.jpg){kind=link}
- Published
- Updated
A contribution taxonomy can make the work behind a research output more visible. Selecting a role on a form does not by itself demonstrate that the contribution occurred or that the person meets the journal’s authorship expectations.
The publication decision
Link contribution statements to activities people actually performed. CRediT provides shared vocabulary for describing contributions, serving a different purpose from an authorship eligibility decision. One person may have several roles, and several people may share a role. Use examples to confirm that the team applies a role descriptor with a consistent meaning.
Worked example
For example, two contributors select data curation. One managed code mappings, while the other only tracked delivery dates. The team reviews the descriptors together and discusses how to represent the actual work. The purpose is understandable attribution rather than inflating or diminishing contributions. Link the final statement to a version contributors can review.
Coordination checks
- Support role selections with short examples of actual work.
- Review contributorship separately from byline order and authorship eligibility.
- Confirm that contributors saw the same statement used in the final draft.
Acceptance and boundaries
Acceptance means readers can reasonably understand who contributed to which work. A contribution statement is not a substitute for staff performance appraisal or contractual delivery acceptance. If the journal requests a different format, map the statement without losing meaning. Do not represent unfulfilled planned tasks as completed contributions; retain explanations for material changes where needed.
Frequently asked questions
- Is CRediT an authorship test?
- It describes contributions. Assess authorship eligibility separately against the target journal’s criteria.
- Can several people share a role?
- Yes, where actual contributions support it and the meaning for each person remains understandable.