underattributing

Underattributing is the act of attributing less credit or recognition to the person, source, or factor responsible for an outcome than is warranted. It can apply to scholarly work, collaborative projects, media reporting, or organizational decision-making. In research, underattribution may involve failing to cite a primary source, omitting a contributor’s role, or giving influence to a factor that was not as central as claimed. In journalism or industry, it can appear as crediting a project to the wrong author, company, or time frame, or broad attributions that minimize a contributor's role.

Causes include biases such as confirmation bias or egocentric bias, social dynamics like power imbalances, norms of modesty, and practical constraints such as page limits or vague authorship criteria. Cultural expectations of deference can also discourage proper attribution.

Consequences include damages to trust and credibility, undermines motivation and collaboration, and can distort the historical record or accountability. In academia, persistent underattribution may affect career advancement and scholarly prestige; in organizations, it can harm morale and retention.

Mitigation strategies involve clear attribution guidelines, such as authorship criteria or the CRediT taxonomy, contribution statements, and mandatory acknowledgments. Editors, managers, and researchers should verify attributions before publication or release, and foster a culture that values accurate credit and open discussion of contributions.

See also: Attribution theory, misattribution, ghost authorship, credit where credit is due, plagiarism.