Why Some Authors Fake Co-Authors on Research Papers – How to Stop It

Why Some Authors Fake Co-Authors on Research Papers – and How to Stop It

Most researchers are familiar with plagiarism, data fabrication and duplicate publication as clear forms of academic misconduct. More recently, however, editors and reviewers have begun to encounter a more subtle but equally corrosive practice: faking co-authors on research papers. At first glance, it may seem puzzling that an author would share credit with others who have done nothing to contribute, but within the pressures of modern scholarly publishing, this behaviour follows a disturbing internal logic.

This article explains what faked co-authorship looks like in practice, how the scheme is typically carried out, why some researchers are tempted to take this risk and what can be done by individuals, institutions and journals to reduce its occurrence. Understanding the mechanics and motivations behind this kind of misconduct is an important step towards protecting the integrity of the scholarly record.

What Does It Mean to Fake Co-Authors?

Faking co-authors occurs when names are added to a manuscript as “authors” even though those people have not met any reasonable criteria for authorship – and in some cases may not even exist. The practice usually takes one of three broad forms:

• Using the names of real researchers without their knowledge. Here, the fraudster lists a well-known scientist as a co-author, often including the correct institutional affiliation but supplying a fake email address that they control.
• Inventing entirely fictional co-authors. In this scenario, the names are fabricated but paired with prestigious universities, laboratories or hospitals, again using convincing yet false contact details.
• Inflating the role of colleagues or supervisors. Sometimes individuals who provided only minor assistance—such as informal feedback—are elevated to full authorship purely to add prestige or credibility.

In all these situations, the key feature is deception: the list of authors gives readers, reviewers and editors a misleading impression of who actually designed, carried out and wrote up the research.

How the Scam Is Typically Carried Out

Perpetrators of this type of misconduct rely on the fact that many journals communicate primarily via email. After inventing or misusing a name, they register a new email address that appears to be associated with a reputable institution. A minimal alteration—such as changing one letter in a domain name or using a free email service configured to look professional—can allow fraudulent correspondence to go unnoticed.

When the paper is submitted, the fraudulent addresses are entered into the submission system for all “co-authors”. Because the perpetrator controls those inboxes, they can respond to editorial queries, confirm authorship and even participate in proof corrections, all without the knowledge of the individuals whose identities they are exploiting or inventing. If the journal does not independently verify authorship, the deception may reach publication.

The risk is enormous. If the fraud is discovered—through post-publication checks, complaints from impersonated researchers or investigative work by editors—the consequences can include retraction of the article, loss of funding, dismissal from employment, expulsion from academic programmes and long-term damage to professional reputation.

Why Would Anyone Take Such a Risk?

From the outside, faking co-authors looks irrational, yet within the context of contemporary academic competition, some researchers regard it as a shortcut to credibility and visibility. Several motivations commonly drive this behaviour.

1. Borrowed Prestige and “Name Power”

High-profile names carry weight in scholarly publishing. Legitimate collaboration with a widely cited researcher can increase the chances that a manuscript is taken seriously by editors and reviewers. In some fields, senior supervisors, principal investigators or renowned scholars are routinely included as co-authors because they have genuinely guided the research or contributed substantially to the work.

Those who fake co-authors attempt to capture the same effect without the inconvenient requirement of an actual collaboration. By attaching a respected name and affiliation to their manuscript, they hope to signal quality, maturity and credibility that their work may not yet have earned.

2. International “Branding” and Institutional Affiliations

In global research environments, the perceived strength of an author’s institution can influence how a paper is received. Editors and reviewers may assume that a study from a world-leading university or research centre is more likely to be well designed and resourced. Misconduct exploits this assumption by pairing fictional or misappropriated names with prestigious affiliations.

For example, a researcher based at a lesser-known institution may invent co-authors allegedly working at top universities in other countries. This creates the illusion of a broad, international collaboration and may seem especially persuasive in interdisciplinary projects, where multiple complementary expertise areas are usually required.

3. Hiding Implausible Productivity

Some cases of faked co-authorship coincide with broader fraud involving fabricated or falsified data. Producing genuinely high-quality research is time-consuming; it is difficult for a single individual to publish large numbers of complex studies in a short period without genuine collaboration or substantial resources.

By inventing co-authors, the fraudster can make their publication record appear more plausible. A stream of articles that might raise suspicion for a lone early-career researcher can instead be presented as the output of a collaborative team, reducing the likelihood that editors or colleagues notice something unusual.

4. Imitating Legitimate Collaboration Patterns

Modern science is highly collaborative. Multi-author, multi-institution papers are now the norm in many disciplines. Researchers who fake co-authors are exploiting this trend, counting on the idea that long author lists and interdisciplinary partnerships are viewed positively rather than suspiciously. The appearance of collaboration acts as camouflage: misconduct is hidden in plain sight.

Why This Behaviour Is So Harmful

Faked co-authorship is far from a harmless embellishment. It undermines several fundamental principles of scholarly work:

• Integrity of the scholarly record: Authorship implies accountability. When listed authors did not actually participate, no one is clearly responsible for the integrity of the work.
• Fairness in academic credit: Genuine collaborators lose recognition and citations when fraudulent names occupy author positions.
• Trust in peer review: When editors and reviewers cannot rely on accurate authorship information, confidence in the peer-review system is weakened.
• Distortion of career evaluation: Hiring, promotion and funding decisions often depend on publication records. Fraudulently enhanced CVs distort fair competition for limited academic positions and grants.

Moreover, if the misconduct co-exists with data fabrication or plagiarism, the downstream effects can be severe: other researchers may base their own work on unreliable findings, wasting time, resources and effort.

What Can Be Done to Prevent Faked Co-Authorship?

Addressing this problem requires action at several levels: individual researchers, supervisors, institutions and journals all have important roles to play.

1. Individual Integrity and Mentorship

At the most basic level, researchers must commit to honest authorship practices. This includes:

• only listing individuals who meet agreed authorship criteria;
• obtaining explicit consent from all co-authors before submission;
• ensuring all authors review and approve the final manuscript.

Supervisors and senior academics should discuss authorship ethics openly with students and junior colleagues. Clear, early conversations about contribution, order of authors and responsibilities reduce misunderstandings and discourage shortcuts.

2. Institutional Education and Policies

Universities and research institutions can reduce misconduct by:

• incorporating research integrity training into postgraduate programmes;
• defining authorship criteria and enforcement mechanisms clearly;
• supporting whistleblowers who report concerns in good faith;
• including authorship practices in performance and promotion discussions.

When expectations are explicit and consequences are known, the perceived benefits of misconduct are often outweighed by the recognised risks.

3. Journal Safeguards

Journals and editors are in a strong position to detect and deter faked co-authors. Practical measures include:

• Contacting all listed authors directly using institutional email addresses during submission and after acceptance.
• Requiring detailed contributor statements (e.g., who designed the study, collected data, analysed results and wrote the manuscript).
• Using ORCID iDs and other persistent identifiers to confirm author identity and track publication histories.
• Flagging suspicious patterns such as repeated use of non-institutional email addresses or implausible combinations of affiliations.

Production and editorial staff can also be instructed to question unusual author lists, inconsistent contact details or rapid submission patterns that do not match typical research timelines.

4. The Role of Peer Reviewers

Peer reviewers are often best placed to notice irregularities in authorship. Reviewers may suspect misconduct if:

• the listed expertise of co-authors does not match the paper’s content;
• the manuscript reads as though written by a single person despite many authors;
• citations or acknowledgements contradict the stated author list.

In such cases, reviewers should not try to investigate independently but should discreetly raise their concerns with the editor. It is then the editor’s responsibility to follow up, consult journal policies and contact authors for clarification where necessary.

Building a Culture That Makes Misconduct Less Attractive

Ultimately, faked co-authorship thrives in environments where output quantity is valued more than quality, where authorship criteria are poorly understood and where oversight is inconsistent. Reducing incentives for misconduct means rewarding careful, transparent research, recognising mentoring and collaboration fairly and providing realistic expectations about publication pace.

As individual researchers, you can contribute to this culture by modelling ethical behaviour, challenging questionable practices respectfully and ensuring that your own papers accurately represent who did what. Editors, reviewers and institutional leaders likewise have a responsibility to strengthen policies and processes that bring transparency to authorship.

Conclusion

Faking co-authors on research papers is a serious and harmful form of misconduct that exploits the trust underlying scholarly communication. By understanding how and why this fraud occurs, the academic community can take practical steps to prevent it—through education, robust journal policies, vigilant peer review and a shared commitment to research integrity.

At the same time, it remains crucial that manuscripts themselves are clearly written, logically structured and free from language errors or ambiguity. If you want to ensure that your legitimate co-authored work is presented as clearly and professionally as possible, you may wish to use specialist journal article editing or manuscript editing services . Professional editing cannot solve ethical issues, but it can help you communicate honest research with clarity and precision.