Authorship Criteria for Research Papers: Who Qualifies, How to Order Authors and How to Document It

Who counts as an author under the ICMJE criteria and the DFG Code, how CRediT records each contribution, how to agree author order and what an authorship agreement should contain.

Written by
Dr. CharlieSenior Medical Writer
Published
Reading time
6 minutes
Sources
4 cited
  • Authorship
  • Publication ethics
  • ICMJE
  • CRediT
CRediT taxonomy
ICMJE
All 4 criteria, for every author
CRediT
14 contributor roles
Not enough alone
Funding, supervision, data access
Agree order
At project start, revisit before submission
On this page
  1. Quick answer
  2. Why authorship criteria matter
  3. The Four ICMJE Criteria
  4. The DFG Perspective on Authorship
  5. What Does Not Qualify
  6. Describing Contributions with the CRediT Taxonomy
  7. Deciding Author Order
  8. How to Document Authorship
  9. Resolving Authorship Disputes
  10. Conclusion
  11. Questions
  12. References
Contact us

Quick answer

  • An author must meet all four ICMJE criteria: substantial contribution, drafting or critical revision, final approval and accountability.
  • CRediT records what each person did; the authorship criteria decide who is listed.
  • Agree author order early and record it in a written authorship agreement.

01Why authorship criteria matter

Authorship confers credit and accountability. It affects careers, funding and responsibility for published work, and disputes about it are a recurring publication-ethics problem for journals and institutions [3]. Clear authorship criteria, applied early and documented, prevent most of these problems.

This guide explains who qualifies as an author under the ICMJE criteria and the DFG Code of Conduct, how the CRediT taxonomy describes individual contributions, how to decide author order, and how to record agreements before submission [1, 2, 4].

02The Four ICMJE Criteria

The ICMJE criteria, widely adopted by biomedical journals, require that every author meets all four conditions [1]:

Table 1. ICMJE authorship criteria and how to test them.
CriterionPractical test
Substantial contribution to conception or design, or to acquisition, analysis or interpretation of dataCan the person name a specific intellectual contribution?
Drafting the work or reviewing it critically for important intellectual contentDid they write or substantively revise the manuscript?
Final approval of the version to be publishedDid they approve the submitted and final versions?
Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the workWill they help resolve questions about accuracy or integrity?

Anyone who meets criterion 1 should be given the opportunity to meet criteria 2 to 4. Contributors who do not meet all four are listed in the acknowledgements, with their permission [1].

03The DFG Perspective on Authorship

For researchers in Germany, Guideline 14 of the DFG Code of Conduct defines an author as someone who has made a genuine, identifiable contribution to the content of a research publication involving text, data or software [4]. Key points include:

  • Contribution types: conceptual design, data collection, provision of software or sources, analysis and interpretation, and drafting the manuscript can each justify authorship.

  • No honorary authorship: a leadership or supervisory role alone does not make someone an author.

  • Shared responsibility: all authors agree on the final version and share responsibility for it.

  • Consent to publish: authors may not refuse consent to publication without sufficient grounds.

Our guide to the DFG authorship and publication guidelines covers Guideline 14 in detail, and good scientific practice under the DFG Code covers documentation and archiving.

04What Does Not Qualify

COPE guidance and the ICMJE criteria both identify inappropriate authorship practices that journals may treat as misconduct [1, 3]:

Table 2. Authorship practices that do not meet authorship criteria.
PracticeDescription
Honorary authorshipListing a department head, supervisor or senior colleague who made no qualifying contribution.
Gift authorshipAdding a colleague as a favour or in exchange for reciprocal authorship.
Ghost authorshipOmitting someone who made a qualifying contribution, such as an undisclosed professional writer.
Funding, supervision or administration onlyAcquiring funding, general supervision of a research group or general administrative support alone.

For a closer look at these practices, see honorary and ghost authorship. AI tools cannot be authors under current journal policies; see AI authorship policy in academic publishing.

05Describing Contributions with the CRediT Taxonomy

The CRediT taxonomy, standardised as ANSI/NISO Z39.104-2022, defines 14 contributor roles. Many journals ask authors to report contributorship using these roles [2]:

Table 3. The 14 CRediT contributor roles.
Contributor roles
ConceptualizationProject administration
Data curationResources
Formal analysisSoftware
Funding acquisitionSupervision
InvestigationValidation
MethodologyVisualization
Writing – original draftWriting – review & editing

CRediT describes contributions; it does not decide authorship. Map each contributor’s roles, then apply the journal’s authorship criteria to decide who is an author and who is acknowledged [1, 2].

06Deciding Author Order

No single rule governs author order across disciplines, so agree the model at the start of the project and revisit it when roles change [3, 4]:

  • First author: usually the person who led the work and drafted the manuscript.

  • Last author: in biomedicine, often the senior researcher who supervised and took overall responsibility.

  • Middle authors: commonly ordered by the size of contribution.

  • Equal contribution: shared first or last authorship, marked with a footnote where the journal allows it.

  • Alphabetical order: used in some fields, such as mathematics and parts of physics, where order does not signal contribution.

The corresponding author manages communication with the journal during submission and peer review and remains available afterwards to answer questions about the work [1].

07How to Document Authorship

A written authorship agreement, updated as the project evolves, provides evidence if questions arise later [2, 3]. Record at least:

Table 4. Minimum content of an authorship agreement.
FieldWhat to record
ContributorsEvery person involved, with institution and ORCID iD
CRediT rolesRoles for each contributor and degree of contribution (lead, equal, supporting)
Authorship statusAuthor or acknowledgement, with the criteria applied
Author orderAgreed order and the basis for it
Corresponding authorName and responsibilities
Version and dateWhen the agreement was made and last revised, with each author’s confirmation

08Resolving Authorship Disputes

Most disputes can be resolved by returning to the agreed criteria and the written record. If not, COPE provides flowcharts that journals follow when authorship changes are requested or contested [3]. In Germany, institutional ombudspersons and the German Research Ombudsman (Ombudsman für die Wissenschaft) offer confidential advice on disputes involving good research practice [4].

Five worked scenarios, including an authorship disagreement, are in our publication support case studies.

09Conclusion

Fair authorship depends on agreed authorship criteria, transparent contributorship records and early decisions on author order. Applying the ICMJE criteria, the DFG Code and the CRediT taxonomy together, and documenting the result in an authorship agreement, protects both credit and accountability.

Questions

What are the authorship criteria for research papers?
Most biomedical journals use the four ICMJE criteria: substantial contribution, drafting or critical revision, final approval and accountability.
Can a supervisor be an author without contributing?
Supervision alone does not meet authorship criteria under the ICMJE recommendations or the DFG Code.
Is CRediT the same as authorship criteria?
CRediT describes what each person did; authorship criteria decide who is listed as an author.
When should author order be agreed?
At the start of the project, with a review when roles change and before submission.

References

  1. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. (n.d.). Defining the role of authors and contributors. Retrieved November 7, 2026, from https://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the-role-of-authors-and-contributors.html
  2. National Information Standards Organization. (2022). CRediT, Contributor Roles Taxonomy (ANSI/NISO Z39.104-2022). https://doi.org/10.3789/ansi.niso.z39.104-2022
  3. Committee on Publication Ethics. Core Principles and Code of Conduct for members (replacing the Core Practices, retired at the end of 2024). Accessed 9 November 2026. https://publicationethics.org/
  4. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft. Guidelines for Safeguarding Good Research Practice. Code of Conduct. Version 1.2. DFG; 2024. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14281892
Dr. CharliePubrica · Senior Medical Writer

Update log

  • Published by Pubrica

How to cite this article

Dr. Charlie. (2026, November 9). Authorship Criteria for Research Papers: Who Qualifies, How to Order Authors and How to Document It. Pubrica. https://pubrica.com/academy/publication-support/authorship-criteria-research-papers/

This article is general information for researchers, not legal, regulatory or funding advice. Check the current requirements of your journal, funder, ethics committee or regulator before you act on it.

Enquire now
WhatsApp
Email us