actually mean in the social sciences?

To keep authorship fair, journals in all fields should list authors based on their contribution rather than in alphabetical order.

Reasons to adopt the ORCID identifier and accept the CRediT taxonomy.

Ensuring appropriate credit and recognition in increasingly collaborative research involving multiple investigators and research groups.

Some scholars add authors to their research papers or grant proposals even when those individuals contribute nothing to the research effort.

Journals are adopting policies that require the disclosure of individual authors’ contributions. However, it is not clear whether and how these disclosures improve upon the conventional approach.

An easy to apply, universally comparable and fair metric to measure and report co-authors contribution in the scientific literature.

Badges that acknowledge open practices significantly increase sharing of reported data and materials, as well as subsequent accessibility, correctness, usability, and completeness.

A system of academic endorsement based on blockchain technology would be decoupled from the publication process, which would allow expeditious appraisal of all kinds of scientific output in a transparent manner without relying on any central authority.