Contributor Roles Taxonomy

Last updated

The Contributor Roles Taxonomy, commonly known as CRediT, is a controlled vocabulary of 14 distinct types of contributions to a scholarly research project. CRediT is commonly used by scientific journals to indicate what each author of a research article did.

Contents

Overview

The Contributor Roles Taxonomy (CRediT) is a standardized list of 14 different ways that people contribute to research projects. For scientific journals and other venues that use CRediT, it provides a way for the researchers and others associated with a project to indicate their role in the project. [1] According to the CRediT website, "CRediT is not designed to determine authorship but to provide more information about the specific contributions of authors" (emphasis in the original). [2]

CRediT defines 14 distinct contributor roles, organized into four functional categories. Contributors can hold multiple roles.

Planning & design roles

Research & analysis roles

Communication roles

Management roles

CRediT also provides for indicating the degree of contribution ("lead", "equal", or "supporting") for each contributor. Unlike the 14 contribution categories, the NISO standard describes this as optional for CRediT users to implement. [3]

The CRediT standard includes machine-readable metadata. [4] Each role has a unique identifier URL for use in structured metadata.

The taxonomy is an open standard conforming to the OpenStand Principles, [5] and is published under a CC-BY Creative Commons licence.

History

Replacing traditional authorship roles with contributorship had been proposed as early as 1997, [6] and the practice was being adopted in the 2000s. [7] [8] The Contributor Roles Taxonomy (CRediT) was developed to address the limitations of traditional author lists, which often fail to accurately represent the diverse contributions of researchers. [9] [10] It originated from a 2012 workshop hosted by the Wellcome Trust and Harvard University, bringing together researchers, publishers, and funders to improve how individual contributions are documented. [9] [10]

In 2012, a draft taxonomy was created at a workshop held at Harvard involving biomedical scientists, publishers, and research funders. [11] [12]

In 2014, the Consortia Advancing Standards in Research Administration Information (CASRAI) took leadership of the CRediT initiative, forming a working group of publishers, funders, and university representatives to refine and formalize the taxonomy. [11] Under CASRAI's stewardship, CRediT was formally introduced in 2015 and has since been actively promoted by CASRAI for adoption by publishers and research organizations worldwide. [9]

By 2017, the PLOS journals and eLife had adopted CRediT, [13] [14] and in 2018 it was endorsed by representatives of the National Academy of Sciences. [15] Over the next several years, many of the largest publishers of scientific journals began using CRediT. [16] [17] [18] [19]

Interest in CRediT increased in 2020 following grant support from the Wellcome Trust and the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, which aimed to expand its use and encourage further awareness, advocacy, and standardization. [9]

In 2022, CRediT became an ANSI/NISO standard, [20] including metadata for use in the JATS XML version of scholarly articles (ANSI/NISO z39104-2022-credit). [21]

Name variation

The unabbreviated name of CRediT is variably presented with the second word being either "Role" or "Roles". CRediT was initially presented in the scholarly literature as the "Contributor Role Taxonomy". [11] [12] However, the official website for CRediT (https://casrai.org/credit/) has used the plural form "Contributor Roles Taxonomy" since its inception in October 2015. [22] Thus, articles about CRediT used the plural form (e.g. [23] , [24] ). A second website for CRediT (https://credit.niso.org/) used the plural form from its debut in 2020 [25] until the end of July 2024, when the site was updated and the name was changed to "Contributor Role Taxonomy". [26] Confusingly, the NISO publication that established CRediT as an American National Standard uses the plural form. [21]

Technical implementation

Supported schema formats

CASRAI provides comprehensive technical specifications for representing CRediT taxonomy data in four primary formats, ensuring compatibility with diverse systems and platforms: [27]

XML Schema

Structured format designed for publication systems and manuscript submission platforms. Enables standardized data exchange and integration with traditional publishing infrastructure, particularly JATS XML (Journal Article Tag Suite).

Example JATS XML with individual role term identifiers:

<contrib-group><contribcontrib-type="author"><name><surname>Smith</surname><given-names>JaneA.</given-names></name><rolevocab="credit"vocab-identifier="https://casrai.org/credit/"vocab-term-identifier="https://casrai.org/credit/roles/conceptualization/"><role-term>Conceptualization</role-term></role><rolevocab="credit"vocab-identifier="https://casrai.org/credit/"vocab-term-identifier="https://casrai.org/credit/roles/formal-analysis/"><role-term>FormalAnalysis</role-term></role></contrib></contrib-group>

The vocab-term-identifier attribute provides a unique URL for each specific CRediT role, enabling precise machine-readable identification and linking to role definitions.

JSON Schema

Web application format commonly used in modern research infrastructure, APIs, and web-based submission systems. Provides lightweight, easily parsed representation suitable for contemporary software architectures.

JSON-LD (Linked Data)

Supports semantic interoperability, integration with knowledge graphs, and linked data queries. Enables CRediT data to be connected with broader scholarly infrastructure and semantic web technologies.

Schema.org integration

Enables compatibility with search engines and knowledge graphs for enhanced discoverability. Allows CRediT information to be indexed by Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic, and other discovery platforms.

Limitations

CRediT, as currently implemented by most publishers, is limited to the contributions of authors named on the byline of a scholarly article. Contributions by acknowledgees (i.e. contributors named in the Acknowledgments) are typically not included. According to one analysis, [23] non-author research contributions, not considered by CRediT, include technical support and manuscript drafting (e.g. by a medical writer), translating, and editing (e.g. by an authors' editor). By ignoring the contributions of acknowledged non-authors, CRediT “induces named authors to attribute these roles to themselves, thus creating the potential for contradictory or misleading information to be passed on to readers and research evaluators.” [23] To overcome this limitation, new and revised CRediT taxa were proposed in 2019. [23]

In a study of one psychology research project, independent researchers read detailed descriptions of other researchers' contributions. The results indicated that the independent researchers had low agreement about both the number and type that the contributions should be classified into. [28]

As the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors has pointed out, documenting contributions with CRediT or another scheme "leaves unresolved the question of the quantity and quality of contribution that qualify an individual for authorship", suggesting that authorship guidelines are still necessary, although authorship guidelines also typically fail to specify the quantity of contribution required. [29]

See also

References

  1. Integrity of Randomized Clinical Trials: How to prevent research misconduct and ensure transparency. CRC Press. 26 December 2024. ISBN   978-1-040-26791-2.
  2. "How to implement CRediT". CRediT. 14 April 2020. Retrieved 1 December 2025.
  3. "CRediT, Contributor Roles Taxonomy" (PDF). NISO. Retrieved 7 December 2025.
  4. "CRediT taxonomy – JATS4R". 2022-05-09. Retrieved 2024-08-11.
  5. "OpenStand". OpenStand. Archived from the original on 18 September 2019. Retrieved 13 June 2018.
  6. Rennie, Drummond (20 August 1997). "When Authorship Fails: A Proposal to Make Contributors Accountable". JAMA. 278 (7): 579–585. doi:10.1001/jama.1997.03550070071041. PMID   9268280.
  7. Bates, Tamara; Anić, Ante; Marušić, Matko; Marušić, Ana (7 July 2004). "Authorship Criteria and Disclosure of Contributions: Comparison of 3 General Medical Journals With Different Author Contribution Forms" . JAMA. 292 (1): 86–88. doi:10.1001/jama.292.1.86. PMID   15238595 . Retrieved 2 July 2025.
  8. "Authorship policies". Nature. 458 (7242): 1078. April 2009. Bibcode:2009Natur.458.1078.. doi:10.1038/4581078a. PMID   19407745 . Retrieved 2 July 2025.
  9. 1 2 3 4 "Origins of CRediT". April 14, 2020.
  10. 1 2 Research Methodology in Bioscience and Biotechnology: Research Mindset • Best Practices • Integrity • Publications • Societal Impact. Springer. 28 July 2023. ISBN   978-981-99-2812-5.
  11. 1 2 3 Brand, Amy; Allen, Liz; Altman, Micah; Hlava, Marjorie; Scott, Jo (April 2015). "Beyond authorship: attribution, contribution, collaboration, and credit" . Learned Publishing. 28 (2): 151–155. Bibcode:2015LePub..28..151B. doi:10.1087/20150211. ISSN   0953-1513.
  12. 1 2 Allen, Liz; Scott, Jo; Brand, Amy; Hlava, Marjorie; Altman, Micah (April 2014). "Publishing: Credit where credit is due". Nature. 508 (7496): 312–313. Bibcode:2014Natur.508..312A. doi:10.1038/508312a. ISSN   1476-4687. PMID   24745070.
  13. Atkins, Helen (2016). "Author Credit: PLOS and CRediT Update". PLOS blog. Archived from the original on 2024-08-09. Retrieved 2024-08-09.
  14. "Enabling the Contributor Roles Taxonomy for author contributions". eLife. 2017-01-04. Retrieved 2024-08-09.
  15. McNutt, Marcia K.; Bradford, Monica; Drazen, Jeffrey M.; Hanson, Brooks; Howard, Bob; Jamieson, Kathleen Hall; Kiermer, Véronique; Marcus, Emilie; Pope, Barbara Kline; Schekman, Randy; Swaminathan, Sowmya; Stang, Peter J.; Verma, Inder M. (2018-03-13). "Transparency in authors' contributions and responsibilities to promote integrity in scientific publication". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 115 (11): 2557–2560. Bibcode:2018PNAS..115.2557M. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1715374115 . ISSN   0027-8424. PMC   5856527 . PMID   29487213.
  16. "CRediT: How do we recognize contributions to Research? An interview with V.P. of Publications at AGU". www.wiley.com. Retrieved 2024-08-09.
  17. "CRediT". Sage Publications. 2020-01-14. Retrieved 2024-08-09.
  18. "CRediT where credit's due". www.elsevier.com. Retrieved 2024-08-09.
  19. "Frontiers adopts CRediT to enhance clarity in research authorship". www.frontiersin.org. Retrieved 2024-08-09.
  20. "Contributor Roles Taxonomy (CRediT) Formalized as ANSI/NISO Standard | NISO website". www.niso.org. Retrieved 2024-08-09.
  21. 1 2 "ANSI/NISO Z39.104-2022, CRediT, Contributor Roles Taxonomy | NISO website". www.niso.org. Retrieved 2024-08-09.
  22. "CRediT - CASRAI". casrai.org. January 2014. Archived from the original on 13 October 2015.
  23. 1 2 3 4 Matarese, Valerie; Shashok, Karen (3 April 2019). "Transparent Attribution of Contributions to Research: Aligning Guidelines to Real-Life Practices". Publications. 7 (2): 24. doi: 10.3390/publications7020024 .
  24. Holcombe, Alex O. (2 July 2019). "Contributorship, Not Authorship: Use CRediT to Indicate Who Did What". Publications. 7 (3): 48. doi: 10.3390/publications7030048 .
  25. "CRediT". CRediT. Archived from the original on 25 September 2020.
  26. "CRediT". CRediT. Archived from the original on 30 July 2024.
  27. "CRediT Schema". CASRAI.
  28. Brown, J. Oliver; Staton, Christian; Smith, Timothy; Paris, Bastien (2020). "Credit where credit is due? An examination of the reliability of crediting behavior in science". Open Science Framework.
  29. "Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals" (PDF). International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. 2024. Retrieved 2024-08-11.