Named nonhumans crediting for scientists Miscellaneous nonhumans with anthropomorphic names are routinely credited as solo authors, coauthors and contributors in scientific publications, including research animals, pet animals and even personal computer. The increase in the number of nonhuman protagonists raises intriguing ethical questions and ushers in a sequential dilemma. Such practice of crediting nonhumans raises thought-provoking questions. This online survey conducted by Tsinghua University, Zhejiang Gongshang University, Hefei University of Technology, and University of Northern British Columbia. We thank you for your time spent taking this survey. Your response has been recorded. If there are any issues or additional comments, you may contact Dr. Zhiwen Hu at huzhiw@cuz.edu.cn. Question Title * 1. What do you think about the crediting of animals or personal computer in scientific journals? Just joke. Human empathetic behaviors. Prosocial behaviours against social norms. They might bias the scientific results. Sometimes nonhumans have made substantial contributions to scientific work, and they should fill the credit niches for authors or contributors in the scientific literature. Human authors have their own reasons. Question Title * 2. What do you think about the present-day canon of publication ethics? I am familiar with the COPE Report 1999. I am familiar with other canon of publication ethics. I am not familiar with any canon of publication ethics. The present-day broad-brush canon of publication ethics should be duly reinforced. I am not sure. Question Title * 3. Did these behaviors disrupt the present-day broad-brush canon of publication ethics? Yes. They undergo several rounds of ethical scrutiny by gatekeepers, but broken the basic canon of publication ethics. Yes. They are Honorary Authorships (no actual work done). Yes. They are False Authorships (false attribution of authorship). Yes. They are Ghost Authorships (who meets the criteria of authorship and has made substantial contributions, but is not credited as an author). Yes, for another reason not listed. No, existing is to be reasonable. No, because they give human attributes to animals or machines. Question Title * 4. Should human-kin primates have naming priority over other laboratory animals? Yes. It will encourage caregivers to take better care of the animals. Yes. Human-kin primates should have the dignity of a name. No. Naming smarter primates that are susceptible to stronger emotional bonds may introduce more anchoring bias than exists for their deindividuated counterparts in experiments. No. Entitlement to named credit should not be considered to be owed to primates only. No. If due credit is not extended to the rest of earth’s fauna, this implies stereotypical notions of anthropocentrism and dogmatism. No, for another reason not listed. Question Title * 5. Should animals or machines used in scientific research be individually named? Yes. Naming is convenient for scientific research. Yes, for another reason not listed. No, because it might bias the scientific result. No, for another reason not listed. Question Title * 6. Would these nonhuman-crediting behaviours have a demonstration effect on collective behaviour? Yes No Question Title * 7. Should we rethink the theories of human-nonhuman collaboration? No. We could employ utility theory to explain human-nonhuman collaboration. No. We could employ reciprocal altruism to explain human-nonhuman collaboration. No. We could employ ultimatum game theory to explain human-nonhuman collaboration. Yes. Less recognition has been given to our partners in human-nonhuman cooperation scenarios. Yes. Human beings working side-by-side with animals and cognitive machines may challenge the well-accepted theoretical frameworks for human-nonhuman collaboration. Yes. The mergers between machine learning and biological synthesis are blurring the boundaries between human and nonhuman. Yes, for another reason not listed. Question Title * 8. Do you know any funniest/strangest case of Nonhuman Authors Credit for Scientists in papers, whatever authorship(s) or contribution-ships (in acknowledgements)? Please post them here and your generous contribution is deeply appreciated! Question Title * 9. In case you encountered any issues with the survey or would like to leave a comment, feel free to do so in the text box below. Done