↓ Skip to main content

Do age and professional rank influence the order of authorship in scientific publications? Some evidence from a micro-level perspective

Overview of attention for article published in Scientometrics, March 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
q&a
1 Q&A thread

Citations

dimensions_citation
100 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
125 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
Title
Do age and professional rank influence the order of authorship in scientific publications? Some evidence from a micro-level perspective
Published in
Scientometrics, March 2011
DOI 10.1007/s11192-011-0368-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rodrigo Costas, María Bordons

Abstract

Scientific authorship has important implications in science since it reflects the contribution to research of the different individual scientists and it is considered by evaluation committees in research assessment processes. This study analyses the order of authorship in the scientific output of 1,064 permanent scientists at the Spanish CSIC (WoS, 1994-2004). The influence of age, professional rank and bibliometric profile of scientists over the position of their names in the byline of publications is explored in three different research areas: Biology and Biomedicine, Materials Science and Natural Resources. There is a strong trend for signatures of younger researchers and those in the lower professional ranks to appear in the first position (junior signing pattern), while more veteran or highly-ranked ones, who tend to play supervisory functions in research, are proportionally more likely to sign in the last position (senior signing pattern). Professional rank and age have an effect on authorship order in the three fields analysed, but there are inter-field differences. Authorship patterns are especially marked in the most collaboration-intensive field (i.e. Biology and Biomedicine), where professional rank seems to be more significant than age in determining the role of scientists in research as seen through their authorship patterns, while age has a more significant effect in the least collaboration-intensive field (Natural Resources).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 125 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 5 4%
Canada 2 2%
United States 2 2%
France 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Unknown 111 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 21 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 17 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 12%
Librarian 14 11%
Student > Master 11 9%
Other 32 26%
Unknown 15 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 53 42%
Computer Science 17 14%
Business, Management and Accounting 9 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 5%
Other 16 13%
Unknown 17 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 April 2022.
All research outputs
#6,656,160
of 23,523,017 outputs
Outputs from Scientometrics
#1,190
of 2,741 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#35,179
of 110,215 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientometrics
#5
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,523,017 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,741 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 110,215 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.