Authors involved in data collection
In the life sciences and behavioural sciences in particular, it is often the case that a researcher participates in data collection as part of a working group for a limited period of time but then leaves the group. Subsequently, the data collected is often further processed by others in the same working group and becomes the subject of new publications in its processed form; the original data is also sometimes made available to other laboratories/working groups, with permission being granted for further processing. In such cases, the question arises as to whether the person who originally collected the data is still a co-author of later publications: how long does the contribution made by that person continue to justify authorship?
In this context, a schematic, formula-based assessment is inappropriate: after all, the contribution of the data to the substance of the research and its significance in the context of a publication can vary considerably. What is more, subject-specific peculiarities may apply.
Generally speaking, the recommendation is for group leaders to engage in discussion with the researchers concerned about their foreseeable role in publications as early as possible and arrive at the relevant agreements so as to avoid conflicts later.
In the case of the multiple use of data, it is often preferable to establish a reference to the first publication and use a citation rather than perpetuating authorship “infinitely” in later publications. This approach seems to be common practice in many fields.
When assessing whether authorship of a publication is (still) justified, it can be helpful to refer to the requirement of a personal and research-relevant contribution to the scientific content of the publication as set out in (interner Link). One question to ask might be whether the activity of data collection itself required independent, scientific input. Data recording may justify authorship, but this is by no means always the case. It may also be helpful to consider how relevant or central the dataset is to the publication in question.