Publication policy

HISTORY OF THIS POLICY

Sharing our research results through publications is a major focus of our work. During the summer of 2010, project staff and partners collaborated closely to produce a publication policy that would be meaningful, respectful and relevant to everyone participating in the research project. This policy came into effect in September 2010 to cover all publications produced for the project as of September 2010. Publications produced prior to this date have followed generally-accepted practices for authorship and acknowledgement.

In the summer of 2012, the publication policy was reviewed and updated based on our experiences during the previous two years with the original policy, and also to reflect the new name and priorities of the First Nations Innovation project. This current revised policy will come into effect in January 2013.

Authorship including aboriginal and community authors

  1. For community-based research, OCAP principles (First Nations ownership, control, access and possession of research) and the appropriate First Nations partner and community research protocols will be considered and applied as appropriate for each publication. The researchers will negotiate authorship with the research partners and the First Nation communities involved.
  2. All publications will have at least one Aboriginal author. This author, along with all other authors, will be invited to participate in all phases of the creative process including writing, editing, reviewing drafts and approving the final version.
  3. All publications based on research from a First Nation community will have at least one author who is a member of the community. This author will be invited to review the drafts and approve the final version. The primary responsibility of this author, to the best of her or his ability, is to ensure that the publication accurately reflects their perspectives as a community member.
  4. There are many different ways of determining authorship order. The project lead researcher will suggest an initial authorship order that will be reviewed by the co-authors.
  5. As soon as a new publication is started, the names of the authors and all other information will be recorded on the list of ongoing publications for the project (see section IV).

Acknowledgement of aboriginal and community research participants

  1. All First Nations Innovation publications will include an acknowledgement section. This section will acknowledge and thank the project partners (e.g., communities and their leadership), funders and research participants. If the publication is based on information collected from community members, the acknowledgements section will include the names of community member research participants who wish to have their names included.
  2. Participation in the acknowledgement section is voluntary; as indicated on the participant consent form or by oral consent, the researcher will give the option to the community member whether or not to have her or his name included in future publications.
  3. The participant consent form will also include an option for community members to review all draft research papers resulting from this project. This option to review will be conducted by email and it is the responsibility of the research participant to include a valid email address on the consent form so that this step can be carried out.  If an oral consent (instead of a written consent) is used, the researcher will record the email address as part of the interview so it will appear in the written transcript.
  4. When photographs of community members are to be published, oral consent needs to be given by the community member and recorded as part of the interview.

Authorship requirements

  1. Everyone listed as an author is required to have made a significant, direct intellectual contribution to the research or the subject being researched. The “subject being researched” includes the use of technology by the First Nation research partners and by the collaborating remote and rural First Nations. For example, co-authors may have contributed to the development of broadband infrastructure and ICT use in the community that is collaborating in the study, or have contributed to the conception, literature search, design, analysis and/or interpretation of data, and writing sections of the paper or report.
  2. Although it is preferable that all authors be familiar with all aspects of the work, this may not be possible when research is done in teams with complimentary expertise so that every author may not be equally familiar with all aspects of the work. For example, an author may have a greater understanding of the conceptual or theoretical aspects of the work but may have little or no expertise in or knowledge of the community collaborating on the study. Thus, with research teams whose members are highly specialized, an individual’s contributions and responsibilities may be limited to specific aspects of the work.
  3. All authors will be invited and given the opportunity to read and recommend revisions to the manuscripts and to review and approve the final version. An author has the right to withdraw her or his name from the paper at any time up to the deadline for the final paper, which usually corresponds to a week before the paper is presented or the final version of the accepted manuscript is submitted to the journal publishers.

Authorship credit and recognition of non-authorship contributions

Roles that deserve acknowledgment but not authorship:

    1. Individuals in administrative charge of a research group, procuring funding for a project but otherwise not involved in the project should not be considered for authorship but do deserve acknowledgement.
    2. Individuals reviewing a manuscript, editing a manuscript, doing the clerical or manual labor of gathering data (exceptional circumstances may alter this), cleaning data and providing resources may qualify for authorship. In this instance, communication among team members is essential, and ethical judgments on the part of the principal investigator (or senior team member) are critical.
    1. Permission of an individual or organization will be sought prior to acknowledging their contribution in a paper or presentation.

Presenting papers at conferences and other events

    1. In keeping with accepted practice, one or more of the authors will present papers at conferences and other events.
    2. Any number of authors can be part of the presentation team at an event; however the project will support the travel cost of a maximum of two presenters.
    3. For community member co-author(s) on a paper about her or his community, the project will offer to pay the cost of the travel for one community member to present the paper.
    4. Presenting papers at academic conferences is a significant part of the training of graduate students working on the project. Whenever possible, they should be given the opportunity to present a paper at an academic conference.
    5. The travel costs of the participating author(s) will be agreed in advance with the project. Reimbursement for the costs of any travel will be made upon receipt of an invoice from the sponsoring organization (such as the band council or partner organization).  These costs will be paid according to UNB travel rates. In the case of UNB graduate students, their travel costs will be reimbursed according to UNB policy.

Ongoing information, deadlines and recording author consent

    1. As soon as a publication is planned or started, the names of the authors as well as all other known essential information (deadlines, conference date and venues) will be recorded on a list of project publications.
    2. The list of publications will be circulated each month with the monthly meeting agenda. In the case of co-authors that do not receive the meeting agenda (such as community co-authors), the list will be sent by email every month with a reminder of their co-author status and an update on the progress of the publication. It will be the responsibility of the lead author to ensure that the details on the publication list are up to date and that all co-authors receive this list monthly. A meeting agenda item will serve to remind people on a monthly basis of the necessity of keeping all involved up to date.
    3. The deadlines listed in the publication list will also be included at the top of each draft paper circulated so that all the co-authors will be aware of them. Deadlines will be respected whenever possible and co-authors are responsible for communicating to the lead author if they will be unable to meet the proposed deadlines. When the deadlines are changed, the lead project researcher will communicate the new deadlines to the co-authors.
    4. The project lead researcher is responsible for ensuring that the publication list is updated, accurate and circulated with the meeting agenda every month (again, it is the responsibility of the lead author to ensure that the list is circulated each month to co-authors who are not attending the meetings).
    5. It is the responsibility of the co-authors to stay aware of the status of the publications they have consented to contribute to and to correct any erroneous information they are aware of on the list of project publications.

Implementation

    1. Research teams should discuss authorship issues early in the course of their work together. In addition to keeping a record of author order on the publication list, the authors and author order will be listed in all drafts of the document, including abstracts, so that all participants involved in a research project understand the authorship inclusions and order for publications emerging from the project.
    2. Community-Based Research Co-Authorship: Organizations and communities should decide how they would like to be acknowledged for their contributions and that authorship agreements should be negotiated at the outset of the project. The topic of publications and authorship will be included in the initial meetings with the community leadership and at subsequent meetings where appropriate.
    3. To avoid conflict and misunderstanding, the research team should be guided by generally accepted procedures that are characterized by openness and transparency. Periodic discussions about authorship should be conducted at the planning stage, the drafting stage and finalization stage of publication. If it is found that previous expectations are not being met (refer to section 3.1), then assignment of authorship credit may have to be modified, based on the actual contributions at the completion of the publication. Alternatively, many manuscripts need to be revised substantially before they are accepted for publication. These revisions may require additional contributions. Thus, when such revisions are required the research team should meet to reexamine their original agreement and determine whether it needs to be modified.
    4. Disputes over authorship are best settled at the local level by the authors themselves or the community-based research team (i.e., organizations, communities and principal investigator). If local efforts fail, it is advised that research members consult with colleagues. In exceptional circumstances, the project team including all four research partners will be asked to come to a decision on the matter.