An interesting article in the Chronicle of Higher Education reports that “William A. Tozier, a consultant in Ann Arbor, Mich., who specializes in machine learning and artificial-intelligence research … auctioned off his services as a co-author on eBay, with the promise of helping the highest bidder write a scientific paper for publication.”

In response, “Jose Burillo, an associate professor of mathematics at the Polytechnic University of Catalonia, in Spain, entered a fake, inflated bid of more than $1,000 in hopes of stopping the auction.” Burillo says in the article: “Nobody should pay anybody for writing or collaborating on a scientific project. This could open the door to many unethical problems … If you’re collaborating, then nobody should pay. If one of them is paying, then that’s not collaborating.”

Burillo’s comments raise some difficult questions, and seem to me to go too far. For example, the U.S. government pays about $130 billion a year for research, much of it collaborative. Researchers approach and are approached to participate in grant proposals in exchange, yes, for being paid, either in salary, other research support, consulting, or in the prestige of being associated with the PI . Undoubtedly many researchers would publish more and better papers with the assistance of a writing consultant on hand (and many have benefited from such services). Of course, if that consultant is paid for by a group with a clear interest in the paper’s outcome, such as a drug company in a pharmaceutical trial, there could be a clear conflict of interest. As in other areas of possible conflict of interest, the scientific community should expect full disclosure in cases of collaborations for hire.

A good place to find information on such ethical issues in the conduct of research is Onlineethics.org.